Cont: The Sinking of MS Estonia: Case Re-opened Part III

[Vixen]

"Crew Buried Cargo" claims Ruotsalainen in full page Sunday Supplement Spread

Harri Ruotsalainen, a former employee of the Helsinki Rescue Department and the Finnish Defense Forces and retired fire engineer, says he saw something in Tallinn in November 1994. He believes it has been classified by Sweden as a state secret for 75 years. A couple of months after the accident he was shown a ‘decisive clue’ which he says was not mentioned in the JAIC report.

He believes the JAIC’s desire to ‘immerse the core issue in endless detail (the falling off of the bow visor and consequent flooding of the car deck) which continues over 200 pages with numerous specifications of the nuts, bolts and locks, to be an example of ‘classical disinformation’.

Ruotsalainen finds the final route map of the Estonia ‘strange’.

He says he went to Tallinn in November 1994 on an internship and as an advisor.

“That's when I came across this diagonal sonar tape,” Ruotsalainen says.

“- After a while, the men of the maritime service company Alfons Håkans came, and my local counterpart at the Rescue Board, the Estonian Rescue Service, was Igor Volke . A couple of other men supported a long strip of paper on a roll, and they asked me what these echoes might be.

- It had echoes in two queues, square echoes, and from the trip I saw, there were quite a lot of them. - I thought it was a cargo that came out, Ruotsalainen says and sighs.

- Later, it started to think specifically that because the order was so good, that cargo could not come out through the bow. After that, it would have collided with a ship quite soon, which would have thrown the cargo down. So those products, or cargo, were dropped from the stern.”

TS

He says there were eyewitnesses who mentioned the sounds of trucks from the car deck yet there is no mention of this in the JAIC report.

According to Ruotsalainen, the result of the oblique sonar was seen at the same time by six other people, some of whom were Norwegian. Later, he has not seen the tape or heard anyone else talk about it.

- I assume that the Swedes took all the material for themselves.”

He also claims there were no Russians present but later a Russian tried to discuss the topic with him.

“The key to the mystery, according to Ruotsalainen, is not in the wreck of Estonia, which most of the scientists and divers describe. Above all, you should explore the location perhaps 500 meters away.

According to the theory, it would have embedded secret cargo in the sounding data, which by no means could end up in the hands of the authorities waiting at the ship's terminal port in Stockholm.”

Once the cargo had been submerged in the sea, Estonia began to sink and made the last loop, surprisingly long, drawn on some maps, according to Ruotsalainen.

ibid

Summary

Theses
Ruotsalainen's theory

This is how Harri Ruotsalainen drew his own conclusions about Estonia's sinking.

According to him, the oblique sonar tape displayed in Tallinn had square echoes in two neat queues. What else could they be than the cargo that came out?

Ruotsalainen concluded that the cargo must have been lowered into the sea from the stern of the ship. From the bow gate, the containers would have ended up under the ship and giggled upside down.

He asks , among other things: what happened to the captain of the ship and who commanded the ship at crucial moments? Why, in the event of a maritime distress, did the ship move further north than normal in the depression? Why has the sinking been shown to have taken place so that the ship was still driving far ahead and turning left in a loop, returning to the same point it had passed moments earlier, and in the end a little over?

It is at the intersection of the routes , about 500 meters from the wreck of Estonia, that the research groups think the Swedish groups should look for any cargo that may be missing from the ship.

He suspects that the person who commanded Estonia was ordered to sink the ship on top of the cargo dumped at sea. The intention would have been to cover up a secret cargo that was possibly Soviet military products en route to Sweden and beyond.

 

[Vixen]

Where can we look it up?

Can you give me a link?

See the Marine Insight link I posted recently.

 

[Vixen]

Those that were in compartments that flooded, yes. Those that were in sealed compartments didn't.

And it is believed the men in the back room are believed to have stayed alive much longer than people expected them to.

 

[whoanellie]

It is to do with trim and stability. Just as centre of gravity keeps you upright as you walk down the road.

You really don't have a clue. What is the "it" that goes negative?

 

[Vixen]

No, it doesn't, and I'm not asking for simple terms. I'm asking for the full-blown vector analysis of ship stability in the roll axis that proves a ship will capsize inevitably, when -- in your naive terms -- its center of gravity "becomes less than zero." You're still conflating buoyancy with stability, and you're doubling down on your ignorance in the face of people who know you're bluffing.

Show us the math, Vixen. I want to see your vector sums.

No, I am not, and shan't.

 

[Andy_Ross]

See the Marine Insight link I posted recently.

Where in that link does it tell me?

Can you give us an actual quote? i can't see it in there.

 

[Andy_Ross]

And it is believed the men in the back room are believed to have stayed alive much longer than people expected them to.

What is your point? they were in a sealed compartment that was at surface atmospheric pressure.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

I am sure you can do the calculations.

Close enough to tell that the HOFE was lying on its side a lot faster than the Estonia was.

So will you now drop your made-up claim that the Estonia sank "in record time"?

 

[JayUtah]

No, I am not, and shan't.

You don't seem to understand. We know you're wrong, Vixen. We know you don't understand the difference between stability and buoyancy. That's been abundantly apparent for the past couple of days. The nail in the coffin was the, "when it's less than zero." comment. You have no clue even how to describe the problem in correct physical terms.

Where you seem to still be deluded is in believing that no one else can know enough about these concepts to know that you're wrong. You seem to think that enough people are as ignorant as you that they will give you the benefit of the doubt. You need to get used to the idea that people can know that you are wrong -- quite a number of people, in fact. When you continue the bluff-and-bluster approach in the face of others' knowledge to the contrary, you don't paint yourself as a forthright person trying to report news items. As others have pointed out, you paint yourself instead as a willfully ignorant person trying to appear smarter than you are. It's pure ego, and it's failing badly today.

At this point you have to make a case that you're worth the further attention of reasonable people. If you're entirely incapable of admitting error or ignorance even when it's staring you right in the face, there is no reason for any reasonable person to believe you have inspected your own beliefs and claims to the point where they pass critical muster. Here it's obvious you just read Anders Björkmann and believed what he said hook-line-and-sinker, and have no desire or ability to question anything you've been spoon-fed. That is not a position from which you can maintain an intelligent discussion.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Harri Ruotsalainen, a former employee of the Helsinki Rescue Department and the Finnish Defense Forces and retired fire engineer, says he saw something in Tallinn in November 1994. He believes it has been classified by Sweden as a state secret for 75 years. A couple of months after the accident he was shown a ‘decisive clue’ which he says was not mentioned in the JAIC report.

He believes the JAIC’s desire to ‘immerse the core issue in endless detail (the falling off of the bow visor and consequent flooding of the car deck) which continues over 200 pages with numerous specifications of the nuts, bolts and locks, to be an example of ‘classical disinformation’.

Ruotsalainen finds the final route map of the Estonia ‘strange’.

He says he went to Tallinn in November 1994 on an internship and as an advisor.

TS

He says there were eyewitnesses who mentioned the sounds of trucks from the car deck yet there is no mention of this in the JAIC report.



He also claims there were no Russians present but later a Russian tried to discuss the topic with him.

ibid

Summary

When power was lost the ship would turn broadside on to the sea and drift downwind and with the waves. As the ship was heading in to the wind and sea where do you expect it to go?

Is the theory now that the cargo was put over the stern?

How were these 'containers put overboard?

How big are they?

How would the captain know where these containers were on the sea bed?

How would he have any control over his ship after the power went to return it to the place where the cargo was supposedly ejected?

How would he have any control over where the ship finally came to rest?

Is the claim now that the 'secret' cargo is underneath the wreck so can't be found?

That's convenient.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Strangely, many of them did.

You think it strange that everyone in the front half of the Kursk died when its entire complement of torpedoes exploded.

 

[Vixen]

You don't seem to understand. We know you're wrong, Vixen. We know you don't understand the difference between stability and buoyancy. That's been abundantly apparent for the past couple of days. The nail in the coffin was the, "when it's less than zero." comment. You have no clue even how to describe the problem in correct physical terms.

Where you seem to still be deluded is in believing that no one else can know enough about these concepts to know that you're wrong. You seem to think that enough people are as ignorant as you that they will give you the benefit of the doubt. You need to get used to the idea that people can know that you are wrong -- quite a number of people, in fact. When you continue the bluff-and-bluster approach in the face of others' knowledge to the contrary, you don't paint yourself as a forthright person trying to report news items. As others have pointed out, you paint yourself instead as a willfully ignorant person trying to appear smarter than you are. It's pure ego, and it's failing badly today.

At this point you have to make a case that you're worth the further attention of reasonable people. If you're entirely incapable of admitting error or ignorance even when it's staring you right in the face, there is no reason for any reasonable person to believe you have inspected your own beliefs and claims to the point where they pass critical muster. Here it's obvious you just read Anders Björkmann and believed what he said hook-line-and-sinker, and have no desire or ability to question anything you've been spoon-fed. That is not a position from which you can maintain an intelligent discussion.

How can I take people claiming to be expert engineers and shipbuilders seriously when they come out with claims such as 'The Herald of Free Enterprise sank faster than the Estonia, dishonestly pretending the two incidents are like for like.

This informs me I would be wasting my time bothering to 'do the calculations' for you are determined to refuse to be honest about it.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Truth is, I don't really care, when it is something so elementary and basic, that you can easily look up for yourself.

Your claim is that an open boat such as a viking longship which lists until water starts to come over the side will usually continue to tip over and finish upside down, floating due to air trapped inside.

I suspect everyone else here thinks that's just false as the boat will usually swamp and settle down into the water without continuing to turn over.

If it's so simple why don't you show us anything suggesting it's true, or just drop the claim as unsupportable?

 

[JayUtah]

How can I take people claiming to be expert engineers and shipbuilders seriously when they come out with claims such as 'The Herald of Free Enterprise sank faster than the Estonia, dishonestly pretending the two incidents are like for like.

This informs me I would be wasting my time bothering to 'do the calculations' for you are determined to refuse to be honest about it.

We know you don't know what you're talking about, Vixen. Calling everyone else liars doesn't fix your problem or make you look smart.

 

[Vixen]

When power was lost the ship would turn broadside on to the sea and drift downwind and with the waves. As the ship was heading in to the wind and sea where do you expect it to go?

Is the theory now that the cargo was put over the stern?

How were these 'containers put overboard?

How big are they?

How would the captain know where these containers were on the sea bed?

How would he have any control over his ship after the power went to return it to the place where the cargo was supposedly ejected?

How would he have any control over where the ship finally came to rest?

Is the claim now that the 'secret' cargo is underneath the wreck so can't be found?

That's convenient.

He's claiming he saw some kind of sonar map when he was a intern in Nov 1994.

He says had the cargo gone through the bow ramp there was the real risk of it colliding with the vessel.

I suspect he is some kind of counter-intelligence agent who has suddenly conveniently popped up after 27 years to spread disinformation.
He's been put forward by some Russian guy. How else do these people get the ear of a State Parliament (the Estonian Riigskugu) and the national press?

His theory seems absurd.

 

[Vixen]

You think it strange that everyone in the front half of the Kursk died when its entire complement of torpedoes exploded.

People did not expect the guys at the back to have lived as long as they did.

 

[Mojo]

The guys in the Kursk backrooms lasted out for quite a while.

I suspect that the Kursk may have been designed in such a way that its crew wouldn’t die when it submerged.

Strangely, many of them did.

 

[Andy_Ross]

How can I take people claiming to be expert engineers and shipbuilders seriously when they come out with claims such as 'The Herald of Free Enterprise sank faster than the Estonia, dishonestly pretending the two incidents are like for like.

This informs me I would be wasting my time bothering to 'do the calculations' for you are determined to refuse to be honest about it.

Why are they not alike?

How quickly did the HOFE turn over and sink?

 

[Andy_Ross]

He's claiming he saw some kind of sonar map when he was a intern in Nov 1994.

He says had the cargo gone through the bow ramp there was the real risk of it colliding with the vessel.

I suspect he is some kind of counter-intelligence agent who has suddenly conveniently popped up after 27 years to spread disinformation.
He's been put forward by some Russian guy. How else do these people get the ear of a State Parliament (the Estonian Riigskugu) and the national press?

His theory seems absurd.

But pushing lorries out of the bow in a storm and torpedoes aren't absurd?

 

[Jack by the hedge]

And it is believed the men in the back room are believed to have stayed alive much longer than people expected them to.

They were not exposed to the very high pressure outside which would have killed them straight away, and which was the relevant point. Nobody in the Estonia would have been in a pressure sealed compartment and they would have quickly succumbed to the effects of normal air at very high pressure.

I'm not aware that the Kursk sailors survived longer than anyone expected. They had emergency oxygen generators and used those.