• 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.

The sinking of MS Estonia: Case Reopened Part VII

Andy_Ross said:
And yet a welder heats metal to those temperatures in seconds.
Click to expand...
And in contrast, high explosives produce high temperatures for only small fractions of a second. High explosives fail metal structures primarily through acoustic loading (i.e., the shock wave), not thermal loading. The metal is torn or shattered (depending on strain rate), not melted or softened. Prof. Westermann reported evidence that the material recovered had been subjected to high temperature, but not high explosives. She does not agree that her findings are consistent with the use of high explosives. The latter would require evidence of those high strain rates, which is absent from the specimens she studied.
 
JayUtah said:
And in contrast, high explosives produce high temperatures for only small fractions of a second. High explosives fail metal structures primarily through acoustic loading (i.e., the shock wave), not thermal loading. The metal is torn or shattered (depending on strain rate), not melted or softened. Prof. Westermann reported evidence that the material recovered had been subjected to high temperature, but not high explosives. She does not agree that her findings are consistent with the use of high explosives. The latter would require evidence of those high strain rates, which is absent from the specimens she studied.
Click to expand...

Yes. It appears that Prof Westermann is neither qualified nor competent to judge the effect of high explosives on metal. As you say, an explosion would have bulged or ripped the Estonia's hull or bow lock rather than melted them. No evidence of such bulging or ripping was ever found - quite the contrary, in fact. The Estonia sank because its improperly maintained and badly designed bow lock failed due to cumulative fatigue, which caused water to pour in through the compromised bow door onto the vehicle decks every time the bow "scooped" down into the oncoming waves. End of story.
 
The conspiracy fantasies can no longer be argued in the vacuum of ambiguity. They went back. They brought all the cool equipment. They searched and inspected the car deck. They removed and recovered the bow ramp. All the stones have been turned over.

Bottom Line: The MS Estonia sailed into weather it was never designed to endure, and it didn't. The bow cover's design wasn't up to the challenge, and the ship was sailing TOO FAST for the conditions that night. Period.

Since the sinking Ro-Ro ferries have been extensively redesigned, and this means the shipping companies had been playing Russian Roulette (pun intended) with passenger safety, which should surprise nobody. Rube and her ilk are nothing more than anti-western toadies. Find better sources.
 
LondonJohn said:
Yes. It appears that Prof Westermann is neither qualified nor competent to judge the effect of high explosives on metal.
Click to expand...
I'm not making that claim. On the contrary, I assume Prof. Westermann is familiar with the metallurgical markers of high strain rates and fracture mechanics. The metallurgical studies pertinent to my licensing covered such topics. There just weren't any such markers in her specimens, and I believe that's the basis of her rejection of the high-explosives claim.
 
Vixen said:
Given this professor was talking about metallurgy deformations caused by explosives - ipso facto extreme high temperatures, I am not sure why people decided it was amusing she said this could only be achieved artificially in a lab. Just because a flame can reach X,000°C, it can take a considerably long time for a metal to reach the same inherent temperature, so I am not sure what the big controversy was.
Click to expand...
Please cite where she said that the temperatures being discussed could only be achieved artificially in a lab. It doesn't make sense on any level. From what I remember, it was *you* that made the claim that the temperatures couldn't be achieved outside of laboratory conditions.

The Estonia wasn't in a laboratory. So can you explain how the damage that was caused by conditions that couldn't occur ouside a lab actually did occur?

Also, with a welding torch, you can melt the steel you're welding in a fraction of a second, it sometimes takes a bit of practise to get used to welding thinner pieces of steel along with dialing down the voltage so you don't end up making a mess of things by melting too much too fast.
 
Vixen said:
To even get to temperatures above 700°C artificially you need to be in a laboratory. There is no way 'welding' would cause the type of deformation as seen here. Professor Westermann was being purely descriptive and was not giving an opinion as all she did was microscopically examine the bow visor for deformations and its type.
Click to expand...

Just so everyone can see what you actually said about steel, temperatures, etc. originally.
 
JayUtah said:
And in contrast, high explosives produce high temperatures for only small fractions of a second. High explosives fail metal structures primarily through acoustic loading (i.e., the shock wave), not thermal loading. The metal is torn or shattered (depending on strain rate), not melted or softened. Prof. Westermann reported evidence that the material recovered had been subjected to high temperature, but not high explosives. She does not agree that her findings are consistent with the use of high explosives. The latter would require evidence of those high strain rates, which is absent from the specimens she studied.
Click to expand...
Yes, PETN shock wave moves at around 21,000 feet a second.
 
erwinl said:
Because if these deformations can only be achieved artificially in a lab, it must be that the Estonia also had been in such a lab. Otherwise it could never have shown those deformations.

Or. If the Estonia has not been in a lab, but does show these deformations, maybe, just maybe, these can occur outside of a lab?

So. Has, in your opinion, the Estonia been in a lab?
Click to expand...
We were talking about deformations as seen on reinforced steel after a detonation.
 
JayUtah said:
And in contrast, high explosives produce high temperatures for only small fractions of a second. High explosives fail metal structures primarily through acoustic loading (i.e., the shock wave), not thermal loading. The metal is torn or shattered (depending on strain rate), not melted or softened. Prof. Westermann reported evidence that the material recovered had been subjected to high temperature, but not high explosives. She does not agree that her findings are consistent with the use of high explosives. The latter would require evidence of those high strain rates, which is absent from the specimens she studied.
Click to expand...
Exactly. We are not talking about someone welding, this was about ascertaining whether such a detonation took place on a particular region of the bow.
 
JesseCuster said:
Just so everyone can see what you actually said about steel, temperatures, etc. originally.
Click to expand...
Yes, the sentence structure very clearly indicates I was referring to what Prof Westermann was discussing, as in: "There is no way 'welding' would cause the type of deformation as seen here. Professor Westermann was being purely descriptive and was not giving an opinion as all she did was microscopically examine the bow visor for deformations and its type."
 
Vixen said:
Exactly. We are not talking about someone welding, this was about ascertaining whether such a detonation took place on a particular region of the bow.
Click to expand...
The evidence presented is not consistent with a detonation. This is why Prof. Westermann does not endorse the high explosives hypothesis.

High explosives do not produce the evidence of thermal loading that Prof. Westermann observed. Welding does. High explosives produce evidence of high strain rates and fractures. The deformations Prof. Westermann observed are evidence of low strain rates. This is consistent with the structural breakup under ordinary sinking loads.

Vixen said:
Yes, the sentence structure very clearly indicates I was referring to what Prof Westermann was discussing, as in: "There is no way 'welding' would cause the type of deformation as seen here. Professor Westermann was being purely descriptive and was not giving an opinion as all she did was microscopically examine the bow visor for deformations and its type."
Click to expand...
That opinion is not from Prof. Westermann, but that of someone interpreting her findings later. I do not need someone else's interpretation in order to know what Westermann's findings imply for forensic engineering.
 
Last edited:
Vixen said:
I'll need to double check what the exact material the bow and the bow ramp were.
Click to expand...
Why did you write "reinforced steel" before you had any inkling of what that might mean? The bow visor and ramp were made of steel. Do you have some actual understanding of what materials we're talking about, or did you just try to sound impressive?
 
JesseCuster said:
Please cite where she said that the temperatures being discussed could only be achieved artificially in a lab. It doesn't make sense on any level. From what I remember, it was *you* that made the claim that the temperatures couldn't be achieved outside of laboratory conditions.

The Estonia wasn't in a laboratory. So can you explain how the damage that was caused by conditions that couldn't occur ouside a lab actually did occur?

Also, with a welding torch, you can melt the steel you're welding in a fraction of a second, it sometimes takes a bit of practise to get used to welding thinner pieces of steel along with dialing down the voltage so you don't end up making a mess of things by melting too much too fast.
Click to expand...
It was in a presentation she gave. As I recall, they had specimens from the recovered bow. Let's try again. If the metallurgists are trying ascertain what sort of deformation would be seen in metal similar to that in the section of the bow looked at, she explained it would not have been caused by someone applying heat and in a lab the said deformation (for an explosives event) would only be achieved in a lab artificially, short of actually applying explosives.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom