• 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.

Cont: The Sinking of MS Estonia: Case Reopened Part V

Status
Not open for further replies.
Vixen said:
The Herald of Free Enterprise never completely sank. It fortuitously came to rest on a sand bank on its side.
Click to expand...
We know. A sand bank stopped it sinking entirely. The official report explains this. That is not relevant to the point at issue which was the great speed with which ship got to that position.



Lifeboats can drift quite a way from the scene of the location of the sunken ship so is no indicator.
Click to expand...
Well this sounds desperate. You're inventing a story that lifeboats were the only things left afloat and there was no other wreckage, and making an irrelevant point that lifeboats could hypothetically drift far away from the scene of the sinking, which did not happen. Still trying to prop up your straw man.
 
Mojo said:
Why do you think a lack of flotsam would be significant? What do you think it would show?
Click to expand...

It shows the accident was not a simple case of the ship listing and then turtling. It indicates a fatal wound at some point along the ship, possibly two, given the military-style complete annihilation with just the lucky few able to escape by pure chance. Had the ship hit rocks or simply turtled, as was the case with Herald of Free Enterprise and similar wrecks, parts of the vessel should still be visible either from nearby vessels or from the air.

Nothing could be seen of the Estonia.

That people fail to see this as unusual shows just how comfortably numb we have all become; waiting to see what the DAILY HORROR has to say first before accepting anything could be true.
 
Jack by the hedge said:
What was rare about the Estonia sinking was the size of the hole though which it was flooding. That makes the fact it had sunk before rescue arrived much less surprising.

The rescuers found no ship at all. You twist that into "no *sign* of the ship at all" in a persisting attempt to justify your straw man argument "without a trace". You appreciate we can actually see you doing that, right?
Click to expand...

The car deck is well above sea level by design. Even if water did flood in via a bow visor falling off (and also the car ramp door also opening) there still should have been plenty of time to evacuate the passengers and crew.

The JAIC to address this issue had to construct a hypothetical scenario of 'all the windows along the side must has smashed' thus filling the vessel with water outweighing the air in bulkheads keeping the thing afloat.

As you know, the fact of military vehicles and equipment stolen from the former Soviet military was classified (as was revealed last week for the first time) so the JAIC were not allowed to mention any of the issues that might have been a factor. So it had to invent an explanation instead that would seem plausible.


When I said there was no sign of the ship you know perfectly well I was not suggesting it was never found (given we know exactly where it lies!) but that nobody could see any trace of it to know where it was located on the seabed. Normally in such an accident, you can see bits of the hull, stern or bow sticking out of the water for many hours or even days.
 
Jack by the hedge said:
We know. A sand bank stopped it sinking entirely. The official report explains this. That is not relevant to the point at issue which was the great speed with which ship got to that position.




Well this sounds desperate. You're inventing a story that lifeboats were the only things left afloat and there was no other wreckage, and making an irrelevant point that lifeboats could hypothetically drift far away from the scene of the sinking, which did not happen. Still trying to prop up your straw man.
Click to expand...

Actually only a couple of lifeboats succeeded in being launched. One was found many many miles away.

The survivors largely had to make do with inflatable life rafts and by letting off flares. The rescue mission by the Mariella, Isabella and Europa was truly heroic, given the difficulty in landing a helicopter on deck in rough seas and the sheer height from over the side of a ship to reach the poor souls in the sea being tossed about on the waves.
 
Vixen said:
Mojo said:
Why do you think a lack of flotsam would be significant? What do you think it would show?
Click to expand...

It shows the accident was not a simple case of the ship listing and then turtling. It indicates a fatal wound at some point along the ship, possibly two, given the military-style complete annihilation with just the lucky few able to escape by pure chance.
Click to expand...


How would holes in the hull prevent the escape of flotsam?
 
Vixen said:
Mojo said:
Why do you think a lack of flotsam would be significant? What do you think it would show?
Click to expand...

It shows the accident was not a simple case of the ship listing and then turtling...
Click to expand...

How so?


Vixen said:
...It indicates a fatal wound at some point along the ship, possibly two...
Click to expand...

How so?


Vixen said:
...given the military-style complete annihilation with just the lucky few able to escape by pure chance...
Click to expand...

Nothing got annihilated. Estonia is still there, at the bottom of the sea, mostly in one piece.


Vixen said:
...Had the ship hit rocks...
Click to expand...

It didn't. Well, not until it hit the sea bed, anyway.


Vixen said:
...parts of the vessel should still be visible either from nearby vessels or from the air.

Nothing could be seen of the Estonia...
Click to expand...

Because it was night-time, and the water was very deep, and Estonia was under it.


Vixen said:
...That people fail to see this as unusual shows just how comfortably numb we have all become; waiting to see what the DAILY HORROR has to say first before accepting anything could be true.
Click to expand...

Bollocks.
 
What happened to the submarines that deliberately or accidentally crashed into the Estonia and caused the sinking? Has Vixen given up on that idea or pretending that it was never her original theory for the sinking of the Estonia?

Is "military style complete annihilation" (that makes it sound like they (the Russkies presumably) nuked the ship or something) the theory du jour?

I'm no expert, but I'm pretty sure the Estonia was not completely annihilated. I do believe that it is sitting, still in one piece, at the bottom of the Baltic sea.
 
Last edited:
Nothing is off the table. Every piece of scrap Vixen can ram into her conspiracy blunderbus is yet more junk to blast at the side of the barn before trying to draw chalk rings around any vague groupings.
 
Vixen said:
It shows the accident was not a simple case of the ship listing and then turtling. It indicates a fatal wound at some point along the ship, possibly two...
Click to expand...

Why would that deprive the scene of flotsam? Do you know where most flotsam comes from when a ship sinks? I do.

Had the ship hit rocks or simply turtled, as was the case with Herald of Free Enterprise and similar wrecks, parts of the vessel should still be visible either from nearby vessels or from the air.
Click to expand...

No. You are not competent to make such a determination.

That people fail to see this as unusual shows just how comfortably numb we have all become; waiting to see what the DAILY HORROR has to say first before accepting anything could be true.
Click to expand...

Oh shut up. People don't accept your ignorant handwaving because we've gone to great, repeated effort to show that you don't know what you're talking about. You're not some morally adroit, awakened sage. You're just an ordinary person being led around by the nose by absurd, easily debunked conspiracy theories. They don't make you look smart. They make you look ignorant and gullible.
 
Last edited:
Vixen said:
No, the official sinking time is thirty-five minutes. From the mayday call at 1:21:55 to when it disappeared from radar at 1:48. For some reason, the JAIC seem to be counting from 1:23 to 1:58 but whatever, it is official, it is 35mins.
Click to expand...

And what time was the initial report of flooding from the car deck? That's where you start the clock on the sinking time. By the time they called for help it was too late.
 
Vixen said:
The car deck is well above sea level by design.
Click to expand...

We've enlightened you about this before. Yes, the deck is above sea level on a flat-calm surface, but Estonia sank in a storm wherein the ship was pitching forward into oncoming waves while sailing at her flank speed. This meant the ship, with the wide open car-deck, was scooping in tons of sea water every minute. This does not take into account the effects of waves slamming into the interior of the car deck, and we know many or the trucks had not been properly secured.

There is no mystery here. There was no explosion, no charges set off, no breach in the hull by sabotage.

Yes, the Adrea Doria stayed afloat for six hours, but when she gave up the ghost, she went down fast.

The Edmond Fitzgerald took on water for a while, but the actual sinking was almost instantaneous.

The Estonia was in trouble for over a half hour before the sent the mayday call.
 
Axxman300 said:
And what time was the initial report of flooding from the car deck? That's where you start the clock on the sinking time. By the time they called for help it was too late.
Click to expand...

From the report:

JAIC said:
During his scheduled round on the car deck the seaman of the watch heard shortly before 0100 hrs a metallic bang from the bow area as the vessel hit a heavy wave.
The seaman of the watch informed the second officer B about what he had heard and was ordered to try to find out what had caused the bang. The seaman did so by waiting at the ramp, listening and checking the indicator lamps for the visor and ramp locking devices. He reported that everything seemed to be normal.
At 0100 hrs the watch on the bridge was taken over by the second officer A and the fourth officer. After being relieved the second officer B and third officer left the bridge.
Further observations of unusual noise, starting at about 0105 hrs, were made during the following 10 minutes by many passengers and some crew members who were off duty in their cabins.
When the seaman of the watch returned from his round, soon after the change of watches, he caught up the master and entered the bridge just behind him. Shortly afterwards he was sent down to the car deck to find out the cause of the sounds reported by telephone to the bridge. He did not, however, manage to reach the car deck.
At about 0115 hrs the visor separated from the bow and tilted over the stem. The ramp was pulled fully open, allowing large amounts of water to enter the car deck. Very rapidly the ship took on a heavy starboard list. She was turned to port and slowed down.
Click to expand...
https://onse.fi/estonia/chapt01.html

This says Estonia started taking on water at 01:15. She disappeared from radar at about 01:50, so the sinking took 35 minutes, which actually agrees with Vixen's statement. However, with the visor and the car ramp missing, there's a freaking big hole almost the entire width and height of the ship!
 
Blue Mountain said:
From the report:


https://onse.fi/estonia/chapt01.html

This says Estonia started taking on water at 01:15. She disappeared from radar at about 01:50, so the sinking took 35 minutes, which actually agrees with Vixen's statement. However, with the visor and the car ramp missing, there's a freaking big hole almost the entire width and height of the ship!
Click to expand...

Yes, you are correct. But 10 to 15 minutes can be added to the total time:

While he was on the car deck the ship was moving so heavily in all directions that it was difficult to walk and he had to support himself against the bulkheads. When he was approximately one metre from the ramp, a heavy wave hit the bow He gave the time as 0045 hrs [3]. In another statement [4] he said 0035 hrs at the latest. Later [5] he stated that he was on the car deck between 0035-0040 hrs. He also said [6] it was about 0040 hrs. In the last testimony [8] he stated that the time was 0050-0055 hrs.
Click to expand...

https://www.multi.fi/estonia/estorap.html#_Toc405839424

So call it 00:45. He sticks around for five minutes, and heads up to the bridge, arriving around 01:00. During his transit from the car-deck to the bridge, the bridge receives reports of loud banging from the the bow. So they order him back down at 01:10 to locate the source of the banging. Then systematic failure comes into play:

He ran to the information desk on deck 5 to ask them to unlock the car deck doors because he had been ordered to go there. He did not yet think that the ship would go down. In the last testimony [8] he said that when he arrived at the information desk the girl there was exchanging money for a passenger. The AB seaman had to wait for a couple of minutes. While he was waiting, the ship heeled over so much that all objects fell. He continued down to deck 4 where the staircase was full of people and he realised that the situation had become serious. The list was now around 25-30 degrees.
Click to expand...

He ran to deck 7 and tried to reach the outer deck but fell. Lying on the deck he reported to the officer on watch over his portable radio that people were screaming in panic, saying that "deck 1 is under water". In another interrogation he stated that the people said "there is water on deck 1" [2] and in a further interrogation he stated that one passenger, either from cabin 1069 or 1096, had told him that there was water on deck 1 [6]. This was new information to the bridge [5]. The bridge was surprised by this information [6].The officer ordered him to go down and check the situation even though the AB seaman thought that the situation was hopeless.
Click to expand...

The poor guy didn't have direct access to the door he needed to open to return to the car-deck. Not that it would would have made any difference by this time. But the entire report is full of moments like this, when time was so desperately short.

The main problem was the MS Estonia shouldn't have been out there in the first place. The Captain and the ship's owner should have, at the very least, sailed with caution, and not full steam headlong into a nasty storm.
 
Vixen said:
In 'sank without trace' is meant that when Capt Esa Mäkelä arrived there was nothing to be seen, when normally, part of the hull, bow or stern is visible or other detritus.

  • The Estonia sank exceptionally fast
  • There was no trace to be seen when the rescue arrived, other than lifeboats and people in the water.
Click to expand...
"Exceptionally" by what standard?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom