The sinking of MS Estonia: Case Reopened Part VII

[junkshop]

It is simply not possible for me to say I believe something when I do not.

Untrue. I'm not saying that that is what you have done, but it is very much possible for you (or anyone) to do that.

 

[Andy_Ross]

I guess you mean "They are only broadcasting if the manual switch is on or the water activated switch has become wet."

You said earlier that once wet, they broadcast until the battery is dead. I presume that means that drying the EPIRB doesn't stop the broadcast.

Not sure, I would have to look at a detailed manual or circuit.
I don't know if it's a latching circuit.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

... I'm not saying that that is what you have done, but it is very much possible for you (or anyone) to do that.

I cannot tell a lie - I can tell a lie.

 

[GlennB]

I get the strong feeling that Vixen would like to drop the whole subject. Why not let her, just let it die?

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Not sure, I would have to look at a detailed manual or circuit.
I don't know if it's a latching circuit.

It would make sense for the water activation to stop when the device is dried, so it behaves like the manual activation switch. I can't see a purpose in designing the device to run until its battery dies even if you take it out of the water.

But IDK for sure.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

I get the strong feeling that Vixen would like to drop the whole subject. Why not let her, just let it die?

We've got to the "let's agree to disagree because I'm entitled to my own facts" point so the topic will die a natural death until she resurrects it in a year or two. I wonder which dead horse is coming around next on the baggage reclaim belt.

 

[P.J. Denyer]

It would make sense for the water activation to stop when the device is dried, so it behaves like the manual activation switch. I can't see a purpose in designing the device to run until its battery dies even if you take it out of the water.

But IDK for sure.

One possibility would be if it wound up floating next to a life boat with survivors and no crew and someone decides to bring it on board but doesn't know about the manual switch.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

One possibility would be if it wound up floating next to a life boat with survivors and no crew and someone decides to bring it on board but doesn't know about the manual switch.

Yeah, not impossible, but it's a bit of a stretch. Not in the same league of likelihood as fumbling the thing and dropping it in the water accidentally. Then being unable to stop it transmitting would be a major PITA for all concerned.

 

[Dabop]

We've got to the "let's agree to disagree because I'm entitled to my own facts" point so the topic will die a natural death until she resurrects it in a year or two. I wonder which dead horse is coming around next on the baggage reclaim belt.

SOP then....

time for the next fringe reset, yes.....

 

[Andy_Ross]

Deactivating EPIRB after water activation.

Manual deactivation is required once an EPIRB starts transmitting (whether activated manually or by water contact).
Simply removing it from the water will not turn it off.
Water sensors only initiate the activation sequence, they don't control ongoing operation.

Deactivation steps to stop the transmission after activation by water contact.
You must follow the specific manual deactivation procedure for your beacon's model.
This usually involves pressing and holding the "OFF" or "ON/OFF" button for a few seconds as described in your beacon's specific instructions.

If deactivation fails and the unit won't stop transmitting, you should wrap the entire EPIRB in several layers of aluminum foil or place it in a metal container to block the signal.

 

[P.J. Denyer]

Yeah, not impossible, but it's a bit of a stretch. Not in the same league of likelihood as fumbling the thing and dropping it in the water accidentally. Then being unable to stop it transmitting would be a major PITA for all concerned.

It was pure speculation so it's not a hill I'm going to die on. What I would say though is that an accidental activation is a major PITA anyway and the handling and storage regulations should make it very unlikely, and I can see there being issues with a situation where an unspecified amount of the beacons transmission time has been used while it was drying and then it's put back into service.

 

[Andy_Ross]

If it has been activated it cannot be used, it has to be replaced.
For private boat owners it's not compulsory just advisable.
Send it to the supplier for an exchange unit.

Also if it activates even for a few seconds It's your responsibility to immediately contact the nearest Search and Rescue Coordination Centre (RCC) or the Coast Guard to notify them of the false alarm and provide your beacon's unique ID.

 

[Here_to_learn]

I've seen a number of call outs for SAR missions where an EPIRB has started transmitting. Usually it turns out to be a sailing boat, participating in an offshore race, that has lost the EPIRB overboard without noticing. Until someone has managed to establish contact with the vessel it will be treated as an emergency.

 

[Vixen]

Several pages from the Brandenburg report have been relegated to AAH apparently for reasons I may have to take up with the moderators. It might make discussion of that report quite problematic. However, I represent that this paragraph comes from the report as reproduced on page 195 of Sven Anér's book.

The in volume panel-shaped iron carbide parts of the perlite are unable to resist the strong micro processes. The destruction of this perlite, marked on the micro section as lamellar structure, becomes particularly clear on pictures 29, 31, and 33. A destruction of the lamellae has occurred which cannot occur by any comparable mechanical technological influence. The processes of explosive treatments of metallic materials as for example explosive hardening and explosive cladding have to be excluded. These processes show in surface-near areas comparable effects.

@Vixen, please rephrase this paragraph in your own words and tell me what it means.

Okay, so I have found your query. Just let me have a look at the report.

 

[JayUtah]

Okay, so I have found your query. Just let me have a look at the report.

I quoted the paragraph I want you to interpret for us. I did so twice. You just quoted it too. I'm not asking for your interpretation of the entire report or some other part of the report. I'm asking you to tell us in your own words what you think that paragraph says.

 

[Vixen]

I quoted the paragraph I want you to interpret for us. I did so twice. You just quoted it too. I'm not asking for your interpretation of the entire report or some other part of the report. I'm asking you to tell us in your own words what you think that paragraph says.

P 195


Para
The in volume panel-shaped iron carbide* parts of the perlite** are unable to resist the strong micro processes. The destruction of this perlite, marked on the micro section as lamellar*** structure, becomes particularly clear on pictures 29, 31, and 33. A destruction of the lamellae has occurred which cannot occur by any comparable mechanical technological influence. The processes of explosive treatments of metallic materials as for example explosive hardening and explosive cladding have to be excluded. These processes show in surface-near areas comparable effects.


In metallurgy, deformation is changing a metal's shape by applying force. This can be mechanical force, such as welding or heat application to harden same. A detonation can be evidenced by signs of crystallization and Neuman bands ('twinning').


A metallurgist can look at the structure of a sample of metal, in this case, steel, to measure known variables, such as hardening, laminia / lamellar (so called because it appears as a layered effect [ = as though 'laminated’). In addition, the chemical composition of various elements can be analysed (Oxygen, Sodium, Magnesium, etc.), so , for example, when iron oxidizes, there will be apparent signs of corrosion, or rusting’.

Brandenburg concludes that changes in sample G022 shows significant changes in the fracture edge area. It states, ‘these plastic deformations in the micro range do indicate exposure to extremely heavy shock forces such as happens from the effects of a substance detonating.’

*Cementite (or iron carbide) is a compound of iron and carbon.

**Pearlite is a two-phased, lamellar (or layered) structure composed of alternating layers of ferrite (87.5 wt%) and cementite (12.5 wt%) that occurs in some steels and cast irons.

***In materials science, lamellar structures or microstructures are composed of fine, alternating layers of different materials in the form of lamellae.


In other words, Brandenburg is saying that deformation caused by mechanical means can probably be ruled out, as a result of their scientific analysis of the various chemical elements and physical features in some of the samples of metal provided by Braidwood and Rabe.

“It has to be concluded that the pressure waves also in areas, where by means of light microscopes, only little deformation is recognizable, did result in hardening due to structure deformation in the micro range; (deformation of the perlite grain, change of the solidification density).

The highest hardening has been established in way of the immediate fracture area of the specimen being most strongly strained.

For this hardness increase as well as for the determined structure deformations detonative influence is probable."

Berlin, 29.9.00” Sven Anér Estonia Sprängdes!

 

[JayUtah]

P 195

No.

Those are not your words. That's an obviously AI-generated spew combined with yet another restatement of what you want the report to say, and conclusory statements offered by others that were expressly outside the scope of the question. We'll get to other parts of the report in due course. For now, please follow my simple instructions.

Try again. Your words. Let's start with the first sentence.

The in volume panel-shaped iron carbide parts of the perlite are unable to resist the strong micro processes.

Tell me what "in volume panel-shaped iron carbide parts" are. What does the author mean by "panel-shaped?" What does the author mean by "in volume?" What is "perlite?"

 

[JesseCuster]

In metallurgy, deformation is changing a metal's shape by applying force. This can be mechanical force, such as welding or heat application to harden same. A detonation can be evidenced by signs of crystallization and Neuman bands ('twinning').


A metallurgist can look at the structure of a sample of metal, in this case, steel, to measure known variables, such as hardening, laminia / lamellar (so called because it appears as a layered effect [ = as though 'laminated’). In addition, the chemical composition of various elements can be analysed (Oxygen, Sodium, Magnesium, etc.), so , for example, when iron oxidizes, there will be apparent signs of corrosion, or rusting’.

Brandenburg concludes that changes in sample G022 shows significant changes in the fracture edge area. It states, ‘these plastic deformations in the micro range do indicate exposure to extremely heavy shock forces such as happens from the effects of a substance detonating.’

*Cementite (or iron carbide) is a compound of iron and carbon.

**Pearlite is a two-phased, lamellar (or layered) structure composed of alternating layers of ferrite (87.5 wt%) and cementite (12.5 wt%) that occurs in some steels and cast irons.

***In materials science, lamellar structures or microstructures are composed of fine, alternating layers of different materials in the form of lamellae.

You were asked to explain something in your own words. These are obviously not your words, but something you got from an AI chatbot.

 

[JayUtah]

You were asked to explain something in your own words. These are obviously not your words, but something you got from an AI chatbot.

The portions involving the asterisks are clearly AI-generated, as evidenced by the copious inclusion of hyperlinks that help the user understand where the AI is getting its information. The other portions appear to be quotations from someone else's general analysis and conclusions. We already discussed the Brandenburg report in general terms, including its final opinions. The exercise here is to test @Vixen's insinuation that having access to the details gave her better understanding of the reported science. Therefore it requires a detailed line of questioning, not yet another high-altitude fly-by.

 

[Vixen]

No.

Those are not your words. That's an obviously AI-generated spew combined with yet another restatement of what you want the report to say, and conclusory statements offered by others that were expressly outside the scope of the question. We'll get to other parts of the report in due course. For now, please follow my simple instructions.

Try again. Your words. Let's start with the first sentence.



Tell me what "in volume panel-shaped iron carbide parts" are. What does the author mean by "panel-shaped?" What does the author mean by "in volume?" What is "perlite?"

It is NOT AI produced. Stop falsely accusing me of wrongdoing. See picture no. 21 (Bild 21) to see what these voluminous panel-shaped parts look like.

See