| I mentioned on another thread that I have just been watching a DVD that one of my Australian contacts sent me, of a programme aired on Australian TV about the loss and discovery of HMAS Sydney. Probably this is the one Andy mentioned above.
The more I think about it the more I can see the heroism of both sides.
HSK Kormoran was a less powerful fighting vessel than Sydney, so she had to use the element of surprise. Both vessels had 6-inch guns, but Sydney, as a modern Perth-class cruiser (similar to the RN's Leander class) had eight of them in twin turrets with a range of 15000 yards, controlled electrically by a central fire-control unit (alas not duplicated). Kormoran had six of them (actually 150mm, or 5.9inch), but as far as I can tell these were mounted three on each side, so a broadside would only consist of three guns. They were old patterns; one had been aboard SMS Seydlitz at Jutland. They were individually operated, and as they fired through casements in the side of the vessel they had little elevation so a range of only about 2000 yards. These were supplement by 37mm flak guns and 20mm cannon and machine guns.
Clearly Captain Burnett made an error in approaching HSK Kormoran so closely, but there seem to be plenty of mitigating arguments. If he had opened fire on an innocent merchant ship he would have got into a lot of trouble, and even more so if by being overcautious he had let a commerce-raider escape. The information that he had received pointed to the other ship being more likely to be Kormoran's unarmed supply vessel, Kulmerland. Maybe he should have sent the Walrus to have a closer look; perhaps it was unserviceable at the time.
Kovetten-Kapitan Detmar's first salvo of 37mm and 20mm cannon fire took out the bridge and gun control position of Sydney, almost certainly killing Burnett and most of the other officers within the first seconds of the action. Ruthless, but the right thing to do from Detmar's point of view: he had to neutralise the other vessels superior armament and control systems. After that, Sydney was virtually a headless chicken. Nevertheless she fought on. She was on fire from stem to stern, her decks raked with cannon and machine-gun fire, taking maybe 50 hits from 5.9inch shells. There must have been total carnage and confusion on board with probably no one person in command. Yet her crew still managed to launch four torpedoes which barely missed Kormoran, which involved turning the vessel about so as use tubes on the opposite side to that which orginally faced the enemy. X turret in particular continued firing, independently of any command system, scoring hits on Kormoran which led to her loss. And as she steamed away, her boiler and engine room crews must have been continuing to work despite a torpedo hit yards away; the fire and smoke on the upper deck must have been coming through the ventilators.
Men have been awarded Victoria Crosses for less. I suppose it is far too late for such an award to be made now. Normally a VC has to be awarded to a named person, though there have been occassions where a ships company decided by ballot which individual should receive a VC awarded collectively. Now that there is the Victoria Cross of Australia, I wonder if the Australian government might consider making this a special case, though of course this would create all sorts of problems in terms of precedents. |