New evidence from the sinking of MS Estonia (2023 Update)

Подписаться 34 тыс.

Просмотров 52 тыс.

50% 1

The forward ramp of the MS Estonia has been raised from the seabed as of today. It was said to be sealed shut during the sinking and only recently discovered to be wide open so it was decided to bring it up to the surface for more research.
For me I still believe somesort of a vessel hit the Estonia that caused it to sink, although I do see how the ramp could have slammed against the forward part of the ship time and time again in the storm from wave to wave.. but many have stated (specially the engine crew) that the RAMP was always closed and water was splashing through the sides of it.. which was also confirmed shut by divers in November of 1994 when they dove to the ferry.. but maybe the ramp just slid back to a closed position when sinking and then rusted shut.
People have also stated that they heard multiple bangs during the sinking.. which would point to the RAMP bouncing up and down against the hull of the ship..
And when looking at the bow visor that was raised just after the sinking the damage does look like it could have just clipped the very front of the ships bulbous bow, maybe there is some paint scrape marks that would support this on both the bow visor and the bulbous bow.
Finally.. the damage to the hull of the ship on the side.. looking at the ROV videos we can clearly see that the seabed is basicly a rocky cliff.. not mud.
Maybe the ship hit it with enough force during the sinking to make such damage.. or rolled a bit over the years.
So.. I can fully understand how people are so divided about the sinking of MS Estonia.
PS! Thanks a lot to my friend "CALJUCOTCAS" for some great 3D renders ‪@caljucotcas‬
PS2! Check out the laser scanned front visor in 3D yourself here:
www.postimees.ee/7615299/vaat...

Развлечения

Опубликовано:

24 июл 2023

Ссылка:

Скачать:

Готовим ссылку...

Добавить в:

Мой плейлист

Посмотреть позже

Комментарии : 250

@TheTanelChannel 11 месяцев назад

I want to state that it is perfectly plausible that the MS Estonia during the time of the sinking was not serviced properly (Like planes, ships also need to be serviced regularly). So.. the big waves slamming against the bow visor might have broken the locks, the bow visor then flew off, hitting the forward bulbous bow causing the dent and also ripping the RAMP with it somehow.. or in a way that caused the hydraulic system to fail and then it would have slammed hard against the part that sits just above the bulbous bow, while sinking the door could have closed by waves to make it seem that it was always shut. Finally, the damage to the hull does look to be in line with how the seabed looks there.. its ROCKY.. not a muddy bottom. The Estonia is literally like sitting on a rocky cliff.. looking how damaged the Costa Concordia looked like when it was raised does make me feel that the hull damage is just done by the rocky bottom and over the years the ship just might have rolled a bit making the damage visible.

@LabiaLicker 11 месяцев назад

imo one of the biggest smoking gun is the Estonian gov very strange way of dealing with the disaster. Almost as if their now new "friend", the UK was applying a lot of pressure for the Estonians to bury the incident (literally). When you put this alongside all the other evidence, I think understanding what happened becomes very clear.

@CreativeHuckleBerry 11 месяцев назад

That's the Goverment teory that it hadd to do with the bow visor. The experts teory however is the opposite, a hole under or on the side caused by something. If it's not an explosion i belive it might be from when they made the boat longer. Norway hadd ordered the boat brand new, but they canceled the order and another company took the order instead, they also wanted the boat a little bit longer, so my teory is that where they made the boat longer it cracked and caused water to come inside the sauna area "under car deck" and flooded that area and caused the boat to sink really fast. But that don't explain the hole on the side, so what caused that hole idk. If you wanted to sink that boat really quick you would want a hole under the boat and one on the side of the boat, so when it starts to lean to one side, air can get out and water can get in quickly, sinking the boat in less then 30min.

@janmode3682 10 месяцев назад

ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-zup7OxqMyoo.htmlsi=2ODTPGjwKGpP92Hj

@harleyrider76 8 месяцев назад

The biggest problem is that the official cause of the sinking does not add up with the laws of physics...

@janmode3682 8 месяцев назад

@@harleyrider76 Spot on but, this site are made for spred false information. There´s plenty of such sites. Do you wanna see the truth, go for Focus Estonia and Henning Witte and Håkan Bergmark.

@svenkaasik9868 9 месяцев назад

I have no idea how the ship sunk but it really is suspicious and disappointing and even insulting how the countries involved have refused to examine what acually happend and instead made sure noone could

@theproletariatreport6283 9 месяцев назад

It’s clear they’re covering something up. The question is, what is it?

@mihnainud115 9 месяцев назад

Well said, give the final conclusion to people who deserve the truth🙏

@cactus_cuber1589 8 месяцев назад

And they ware planning on covering it up with concrete

@gutsfinky 7 месяцев назад

Agreed. Do they think we're stupid?

@TruthGatherer2013 7 месяцев назад

I heard they smuggled weapons of some sort. maybe drugs too

@EricBlair-jg2ux 8 месяцев назад

If the sinking happened the way authorities stated back in the mid 90's, then there would have been no need for all the very secretive and nefarious cover up actions and demonstrable propaganda and disinformation campaigns taken by the state, they would have also stuck to their original plan of raising the ship and allowing families to bury their loved ones with dignity. The fact that all these anomalies happened point to there being more to the story, as well as the way the ship sank so quickly.

@Z-e-r-0 6 месяцев назад

Raising that Ship back in the 90s would of cost a TON of Money, They would of probably lost a lot of Bodies Not to mention they probably would of had to bring it up in Pieces. I cant think of the name of the Ship but it was one of these Car Carrying ferries and when it sank they had to cut it with a big azz Diamond/Steel Cable into like 10 sections to bring up. and don't bring up having Divers bring up Bodies. even with todays tech we would loose so many Divers to bring up all those Bodies. and think of this. this would of completely DESTROYED the ship... leaving no evidence of anything that happened... wouldn't that been worth the money if they were "Covering something up"?

@EricBlair-jg2ux 6 месяцев назад

The tech was available, expensive? Yes, feesable for Sweden to have done it? Yes. Look into how the Ferry Sewol was raised, sank in very similar conditions and depth, the semi-submersible platform design that raised it was around in 90s. The Estonia is only at a depth of 70m, that is very shallow. If they wanted to do it they could have done and recovered the majority of the bodies pretty easily.@@Z-e-r-0

@MadsNature 4 месяца назад

I think the saddest part, to me, is them leaving the bodies down there. The first diving crew that went down said it was so shallow you could dive to it holding your breath and it would be not that hard to get them. The lack of closure has to be devastating. So much suffering from this tragedy

@J.R.in_WV 3 месяца назад

I’m with you…they were all gung ho to raise the ship at first, as one would think they would be….it was known it was resting on a steep incline and could slip down to a depth where it could be damaged far worse and rendered unsalvageable….time was of the essence. Then all of a sudden officials changed their stance around / just before the time of the “first” dives on the wreck….at least the first publicly reported on dives. Ever since then they have rallied HARD against any plan to raise, photograph or even dive on the ship. they’ve been acting more than a little suspicious and doing all they possibly can to avoid any serious efforts to investigate the wreck at all. I think they (officials with authority to control the narrative and fate of the wreck) thought their official narrative was what really happened at first but then whoever out there knew what really happened approached them and either blackmailed the officials or showed them it would be beneficial for them in some other way to make sure the truth was never found. When they started pushing BURYING the wreck in concrete and / or massive boulders I was certain there’s something very wrong there. Bodies don’t float up after 25 years, at that shallow depth with open windows, etc for marine life to get into the wreck, they’re all skeletons by now.

@J.R.in_WV 3 месяца назад

@@Z-e-r-0that wasn’t a car ferry, it was the submarine Kursk and the front 1/2 of it exploded and severely damaged the hull. Also it was in water over 1,000 feet deep. They had multiple heavy salvage contractors putting in bids, and all of them had plans and equipment that would re-float and raise the Estonia in one piece. By the official narrative you cling to there is zero major damage to the hull anyway, why on earth would they cut a structurally sound ship into sections when the technology existed and was in use already to raise it in one piece. Also as is now common knowledge a majority of the easily accessible bodies could have been recovered on the initial dives just a few months after the accident in a matter of weeks. Your “loose lots of bodies” theory is just poor logic. I should mention I don’t buy into half baked conspiracy theories…. I’ve been a Maritime history and disaster buff my entire life, before the internet I bought and read dozens of books on subjects like Titanic, Lusitania, Britannic, Kursk, USS Thresher, Bismarck, the Hood, the Edmund Fitzgerald, the Arthur M. Anderson and many others and I agree with all the commonly accepted explanations on how all those things were handled because there is tons of actual evidence to refute conspiracy theories. Also diving on the wrecks for answers wasn’t hindered but encouraged and there was NEVER any talk of literally covering up the sites in concrete and massive boulders at a cost of hundreds of millions decades after the fact to keep skeletons from learning how to swim. I’m not saying I know what happened to Estonia, I’m just saying to anyone who’s spent real time looking at the history of shipwrecks in the modern era, it’s painfully obvious there is something more to the story that powerful people with enough weight to influence an entire nation’s government do NOT want being found out. It might be something we’d think of as a minor detail (though I doubt it)…..espionage and coverups are funny business, the people engaging in it will spend ridiculous amounts of money and time to cover up something that might cause a national leader a little public embarrassment.

@VanadisWarrior 10 месяцев назад

It's astonishing how Jutta Rabes investigation is totally ignored, although she sent a lot to a renowned forensic lab.

@gerdokurt 9 месяцев назад

Astonishing how people totaly ignore that the holes the sensation hungry jutta rabe wants to have seen are not there where she claimed they are. And the only lab (out of 3) that did real and extensive testing with a clear answer (not a " we dont confirm anything, but we think it looks like" statement) ruled out explosives for 100%! They did hundreds of tests with explosives. They did tests with mechanical forces. They went to Meyer and analysed raw material! The analysis showed that what the other lab classified as LIKELY an explosive damage based on some things they saw in the micro structure of the steel sample, is already existing in the raw material!

@Tracy-zr9mg 8 месяцев назад

What was really astonishing is how that woman was dancing with pieces of the Estonia in her hand directly over the top of the wreck. She has no respect for the victims nor their families and all she did was spread lies and invent "facts"

@xvalentinserbanx 4 месяца назад

One thing is clear, the swedish government does anything to prevent indepent investigation. And I have heard interviews with survivors who all claim that their testimony was ignored by the authorities.

@Estoniaveckan 10 месяцев назад

As you said in the end of the video, the dent in the visor is from the bulbous bow of MS Estonia. On pictures from 1994, you can see blue color in the dent. The same color that the hull was painted with close to and below the water line. The ramp damage was caused by the ramp falling forward and hitting the forpeak deck. Sea loads probably damaged it more. The damages was not caused by oncoming waves that hit the ramp from outside. You can clearly see the contour of the fore peak deck on the ramp underside. The hudraulic actuators that held the ramp on both sides are broken and can be seen on the wreck.

@janmode3682 10 месяцев назад

The Bow was blown off by explosives. Hexacomposite was used, used by MI6 for attacks at sea in order to sabotage and sink ships.. One bomb did not go off and was found at the ramp. End of story.

@RawbLV 10 месяцев назад

@@janmode3682lol

@MBkufel 9 месяцев назад

@@janmode3682 You're delusional or are spreading purposeful misinformation. End of story.

@Tracy-zr9mg 8 месяцев назад

Thank you for your reasonable and evidence backed comment. Too many conspiracy theories too many idiotic statements about explosives it's just disrespectful to the people who died. I don't understand why people can't accept what really happened. Furthermore, to think a Submarine would be on the surface during a horrible storm and high sea States is just idiotic

@Tracy-zr9mg 8 месяцев назад

@@janmode3682 it appears you have your aluminum foil hat on too tight

@danielandersson1139 4 месяца назад

The damage to the ramp matches the explanation in the official scenario very closely. When the bow visor fell off it took the ramp with it(because of the ramp house construction), and the damages on the ramp match the shape of the forepeak.

@velezdragon3574 10 месяцев назад

She couldn’t be a old rust bucket she was only 14 years old her sister was just scrapped after 40+ years of service in 2022

@TheMimis11 10 месяцев назад

Yeah but In Estonia they did not do repairs.

@petriisoaho 8 месяцев назад

Estonia was owned by Swedish company for 80 %. Don´t think they would allow it.

@Tvuvtctoj46fck 7 месяцев назад

RU-vid is full of disaster channels. Check them and see how responsible companies are when they can save money.

@tugboats79 3 месяца назад

@@petriisoahoyou would be surprised if you would know first hand...

@rutkettu 8 месяцев назад

Agree with your theory that it was a unidentified submarine, BUT, why would the Swedish, Finnish and Estonian authorities want to keep that hidden? I just don't understand

@bjrnhalvorsen9982 7 месяцев назад

Estonia became independent from Soviet Union in 1991 that is 3 years before the accident. It is known that soviet military equipment was transported regulary with MS Estonia, confirmed by a former worker for the Swedish customs few years ago. Finland has always wanted to keep a ok relationship with the Russians. Sweden and Finland have been kind of dependent of each other because of their lack of NATO membership In former Soviet Union in 1994 it was lack of control with the weapons from the former union and a lot was for sale. Who says it had to be a Russian sub, it could be a sub from any country. Sweden did many strange things to make this to a disaster with no conclusion. The tree nations should have raised the ship in 1995 to close this case instead Sweden wanted to cover the ship in concrete.

@gutsfinky 7 месяцев назад

The countries involved would want to keep it quiet to avoid causing a huge international outcry and damaging their working relationship amongst each other. Sometimes the thinking is, it's better to not talk about something that happened. Not that I agree.

@Tvuvtctoj46fck 7 месяцев назад

"hidden" actually means "it's bs and i know it"

@user-nw3xc2tk6y 12 дней назад

If so, that would mean TWO vessels and their crew would not see the other? Highly unlikely, especially given the instruments and crew required for each vessel. Def a cover up though, whatever it was.

@Pilvenuga 2 дня назад

why would a submarine be traveling on the surface in a stormy sea? your theory doesnt add up here

@IZAQ_ 9 месяцев назад

I feel the Estonia should be raised. There is no real reason for it to be at the bottom of the ocean, she should be raised, have the bodies be buried, let the investigators investigate the ship properly and then put it in a museum in Tallin or Stockholm similar to the Vasa ship.

@coderider3022 7 месяцев назад

What bodies ? Gone by now.

@tugboats79 3 месяца назад

@@coderider3022some remains would still exist... Like bones for example...

@bob68hahalol 2 месяца назад

its too heavy to pull

@IZAQ_ 2 месяца назад

@@bob68hahalol Pretty sure it's not, but it is very expensive

@bob68hahalol 2 месяца назад

it is 3000 tons

@wayneh1455 4 месяца назад

The Estonia collided with a submarine,submarine was pushed back an it was the propeller of the submarine caused the hole on the side of the Estonia

@TrulyMadlyShallowly 10 месяцев назад

Even without the military equipment smuggle history - which would make it exponentially worse - I can see why this is not the time to create an international incident by blaming Russian submarines. Even if it was all an accident, the public discourse around a shipping accident is going to be very different from a shipping accident *involving a secret Russian vessel*. Even Estonia would avoid that at this point, I suspect

@stanislavczebinski994 10 месяцев назад

In the German book "Mayday, Mayday..." by Günther Bossow the Estonia is featured, too. After the desaster, a 1:35 model was tested at 14kts and 4m wave height. It was found that the construction of visor and ramp needed to be multiple times stronger to handle the forces of the Baltic than it actually was. This was unknown to the company building it - the construction met all rules and regulations existing at the time. Furthermore, it was in very very bad shape. Some welding was done in the form of 3mm welds where at least 8mm were required. In the locking process, shortcuts were taken. Not all locking bolts were secured. Besides mechanical issues - going into high seas head on at 14kts contributed significantly to the sinking as water ingress was sped up. After all, the official version comes together. No great mystery here.

@Oliverr544 8 месяцев назад

But explain why it took 30 minutes for the ship to completely sunk while it had air pockets these ships will float for hours if not days….also the assasination of Tallinn’s chief of port. Igor kristapovitš Who worked on the same day when the ship sunk and also the assasination of Harri Enula the manager of estline.. both of these men knew everything which was being transported on the ship. Both of them were just shot dead no valuabes stolen nothing. clearly assassinated, also thr missing crew member who many people saw and their relatives claim even some of them called them, then disappeared into thin air. Explain them please

@Oliverr544 8 месяцев назад

Clearly Russians sunk that ship… why on hell would Russia sign that treary which prohibits their citizens to dive there?? During 1994 the russian-estonian relations were very bad.. why on earth would russia care about this ship if it wasnt involved?? They 100% transported stolen soviet military/space technology there. One fact also why did nato do their training exercises on baltic sea during the day of sinking?? Clear cover up they were probably there to defend the ship. But KGB agents managed to sneak on board the ship and plant bombs there…..with all those weird circumstances the official sinking theory dosent sound good at all.. and now nobody wants to take responsibility for the mass murder of 800+ people. During the recent ROV diving footage where the holes where found on the ship theres visible dark spots like something had burnt there or exploded thats 100% not from rusting…

@stanislavczebinski994 8 месяцев назад

@@Oliverr544 Firstly, Estonia was a large ship - but the open cargo deck did take on enough water to eventually sink her. The engine room vents are placed there, too - allowing the water too fill another big area - killing engines and generators in the process. Back then, several Ro/Ro-vessels sunk - and all of them very quickly. That's why they were called roll on - roll over. Ro/Ro-ships today have movable bulkheads in place whilst out at sea - and many other modern safety features plus an enhanced safety culture amongst sailors.

@stanislavczebinski994 8 месяцев назад

@@Oliverr544 "both of these men knew everything which was being transported on the ship" - That's a clear no. They probably had access to the cargo list - but if the rumours about some sort of secret Russian weapon or device is true - it would most definitely not be declared as such. Some sort of truck with "machine parts" or something alike would have been declared. Therefore - this guys hadn't the slightest clue just by what was written in the cargo list. As this was the time of "the wild east" - with enough money one could buy basically everything - they could have been murdered for this transport, for another one - or for something unrelated. Hard to tell today.

@user-nw3xc2tk6y 12 дней назад

then explain the concrete

@margay34 10 месяцев назад

A hit like that would have surely damaged the sub to either sink it or for it to need repairs are there any reports of a lost or damaged sub in the Baltic Sea at that time?

@jcdenton6074 9 месяцев назад

No, there aren't. In addition a submarine would have definitely been sunk by an impact like that. Even further, a submarine on the surface would have a flashing yellow beacon as required by law, and have their navigation lights on.

@lacai527 9 месяцев назад

at baltic sea we have this one country who dont care so much about international laws.

@jcdenton6074 9 месяцев назад

Yeah, but it didn't happen.@@lacai527

@gutsfinky 7 месяцев назад

Not the Baltic but a submarine apparently made port in Scotland a few months later with hull damage.

@jcdenton6074 7 месяцев назад

@@gutsfinky didn't happen. The MS Estonia submarine theory is debunked multiple times.

@stanislavczebinski994 10 месяцев назад

The submarine theory doesn't add up. Yes, they can damage a vessel - but a fishing boat of a few hundred gross tonnes is no comparison to Estonia's 16,000 tonnes. IDK where the shown fishing vessel hit the sub or how big the latter was - but in the small Baltic Sea, most submarines are quite small, too. It wouldn't do much to Estonia. They would run over it like a car over a rabbit. And the point of contact would have been a lot lower - especially in a storm, no submarine dives up completely. It would roll and pitch like crazy making everybody on board very seasick. And for a collision to happen the sub crew has to be completely blind - and deaf, too. In a sub - your ears are your eyes. Sonar tells you what's going on outside. Yes - a storm is quite noisy - but a 16,000 gross tonnes ship with 4 huge engines running at full throttle 14kts is a lot louder. Besides engines and props - even the sound of the bow alone smashing into the waves would be loud enough to be heard dozens of miles away. They would have heard it long before they saw the lights. Sub crews are very well trained. There is little room for error. You make a mistake - you die. Period. A crew so inept to get the very basics wrong would probably sink the boat before even leaving the harbour. That's why I doubt the sub theory.

@jcdenton6074 9 месяцев назад

I agree, this collision theory is nothing but complete misinformation. A coastal submarine like operates in the Baltic would have been completely destroyed while Estonia would have sustained likely only cosmetic damage.

@stanislavczebinski994 9 месяцев назад

@@jcdenton6074 Exactly.

@ShortArmOfGod 9 месяцев назад

You put entirely too much faith in the military and military systems. They're humans. Which is good enough reason for anything to happen.

@teijaflink2226 8 месяцев назад

Now that you say this that theory sounds totally dumb. I don't think any proof of any missiles have been found either, the holes are supposed to have come from the rocky ground. I do believe though that they where possibly smuggling military equipment on Estonia but I don't think it has anything to do with the sinking. Like in most cases the sinking has to do with human greed and incompetence. The ship was horribly maintained and the grew incompetent, someone should have been held responsible for this instead.

@danielandersson1139 4 месяца назад

Totally agree. The sub theory is extremely unlikely, as is the bomb theory. (for many, many reasons) Sereral (7) witnesses saw the ship go down without the visor, including two who climbed down on the outside of the ramp, which of course is only accessible if the visor is gone.

@elgainus 3 месяца назад

LOUD metal to metal contact--that fact can't be ignored...

@MajorLazer182 7 месяцев назад

According to the frontal collision theory, trust me, that bow would NOT look it does that if it were the actual case...

@Joonas_Rytkonen 5 месяцев назад

The ship needs to be raised now if they are meaning to do that. The wreck has been there this year for 30 years. Soon it will be in such a bad state that it cannot stand the lifting operation. I think still it can be raised, but soon in a few years, the ship would not come in one peace anymore to the surface. But what i think personally.... they are not gonna lift her. They are gonna let the wreck stay there for good. That's pretty obvious now.

@emusaurus 5 дней назад

Are you offering to pay for it, mate?

@damo85 10 месяцев назад

I think there's some serious issues regarding your video here. You make it sound as if the waves alone had been blamed for the damage sustained by Estonia - this is NOT the case, the weather was just one mitigating factor. The improper servicing of the locking devices and the known design flaw are also mitigating factors, as are the improper actions of certain crew members. The damage to the visor was likely sustained when colliding with the bulbous bow which also has consistent damage, and that mass of metal falling 240 feet through the water would likely receive damage and scratches as it hit the seabed in its forward-down descent. The damage to the ramp remains consistent with the official version of events - what we see on models where the ramp falls neatly open is not necessarily the most accurate depiction. For example, it is perfectly possible the visor only succeeded in bending the ramp and mangling it out of place allowing flooding to occur. Mind the pun but there are various holes in the submarine theory that make it far more unlikely than the official version of events.

@emusaurus 5 дней назад

How dare you bring logic to the tin foil hat club

@Tom8201 4 месяца назад

What happened to the bow visor after it was raised?

@randomnamd627 5 месяцев назад

5:40 i do think that its plausible that the bow visor coming off would have hit the bow ramp with enough force and with the edgea you can see at the bottom of the visor to make a mark in it

@KingBritish 10 месяцев назад

Why is the dent in the visor such a mystery it literlly hit the sea floor plus when it snapped off it likely hit the side of the ship causing the gash.

@fbportnoy 10 месяцев назад

These CT theories are just too dumb.

@Attomicc076 10 месяцев назад

Submarines are too precise and secure to hit something like a cruise-ferry. They have methods of telling stuff is there

@KingBritish 10 месяцев назад

@@Attomicc076 Exactly but I think those that believe it was a sub, did so on purpose. Of course it wasn't a sub.

@coderider3022 7 месяцев назад

Bulbous bow would take the hit on sea floor, not the visor ?

@MBkufel 9 месяцев назад

"I just don't believe that water crashing against the ramp could cause such damage" Bruh, haven't read a lot about ships, have you?

@gerdokurt 9 месяцев назад

I think it`s pretty obvious what happend. A mixture of design/regulation issues, early east european maintenance, bad weather and a captain that steered the vessel like an atomic icebreaker caused the sinking of the ship. The "jutta rabe explosives" are 100% debunked since 20 years and the submarine plot is not thought through, with no evidence to begin with! The reasons for the more or less successfull attempts at the time to limit access to a wreckage in international waters and the lack of motivation to salvage the ship, are obvious too. There is stuff on the ship that shouldnt be there and 1994 it was unthinkable to admit officially, even if the russians already knew it.

@deborahstafford8850 10 месяцев назад

Such disasters of course tragic and have to rely on those with intimate knowledge and expertise to provide answers. Unfortunately while conclusions and information should be shared we know a plethora of reasons why often doesn’t happen. Stating obvious but cost of ongoing investigations must play role too. IMO good for all to question, investigate and push for answers.

@dianasp1648 7 месяцев назад

By the way, do you know anything about the captain of Estonia? Was he found? There was information that he survived but then disappeared.

@TheTanelChannel 7 месяцев назад

Yes i´ve seen the photos but they are pretty blurry and it is not possible to say with full confidence it was him in the ambulance. I think he went down with the ship as the crew was still stuck inside the ship when the listing was very bad.

@gutsfinky 7 месяцев назад

@@TheTanelChanneltrue, the video is very short and he turns at one point. But what about his name being on the list of survivors?

@popcorncast 2 месяца назад

@@TheTanelChannel Is there any chance to upscale the blurry photos bcuz of the AI today

@r-saint 6 месяцев назад

On your animation, the sub after the ramming raises the bow of Estonia so much the bridge crew would have see it. It didn't happen.

@pountoloco9872 5 месяцев назад

The french trawler is damaged on both sides yes , but not by direct hit . The bow is crushed on both side , this was caused by a “very rapid and quick sinking” that trapped the crew and some air . But with a rapid descent the bow was crushed under the pressure of the ocean . The Trawler name is “Bugaled Breizh” In this tragic story , Yves Gloaguen, Georges Lemétayer, Éric Guillamet, Pascal Le Floch, Patrick Gloaguen all lost their lives. In fact nobody was found guilty . So no compensation for their families. But some peoples know the truth.. and we will know one day .

@mtprince09 7 дней назад

Have there been any updates?

@tidan4575 7 месяцев назад

I've read enough to know that everyone and I mean EVERYONE responsible for the operation, certification, and manufacturing of the Estiona had screwed up. The manufacturer for taking shortcuts in design and building, especially inadequate escape routes for evacuation, The government for certifying it to sail in open seas in which it was never intended to do so, The operators for not providing proper training to their crews for operation, safety, and evacuation if needed. Nor did the operators properly maintain their emergency equipment, or warn their fleet after a bow visor broke off of one of their sister ships. And the captain for improper loading of the Estonia and sailing at full speed in a storm, putting maximum stress on the bow visor breaking it off, nor did he slow down when the Estonia violently listed, sinking the vessel much quicker. The government wants it buried because they want to cover up their guilt in the accident. Nothing complicated like a conspiracy theory.

@M167A1 4 месяца назад

You would be amazed to see what water can do

@J.R.in_WV 3 месяца назад

I’m certain I’ve heard / read at least one somewhat credible theory from someone who was qualified to speculate on ways the ship could have wound up where it did that says it’s possible the bow visor actually remained attached on the ship throughout the sinking and was torched off by those trying to cover up something fishy about the sinking and raised up then was moved some distance away from the wreck and dropped back in the sea where it was later recovered with cameras rolling.

@JackSondrol-qe8xj 2 месяца назад

The gash is from the visor hitting against the hull

@DaystromDataConcepts 4 месяца назад

The problem with such disasters is that there are always people who latch onto alternative explanations. Once you start down that road, you tend, as is human, to lose your objectivity. You become more and more convinced that there MUST be something more to it an that official explanations, no matter how well they account for the evidence, must be a cover up. I grant you, conspiracies are far more seductive and compelling than the, often mundane, truths behind such disasters. As for the suspicious behaviour of not raising the wreck etc? Never under estimate the political/personal need to conceal incompetence. Apart from those ultimately responsible trying to cover their own asses, I see no reason to always try and find more sinister rationales here. Also bear in mind that the ferry wasn't designed for open water, it was designed for coastal routes that are much calmer. The builders of the ferry have produced documentation showing the inadequate maintenance on the bow visor. That, in conjunction with the very heavy seas that night, led to the failure of the visor when placed under stresses it wasn't built for and poor maintenance to further worsen the situation. Further, there is no reason at all for a submarine of any navy to operate in clearly defined sea lanes and at such shallow depths - especially with such heavy seas. It makes absolutely no sense at all as far as I can see. Also, if such a submarine was present, the Estonia's mass would've been likely more than double that of the sub, resulting in catastrophic flooding for the submarine. No, I think the disaster has been explained.

@pachuskinhavii-d866 5 месяцев назад

Where is the ramp stored???

@Tracy-zr9mg 8 месяцев назад

Why would a submarine be anywhere near the surface during a storm? That is not likely at all

@bladesrightleg9209 8 месяцев назад

true. unless the goal was to sink the ship, of course :)

@darinakulish1128 3 месяца назад

I don’t quite understand how would the damage to the visor and the ramp (even though it is actually said that it did not open by engineers) how would it sink that fast? How would it sink that fast without the damage below the waterline? What am I missing, please tell… There is also the that side impact filmed by a German investigator, that is not explained by any other theory, other than submarine or some sizeable object impact? Why can’t it be that this impact made already loosed visor fell down, but the water came through this under waterline side damage?

@1MercedesBenzW124 8 месяцев назад

Well logically thinking if there was a submarine then there would either be traces of it or even a submarine wreck because of the power or how to call it from collision

@edgarran8709 2 месяца назад

It is also possible that it was Swedish or Nato submarine.

@annaolausson6862 Месяц назад

Back in the day they said the car deck was not closed…

@annaolausson6862 Месяц назад

Or “bow visir”

@Nedvio 9 месяцев назад

2:00 Paldiski, in Tallinn?

@slothinaspacesuit 4 месяца назад

It's well documented and reported that wave action can cause extreme damage to the structure of ships. Even ships that have been well maintained can be damaged by waves. The bow visor breaking loose is much more plausible explanation than a random sub hitting the ship then disappearing into the night and was completely covered up. if a sub hit the ferry it's very unlikely that it would have come away from the encounter undamaged or without being completely destroyed. Where's the evidence of a missing or heavily damaged sub from around this time? Instead of the massive forces of water on a badly designed and maintained vessel mixed with over confident crew that trusted an idiot light instead of actually inspecting after a loud popping metallic bang allowed high seas to enter a known dangerously designed portion of the ship causing this tragedy. The official explanation makes the most sense.

@user-nw3xc2tk6y 12 дней назад

yes, until you add the concrete

@baconeggs8738 9 месяцев назад

Great video! PS: It's bow VISOR, not bow WISOR.

@Mr.Marketing 9 месяцев назад

Leave the silly Baltic accent alone, it’s part of the charm. I’d take it over the “#15 guy’s” or “Daily dose of the internet’s” phony and unbearable speech patterns. Worst of all… fucking text to speech.

@reflexreaction3797 8 месяцев назад

Kudos to you for not using a robot for speech, despite your accent. Too many snowflakes doing it.

@gutsfinky 7 месяцев назад

As an American who only started learning a second language in 10th grade, I'm in awe of anyone who can speak another language with such skill!

@Skupik1 2 месяца назад

Swedish government be like: “Nothing to see here, so much nothing we’ll cover it with 10.000t of rocks so you don’t have to see.”

@henningwitte2118 4 месяца назад

Totally BS! You should learn all the evidence that the bow visor was blown of with explosives! But the ramp did NOT OPEN. Estonia sank so quickly because of huge holes on starboard caused by bombs!

@georgevavoulis4758 2 месяца назад

Let's have the REAL truth about this disaster.

@SPPhotography89 7 месяцев назад

the greatest secret of the universe.

@Tvuvtctoj46fck 7 месяцев назад

No the greatest secret is "what caused the braindamage on conspiracy nutcases".

@durango.j-onez 4 месяца назад

Everyone aboard the ship would have noticed a collision with multiple hits - particularly the Bridge officers and Engineers. Reports say a loud bang came from the bow of the ship - a collision would have a marked difference in how the impact wouldnhave reverberated through the ship vs the bow door falling off Unless the reports have been falsified from crew to the surviving passengers, I have seen nothing to convince me it was a collision I am all ears to any evidence to the contrary If the estonia sank due to a collision - there would be a submarine wreck nearby

@ameljaeriksson3785 7 месяцев назад

Check out fokus estonia

@christianconcorde6033 9 месяцев назад

🎬🎬🎬

@elefteriosmouratidis 9 месяцев назад

Really, You think a submarine was involved? Com on. So what happend to the sub? You cant possible say i just sailed away..... Esonia was a rustbucket .

@petriisoaho 8 месяцев назад

estonia was not a rost bucket. Good condition.

@elefteriosmouratidis 8 месяцев назад

Yeah and I am the God of all Gods@@petriisoaho

@petriisoaho 8 месяцев назад

@@elefteriosmouratidis happy now?

@elefteriosmouratidis 8 месяцев назад

about what @@petriisoaho

@lacai527 9 месяцев назад

Lack of investigation is so suscpicious, specially when it was a Finnish made ship and we have solid ship building industry, but our goverment did not want to investigate more, sure we all blamed all estline for the maintenance.

@petriisoaho 8 месяцев назад

German made ship!

@lacai527 8 месяцев назад

@@petriisoaho Oh true! never looked Meyr Werft is parent company oh Meyr Turku (Finnish dock), and it was build in Meyr german dock! thansk for education!

@Tvuvtctoj46fck 7 месяцев назад

I think this ship killed JFK.

@batteryjuice3041 3 месяца назад

I think a person with an IQ of above 50 know that the reason for MS estonia sinking was not the officical version. Now my comment will be erased withing a few hours.. there where much more than one hole, actually several holes, and this sub collision..

@nortontihane7089 10 месяцев назад

Wasn't it concluded that there are some damages to the steel itself that could only be caused with heat exceeding 1200 degrees C?

@fbportnoy 10 месяцев назад

No.

@JoakimLarsson570 10 месяцев назад

That's really funny.

@TheMimis11 10 месяцев назад

Yes. It was university who studied it.

@TheMimis11 10 месяцев назад

@@JoakimLarsson570its not

@JoakimLarsson570 10 месяцев назад

@@TheMimis11 Sorry, it was meant as a sarcastic reply to what I thought was a joke, as in a reference to "jet fuel can't melt steel beams" (9/11).

@trainspotting_estonia7295 11 месяцев назад

Port of paldiski in tallinn estonia😂

@TheTanelChannel 11 месяцев назад

Yes sorry, its 50KM from Tallinn! I mixed up Muuga with Paldiski :)

@jcdenton6074 9 месяцев назад

This submarine collision theory is pure misinformation. A coastal submarine like the type that operates in these waters would be completely destroyed by a collision with a large ship like Estonia, and it is unlikely Estonia would have suffered anything more than cosmetic damage. The answer is shoddy shipbuilding. This needs to be put to bed for the sake of the families.

@daveyshambles01howtosandgaming 10 месяцев назад

Nice wydeo ?

@Z-e-r-0 6 месяцев назад

Nice Click Bait. There's nothing said in this video of a "2023 Update" that wasn't already said back when the ship sank in 1994.

@austinflores8552 8 месяцев назад

I blame the Russians 😊

@foundedcupid5286 2 месяца назад

I dont believe at all in the submarine the submarine would be massive (because if it was a small sub it would just sink imediatly) and would need to hit a head on and then the side? And no submarine was found sunk . My honest opinion it was just an old rusty ship and after the front fell off the water bend the ramp (you can see the ranp is not that thick) and water started rushing faster as for the hole it could be many many things like the piece that fell of hiting the side or after it sunk it hit or laid in to a rock under water ( not just that why tf would a submarine be doing so high up in a rough water? )

@Tvuvtctoj46fck 7 месяцев назад

All you guys are brilliant. It is a cover up. But you guys solved it. Thank god for the lack of common sense. What would the world turn to without you guys, who are not only very experienced on intelligence, but also naval technicians. What are the chances??? I bet the estonian government is pretty annoyed. Should watch my back if i were you ...

@bladesrightleg9209 8 месяцев назад

The Russians 100% sank the ship. No doubt. Estonia transported military equipment from the Soviet Union on several occasions and the Russians had threatened those who did so that something would happen if they did not stop. According to one or more passengers, the ship was held back before departure in order to let several military vehicles on board. I believe I have also read that someone has been down in the wreckage and retrieved something from a car deck after the sinking. There's a reason why it was all covered up and they didn't want to find the real reason the ship sank; because it would create more questions and problems, than answers.

@SPPhotography89 7 месяцев назад

Not necessarily a Russian, that's why this is being kept secret, otherwise the truth could hurt more when the matter comes out.

@SPPhotography89 7 месяцев назад

possibly the neighbor's "guys" hit it by accident. but they only defend, not sink.

@gutsfinky 7 месяцев назад

If it were Russians why wouldn't they come out and say so? What would they have lost in doing so? Russia was extremely weak in 1994. No, I think it was a sub from a "friendly" country, an accidental hit.

@SPPhotography89 7 месяцев назад

yes, the collapse of the Soviet Union was the greatest virtue since time immemorial, but also the ship's destination on land can have its own secret with that alleged and partly admitted secret cargo, but the question is still why the ship was covered with concrete? we fear something that has not been told.

@Tvuvtctoj46fck 7 месяцев назад

Thank you Sherlock. You solved the mystery.

@janmode3682 10 месяцев назад

The ramp was closed during the sinking. If the ramp was open the ferry would not sink at all, only turn 180 degrees and stay afloat for days, floating on the air in the bottom. Several bomb holes has been discovered in the starboard side cause M/S Estonia to sink in less than 45 min. Here you have the facts ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-zup7OxqMyoo.htmlsi=2ODTPGjwKGpP92Hj

@MBkufel 9 месяцев назад

Laughable.

@janmode3682 9 месяцев назад

@@MBkufel The 852 passangers who drown like rats did not laugh. How about some history lessons for you. M/S Estonia sank in 20 minutes. That´s impossible with out blow the whole starboardside under the waterline. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-5YcHjtZPYuU.htmlsi=vraPqb6v4uei125O

@FadeToBlack1989 11 месяцев назад

It was a U.S sub that hit them. Either a torpedo or impact caused the estonia to sink

@JackpodyDK 11 месяцев назад

I really don't imagine you have the background to definitively write such statement, tbh.

@FadeToBlack1989 11 месяцев назад

@@JackpodyDK im sorry, next time i wont voice my personal opinion on a public platforms comment section

@ottotroelsgaardmikkelsen9554 11 месяцев назад

Why would they launch a torpedo?

@FadeToBlack1989 11 месяцев назад

@@ottotroelsgaardmikkelsen9554 I am not saying thats 100% what happened. Im just saying. There were U.S sub/s in the area doing war exercises and maybe they either crashed into it or launched a torpedo thinking they were hitting a dummy ship. Again this is just a personal opinion based on the fact that they went and closed the hole with concrete. What were they trying to cover up.( they said it was so no bodies would float out. But that doesnt make sense)

@ottotroelsgaardmikkelsen9554 11 месяцев назад

@@FadeToBlack1989 oh. Ok👍 now i understand