My proven facts are
simple and correct and good news.
A-bombs do not work. Humans cannot
travel to the Moon. M/S Estonia
didn't lose her bow visor (as
explained below). Skyscrapers do not
collapse from top down. All information
to the contrary is pseudoscience,
propaganda lies or fantasies promoted
by media and taught at
universities. And if you do not
agree with the official lies, you will
no be allowed at the university boat
race* and other silly events, etc. Your
position in society is at risk. If you suffer from cognitive
dissonance, you no doubt
find my info disturbing and get upset,
angry, anxious or worried. What to
believe and write? Old lies or
truth? Media incl. newspaper chief
editors are kindly requested to get
psychological assistance to get rid of
dissonance. Why not
cure yourself? And publish the result
as a scoop. *Safety at sea is my
My proven facts are simple and correct and good news. A-bombs do not work. Humans cannot travel to the Moon. M/S Estonia didn't lose her bow visor (as explained below). Skyscrapers do not collapse from top down. All information to the contrary is pseudoscience, propaganda lies or fantasies promoted by media and taught at universities. And if you do not agree with the official lies, you will no be allowed at the university boat race* and other silly events, etc. Your position in society is at risk.
If you suffer from cognitive dissonance, you no doubt find my info disturbing and get upset, angry, anxious or worried. What to believe and write? Old lies or truth?
Media incl. newspaper chief editors are kindly requested to get psychological assistance to get rid of their cognitive dissonance. Why not cure yourself? And publish the result as a scoop.
*Safety at sea is my business
Articles and information about M/S Estonia fakery
2005/8 Swedish tax payers paid SEK millions for research to explain the M/S Estonia sinking 1994 but the result was not put on the Internet. You have to read about it here.
The Swedish State Commission of Fantasies, SCF, 21 years
On 28 September 2015, it was 21 years since the M/S Estonia sank in the Baltic Sea 1994 and the Prime Minister Carl Bildt ordered SCF to show that the visor had fallen off and caused the accident. Bildt knew that the M/S Estonia transported military contraband and that certain parties did not like it. The SCF Director General Olof Forssberg was eager to help Bildt and SCF shipbuilding technical expert, my old friend, navy commander Börje Stenström invented the following fantasies:
The visor was wrongly constructed since 1980, when the ferry was built, it was full hurricane during the night of the accident, the ferry was travelling at too high speed due to an incompetent commander and huge waves struck off the visor 01.15 hrs without a single person aboard noticing it, the visor then pulled open the ramp, so that hundreds of tons of water could silently flood into the superstructure, when the ferry's bow dipped under water every ten seconds, the ferry heeled more than 30° after a few minutes and turned 180° south and east, when the engines stopped, Estonia then capsized but floated upside down and drifted eastward at high speed, but suddenly sank completely at 1.53 hrs a mile east of where the visor had fallen off at 01.15 hrs, several hundred people managed to get out to the open decks during 10 minutes, but only 137 survived, because they did not understand that they must swim and crawl up into the life rafts thrown into the water, the ferry was fully seaworthy on departure despite there were 22 open, watertight doors in the hull, which was not allowed, etc, etc,
The German shipyard that built the ferry for protected coastal Finland/Sweden trade suggested that the ferry was perhaps not well maintained after the first owner went bankrupt about 1989, people who suggested that the ferry might have sank due to leakage below the waterline, which should be investigated, were declared to be idiots by SCF (media happily transmitted that message) and were blamed in the media to be unintelligent, unscientific and unreasonable conspiracy theorists, whose sole purpose was to topple the government, the visor was found after a while almost one mile west of the wreck, it was said, and it was salvaged by the Swedish Navy, which however could not tell where it took place, after almost three years of accident investigation Börje Stenström died suddenly of cancer, it was sadly said, and Director General Olof Forssberg took the opportunity to announce that he forgot to register a letter, what a serious error!, so he was unable to complete the fantasy investigations and a new female fat DG had to do it, who then published a final report in December 1997 that no one was basically happy with, for example, the sinking was not explained, i.e. how and why the ferry sank after floating upside down, etc., etc., which led to numerous parliamentary debates with Mona Sahlin until the government decided in 2005 that it, i.e. the sinking process, would scientifically be clarified by independent but very well-paid experts from Sweden, Scotland, Germany and Holland, which was completed in 2008, the explanation was that the M/S Estonia floated upside down due to the trapped air in the hull but the air was compressed, etc., for 30 minutes, which had never happened sooner or later, so the ferry sank. The experts declared this while licking the Bildt ass. As if it were something? No. Most Swedes just do as they are told from above. Easiest way!
You can read more about all those strange fantasies in the links at the bottom of this web page. There I am not satirical!
Anders Björkman - September 2015
The M/S Estonia 1994 sinking killing >850 persons is still not explained September 2014! So far only pseudo scientific info has been presented (5 December 2014 and up-dated later)
More than 20 years have passed since M/S Estonia sank due to hull leakage below waterline 28 September 1994 probably due to sabotage. The ship carried military cargo protected by Swedish police and military aboard. The ship was not seaworthy at departure due to lack of correct lifesaving equipment and watertight hull subdivision. A false cause of incident was invented; a weak bow visor that dropped off. The cover-up of the incident is a success 2015.
You have to admit that the Swedish cover-up of the crime of evil people works fine.
On 20 September 2014 various memorial events took place to honour the dead. Mainstream media reported these events. Media also repeated the old, official explanations/lies what happened 20 years ago. The visor fell off and water was loaded in the superstructure. However it was not explained then how the ship sank, i.e. lost its buoyancy produced by the hull. And they didn't report what could have had happened - my proposal #1 or proposal #2 (formulated already 2001!)
Media thought 2014 that the incident was fully explained 1997 and was completely resolved and that any publicity about other theories is an insult to governments and authorities. I just want to be helpful. It is not popular.
Media forget that the sinking was supposedly scientifically explained 2008 at high costs by five scientific institutions: SSPA & Chalmers University of Gothenburg, Sweden, Safety at Sea, Ltd and University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, Scotland and MARIN, Delft, Netherlands.
Media forgot 2014 to mention that a very strange sinking was presented 2008 using pseudoscientific methods.
Which means that the sinking is still not explained 2015!
All links to the scientific reports by SSPA & Chalmers University of Gothenburg, Sweden, and Safety at Sea, Ltd , Scotland, paid for by Swedish taxpayers, stopped working many years ago and do not work any more (September 2014). You should wonder why. Luckily the SSPA Final report is available.
The objective of the scientific project was as per Swedish government clear instructions 2005 to scientifically explain the sinking, i.e. loss of buoyancy of the ferry based on the alleged factual findings of the JAIC investigation 1994-1997, i.e. first
i) the visor fell off at 01.15 hrs and pulled open the ramp protecting the superstructure and
ii) water was loaded in the superstructure 2.5 meter above waterline in severe weather, so that
iii) the ferry heeled/capsized/floated/drifted upside down for a certain time and
iv) after having turned 180° upside down and drifted more than a mile at high speed the vessel
v) sank/lost buoyancy/disappeared around 01.50 hrs.
No buoyancy was lost until after the capsize, so the objective of the whole project was to establish why the floating, capsized ship with intact hull lost buoyancy and sank.
JAIC, the official accident investigation commission had 1994-1997 forgotten to explain the sinking of the ferry, i.e. how water loaded in the superstructure caused sinking i.e. loss of buoyancy of the hull while drifting.
The scientists reported their findings 2008.
Swedish SSPA studies of records and scientific model tests showed that >2 000 tons/min water was loaded into the superstructure starting at 01.02 hrs (not 01.14 hrs as per JAIC picture above) and that the ferry was heeling >40° after two minutes at 01.04 hrs (and not only 15°) and then stopped heeling.
These events were evidently not according to the JAIC 1994-1997 findings, where sudden heeling started at 01.15 hrs but stopped at <15°, so that, say 400+ persons aboard could evacuate to open decks during 10 minutes.
All 130+ survivors reported that the ship never remained at heel >40° after the first heeling/severe rolling but uprighted and was not heeling so much so they could escape. You wonder why the scientists decided otherwise.
The Swedish scientists, generously paid to to be politically correct and to maintain social order in their country, whose government used M/S Estonia to carry and smuggle military equipment, suggested 2008 that the vessel, still floating on the intact hull with heel >40°, then, after turning port 180°, didn't immediately capsize and float upside down.
Reason was the buoyancy of an intact deck house above the suprerstructure! JAIC suggested 1994-1997 that the deck house (green in picture below) was flooded immediately, when it was submerged, as all deck house windows were broken at once. The Swedish scientists, to be politically correct, to lie and to maintain social order in their country, suggested 2008 that only a few windows were broken and that the ferry floated on the windows not broken, i.e. no water entered the deck house (red in picture below):
The Swedish scientists at SSPA/Chalmers thus suggested 2008, without any evidence, that the almost intact deck house (built of 4 mm steel plates with 100's of windows) prevented capsize, i.e. turning and floating upside down, for 20 minutes. Like this:
No ship can float like
this! According Strathclyde
University it can in faked, criminal animations! Antti Arak
and Ain-Alar Juhanson are the two persons on the bow of M/S
lie!) that they walked on the horizontal side of the ship to
the bow and climbed down on a closed ramp, the ship was
rolling in full storm, when the list was 90° at around
01.30 hrs ... and that the visor was missing!
This magic event was confirmed by model tests of the Dutch MARIN company; it took twenty minutes (!) to fill up the deck house if only a few windows were broken, according Dutch scientists.
But there was no evidence that only a few thin window panes broke. The scientists just invented it.
Nobody bothered to explain how the 137 survivors managed to get out of the ship at >40° heel.
However, when the deck house was finally full of water at 01.30 hrs, the ship, still floating on its intact hull, capsized and floated upside down according Archimedes and Swedish model tests and Scottish calculations. How the then upside down floating ship later sank is not explained.
All persons - probably >250 - on open decks or on the side of the ferry jumped into the cold water and swam to rafts that had been dropped into the sea - an illegal procedure. Most drowned. Some survivors were sitting on the bottom of the upside down floating ship until they were swept away.
And then the floating ferry drifted upside down a mile at 2.2 knots speed and suddenly sank at 01.50 hrs stern first according JAIC.
How the buoyancy was lost!
The Swedish and Scottish scientists explained 2008 the reason for sinking being that buoyancy (compressed air inside the capsized, intact hull floating upside down) starting at 01.30 hrs disappeared (!) during 20 minutes; buoyancy air inside the hull disappeared by compression of the air starting at the stern. Archimedes principle didn't work!
Chalmers University has decided to verify this mystery 2014!
It could not happen in model scale and model tests or in reality, so in scientific model tests the air escaped through two valves in the bottom of the model.
The Scottish scientists (actually an Austrian underpaid student) made full scale computer animations of the loading of water into the superstructure, the heeling to 40°, the floating on the deck house, the capsize upside down, the drifting and sinking that confirmed or copied the Swedish/Dutch model tests; vessel heeled >40° in two minutes, it took then 20 minutes to flood the deck house, then capsize upside down followed and another 20 minutes was required to slowly sink stern first due to buoyancy being lost due to air slowly (!) being compressed in the intact hull starting aft. By manipulating the software and the input a fantastic animation was produced Hollywood style.
Imagine that air is slowly compressed by water, when a ship floats upside down! It is really magic. And it started at the stern! It was the first and only time in history such sinking of a ship with intact hull happened.
Nobody managed to explain 2008 how a capsized, sinking vessel could drift at 2.2 knots upside down. If you asked that question, you were immediately attacked and asked to shut up and not to disturb the social order protecting corrupt, lying government officials and well paid scientists.
There is evidently no evidence anywhere that the alleged scientific findings 2008 of the Swedish, Dutch and Scottish scientists are correct but nobody, except Heiwa Co, seems to care 2014. The findings were just politically correct (i.e. lies or fraud to maintain social order) generously paid for by the Swedish government and its Ministry of Defence and that's what counts in Sweden 1994-2014. When Heiwa Co published evidence (see below links) and suggested scientific fraud by Strathclyde and Chalmers universities, the Scots threatened to sue Heiwa Co. They never did it in the end, because they would have lost. But it seems they got away with the fraud assisted by media and authorities. Question is only for how long. Hopefully they will be put in jail 2016.
M/S Estonia was 28 September 1994 allegedly sailing at much too great speed in very severe weather in the Baltic ... and nobody noticed it aboard in bars, restaurants, casino and in the wheelhouse. Few were seasick - the ship just rolled and pitched normally. The visor at the front of the superstructure was suddenly ripped off by big wave impacts ... and nobody heard anything. The ramp protecting the opening into the superstructure was also ripped open by big wave forces ... nobody heard anything. And 200 tons of water was loaded 10 times into the superstructure ... and nobody heard or saw anything even if the light was on in the superstructure ... . Prime minister Carl Bildt made up this fairy tale the same day ... and there we are today 2014. To be politically correct you MUST believe it! If not ...
Chalmers University of Technology, CTH, Gothenburg, Sweden, shall finally review the information of Anders Björkman about the CTH fake scientific research 2006-2008 about the 1994 sinking of M/S Estonia (12 December 2013)
The prorector of Chalmers Tekniska Högskola, CTH, Mats Viberg and others have appointed Karin Andersson as new prefect of the CTH department of Shipping and marine technology until 2014-12-31 and Mats has asked Karin to check about the alleged scientific fakery done there 2006-2009 by professor Olle Rutgersson and dr. Claes Källström, SSPA Marin AB (a fully owned company of CTH).
The result of the review of the alleged fakery by Karin Anderssin will be published here. It is a simple question:
Can an upside down floating ship after capsize, which floats on trapped air inside the intact hull and other bouyant material, sink during 18 minutes as described by Chalmer's and Strathclyde's universities 2008.
The answer came 2014. Yes it can! The principle of Archimedes does not apply in Sweden! More in Swedish here.
The RMS Titanic 1912 sinking explained 2013 No iceberg. Just the usual MV Estonia style collusion! Happens at sea all the time.
December 2012 I was invited to an August 2013 conference at Evanston, USA, to discuss structures (not Estonia) and present a paper. A week prior the opening the invitation was withdrawn! It feels like Estonia. When they do not like the music, they shoot the pianist.
Jutta Rabe ëxplains in German how M/S Estonia was leaking, how Swedish Ministry of Defence called, etc, etc.
The German report update is interesting to read March 2013:
(3) The visor did not tumble forward over the bulbous bow while the vessel was still on full ahead making some 14 kn, but remained attached to the vessel until she had capsized and heeled to about 130°/140°.
What does it really mean? Until she had capsized? How can a ship capsize - and float upside down - if the visor remains attached? How could any water enter the superstructure when the bow opening was closed?
Anybody that can explain how a capsized ship, which floats upside down for four minutes, then sinks during 18 minutes should have no problems with the Heiwa Challenge.
"When windows on the accommodation decks (i.e. in the deck house decks 4 - 9) were broken by wave forces, subsequent .... sinking was inevitable".
Many persons suggest it is a lost cause to explain the M/S Estonia's mysterious sinking 1994 but I do not believe in lost causes!
Foreword 1999 explains everything about the Estonia accident cover-up
The "bow visor" lie (June 1, 2001)
"It should be remembered that Carl Bildt was the father of the "bow visor" lie, which was used to explain the sinking of Estonia on September 28, 1994. The Swedish-owned passenger ferry, which sank with an estimated 1,000 lives lost including 502 Swedes, was being used in an ongoing operation to smuggle stolen Soviet military technology - with the approval of then prime minister Bildt and the head of the Swedish military. Sweden was evidently being used as a transit point for the contraband, which was being forwarded on to Israel from Arlanda airport - without being inspected by Swedish customs on entry or exit from Sweden."
M/V 'Al Salam Boccaccio 98', February 3, 2006 Why is it, that whenever a serious incident occurs at sea with many killed, that the maritime authorities invent a completely unrealistic cause?
Lifeboat Alarm Learn about lifeboat alarms!
Scientific fraud is permitted at Strathclyde University Subject matter has been raised and investigated. Professor Jim McDonald, FREng FRSE FIET FInstP, Principal and Vice Chancellor of Strathclyde University have been investigating for several months! It seems fraud is permitted.
The Naval Architect, journal of the Royal Institution of Naval Architects in London writes on pp 28-42 in the September 2010 issue about the Estonia accident and quotes the info of Heiwa Co that has been censored by the authorities since 1994 - the defective watertight doors.
New Estonia Investigation demanded (15 March 2009) Swedish MPs Jan Erik Ågren (-), Per Bolund (mp), Kent Härstedt (s) and Aleksander Gabelic (s) demand 091002 a new investigation of the Estonia sinking 1994!
The reasons are results from latest work carried out at the request of Vinnova (The Swedish Governmental Agency for Innovation Systems) by various research institutions. Some persons participating in the studies suggest that past investigations of the cause of the accident are not sufficient for complete clarity. The Joint Accident Investigation Commission, JAIC, working 1994-1997 never studied or explained the causes for the sudden sinking.
The Vinnova research was presented during 2008 at a demonstration of model tests at Chalmers University 3 April and at a symposium at Stockholm 23 May.
At the model tests it was clearly shown that the vessel capsized and floated upside down, which, according JAIC, didnt happen 1994. Furthermore it is now shown that three persons in the engine room must have evacuated latest 01.06-01.07 hrs and not after 01.23 hrs or later as suggested by JAIC.
The examples just show two circumstances that the JAIC investigation is full of important errors. Another serious fault is that questionings of survivors were done unprofessionally more to confirm one event than to find out all circumstances. The JAIC was not independent. It consisted of hand picked representatives of Sweden, Estonia and Finland.
Several expert reports, results of divings the days after the accident and other information suggest that the description of JAIC in its report that the visor dropped off does not satisfactorily explain the speedy sinking of the M/S Estonia 1994. The uncertainty about cause and sinking must be removed and a responsible party identified.
These factors taken together are good reasons to appoint one from Sweden, Finland and Estonia independent and international investigation about the sinking of the ship, the four MPs say.
The suggestion will be dealt with by the Parliament in 2010. On 3rd March 2010 Swedish Parliament decided to do nothing - without discussion or voting!
Safety at Sea Ltd, 280 St Vincent Street, Glasgow, G2 5RL, UK has on 17 November 2009 asked Heiwa Co to remove the following web pages/articles from this web site within 15 days:
Safety at Sea Ltd suggests that Heiwa Co questions the intellectual and professional independence and the technical competency of Safety at Sea Ltd and/or its staff. It is further suggested that criticism by Heiwa Co is not scientific and that the objective is to annoy and damage the reputation of Safety at Sea Ltd and/or its staff.
The Safety at Sea Ltd report May 2008 is evidently a review, where the JAIC scenario is modified but it is still maintained that >4 000 tons of water was loaded in the M/V Estonia superstructure within a few minutes causing a list of >47°, etc. There is nothing there to annoy or damage anybodies reputation. Evidently you cannot load >4 000 tons of water at open seas into a cargo space full of cars and trucks, while nobody hears it and when the light in the hold is still on!
It is further suggested by Safety at Sea Ltd that the condition with 47° list is stable; the ferry is floating on the deckhouse for 20-30 minutes! This is also wrong! The submerged deckhouse does not provide any buoyancy, all side windows are smashed at once and the ferry should capsize at once and then float upside down.
It is finally suggested by Safety at Sea Ltd that, when the ferry floats upside down after capsize and bouyancy is provided by air inside the hull and displaced bouyant materials (as seen in model tests and verified by calculations), it will slowly sink! Buoyancy is slowly lost during 15 minutes! The Safety at Sea Ltd explanations for this are also wrong.
Ferry floating after capsize - it cannot sink! Suggesting anything else, e.g. air leaking out, is fraud!
The following links are news items prior to and after Heiwa Co:s review. These references pose similar unanswered questions. It is then also concluded that model tests and computer simulations are falsified by SSPA (model tests) and Safety at Sea Ltd (computer simulations) to achieve the requested results. Heiwa Co conclusions are evidently supported by facts and calculations as provided in the links.
The last link is the Preamble to a book originally written 2002 that summarizes the whole thing long before Safety at Sea Ltd got involved.
Heiwa Co:s recommendation to Safety at Sea Ltd in order to save its intellectual and professional independence and its technical competency is that it publicly withdraws its reports and computer simulations of the Estonia accident with the explanation that they contain serious errors. Let's do that within 15 days!
TV-program about M/V Estonia - Friday 16 October 2009 French TV-company FR3/Thalassa sent a 30 minutes reportage about the latest investigations of the M/V Estonia disaster with info of Heiwa Co! Link to program .
How does a capsized Ship like M/V Estonia sink? (31 July 2009)
The Films by M/V Finnmerchant of the Rescue
M/V Finnmerchant arrived at 03.25 hrs at the site of accident on 28 September 1994 and when dawn arrived they filmed rafts and helicopters. As you can see, the weather was not too bad. No 10 metres waves as JAIC reported, etc.
147 Estonians demand a new Investigation! The Government refuses! (27 July 2009)
How did the Estonia heel? (18 July 2009)
Books 'Disaster Investigation' and 'Lies and Truths about the M/V Estonia Accident' now available in pdf Format! (13 June 2009)
Very easy to examine the Estonia Hull (4 April 2009) Many experts have recently suggested that the underwater hull of MS Estonia must be re-examined. It is very easy! The whole underwater hull is accessible on the sea floor - both the flat hull bottom and the hull sides up to the waterline and to the main deck fender. All parts of the underwater hull are above the mud line. All areas can be marked up by divers and then filmed by ROV.
Report of the Committee of Experts formed for the investigation of circumstances related to the transport of equipment for military use on the passenger ferry Estonia in September 1994 (2 March 2009) On 16 February 2009 Margus Kurm, Chairman of the Committee, Leading Public Prosecutor, handed in subject report to the Estonian government. It was the result of the Committee studying the latest research studies done by the SSPA consortium and the HSVA/TUHH consortium 2006-2008.
Competition for Naval Architects (20 December 2008)
Unbelievable new Information (29 November 2008)
Mariella rescued 40 Persons! (29 November 2008)
Anders Björkman, Heiwa Co, lectures
at Pärnu, Tartu and Tallinn 'Ten good Reasons why the M/S Estonia
Accident Investigation (1994-1997) must be
reopened 2008!' A lot of new
evidence has been produced 2008. The new evidence
will be presented and it is suggested it is best
handled by a Formal Investigation reopened as per
international law by the Estonian government.
Lecture will be in English and
Estonian. Sunday 23 November, 12-2 pm, Pärnu -
Pensionäride päevakeskus, Tammsaare 11 -
invited by ELA Monday 24 November, 5-7 pm, Tartu - Theatre
Vanemuine (ERGO saal) - invited by ELA Tuesday 25 November, 6.30-8.30 pm, Lüganuse
Rahvamajas - invited by Nõmmeradio Wednesday 26 November, 11 am-1 pm, Tallinn -
Tallinna Volikogu istungite saal, Vana-Viru 12 -
invited by Evelyn Sepp, MP Listen to Nõmmeradio or watch this space
for further details! Lecture can be found here!
Anders Björkman, Heiwa Co, lectures at Pärnu, Tartu and Tallinn
'Ten good Reasons why the M/S Estonia Accident Investigation (1994-1997) must be reopened 2008!'
A lot of new evidence has been produced 2008. The new evidence will be presented and it is suggested it is best handled by a Formal Investigation reopened as per international law by the Estonian government. Lecture will be in English and Estonian.
Sunday 23 November, 12-2 pm, Pärnu - Pensionäride päevakeskus, Tammsaare 11 - invited by ELA
Monday 24 November, 5-7 pm, Tartu - Theatre Vanemuine (ERGO saal) - invited by ELA
Tuesday 25 November, 6.30-8.30 pm, Lüganuse Rahvamajas - invited by Nõmmeradio
Wednesday 26 November, 11 am-1 pm, Tallinn - Tallinna Volikogu istungite saal, Vana-Viru 12 - invited by Evelyn Sepp, MP
Listen to Nõmmeradio or watch this space for further details!
Lecture can be found here!
At some instant two survivors managed to climb down the closed ramp, using its stiffening arrangement and abandon the ship. Angle of heel 93°. (Source - Vinnova/SSPA/Safety at Sea/Glasgow, May 2008)
Serious Errors in the SSPA Reports (20 October 2008)
Vinnova and Chalmers University deny Faults with Estonia Study (15 October 2008)
The ultimate Manipulation - how SSPA faked the Model Tests (to hide the true cause of accident!)
Announcement by SSPA/Chalmers/Strathclyde/MARIN
7th April 2008 (actually published on their web site15 April 2008)
"It is hereby announced that the project has entered into its final stages of synthesis of the available evidence. All final reports, relevant data and the video from physical model experiment on the most likely sinking sequence conducted on the 3rd April 2008 at SSPAs laboratory in Gothenburg will be made available in early May 2008. A final international workshop will be held in Stockholm on 23rd of May 2008 to facilitate public discussion and exchange of opinions on the outcome from this investigation."
So then we will know (1) how fast the Estonia model heeled to 37° due to water noisily loaded on the superstructure car deck and then (2) how she floated on the (model) deck house for 20-25 minutes (full scale) and (3) how at least 18 000 m3 air trapped in the (model) hull leaked out during another 20-25 minutes (full scale), when vessel (model) floated upside down until sinking, and (4) how she moved/drifted between the position of alleged visor loss and the final position of the impossible sinking for about 50 minutes (full scale)!
Video with the SSPA Model Test (the link is no longer available on the Internet)
But then finally the complete deck house is flooded ... and the model heels upside down ... slowly. The floating condition shown in the picture below (next section) is not shown after 26.58 minutes of the video! Instead underwater pictures are shown. The Estonia floats upside down. And then the stern sinks. Very strange. How does the air trapped in the stern escape?
Heiwa Co will analyse the SSPA video further, when all details of the model, incl. its deck house, are available.
Did MV Estonia turn 180° port at 01.02 hrs? New findings to explain the MV Estonia sinking have been reported by Der Spiegel 01/08! According to German scientists Valanto and Krüger, HSVA and T-U Hamburg-Harburg working for Vinnova, the MV Estonia made a 180° port turn south/east already at 01.02 hrs (sic) on the morning of 28 September 1994!! According to official information by the JAIC the turn took place 01.17 hrs ... as witnessed by MV Mariella. The 180° turn took place a few minutes before the Mayday at 01.22 hrs.
According to the latest German findings MV Estonia had 50° list at 01.20 hrs and was drifting at that time. It will be interesting to see how the scientists invent new events to explain the sinking. The German report to explain the sinking will be pusblished in May 2008.
The Swedish/Scottish/Dutch consortium led by SSPA working on the same project has commented upon the new findings in Swedish daily Dagens Nyheter. They are not so certain that the Germans are right! SSPA are doing there own final model tests of the sinking to be completed this spring. Heiwa Co has already analyzed the SSPA 2007 model tests. See below!
Heiwa Co will publish an analysis of all these findings when available. Here!
On 1 st April 2006 an ANNOUNCEMENT was made:
"It is hereby announced that to aid the proceeding of this study, the SSPA Consortium invites any substantive information to be provided in written form for consideration in explaining the circumstances of the loss of the MV Estonia.
If deemed beneficial, and is agreeable, further dialog will be initiated with the contributing parties.
The information provided to this consortium will be made available publicly through this site, or other media, after due scrutiny.
The information can be sent electronically or in other form to the address given in the Contact Us section."
Heiwa Co has since made a number of contributions to the SSPA Consortium and none has been made available publicly and no dialog has been initiated today (21 January 2008). The SSPA Consortium final report explaining the sinking will be ready by March 2008 and later reviewed at a Seminary of unknown date and location. In the meantime interested parties should continue visit this page for review of the developments.
SSPA produces a Power Point Presentation with Questions about MV Estonia Sinking (31 August 2007) In a recent PPP the SSPA consortium statets that :
"No consistent explanation of the chain of events leading to all these processes (various observations of the sinking) has been provided to date".
However, Heiwa Co has already 2006 provided the explanations required!
SSPA Sweden AB produces another manipulated 'Estonia' Model Test Report (Report no. 4006 4100-2)! (uppdated 25 August 2007)
Survivors' Testimonies prove the JAIC wrong (Updated 20 July 2007)
Chief prosecutor Margus Kurm believes the lying Crewmembers - On 11 May 2007 Estonian chief prosecutor Margus Kurm reported that he belives the three crewmembers that escaped from the engine room of the Estonia long after the listing ocurred and thus that he does not believe the 134 other survivors! His findings can be read here.
Scientific Report proves the JAIC Accident Scenario wrong - In a report by SSPA Marine AB dated 27 March 2007 the tests indicated that initial flooding in the order of 2000-2500 tons/min could be expected with a fully open ramp.
Actually the only test close to the actual conditions of the Estonia (14.5 knots) was done at 11.36 knots, when the initial inflow was 1108.9 tons/min. Tests at higher speeds could not be done as then the model was overfilled with water! By simple extrapolation it is clear that the initial inflow at 14.5 knots would be >1800 tons/min. As this water will trim the vessel on the bow the conclusion is that the initial inflow will increase to 2000-2500 tons/min! By simple calculations done 1999 Heiwa Co has got exactly the same result. With such big inflows the vessel would capsize and float upside down after one minute!
The JAIC suggests (figure 12.16 in the Final report) that the initial inflow at 15 knots would have been only 315 tons/min increasing to 580 tons/min when there was 1000 tons of water loaded. It is thus evident that JAIC miscalculated the inflow by a factor 6, which invalidates (again) the complete JAIC report. But the writers of the SSPA report shall still validate the JAIC scenario! As this is impossible, the SSPA staff indicates that maybe the vessel sank due to leakage below waterline. Media does not react.
Diving is permitted at the Wreck - It must be clear to anybody that diving is permitted at the wreck as long as it is done under the authority of, e.g. the Estonian government or Parliament and that the purpose of the diving is either to 'protect the wreck' or to 'protect the marine environment'. The wreck has spent a long time on the bottom of the sea and it would be very prudent to carry out a detailed examination of the wreck now to establish if any further action is required to protect it or the marine environment. At the same time any suspect areas of the wreck can be examined of damages not reported by the JAIC or caused by unreported human activity.
Heiwa Co does not believe that the accident 1994 was caused by bad visor locks 1978! Every essential finding by the Commission is false! Testimonies have been changed, facts have been manipulated, people have been threatened to shut up.
To assist survivors and relatives who after the accident still pursue the Truth 2006, Heiwa Co has compiled some Findings that will easily convince anybody that all essential, official facts of the accident are false. If you want to study the official lies you only have to visit the Swedish government web site Estoniasamlingen and compare (in Swedish only).
Twenty facts listed below also prove that the complete official investigation 1994-1997 is 100% falsified. Not one essential information is correct. It is a legal scandal according to a statement by the MP Björn von der Esch in the Swedish Parliament 30 May 2002 (and not reported in the media).
The alleged loss of the visor having caused the accident is a well orchestrated myth and the Swedish media does not dare to inform the public about it.
20 Facts prove the Commission wrong - It is sad to conclude that every essential official information about the 'Estonia' accident 28 September 1994 announced between 1994 and 1997 is false. The following are, e.g. twenty proven facts, which are not mentioned in the official Final Report issued December 1997, but are described in the book Disaster Investigation and summarized for Estonian readers at a separate web page:
Recovery of dead Bodies 1994 - The dead bodies could and should have been recovered immediately after the accident. The French-Norwegian company Stolt-Comex offered its services at very low cost and had equipment and staff in place. The offer was refused. The only logical reason seems to have been to prevent outsiders from investigating the wreck in early October 1994 and to find the true cause of the accident. Probably the visor was then first attached to wreck itself, then detached underwater around 4-6 October, so it fell to the bottom below the wreck, and as the visor was not finally removed/salvaged until mid-November, no salvage of bodies could take place in early October. Later - all proposals for further investigation of the wreck to confirm new findings are refused with reference to the dead bodies - they shall rest in peace. So the refusal to salvage the bodies had two reasons - to prevent an early inspection of the wreck and to prevent any later inspections of the wreck.
The official sequence of events during and after the accident is not possible.
The official Explanation - slow Sinking due to Water on the Car Deck in the Superstructure - not possible! Heiwa Co quickly concluded 1994 that the official sequence of events was unlikely - unbelievable - and that the visor must have fallen off after the first sudden listing.
Staff Changes at the National Maritime Administration
It is quite strange to note the following staff changes in the Swedish National Maritime Administration 2001 since the 'Estonia' accident 1994:
1. Mr. Jan-Olof Selén is Director General 2001. In 1994 he was legal counsel at the Ministry of Transportation to minister Ines Uusmann who decided not to or prevented the salvage of dead bodies. He is not a seafarer.
The seven top members of the Swedish NMA have all contributed to the misleading 'Estonia' accident investigation. The official position of the Swedish NMA is that the Final Report is complete and correct and that this web page does not include any new information.
Other new information is the below picture of the 'Estonia' wreck published in Sweden spring 2000. The left picture is a 'sonar picture' of the wreck officially made 1996 - two years after the accident - but probably made already 30 September, 1994 - the day the wreck was found. Actually the left picture is a hydrographical chart of the wreck area with a picture of the wreck sketched on top. By removing the 'wreck' you get the center picture showing a pyramide shaped object about 13x13 m on the bottom about 6-7 metres high - shaped like the visor (left picture) with the bottom up. The pictures suggest that the visor was in fact found at the bow of the ship, i.e. it could not have fallen off under way, before the sudden list occurred far away from the sinking position. There are more pictures of the visor on the bottom of the sea.
Same picture with the sketch
of the 'wreck' removed showing only barimetric
depth curves The visor after salvage -
note the big buckle due to a
Same picture with the sketch of the 'wreck' removed showing only barimetric depth curves
The visor after salvage - note the big buckle due to a collision
Disaster Investigation (2001 in English)
Katastrofutredning (2000 - in Swedish)
Nya Fakta om Estonia (1999 - in Swedish) - Price Euro 15:- incl. postage. Order the book !
Some outstanding Questions about the M/S Estonia - Paper presented the 27 October 1999 at the 'Debate on the Estonia' of the "DESIGN FOR SAFETY" CONFERENCE of the Ship Stability Research Centre, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, Scotland.
Lies and Truths about the M/V Estonia Accident (1998 - in English) - Price Euro 15:- incl.postage.
Not learning from Marine Accidents - some Lessons which have not been learnt - Paper censored by the Royal Institution of Naval Architects - it should have been read at the Learning from Marine Incidents II conference the 14 March, 2002, in London.
28 september 1994 - Estoniabluffen - visiret föll aldrig av Estonia (2002 - in Swedish)
Lessons learnt by the M/S Estonia Accident
Ship owners and ship safety experts have a lot to learn from the 'Estonia' accident. The deficiencies 1993 in design and arrangements were due to the fact that the 'Estonia' was never designed to sail on the open sea. She was designed 1979 for protected coastal trading and the SOLAS requirements were never fully used or complied with in spite of certification to the contrary. Thus she was permitted by the Finnish and Swedish maritime administrations 1980 to have too many (open) watertight doors - total 22!, restricted number of life rafts under davits, no possibility to evacuate all 2000 passengers aboard by life saving means under davits, a swimming pool on the the double bottom, etc.
Unfortunately, when the trade changed in 1993, the new Swedish/Estonian owners never bothered to up-grade the ship. The owners and the maritime administrations were one and the same. In retrospect it would have cost very little to have made the 'Estonia' safe and seaworthy as per the SOLAS in 1993.
The hull steel work performed in 1994 to install the fin stabilizers should have been better supervised and documented. Now the stabilizers were installed in a compartment that could only be accessed via watertight doors! Then the Estonia would never have sunk in 35 minutes as she did in 1994.
The visor and bow ramp were defective prior to the accident and could not be locked. The ramp was secured by ropes and the visor was held in place by its own weight and its hydraulics. The JAIC just concluded without any evidence that they were in perfect condition and locked at the time of accident.
There are strange stories about an explosive device found at the bow
Read about the
Since 1999 many parties have requested the Swedish government to re-open the investigation as per IMO Resolution A.849(20) and to review the new proven facts and then inform other interested countries. Every time the Swedish government has refused with the weak argument - no new facts have been presented. In April 2001 the Swedish government in a press release referring to this web page stated that it did not contain any information to the effect that the official cause and sequence of accident were wrong! It is very sad - the writer of this web page started out trying to help and to improve safety at sea. Now he is being treated like an idiot by the Swedish and Finnish establishments.
Read the report of The German 'Expert group'
Read the reports of The Independent Fact Group
And what do you see on the picture right? It is
a big hole found in the superstructure of the
'Estonia'. The hole is in an area, which the
Commission states is 100% undamaged. The hole is
certainly the result of an explosion from inside
the superstructure as (i) the edges are bent
outboard, (ii) material is missing from the centre
inside of the hole and (iii) analysis of test
pieces of the ruptured edges show that the material
has been subject to high temperatures = explosion.
See the damage hole
in the superstructure . The hole was blown open by the Swedish Navy when
the visor was removed from the wreck at the bottom
of the sea after the accident. How it was done under water is described
And what do you see on the picture right? It is a big hole found in the superstructure of the 'Estonia'. The hole is in an area, which the Commission states is 100% undamaged. The hole is certainly the result of an explosion from inside the superstructure as (i) the edges are bent outboard, (ii) material is missing from the centre inside of the hole and (iii) analysis of test pieces of the ruptured edges show that the material has been subject to high temperatures = explosion. See the damage hole in the superstructure .
The hole was blown open by the Swedish Navy when the visor was removed from the wreck at the bottom of the sea after the accident.
How it was done under water is described here .
Why a falsified Report and Explanation?
Many persons ask why the authorities presented a 100% falsified explanation and report about the accident. The simple answer is that the Swedish government didn't want the public to know what really happened, so it decided to make up a totally false story - the lost visor.
By parading 'experts' stating that ferries sink due to lost visors and by falsifying testimonies from some crew members the conspirators managed to create a fairly credible story among the ignorant public.
Evidently, the visor was attached to the wreck, so the visor had to be removed by explosives in order to be salvaged, etc., etc., which had to be kept secret.
And the technical explanations were never good enough - evidently a ferry does not sink due to a lost visor - the ferry would have capsized and floated upside down with water in the superstructure. So why was a falsified explanation ordered by the Swedish government? To protect the incompetents Swedish National Maritime Authority (Sjöfartsverket)? Or a more sinister cause - to protect, e.g. military interests using the 'Estonia' ferry to carry secret ordinance from the former Soviet Union to Sweden? Will we ever know? It is quite easy actually - ask the Swedish government to provide the missing information. The whole matter is presently handled by the Swedish military authorities.
This is not a "conspiracy theory" website. The definition of a theory is: "An assumption based on limited information or knowledge; a conjecture (guesswork)." No theories are presented here, only conclusive evidence and, well, some hypothesis. After the MV Estonia sinking 1994, the Swedish Government and its lackey the Joint Accident Investigation Commission took it upon itself to be the official determiners of the Truth, in this case a story about a stupid visor. But, it is evidence, and not the Government, that determines what the Truth is. The Government's official story about MV Estonia is not the divine Truth; do not fall into the trap of thinking that any counter-evidence against their story is just a mere theory.
Accepting The MV Estonia Truth
Do not get defensive when presented with MV Estonia counter-evidence even late. Who are you trying to defend? You are not being accused of lying about MV Estonia; the Government is.
No longer let society, the media, social democrats, moderates, or the Government do your thinking for you. You will not be charged with a "thought crime" for believing that the Government did lie about the MV Estonia sinking. You are free to believe whatever you want to.
According to the logic of the Swedish public, a story is not real unless it is reported by the mass media. Following this logic, the Government couldn't possibly have lied about the MV Estonia sinking unless some major newspaper or TV news station said so.
Fact: The media has the exact same evidence that this website has. Fact: The media has had this evidence for many years. Fact: The media has had many years to say that the Government lied about the MV Estonia. Thus, the media will not suddenly come out tomorrow and say that the Government lied about the MV Estonia.
It is not important to know why the Swedish media will not report that the Government lied about the MV Estonia. All you need to know is that after many years they have not done so and therefore will not do so. As for Heiwa Co, it is just an organization of people concerned with safety at sea who are here to show you the Truth.
So, either all of the evidence on this website means nothing and does not warrant any kind of investigation, OR, the Swedish media knows the truth about the MV Estonia and is withholding it from the public.
This is the MV Estonia fulcrum. You must pick one of the two; you have no other choice.
Come On, Rebut The Counter-Evidence!
If the MV Estonia counter-evidence is indeed so kooky and crazy, then how come the Swedish media can't just rebut it? What, are they so dignified and classy that they are "not even going to justify it with a response"? There should be no problem with the Estonia counter-evidence being plastered all over the TV news.
Skeptics love to attack the messenger and love to attack the plausibility of the conspiracy i.e. "The Government lying about the MV Estonia is totally implausible and beyond absurd.", but never talk about the actual evidence. They feel it is not necessary to acknowledge the evidence, when in fact the evidence is the only thing they should be concerned about.
Your Opinion About The Swedish Government Means Nothing
Attempting to debunk the MV Estonia counter-evidence is one thing, but simply saying, "I don't think that the Government is capable of doing such a thing," means absolutely nothing and is not evidence. Stick to evaluating the evidence, rather than pushing blind allegiance.
Making Your Decision, Taking A Stand
Once you have viewed all of the evidence on this website, make your new decision about the MV Estonia sinking immediately. Do not be someone who refuses to act alone, waiting to see what others will do first. What you need to realize is that you are in fact that "other person." And, you need not be in accord with "the collective". Think for yourself, rather than falling to peer pressure and engaging in groupthink. But remember, "thinking for yourself" involves the fact that you do not need your beliefs to be validated by other people's beliefs.
If the majority is uninformed, then their opinion means absolutely nothing. Just because something is widely thought to be the Truth does not automatically make it the Truth. You should be able to go up to your family and friends, and proudly tell them that you know the Truth about MV Estonia 1994. And don't worry if they call you "crazy," because it is not that you are crazy, it is that they are uninformed.
"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident."
The Real Kooks
The person who goes about an investigation in a logical, objective manner and pays attention to evidence is not a kook. The real kook is one who thinks that governmental treason is impossible and ignores evidence that is right in front of their face.
Skeptics will use delusional rationalizations to explain away all of the MV Estonia evidence. For them, it does not matter what evidence is presented, because their ultimate goal is to hold onto their existing worldview at any cost rather than to be open-minded and seek the Truth. It is a worldview that is practical, sensible, popular, sane, and rational....but not true.
The MV Estonia Truth Is Not Some Kind Of "Mysterious Secret"
The MV Estonia counter-evidence is obvious. The fact that the Truth finally after 12 years is coming out is refreshing.
MV Estonia is not up for debate. It has already been proven, far beyond a reasonable doubt, that the Government and JAIC lied about the MV Estonia sinking - that was the easy part. The hard part is getting the Truth out to the Swedish and Estonian public, because to them the thought of their Governments lying about the MV Estonia sinking is taboo.
It is not as though the MV Estonia counter-evidence is weak, it is blind allegiance, herd mentality and ignorance, that is stalling the Truth. The evidence is here, but because the people have been tricked into believing the Joint Accident Investigation Commission 1994-1997 and don't want to feel they have been duped for the last 12 years, they stop asking questions. For the skeptics, being correct is more important than being corrected. Skeptics are not "defending the Truth," they are just defending their fragile egos. A real defender of the Truth would take all pieces of evidence into account; and then, they would evaluate that evidence OBJECTIVELY.
"A fundamental objective of the Swedish system is that the citizens should have faith in central government activities and be able to examine them critically. The decentralisation of central government activities has been carried out with the aim of making the agencies more efficient and of moving the decision-making process closer to the individual citizen. Under the law, all agencies serve the citizens and provide them, on request, with information about their activities. The management controls in the agencies must safeguard this right.
Government organisation in Sweden differs from that in most other countries. Sweden's central government administration is characterised by very small ministries. Less than 1 per cent of the 300 000 central government employees work for the ministries. The agencies working within the different fields of competence of the ministries have a high degree of independence from the ministries. The central government agencies are responsible for making their own decisions in cases that involve the application of the law and the exercise of public authority.
It is common for an agency employee to have tasks or interests beyond his or her job at the agency. Decentralisation and/or delegation of responsibility and powers create greater risks of conflicts of interest and similar situations. One such situation arises when civil servants, in the course of their duties, are improperly affected by their spare-time occupations. This is particularly true for universities and technical institutes, where many employees have second occupations. For example, university employees may own companies that have business relations with their own university. Such situations, which in themselves are questionable, can mean that employees, on behalf of their university departments, favour their own companies in a bidding process. The public's faith in civil servants can be shaken by problems of conflict of interest if agency management is unable to apply the Administrative Act's rules on conflict of interest in the agency's internal control system. Conflicts of interest and part-time occupations still pose a serious problem, especially in universities.
Jan Hagvall - Audit director at the Swedish National Audit Office, responsible for the audit of all government agencies within the area of responsibility of the Ministry of Finance.