CHAPTER 37- ACTIVITIES OF THE JAIC AND SURROUNDING CIRCUMSTANCES

CHAPTER 37

ACTIVITIES OF THE JAIC AND SURROUNDING CIRCUMSTANCES
AFTER THE CASUALTY TO THE END OF THE YEAR 1994

The knowledge about such activities and their surrounding circumstances is mainly based on documents copied from the files of the Swedish part of the JAIC, i.e. documents which became public only after the publication of the Final JAIC Report.
      Further knowledge stems from information given to the Swedish media during the investigation especially by Olof Forssberg, Kari Lethola, Tuomo Karppinen and Börje Stenström.

37.1
29 September 1994 - The Day After the Casualty

In the afternoon the JAIC met for the first time in Turku - see Subchapter 35.1 - and after the preliminaries were established it was decided to jointly hear three crew survivors considered to be key witnesses. These were

Watch A.B. Silver Linde
System Engineer Henrik Sillaste
Motorman Hannes Kadak

No details are known except what was published in DAGENS NYHETER on 08.10.94, viz.

"Crew Reports About the Casualty DN had a look into the JAIC working papers with notes taken during the hearing of crew members at Turku on 29.09.94:
Kadak: motorman, 11/2 years at sea, first shift on 'Estonia', was on board 10 days
1. Q: Do you know how the visor functioned?
A: Very little, not my job.
2. Q: Was it dark when you left 'Estonia'?
A: Some light in the distance. Was swimming. Saw 'Estonia's' silhouette. Frightening. Heavy list. Saved himself before the capsizing.
3. Q: Was the visor in place?
A: Possibly, but not fully certain. The stern sank first. The vessel turned when the stern sank down. Much shouting. Completely dark.
4. Q: Did you see the bulbous bow above water!
A: Cannot answer this (was close to being squeezed to death when rescued by 'Silja Europa').
5. Q: Did you see a black hole?
A: Impossible to see.
6. Q: Have you been on watch?
A: Yes, I was in the engine control room. Did not see anything unusual.
7. Q: How did the vessel behave?
A: It was very stormy. Heavy movements. Heavy vibrations. No abnormal noises. Was in the control room when the engines stopped. Heel was then about 50°. Everything rushed to the side.
8. Q: How did you get out?
A: Via the engine room and up through the emergency exit in the funnel.
9. Q: Which building no. did you have?
A: Don't know.
10. Q: Did you go o full speed?
A: I am certain. Not my job.
11. Q: Did you look to the monitor?
A: Yes, I saw water on the monitor. I don't know when it started to penetrate. The height of the water was above the roofs of the personal cars.
12. Q: Did you see whether the hatch burst open by explosion (was blown open)?
A: Don't know. Was in control room and asked: Shall we leave? Went out through the watertight door. Did not close the door because certain personnel stayed behind.
13. Q: Why did you leave? Heel or water on car deck?
A: General feeling that something did happen. The emergency generator started when they pulled themselves up. 15-20 seconds after they came out everything became dark. Injured his hands at a hot boiler in the engine room when it was dark.
14. Q: How long did it take from everything normal until leaving the vessel?
A: Ca. 30 minutes. From the bridge came as long as Kadak was in the engine control room: Can you correct the list? Are the engines OK?"

These question/answer notes were also published in SVENSKA DAGBLADET on 06.10.94, however, without the question whether the bow ramp was blown open by an explosion.
   Much to the surprise of the Finnish and Swedish members the interrogations were suddenly interrupted by Andi Meister at this time, allegedly because their plane would be waiting, which was a poor excuse as the plane - owned by the Estonian Coast Guard - would have waited as long as required.
      The manner which Andi Meister chose to end the first meeting of the JAIC caused considerable irritation with the Swedish and Finnish members.
This was reported in SVENSKA DAGBLADET on the next day - 30.09.94 - as follows:

"Political manipulations disturb casualty investigation. Estonian Minister blamed for forcing important questioning of survivors.
The Estonian chairman of the JAIC, Transport Minister Andi Meister, is committing political manipulations which have already done damage to the work of the JAIC.
Due to the pressure resulting from forthcoming elections in Estonia he forced the first questioning of surviving crew members in Turku. "Therewith Meister, having absolutely no experience with casualty investigation, has already proved that he is unsuitable to lead the work", a source said.
Both the Swedish and the Finnish members of the JAIC are irritated about the Estonian chairman's stopping the first interrogations held in Turku on Wednesday. The JAIC had selected 3 crew members who were considered to be the most interesting to be questioned:
- AB sailor Silver Linde, who went the last watch-round, just an hour before the casualty, and who subsequently received instructions from the vessel's command to go down to the car deck to find out what was happening there, just before the vessel took the heavy list and sank.
- Engineer Henrik Sillaste who saw on the TV monitor in the engine room that water was streaming onto the deck.
- the third witness was a motorman.
Interrogating the three has revealed valuable information. For the JAIC it was very important to hear their reports and to put forward their questions without haste and pressure. Therefore the behaviour of the Estonian Transport Minister "is, at least, strange", said one of the Swedish participants. "He made it understood, powerfully and determinedly, that the interrogation should be stopped so that he could go back on the plane waiting at the airport of Turku." The plane had been chartered by the Foreign Ministry to take survivors home to Tallinn. "We carried out the questioning as well as possible. Finally we understood that we were compelled to end the interrogation - the plane was waiting", said one of the investigators. Various different sources have confirmed the picture. In addition, the Transport Minister had made it quite clear that he wished a quick investigation. "He believes in his naiveté that the investigation can be finalised within two weeks". It was apparently the intention of the Minister to present the investigation report on the 'Estonia' casualty before the change of government in Estonia which was forthcoming. Upon the question of the Transport Minister Meister to Olof Forssberg, head of the three-man Swedish part of the JAIC, as to how long it would take until the investigation is completed, Forssberg replied: "About 1 year." "This answer left him considerably surprised", said one source. "No perspective, no experience. He obviously has never had anything to do with qualified casualty investigations", said another participant at the Turku meeting."
Note: When being interviewed by Jutta Rabe, Andi Meister said among other things: "I thought it was not the best decision to appoint me as chairman because of my position."

Also the following statements were made to DAGENS NYHETER and published on 29.09.94:
Kari Lethola refused to make a statement as to the possible cause of the casualty, but said: "However, since there is a bulkhead between the port and starboard side of the car deck, shifting of cargo can be excluded ..... "
Note: He means the centre casing.
Also Carl Bildt did not wish to speculate on the causes, but stated that "it could not just have been the heavy weather". He added that during the forthcoming investigation work " ...... each stone will be turned".

"One master survived
There were two masters onboard the 'Estonia'. The acting master was Arvo Andresson who did not survive.
Piht was onboard to fulfil his examination to obtain the pilot licence for the Stockholm archipelago. "The 4 inspections carried out by the Swedish Sjöfartsinspektionen did not include the condition of visor and bow ramp. This had to be done by the French classification society Bureau Veritas."
"Henrik Sillaste, 25 years old, was working in the engine room when he saw on the TV monitor that water was penetrating the bow ramp." "We had 'Estonia' on the radar screen for exactly 8 minutes. Then she was lying stopped in the water. At 01.48 hours (Finnish time) she disappeared from the radar and we knew what that meant", said the Staff Commander of the Fortress Utö."

In the evening the Swedish Embassy in Moscow sent by fax an ITAR-TASS message from St. Petersburg with the following wording:

"St. Petersburg September 29 TAS - by ITAR-TASS correspondent Lev. Rumyantsev: A Russian underwater expert believes people may still be alive inside the 'Estonia' ferry which capsized in the Baltic Sea on Wednesday and lies at a depth of 80-90 metres.
"Hundreds of people remaining inside the sunken ferry can be saved and should be saved." Anatoly Kuteinikov, designer general of the St. Petersburg based 'Malakhit' company told TASS on Thursday. The company is the leading Russian defence enterprise producing underwater craft.
He said that an "air cushion" always accompanies any shipwreck and may allow those remaining inside the ferry to stay alive for at least a week.
"One should not be scared by the excessive pressure. 80 metres are not too deep", Kuteinikov said.
He regretted that the Finnish and Swedish authorities had not requested the Russian rescuers to help with the 'Estonia' shipwreck. "We have a big experience in underwater work, as well as good and maybe the best equipment. It is a pity that we did not join efforts. Moreover, there are our citizens in distress", Kuteinikov complained. The chief designer believes that the main cause of the disaster was a poor training level of the crew. Besides, it is also clear that the ship had some design faults. "Ships of the 'Estonia' class do not sink in five minutes. They can overturn, but should stay afloat for several hours to a whole day", he said."