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

[Vixen]

To follow on, also no to the highlighted.

Ship radiocommunications entered a new era on 1 February 1999 with the full implementation of the Global Maritime Distress and Safety System (GMDSS), an integrated communications system using satellite and terrestrial radiocommunication systems.

https://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/Safety/Pages/RadioCommunications-Default.aspx

Vixen, I look forward to you contradicting this.

The GMDSS implementation was a harmonization of radio communications standards already in place. GPS had been in use by the USA since 1973. Radio communications a hundred years. Certainly, European maritime vessels already used VHF channels for communications. The only introduction of change was in Chapter IV which stipulates that every vessel within the remit had to have a trained, qualified and certified inspector of radio communications to ensure every relevant vessel was in compliance with the GMDSS standards.

Which international convention introduced the GMDSS?

The GMDSS is mandated for ships internationally by the International Maritime Organization (IMO) Safety of Life at Sea Convention (SOLAS), 1974, as amended in 1988, and carries the force of an international treaty.

Global Maritime Distress and Safety System (GMDSS)

Federal Communications Commission (.gov)

Note the date? 1988. There is a new amendment coming into effect 1 Jan 2024.

Your logical fallacy is that of the false premise. For example, you might now claim that "MV Estonia didn't have to comply until 1.1.2024".

Do you see the flaw in your undertanding?

 

[Vixen]

You don't need to recall exactly what you wrote yonks ago as posters have helpfully quoted what you wrote. As you know, I suggested that you might argue that the reference to reporters on the front line was a different front line to your Stalingrad remark. So I asked if you still believed that the British had secret agents infiltrate a German front line in order that their reports on what the German soldiers were talking about could be published in the Times.

You replied "Yawn".

I take that to mean you do not intend to defend this ludicrous suggestion, yet you won't disavow it either, so that in another hundred pages or so you can recycle it just as if nothing had ever been said about it.

Of course there was intelligence and very close intelligence, too.

 

[Vixen]

Whats a bit "hilarious" is that Vixen took issue with your use of the term "co-belligerent" when in reality Finland was actually allied with Germany during the Continuation War. They were not only at war with Germany at the same time, they planned operations together, and Finland allowed German troops on their territory etc.

Vixen, please realize I'm an admirer of Finland. They were put between a rock and a hard place through no fault of their own. And the fact they've kept their independence since the fall of the Russian Empire is admirable. But, they were allied with Nazi Germany for a time, that's a fact.

Wars are very rarely about 'goodies versus the baddies'. Even with the Ukraine-Russia war an understanding of history even going back as far as the Rus Princes of Kiev, of the dynamics between the warring sides. Simply quoting snippets on what you remember from a textbook or a newspaper highlights a lack of understanding of the true facts.

For example, when I discuss the 'Troubles' affecting Ireland with Irish people, thinking I was well-read, I invariably annoyed and irritated them because my knowledge was lacking in proper understanding. You might want to consider that you might be similar.

 

[GlennB]

Of course there was intelligence and very close intelligence, too.

Pitiful evasion.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Of course there was intelligence and very close intelligence, too.

You're still desperately manoeuvring to find a form of words which blur your original claim into looking less obviously wrong, rather than just admit it was clearly silly.

Why not just admit you misconstrued what the source of the Times article actually was, and on reflection it was a daft idea to think the British had infiltrated secret agents into German front lines in order to provide the Times with a piece about what the German soldiers were saying about the British?

 

[MarkCorrigan]

You're still desperately manoeuvring to find a form of words which blur your original claim into looking less obviously wrong, rather than just admit it was clearly silly.

Why not just admit you misconstrued what the source of the Times article actually was, and on reflection it was a daft idea to think the British had infiltrated secret agents into German front lines in order to provide the Times with a piece about what the German soldiers were saying about the British?

Because that would be admitting error, which Vixen cannot do. I'm reminded of a post from another thread where she blatantly lied rather than admit to a typo.

 

[malbui]

I think there were some Spaniards that volunteered to fight become cannon fodder too IIRC.

I think around 47,000 served in the División Azul, with around 5,000 killed and 9,000 wounded or captured.

 

[Disbelief]

Because that would be admitting error, which Vixen cannot do. I'm reminded of a post from another thread where she blatantly lied rather than admit to a typo.

It appears to be something with the CT mindset, as seen many times in the 911 forum when it was active. Besides the technical stuff that has been shown to be incorrect, it's just simple things that are wrong that CTists refuse to acknowledge.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Rubbish. You are trying to conflate the GMDSS standardisation of radio communications at sea with regulations already in force.

Not at all. Estonia was allowed to use the manual buoys until they expired and needed routine replacement. As we're other ships.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Double post

 

[Andy_Ross]

Duplicate.

 

[Andy_Ross]

For a good and thorough overview I recommend The Secret War: Spies, Codes and Guerrillas 1939-1945 by Max Hastings.

It will leave you in no doubt as to why Vixen's ideas on British spies on the front line at Stalingrad, or anywhere else for that matter is laughable.

 

[JayUtah]

I invariably annoyed and irritated them because my knowledge was lacking in proper understanding. You might want to consider that you might be similar.

You might want to consider that wading into a highly technical subject such as forensic engineering on which you are demonstrably ignorant, on which those who are proficient generally must be licensed and heavily trained, and toward which you have displayed not even the slightest inclination of being educated, you might be properly considered annoying and irritating. Unless that's your intent.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

<silly joke about forum quirks deleted>

 

[JayUtah]

GPS had been in use by the USA since 1973.

No. The design program began in 1973. The system was considered in development all through the 1980s (although early commercial use was allowed to U.S. airlines) and not considered operational until the 1990s. Sea navigation had heavily invested in LORAN and held onto it until the mid to late 1990s. It's ludicrous to supposed GPS would have been required for ships in, say, 1994.

 

[Andy_Ross]

You might want to consider that wading into a highly technical subject such as forensic engineering on which you are demonstrably ignorant, on which those who are proficient generally must be licensed and heavily trained, and toward which you have displayed not even the slightest inclination of being educated, you might be properly considered annoying and irritating. Unless that's your intent.

Not to mention the detail and application of maritime law and regulations.

 

[Andy_Ross]

No. The design program began in 1973. The system was considered in development all through the 1980s (although early commercial use was allowed to U.S. airlines) and not considered operational until the 1990s. Sea navigation had heavily invested in LORAN and held onto it until the mid to late 1990s. It's ludicrous to supposed GPS would have been required for ships in, say, 1994.

GPS wasn't aboard navy ships in the 80s when I was in. Loran and Decca were the systems used for electronic navigation alongside good old fashioned sextants.

Thinking about it, there may have been some deployment towards the end of my time. To be honest, I wasn't that concerned at the time, not my branch and by then I was ashore at HMS Excellent working as an armourer.

 

[JayUtah]

GPS wasn't aboard navy ships in the 80s when I was in.

The FAA did not authorize GPS for IFR flight until 1994. The system had been available to commercial air operations since 1983, but it didn't work very well. It was still under development. Part of that development included work by commercial airframe manufacturers to integrate it into their navigation systems.

 

[Disbelief]

No. The design program began in 1973. The system was considered in development all through the 1980s (although early commercial use was allowed to U.S. airlines) and not considered operational until the 1990s. Sea navigation had heavily invested in LORAN and held onto it until the mid to late 1990s. It's ludicrous to supposed GPS would have been required for ships in, say, 1994.

It was fairly new technology when I was going through USAF tech school in 1992.

 

[lobosrul5]

Wow someone who claims to know their WWII History doesn't know that Italy were part of the Axis, as was Romania and Hungary. Wow, just wow.

Lol your own link has a map of the Axis powers with... Finland as one of them.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axis_powers#/media/File:Map_of_participants_in_World_War_II.svg

I actually would disagree with this. It was a separate alliance, and Finland never signed the Tripartite Pact. But a majority of Finnish historians surveyed in 2008 agreed that Finland HAD AN ALLIANCE with Nazi Germany during the Continuation War.

https://www.hs.fi/kulttuuri/art-2000004606365.html

But you do you. Go on being confidently incorrect to godlike levels. Please keep on telling us that buoys going back to 1988 had GPS capabilities, and pretend that Andy Ross didn't know that Italy was a member of the Axis by pointing out that they sent a relatively small contingent to fight against the Soviets.