The wreckage of HMAS Sydney should be left in its place as a war grave so the 645 sailors who died on the warship can rest in peace, the chairman of the Finding Sydney Foundation said today.
“For a start they’re in very deep water,” Ted Graham said.
“From my point of view … they contain the remains of many people and our firm view is that they should be left alone.”
Prime Minister Kevin Rudd said the discovery of the HMAS Sydney, sunk by the German raider Kormoran off the coast of West Australia in November 1941, would help bring closure to the families of the 645 crew members who perished.
Mr Rudd confirmed at a press conference in Canberra this morning the discovery of the warship in waters about 800 kilometres north of Perth.
The wreckage of the merchant raider Kormoran was found yesterday.
“The pain and family loss at 65 years removed is still pain, and very deep pain,” Mr Rudd said.
“I would say to all members of the family of the crew of HMAS Sydney, our Government sends our condolences for the loss of these brave young men.
“This is a day … which begins a process of closure for many families of the crew of the Sydney.
“It’s also a time for the nation to reflect on the bravery of all the men who gave their lives in the defence of this country in this particularly brutal and bloody engagement.”
He dismissed the possibility of raising the wreckage.
“We will treat these war dead … with complete respect.”
Mr Rudd said the Government had begun the process of protecting the wrecks.
“I wish to confirm that under the Historic Shipwrecks Act, the Minister for Environment is in the process of issuing an interim protection order for both vessels.”
Mr Rudd thanked the Finding Sydney Foundation and the navy for their efforts in finding the vessels.
He said the Australian Defence Force would be communicating with family members.
”They will be using their own communications systems to make sure that the surviving family members of the crew of HMAS Sydney are informed of this discovery as soon as is practically possible.”
Mr Rudd said the order would prohibit any unauthorised intrusion into the site. “It is the protection mechanism we have available to us under Australian law.”
Mr Rudd said the hull had been found largely intact.
The Sydney’s entire crew of 645 went down with the ship in the Indian Ocean and its location has been a mystery for 66 years.
Chief executive of the Finding Sydney Foundation, Bob Trotter, said an announcement would be made later today, but his organisation was “pretty confident” evidence of the Sydney wreckage had been found.
Very large pieces of wreckage had been located about four kilometres from where the wreck of the Kormoran was found on Saturday, he told ABC Radio.
“Things have yet to be confirmed,” Mr Trotter told ABC Radio.
“I’m not in a position at the moment to give an absolute that Sydney itself has been found.
Mr Potter said traces of the Sydney had been found in the field of action where the Australian cruiser and the Kormoran engaged on November 19, 1941.
“The search ship and its sonar have found very large pieces of wreckage about four kilometres from the wreck of Kormoran which don’t appear to be from the Kormoran, therefore are more likely to be from the Sydney,” Mr Trotter said.
He said the chances were “fairly good” the wreckage of the Sydney had been found.
“The (search) ship is out there now doing passes over the wreckage and in that area up to 10 kilometres away from the Kormoran because that’s where we believe she (HMAS Sydney) must be, given the evidence of the last sighting of the Sydney in 1941 by the German survivors.”
Mr Trotter likened the search for Sydney as climbing Mount Everest.
“Now we’re on our backsides sliding down.”
Ean McDonald, a signalman on board the Sydney until 1939, described reports of the finding as “momentous news”.
He queried whether the location of the Sydney and the Kormoran had been kept secret by “hierarchy”.
“There’s always been that side of the mystery,” he told ABC Radio.
Mr McDonald said the Sydney would have been sending out signals during the pitched battle with the Kormoran.
“There is this conspiracy theory which a lot of people hold.”
By: steve rowell - 16th June 2008 at 07:53
Maybe it’ll bring closure for some of the relatives
By: Creaking Door - 15th June 2008 at 00:48
Photographs of the wreck of HMAS Sydney from the ‘The Australian’.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,24897,23482883-601,00.html
By: Pete Truman - 20th March 2008 at 10:03
A Leander class cruiser I gather, more modern than the Achilles type.
Did you know that Achilles was only scrapped in recent times by the Indian Navy, despite being offered to us for preservation. Imagine, a surviving example of one of our greatest Naval battles and it wasn’t saved. The Americans prefer to preserve their warship heritage, we don’t bother, our last WW2 aircraft carrier was sent for scrapping by Brasil only recently, imagine that parked up in Chatham with a full complement of aircraft.
Britain has been founded on our naval heritage, but very little of it survives, it’s very sad.
By: Creaking Door - 19th March 2008 at 14:44
Thanks for putting me on to that account…
Captain Detmers of the Kormoran was obviously a very skilled and experienced commander, sounds like a pretty humane bloke too, in the Langsdorff mould I would suggest.
No problem, it was a link I followed from the Wikipedia article; hadn’t read it myself until after my first post.
It would be easy to perpetuate the propaganda image of the Germans but as you say there are many examples of ‘civilised’ warfare. Don’t get me wrong, the Nazi ideology was rotten to the core, and there were some real monsters but it’s important, especially nowadays with our sound-bite view of the world not to ‘tar them all with the same brush’.
And the above is in no way intended to undermine the efforts of the crew of HMAS Sydney; even after a devastating first salvo at around 17:30 she still represented enough of a threat for the crew of Kormoran to still be firing nearly an hour later.
The auxiliary commerce-raiders of the early war are a fascinating subject; could do with a decent film making about it, the HMAS Sydney / Kormoran story has everything you could wish for (and Australia still has something of a film industry).
I’d also love to hear some input from our Australian forum members; particularly as to what the public mood was at the time (was the news of the loss even released?), and how much publicity did the crew of the Kormoran get when they reached Australia?
HMAS Sydney was a ‘modified Leander Class’ cruiser but I can’t find my British Cruisers book either!
By: Pete Truman - 19th March 2008 at 10:25
Creaking Door
Thanks for putting me on to that account, it’s given me a good half hours slow read and I think it answers most of the questions.
Captain Detmers of the Kormoran was obviously a very skilled and experienced commander, sounds like a pretty humane bloke too, in the Langsdorff mould I would suggest.
I didn’t appreciate how well equiped these raiders were, torpedo tubes below the waterline and even Arado seaplanes.
It was quite obvious that the commander of the Sydney made all the mistakes against a superior tactition, he was cleverly drawn into an action that he wasn’t going to win, even with, on paper, a superior ship.
I find it sad that the Australian authorities at the time were trying to press charges against Detmers for what amounts to ‘ungentlemanly behaviour’, pathetic, what was he supposed to do, let his ship get blown out of the water, good for him if he managed to defeat a superior apponent.
By the sound of it, if any of the crew from the sunken Sydney had been found by a German lifeboat, they would have rescued and treated them as if they had been their own countrymen.
Only one grouse with the account, Sydney was not in the same class of cruiser as Ajax and Achilles, she was much more modern, perhaps the writer had been watching the film ‘Battle of the River Plate’, where with all the best intentions, the only actual ships used in the film from the battle were the real Achilles and, though not in the action, HMS Cumberland.
Sorry, I can’t find my British Cruisers book to give you the actual class reference, Jamaica class?
It reads to me that the Sydney was so devastated that any survivors ended up in the sea, it could have been a shark job, who knows, I think that the Japanese sub theory is ridiculous, and as you say, they may have been patrolling about as a precourser to preparing for the events leading up to Pearl Harbour, but they wouldn’t have brought the plan into jepardy over a pointless attack with all it’s possible consequencees.
By: Creaking Door - 19th March 2008 at 01:33
Japanese Submarine / Machine-Gunned Rafts
Aren’t we getting a bit carried away here?
Remember this was the 19th November 1941; that is a few days before 7th December 1941, does that ring any bells?
Kormoran disengaged HMAS Sydney at about 18:30 ‘in fading daylight’ but the glow of fires aboard HMAS Sydney could be seen until about 21:00 when a single large ‘flame’ was seen and then nothing; caused by a magazine explosion aboard HMAS Sydney?
I know there were instances of Japanese, German (and British) submarine crews machine-gunning survivors in the water but in most of these cases we know of them because some of the survivors survived the machine-gunning! Are we really suggesting that after 21:00 hours when HMAS Sydney blows up and all the surviving crew must be in the water or on rafts a Japanese submarine surfaces and manages to machine-gun every single survivor from a crew of 645, in the dark?
Yes, HMAS Sydney was hit by a torpedo but it must surely have been fired by Kormoran or it could conceivably (but unlikely) have been one of her own torpedoes, damaged and circling, fired in a last desperate act.
Were the Japanese not concerned that their surprise attack on Pearl Harbour might be compromised by such an action? And for what, the sinking of one 7000 ton light cruiser, when their target at Pearl Harbour was a whole fleet?
This is really conspiracy-theory and propaganda territory is it not?
By: Drem - 18th March 2008 at 23:32
Hi Bruggen,
Have read a similar reports regards Sydney survivors being attacked by a Japanese Submarine.
A Life Raft found some time later showed signs of being hit by bullets which matched up to types used at the time by Japan, in fact, the head of a Japanese bullet was found embeded in this Raft.
By: Creaking Door - 18th March 2008 at 22:53
As a commerce raider Kormoran guns were camouflaged and apparently were ‘unmasked’ and brought into action in six seconds during the engagement with HMAS Sydney. Although the guns of HMAS Sydney were trained on Kormoran the German witnesses saw ‘cooks’ lining the rails of HMAS Sydney and noted that the secondary armament wasn’t manned.
HMAS Sydney had closed to 1000 yards before Kormoran open fire; at that range a rudimentary sight on a 150mm mounting would probably be better than the more complicated fire-control of HMAS Sydney.
The first 150mm salvo from Kormoran was seen to “score hits on the cruiser’s bridge and forward gunnery fire-control position”.
“As the second 150mm salvo was fired by Kormoran, HMAS Sydney opened up with a full eight-gun broadside, which passed harmlessly high over the stern of Kormoran.”
“Kormoran then fired eight salvos in succession, at six second intervals, without any fire coming back.”
Altogether Kormoran fired 450 rounds of 150mm, hitting HMAS Sydney at least 50 times, Kormoran also fired a huge amount of 20mm automatic anti-aircraft fire that would have been deadly and hugely demoralising at such short range.
HMAS Sydney was also hit by a least one torpedo, abreast the forward turrets.
The quotations above come from this detailed account:
http://www.bismarck-class.dk/hilfskreuzer/kormoran.html
You make a good point about the 11 inch guns of the Graf Spee striking the Ajax and Achilles. I can’t really explain that one, possibly the ammunition was a factor; armoured-piercing as opposed to high-explosive?
By: Pete Truman - 18th March 2008 at 14:42
The Wikipedia account of the action:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_between_HMAS_Sydney_and_HSK_Kormoran
It sounds pretty plausible to me; the six 150mm guns carried by Kormoran would have inflicted severe damage on HMAS Sydney which was only lightly armoured.
If HMAS Sydney was damaged and on fire when she retired the fires could well have spread to cause an eventual magazine explosion, as was alluded to by the German survivors. The lack of survivors can easily be explained if this was the case; compare it with the loss of HMS Hood. How many would have survived from HMS Hood (only three did anyway) if she had been operating alone?
The Japanese submarine theory sounds like crude propaganda to cover-up the ‘embarrassing’ loss of Australia’s capital ship and crew to a weaker opponent whose crew survived and ended up reaching Australia in a (relative) blaze of publicity.
It’s unlikely that the Kormoran would have managed to lose off a salvo and obtained first time hits on vital areas even with a state of the art range finding system, which I doubt that it had, any twitch of it’s guns would surely have brought the Sydney to have brought elements of it’s armoury to engagement status, I would have thought it would be difficult to hide a 6 gun 6 inch armament on such a vessel, they are very big mothers, maybe individually placed without much protection, but nevertheless, hard to conceal. They no doubt would have been a bit of an effort to remove their disguises and bring to bear on the target, didn’t anyone on the bridge of the Sydney have a pair of binoculars.
If the older, slower, less sophisticated and lesser armoured Ajax and Achilles managed to not only survive the 11 inch guns of the heavily armoured Graf Spee, taking hits too, but inflicting damage as well, it makes you wonder what planet the Sydney’s captain was on to allow himself to be sunk by a merchant ship, albeit with a few big guns, though I doubt whether their mountings in a merchant ships hull could have coped with more than a few salvoes of their own.
C’mon, lets have a bit of Aussie imput Mr Rowell.
By: Bruggen 130 - 18th March 2008 at 11:22
According to accounts that I’ve subsequently read, the Kormoran managed to fire it’s own torpedoes before the Sydney could react, but were these commercial raiders fitted with what must have been a complicated device.
From sources that I’ve looked at, the captain of the Sydney was suspicious of this vessel, but didn’t train it’s main armament on it, very odd, so what was used to sink the Kormoran.
Your theory sounds quite pertinent, knowing the mind set of the Japanese at the time, they probably sank the Kormoran as well, in order to keep their mouths shut at the extent of their own brutality. On the other hand, wouldn’t the German survivors have said something about this at the time, or would they cover up for their ‘allies’.
Does anyone know whether one of the survivors, and at 318 of them it’s a good chance, are still alive, as I presume that they spent the war in an Australian prison camp for the duration, though I have a nagging feeling that there was some sort of breakout at an Ozzie POW camp and a few were killed, another hushed up story perhaps.
How many of these POW’s were allowed to live in Oz after the war, are any still there.
Iv’e also read that the Kormoran was so badly damaged that the crew
surrendered abandoned ship and started to make their way over to
Sydney in lifeboats, when a single torpedo struck Sydney and she drifted
away and was never seen again until now, it states that the kormoran was
not in state to fire the last torpedo and that i must have come from a sub.
By 24 Nov the Australian Naval Board was satisfied (although they had
no absolute proof) that a Japanese I-class sub had operated with Kormoran
a the time. The only one of the Sydney’s life rafts to be found was riddled with bullit holes, (how true that is, I don’t know)
By: Creaking Door - 18th March 2008 at 11:11
The Wikipedia account of the action:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_between_HMAS_Sydney_and_HSK_Kormoran
It sounds pretty plausible to me; the six 150mm guns carried by Kormoran would have inflicted severe damage on HMAS Sydney which was only lightly armoured.
If HMAS Sydney was damaged and on fire when she retired the fires could well have spread to cause an eventual magazine explosion, as was alluded to by the German survivors. The lack of survivors can easily be explained if this was the case; compare it with the loss of HMS Hood. How many would have survived from HMS Hood (only three did anyway) if she had been operating alone?
The Japanese submarine theory sounds like crude propaganda to cover-up the ‘embarrassing’ loss of Australia’s capital ship and crew to a weaker opponent whose crew survived and ended up reaching Australia in a (relative) blaze of publicity.
By: Pete Truman - 18th March 2008 at 09:25
Some intelligence reports said that she was sunk by a Japanese sub which then machine-gunned the survivors, which would explain why there were no
survivors from HMAS Sydney and yet about 318 out of the 390 crew of the
Kormoran were saved
According to accounts that I’ve subsequently read, the Kormoran managed to fire it’s own torpedoes before the Sydney could react, but were these commercial raiders fitted with what must have been a complicated device.
From sources that I’ve looked at, the captain of the Sydney was suspicious of this vessel, but didn’t train it’s main armament on it, very odd, so what was used to sink the Kormoran.
Your theory sounds quite pertinent, knowing the mind set of the Japanese at the time, they probably sank the Kormoran as well, in order to keep their mouths shut at the extent of their own brutality. On the other hand, wouldn’t the German survivors have said something about this at the time, or would they cover up for their ‘allies’.
Does anyone know whether one of the survivors, and at 318 of them it’s a good chance, are still alive, as I presume that they spent the war in an Australian prison camp for the duration, though I have a nagging feeling that there was some sort of breakout at an Ozzie POW camp and a few were killed, another hushed up story perhaps.
How many of these POW’s were allowed to live in Oz after the war, are any still there.
By: Bruggen 130 - 17th March 2008 at 20:29
A WW11 mystery solved at last, wonder if they will be able to find out what actualy sunk her.
Some intelligence reports said that she was sunk by a Japanese sub which then machine-gunned the survivors, which would explain why there were no
survivors from HMAS Sydney and yet about 318 out of the 390 crew of the
Kormoran were saved
By: Drem - 17th March 2008 at 19:02
A WW11 mystery solved at last, wonder if they will be able to find out what actualy sunk her.
By: Pete Truman - 17th March 2008 at 09:55
I have a bit of an interest in warships, what defeats me is how a relatively large, modern, 6inch gun armoured cruiser allowed itself to be trapped and sunk by what must have been a converted, lightly armoured merchant ship.
Before I spotted this thread, I knew nothing of this battle, what exactly happened, or don’t we know for sure, presumably the Kormoran was flying a flag of convenience, got in close and caught them by surprise with a few well placed torpedoes, assuming the Sydney got in enough fire power to sink the Kormoran before it went down, I’m surprised that all hands were lost.
Without searching the web, is this one of the great mysteries of the sea.
By: Newforest - 17th March 2008 at 08:02
Three threads on the subject so far!
Sign In
March 17, 2008 at 12:22 am