Cont: The sinking of MS Estonia: Case Reopened Part VI

[MarkCorrigan]

I am laughing at your claim that a storm at sea qualifies as a 'combat scenario'. The storm was over by then.

I get that you enjoy the cut and thrust of trading insults but I am not the slightest bit interested in that sort of thing, so I will not be indulging in it. It is an extremely boring form of debate.

But each to their own.

No, I'm not "enjoying trading insults". You're simply wrong and cannot ever admit it.

Let's take a nice easy one. You claimed that Kemo sabe was cockney slang for "understand". This is wrong. Can you bring yourself to admit it?

 

[Jack by the hedge]

If MV Estonia had been travelling since 19:15 then by 1:48 (six hours and 33 minutes, or 6.55 hrs) when it went off the radar, it had travelled roughly 193 km which meant it was travelling an average of 18 knots, ergo, it will have travelled 119 miles*/.868976 [miles to knots conversion] = 137 knots over 6.55 hours = an average speed of 20.91 knots per hour. Its capability was only circa 20 knots at full speed, so must have been carried along by the waves - southwesterly, similar to the wind.

A few points raised by your calculations:
Where did you get the initial figure of 193km from?
You then converted that to 119 miles. (I get 120 but let's not quibble.)
You then converted that wrongly to 137 nautical miles. It's 104 nm. You applied the multiplier backwards.
Also 'knots' is nautical miles per hour, not nautical miles. You meant nm.
So now you have two different answers for the same calculation: 18 knots or 20.91 knots. (Not 'knots per hour'.) So your results are contradictory. That should have been a clue you had blundered. I wonder that you didn't spot this.
A southwesterly wind is one which blows from the southwest, not toward the southwest.
If you ever read the JAIC report you would discover section 5.4 describing the wind and wave conditions in considerable detail. https://onse.fi/estonia/chapt05.html#4
And you would see that section 5.5 has considerable detail on the Estonia's speed too. https://onse.fi/estonia/chapt05.html#5

Have you been letting AI do your calculations again? You appreciate they produce plausible-looking nonsense, right?

 

[Jack by the hedge]

It's not a question of 'justified'. War medals are restricted to combat situations. If you look at the list of war medals awarded, these guys were in Afghanistan, for heaven's sake. Nobody is claiming that heroics at sea saving the lives of civilians is not the height of heroicism.

However, he was working in a team. All of the teams were heroically saving lives at risk to their own.

Svensson got the Swedish 'Victoria Cross' so to speak because he carried out an OPERATION and brought nine Estonian survivors to Huddinge Hospital in Stockholm 'just after two'.

Half truths, twisted facts, unsupportable false claims.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

He got the award because (a) it was a military situation and (b) he earned it, albeit it remains classified as to why, exactly.

Lies. He got the award because he was in the military, in a situation his superiors judged to be sufficiently similarly hazardous to a combat operation. And the reason he received the medal is public knowledge understood by anyone who does not insist on affecting bewilderment at its description.

 

[Here_to_learn]

The thing is, once MV Estonia reached Utö, she was 'inshore' as it were. The Ålands are geographically and politically part of Finland because 'open sea' doesn't start again until between the Ålands and Sweden (about 200km).

It certainly was not in 'open-ocean transit' as Axxman claims.

Plus another salient point is that at this location MV Estonia was now in International Waters.

It's quite telling that you can post both these things, and not see the contradiction.


For anyone that is interested, it's quite easy to look at the map and see the location.

https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estoniakatastrofen#/map/0

 

[Here_to_learn]

There were two basic routes from Tallinn to Stockholm, changing westwards or carrying on northwestwards. The JAIC assumed it was the westward one but it was more normal to follow the same route as the Helsinki-Stockholm ferries.

That is a lie. The normal good-weather route was to enter the Stockholm Archipelago at Sandhamn. In bad weather they took the longer route, entering further north at Söderarm. (Chapter 5.1). This is a slightly longer route, resulting in the need for a higher average speed.

The route planned is visualized by JAIC in chapter 1, illustration 1.2, and is via Söderarm - the one that requires a more northwesterly course.

 

[Andy_Ross]

There were two basic routes from Tallinn to Stockholm, changing westwards or carrying on northwestwards. The JAIC assumed it was the westward one but it was more normal to follow the same route as the Helsinki-Stockholm ferries. The archipelago is particularly fraught with dangers (rocks, skerries, shallows) so a captain is allowed to use his best judgment along them.

If MV Estonia had been travelling since 19:15 then by 1:48 (six hours and 33 minutes, or 6.55 hrs) when it went off the radar, it had travelled roughly 193 km which meant it was travelling an average of 18 knots, ergo, it will have travelled 119 miles*/.868976 [miles to knots conversion] = 137 knots over 6.55 hours = an average speed of 20.91 knots per hour. Its capability was only circa 20 knots at full speed, so must have been carried along by the waves - southwesterly, similar to the wind.

*119 miles = 191.512km

Utö to Stockholm is 193 km. Tallinn to Stockholm is 426km. But MV Estonia was still 40km away from Utö. Pretty much bang on midway.

Plus another salient point is that at this location MV Estonia was now in International Waters.

Absolutely bollocks from start to finish

 

[Andy_Ross]

MS Wilhelm Gustloff - a lot of shooting was heard, as nazi officers began to shooting their wives and kids and then, themselves, when it became clear it had been torpedoed, rather than face fear and drowning.

That makes it a tradition?

 

[Andy_Ross]

Like all the ferries that traverse between Finland and Sweden, she had the relevant certificate. The problem here was the Estonia to Finnish waters part.

It's a red herring. Doesn't impinge on the cause of the disaster IMV.

It's not a red herring, the ship was given a limited certificate because it wasn't safe to operate offshore.
We went in to great detail over the certificates previously

 

[Vixen]

A few points raised by your calculations:
Where did you get the initial figure of 193km from?
You then converted that to 119 miles. (I get 120 but let's not quibble.)
You then converted that wrongly to 137 nautical miles. It's 104 nm. You applied the multiplier backwards.
Also 'knots' is nautical miles per hour, not nautical miles. You meant nm.
So now you have two different answers for the same calculation: 18 knots or 20.91 knots. (Not 'knots per hour'.) So your results are contradictory. That should have been a clue you had blundered. I wonder that you didn't spot this.
A southwesterly wind is one which blows from the southwest, not toward the southwest.
If you ever read the JAIC report you would discover section 5.4 describing the wind and wave conditions in considerable detail. https://onse.fi/estonia/chapt05.html#4
And you would see that section 5.5 has considerable detail on the Estonia's speed too. https://onse.fi/estonia/chapt05.html#5

Have you been letting AI do your calculations again? You appreciate they produce plausible-looking nonsense, right?

It is a very simple calculation and doesn't need any aide to do it. MV Estonia was 6.55hrs into its journey. If its average speed was (according to JAIC iirc) 18knots, then 18knots x 6.55 hours = 117 nautical miles = 135.67 miles or, 218 km.

One knot equals one nautical mile per hour, or roughly 1.15 statute mph.

The wind was indeed southwesterly - coming from the south west and wave action will affect how far it actually travelled, that is why we can only estimate how fast it was going.

Clear now?

 

[Vixen]

That makes it a tradition?

History tells us that Nazi's killed themselves and their children rather than face the music.

Who knows? Why would Capt Andresson had a bullet in his head? (Accoridng to one diver.) The JAIC never looked into what happened to the captain, which you would have thought would be important to know.

 

[Here_to_learn]

It is a very simple calculation and doesn't need any aide to do it. MV Estonia was 6.55hrs into its journey. If its average speed was (according to JAIC iirc) 18knots, then 18knots x 6.55 hours = 117 nautical miles = 135.67 miles or, 218 km.

One knot equals one nautical mile per hour, or roughly 1.15 statute mph.

The wind was indeed southwesterly - coming from the south west and wave action will affect how far it actually travelled, that is why we can only estimate how fast it was going.

Clear now?

You don't.

Check chapter 5.5 in the JAIC report.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

It is a very simple calculation and doesn't need any aide to do it. MV Estonia was 6.55hrs into its journey. If its average speed was (according to JAIC iirc) 18knots, then 18knots x 6.55 hours = 117 nautical miles = 135.67 miles or, 218 km.

One knot equals one nautical mile per hour, or roughly 1.15 statute mph.

The wind was indeed southwesterly - coming from the south west and wave action will affect how far it actually travelled, that is why we can only estimate how fast it was going.

Clear now?

Clear as mud.

Those are a whole bunch of new numbers and don't explain where you got your initial figure of 193 km. You told us that distance and the travelling time meant the ship had averaged 18 knots. (Then you converted the distance wrongly into nautical miles and recalculated the average speed as 20.91 knots. Gibberish.) You didn't say you got the speed from any reference (you definitely didn't get it from the JAIC) and calculated the distance from that. You told us you calculated the speed from the distance.

Now you're offering us a different distance. And you're glossing over your error in claiming the wind and waves must have increased the ship's speed when in fact they hindered it.

How would you regard an accountant who produced such a chaotic jumble of mislabeled, unattributed figures and errors in arithmetic?

 

[Vixen]

That is a lie. The normal good-weather route was to enter the Stockholm Archipelago at Sandhamn. In bad weather they took the longer route, entering further north at Söderarm. (Chapter 5.1). This is a slightly longer route, resulting in the need for a higher average speed.

The route planned is visualized by JAIC in chapter 1, illustration 1.2, and is via Söderarm - the one that requires a more northwesterly course.

This is the route, according to JAIC, which appears to show MV Estonia cutting across a busy traffic zone. It was more usual to go the other route, according to consensus.

Estonia route re JAIC by Username Vixen, on Flickr

Source: http://privat.bahnhof.se/wb576311/factgroup/est/route.html

You can discover its reasoning there.

 

[JayUtah]

The JAIC didn't tackle any of this.

Because it's all absurd on its face. Conspiracy theorists take themselves way too seriously.

 

[JayUtah]

You believe Lake Ontario is 'rough seas'?

No, I know.

First, as pointed out, it's Lake Superior. Second, I spent a number of summers crewing large sailing vessels on the Great Lakes for weeks at a time. Third, the seas on Lake Superior are rough enough during storms to pummel large ore carriers into foundering, which is why they stop when the weather gets rough in late autumn. Or did you forget what we were talking about?

So we can add Great Lakes shipping and weather to the very long list of things I know better than you.

 

[JayUtah]

From wiki:

And you were asked how much cesium isotope it would take for this reaction to produce enough energy to melt steel. You don't know, and your only response was a vague statement: "elementary chemistry."

You didn't realize that was part of the joke at the parody site you quoted, thinking it was real.

So it would be grossly irresponsible and dangerus to smuggle nuclear waste on a passenger ferry.

Yeah, that was the joke, Vixen.

Why shouldn't people ask why?

Because they get jokes.

 

[MarkCorrigan]

No, I'm not "enjoying trading insults". You're simply wrong and cannot ever admit it.

Let's take a nice easy one. You claimed that Kemo sabe was cockney slang for "understand". This is wrong. Can you bring yourself to admit it?

Well Vixen?

 

[JayUtah]

According to Captn Mäkelä who has done this trip hundreds of times...

...but who has no qualifications relevant to forensic investigation.

 

[JayUtah]

Er, Svensson received the highest combat medal.

Asked and answered.