The sinking of MS Estonia: Case Reopened Part VII

[Vixen]

Other questions could be - how come the Accident Investigation report for the Silja Europa grounding is about the bridge control/navigation system, and not the communications system? (And why didn't they investigate potential sub-marines that pushed the ferry off course? ...)

Could that possible have anything do with that the company that Asser Koivisto was part of starting sold solutions not for communications, but for navigation and bridge management.

Koivisto's firm provides radar and sonar maritime systems. It if very much to do with GMDSS compliance, and this involves the installations at the bridge and navigation systems, in particular re the bridge: VHF communication.

 

[Vixen]

That wasn't what I asked. You cited a paywalled article that you claim "clearly" established Koivisto as the JAIC's expert on EBIRBs. Provide that part of that article, please. Or else we'll have to assume you're lying about your sources, as usual.

As per the YLE article, which pictures Koivisto with a replica model of the EPIRB in question, it further mentions that their journalists searched for the EPIRB representations to the JAIC but together with the beacons themselves, all of the documentation was nowhere to be found.


They are possibly in a box in a dusty museum archive.

 

[Vixen]

Not in 1994 they didn't.

SDRs are called for when there is a need to operate on a wide range of frequencies dynamically. Emergency beacons in 1994 required exactly the opposite: they had to operate on a fixed frequency to within a very high tolerance for frequency stability, and very long term reliability.

Your source is from 2016. Nowadays we use several channels in the designated emergency band 406.000 MHz to 406.100 MHz, and modern beacons may have to be compatible with legacy receivers and spacecraft. There are currently four fixed frequencies in use, requiring switching between them in normal operation. That makes SDRs the preferred technology in modern beacons. The frequency drift tolerances are still the same for each discrete channel, and none of that behavior is available for external control. There is no way to make the radio not heard on the two channels in use in 1994.

Sorry, as usual you don't get to map modern practice back onto history and pretend you understand anything about it. You cited two sources: one a Wikipedia article giving the history of software-defined radios, and the other a manfucturer's spec sheet for modern SDRs certified for use in beacons. Had you actually attempted to assimilate and combine the information from those two sources instead of merely trying to beat your critics over the head with them, you would have seen why your claim fails.



You claimed they had been sabotaged by having been tuned away from the proper frequency. That is not possible.



No.

Normal testing is simply to ensure the battery charge. In the 1990s, the lengthier (e.g., annual) test to which you refer requires a test rig, such that the EPIRBs would have to be removed and taken ashore.



No.

As you agree, Lehtola was not an expert in EPIRBs and did not describe them accurately to the reporter who asked.



Because the EPIRBs had not been switched on. This was determined to everyone's satisfaction but yours. And since you don't understand how they work, we know the cause of that confusion.

All beacons have to be 'switched on' for them to work. In the case of the automatic ones, they have to be set up so that whilst the frequency of the signal can be tested, at the same time they should not emit a signal to the satellite, with the consequent false distress call. So they are set up to automatically emit a signal when freed from their brackets and upon rising to the surface of the water. Alternatively, they can be removed and used manually by attaching the lanyard to one's clothing or boat, and thrown overboard.

 

[Vixen]

<snip>

The exemption to regulations under which MS Estonia sailed with manual-only EPIRBs were rescinded following the accident.

<snip>

That is a blatant lie.

 

[Vixen]

All covered in the JAIC, which lists the dates of involvement for the commissioners and subject matter experts.

You have claimed repeatedly that Asser Koivisto was the JAIC's expert on EBIRBs. Yet his name appears nowhere in the formal reports. There is evidence in commission records that he consulted once, informally, on the subject of electronic navigation. There is evidence in the media that he attended a meeting in Helsinki at which EPIRBs were discussed, but deferred reporter's further questions on EPIRBs to those whom he considered subject matter experts.

Koivisto was the person who gathered information from the ship's radio electricians. That is how we know that in the week prior to the disaster the EPIRB's had been tested as fit for use.

 

[Vixen]

So, on 12 October, the much anticipated eight-part Estonia - docu-drama is due to be shown on MTV. It should also be shown in Sweden, Estonia and Belgium, or even contracted out to Netflix at some point, as it is a joint-country production. The director was an assistant producer on Chernobyl. He is a Swedish guy named Måns Månsson.

Swedish, up-and-coming director Måns Månsson was hired as the main director of the Estonia series . He has previously worked as a second unit director in the American-British mini-series Chernobyl . It means the director of the "second crew" who shoots the "less important" scenes of the production.

Another director of the series is Juuso Syrjä, known from the Sorjonen TV series .

Born in 1982, Månsson has a vivid memory of the accident in Estonia. He was in elementary school then. The school principal and teachers gathered the students together in the morning.

- It was obviously crisis management to some extent, but I was left with a strong feeling that it was also a way to count us down. Was someone missing?

- I will never forget it, says Månsson now 30 years later.

The article can be read here:

The director and screenwriter Miikko Oikkonen, who achieved international success with the Sorjonen TV series (Yle), has created the eight-part series Estonia, which deals with the Estonian tragedy through the eyes of an investigative commission. It is a joint production of Finland, Sweden, Estonia and Belgium, and 15.3 million euros have been sunk into it.

It is the most expensive TV series in Finland so far. The idea for the series was born before the corona pandemic at the Fisher King production company in Helsinki.

https://yle.fi/a/74-20054501

 

[lobosrul5]

EPIRB's and PLB run on SDR technology.

wiki

You can see examples of OEM cards here:

https://mussonmarine.com/downloads/oem_eng_(musson_marine)_epirb.pdf

That is *NOT* what I asked for Vixen. Try again.

Nobody said the Kannad 406 F should be 'manually tuned'. In the set up phase or inspection phase, they need to be tested as to whether they are emitting the correct frequency in the 406mhz range. That is what was meant by Lehtola when he said they were 'untuned'. The signal was not reaching the satellite for some reason.

Your quoted article, the ONLY FRICKIN PLACE ON THE ENTIRE INTERNET THAT USED "UN-TUNED" doesn't even specify who its quoting (in the available snippet). So your assertion that Lehtola said it. Is a fabrication. FYI that full article is behind a paywall and I cannot sign up for it without having a Finnish telephone number to receive a text.

Your reply is also nonsensical. It was turned on and found to be operable after being turned on. So you are claiming that somehow someone untuned it for nefarious reasons, OR the ships electrician was negligent, AND THEN someone re-tuned it to the correct frequency. When this is entirely impossible. They are tuned by the manufacturer, in the manufacturing process via hardware. Or are you trying to claim Kannad ****** up and didn't "tune" this particular beacon?! In 1994 no one was using SDR, outside of experimentation, per YOUR OWN WIKI LINK. You are hanging on to one newspaper article, that is either wrong, quoting a non-expert, or mistranslated. GIVE IT UP. Or give me what I asked for, a manufacturer or government link saying that model of EPIRB must be tested for the correct frequency transmission and tuned by the user.

...



...


...

 

[zooterkin]

I have never claimed to be an expert.

Whoosh.

 

[zooterkin]

Back to name-calling are we?

'Limited exemption', ha ha, all in your mind as you cannot face admitting to the fact MV Estonia had standard free-float automatic buoys, complete with brackets either side of the bridge, externally, and together with hydrostatic units.

Describing what you appear to be doing is not calling you names. Nor is pointing out that you continue to post lies.

 

[JayUtah]

'Limited exemption', ha ha, all in your mind...

No, it's spelled out explicitly in the statute.

 

[JayUtah]

Nobody ever took a degree in EPIRBs. EPIRB functioning is very much to do with radio communications and Koivisto is an expert in maritime communications.

No. In 1994 Koivisto was an expert in electronic navigation. That has nothing to do with marine communications.

 

[JayUtah]

Koivisto's firm provides radar and sonar maritime systems.

Radar has almost nothing to do with marine communications and literally nothing to with emergency signaling beacons, how to design them, and how to operate them.

Since 1994 his company has shifted focus from sea navigation to maritime traffic management. This is peripherally involved with marine VHF radio, but emergency beacons have nothing to do with that radio traffic.

What you specifically require Koivisto to be an expert on is whether the EPIRBs on MS Estonia were in working order and operated correctly. He is not an expert on that, and he refers the reporter who asked him about them to those who are.

 

[JayUtah]

As per the YLE article...

Asked and answered.

 

[JayUtah]

All beacons...

You didn't address my post. The modern usage of software-defined radios for many radio applications, including emergency signalling, does not prove your claim that the EPIRBs in 1994 were detuned so as not to have been received properly by receivers.

So they are set up to automatically emit a signal when freed from their brackets and upon rising to the surface of the water.

Asked and answered.

 

[JayUtah]

That is a blatant lie.

No. Documentation has been previously provided several times.

 

[JayUtah]

Koivisto was the person who gathered information from the ship's radio electricians.

You have provided no documentation from JAIC to support your claim for this role. The JAIC names a different person who is the subject matter expert in marine radio communications. When asked about EPIRBs by a journalist, Koivisto gives a brief answer and then notes that the EPIRB matter is being investigated by the proper subject matter experts.

The JAIC findings were made according to an appropriately thorough investigation and are consistent with all known facts. Your unwillingness to accept those findings appears to be based on willful ignorance.

 

[lobosrul5]

All beacons have to be 'switched on' for them to work. In the case of the automatic ones, they have to be set up so that whilst the frequency of the signal can be tested, at the same time they should not emit a signal to the satellite, with the consequent false distress call. So they are set up to automatically emit a signal when freed from their brackets and upon rising to the surface of the water. Alternatively, they can be removed and used manually by attaching the lanyard to one's clothing or boat, and thrown overboard.

Wrong actually. Theres no "master switch" or such of any kind on the following model:

https://manualzz.com/doc/o/al1ac/kannad-marine-epirb-user-manual-overview#p7

When out of its bracket there is a "collar" to prevent false immersion activation. Its not a switch. See page 8.

ETA: of course we are back to Schrodinger's CT... which is it Vixen. Did the EPIRB on Estonia not transmit because its master switch was set to off, or was it because it was de-tuned... or are we back to the silly: Spetsnaz is super thorough BS, they both magically de-tuned something that cannot be de-tuned and turned a non-existent master switch to off.

 

[zooterkin]

As per the YLE article, which pictures Koivisto with a replica model of the EPIRB in question, it further mentions that their journalists searched for the EPIRB representations to the JAIC but together with the beacons themselves, all of the documentation was nowhere to be found.


They are possibly in a box in a dusty museum archive.

It wasn't a 'replica model'. It was a brand-new EPIRB with a similar model number to the manually activated EPIRBs that were actually fitted to the Estonia. Because it was brand-new, and therefore subject to the current regulations, it was immersion activated. My suspicion is that this may have led to some confusion, before the exact model that was actually on the Estonia was established (which might not have been until the actual EPIRBs washed ashore).

 

[Jack by the hedge]

I have never claimed to be an expert.

That explains why you make mistakes like assuming that back in 1994 a float free EPIRB was also necessarily an automatic activation type.

It doesn't explain why you keep insisting on repeating the same mistakes over and over ad nauseam.

 

[Vixen]

No, it's spelled out explicitly in the statute.

Prove it. Produce the statute.