W.D.Clinger
Philosopher
Many years ago, when I was a faster runner than I am now, 15 knots was a speed I could maintain for short distances (e.g. 200m).
No one in the world has ever been able to run at 18 m/s.
The sinking of MS Estonia: Case Reopened Part VII
- Thread starter Jack by the hedge
- Start date
-
- Tags
- ms estonia
No one in the world has ever been able to run at 18 m/s.
JesseCuster
Master Poster
- Joined
- May 4, 2016
- Messages
- 2,159
What about massively overweight Estonian spacecraft dealers, on their last legs due to multiple advanced medical conditions, hopping on one leg? I hear they’re suspiciously nimble.
Reformed Offlian
Master Poster
I dunno. 18 m/s isn't a lot of delta-v.
Helen
Implicitly explicit
But don't you see what a very strange coincidence it is that it sank exactly on that night, the night of this disaster, and not some other day, when it didn't happen. I've been on those boats, and none of them sank. None! Not A One! And also, it sank at midnight. That must mean something! Come on, sinking at midnight, when it could have happened at some completely random time instead - military precision, i'd say!
If you don't hear from me again, it means that my government has disappeared me for questioning this. If that happens, could you please ask someone very intelligent, honest and autentic to look into it? Someone skilled, a polymath even, and with boundless curiosity? I feel that would be the only way to find out the truth.
Last edited:
Mojo
Mostly harmless
Can you give a citation for 'a strong wave', please?
Mojo
Mostly harmless
At least it isn't "knots per hour".
Is it, perhaps, 'not a problem for these boats' because they are certified for such operations (unlike, you know, the MS Estonia, which is the subject under discussion). And perhaps ship design has evolved in the last 30 years.
Oh and your unit conversion of m/s to knots is out by about a factor of 2! So much for honesty, integrity and precision.
Imagine being emotionally invested in a discussion spanning hundreds of pages and not knowing such basics as (1) immersion suits are red, (2) the open bow visor is visible from the bridge, (3) your key witness is dead, and (4) how to convert units of speed.
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
SOLAS votes on the recommendations from marine accident investigators.
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
Last edited:
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
Please let me know why you think the figures as stated, above, are out by about a factor of 2! Let's see which one of us is wrong and which one of us has a desperate need to blurt out, 'So much for honesty, integrity and precision'. Perhaps set an example.
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
the knots is the speed of the vessel but then you knew that.
EHocking
Penultimate Amazing
And nothing in your quote/cite indicates that they read any recommendation by the JAIC report that the bow should be moved closer to the bridge.
Go on, show me where either did.
EHocking
Penultimate Amazing
No they are not. And again, even if it is, you merely prove my point that you merely regurgitate CT bollocks with even thinking about what you are repeating.
It is you that claims 18 m/s = 15 to 18 knots.
Please show us on your source where that claim is made, otherwise, just admit you have no clue how to convert m/s to knots.
JesseCuster
Master Poster
- Joined
- May 4, 2016
- Messages
- 2,159
How is this meant be a response to a post pointing out that the section of the JAIC that you quoted does not say what you claimed it does, that the JAIC recommended moving the bow visor near to the bridge. Can someone with your intellect, high debating standards, commitment to reasoned open debate, commitment to accurate and reliable reporting of facts, well-researched and properly cited and referenced, not read what you’re copying and pasting? It’s kinda worrying how frequently you copy and paste text or link to sources that in no way back up your claims and sometimes say the exact opposite.
EHocking
Penultimate Amazing
There are few transport vessels that can do 18 m/s and I can nearly guarantee that no RORO ever, in the history of marine transport, is capable of 18 m/s.
ETA. A quick google contradicts my assertion regarding fast RORO.
Regardless, it is still your claim that the wind was “only” 15 to 18 knots, when your “source” indicates the wind speed was 18 m/s.
Last edited:
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
See conclusions Chapter 21: Actions of crew in the JAIC and follow through on the steps taken after that. There was a lengthy discussion of the steps taken after the Herald of Free Enterprise disaster, which might be a useful example of how safety at sea international standards come into effect. It can't just be an edict from bunch of guys sitting around a committee table, it has to be written into the safety at see standards at their conventions with IIRC apx 65 nations worldwide signing up to them.
Last edited:
JesseCuster
Master Poster
- Joined
- May 4, 2016
- Messages
- 2,159
In fairness, I think Vixen possibly meant here that the wind speed was 24-25 meters per second and 18 meter per second, but the Estonia was travelling at 15-18 knots. Using completely different units for speed in the same context is confusing.
Last edited:
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
But of course EHocking and the other poster knew that. For the record, we were discussing the claim the vessel was going too fast and in a unusually heavy storm. The self-explanatory diagram I produced - or at least, I thought it was self-explanatory - shows the wind speed was not particularly outside the norms although 24/25 m/s will cause the metereology department here to put out a strong winds warning,especially at sea, and the speed of the vessel 15/18 knots slightly faster than it should have been but hardly breakneck speed. This is what happens when you don't follow the thread properly.
Last edited:
JesseCuster
Master Poster
- Joined
- May 4, 2016
- Messages
- 2,159
Why don’t you just quote the part that specifically recommends that the bow visor be moved closer to the bridge. You’ve already tried once and failed. Try again.
Here you go again, padding your posts with irrelevant links to try and look smart and informed and don’t actually help your cause in any way. That is not evidence that the JAIC report contains recommendations to move the bow visor closer to the bridge. You have yet to provide evidence that the JAIC in fact did that, because you can’t.
EHocking
Penultimate Amazing
No. Your claim. Please quote the exact wording where the JAIC report recommends moving the bridge closer to the bow/visor. Include a link to the document - but you know how citations actually work, don’t you.
Obfuscation noted. We’re talking about the JAIC report on the Estonia incident.
So. You still can’t point us to the actual JAIC recommendation then?which might be a useful example of how safety at sea international standards come into effect. It can't just be an edict from bunch of guys sitting around a committee table, it has to be written into the safety at see standards at their conventions with IIRC apx 65 nations worldwide signing up to them.
Just vague googling of irrelevancies?