SSSPA Sweden AB produces another manipulated 'Estonia' Model Test Report 2007

by Anders Björkman

Home

About us

Services

Contact info

News

Order books

Fakeboot


SSPA Sweden AB produces another manipulated 'Estonia' Model Test Report (Report no. 4006 4100-2)! (uppdated 25 August 2007)

In 1995 SSPA Sweden AB produced a manipulated 'Estonia' model test report to show big wave impact forces acting on the visor (when there were none!). 31 May 2007 SSPA Sweden AB produced a second such report (Report no. 4006 4100-2) with completely misleading conclusions about water inflow into the 'Estonia' superstructure after the visor was lost and what happens.

The ship model was self propelled and manually radio controlled and allowed to run into irregular head waves (Hs = 4.2 m) at speed 14.5 knots with open ramp. So far so good!

- Not to risk that the ship model would capsize (heel 180°) starting at 37° heel with 1800 tons of water (full scale) loaded on the car deck and to pitch/trim too much, an additional 100% buoyant superstructure (0% permeability) was added full length on deck 4 on top of the car deck superstructure decks 2-4. In reality a deck house with windows and doors is located on deck 4-8, which does not provide any buoyancy at any time! It fills immediately with water when submerged. Proper means to prevent the model to capsize and protect instruments and equipment inside the model should allow the model to heel to 80° when capsize can be stopped. Equipment/instruments can be protected by plastic bags.

-The model ramp could not have been properly scaled - apparently it was too light. It was seen to close 'now and then' during the tests; a 16 ton full scale steel ramp would have permanently fallen down below the waves and been acting as a plough forcing water into the superstructure all the time.

- Probably the permeability of the car deck superstructure space was not done correctly, i.e. 100% permeability forward where no cargo was loaded and about 60% where trucks and cars midship and aft occupied the space. More water should have accumulated forward during the tests.

The model was therefore seriously flawed.

A correct model should have been permitted to pitch/trim freely at any angle of heel and to heel until at least 80° when some means to prevent further heeling - capsize 180° heel - would be activated.

Two runs were performed.

The responsible persons, Claes Källström and Björn Allenström, conclude:

In both cases the model heeled about 15° after about half a minute full scale time (600 tons of water on the car deck) and 25° after one minute full scale time (1200 tons of water on the car deck).

"The ship model got a final heel angle of about 46-47 degrees after about 3-4 minutes".

Comments:

The reason for the 40% reduced water inflow (1200 tons/min versus expected >2000 tons/min as per previous tests) is that the model ramp was closed, 'now and then' (sic), during the tests.

There is no doubt that the ship model would have trimmed several metres on the bow and capsized at 37° heel caused by 1800 tons of water on the car deck after only one minute and then turned 180° turtle and floated upside down. This was only prevented by the extra 100% buoyancy fitted on top of deck 4 of the model and the incorrect permeability of the car deck space deck 2. The time delay was due to the model ramp reducing inflow.

The reason, why the report does not say when the the critical heel angle 37° (or slightly less) occurs during the tests and what happens then, is that then the model suddenly heels much more, >47°, it capsizes, but the capsize and trimming on the bow are prevented by the additional 100% buoyant superstructure on top of deck 4.

The observation that the ship model got a final heel of about 46-47 degrees (3000 tons of water on the car deck) after about 3-4 minutes has therefore no relevance as that condition is not stable! Stability is then only provided by the extra 100% buoyancy on top of deck 4 that does not exist in reality. See photo right!

The responsible persons, Claes Källström and Björn Allenström, further conclude:

"After that the model was filled with (3000 tons of) water on car deck it was left drifting in the waves. … The drift speed in the waves was measured to about one knot (full scale). It can be assumed that if wind had been added the drift speed would have been about twice".

Comments:

The observation that a ship model filled with 3000 tons of water (full scale) drifts at one knot (full scale) in test basin due waves is evidently ridiculous. There is no current in a model basin. The waves only heaves the model up/down. The assumption that the drift speed is twice due to wind is also unscientific gibberish. The model would simpy have capsized and floated upside down long before reaching the condition with 46-47° heel.

Question:

Why does SSPA Sweden AB produce such misleading findings? No big bow trim or capsize at 37° heel but a stable condition with 46-47° heel (sic) and big stern trim and then drifting with a speed 2 knots (sic)!

Answer:

This is to permit the ship to float another 50 minutes and to drift one and a half mile before sinking as alleged by the JAIC - to be further simulated by the 'research' consortia.

Evidently no such things happened. The survivors reported sudden rolling 30° port/starboard at time of accident (01.02 hrs) and then a stable condition with <15° list starboard during 5-10 minutes, so that they could evacuate. Attending vessel observed 'Estonia' immobile in the water and not drifting at all (at 01.25 hrs) and the vessel sinking at 01.35 hrs.

The latest SSPA Sweden AB tests and report, falsified by Claes Källström and Björn Allenström using a flawed model with a 100% buouyant tank on top deck 4 is another shameful attempt to mislead the public about the 'Estonia' accident!

Heiwa Co has 22 August 2007 asked a spokesperson for the consortia to withdraw the report and to redo proper model tests but the reply is that this is 'very unreasonable'!

The earlier promise that 'All Heiwa Co information will be considered' is forgotten!

Surviving 3/M Margus Treu explains 'In the engine room, there was water to the knees".

Heiwa Co start page

Heiwa Co English Estonia page

Heiwa Co Swedish Estoniasida