Hmas Sydney
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: gold coast QLD australia
Age: 86
Posts: 1,345
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmas Sydney
While it is not strickly aviation, it was certainly the talk on many a flight deck today, and the airlines were born of the two wars, so stay with us tidbinbilla and let us rejoice at the finding of the Sydney, and to any of you who can lay claim to a relative our thoughts are with your family.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Devil's Island
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
T Green
Good post. Twas a day of hearing the news and whilst having no conection to the event, I spent quite a bit of time reflecting on what this would mean to those who do have a connection. Hopefully closure for those families affected and leave it as it is with maybe underwater photos of the ship in the war memorial and a declaration of an official memorial site.
My thoughts go out to the families of those brave young men.
Good post. Twas a day of hearing the news and whilst having no conection to the event, I spent quite a bit of time reflecting on what this would mean to those who do have a connection. Hopefully closure for those families affected and leave it as it is with maybe underwater photos of the ship in the war memorial and a declaration of an official memorial site.
My thoughts go out to the families of those brave young men.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Oz
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Eternal Father, strong to save,
Whose arm hath bound the restless wave,
Who bidd'st the mighty ocean deep
Its own appointed limits keep;
Oh, hear us when we cry to Thee,
For those in peril on the sea!
O Christ! Whose voice the waters heard
And hushed their raging at Thy word,
Who walked'st on the foaming deep,
And calm amidst its rage didst sleep;
Oh, hear us when we cry to Thee,
For those in peril on the sea!
Most Holy Spirit! Who didst brood
Upon the chaos dark and rude,
And bid its angry tumult cease,
And give, for wild confusion, peace;
Oh, hear us when we cry to Thee,
For those in peril on the sea!
O Trinity of love and power!
Our brethren shield in danger's hour;
From rock and tempest, fire and foe,
Protect them wheresoe'er they go;
Thus evermore shall rise to Thee
Glad hymns of praise from land and sea.
Whose arm hath bound the restless wave,
Who bidd'st the mighty ocean deep
Its own appointed limits keep;
Oh, hear us when we cry to Thee,
For those in peril on the sea!
O Christ! Whose voice the waters heard
And hushed their raging at Thy word,
Who walked'st on the foaming deep,
And calm amidst its rage didst sleep;
Oh, hear us when we cry to Thee,
For those in peril on the sea!
Most Holy Spirit! Who didst brood
Upon the chaos dark and rude,
And bid its angry tumult cease,
And give, for wild confusion, peace;
Oh, hear us when we cry to Thee,
For those in peril on the sea!
O Trinity of love and power!
Our brethren shield in danger's hour;
From rock and tempest, fire and foe,
Protect them wheresoe'er they go;
Thus evermore shall rise to Thee
Glad hymns of praise from land and sea.
Evertonian
I was asked by someone the other day, why it was so important to find the Sydney. When I saw the faces of the families on the news, I thought it a no brainer really.
Whilst I give thanks to those that gave the ultimate sacrifice for our nation, I am also greatful to those who refused to give up the search. You have done a good deed today.
Whilst I give thanks to those that gave the ultimate sacrifice for our nation, I am also greatful to those who refused to give up the search. You have done a good deed today.
.........
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Otautahi (awright, NZCH)
Age: 74
Posts: 101
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Agony: Spot on. Amen. (Hymn of the RN, I believe)
Buster: Agree wholeheartedly. Anyone who willingly puts their life on the line for the freedoms I enjoy earns my respect, doubly so if their life was lost.
There are parallels here to the Arizona at Pearl. While, from what I've heard and read, it would not be possible to erect a memorial such as that afforded those who perished at Pearl, their selfless intent and actions are worthy of some form of enduring memorial. Declaring the site a national memorial would be a suitable way to start.
May the souls of those who gave so much rest in peace.
Le vieux
Buster: Agree wholeheartedly. Anyone who willingly puts their life on the line for the freedoms I enjoy earns my respect, doubly so if their life was lost.
There are parallels here to the Arizona at Pearl. While, from what I've heard and read, it would not be possible to erect a memorial such as that afforded those who perished at Pearl, their selfless intent and actions are worthy of some form of enduring memorial. Declaring the site a national memorial would be a suitable way to start.
May the souls of those who gave so much rest in peace.
Le vieux
Last edited by Old 'Un; 18th Mar 2008 at 23:39.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 408
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: gold coast QLD australia
Age: 86
Posts: 1,345
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The talk has always been since I was a lad that there was a possibility that a Jap sub was present (and this is before Pearl Harbour) and fired a couple of torpedoes into the "Sydney". The reason being the german ship had 5.9 inch guns and that did not seem enough to take out a heavy cruiser like the "Sydney". Even if they hit her magazines surely some would live to tell the tale. Why only one carley float? The wreck will be very interesting and if she has been hit on both sides??? It would open a can of worms, and a international incident that would bring some bitterness to Australian families (including mine) and a whole lot of "please explain" to the Japanese Govt. I imagine kevin07 would have to think long and hard if the camera shows both sides hit. Let it be or let it out? There was talk by fishermen in the area of a sub, and a lot of sandgropers who lived in the area believed a sub was around, and it certainly was not one of ours. Interesting times ahead.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: CBR
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I hope the wreck is largely left alone. I know the daughter of the Sydney's Captain - she last saw him when she was only 4 or 5. Despite what was said earlier in the thread this is still a raw and very personal issue for the families of those 645 sailors.
RIP
RIP
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 1,451
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There’s some bloke in the West who says he has letters written by RAAF and Army personnel who buried quite a large number of the dead from Sydney on a beach near Carnavon. This is the first I’ve ever heard of any of the Sydney’s dead being recovered (apart from the single body found and buried at Christmas Island).
If this is true, it brings all sorts of questions to mind that would set your average conspiracy theorist’s heart racing. However, I can’t help but think it might be an urban myth. Lots of merchantmen – more than many might imagine – were lost off the Australian coast during the war, and I can’t help but feel the dead found on the beach might have been from some other ship and the story that they were from Sydney took root fourth or fifth hand, and the story more or less grew in the telling, as such stories do.
If the bodies of some of the Sydney’s crew were found, you’d have to ask why the wartime government didn’t allow the families the ‘closure’ of burying their loved ones (as Mr Rudd is talking about now). I know the Navy had a very different attitude to returning their dead for burial to the other services, but if the bodies are ashore, it’s not quite the same as sewing them into a hammock with a link of anchor chain far out to sea and consigning them to the deep.
I know national security at a time of war can result in some really strange decisions, but you’d have to ask, if bodies were found, what would have caused the government not to announce this at the time? The fact that all hands were lost was hugely embarrassing to the Australian government and the RAN at the time. (A major warship lost with all hands to an unarmoured commerce raider is almost unbelievable, and some naval experts would quite happily drop the ‘almost’.) You’d think that recovering even some of the dead would have taken away some of the totality of the disaster.
Some might ask the obvious question: did the bodies show evidence of an atrocity – perhaps of the survivors having been machine gunned in the water so they could not give a differing version of events to the (let’s face it) self-serving version the Germans gave their captors? Even if you discount the Japanese submarine theory (which will never go away for many), did Detmers open fire before striking his Dutch colours, or perhaps use some other form of subterfuge that a court of law would consider against the rules of war? In an largely unarmoured commerce raider faced with a large, well-armoured warship, some would say he’d have been crazy NOT to have used every dirty trick in the book to gain some advantage, for even the most optimistic observer would say the outcome of any such engagement if it was to be fought even half way ‘fairly’ could go only one way.
At first glance, you’d think any hint that a mortal enemy had committed an atrocity on that scale would have been jumped on by the Allies for propaganda purposes. But who knows what was going on in the background at the time? Quite possibly, if the government had proof of an atrocity, they wanted to avoid what would have been the huge political complications any such announcement would throw upon them. Imagine it, an outraged population at home screaming for revenge, with the perpetrators already in Australian custody. Any court martial would have undoubtedly resulted in death sentences, certainly for Captain Detmers and who knows how many others of his crew – while the Germans held many thousands of Australian prisoners of war from North Africa and Greece/Crete.
The possibility of tit-for-tat ‘atrocity’ courts martial is obvious – and the Germans could have, (with some credibility), pressed charges on quite a few of the Australians they had captured in Crete, for the Australians had inflicted dreadful losses on the German paratroopers, who suffered such a high casualty rate, they never made a large scale drop again. (The losses the German paratroopers suffered on Crete almost surely saved Malta from an airborne assault, and if Malta had fallen to the Germans, it would almost certainly have resulted in the Allies losing the North African campaign.)
Quite a few accounts of the Crete battles say that a large number of the Germans died in circumstances that a lawyer (or Dr Goebbels!) could have turned into anything that suited them. The fact that the German paratroopers definitely shot many of the prisoners they took on Crete wouldn’t have surfaced then, nor the undeniable fact that in the first few hours of any airborne assault, taking prisoners – be either side – is simply not an option.
However, after all that postulating, there is also the pressing argument of Okham’s Razor – that the most simple explanation, something along the lines of the one the Germans gave, that the Australian Captain Burnett made an incredibly stupid blunder, is the real explanation. However, ever since first reading about the loss of Sydney, I’ve always had this niggle in my mind that won’t go away. How could the very experienced captain of a major warship put his ship in a position where it could be defeated by a commerce raider – a merchant ship with guns – and perhaps more importantly, how could 300+ of one crew survive such an engagement, almost all of them uninjured, and not a single one survive from the other ship? Anyone who has seen Sydney’s Carley float in the AWM and the many small, uniform bullet holes in it would be hard pressed not to ask similar questions.
If this is true, it brings all sorts of questions to mind that would set your average conspiracy theorist’s heart racing. However, I can’t help but think it might be an urban myth. Lots of merchantmen – more than many might imagine – were lost off the Australian coast during the war, and I can’t help but feel the dead found on the beach might have been from some other ship and the story that they were from Sydney took root fourth or fifth hand, and the story more or less grew in the telling, as such stories do.
If the bodies of some of the Sydney’s crew were found, you’d have to ask why the wartime government didn’t allow the families the ‘closure’ of burying their loved ones (as Mr Rudd is talking about now). I know the Navy had a very different attitude to returning their dead for burial to the other services, but if the bodies are ashore, it’s not quite the same as sewing them into a hammock with a link of anchor chain far out to sea and consigning them to the deep.
I know national security at a time of war can result in some really strange decisions, but you’d have to ask, if bodies were found, what would have caused the government not to announce this at the time? The fact that all hands were lost was hugely embarrassing to the Australian government and the RAN at the time. (A major warship lost with all hands to an unarmoured commerce raider is almost unbelievable, and some naval experts would quite happily drop the ‘almost’.) You’d think that recovering even some of the dead would have taken away some of the totality of the disaster.
Some might ask the obvious question: did the bodies show evidence of an atrocity – perhaps of the survivors having been machine gunned in the water so they could not give a differing version of events to the (let’s face it) self-serving version the Germans gave their captors? Even if you discount the Japanese submarine theory (which will never go away for many), did Detmers open fire before striking his Dutch colours, or perhaps use some other form of subterfuge that a court of law would consider against the rules of war? In an largely unarmoured commerce raider faced with a large, well-armoured warship, some would say he’d have been crazy NOT to have used every dirty trick in the book to gain some advantage, for even the most optimistic observer would say the outcome of any such engagement if it was to be fought even half way ‘fairly’ could go only one way.
At first glance, you’d think any hint that a mortal enemy had committed an atrocity on that scale would have been jumped on by the Allies for propaganda purposes. But who knows what was going on in the background at the time? Quite possibly, if the government had proof of an atrocity, they wanted to avoid what would have been the huge political complications any such announcement would throw upon them. Imagine it, an outraged population at home screaming for revenge, with the perpetrators already in Australian custody. Any court martial would have undoubtedly resulted in death sentences, certainly for Captain Detmers and who knows how many others of his crew – while the Germans held many thousands of Australian prisoners of war from North Africa and Greece/Crete.
The possibility of tit-for-tat ‘atrocity’ courts martial is obvious – and the Germans could have, (with some credibility), pressed charges on quite a few of the Australians they had captured in Crete, for the Australians had inflicted dreadful losses on the German paratroopers, who suffered such a high casualty rate, they never made a large scale drop again. (The losses the German paratroopers suffered on Crete almost surely saved Malta from an airborne assault, and if Malta had fallen to the Germans, it would almost certainly have resulted in the Allies losing the North African campaign.)
Quite a few accounts of the Crete battles say that a large number of the Germans died in circumstances that a lawyer (or Dr Goebbels!) could have turned into anything that suited them. The fact that the German paratroopers definitely shot many of the prisoners they took on Crete wouldn’t have surfaced then, nor the undeniable fact that in the first few hours of any airborne assault, taking prisoners – be either side – is simply not an option.
However, after all that postulating, there is also the pressing argument of Okham’s Razor – that the most simple explanation, something along the lines of the one the Germans gave, that the Australian Captain Burnett made an incredibly stupid blunder, is the real explanation. However, ever since first reading about the loss of Sydney, I’ve always had this niggle in my mind that won’t go away. How could the very experienced captain of a major warship put his ship in a position where it could be defeated by a commerce raider – a merchant ship with guns – and perhaps more importantly, how could 300+ of one crew survive such an engagement, almost all of them uninjured, and not a single one survive from the other ship? Anyone who has seen Sydney’s Carley float in the AWM and the many small, uniform bullet holes in it would be hard pressed not to ask similar questions.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: HK
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
History of the Kormoran from the German side...
http://www.bismarck-class.dk/hilfskreuzer/kormoran.html
Captain Detmers appears to have been a fairly resourceful chap - even managing to escape from a POW camp in Australia.
Usually, cock-up (or co-incidence) >> conspiracy. Looks like the bridge and firecontrol was taken out in the first salvo, and from then Sydney was fighting blind.
This might explain the bullet holes in the float - they used machine guns too as the range was so close
"The automatic fire from the Kormoran’s 37mm and 20mm guns and heavy machines-guns was devastating, killing everybody on the bridge and decks, setting the Walrus seaplane on fire on its catapult, where it sat, engine running, but not ready for launching due to the catapult being trained inboard, and destroying all the lifeboats and rafts"
And as for no survivors and hits on both sides - this might help explain it
"Once again, the automatic fire from the Kormoran destroyed everything on Sydney’s starboard superstructure, and as with the previously devastated port side, this included all the lifeboats and rafts.
This is believed to have been the main reason for the loss of all 645 officers and men on board when she subsequently went down."
The Kormoran also hit Sydney with torpedoes, as well as 150mm shells (and 150mm is basically same calibre as Sydney's 6" guns)
Given the large numbers of German survivors (including 3 chinese laundrymen) I would think highly unlikely they would have all stuck to their story, for the rest of their lives, unless it was true.
http://www.bismarck-class.dk/hilfskreuzer/kormoran.html
Captain Detmers appears to have been a fairly resourceful chap - even managing to escape from a POW camp in Australia.
Usually, cock-up (or co-incidence) >> conspiracy. Looks like the bridge and firecontrol was taken out in the first salvo, and from then Sydney was fighting blind.
This might explain the bullet holes in the float - they used machine guns too as the range was so close
"The automatic fire from the Kormoran’s 37mm and 20mm guns and heavy machines-guns was devastating, killing everybody on the bridge and decks, setting the Walrus seaplane on fire on its catapult, where it sat, engine running, but not ready for launching due to the catapult being trained inboard, and destroying all the lifeboats and rafts"
And as for no survivors and hits on both sides - this might help explain it
"Once again, the automatic fire from the Kormoran destroyed everything on Sydney’s starboard superstructure, and as with the previously devastated port side, this included all the lifeboats and rafts.
This is believed to have been the main reason for the loss of all 645 officers and men on board when she subsequently went down."
The Kormoran also hit Sydney with torpedoes, as well as 150mm shells (and 150mm is basically same calibre as Sydney's 6" guns)
Given the large numbers of German survivors (including 3 chinese laundrymen) I would think highly unlikely they would have all stuck to their story, for the rest of their lives, unless it was true.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: New Zealand
Age: 64
Posts: 523
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A timely reminder that actual shooting & firing can occur in Dunnunda & Godzone (and let's not forget the bombing of Darwin).
But the Yanks will always bail us out, we think. Maybe. I'm sure that the USA will come to the defence of Australia, but I very much doubt that we in New Zealand will be on the same level in their list of priorities - for very good reason: we have, by act of our own parliament, told them to f*ck off.
But the Yanks will always bail us out, we think. Maybe. I'm sure that the USA will come to the defence of Australia, but I very much doubt that we in New Zealand will be on the same level in their list of priorities - for very good reason: we have, by act of our own parliament, told them to f*ck off.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 1,451
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for the transcriptions, Freehills. I've read the book most of them came from, and I agree with the idea of cockup almost always beating conspiracy. However, after tuning in to Sydney talkback radio only briefly last week, I can assure you the conspiracy theorists, particularly those spouting the phantom Japanese submarine story, are thick on the ground and out in full force since the wrecks were located.
If only for the reasons already cited in most newspapers - the damage to relations with current important trading partners etc, this is the classic conspiracy theory. Whatever result a photographic survey of the to wrecks comes up with, the conspiracy theorists will reply with Mandy Rice Davies' classic retort to the Profumo Report, which whitewashed everyone still in power but the fall guy, John Prufomo: "Well, they would say that, wouldn't they?"
Anyone familiar with investigations into major military disasters, (certainly in Australia, at least), will know that the fall guy who bears all the blame is almost always someone of a rank below flag rank. This is a case in point. The only explanation that does not dredge up possibilites no one wants to face, even to this day, is the senior officer on the spot making an extraordinary, totally inexplicable error of truly horrendous proportions, particularly if you accept that Burnett knew a commerce raider was in the area.
I seem to recall that the Court of Inquiry found that Burnett had done something similar (approaching too close) when intercepting a merchant ship somewhere near Ceylon a few months earlier and been reprimanded for it. But I direct readers back to Mandy Rice Davies' comment when they read comments like that in an official report.
The question many conspiracy theorists will ask is just how "resourceful" was Capt Detmers in regard to luring Sydney in to the killing range of his guns.
If only for the reasons already cited in most newspapers - the damage to relations with current important trading partners etc, this is the classic conspiracy theory. Whatever result a photographic survey of the to wrecks comes up with, the conspiracy theorists will reply with Mandy Rice Davies' classic retort to the Profumo Report, which whitewashed everyone still in power but the fall guy, John Prufomo: "Well, they would say that, wouldn't they?"
Anyone familiar with investigations into major military disasters, (certainly in Australia, at least), will know that the fall guy who bears all the blame is almost always someone of a rank below flag rank. This is a case in point. The only explanation that does not dredge up possibilites no one wants to face, even to this day, is the senior officer on the spot making an extraordinary, totally inexplicable error of truly horrendous proportions, particularly if you accept that Burnett knew a commerce raider was in the area.
I seem to recall that the Court of Inquiry found that Burnett had done something similar (approaching too close) when intercepting a merchant ship somewhere near Ceylon a few months earlier and been reprimanded for it. But I direct readers back to Mandy Rice Davies' comment when they read comments like that in an official report.
The question many conspiracy theorists will ask is just how "resourceful" was Capt Detmers in regard to luring Sydney in to the killing range of his guns.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Permanently lost
Posts: 1,785
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Craney
I doubt that the wreck will be much disturbed unless someone has some very expensive equipment. From the newspaper reports she lies at some 2,000 metres.
As to how it was possible for all the crew to perish, the report I read said the ship was lying on its keel with approximately 25 metres of the bow missing. The German crew told their interrogators that a torpedo had struck the Sydney between the A and B turrets. If that torpedo had weakened the hull to the point that it caused the bow to detach the ship would have sunk in seconds. There would have been no time to launch lifeboats or carley floats, especially as most of the crew would have been either fire fighting or caring for the injured.
I hope that both the wrecks are declared war graves and given legal protection. I understand the Australian government has reported the finding of the "Kormoron" to the German government with a view to their decision about any declaration.
I doubt that the wreck will be much disturbed unless someone has some very expensive equipment. From the newspaper reports she lies at some 2,000 metres.
As to how it was possible for all the crew to perish, the report I read said the ship was lying on its keel with approximately 25 metres of the bow missing. The German crew told their interrogators that a torpedo had struck the Sydney between the A and B turrets. If that torpedo had weakened the hull to the point that it caused the bow to detach the ship would have sunk in seconds. There would have been no time to launch lifeboats or carley floats, especially as most of the crew would have been either fire fighting or caring for the injured.
I hope that both the wrecks are declared war graves and given legal protection. I understand the Australian government has reported the finding of the "Kormoron" to the German government with a view to their decision about any declaration.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Lost, but often Indonesia
Posts: 653
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm a little surprised it's been announced to the world the HMAS Sydney and the German raider have definitely been found 2 km deep based solely on sonar (or whatever the technology is) data. I'd of thought it prudent to await video evidence..........
Octane
Octane