HMAS Sydney´s wreck found

[Karl Heidenreich]

For all those the love this story (specially RF) about the auxiliary cruiser Kormoran sinking a HMAS cruiser this is it:

Aparently, some guys found Sydney. Now the forensics could tell us what really sunk it.

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,22226050-2,00.html

Best regards...

[paulcadogan]

Thanks Karl!

..and everyone, you can see a little bit of video footage here:

http://media.smh.com.au/?rid=30685&cate ... ing%20News

and comments by David Mearns (he thinks it's too soon to be certain that it's Sydney and since the wreck is 65 miles away from her last known position, with the state she was described to be in by Kormoran's survivors, it's unlikely to be her):

http://nz.news.yahoo.com/070812/9/16ve.html

Who knows? Wrecks have often turned out to be some distance from where they were expected to be. But he's right that it needs close examination to find some definitive feature.

Paul

[iankw]

If you read Bob Henneman's site you will see there is a lot of skepticism over this claim.

Ian

[RF]

Having seen the video news report I am sceptical, particulary as the video showed little detail that could be put into perspective. It looks like a period warship but there is no sense of scale or size, as it is all close up without reference to any background such as seabed etc.

A key question would be of what other ships were sunk in roughly that position?

And could the Sydney really have drifted 65 miles - say between 8 to 12 hours drifting time outside of enemy fire - and still no survivors?

[lwd]

The original position calculation could well have been off. That's hardly unheard of and one of the real problems with reconstructing some battles.

[von tunzelmann]

Living in Australia I have to tell you this story was on all the TV stations.

It didn't take long to be proven false.
Yea a wreck was found, but there are lots off wrecks off that coast. and the one which was claimed to be the Sydnet wasn't even a warchip

[dunmunro]

http://presspass.findingsydney.com/

[paulcadogan]

Great news! Thanks Dunmunro! The Kormoran found.....

Conratulations to David Mearns and his team.

[RNfanDan]

Any idea yet how close her actual position is, relevant to best-guess estimates up to the day of discovery? If she 's way off that of her crew's reported position, it will undoubtedly tie-up some loose ends in the history books.

Kudos to Mearns and his team of professionals!

[dunmunro]

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008 ... 190983.htm

but this little tidbit is very interesting:

"The wreckage of the Kormoran was found about 100 nautical miles off Steep Point, more than two kilometres below the ocean's surface, and the Sydney was found just 10 nautical miles west"

I found it hard to believe that Sydney could have sunk only 10nm west of Kormoran, and yet no one from Kormoran, was aware of it.

[Erich]

I wonder if anyone can quote from T. Detmers own work on the Kormoran for more info.

the KM crew went to life boats and rowed in the opposite direction of the Sydney, the Sydney was last seen on the horizon and then nothing - did she then go down due to overfilling of water due to the Torpedo strike from the Kormoran. It's all a matter of speculation of course

no doubt finding both boats there is sure to be a large book covering both ships as well as hard as it might be putting some sort of battle scenario together alas we only have the surviving KM crew memories

[dunmunro]

I wonder if anyone can quote from T. Detmers own work on the Kormoran for more info.

the KM crew went to life boats and rowed in the opposite direction of the Sydney, the Sydney was last seen on the horizon and then nothing - did she then go down due to overfilling of water due to the Torpedo strike from the Kormoran. It's all a matter of speculation of course

no doubt finding both boats there is sure to be a large book covering both ships as well as hard as it might be putting some sort of battle scenario together alas we only have the surviving KM crew memories

Kormoran's crew made for Australia, which was also West, and would have passed by the site of Sydney's sinking.

[paulcadogan]

Sydney being 10 nm west of Kormoran does not match what is said in the original findingsydney press release.

That says the site of the battle debris field was 4 nm SOUTH of Kormoran and Sydney was found 10.5 nm SOUTH EAST of the battle site and 12.2 nm from Kormoran. This should then mean that Sydney is roughly south south east of Kormoran and not west.

The battle took place off western Australia so the Kormoran's survivors would have had to sail east, not west. If they sailed due east, they would not have passed the Sydney's sinking site.

But what a day it has been!

Paul

[dunmunro]

Sydney being 10 nm west of Kormoran does not match what is said in the original findingsydney press release.

That says the site of the battle debris field was 4 nm SOUTH of Kormoran and Sydney was found 10.5 nm SOUTH EAST of the battle site and 12.2 nm from Kormoran. This should then mean that Sydney is roughly south south east of Kormoran and not west.

The battle took place off western Australia so the Kormoran's survivors would have had to sail east, not west. If they sailed due east, they would not have passed the Sydney's sinking site.

But what a day it has been!

Paul

You're correct. I looked at the battle map showing Sydney heading south east and transposed all the directions, after reading the newspaper article.

[RF]

I wonder if anyone can quote from T. Detmers own work on the Kormoran for more info.

I have a copy of Detmer's book if you need more info.