off topic but topical. others see the doco on what sunk the sydney so quick last nite on aunty? if not, here's the reason noone got out alive:
1. for whatever reason, the sydney came in way too close to the kormoran (assume thought it was a friendly - was disguised as a freighter)
2. the first salvo from the kormoran all hit home, including the control tower/bridge
3. the first salvo from the sydney missed
4. others hit after that, enough to do in the kormoran
5. but by that time, sydney had been hit with two torpedos, and plenty of big shells
6. the sydney's engine was still working, and would have otherwise been able to limp home, except for that fact that
7. the torpedos had hit right near the bow, and a few k away from the battle site, just plain fell off (the bow that is). ship filled with water instantly, no time to put out lifeboats or nothing. all gone within a minute probably.
at least the family of the 600 or so now know where, how and why they died. may they rest in peace.
“others see the doco on what sunk the sydney so quick last nite on aunty?”. caught the last 15 mins or so.
“1. for whatever reason, the sydney came in way too close to the kormoran”
Why she did it is beyond comprehension – against all rules/ tactics (as I know them.)
“(assume thought it was a friendly - was disguised as a freighter)”
It is thought that Sydney assumed she was ‘unfriendly’ (she obviously turned away and was running – albeit at 18 knots (one engine out of action, by German account) – Sydney would have been at 30-35 knots. Indeed it is thought that Sydney thought she was a raider support ship rather than the raider, Komoron. Which is an attempted explanation why the Sydney came so close – to effect a boarding before she was scuttled.
Just as devastating as the 150mm German main guns was that she was in range of all the Komoron’s anti-air hvy 20mm MG’s. In the first ‘stunning’ boardside these would have been just as devastating and effective as the 150’s, killing anyone topside and preventing movement on the deck and people reaching battle stations (Sydney’s main guns were manned and trained on target but apparently a/a guns weren’t (a MAJOR inexcusable fork up) – which may reflect a relaxed casual mood on board).
2. the first salvo from the kormoran all hit home, including the control tower/bridge.
The Germans first shots were ranging shots and missed. The second salvo hit the prime target of the bridge/gun control (coordination and ranging) – which is THE reason Sydney should never been in so close. Her advantage would have been armour and gun control which would have been maximized at maximum range (The Kormorant 150’s would have similar range as Sydney’s).
3. the first salvo from the sydney missedThe Sydney’s first broadside were ranging shots and bracketed the Kormorant as per ‘the book’. By time the second broadside was ready the Sydney’s gun control had been taken out. I’m not certain but I think the Sydney A and B turrets took no further effective part. The K's torpedoes impacted right under B turret and I think this is what took them out of the battle.
4. others hit after that, enough to do in the kormoranThe Germans credit X turret with all the effective hits on the K. In particular X hit the K’s engine room which set a fire. This fire is what lead the K to be scuttled – the fire couldn’t be contained fast enough and was lapping around the stored mines (destined for the approaches off Freemantle).
5. but by that time, sydney had been hit with two torpedos, and plenty of big shellsSydney was hit with about 150 150mm rounds. Most were H.E. and not armour piercing (K was a raider, her main prey was freighters with thin hull against which HE is effective. AP was needed for warships which K tried to avoid like the plague. K would have had very few AP rounds.)
Another two reasons, torpedoes and lack of AP known to be carried by a raider, that Sydney should never have been so close.
6. the sydney's engine was still working, and would have otherwise been able to limp home, except for that fact thatThe Germans describe the Sydney as steaming off with a raging fire stem to stern. This is the one detailed that to my eyes/knowledge is not supported by the discovery and photos of the wreck. If she was ablaze as described it could account for ‘lost all hands’ and sudden sinking as much any other (but more to the point working in with other causes).
With a major fire I think Sydney was doomed, both as a ship and she wasn't gonna make it to port.
7. the torpedos had hit right near the bow, and a few k away from the battle site, just plain fell off (the bow that is). Which could have been weakening from the torpedoes, a secondary explosion and/ or the fire.
The Sydney went down almost as soon as she lost her bow. The bow was fould within 500m of the main wreck and about 25klms from the battle.
“…..no time to put out lifeboats or nothing.”Warships don’t have lifeboats. They did have ships boats/ work launches etc which have to be launched by crane etc and not self launching as per lifeboats (which the K as a converted freight did have as part of her disguise). These would not have been launched easily in any case and were probably inoperable after a raging deck fire and /or been holed by strafing 20mm a/a MG fire (Sydney was fired on both sides as she passed by the stern of the K at close range - an attempted ramming?).
Sydney would have had lift rafts. These would have been prime fuel and victims of a deck fire.
(Twisty, it would appear that the very mention of a topic so far removed from VMX as already offended. To bring it back on the topic back on to a vaguely VMX bent I move that all Maico's, BMW's, Medcedes and VW's found on the site of CD5 on the 25/04/08, shall be plundered and burnt as a mindless act of nationalistic revenge for the Sydney
)
