Sorry, but the obsessive way authorities attempted to thwart any efforts of investigating the wreck points towards a DELIBERATE effort at a cover-up - and only someone, who knew DAMN WELL what had happened would be interested in covering anything up in the first place.
It is chilling. The towel looks modern and familiar, it looks like the sort of towel I would find in a hotel room. Seeing that towel makes the shipwreck so much more real to me. I imagine the passengers that morning choosing what clothing to wear, and that clothing is still on their bodies right now. 650 corpses inside that hull on the bottom of the baltic sea, wearing clothing from the 1990s - tennis shoes and jeans and sweatshirts.
@@kevinmathewson4272 Aside there won't be any remarkable bodies left. It is said much of the bodies are now decomposed, and when you have a look through the large windows from outside into the wreck, you can see swimming a kind of flakes behind. These are the decomposed bodies.
@@xkm-thebasetecchannel3823 there are older shipwrecks than this one that still contain intact corpses. cold salt water like this can preserve corpses surprisingly well.
@@kevinmathewson4272 there's a ship that sank in Lake Superior (I think in the late 1800s to early 1900s) that the crew are still intact and you can make out facial features till.
The Swedish government are in trouble, after the official investigation they insisted the estonia was hole free, they said the hull was completely intact and any discussion of hole's in the hull were conspiracy theory's. Now the expert piloting the drone in this video says there is no way the goverment missed this hole in there official investigation, and i agree. The drone pilot also states that he has never seen anything like this damage before and immense forces must of been at play, definitely NOT a result of hitting soft squidgy clay seabed. This hole is pre-sinking no question, so did the government simply miss it to shear incompetency? Or did they find it and lie? When you consider the above, then factor in the goverment dropped 10,000 tonnes of rock over the starboard side of the wreck near were the hole is, it is very clear they found this hole and buried it from view, but because estonia has rotated 12 degrees in the clay over the years the hole has emerged from under the stones. It also explains why the government only very partially covered the wreck in that one specific place, they only needed to deposit enough stone around the starboard side to bury the hole then they called it a day, but unfortunately for them estonia has rotated and exposed the damage from under the rug for this brave brilliant film crew to discover...tut tut tut..Conspiracy against the people blatenly exposed. It's outrageously obvious what's happened here, the only questions left are how the hole was made pre-sinking, who is responsible for it, and why did the government hide it? Look at this picture of the hole closely, you can see clear as day a submarine has hit estonia. There is a huge round dent which you can see has torn the hull apart with it. Blatenly! news.err.ee/1141269/swedish-authorities-considering-ms-estonia-investigation#lg=1&slide=0
The ship could she twisted it self when capsizing and then hitting bottom the ship probably rolled it self back in to the position it was in 1994 when it sank and also because the Estonia is twisting it self apart from rolling upside down again in the sea bed
Mate, put the pieces together, it's extremely clear what has happened. If i had all this evidence stacked up against me in court I would be convicted of a crime...maybe it wouldn't be so obvious if the goverment hadn't dumped the stone down there. Watch the footage from the documentary, they scan the port side of estonia and the starboard side, the stone pile is only present on the starboard side around were the hole is. So the government have blatenly dropped the stones only in one specific place which just so happens to be were this hole was discovered? You think its just a coincidence they happened to only cover the hole with rocks? As far as I am concerned it has already been concluded this hole was made pre sinking and the government poorly attempted to cover it up with rocks, that much is obvious. The only unclear answers are how the hole was made, who done it, and why was it covered up. But like I said examine the photo in my post and tell me you can't see something round his impacted estonia.
The real sad thing is that it took 10 years to admit military transports happened but, in state radio the defense minister was qustioned about if a transport occured during the 28 sep he said no why wouldnt they examine the most important date? And the lock to the bowvisor they threw it back to the sea stating it was to heavey for the helicopter .... but ok leave it at the ship and come back, i smell smoke and where there is smoke there is fire
@@CreativeHuckleBerry If NATO payed Sweden for this deliverance of Sovjet military secrets, they most likely payed well, that is the sense behind it all....money, big money my friend!
I'm not into conspiration but... This is definitively in the column "We have questions". Even if the ship sunk because of the official reasons, why try to bury the wreck and why not recover the corpses?
@@fenrislegacy My question is, why did they hide the corpses existence in the initial footage of the wreck exploration? I fully understand not showing them and cutting the camera in order to respect the dead, but they took out entire sections of audio while trying to make it seem like less of an issue than it was. They also attempted to cover the ship with cement, if I remember correctly. The whole thing is just weird...
@@thecornfieldiii2069 because they lied out the actually caused and prevented the truth by stopping the ship being raised even tho drivers who did a report said it could be and they put cement, rumble on the ship and rocks around it. So the the truth wouldn’t be found and the fact that there might be four different governments of different countries that caused the sinking of ship which are the British, Swedish, Estonia and Russia because the Swedish and Estonia had military equipment on the ship from Russia and was trying to smuggle it out to the British because British intelligence and M16 were involved which if told now could cause a world war three.
Looking at examples of other wrecks that have sunk, evidence of buckling of the rest of the Hull to come degree would be visible if it was post sinking. The damage is focused in a very narrow area. If it was from a Container which I initially believed, the damage would be carried further along the Hull as its impossible for a container to cause such little damage compared with the sudden "impact" that struck the vessel which was initially surmised to be the door falling off. I find it hard to believe it was a submarine but naval collision do indeed occur and its within the relm of possiblity to have been just that.
Subs have crashed with big ships before and made it back to port relatively unscathed. Happened in Hawaii between a US sub and a Japanese ship, and it also happened in the English Channel between a French sub and a tanker.
The impact could be the ship hitting the gate as it suddenly slows upon impacting water...the boats still moving forward and runs into it as it had air pockets, not enough to float it, but enough to cause it to sink more slowly than freefall....and BAM the ship which is still powering toward it hits it
If you watch this video from a US IP Address, you get a disclaimer. "MS Estonia was a cruiseferry built in 1980 at the German shipyard Meyer Werft in Papenburg. In 1993, she was sold to Nordström & Thulin for use on Estline's Tallinn-Stockholm route." And when you try to copy it they send you to a Google page.
"The truth doesn't care about our needs or wants. It doesn't care about our governments, our ideologies, our religions. It will lie in wait, for all time."
I want to watch this documentary so badly. I've been following the story of this ship for a long time now. It's on Discovery+ and on Dplay but sadly there's no way I can access those channels here from Germany. Can anybody help me? Is there another way to watch it? With English subtitles? Thank You
Mir geht es auch so. Ich habe gesucht und gesucht aber nichts gefunden. Wir müssen wohl warten bis die den ganzen Krempel hier hochladen bzw freigeben was weiß ich
Ships are build in parts, same as airplanes. Did you ever noticed that when a plane breaks up in mid air, it'll break at the joint and come down in the same parts it was build. Same goes for ships. Estonia went nose down on her side and hit the bottom with approximately 30 km/h wich is 8.6 meter per second and then comes to a sudden stop at the bottom. A ferry structure can't handle such a force, so the crack is very logic to me.
Is it common to drop sand and stones on a wrecked ship? Ive never heard about this before. Or where there too many catastrophe tourists so this was neccessary?
its common if you dont want people to see what you are hiding and lying about. How many shipwrecks were covered ... EVER ? yes thats right ... only this one
This fascinates me. Have you heard about the joint British and Swedish operation to smuggle Soviet technology out of Estonia on board civilian ferries?. Apparently the Russians sent two warnings to stop it or face consequences. One to the Swedes and another to the Brits. Do you think rather than colliding with a submarine a submarine fired some sort of inert torpedo that slammed into the hull of Estonia causing it to sink but also making it look like an accident?
@@tigerland4328 Estonian government was warned by different ways at least 3 times during 1993-1994. " just stop smuggling our technology by civilian ship " ! all 3 countries were informed about warnings and MI6 was informed too !!!
If the dent in the visor was from it hitting the bulbous bow, then it would have fallen of to the left; the hole is on the right. If the hole was made by the visor, then the dent on the visor wasn't made by the bulbous bow.
As a swedish kid i understand what Henrik says and the other guy but it's hard to translate the entire video depending on what they are saying you know.
some of the crew that survived got off the helipad and disappeared so did they run away as not to charged for criminals neglect or did Sweden, Estonia, uk, Finland managed to hide the crew to cover up the truth! the torn hull on the side doesn't add up which might have caused the ship to list to starboard and found a video saying that the visor was damaged in the explosion and metallurgy people found that the visor metal melted to 1200 degree...
It wasn't just crew members, passengers also disappeared, as well as people who were crewmen but low level, like a store attendant. Overall 11 people disappeared after being rescued, a couple of them found "drowned" much later.
@@kontras4571 Thanks, but if my orientation is correct it's below the waterline. Absolutely fascinating video, if only the original Rockwater ROV footage was so clear.
@@the_bear2_072 no, he did find it, but the photographs were not as clear as these ones. He also presumed that the evidence he gathered would be enough to reopen the investigation which it was not unfortunately. The ship has tilted more now so it's easier to observe the hole
Quizás otra opción es que ese hueco en el casco sea producto del impacto contra el fondo del mar. Sea como sea, los informes oficiales deberían haberlo registrado. Es raro. Algo que no sabía ni entendí es ¿por que tiraron piedras al rededor del naufragio?
because the ship is made out of hard metal and the ground where the ship sank is soft clay. While it is possible that the hole was caused by the sinking and shifting most investigators agree that it was most likely caused by the big frontal loading door that fell of and got hit back to the ship by the waves. (the loading door that fell of was about 80 tons heavy so it was more than capable of causing a hole like this)
@@thedesertrat_9514 I disagree, the visor isn’t that heavy compared to the ship which would probably just result in the visor taking more damage than the hull. Also this doesn’t explain how the visor would be able to float for such a long period
@@nissethepear4743 80 tons is more than heavy enough to cause damage. They’re designed to be buoyant with the rest of the ship as well since part of it lines with the lower hull.
@@the_bear2_072 The loading door would have sank like a rock, the hole is dozens of meters away from the original position of the door, there is zero chance it caused this damage.
At the stern.....”Here the damage is pointing outward”..... outward..... would a torpedo produce damage thrusting outward? Could an explosion from within have occurred at the stern?
Lies tons of lies o have studied stuff like this since I found out about estonia the outward motion could be an explosion or could be water outside the ship and the water pressure inside the ship hitting bottom can cause the hull to blow outwards like that
I was working at a naval base tgat became Gunwarf Keys in 2000 and the paparazzi where shouting over the wall at the chap I was working with. I asked him what it was about and he said " I would find out in a few days as it would be in the press, but when he was in the SBS he dived the Estonia after the incident". He told me what he found, and it was no accident. It was never in the press...
I find it hard to bellive, if there was Submarine escort it M/S Estonia, that the Crew and Captain of M/S Estonia wasn t told or knew that they where hauling Military Cargo and Was Escorted by Nato Submarine? or Estonia Submarine? and either way a Submarine collied with M/S Estonia, but didn t stay and help Survivors or called this "Accident in"? its proably more in the lines of a "Sovet/Russian Submarine that possible was the factor in this Tragedy and sunk M/S Estonia is more likly, than a Submarine at this time, collides with it and leaves it? its shame on the Current Swedish Goverment of 2020 not to do anything to reveal more on what happends with M/S Estonia, than what we go just during its aftermate in the late 1990s.
I've heard rumors that a submarine with damages to the front docked in Scotland one or two weeks after the sinking. Just a rumor but worth looking into.
@@93Crash101 Sweden was also doing military exercises in the same area. I can't say what really happened but the fact that the only area they dumped rocks around happens to be where the hole is makes you wonder.
5:44 You see that towel there? That towel used to be a clean fresh towel. Still it’s very much usable today. There’s probably hundreds of usable towels in that wreck. Also smaller blankets maybe.
So creepy this ship is not a big pile of rust like the Titanic it's still in decent shape and the bodies have not dissolved yet completely like the victims of Titanic.
It’s become a grave and under Swedish law, it’s illegal to disturb a grave. Back in 1994, they could have brought up the bodies but chose not to. There has been a theory that it was transporting ex soviet military equipment and there was a special document on board that night. Sounds a tad suspicious to me.
It's all shady with this shipwreck. First the government wanted to lift the ship up, but then suddenly backed out. Why did they try to bury the wreck with rocks? Why did the ship sink so unusually fast and why do they protect the burial site so hard? Of course people tried to sue to at least recover the bodies but they were all declined. This investigation happened in August, they found a hew hole in the left starboard side which would explain the fast sinking, but again why and how it appeared there and why wasn't it mentioned in the official investigation reports is unknown and probably will be for at least another 70 years.
@@desa3887 thx for the info. I hope the family will have the truth. And those responsible, or hiding evidences will pay. Like in mh 370, when an event implies several people (military, politics ...), there always is someone on his death bed or retiring that is gonna let some info go. I hope so. May they all rest in peace Bonne soirée à vous
Issue was that the boat sank like it did which means there was a hole below waterline. Normally it would have been upside down for a long time like Jan heweliusz. Also there was water under car deck and survivors said it came in a lot of water below car deck but not from the stairs leading up. Something collided with it on starboard. Also the area Estonia sunk consist on thick layers of boulder clay.
@@jonasthesen theres obviosly something going on the survivors and the victims wanted to sue the ship company for building a bad ship but the company denies it and says it was an inside job and their not goin to pay to relieve the pain of the victims family members and prove their innocence they created their own research crew in 1997. And their crew came to a conclusion that there has to be some hole on the hull which caused the ship to sink and boom in 2019 they discover a hole there.... also a guy who was one of the last person to make it out of estonia alive.. he was stuck at the lower deck when the ship was felling on its side and he got stuck wasnt able to climb up there so he went running around looking for an exit .. but when he was running sround he took a look at the cameras in the area where the ramp is idk what its called i think its car deck but anyway what he saw was that the ramps door was very slightly opened and only a small amount of water came through there. But it wasnt opened widely enough to fit him through so he literally climbed all the way through the chimney to get out...something is competly off about the offical sinking story...
Harvey willmott.. i doubt it because the sea bed is made of soft clay which would never ever cause such damages to a steel.... also the clay is so soft the ship has diggen through it a little bit.. idk only logical explanation i could find is when they dumped rocks there at 1996 some big ass rock caused it but its very very unlikely it fkin had to travel atleast 1000 km/h to cause such damage ... look at the ship its not made of some soft wood.. there has to be alot of force behind it to cause such a huge hole....
@@pudelpea9130 and even if we admit the possibility of a rock impact powerful enough, the whole is on the side facing the sea bottom, hence big impact impossible.
That's the "Other side", the hole is starboard which is the side that lies on the seabed. However, since the seabed is made of soft clay, it's doubtful that it could have punctured a double-hull: / Here's a picture: i.imgur.com/n4f3rWY.png
4:12 anyone who can't see that this is buckling... it even follows the line in the sheet metal and splits AROUND the weak points, follows the weakpoints. 15 thousands tonnes of ship landing almost nose down on a non load bearing surface. People are just full of nonsense.Isn't it funny the submarine hit it at the weakest points.a submarine hit at the exact same time the bow door joints failed... amazingt timing. Also half is pushed in half is pulled out, they fail to mention the pulled out part. Also, they're talking about a 1 meter width submarine? Submarines are 15 meters wide. Submarines ae as big as this ship, if there was a collision it would have broken a 20 metere damagfe to the side ffs
You are right! This is a crack at an expansion joint to be exact. There was never a submarine. This ship had een A1 certificate. Fit to sail anyware in the world, that might be true but an RoRo Ferry in rough sea with a broken visor and water pooring in wil always lead to a tragedy like Estonia, leave a door open and the ferry will quikly sink. Same happen to the Herald of free enterprise. In that scenario the sea was calm but the doors fully open, shallow water effect pulled the water in by tonnes a minute. It took a little bit longer at the Estonia buth the result was the same. Put 10 cm of water on a RoRo, sail out in rough sea and you can be sure the vessel will sink.
@@hansdegraaf8263 EXACTLY someone with sense. The damae follows an expansion point. It breaks AROUND the weakpoint, buckled inside and out. Nothing is small enough to make that hole, somethin to make a hole like that is either buckling when it landed on it's stern actually, The only thing that would make a hole other than buckling at it's weak points is something like a Gerder, a pillar from insie the ship, long and thin under strain, you can see one there. I'll write more later. But look, people say the ship just went one way, then went the other way and stayed that side VERY quickly. Listen to what happened in the Zebrugge RoRo ferry thing, it went one way, then the other. This happens when lots of water goes to one side. and this is exactly what happened. They capsize and o bottom up. Whats the problem?
MS Estonia rests at 80 meters depth. The MS Estonia is 157 meters long. There are better images out there than you see in this small clip, it's not really pulled out. And the hole is 4 meters tall and 1.2 meters "deep". The damage to the titanic is suprisingly small, about 13 square feet, and it hit solid ice at 22 knots. The Spirit of free enterprise left port in Zeebrugge with her bow visor open in 1987 and capsized onto a sandbank 90 seconds after she started to take in water. Estonia supposedly suffered the same fate but didn't hit 90 degrees for 45 minutes and then just sank, without turning over. M/S Jan Heweliusz capsized during huricane like winds and 6 meter waves when her cargo of trailers and railway wagons came loose and remained floating for a week in the baltic sea. Eye witness accounts of water coming up from below the car deck, Eye witnesses from the crew who stayed at their stations (which had cameras in the car deck) until the last second never saw the inner gate open, eye witnesses reporting a large bang and the ship being hit in the side before the list started (one of them, Kent Härstedt, is now a Swedish politician and in the Riksdag). The locking lug for the so called Atlantic lock on estonias bow visor was dumped back into the sea after divers recovered it. Initial Finish ecolocation of the wreck found a pyramid shaped object at the bow with the same dimensions as the visor but officially the visor was found nearly 2km away. Mikael Öuns famous clock that fell to the deck and broke after Estonia took on a heavy list, reads 00:02 Swedish time (01:02 local) but the official report says the bow visor fell of and opened the car deck ramp at 01:15. The timeline of the sinking of the MS Express Samina that ran aground and took in water from below the waterline is eerily simular to that of Estonia. The list goes on. Whatever the reason behind the Sinking of MS Estonia, rest assured we haven't been told everything.
Stern down first with the bow most likely at the surface i might add.... Weakest point!? right through the fenderbeam, through the cardeck and through some steel beams , probably the strongest point on this area of the ship! One size for all submarines.....really? There is plenty of good information in this case that contradicts the idea that the bow door fell off like the official report claims. Official isnt always gospel you know!
Sweden fire back from Covid-19 global lockdown ?! Rest in peace for my ex-college brother he was a truck driver and wanished/died on the HMS Estonia board.
1) Could this hole have been made when the ship hit the sea floor? 2) how fast would the submarine have to be going to make that kind of impact/sound/ devastation. I love questions and conspiracies but unless they are followed through properly they mean nothing. Present a logical scenario and prove cover-up.
Wreckage divers have seen a ton of ships in the past century. They have experience and can see unusual damage. The ship hitting the seafloor would be a lot of force, but spread out over the entire hull. This looks like a very big force at a small point.
I have some theories, but I need you to have some critical comments on my theory and maybe you could explain to me if you can break my theory and why please. So at 4:02 you can see the drone underneath the ship somewhat, tho the angle is bad. So if the Estonia moved slightly after the impact on the left in this angle, is it likely that the Estonia hit the ground first, possibly even hit the rock, which obviously could have made the hole and also the other one whitch was not shown, and then over the years the ship turned enough over that that we could see the hole? I recon some finnish investigators said that the hole is most likely result of an impact when the Estonia hit the rock bottom. But something deep inside of me some part wants this to be a big conspiracy that will be revealed. Thanks.
There are not any big enough rocks there, those small stones where dumped there after the sinking, to small size on these stones to create such a hole. Also quite suspicious that those stones suddenly appear near the hole only, that is the dealbreaker for me!
It didn't have to be from a rock, it could be just impact damage. Ship of this size doesn't just settle on on the bottom. It literally crashes into it with considerable momentum. Besides, we have quite a bit of evidence, pointing at the visor separation and subsequent flooding of car deck. This new discovery doesn't change anything on that. Can it be an evidence of either sloppiness or maliciousness of the investigators? Yes, but it doesn't alter in any way the reasons why it sunk.
@@gtpk3527 There is no doubt that the weight of the ship theoretically could have created a hole. However the weight in this silt/clay bottom environment could not have created this kind of hole, this hole is from something focused and sharp. The evidence for the bow visor separation is somewhat questionable...the car ramp has never been proved to have falled down, several witnesses have confirmed it to be in closed position until the ship sank. The reason why Estonia sank is unknown, that is the main objective. There could be many alternative scenarios outside the official one.
@@stianmathisen4284 Obviously, there’s not much to go on, but it seems to me like fracture (as in, pulled apart), rather then pierced hole. The metal is straight, not bending inwards. On top of that at 8:09 as it goes around that bolt nut or whatever it is, the separation follows the circular line around the bolt, exactly as it would when forced apart by pulling. That would be consistent with forces created by the hull impacting the bottom. You are right that there are still some questions, I’m just saying that this, as an evidence, doesn’t make the visor theory invalid.
Could be, but then again the MS Estonia is resting on the soft clay seabed. For such a big hole, there had to be a great impact. So a theory of a submarine is plausible but then again Estonia could have just hit a rock on the seabed while sinking. We just don't know.
When you consider the thick soft clay seabed, and the fact estonia rests in very shallow water its definitely a no. Estonia didn't Impact the seabed anywere near as hard as people think. Estonia rests in 85 metres of water, estonia is 157 metres long, if estonia was stood upright on her stern then half the ship would be poking out the sea, its very shallow for this ship, just over half the length of estonia is equals to the depth of water she rests in. She floated to the bottom in essence, she didn't hit the soft clay anywhere near hard enough to cause that kind of damage, snapping steel beams and stuff like that, no way. Everything points to a submarine collision, the videos, the pictures, the survivors testimonies, the mechanics and logistics. Everything about the sub theory makes sense, adds up and is the only logical conclusion for this.
@@borisjohnson2606 take a look on the damages on Costa Concordia. But maybe its damages was so severe because it was on even shallower water where the force from the part above water line would be higher.
@@DrDanB the Costa has a number of different factors. First costa was larger, much larger, were talking a large ferry vs the pride of a cruise line. Secondly the costa was not entirely below the waterline, meaning a lot of her weight was not lessened by water, amd thirdly Costa sat on a hard rocky coastal shelf, Estonia here is sat on a fairly soft bed of clay, and while it sunk it sunk mostly intact, and is a relatively shallow wreck, 85m down i believe, I'm unsure it could have cracked itself with a fall to this depth.
@@98765zach You're right. Should be able to see if there is any rock in line with the hole as the wreck is turning. I find it as the most probable cause.
Another cover-up! There are people who know the truth, but to leave all the dead in the ship and call it a grave tells me that. I would want my loved ones back.
I have yet to see the whole documentary, as it's not available in my country. But wouldn't it have been possible for the broken off visor to cause this damage? Even if it's not, that's definitely the way they're going to spin this. Unfortunately, if there was a sub involved, we'll probably never know the truth, especially if it was a Russian sub. The truth will distord amidst geopolitical nonsense and propaganda (from both sides!) Even when you know for sure it wasn't a regular accident. Look at the flight MH17 case for an example.
No, they considered this, the visor was around 55 tons I think, but the damage that caused the hole needed like 1000 tons of force. And the visor itself didn't have any damage other than breaking and falling off.
Militaries use them too, for drones. No point in buying a special controller for several thousand dollars when a cheap xbox controller does the exact same job.
Explosives inside would have blown the metal outwards, the impact or hole has bent the metal inwards. It also lacks the spelling and shearing of a torpedo at least one made of conventional explosives
@@98765zach Maybe a non-exploding torpedo or other debris from the maritime industry or nature of the sea. In a storm things go wild. On land we have to watch out for the airborne debris. Titanic also hit something unexpected. An iceberg as far as I understand. I don't really care what is extrapolated after. Facts are something we basically have to prove to get moving on it with responsibility and evidence of things being available..
@@elektron2kim666 Maybe an unmanned submarine? They tell about some radio antenna findings near that did not belong to Estonia...maybe cut down when hitting, maybe that caused also that blackout nearby in communication. One thing not talked, why those phone calls with Silja Europa are shortened, they say that captain had informed more before sinking.
@@kyostim Great points. Thanks.The Swedish navy was all over it after which is represented by a minister. In comparison I know that NATO and Norway meet/spy in the north with subs vs Russian subs for obvious reasons. It's not something we are told about in big details. I have used ferries a lot and to Åland in the '90s I got the impression of people doing a great job and of high quality ships. "A lose nose tip" seems like a lie to me. The car deck being flooded and causing the sinking is a bit extreme to say officially with how they can counter it. These ships got a lot of sensors to detect all sorts of leakage in good time but officially it takes the crew to go there. A big hole in the ship is exactly what it takes to sink in 1 hour and destroy normal procedures and overwhelm the crew and automatic systems. The storm is also "normal" in regards to what the crew and the ship can do. At most it would stay on the side as it is built to do - kind of thing. Communications will be censored, if they mention subs and warships or scream something out with personal info. These videos are toned down as much as possible any way.
Really, Guys, you think that, after 26 years, the government(s) that forbade diving at the wreckage site just suddenly changed their minds and said "ah, sure, have at it!"?? Here's my question to the producers of this video: are all the wide shots of the ship purely for the purpose of referencing the position of the diver? They are clearly computer-generated.
Sorry, but the obsessive way authorities attempted to thwart any efforts of investigating the wreck points towards a DELIBERATE effort at a cover-up - and only someone, who knew DAMN WELL what had happened would be interested in covering anything up in the first place.
So waves are controlled by the government wow......
@@ender8416 WTF are you talking about?
@@taxiuniversum do you know what sarcasm is
05:43 Creepy seeing the towel still intact just sitting there for over 26 years. I remember this incident very well.
It is chilling. The towel looks modern and familiar, it looks like the sort of towel I would find in a hotel room. Seeing that towel makes the shipwreck so much more real to me. I imagine the passengers that morning choosing what clothing to wear, and that clothing is still on their bodies right now. 650 corpses inside that hull on the bottom of the baltic sea, wearing clothing from the 1990s - tennis shoes and jeans and sweatshirts.
@@kevinmathewson4272 wich boat costguard ship they talk to
@@kevinmathewson4272 Aside there won't be any remarkable bodies left. It is said much of the bodies are now decomposed, and when you have a look through the large windows from outside into the wreck, you can see swimming a kind of flakes behind. These are the decomposed bodies.
@@xkm-thebasetecchannel3823 there are older shipwrecks than this one that still contain intact corpses. cold salt water like this can preserve corpses surprisingly well.
@@kevinmathewson4272 there's a ship that sank in Lake Superior (I think in the late 1800s to early 1900s) that the crew are still intact and you can make out facial features till.
The Swedish government are in trouble, after the official investigation they insisted the estonia was hole free, they said the hull was completely intact and any discussion of hole's in the hull were conspiracy theory's. Now the expert piloting the drone in this video says there is no way the goverment missed this hole in there official investigation, and i agree. The drone pilot also states that he has never seen anything like this damage before and immense forces must of been at play, definitely NOT a result of hitting soft squidgy clay seabed. This hole is pre-sinking no question, so did the government simply miss it to shear incompetency? Or did they find it and lie?
When you consider the above, then factor in the goverment dropped 10,000 tonnes of rock over the starboard side of the wreck near were the hole is, it is very clear they found this hole and buried it from view, but because estonia has rotated 12 degrees in the clay over the years the hole has emerged from under the stones. It also explains why the government only very partially covered the wreck in that one specific place, they only needed to deposit enough stone around the starboard side to bury the hole then they called it a day, but unfortunately for them estonia has rotated and exposed the damage from under the rug for this brave brilliant film crew to discover...tut tut tut..Conspiracy against the people blatenly exposed. It's outrageously obvious what's happened here, the only questions left are how the hole was made pre-sinking, who is responsible for it, and why did the government hide it?
Look at this picture of the hole closely, you can see clear as day a submarine has hit estonia. There is a huge round dent which you can see has torn the hull apart with it. Blatenly!
news.err.ee/1141269/swedish-authorities-considering-ms-estonia-investigation#lg=1&slide=0
The ship could she twisted it self when capsizing and then hitting bottom the ship probably rolled it self back in to the position it was in 1994 when it sank and also because the Estonia is twisting it self apart from rolling upside down again in the sea bed
Mate, put the pieces together, it's extremely clear what has happened. If i had all this evidence stacked up against me in court I would be convicted of a crime...maybe it wouldn't be so obvious if the goverment hadn't dumped the stone down there. Watch the footage from the documentary, they scan the port side of estonia and the starboard side, the stone pile is only present on the starboard side around were the hole is. So the government have blatenly dropped the stones only in one specific place which just so happens to be were this hole was discovered? You think its just a coincidence they happened to only cover the hole with rocks? As far as I am concerned it has already been concluded this hole was made pre sinking and the government poorly attempted to cover it up with rocks, that much is obvious. The only unclear answers are how the hole was made, who done it, and why was it covered up. But like I said examine the photo in my post and tell me you can't see something round his impacted estonia.
Thank you John for all the work you've contributed with. As a Swede, I greatly appreciate you.
So what's your version about the visor falling down?
@@borisjohnson2606 yes they did that but also they tried to pour cement I have been told over the wreak
The real sad thing is that it took 10 years to admit military transports happened but, in state radio the defense minister was qustioned about if a transport occured during the 28 sep he said no why wouldnt they examine the most important date? And the lock to the bowvisor they threw it back to the sea stating it was to heavey for the helicopter .... but ok leave it at the ship and come back, i smell smoke and where there is smoke there is fire
what the fuck are you talking about, visor is on some swedens island.
@@CreativeHuckleBerry If NATO payed Sweden for this deliverance of Sovjet military secrets, they most likely payed well, that is the sense behind it all....money, big money my friend!
@@Benicius10 He said the lock to the bowvisor. (alltså låset inte själva visiret). :P
Social democrats just wanted to cover up the evidence by covering the ship in concrete
I love that he's controlling it with an xBox controller
Ocean gate. That didn’t age well
@@Sinister_fartboxWasn't the controllers fault the Titan was like a can of Coke
@@IrishPride7 it’s a reference joke dumb ss
Even without the conspiracy, this still gives me the creeps. So much death in such a sudden manner...and many still trapped there forever and ever
I'm not into conspiration but... This is definitively in the column "We have questions". Even if the ship sunk because of the official reasons, why try to bury the wreck and why not recover the corpses?
@@fenrislegacy My question is, why did they hide the corpses existence in the initial footage of the wreck exploration? I fully understand not showing them and cutting the camera in order to respect the dead, but they took out entire sections of audio while trying to make it seem like less of an issue than it was. They also attempted to cover the ship with cement, if I remember correctly. The whole thing is just weird...
This is really good video and this info we can trust. Thanks for the team, now everyone can see what really caused the sinking.
Yep, but the government will still lie and cover up. I can't wait to hear what the government come out with.
@@borisjohnson2606 why would they lie?
@@thecornfieldiii2069 because they lied out the actually caused and prevented the truth by stopping the ship being raised even tho drivers who did a report said it could be and they put cement, rumble on the ship and rocks around it. So the the truth wouldn’t be found and the fact that there might be four different governments of different countries that caused the sinking of ship which are the British, Swedish, Estonia and Russia because the Swedish and Estonia had military equipment on the ship from Russia and was trying to smuggle it out to the British because British intelligence and M16 were involved which if told now could cause a world war three.
@@emilybarber5962 stop lying you hysteric fool
@@thecornfieldiii2069 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MS_Estonia
Looking at examples of other wrecks that have sunk, evidence of buckling of the rest of the Hull to come degree would be visible if it was post sinking. The damage is focused in a very narrow area. If it was from a Container which I initially believed, the damage would be carried further along the Hull as its impossible for a container to cause such little damage compared with the sudden "impact" that struck the vessel which was initially surmised to be the door falling off.
I find it hard to believe it was a submarine but naval collision do indeed occur and its within the relm of possiblity to have been just that.
Subs have crashed with big ships before and made it back to port relatively unscathed. Happened in Hawaii between a US sub and a Japanese ship, and it also happened in the English Channel between a French sub and a tanker.
The impact could be the ship hitting the gate as it suddenly slows upon impacting water...the boats still moving forward and runs into it as it had air pockets, not enough to float it, but enough to cause it to sink more slowly than freefall....and BAM the ship which is still powering toward it hits it
Social democrats just wanted to cover up the evidence by covering the ship in concrete
I am listening to the language and the translation is correct
If you watch this video from a US IP Address, you get a disclaimer. "MS Estonia was a cruiseferry built in 1980 at the German shipyard Meyer Werft in Papenburg. In 1993, she was sold to Nordström & Thulin for use on Estline's Tallinn-Stockholm route."
And when you try to copy it they send you to a Google page.
"The truth doesn't care about our needs or wants. It doesn't care about our governments, our ideologies, our religions. It will lie in wait, for all time."
Swedish government be like: “Nothing suspicious to see in here. So much nothing that we will cover it under 10.000 tonnes of rocks”
Thank you for posting!
This is very interesting
Don't worry, one day, the truth comes to life! I have no doubt!
What do you think about the damages guys? Was it the bottom? The bow visor or even a sub marine? Pretty mysterious thing..
After all the weird statements by the Swedish government, and how survivors disappeared.
I want to watch this documentary so badly. I've been following the story of this ship for a long time now. It's on Discovery+ and on Dplay but sadly there's no way I can access those channels here from Germany. Can anybody help me? Is there another way to watch it? With English subtitles?
Thank You
Mir geht es auch so. Ich habe gesucht und gesucht aber nichts gefunden. Wir müssen wohl warten bis die den ganzen Krempel hier hochladen bzw freigeben was weiß ich
I have all episodes on my harddrive. How about I upload them to google disk and share the link with you?
@@danielval4616 yes please
@@danielval4616 this would be so great, I'd he eternally thankful!
@@collecting2131 link coming soon :)
And they tell us a stone must have caused the gash ... Yeah right.
Ships are build in parts, same as airplanes. Did you ever noticed that when a plane breaks up in mid air, it'll break at the joint and come down in the same parts it was build.
Same goes for ships. Estonia went nose down on her side and hit the bottom with approximately 30 km/h wich is 8.6 meter per second and then comes to a sudden stop at the bottom.
A ferry structure can't handle such a force, so the crack is very logic to me.
@@hansdegraaf8263 It went stern down...and it probably hit the seabottom before the bow left the surface of the sea...
Is it common to drop sand and stones on a wrecked ship? Ive never heard about this before. Or where there too many catastrophe tourists so this was neccessary?
its common if you dont want people to see what you are hiding and lying about. How many shipwrecks were covered ... EVER ? yes thats right ... only this one
Weren't they doing that so they could cover it with cement, but stopped that fool plan due to rightful public outcry?
Does anyone know where I can watch this whole Documentary series in HD with english subtitles?
The episodes where posted to RUclips, but now they are taken down. I want to watch the full series too.
Discovery plus is showing this documentary, don't know if it's free or subscription though.
@@majorminor3367 Its subscrption like Netflex.
What is the name of the documentary?
Well, they probably collided with a submarine and that was hushed up.
I know there is ESTLINE written on that side so what is that letter at 3:36 ?
Probably marked the location of the stabilizer fin.
@@kontras4571 you are correct because all ships have that X marking telling u it is a stabilizer fins or a little fin marking as well
The new info is from latest dives is the hole is actually 40 m long and 6 meters in height.
Interessting too see what additional dives will show.
This fascinates me. Have you heard about the joint British and Swedish operation to smuggle Soviet technology out of Estonia on board civilian ferries?. Apparently the Russians sent two warnings to stop it or face consequences. One to the Swedes and another to the Brits. Do you think rather than colliding with a submarine a submarine fired some sort of inert torpedo that slammed into the hull of Estonia causing it to sink but also making it look like an accident?
@@tigerland4328 Estonian government was warned by different ways at least 3 times during 1993-1994. " just stop smuggling our technology by civilian ship " ! all 3 countries were informed about warnings and MI6 was informed too !!!
If the dent in the visor was from it hitting the bulbous bow, then it would have fallen of to the left; the hole is on the right. If the hole was made by the visor, then the dent on the visor wasn't made by the bulbous bow.
Yes, this was determined in the documentary. The bow visor would not have enough strength to pierce a hole into the hull of the ship. Not enough force
Did you notice that smaller horizontal dent that crosses the vertical one?
@@pez555 Explosives.
I'm not buying this conspiracy theory.
If it was a big hole in the ship it would have sunk much faster than it did. Like minutes.
@@ziudra91 Which it did, sank in minutes.
As a swedish kid i understand what Henrik says and the other guy but it's hard to translate the entire video depending on what they are saying you know.
Understand 40% of it since I speak norwegian
some of the crew that survived got off the helipad and disappeared so did they run away as not to charged for criminals neglect or did Sweden, Estonia, uk, Finland managed to hide the crew to cover up the truth! the torn hull on the side doesn't add up which might have caused the ship to list to starboard and found a video saying that the visor was damaged in the explosion and metallurgy people found that the visor metal melted to 1200 degree...
It wasn't just crew members, passengers also disappeared, as well as people who were crewmen but low level, like a store attendant.
Overall 11 people disappeared after being rescued, a couple of them found "drowned" much later.
Anyone know what that circular hull penetration is? The crack starts there. Some kind of intake pipe or sea chest?
Most probably this is a water drain pipe from the car deck.
@@kontras4571 Thanks, but if my orientation is correct it's below the waterline. Absolutely fascinating video, if only the original Rockwater ROV footage was so clear.
Guess the American who investigated the hole in the first place was right all along
well the guy with the beard is a swede and the ship is a german ship with a german crew so im not sure where you got the American bit from.
@@the_bear2_072 well if you watched the hole documentary you’ll know it was an American who found out about the hole first
@@floppydorito1408 he didn't "find out about it" he speculated that there could possibly be a hole because it sunk so fast. But he didn't "find" it
@@the_bear2_072 no, he did find it, but the photographs were not as clear as these ones. He also presumed that the evidence he gathered would be enough to reopen the investigation which it was not unfortunately. The ship has tilted more now so it's easier to observe the hole
@@EnEvighet7 your one year late to the discussion m8 but thanks for your input.
does anyone ever checked the remains with geiger counter?
Quizás otra opción es que ese hueco en el casco sea producto del impacto contra el fondo del mar. Sea como sea, los informes oficiales deberían haberlo registrado. Es raro.
Algo que no sabía ni entendí es ¿por que tiraron piedras al rededor del naufragio?
Where can we watch a full documentary???
Dplay
You can maybe download it from thepiratebay
@Hansy unfortunately it's not available in the US 🙃
Does anyone know where I can watch this as I don’t have discovery+
Discovery+ have a 2 week free trial.
@@danielval4616 This Documentary coming up in the UK over Christmas 2020
@@danielval4616 I would do that but you have to be in the UK to be able to take the trial. Is there another way ? I want to see this so badly!
@@collecting2131 same
You can watch it here:
ruclips.net/video/5bAAqXAwV6Y/видео.html
All episodes are on youtube, for now lol
Why can't this hole simply be the result of forces applied to the ship while sinking or even years later while shifting?
because the ship is made out of hard metal and the ground where the ship sank is soft clay. While it is possible that the hole was caused by the sinking and shifting most investigators agree that it was most likely caused by the big frontal loading door that fell of and got hit back to the ship by the waves. (the loading door that fell of was about 80 tons heavy so it was more than capable of causing a hole like this)
@@the_bear2_072 Finally, someone with a brain. Can’t explain how many people keep saying that bow door isn’t heavy enough to cause damage to the ship.
@@thedesertrat_9514 I disagree, the visor isn’t that heavy compared to the ship which would probably just result in the visor taking more damage than the hull.
Also this doesn’t explain how the visor would be able to float for such a long period
@@nissethepear4743 80 tons is more than heavy enough to cause damage. They’re designed to be buoyant with the rest of the ship as well since part of it lines with the lower hull.
@@the_bear2_072 The loading door would have sank like a rock, the hole is dozens of meters away from the original position of the door, there is zero chance it caused this damage.
It was disgusting and disgraceful the way these poor people the survivors and families were threated. This is why I despise governments all scum bags.
Sniff sniff I smell a conspiracy.
the only way to get the true, is to get the entire ship to the surface...
650 corpses raised from the depths of the baltic sea.
@@kevinmathewson4272 the majority is now levitating flesh
At the stern.....”Here the damage is pointing outward”..... outward..... would a torpedo produce damage thrusting outward?
Could an explosion from within have occurred at the stern?
Well according to some thoeries they had soviet war tech onboard.
Lies tons of lies o have studied stuff like this since I found out about estonia the outward motion could be an explosion or could be water outside the ship and the water pressure inside the ship hitting bottom can cause the hull to blow outwards like that
It was proven on the titanic when it sank
@José Menendéz why would CIA sink it? it was literally british-swedish-estonian joint smuggling operation of Soviet materials. if anything it was KGB
@@PoseidoncapsizesHi Hang on....are you saying the Titanic hit the bottom and this caused part of the hull to explode outwardly?
I was working at a naval base tgat became Gunwarf Keys in 2000 and the paparazzi where shouting over the wall at the chap I was working with. I asked him what it was about and he said " I would find out in a few days as it would be in the press, but when he was in the SBS he dived the Estonia after the incident". He told me what he found, and it was no accident. It was never in the press...
... and what he found?
@@kontras4571 two bombs. One gone off, one unexploded
These facts should be confirmed with 100 evidence.
@@kontras4571 not facts I'm afraid, just additional circumstantial evidence.
@@dominicsheldon8154Yes, no smoke without the fire!
Could of the bow door have hit the side during the sinking causing it to sink faster or at all
IS there more??
More of what?
@@serc7553 The video
@Hansy
Why cannot you just write the full name of that documentary?
@Hansy
Why cannot you just write the full name of that documentary?
"Oi oi oi oi..."
I find it hard to bellive, if there was Submarine escort it M/S Estonia, that the Crew and Captain of M/S Estonia wasn t told or knew that they where hauling Military Cargo and Was Escorted by Nato Submarine? or Estonia Submarine? and either way a Submarine collied with M/S Estonia, but didn t stay and help Survivors or called this "Accident in"? its proably more in the lines of a "Sovet/Russian Submarine that possible was the factor in this Tragedy and sunk M/S Estonia is more likly, than a Submarine at this time, collides with it and leaves it? its shame on the Current Swedish Goverment of 2020 not to do anything to reveal more on what happends with M/S Estonia, than what we go just during its aftermate in the late 1990s.
I've heard rumors that a submarine with damages to the front docked in Scotland one or two weeks after the sinking. Just a rumor but worth looking into.
@@93Crash101 not a rumor but fact
@@93Crash101 Sweden was also doing military exercises in the same area. I can't say what really happened but the fact that the only area they dumped rocks around happens to be where the hole is makes you wonder.
5:44 You see that towel there? That towel used to be a clean fresh towel. Still it’s very much usable today. There’s probably hundreds of usable towels in that wreck. Also smaller blankets maybe.
So creepy this ship is not a big pile of rust like the Titanic it's still in decent shape and the bodies have not dissolved yet completely like the victims of Titanic.
Why won't they salvage the ship??
It’s become a grave and under Swedish law, it’s illegal to disturb a grave. Back in 1994, they could have brought up the bodies but chose not to. There has been a theory that it was transporting ex soviet military equipment and there was a special document on board that night. Sounds a tad suspicious to me.
So what is going on with this story ? Is this investigation recent ? Do people sue the governement ?
It's all shady with this shipwreck. First the government wanted to lift the ship up, but then suddenly backed out. Why did they try to bury the wreck with rocks? Why did the ship sink so unusually fast and why do they protect the burial site so hard? Of course people tried to sue to at least recover the bodies but they were all declined.
This investigation happened in August, they found a hew hole in the left starboard side which would explain the fast sinking, but again why and how it appeared there and why wasn't it mentioned in the official investigation reports is unknown and probably will be for at least another 70 years.
@@desa3887 thx for the info. I hope the family will have the truth. And those responsible, or hiding evidences will pay.
Like in mh 370, when an event implies several people (military, politics ...), there always is someone on his death bed or retiring that is gonna let some info go. I hope so.
May they all rest in peace
Bonne soirée à vous
Could this not have happened when it hit the sea bed? The forces must have been huge! Especially considering it sank in a storm.
Issue was that the boat sank like it did which means there was a hole below waterline. Normally it would have been upside down for a long time like Jan heweliusz. Also there was water under car deck and survivors said it came in a lot of water below car deck but not from the stairs leading up. Something collided with it on starboard. Also the area Estonia sunk consist on thick layers of boulder clay.
@@jonasthesen theres obviosly something going on the survivors and the victims wanted to sue the ship company for building a bad ship but the company denies it and says it was an inside job and their not goin to pay to relieve the pain of the victims family members and prove their innocence they created their own research crew in 1997. And their crew came to a conclusion that there has to be some hole on the hull which caused the ship to sink and boom in 2019 they discover a hole there.... also a guy who was one of the last person to make it out of estonia alive.. he was stuck at the lower deck when the ship was felling on its side and he got stuck wasnt able to climb up there so he went running around looking for an exit .. but when he was running sround he took a look at the cameras in the area where the ramp is idk what its called i think its car deck but anyway what he saw was that the ramps door was very slightly opened and only a small amount of water came through there. But it wasnt opened widely enough to fit him through so he literally climbed all the way through the chimney to get out...something is competly off about the offical sinking story...
Harvey willmott.. i doubt it because the sea bed is made of soft clay which would never ever cause such damages to a steel.... also the clay is so soft the ship has diggen through it a little bit.. idk only logical explanation i could find is when they dumped rocks there at 1996 some big ass rock caused it but its very very unlikely it fkin had to travel atleast 1000 km/h to cause such damage ... look at the ship its not made of some soft wood.. there has to be alot of force behind it to cause such a huge hole....
@@pudelpea9130 and even if we admit the possibility of a rock impact powerful enough, the whole is on the side facing the sea bottom, hence big impact impossible.
@@jonasthesen The ship could have easely capzised without the hole due to the free surface effect
Could it be possible that there are holes on the other side, that lies to the ground ?
That's the "Other side", the hole is starboard which is the side that lies on the seabed. However, since the seabed is made of soft clay, it's doubtful that it could have punctured a double-hull: / Here's a picture: i.imgur.com/n4f3rWY.png
4:12 anyone who can't see that this is buckling... it even follows the line in the sheet metal and splits AROUND the weak points, follows the weakpoints. 15 thousands tonnes of ship landing almost nose down on a non load bearing surface. People are just full of nonsense.Isn't it funny the submarine hit it at the weakest points.a submarine hit at the exact same time the bow door joints failed... amazingt timing. Also half is pushed in half is pulled out, they fail to mention the pulled out part. Also, they're talking about a 1 meter width submarine? Submarines are 15 meters wide. Submarines ae as big as this ship, if there was a collision it would have broken a 20 metere damagfe to the side ffs
You are right! This is a crack at an expansion joint to be exact. There was never a submarine. This ship had een A1 certificate. Fit to sail anyware in the world, that might be true but an RoRo Ferry in rough sea with a broken visor and water pooring in wil always lead to a tragedy like Estonia, leave a door open and the ferry will quikly sink. Same happen to the Herald of free enterprise. In that scenario the sea was calm but the doors fully open, shallow water effect pulled the water in by tonnes a minute. It took a little bit longer at the Estonia buth the result was the same. Put 10 cm of water on a RoRo, sail out in rough sea and you can be sure the vessel will sink.
@@hansdegraaf8263 EXACTLY someone with sense. The damae follows an expansion point. It breaks AROUND the weakpoint, buckled inside and out. Nothing is small enough to make that hole, somethin to make a hole like that is either buckling when it landed on it's stern actually, The only thing that would make a hole other than buckling at it's weak points is something like a Gerder, a pillar from insie the ship, long and thin under strain, you can see one there. I'll write more later. But look, people say the ship just went one way, then went the other way and stayed that side VERY quickly. Listen to what happened in the Zebrugge RoRo ferry thing, it went one way, then the other. This happens when lots of water goes to one side. and this is exactly what happened. They capsize and o bottom up. Whats the problem?
MS Estonia rests at 80 meters depth. The MS Estonia is 157 meters long. There are better images out there than you see in this small clip, it's not really pulled out. And the hole is 4 meters tall and 1.2 meters "deep". The damage to the titanic is suprisingly small, about 13 square feet, and it hit solid ice at 22 knots.
The Spirit of free enterprise left port in Zeebrugge with her bow visor open in 1987 and capsized onto a sandbank 90 seconds after she started to take in water. Estonia supposedly suffered the same fate but didn't hit 90 degrees for 45 minutes and then just sank, without turning over.
M/S Jan Heweliusz capsized during huricane like winds and 6 meter waves when her cargo of trailers and railway wagons came loose and remained floating for a week in the baltic sea.
Eye witness accounts of water coming up from below the car deck, Eye witnesses from the crew who stayed at their stations (which had cameras in the car deck) until the last second never saw the inner gate open, eye witnesses reporting a large bang and the ship being hit in the side before the list started (one of them, Kent Härstedt, is now a Swedish politician and in the Riksdag). The locking lug for the so called Atlantic lock on estonias bow visor was dumped back into the sea after divers recovered it. Initial Finish ecolocation of the wreck found a pyramid shaped object at the bow with the same dimensions as the visor but officially the visor was found nearly 2km away. Mikael Öuns famous clock that fell to the deck and broke after Estonia took on a heavy list, reads 00:02 Swedish time (01:02 local) but the official report says the bow visor fell of and opened the car deck ramp at 01:15.
The timeline of the sinking of the MS Express Samina that ran aground and took in water from below the waterline is eerily simular to that of Estonia.
The list goes on. Whatever the reason behind the Sinking of MS Estonia, rest assured we haven't been told everything.
@@boogiestreet594 Could you define expansion joint please?
Stern down first with the bow most likely at the surface i might add....
Weakest point!? right through the fenderbeam, through the cardeck and through some steel beams , probably the strongest point on this area of the ship!
One size for all submarines.....really?
There is plenty of good information in this case that contradicts the idea that the bow door fell off like the official report claims.
Official isnt always gospel you know!
Sweden fire back from Covid-19 global lockdown ?!
Rest in peace for my ex-college brother he was a truck driver and wanished/died on the HMS Estonia board.
HMS? I believe that is for British Navy vessels, not Estonian ferries ;)
This is not full video... In full video we see real reason.
1) Could this hole have been made when the ship hit the sea floor? 2) how fast would the submarine have to be going to make that kind of impact/sound/ devastation. I love questions and conspiracies but unless they are followed through properly they mean nothing. Present a logical scenario and prove cover-up.
Wreckage divers have seen a ton of ships in the past century. They have experience and can see unusual damage. The ship hitting the seafloor would be a lot of force, but spread out over the entire hull. This looks like a very big force at a small point.
@@MaxMakerChannel Correct my friend!
is this a new mh17 ...😏
I have some theories, but I need you to have some critical comments on my theory and maybe you could explain to me if you can break my theory and why please. So at 4:02 you can see the drone underneath the ship somewhat, tho the angle is bad. So if the Estonia moved slightly after the impact on the left in this angle, is it likely that the Estonia hit the ground first, possibly even hit the rock, which obviously could have made the hole and also the other one whitch was not shown, and then over the years the ship turned enough over that that we could see the hole? I recon some finnish investigators said that the hole is most likely result of an impact when the Estonia hit the rock bottom. But something deep inside of me some part wants this to be a big conspiracy that will be revealed. Thanks.
There are not any big enough rocks there, those small stones where dumped there after the sinking, to small size on these stones to create such a hole.
Also quite suspicious that those stones suddenly appear near the hole only, that is the dealbreaker for me!
It didn't have to be from a rock, it could be just impact damage. Ship of this size doesn't just settle on on the bottom. It literally crashes into it with considerable momentum.
Besides, we have quite a bit of evidence, pointing at the visor separation and subsequent flooding of car deck. This new discovery doesn't change anything on that.
Can it be an evidence of either sloppiness or maliciousness of the investigators? Yes, but it doesn't alter in any way the reasons why it sunk.
@@gtpk3527 There is no doubt that the weight of the ship theoretically could have created a hole.
However the weight in this silt/clay
bottom environment could not have created this kind of hole, this hole is from something focused and sharp.
The evidence for the bow visor separation is somewhat questionable...the car ramp has never been proved to have falled down, several witnesses have confirmed it to be in closed position until the ship sank.
The reason why Estonia sank is unknown, that is the main objective.
There could be many alternative scenarios outside the official one.
@@stianmathisen4284 Obviously, there’s not much to go on, but it seems to me like fracture (as in, pulled apart), rather then pierced hole. The metal is straight, not bending inwards. On top of that at 8:09 as it goes around that bolt nut or whatever it is, the separation follows the circular line around the bolt, exactly as it would when forced apart by pulling. That would be consistent with forces created by the hull impacting the bottom. You are right that there are still some questions, I’m just saying that this, as an evidence, doesn’t make the visor theory invalid.
@@gtpk3527 Totally disagree, metal is definitely bending inwards and outwards
Fenderbeam is definitely fractured!
Not possible that the hole is a result of the hull hitting the seafloor? No?
Could be, but then again the MS Estonia is resting on the soft clay seabed. For such a big hole, there had to be a great impact. So a theory of a submarine is plausible but then again Estonia could have just hit a rock on the seabed while sinking. We just don't know.
When you consider the thick soft clay seabed, and the fact estonia rests in very shallow water its definitely a no. Estonia didn't Impact the seabed anywere near as hard as people think. Estonia rests in 85 metres of water, estonia is 157 metres long, if estonia was stood upright on her stern then half the ship would be poking out the sea, its very shallow for this ship, just over half the length of estonia is equals to the depth of water she rests in. She floated to the bottom in essence, she didn't hit the soft clay anywhere near hard enough to cause that kind of damage, snapping steel beams and stuff like that, no way.
Everything points to a submarine collision, the videos, the pictures, the survivors testimonies, the mechanics and logistics. Everything about the sub theory makes sense, adds up and is the only logical conclusion for this.
@@borisjohnson2606 take a look on the damages on Costa Concordia. But maybe its damages was so severe because it was on even shallower water where the force from the part above water line would be higher.
@@DrDanB the Costa has a number of different factors. First costa was larger, much larger, were talking a large ferry vs the pride of a cruise line. Secondly the costa was not entirely below the waterline, meaning a lot of her weight was not lessened by water, amd thirdly Costa sat on a hard rocky coastal shelf, Estonia here is sat on a fairly soft bed of clay, and while it sunk it sunk mostly intact, and is a relatively shallow wreck, 85m down i believe, I'm unsure it could have cracked itself with a fall to this depth.
@@98765zach You're right. Should be able to see if there is any rock in line with the hole as the wreck is turning. I find it as the most probable cause.
Det lilla hålet kan väl inte få en hel färja att sjunka.
Another cover-up! There are people who know the truth, but to leave all the dead in the ship and call it a grave tells me that. I would want my loved ones back.
I have yet to see the whole documentary, as it's not available in my country. But wouldn't it have been possible for the broken off visor to cause this damage?
Even if it's not, that's definitely the way they're going to spin this. Unfortunately, if there was a sub involved, we'll probably never know the truth, especially if it was a Russian sub. The truth will distord amidst geopolitical nonsense and propaganda (from both sides!) Even when you know for sure it wasn't a regular accident. Look at the flight MH17 case for an example.
No, they considered this, the visor was around 55 tons I think, but the damage that caused the hole needed like 1000 tons of force. And the visor itself didn't have any damage other than breaking and falling off.
I think you’re able to watch it for free at the website Big Chute, If you type in ”Estonia dokumentär gratis” in Google
There are uploads on youtube. I can send you link
2:01 is he using a xbox controller to control the remote sub???? nani the fk?
They are often used for any kind of remote robot. Native Windows controls.
Militaries use them too, for drones. No point in buying a special controller for several thousand dollars when a cheap xbox controller does the exact same job.
My reaction totally. Gaming has gone far in this world.
“nani the fk” are you like 12
@@plant5875 yes
Was that a Xbox controller?
yes
I believe it was a torpedo from the inside or the outside.
Explosives inside would have blown the metal outwards, the impact or hole has bent the metal inwards. It also lacks the spelling and shearing of a torpedo at least one made of conventional explosives
@@98765zach Maybe a non-exploding torpedo or other debris from the maritime industry or nature of the sea. In a storm things go wild. On land we have to watch out for the airborne debris. Titanic also hit something unexpected. An iceberg as far as I understand. I don't really care what is extrapolated after. Facts are something we basically have to prove to get moving on it with responsibility and evidence of things being available..
@@elektron2kim666 Maybe an unmanned submarine? They tell about some radio antenna findings near that did not belong to Estonia...maybe cut down when hitting, maybe that caused also that blackout nearby in communication. One thing not talked, why those phone calls with Silja Europa are shortened, they say that captain had informed more before sinking.
@@kyostim Great points. Thanks.The Swedish navy was all over it after which is represented by a minister. In comparison I know that NATO and Norway meet/spy in the north with subs vs Russian subs for obvious reasons. It's not something we are told about in big details. I have used ferries a lot and to Åland in the '90s I got the impression of people doing a great job and of high quality ships. "A lose nose tip" seems like a lie to me. The car deck being flooded and causing the sinking is a bit extreme to say officially with how they can counter it. These ships got a lot of sensors to detect all sorts of leakage in good time but officially it takes the crew to go there.
A big hole in the ship is exactly what it takes to sink in 1 hour and destroy normal procedures and overwhelm the crew and automatic systems. The storm is also "normal" in regards to what the crew and the ship can do. At most it would stay on the side as it is built to do - kind of thing.
Communications will be censored, if they mention subs and warships or scream something out with personal info. These videos are toned down as much as possible any way.
@@elektron2kim666 Its difficult to add something, its easy to find false. Its easy to make videos worse and cut those as with other communications.
GEMANIJ SUBMARINES U-995 SIKRET
Really, Guys, you think that, after 26 years, the government(s) that forbade diving at the wreckage site just suddenly changed their minds and said "ah, sure, have at it!"??
Here's my question to the producers of this video: are all the wide shots of the ship purely for the purpose of referencing the position of the diver? They are clearly computer-generated.
Is this a serious comment? I honestly can’t tell