The sinking of MS Estonia: Case Reopened Part VII

[Vixen]

It reconciles with the known facts. Your version does not.

Whatever you think was meant by the reported word translated as 'untuned', it either has to somehow reconcile with the absence of any means of user adjustment of EPIRBs or it's just wrong.

Your insistence they were automatically activated does not reconcile with the manufacturer's naming convention, nor with the fact that the devices operated normally when found and switched on and that fact did not indicate to the commission nor any other interested party that these EPIRBs had failed to work as designed. That dog which did not bark in the night is fatal to your story. The service manuals for later automatic models show no user switch to override the immersion activation. The only thing which can prevent activation is a magnetic switch, active when the buoy is in its holder and which releases as it floats free from the holder.

You don't have a coherent story.

Given, as amply demonstrated, that the MV Estonia EPIRB's were standard free-float automatic buoys with standard cages including hydrostatic units, as mandated by IMO CHAPTER III, and they failed to emit a signal when the ship sank, of course the experts are going to speculate as to the reasons why. Kalle Peder, the Estonian chief of maritime affairs conjectured that the buoys must have got trapped within the wreckage, thus preventing them from arising to the surface of the water to emit the signal, others that perhaps the signal emitted was not quite the right wavelength for the satellite to have picked it up, as there could be no other reason, other than that they had been switched off. As the JAIC glosses over this, we can be sure they were not manualy-activation-only or it would have just said so. It would have said, 'Some idiot placed manually-activated-only buoys into an automatic free-float only cage with an HRU, and claimed to have tested they were ready to function, and nobody switched them on as the ship was sinking. No mystery here. Nothing to test. Move along.'

 

[Vixen]

Yes, that's how I make my living in part. This is not your industry. It's mine. I'm the one telling you how it works.



Provide the portion of the article that identifies Koivisto by name as the expert on EPIRBs. The reference you provided previously to Koivisto quotes him as deferring the questions to others who were the experts. It also quotes the Commission chair wrongly claiming the EPIRBs were "untuned," and wrongly identifies Koivisto as a member of the Commission. Better sources have contradicted this reporting.

He was the go-to person in accident investigations. For example, in January 1995, shortly after the MV Estonia accident Sept 1994, Silja Europa ran aground and Koivisto was wheeled in.

On Thursday, the Government appointed a Major Accident Investigation Board to investigate the incident that arose after Silja Europa ran aground on 13 January in the Stockholm archipelago of Furusund.

The three-member committee is headed by sea captain Simo Aarnio, and the members are Heikki Tissari , M.Sc. (Tech.), and Asser Koivisto, technician. Aarnio is the Head of the Maritime Inspection Office of the Finnish Maritime Administration, but since March 1994 he has been on leave of absence and as a full-time major accident investigator.

PAAVO TUKKIMÄKI Helsingin Sanomat 17.2.1995

 

[Vixen]

Perhaps Vixen "tunes" her smoke detectors?

You didn't know that EPIRB'S emitted a 406Mhz range signal...?


Maybe that is wherein your confusion lies.

 

[Vixen]

That might be sufficient in a normal thread, but under these circumstances we STRONGLY recommend turning off and unplugging any irony meters, then storing them safely in a lead lined concrete room in a different county. I'd recommend in the house of someone you really don't like, might as well get some benefit if you're going to have to replace them anyway!

Oh the irony.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Asser Koivisto is a confirmed expert in maritime communications.

That wasn't the matter in question.

 

[zooterkin]

Given, as amply demonstrated, that the MV Estonia EPIRB's were standard free-float automatic buoys

No.

 

[Vixen]

Where is your source Vixen?

Please give us some sort of official government or manufacturer link that the Kannad 406 F must be manually tuned. NOT a snippet of a paywalled, auto-translated, old article, for whom is even being quoted is suspect...

...



...

...


[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/73767638a89085fe44.gif[/qimg]

EPIRB's and PLB run on SDR technology.

Superheterodyne receivers use a VFO (variable-frequency oscillator), mixer, and filter to tune the desired signal to a common IF (intermediate frequency) or baseband. Typically in SDR, this signal is then sampled by the analog-to-digital converter. However, in some applications it is not necessary to tune the signal to an intermediate frequency and the radio frequency signal is directly sampled by the analog-to-digital converter (after amplification).

wiki

You can see examples of OEM cards here:

https://mussonmarine.com/downloads/oem_eng_(musson_marine)_epirb.pdf

Nobody said the Kannad 406 F should be 'manually tuned'. In the set up phase or inspection phase, they need to be tested as to whether they are emitting the correct frequency in the 406mhz range. That is what was meant by Lehtola when he said they were 'untuned'. The signal was not reaching the satellite for some reason.

 

[Andy_Ross]

You are just trolling now

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Given, as amply demonstrated, that the MV Estonia EPIRB's were standard free-float automatic buoys with standard cages including hydrostatic units, as mandated by IMO CHAPTER III, and they failed to emit a signal when the ship sank, of course the experts are going to speculate as to the reasons why. Kalle Peder, the Estonian chief of maritime affairs conjectured that the buoys must have got trapped within the wreckage, thus preventing them from arising to the surface of the water to emit the signal, others that perhaps the signal emitted was not quite the right wavelength for the satellite to have picked it up, as there could be no other reason, other than that they had been switched off. As the JAIC glosses over this, we can be sure they were not manualy-activation-only or it would have just said so. It would have said, 'Some idiot placed manually-activated-only buoys into an automatic free-float only cage with an HRU, and claimed to have tested they were ready to function, and nobody switched them on as the ship was sinking. No mystery here. Nothing to test. Move along.'

Disingenuous garbage.

Considering which part of the chain of events in the COPAS/SARSAT emergency system didn't happen is exactly what should have been investigated and was investigated.

The JAIC did not gloss over this. The buoys were manual types. The JAIC did "say so" when it identified them as Kannad 406F models. Continuing to use old manual models was a premitted temporary exemption, not "idiocy". There is no shred of evidence the test record was anything but honest and correct. The fact that the beacons were not switched on fully explains the outcome. There is no remaining mystery. Everything that required testing was tested and the answer fully reconciled with the evidence. There was no evidence that the Kannad devices failed to work exactly as designed, so there were no repercussions for the manufacturer.

Your continued insinuation that the JAIC could not explain why the beacons did not function and decided to gloss over the matter hoping nobody would read their report and notice this is frankly asinine and its repetition utterly tedious.

 

[Vixen]

No.

ZZZzzzzzz Zzzzzzzz


What are you hoping to achieve by dissimulating the refutation of a fact?

I am guessing, such as if you were disputing, for example, 'Paris is the capital of France', you are merely doing it for the enjoyment of winding people up.

Maybe self-reflect as to why on earth anyone would bother to do that and let us know your thoughts and how the matter can be rectified.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

He was the go-to person in accident investigations.

Says you. How many of the available experts are you familiar with? Is it one? I think it's one.

If your claim was true then why was Seppo Rajamäki appointed subject expert in maritime radio for the Estonia inquiry and not Asser Koivisto?

 

[Andy_Ross]

There was no evidence that the Kannad devices failed to work exactly as designed, so there were no repercussions for the manufacturer.

This is important.

If the buoys had been found to have failed for some technical reason it would have had major repercussions for the manufacturer.

At the least they would have had to recall that particular model, and maybe their entire range.

More seriously it could have had repercussions for the entire system..

In the event there was no recall of anything and no failure of the system as a whole at any point.

 

[Vixen]

Disingenuous garbage.

Considering which part of the chain of events in the COPAS/SARSAT emergency system didn't happen is exactly what should have been investigated and was investigated.

The JAIC did not gloss over this. The buoys were manual types. The JAIC did "say so" when it identified them as Kannad 406F models. Continuing to use old manual models was a premitted temporary exemption, not "idiocy". There is no shred of evidence the test record was anything but honest and correct. The fact that the beacons were not switched on fully explains the outcome. There is no remaining mystery. Everything that required testing was tested and the answer fully reconciled with the evidence. There was no evidence that the Kannad devices failed to work exactly as designed, so there were no repercussions for the manufacturer.

Your continued insinuation that the JAIC could not explain why the beacons did not function and decided to gloss over the matter hoping nobody would read their report and notice this is frankly asinine and its repetition utterly tedious.

JAIC did not mention for example the fact of the Finnish authorities demanding that Böden centre in Norway that would have recorded the signals produce its logs so as to examine whether it did indeed receive the signals. Had the buoys been of an illegal and non-conformant 'manual-activation-only' type not switched on there would be no mystery about where the 'automatic' signals went.

The JAIC glossed over many important issues such as whether the hull was intact, the nature of the cargo, whether the cargo was correctly registered with customs, the issue of witnesses seeing military trucks, why the vessel slowed down to 5/6 kn at Dagö bank, what happened to the captain or what was he doing, the reports of several witnesses of feeling a collision or hearing bangs shortly before the violent listing, why MRCC Stockholm didn't get the mayday until almost 02:00am and why the communications were down for an hour.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Nobody said the Kannad 406 F should be 'manually tuned'. In the set up phase or inspection phase, they need to be tested as to whether they are emitting the correct frequency in the 406mhz range. That is what was meant by Lehtola when he said they were 'untuned'. The signal was not reaching the satellite for some reason.

This is barely Star-Trek-style technobabble. You insinuate the JAIC "gloss over" stuff but then you have the nerve to write this crap. Shame on you.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Illegal

 

[Vixen]

Says you. How many of the available experts are you familiar with? Is it one? I think it's one.

If your claim was true then why was Seppo Rajamäki appointed subject expert in maritime radio for the Estonia inquiry and not Asser Koivisto?

Over the almost four years it took for the JAIC to bring the report out, there were many experts coming and going. Many disputes, resignations, sackings and arguments and even a suicide.

 

[whoanellie]

You didn't know that EPIRB'S emitted a 406Mhz range signal...?

Maybe that is wherein your confusion lies.

> Dodge
> Duck
> Dip
> Dive
> Dodge

 

[Vixen]

Illegal

You yourself stated that if a vessel were non-compliant with SOLAS or IMO they would not get the necessary insurance required to use harbour facilities and waters.

 

[Vixen]

> Dodge
> Duck
> Dip
> Dive
> Dodge

Why would anyone think a smoke detector is equivalent to an EPIRB? Sheesh.

 

[Here_to_learn]

Says you. How many of the available experts are you familiar with? Is it one? I think it's one.

If your claim was true then why was Seppo Rajamäki appointed subject expert in maritime radio for the Estonia inquiry and not Asser Koivisto?

Other questions could be - how come the Accident Investigation report for the Silja Europa grounding is about the bridge control/navigation system, and not the communications system? (And why didn't they investigate potential sub-marines that pushed the ferry off course? ...)

Could that possible have anything do with that the company that Asser Koivisto was part of starting sold solutions not for communications, but for navigation and bridge management.