Utvik Senior, Ukebladet Vi Menn

Accusation, presented A series of statements Since July last year, it has been more than rough. The ship's crew would have broken one of the primary laws of the sea, a code of honor: You help others in distress at sea. You declare. V Men claims the crime was covered up by falsifying the record book. It says the warship was docked at Harstad on February 17, 1978, the evening Udvik Sr. sank.

V Men suggests that there are solid facts behind the allegation. It refers to notes in the logbook about diesel consumption – and distance traveled from the counter – that “the vessel was not stationary in port at the time of the accident”. The articles report damage to the sonar dome, located under the ship behind the bow, and indicate that the damage was caused by the collision.

counters

The counter for the distance traveled is an instrument called “a log” which is lowered during the voyage and taken at the port. It is not reset when the record is posted, but it is referenced in the starting number. Vi Menn journalist Eivind Pedersen noticed a difference of 60 nautical miles when posting the log after staying at Harstad. He believes he has found proof that the logbook is a lie. A secret raid has taken place.

But still Record book Every time KNM Stavanger loads the register and retrieves the record, it shows that the specified number is different from the one specified when it is reissued. Sometimes over 60 nautical miles. There must be another reason for these differences.

Diesel consumption

Pedersen assumes that bunker tanks are always completely full. After the warship left Harstad, the Ramsund was filled with 181,000 liters of diesel. The activity calculated in the log book since the last fill was only used for 35,000 – 45,000 liters. The boat was on a secret voyage, otherwise the thoughts would have been destroyed, Pedersen reasoned. But his assumption that the ship always fills the tanks to capacity is not correct. Record book The first bunker that followed featured rowboats that were by no means mind-blowing. Also, he doesn't take into account consumption in the ocean. Engines run when ship is ready.

Hull damage?

KNM Stavanger should have participated in the Arctic Express exercise, but went to Ramsund for repairs. Pedersen says there is evidence among the crew that the sonar dome, which sticks out under the keel behind the bow, is resting due to damage. He notes that the damage was the result of a collision. A statement From March 16, engineer Bjarne Jølner on board tells a different story: the anchor winch is defective. It was decided to go to the naval base at Ramsund and get help. KNM Stavanger took part in the last part of the exercise and then proceeded to dry dock at Håkonsvern, the navy's main base in Bergen. According to Pedersen, the damage was done to the “sonar dome”. Zollner's report states that leaks in the cooling water system at Haakonsvern have been repaired. However, this does not explain why the ship must go into dry dock.

Exemption certificate

When I brought a dormant shipwreck out of the archives in 1997, one of the first things I relied on was a frigate track. Olav Arne Wilsgaard, the sheriff's officer in Berg og Torsken, visited the wreck the next day. Information A Norwegian warship departed Harstad, just outside Senja, and arrived in Tromsø at 01.00 on the night of the sinking. At the time of the shipwreck it will pass the shipwreck area. He didn't like the name of the warship. Wilsgaard wanted to follow this route, but his superior, the sheriff, refused.

I am Addressed me For the Maritime Museum in Horton, it is in the warships log books. Two warships were in northern Norway on the night of the sinking. KNM Stavanger and KNM Trondheim were docked at Harstad. Only KNM Stavanger would have had the opportunity to build a route outside Senja. But no, KNM Stavanger was based in Harstad from February 7th to February 20th according to the log book.

Has the record book been tampered with? I stood near the tank. In that case, the decision to enter the false information must have been made before the warship left the dock at Harstad. The log is kept continuously and must be observed when the ship leaves the port. If the battleship was going to collide tonight, they couldn't have known it in advance. I felt the logbook was a source of exclusion. Besides, the 130-plus crew, most of them private, would be unlikely to stick together in the event of a conflict. I placed the battleship track.

Engineer Zollner's report of the KNM Stavanger to the dock at Harstad on the night of the sinking on 17 February. He describes an unsuccessful attempt to repair the windmill “late on the evening of 17 February” with the assistance of Carbo Mechanical Workshop, and his own crew continuing repairs “until the evening of 18 February”. I contacted Zollner. He doesn't remember making this statement 45 years ago, but adds without hesitation: “I can guarantee that I've never put my name to anything false.”

Zollner's Report Wilsgard can also provide an explanation of the message received. KNM Stavanger can plan to go to Tromsø. The report showed that the wind farm was expected to be fully repaired by morning. When that is not successful, the departure may have to be canceled and may not be registered with the Overseers at the Norwegian Armed Forces Maritime Operations Center in Bodø.

Not SCOPE

Pedersen has entered the essay series in the running for the 2023 SKUP Award for “Best Project in Investigative and Critical Journalism.” In the recorded method statement, he appears to have read Zullner's statement. He knew it said the KNM was docked at Stavanger on the night of the sinking. He knows that it explains that the reason for his stay in Ramsund is the windmill's fault. But this is not yet revealed in the Vi Menn articles. “Through other excavating cases, I learned that documents written in real time are a journalist's best friend”, Pedersen declares. Yet he ignores essential information from documents written in real time.

list 49 projects over registrations. Here you can expect the best in Norwegian investigative and critical journalism. V Man's reporting series is a rotten apple in the basket. It compromises on price. Registration should be deleted. The responsibility rests with the editor of V Men.

Confidence in the armed forces is eroding

In the wake of the V Men article, the reaction among many outside of Chencha: Finally, the evidence falls into place. Rumors about the warship turned out to be true. The background is that confidence in the armed forces has – rightly – been eroded in this regard.

In the first days after the shipwreck, everything was aimed at finding the ship that contained Udvik Sr. in the sink. The debris washed ashore told a vivid story. Police, rescue teams and local people were involved in the rescue operation Same result: Cause of drowning is collision. Then the armed forces reached the spot. They claimed to have a complete overview of the water with their radars. They rejected conflict. There are no other ships near Woodwick Senior.

That set the stage for further investigation and a state inquiry. The search for the runaway ship was abandoned. But that was a false premise. There was security An unidentified vessel, a Russian spy ship, was registered by the Norwegian Coast Guard and Coast Guard. Then a large iron ship was observed by a fishing boat. The record was detailed and safe. The ship came from Andfjord along the route to the shipwreck area. Its ground-based radar network could not avoid its capture.

Security took An active role In the public eye and slandered those who believed the wreck was caused by a collision. Ask them to be quiet and not disturb the investigation. But he asked himself what had happened Conclusion of the State's investigation: Udvik Sr. is crushed against the rocks. It was 25 years before this A new investigation It established what was clear from the beginning: the cause of the sinking was a collision. It was too late. Darkness shrouded the departing craft.

“We now know that the old commission Totally missed (…) The big question is whether it was a deliberate act because someone wanted to hide something? (…) Military authority may have deliberately trained civilian clarification of a tragedy that claimed nine lives”Nortlis wrote in the lead.

An independent inquiry into the authorities' handling of the sinking could provide answers. Nortlis followed up on the request of those who had been left behind in administrative positions under the municipality of Berg and the title “Investigate them!”: “The Storting must agree to find out what happened. 25 years ago, the next of kin managed to tabulate documents showing that the accident occurred in open water. However, they ran up against closed doors. Who wouldn't want to open up?

Drome's Folkeplot believed the answer to the demand for an independent investigation was “yes.” But in this case as before; – Voices of the region are not heard. required Rejected. The responsible judiciary allowed itself to be investigated Completed with Release and Cleanup: “No objectionable assessments”, “No cases of poor workmanship”, “No examples of gross misunderstanding or other particularly objectionable conditions that influenced the course of the case”. The case was re-entered into the archive and is now closed New lies.

Security forces withheld information. The question of why is not answered. The answer is no shipping line.

• KNM Stavanger is located deep in the Westfjords. It was sunk on 12 June 2002 in an exercise. Watch a movie from the show here. A sister ship, KNM Norvik (Oslo-class frigate), is docked at the Naval Museum in Horton.