• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

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

Status
Not open for further replies.
JayUtah said:
We seem to have no end of technical subjects on which Vixen can express only wrong assertions. I have yet to see her get a technical subject right. Maybe her expectations are not the best yardstick for whether the professional investigators did or are doing a good job.
Click to expand...

I would argue it's not just technical subjects. She's also proven to be utterly clueless about politics, strategic studies, how university works, cockney slang...
 
Jack by the hedge said:
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?
Click to expand...


I'd say the implausibility of the nonsense produced would suggest it wasn't AI generated.
 
lobosrul5 said:
Is she a self claimed accountant? Because basic UOM conversions are a pretty big part of being one.
Click to expand...

Vixen claims to be a chartered accountant as of U.K. requirements, which I take to be suitably equivalent to certified public accountant in the U.S. She also claims to have some experience in sailing and/or boat operation, although this was never clarified to our satisfaction.

Regardless, she is making highly novice errors in attempting to analyze the navigation of the ship.
 
MarkCorrigan said:
Why are you repeating this lie?
Click to expand...
You're asking Vixen why she's repeating a lie?

Have you never heard this famous quotation?

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

— Shakespeare​
Shakespeare was of course the real author of Rita Mae Brown's Sudden Death, published in 1983.
Not everything you read on the Internet is true.

— 17th Earl of Oxford​
 
Vixen, will you admit to any of the errors you've made in these threads?

ETA: Here's a nice easy one.

Vixen said:
There hath been many a true word spoken in jest ~ Shakespeare
Click to expand...

That's not a Shakespeare quote. Will you admit this?
 
Last edited:
W.D.Clinger said:
You're asking Vixen why she's repeating a lie?

Have you never heard this famous quotation?

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

— Shakespeare​
Shakespeare was of course the real author of Rita Mae Brown's Sudden Death, published in 1983.
Not everything you read on the Internet is true.

— 17th Earl of Oxford​
Click to expand...

This must be why Vixen can't find that quote about seeing the military trucks. It's actually from Shakespeare. Here I found it!

I saw two military trucks getting loaded onto the Estonia at the last minute.

— Shakespeare​
 
Vixen said:
You believe Lake Ontario is 'rough seas'?
Click to expand...

If we raise the money, are you willing to sail on Lake Ontario in a November storm? They'll have to show you how to work the boat because no one in their right mind would take you out. And the Coast Guard will take their time looking for you.

Seriously, how are you so ignorant about basic facts of shipwrecks? There are 6,000 ships on the bottom of the Great Lakes, most all were sunk in "rough seas".
 
Vixen said:
For you to get a grasp of the issues, you really need to stop fixating on the idea that there was a massive storm - a tempest - with raging winds, lightning and thunder. No.

Likewise, as for debris:

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


Stop believing the hype about killer storms.
Click to expand...

Combined with the speed Estonia was sailing, and the fact she was sailing into the wind, the waves were breaking over the bow. It's not hype, they were sailing too fast into a storm the ship was never designed to survive in the first place. Without the storm, the ship doesn't sink. It's that easy.

All the other ships, the ones who came to rescue survivors, were sailing at reduced speeds because their captains weren't reckless. And the storm is on video. And I pointed out that the area where the Estonia sank is prime for rogue waves, thanks to the benthic topography. Combine that with the fetch, and it was a perfect mix. A single wave in the right conditions, striking the one ship not designed to travel in the open ocean.

This was an accident waiting to happen, not a conspiracy.
 
Vixen said:
So you concur the MS Estonia disaster qualifies as a combat like scenario.

Thank you.

Q.E.D.

::
Click to expand...

In that weather? Yes.

In the US military there are some MOSs whose jobs don't change much between peacetime action and combat. That's why you rarely see USAF PJs get the CMOH, even though many truly deserve it (see: Mogadishu, Robert's Ridge, Afghanistan). In fact, PJs have only been awarded 1 CMOH, and 105 Silver Stars since their inception, which feels like a huge injustice.

The obsession over the rescue team's medals is just weird.
 
Vixen said:
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.
Click to expand...

1. We don't have proof he had been shot in the head.

2. He he was shot in the head, we do not know the circumstances.

3. He was reportedly found on an upper deck, suggesting he was trying to get out.

4. He wouldn't have had time to shoot himself, unless he did it early on, which he didn't.

5. All that matters is the bow-visor. That's the cause of the sinking.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom