estoniaferrydisaster.net

Home

Sitemap (Chapters)

Enclosures

Mail us

A. New Evidence

1. The AgnEf Seminar on 29/30.05.2000 in Stockholm

1.2.1 The mating boxes of the bow ramp - Page 3

Comparison damaged and undamaged ramp

008

<<< The mating box ‘original design’.To the right, the cracks in the ramp construction close to the mating box

<<< The cross section of the ramp, ‘original design’ and after the damage that bent the ramp.
Below, the mating box ‘original design’.

<<< Also this mating box is in fact undamaged, but the JAIC concluded it to be ‘ripped open’. There are two cracks close to where the mating box has been welded to the ramp beam exactly in the same way as at the lower port side mating box (explained before).

The upper port side mating box

Note: The picture quality is very poor and the mentioned cracks cannot be seen. Therefore reference is made to pages 818-824 of our Report with slightly better pictures and explanatory drawings.

The so-called ‘ripped open mating boxes’ are the most important evidence for the JAIC scenario to prove that the ramp was pulled to open position. This evidence is now found to be incorrect. The correct conclusion would have been that close to the port side mating boxes, the ramp construction is damaged by cracks in the construction. As one of the locking pins was found only partly extended, too short to have been engaged in the mating box, it is logical to assume that the ramp construction was already misaligned prior to the accident.

As the mating boxes are undamaged and the ramp was found to be open at the wreck, the ramp may not have been properly closed when the ship left Tallinn. It cannot be excluded that the cracks close to the mating boxes were not those subject to ‘routine welding repairs’ as mentioned. We are not going to speculate into this matter, we leave that to be a task for a new investigation group."

Note: In fact, it was the port lower locking pin which was only partly extended, because it was unable to engage the mating box due to the severe misalignment of the bow ramp as a result of the broken port outer ramp hinge. It was for the same reason that the port upper locking pin could also not engage its mating box, which is proven by the intact mating box. (See the two photos on page 822 of our Report) At the starboard side of the ramp the lower mating box was found to be crushed, i.e. presumably the ramp was closed when the pin was already extended, which must have occurred some time before the casualty. The upper starboard mating box is open, i.e. the top plate is missing and the pin is extended. According to the statement of a truck driver who had arrived in the morning of the 27 September 1994 on board the ESTONIA at Tallinn and who had to wait on the car deck, because the crew was unable to open the bow ramp. Finally the crew burned off this top plate of the starboard upper mating box and was then able to open the ramp because the pin was apparently jammed in the box. It has to be assumed that there was no time for the welder during the day to re-weld the top plate to this mating box and this is the explanation why it was found open after the casualty.

In summary it must thus be concluded again that none of the 4 locking pins had engaged its mating box at the port ramp side upon departure from Tallinn on the last voyage of the ESTONIA.
In this connection it has to be mentioned that the port ramp hook as well as its mating lug was found to be intact, consequently the bow ramp could only have been “secured” by the starboard ramp hook, if at all. See also pages 815 ff. of our report.