The sinking of MS Estonia: Case Reopened Part VII

[Mojo]

Her Khyber, I reckon

Kemo sabi, my son, kemo sabi!

 

[Mojo]

What does the user manual tell you?

That they should be switched off until needed.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

From what I can gather...

How trustworthy is the source from which you gather?

 

[Vixen]

Let’s go back to your post that I responded to:
As we can all see, you looked at the timespan until MRCC Stockholm sent out the notification to Swedish rescue services. Now, the responsibility to coordinate all rescue operations falls with Finland, since it’s within their SAR area, so rescue operations started earlier. At 01:26 (ship) and 01:36 (helicopter).

But your end time above is important for a later point.
As for the starting time in your timespan above, JAIC reports that the Bow Visor fell off at about 01:15.

What is your source that the mayday didn’t come from the bridge?
The list started at around 01:15, so not 20 minutes after the list.
Chapter 7.3 lists all the stations that received the first and the second mayday call, and the times the logged for it.

What is your source for this? We know that they didn’t survive but what is your source where they were at the time?
Mariella was trying to reach Helsinki Radio at 01:27. MRCC Turku was already in the loop by this time. Chapter 7.3.3.

You may wish that it was so, but in fact the number of staff available limits how much can happen at any given time.


Mariehamn heard the 2nd mayday call, and was involved since 01:27 according to their log.

Yes they could. They could have sent out a Mayday Relay directly. You do not need an exact position to do that. The exact position can follow in a later transmission.

It wasn’t down. We knew that since the VHF channel 16 traffic is recorded, and we can listen to it.

And MF 2182 was not down – the reason nobody answered was covered above.

Exactly why any delay was fatal. Had the Finnish radio stations/Rescue stations had more staff available, we might have seen helicopters being launched earlier, and possibly they might have been able to save some more lives.

There you have it, information about what JAIC explained, with links to each chapter.

Pretty sure Tammes' body was found outside the bridge. Fact they had to use walkie talkies and poor reception indicates they were not on the bridge.

With all due respect, in any major incident there will always be pointers as to where there is room for improvement. The JAIC pointing out where improvements could be made does not equate to an actual explanation of what was wrong with the communications during that hour. All maydays are automatically recorded but they may not be picked up immediately. There needs to be a chain of command that sets rescue into operation. Accordingly, it took apx an hour for the rescue teams for the Super Puma to jump out of their beds, jump in their cars and make their way to the coastguards.

Utö is a well-known area for shipwrecks over hundreds of years so it is not as if they are unfamiliar with protocols or lack skills. Cf Park Victory 1948.

The JAIC Report might fool some people into thinking it was just a mix up with protocols but this serves to evade the very real communications problems that night.

 

[Mojo]

How trustworthy is the source from which you gather?

I expect it's quite regular.

 

[Vixen]

Yes they do, in several places including chapter 17.2.

It doesn't actually tell you you why, does it, given the ship's radio electricians had inspected and tested them the week before, according to official logs.

 

[Vixen]

And where are such generators typically located? What powers them? What conditions involving a ship foundering might cause such generators not to function?

Near the funnel AIUI.

 

[JayUtah]

How trustworthy is the source from which you gather?

I would like her to name her source. I'll draw my own conclusion about how trustworthy it is.

ETA: I know what her source is on this. I'm just wondering if she'll identify it.

 

[Here_to_learn]

It doesn't actually tell you you why, does it, given the ship's radio electricians had inspected and tested them the week before, according to official logs.

That is in chapter 8.11

The EPIRB beacons along with some liferafts and lifejackets were found on 2 October 1994 by two Estonian fishing vessels in the vicinity of Dirhami on the north coast of Estonia. The beacons were switched off when found.
On 28 December 1994 the condition of the above EPIRBs was tested by the Finnish experts. The radio beacons proved to be in full working order when switched on.
On 24 January 1995 both EPIRBs were activated on board the Estonian icebreaker TARMO, when they worked without interval for four hours. According to the Russian COSPAS Mission control centre, whose area of responsibility includes the Estonian waters, the radio beacons were transmitting the signal in the normal way throughout the test period.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

The JAIC Report might fool some people into thinking it was just a mix up with protocols but this serves to evade the very real communications problems that night.

Handwaving does not appear to magic your X-files version of events back to life.

 

[Vixen]

That is in chapter 8.11

But it offers no explanation at all as to why they did not emit a signal when immersed and rising to the surface, given they had been inspected and certified as being in working order the week before. It is not good enough to merely record 'they were switched off'. An explanation is required.

 

[Mojo]

But it offers no explanation at all as to why they did not emit a signal when immersed and rising to the surface, given they had been inspected and certified as being in working order the week before. It is not good enough to merely record 'they were switched off'. An explanation is required.

They. Were. Manually. Activated. And. Not. Switched. On.

 

[JayUtah]

But it offers no explanation at all as to why they did not emit a signal when immersed and rising to the surface...

False.

 

[GlennB]

But it offers no explanation at all as to why they did not emit a signal when immersed and rising to the surface, given they had been inspected and certified as being in working order the week before. It is not good enough to merely record 'they were switched off'. An explanation is required.

Explained to you about 100 times in this iteration of the thread alone. Probably 500 times in all. Why do you do this? Are you going for 1000 times?

 

[Here_to_learn]

Pretty sure Tammes' body was found outside the bridge. Fact they had to use walkie talkies and poor reception indicates they were not on the bridge.

So you are guessing.

With all due respect, in any major incident there will always be pointers as to where there is room for improvement. The JAIC pointing out where improvements could be made does not equate to an actual explanation of what was wrong with the communications during that hour.

Now, this is an area where JayUtah specializes, but from what I know, this is eactly the point of a report like the one from JAIC. To identify what went wrong, and to suggest improvements. And that they did.

All maydays are automatically recorded but they may not be picked up immediately. There needs to be a chain of command that sets rescue into operation.

Exactly the point of the JAIC report. With too few people around, they will not react quickly enough, and they will not be able to get everything going quick enough.

The other point here is of course that if there is a recording of radio traffic, there wasn't a blackout. And there are recordings from several coastal stations, as well as on the ships.

The JAIC Report might fool some people into thinking it was just a mix up with protocols but this serves to evade the very real communications problems that night.

Communication is a only party about technology - most of communication is about people. And the people did not do good enough.


But again we see the way you act. You claim something. I (or several others in this thread) show how you are wrong, in a point-by-point refutation including links to the official source material. And how do you respond? You do not acknowledge that you were wrong. Instead you just move on to the next thing, and that without any references to source material or anything like that.

That only tells me that in a couple of hours/days/weeks, we will see exactly the same subject being brought up again, with you again pretending that your points haven't been refuted over and over again.

 

[Mojo]

Now, this is an area where JayUtah specializes, but from what I know, this is eactly the point of a report like the one from JAIC. To identify what went wrong, and to suggest improvements. And that they did.

But that isn't exciting enough for Vixen.

 

[JayUtah]

Pretty sure Tammes' body was found outside the bridge. Fact they had to use walkie talkies and poor reception indicates they were not on the bridge.

Or so your source speculated. I know what your source is. Will you admit to it?

With all due respect...

You haven't respected anyone's expertise in this thread but your own, and you don't have any.

The JAIC pointing out where improvements could be made does not equate to an actual explanation of what was wrong with the communications during that hour.

What if the actual explanation is something other than what you want it to be?

The JAIC Report might fool some people into thinking it was just a mix up with protocols but this serves to evade the very real communications problems that night.

Your source had a vested interested in stirring up a lot of doubt regarding the JAIC report. How would you go about proving to us that you, Vixen, are simply not able to see through the fog they're making?

 

[zooterkin]

How little you know.

That muffled boom you heard was my remaining store of irony meters, which I thought were safe in a lead-lined cellar, far from this thread; how wrong I was.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Don't judge others by your standards.

Speaking of musical sense, here's a recent article in TS:



Google translate:

"A piano tuner finds the right sound by ear - "Each piano is unique"


There is no ambiguity about the meaning of the word used by Lehtola.

But an EPIRB is not a piano
It doesn't have anything that can be tuned.

 

[Andy_Ross]

If you read the article carefully, Lehtola confirms that in the set up phase, the ship's electrical radiographers, 'forgot' to tune the EPIRB's. This omission happened in the set up phase.

Or they were perfectly functional and someone tampered with them.

A whole one hour with a communications blackout as the vessel sank in record time and with a NATO exercise nearby.

There's nothing that could be 'tuned' by anyone aboard the ship.
They are sealed units.

What 'record time' is this? Lots of ships have sunk much more quickly, some so fast the crew never had chance to transmit anything or even get off the ship.

What does NATO have to do with it?