• 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

Mojo said:
You said that you "thought it strange they didn't recover the body of Andresson from the bridge, given the mystery over various issues (speed, changeover, the listing)." If this was information that would be provided by the instruments on the bridge, why would a "mystery" about this information make it strange that the body wasn't recovered?
Click to expand...
Three nines, innit?
 
Just to be clear, they did a second investigation which mostly confirms the first investigation, but with the latest equipment. There is no longer a vacuum to run wild with silly conspiracies. It doesn't matter what some "expert" said about explosives, the bow ramp was recovered. It failed just as they originally said it did. They explored the car deck. They've imaged the entire hull.

It's done. The conspiracy shills were all wrong. What's the point of arguing they were now?
 
JesseCuster said:
How is the captain's dead body going to tell you anything about the things you think are mysterious - i.e. the listing, speed and changeover? How do you propose extracting information about the speed of the Estonia or how it was listing from the captain's dead body?
Click to expand...
Post-mortems are carried out by a public coroner. The whole point of of carrying out a post-mortem in an accidental death is in the interests of justice. Given Andresson had literally just come on duty (1:00am) and the 'bang' or 'collision' sensation was heard about the same time, one would have thought determining the cause of the Captain's death (if by heart attack there would be no water in his lungs) then that would be in the public interest to know a possible contributing cause for the loss of comtrol of the vessel. Given the extraordinary lengths to retrieve Capt. Piht's briefcase, which was in Voronin's designated room, it would appear they decided early on their aim was Piht, so they didn't care about whatever was going on at the bridge.
 
Vixen said:
Post-mortems are carried out by a public coroner. The whole point of of carrying out a post-mortem in an accidental death is in the interests of justice. Given Andresson had literally just come on duty (1:00am) and the 'bang' or 'collision' sensation was heard about the same time, one would have thought determining the cause of the Captain's death (if by heart attack there would be no water in his lungs) then that would be in the public interest to know a possible contributing cause for the loss of comtrol of the vessel. Given the extraordinary lengths to retrieve Capt. Piht's briefcase, which was in Voronin's designated room, it would appear they decided early on their aim was Piht, so they didn't care about whatever was going on at the bridge.
Click to expand...
So are you claiming it's suspicious that they didn't recover the captain's body?
 
Andy_Ross said:
What clue would their position in a partially capsized wreck on the seabed give you?

Apart from things not fixed down move about in a flooded compartment when the angle of heel changes, it's one of the reasons furniture on a warship isfixed down and all lockers and drawers have positive closing.

Not just for sinking or flooding but for rough weather in general.

Click to expand...
AIUI only designated personnel are allowed access to the bridge, so who the heck was the guy in red. Given the ferry was used to smuggle dismantled nuclear power materials from the former USSR bases in Estonia, and there were reports of old stalinists objecting to this including key crew trained at Russian naval academies, one can see it'd be a high risk situation to put the civilian public in, should organised crime warfare break out. It seems strange to me the investigators weren't champing at the bit to examine the bridge instruments. I should think given what the ferry was used for, sabotage was a high risk. But hey ho.
 
Vixen said:
Post-mortems are carried out by a public coroner. The whole point of of carrying out a post-mortem in an accidental death is in the interests of justice. <snip>
Click to expand...
You really are incapable of following a simple back and forth. aren't you? You were asked why the captain's body would need to be retrieved and you answered with the bizarre reason that the authorities would want to interview the captain after a sinking ("it's that simple").

That's a weird nonsensical answer, and when pressed further and asked again, you responded by saying that the reason had to do with solving mysteries to do with "speed, changeover and listing" which you then said would be stored on the bridge instruments, which makes just as little sense.

This latest post doesn't address any of that.

Can you explain what you meant when you answered that the reason for retrieving the captain's dead body was because the authorites would want to interview him or to help solve mysteries relating to the speed, changeover and listing?
 
Last edited:
Vixen said:
AIUI only designated personnel are allowed access to the bridge, so who the heck was the guy in red. Given the ferry was used to smuggle dismantled nuclear power materials from the former USSR bases in Estonia, and there were reports of old stalinists objecting to this including key crew trained at Russian naval academies, one can see it'd be a high risk situation to put the civilian public in, should organised crime warfare break out. It seems strange to me the investigators weren't champing at the bit to examine the bridge instruments. I should think given what the ferry was used for, sabotage was a high risk. But hey ho.
Click to expand...
Deranged
 
LondonJohn said:
Hilariously, you demonstrate your ineptitude* once again within this very post in which you tried to imply that the challenges to your knowledge/understanding were misplaced :ROFLMAO:

* 35 minutes in prime notation is 35' not 35" (35" is 35 seconds LOL)
Click to expand...
Well, considering the draft of the Estonia was 2165”, it looks like the vessel might have sunk at any time!!!
 
JesseCuster said:
You really are incapable of following a simple back and forth. aren't you? You were asked why the captain's body would need to be retrieved and you answered with the bizarre reason that the authorities would want to interview the captain after a sinking ("it's that simple").

That's a weird nonsensical answer, and when pressed further and asked again, you responded by saying that the reason had to do with solving mysteries to do with "speed, changeover and listing" which you then said would be stored on the bridge instruments, which makes just as little sense.

This latest post doesn't address any of that.

Can you explain what you meant when you answered that the reason for retrieving the captain's dead body was because the authorites would want to interview him or to help solve mysteries relating to the speed, changeover and listing?
Click to expand...
Er no! Do read carefully. I did explain why the captain was considered an important figure in disaster investigations.

I. Direct quote:
Vixen said:
Given the captain is in charge of the ship and its operations, in shipping disasters, such as Concordia and Free Herald (not to mention the more recent underwater sabotage by Eagles S) prosecutors generally want to interview the captain.
Click to expand...

2. Next sentence, Direct quote:

Vixen said:
I thought it strange they didn't recover the body of Andresson from the bridge, given the mystery over various issues (speed, changeover, the listing). That is not the same as suspicious. Suspicious is when you consider the possibility of ill-intent, concealment or a crime.
Click to expand...

Two separate ideas answering in shorthand a query from a poster. Clear now?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom