Cont: The sinking of MS Estonia: Case Reopened Part VI

[JesseCuster]

Thread continued from here http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=356236

Edited by sarge: 

fixed link to wrong previous thread

Posted By: sarge

Happy to see you back, captain. Sorry you missed last month's futile fringe reset.

Maybe when the wreck's ramp is recovered and examined Vixen will return from self-imposed exile to tell us what the report on it means.

A British submarine escorting the submarine crashed into it causing it to sink, while simultaneously a minisubmarine with wheels squirreled away the officers to be flown to a CIA black site to be tried in secret for their involvement in the sinking of the ship, while at the same time Spetsnaz forces took over the bridge and shot the captain before planting explosives to sink the ship, while also at the same time some of the crew tried to push a truck containing radioactive nuclear material out through the bow door (during a storm) which caused the locks on the bow doors to dissolve.

Helicopter crews involved in the rescue also squirreled away officers to be taken away to CIA black sites for secret trials.

I'm probably missing some pieces of the puzzle, but that's the picture I'm getting. Seems reasonable to me.

 

[Delphic Oracle]

The official report will only credit Svensson with recovering one ramp, when early news reports (which are always definitively reliable and accurate) say that he recovered seven. Something something therefore coverup.

I've got three ramps, myself.

I wont't say how I got the first two, but bought the third one off of Craigslist when I thought I had misplaced them.

 

[lobosrul5]

A British submarine escorting the submarine crashed into it causing it to sink, while simultaneously a minisubmarine with wheels squirreled away the officers to be flown to a CIA black site to be tried in secret for their involvement in the sinking of the ship, while at the same time Spetsnaz forces took over the bridge and shot the captain before planting explosives to sink the ship, while also at the same time some of the crew tried to push a truck containing radioactive nuclear material out through the bow door (during a storm) which caused the locks on the bow doors to dissolve.

Helicopter crews involved in the rescue also squirreled away officers to be taken away to CIA black sites for secret trials.

I'm probably missing some pieces of the puzzle, but that's the picture I'm getting. Seems reasonable to me.

The Estonia didn't "turn turtle"... which proves it was deliberately sunk by explosives, because everyone knows that ships sunk that way don't fully capsize, while ships sunk by flooding for reasons other than explosives do. Just trust me on this, do not Google it, google has been infiltrated by Spetsnaz... who still keeps this secret... and for some reason has become an intelligence agency.

Oh and maybe it wasn't sunk by explosives. In which case the lack of fully capsizing prooves... oh look Squirrel!

 

[catsmate]

I go away for nearly a year and the thread is going over and over the same ground that has already been gone over in excruciating detail.

Amazing

You remember the 911 sub-forum don't you? Or the Shroud of Turin thread......

 

[CompusMentus]

You remember the 911 sub-forum don't you? Or the Shroud of Turin thread......

One word: Realistice


Compus

 

[CompusMentus]

Double post

 

[Metullus]

One word: Realistice


Compus

That is just so wrong...

 

[JayUtah]

To be fair, this thread was fallow for most of the past year. But when it restarted, it restarted predictably as if none of the foregoing conversation had occurred.

 

[P.J. Denyer]

To be fair, this thread was fallow for most of the past year. But when it restarted, it restarted predictably as if none of the foregoing conversation had occurred.

It's the Mandela Effect, a certain person remembers things differently than everything they posted having been thoroughly demolished. Or maybe they're from a different dimension where they hadn't been posting rubbish for grud only knows how long. Do de do do, Do de do do....

 

[Andy_Ross]

Standard tactic, the point isn't to be persuaded or have any kind of meaningful discussion. Keeping the thread going is seen as a win.

 

[catsmate]

One word: Realistice


Compus

Or magically invisible cloth repairs.....

 

[MarkCorrigan]

Or magically invisible cloth repairs.....

I think I can prove that I'm immortal using statistics.

 

[Here_to_learn]

Today the investigation that started 2020 will continue on-site. They plan to retrieve the car ramp that is no longer attached to the wreck, and do some camera work inside the car deck.

They will use ROVs to take the photos, and to attach line/chains to the ramp to lift it. The ramp will be transported to Estonia for investigations.

(Ref: https://sverigesradio.se/artikel/nya-dykningar-till-estonias-vrak-sahar-ska-de-ga-till in Swedish)

 

[Axxman300]

Hope they have good weather, and everyone stays safe.

 

[Here_to_learn]

The on-site part of the investigation has been completed now.

They have

• Drilled a core from the bedrock that the wreck landed on, to be able to check what kind of rock it is. "But is is a hard rock"
• Taken samples from the "black" areas next to the whole in the hull. It has been claimed to be leftovers from an explosion, but the investiagators say it's probably some kind of bacteria
• Send ROVs into the car deck to take photos. They have images from the hull damage from the inside, were it's possible to see that the white paint is still left, ruling out an explosion on the inside.
• They have removed window panes and seals to be abe to meassure the pressure needed to break them.
• The bow ramp has been lifted, and is beeing transported to Estonia for investigation

The comments from the investigation all say that what they have found so far supports the earlier conclusions that the hull damage is from landing on hard bedrock, and that the cause of the accident is the bow visor/bow ramp failing.

Several articles (some probably behind paywalls):
https://www.svd.se/a/xgpWRQ/nya-filmer-pa-estonia-visar-intakt-farg
https://www.dn.se/sok/?q=estonia&page=1&sort=newest&date=&fields=
https://news.err.ee/1609042985/photos-ms-estonia-bow-ramp-raised-being-taken-to-paldiski
https://www.svd.se/a/VP2rj3/estonia-robot-tog-sig-80-meter-in-pa-bildack

 

[The Man]

The on-site part of the investigation has been completed now.

They have

• Drilled a core from the bedrock that the wreck landed on, to be able to check what kind of rock it is. "But is is a hard rock"

Wait, they got a cafe down there?

• Taken samples from the "black" areas next to the whole in the hull. It has been claimed to be leftovers from an explosion, but the investiagators say it's probably some kind of bacteria

Of course, explosive bacteria, the same kind that gives me 'the wind'.

• Send ROVs into the car deck to take photos. They have images from the hull damage from the inside, were it's possible to see that the white paint is still left, ruling out an explosion on the inside.

Wait didn't the Myth Busters test that, painting with explosives. So a white paint explosive bacteria.

• They have removed window panes and seals to be abe to meassure the pressure needed to break them.
• The bow ramp has been lifted, and is beeing transported to Estonia for investigation

The comments from the investigation all say that what they have found so far supports the earlier conclusions that the hull damage is from landing on hard bedrock, and that the cause of the accident is the bow visor/bow ramp failing.

Several articles (some probably behind paywalls):
https://www.svd.se/a/xgpWRQ/nya-filmer-pa-estonia-visar-intakt-farg
https://www.dn.se/sok/?q=estonia&page=1&sort=newest&date=&fields=
https://news.err.ee/1609042985/photos-ms-estonia-bow-ramp-raised-being-taken-to-paldiski
https://www.svd.se/a/VP2rj3/estonia-robot-tog-sig-80-meter-in-pa-bildack

OK I give up that last one was getting too ridiculous even for me. Thanks for the update, Here_to_learn.

 

[Here_to_learn]

OK I give up that last one was getting too ridiculous even for me. Thanks for the update, Here_to_learn.

I think there still were potential with seals and so on...


Today the Swedish Public Radio news program had an interview with the investigators (in Swedish):

https://sverigesradio.se/artikel/haverikommissionen-darfor-kan-estonia-ha-sjunkit-sa-snabbt

Basically he confirmed that what they have found and seen so far largely supports the original JAIC report, and that the damage on the hull side is from hitting/resting on a rocky bottom.

He also said that they think the thin metal used in ventilation shafts onboard Estonia may have allowed water get from cardeck and to the decks below, contributing to the rapid sinking. Apparently today thicker sheet metal is mandated.

He also pointed out that where they differ from the JAIC is that they make it clearer that the ship was not suitable for the route - not seaworthy.

The analysis is expected to be done during the autumn, with a full report later this year from what I understand.


My reflection on this is that the investigators have communicated quite a lot during this week, and have been clear in their message that what they have found supports the original report when it comes to the reason for the sinking. It has not been the "we have collected information, now we will analyse" type message, but rather "everything we have seen supports previous conclusions" and "I'm sure we have everything we need to fully conclude on the reason for the sinking". (I'm paraphrasing, not quoting here).

 

[Andy_Ross]

It was already known the ship wasn't seaworthy, it was on a special certificate that was supposed to limit it to coastal waters.

 

[JayUtah]

It was already known the ship wasn't seaworthy, it was on a special certificate that was supposed to limit it to coastal waters.

Which is why it still rings hollow that the JAIC supposedly declared the ship "seaworthy" and therefore casts doubt on mechanical failure as the cause of the accident. Noting that the ship bears a certificate of seaworthiness and that the relevant regulatory bodies hold no outstanding variances or citations for the ship is a cursory notice that the ship is considered seaworthy only in the legal sense. That it was being operated in violation of its certification and that it was operating with serious actual engineering deficiencies is a completely separate question.

As I note frequently, we find perfectly valid certificates of airworthiness in the wreckage of airplanes that crash for mechanical reasons.

 

[The Man]

I think there still were potential with seals and so on...

Yeah, the pressure measuring seals must have been very hard to train.

Today the Swedish Public Radio news program had an interview with the investigators (in Swedish):

https://sverigesradio.se/artikel/haverikommissionen-darfor-kan-estonia-ha-sjunkit-sa-snabbt

Basically he confirmed that what they have found and seen so far largely supports the original JAIC report, and that the damage on the hull side is from hitting/resting on a rocky bottom.

He also said that they think the thin metal used in ventilation shafts onboard Estonia may have allowed water get from cardeck and to the decks below, contributing to the rapid sinking. Apparently today thicker sheet metal is mandated.

He also pointed out that where they differ from the JAIC is that they make it clearer that the ship was not suitable for the route - not seaworthy.

The analysis is expected to be done during the autumn, with a full report later this year from what I understand.


My reflection on this is that the investigators have communicated quite a lot during this week, and have been clear in their message that what they have found supports the original report when it comes to the reason for the sinking. It has not been the "we have collected information, now we will analyse" type message, but rather "everything we have seen supports previous conclusions" and "I'm sure we have everything we need to fully conclude on the reason for the sinking". (I'm paraphrasing, not quoting here).

Thanks again for the updates.