Submarine AE1

[Peter.J.Richardson]

I just wanted to open up a new thread that just deals with the Australian Submarine - AE1.
www.ae1submarine.com
I am currently re-working the web site (a project for 2010) & would be interested in hearing from readers what might be worthwhile adding.
Regards,

[Kevin Denlay]

Hello Peter,

Welcome to the forum.

You may have seen that I have made a few post on the AE2 thread re something that John Stoker brought up (i.e. the possible sinking of AE1 in St George's Channel by Reuschel, et al). When I asked him where in St G C this took place he directed me to your website, but I could not find any details there re where the incident took place.

May I ask where the supposed AE1/Kolonialgesellschaft incident took place (i.e. off what location) and is there anywhere on the web one can read about this incident.

Regards,
Kevin

[Peter.J.Richardson]

Hello Kevin,
I will recheck the web site & see if I uploaded enough information on the Kolonial Gesellschaft / Reuschel issue.
Also whether my articles for Asian Diver (May 1994) & Air NiuGuinea 'paradise' Magazine (1995) have been uploaded.
These dealt a lot with Signaller Aubrey Hodgson's diary, his chat with Reuschel and my theory that the AE1 may well have been his victim.
Feel free to email me and I will send you scans of the articles.
According to Reuschel, the incident took place outside Mioko Harbour, in Duke of York Islands. These islands are situated in the Saint George's Channel which divides New Britain & New Ireland.
Reuschel was ex SMS Planet (scuttled at Yap Island) & claimed to be in charge of the KG & hiding in Mioko Harbour. He saw the AE1 hove to that Monday afternoon, 14th September 1914.
He fired a shot at AE1 and then rammed (& sunk) her.
But the rest of the story is way too long for this thread.
Again, email me [peter.john.richardson@gmail.com] and I will send any info that you would like to read.
Regards - Pete

[Kevin Denlay]

Thanks Peter, I will be in touch in due course.

In the interim since my last post I finally located my copy of John Foster’s book on AE1 ‘Entombed But Not Forgotten’. I assume you have read?

In that he devotes about 8 pages to the Kolonialgesellschaft affair but seems to show that she was not in the vicinity on the day AE1 went down (14th), but had left the area on the 9th, according to the postamaster from Madang who was aboard her at the time. (I say 'seems to show' above as I will have to reread that section a little more closely to be sure of what his final prognosis was.)

[Peter.J.Richardson]

Hello Kevin,
Yes, but I have never seen the proof that the KG was bound for Rabaul from Madang. Does John Foster site his sources?
Aubrey Hodgson was the Signaller on Aorangi. In his diary he recalls his conversation with Reuschel & his attitude to the sinking of AE1.
The 'Sydney' had been patrolling the north coast of New Britain after the AE1 failed to return from patrol.
I am sure she would have seen the KG if in fact it was at sea in that area & coming from Madang.
That the 'Warrego' found the KG scuttled & on fire on one of the reefs off the Baining (north) coast always seemed very suspicious to me.
It is unfortunate that I can not find out where Reuschel was captured.
The KG had a 5-barreled Nordenfeldt one pounder mounting on the bow when the 'Warrego' found her and the gun itself was found in the hold. One shell fired.
I had thought that the gun was retrieved but can find no evidence now.
The KG crew had got ashore and moved to Varsin Plantation, (near Toma Mountain) the rear HQ of the German Governor.
There was & possibly still is a well used track from Varsin down to the coast near Keravat. And then on to Massava Bay - a tidal station.
When the KG crew were picked up, they denied any knowledge of the AE1.
Until I (or anyone else) can positively prove to me that the KG left Madang I will leave that issue in question.
After Aubrey had his conversation with Reuschel, he reported it to the Aorangi Captain.
Orders were given not to speak with any of the prisoners and Reuschel was transferred to another vessel the next day.
I have not seen any contrary evidence to dismiss Reuschel's claims.
Even Alec B Doyle (later to become an Admiral in the RAN) thought the possibility of the AE1 being sunk in the D of Y Islands a distinct reality!
He wrote a letter to this effect on the 17th September 1914. At the time he was an engineer-lieutenant on the 'Parramatta'.
I still don't understand why the 'Parramatta' stopped & then proceeded that Monday afternoon after losing sight of the AE1.
Or even why she went north around the top D of Y Island when she did get under way again.
I would have thought that the sensible thing to do would be to escort AE1 back to harbour.
That would have meant steaming south around Mioko Harbour, then west into Simpson Harbour.
Very odd proceedings for the AE1 'escort' - regardless of how 'Parramatta' was treated by Besant during the morning of the patrol.
Regards for now - Pete

[JOHN STOKER]

Dear Dear Me. I thought you Australian was a bit more of a individual race of people. If you don't stand with your fallen comrades who is. ASK , DEMAND. Your failings in not asking were to search, The German was telling the truth he had no reason in telling a lie. John

[JOHN STOKER]

Hi. I have just reread Straws in the Wind. I would like to point out that Stoker thought that the Captain of AE1 was a fine officer, a good submariner was very thorougher in his following the correct procedure, He was like Stoker says in the book, no reason to dive unless he was in danger, or a ship or boat was attacking. He could not fathom out why the AE1 was missing. He did not know of the German saying he rammed her. Stoker says the reason might be. no 1 Operation of the enemy. 2 Internal explosion.3 Accident while carrying out diving practice. 4 Ordinary navigational accident. There was no reason to dive unless he was being attack. His only method of defence was torpedo's, so he must have dived, if that was the case and some thing hit the conning tower, that would have been enough to sink the AE1 also explain why there was no wreckage or oil in the area. Lets look in the area that she was last seen? So what the costs, enough has being spent looking in the wrong places. What is the cost of the truth? [35brave men.] John

[Polycell]

Nice site John, well done would you like a link to your site from my submarine forum site?
Fred BZ

[BALTICSUBS]

Hi John,

just went through a massive document on AE1/2 in the Melbourne Natinal Archives. So detailed even with press releases. Just wish every British sub had the same material.

It is strange that she would dive i must agree. I always though Beasant was running on a rumour of a German vessel in the Duke of York Island which could explain his behavior that day, as he would not know that Horton had already become the first to sink an enemy ship in E9 the day before. As you say his only defence was his torpedoes, and if wanting to get closer in to view inside any entrance to the Island group he could have dived and got into trouble. His time frame for his journey home does not match doing any more major snooping around involving altering his course unless he did in fact sight something. One thing is very certain, AE1 was lost quickly and suddenly.

Expolsions, i know of 2 E Class suffering explosions, and being diesel these were not as common as on the A, B, & C Class petrol driven boats. The boats were E5 & E30, and they were not lost although crew were killed.

Must get the Stoker book as i have yet to read it, but have his report into the loss of AE1.

DB.

[BALTICSUBS]

Hi All,

when the Navy searched for AE1 a couple of years ago they lost their side scan sonar, but they had picked up in indication of something that was not man made. I think i remember this turned out not to be AE1. Does anyone have a link to what the end result was on this indication? And also did they in fact drop a ROV down to confirm this indication? They all seemed pretty convinced at the time, and then what happened?

[BALTICSUBS]

Answer my own question here!

Top Stories

Resurface of mystery


Volume 50, No. 10, June 14, 2007

An enduring Naval mystery has resurfaced with mixed results.

The Huon class minehunter HMAS Yarra recently searched for the WW1 submarine HMAS AE1 in the vicinity of the Duke of York Islands in Papua New Guinea. Hopes of finding AE1 were raised when the Navy survey ship HMAS Benalla identified what was thought to be a man made submerged object using her towed side scan sonar in February.

Yarra (LCDR Sean Andrews) searched a 50 sq km area around the position of the object identified by Benalla. The object detected by Benalla’s sonar was confirmed to be a submarine shaped rock formation.

The complex bottom topography created some significant challenges in the conduct of the search and provided a number of possible objects of interest for Yarra’s ship’s company to investigate. All objects discovered will be further analysed when the camera footage of the underwater search is returned to Australia.

The crew of Yarra conducted a memorial service to commemorate the loss of AE1.

[JOHN STOKER]

Hi all I have been AWOL for some time. so I am not up to date on AE1. My computer is playing up and I find it hard to log on. I am geting a laptop in the next few week , that is if I am still in my sons good books. Regards to all j.s.

[Peter.J.Richardson]

Dear All,
Not much here for a while. But research is ongoing.
However, some of the material I have located recently for Wilhelm August Ewald REUSCHEL is very interesting.
Below is wording on the back of a post card from Herbertshohe (Kokopo).
Ewald was very close to his brother, Hermann.
But it seems that Herman was not a good letter writer.

Herbertshöhe, New Guinea. Servant boys.
Mr.H. Reuschel
in Wilhelmshaven
Marienstraße No. 22, II. Floor
Germany.

Matupi, 1 January 14 (German New Guinea)
Dear brother,
Am sending most heartfelt New Years Wishes to you.
Hopefully you all made it well into the New Year.
Wishing best of health to all of you.
I’m also doing quite well.
Once again heartfelt regards to you, my dear Herm., as well as parents and siblings,
from your Ewald

Unfortunately, Ewald (as he preferred to be called) died soon after he returned from Liverpool Camp.
He died in February 1920.
Nothing as yet has come to light regarding his stay in Rabaul.
This is the only letter we have that was written by Ewald when he was interned at Liverpool.

CONCENTRATION CAMPS, AUSTRALIA
PRISONER OF WAR LETTER
Liverpool, February 3rd, 1917

My dear parents and siblings,
It is high time for me to write a few lines to you.
I’m doing rather well thus far, but I can’t defend myself against my
feelings of longing for you, and for all of my loved ones at
home. Can you blame me for that?
Now then, I’m cherishing the hope that you all are in good health.
Please give my most heartfelt birthday and well wishes to Hermann.
Have received your dear package for Christmas, but no letter in a long time.
Once again, dear parents and Rieckchen, a heartfelt thank you.
Yesterday I received a beautiful package from our Mess II.W.D. Wilhelmshaven.
Will always remember my comrades’ kindness.
I’d be pleased to receive a few lines from Max every now and then?
Can Hermann also write once?
Hoping that we are going to see each other again soon safe and sound, and sending regards and kisses to all of you Ewald.
Ewald Reuschel, M.Mt.
prisoner of war
German-Concentration-Camp, 10. Comp. 9. Mess
Liverpool, “Australia”

There are no references yet to his time in Rabaul or that he may have had TB. Once we find his death certificate the answer may be there.

And the quest for the 'Koloniagesellschaft' & her movements is ongoing.
Also Ewald's war service record.

Regards, Pete

[BALTICSUBS]

Hi Peter,

thanks for the update. Well we at least know 'Koloniagesellschaft' was a steamship, surely someone somewhere must have a photo of her just to gauge her size. This on its own could say yes or no to the theory of her ramming AE1, or being capable of it.

Can't help but think that the only way AE1 can be found is the Government footing the bill to have a ship with side scan sonar and ROV capabilities stay there until they find her. There is just that missing gold nugget, another sighting, something. We all know where she was last sighted, we all know where the base was, 2.5 hrs of sailing time left at 10 knots, everything else a mystery or rumour.

Still can't help but think they were looking for something, running on a rumour as many talk of a possible German ship in the D of Y group, only takes a rumour. I was surprised where they searched for her last in 2009 as I would be amazed had she got so close to Rabaul without a signal or sighting. Surely Rabaul would have had a front line picket, signal point that could challenge any vessel before they got that far in? Where AE1 met Parramatta that morning would be what I’m talking about, yes you would think she would go back into the shelters of Rabaul after calling in or past her morning meeting place.

German ship theory still there for me only as that concrete proof has come up that she was not invlolved. Would love to know when the German was captured, and where, did he in fact know of AE1 before mouthing off about it? Also a dive near an entrance to D of York Islands is a real possibility. He would not want to get too close in surfaced as he would not know what to expect re guns from ships or shore, if any?.

Practice dive, just does not make sense. From all the British sub logs and so forth I have studies from WW1 this would be unusual, once I remember, but that was onto the bottom to have a talk with the crew for their secret mission. From everything I have read, they run on the surface, dive if something suspicious sighted, surface, arrive on patrol billet, submerged for the day and pop up the periscope say every 20 minutes, come up at night to charge batteries, same routine, then surface and run for home, only diving if something suspicious was sighted. Stoker was also left pondering, but in the end what he has thrown up are just possibilities as he just had no idea.

Because no wreckage was found does not mean there was none. Just means it was not found where they searched. There must be some gaps of where the original search was done and where current searches have been.

[Peter.J.Richardson]

The post card is from the Ewald Reuschel collection.

Germany
Mr. H. Reuschel
journeyman plumber
Wilhelmshaven
Marienstraße No. 8 II.

Manila, 14 Feb. 14
Dear H.,
Heartfelt thanks for your last card.
It looks as if you’re doing well now, and I’m very happy about it.
Isn’t this a beautiful card?
Heartfelt regards from your brother Ewald.

Also a photo of the same submarine USS 'Shark' or SS-08, 1912;

Regards, Pete Richardson

[BALTICSUBS]

Hi Peter,

what was your German chap trying to say with submarine postcards?

Have carried out some searching and rather than dismissing your theory it gained some strength.

I have proof HMAS Encounter did in fact leave her position and move into Rabaul as has been suggested, but it was not to service AE1 for her duff engine that evening, but take over the guardship duties due to HMAS Sydney leaving. Some documents i got them to dig out, well they had to break the sealed boxes open from when they were packed away 20 years ago.

Also found full details of the German vessel your man said he was on, ironically she was British built for the Germans.

Will let you know more once i sniff through the catch!

In the meatime, here is the Model they have of HMAS AE1 in the Australian War Memorial. Well poor attempt at a model. Can anyone spot any glaring issues with this?

[JOHN STOKER]

:DWell done Balticsubs. You seem to be the man to find AE 1 Keep up the good work, its people like you who have the knowledge to probe the right way. Peter will be made up with what you have found out to date. Well done. John Stoker

[qprdave]

Here are a couple of items that I found that was published The Times about H.M.A.S. AE1

[steve roberts]

Hi Dave.Thanks for the AE1 crew list.
Balticsubs.That looks more like a model of a D class than an E.The lettering is atrocious on it.
Regards Steve.

[BALTICSUBS]

Hi Steve,

all they have on HMAS AE1 in the Australian War Memorial is this model and a small description on her loss.

As for the model, it is definitely not even a Group 1 Type E Class submarine which AE1 was. This model has 2 x bow tubes, not one, the conning tower, (fin), is of the smaller type and not the large one AE1 had, the Hydroplane guards are more in line with a Group 3 E Class, and the wireless aerials are from boats E18 onwards.

Maybe they need to be told!

[Peter.J.Richardson]

Dear All,
We should be very grateful for the excellent work being done by Balticsubs. At some point all this will end up in the AE1 web site I hope.
The public and 'Friends of the AE1', need to see how the story is unfolding.
I will add some more to this thread when I can, but I am also very busy with diving projects offshore at the moment that are taking up quite a bit of my time.
However, the resources of the internet (when available to me) have allowed my to continue sleuthing.
In concert with Balticsubs, we are definitely making headway.
I must also apologise for incorrectly referring to Reuschel's second name as August. In fact it is Gustav.
He always called himself by his third name, Ewald.
I will post a number of items from his collection over the next week or so.
I find it an interesting insight into a man that was part of the Rabaul story in 1914. Particularly from the German side.
I need to now identify his 7 comrades left behind by the SMS Planet. Reuschel I now know was suffering from a bout of Typhoid.
I am not too sure about his shipmates.
Whether he in fact did as he claimed remains to be seen. More solid research is needed.
Darren is concentrating on the records available in Australia & I on the records still available in Germany.
At this point I would like to thank Darren for his continued involvement & tireless efforts.
The bigger picture of actually locating AE1 will be tackled at a later date.
Amateur efforts will need to give way to a professional effort. And in this pursuit, the RAN will need to get involved.
For a later discussion, maybe.
Very kind regards to all, Pete

[BALTICSUBS]

Thanks Peter,

still much to sniff out, unfortunatley the Austrailian achives are not as one, some items in Melbourne, some in Canberra, some in Australian War Memorial Canberra, and then some important items in Sydney which is next on the hit list. I met one of the officials in Canberra in their archives who said it was astounding what was found when they officially started to dig for info on HMAS Sydney. My aim is to establish a time line of AE1's last day, and the following search.

I found another account from a WW1 submariner who went on to serve with the RN Submarines that goes with Peter's theory, but still we have to check this was not written on rumours of the time.

Another interesting point, AE1 was definately due back in Rabaul and not a forward station, the alarm was raised by none other that Stoker on AE2 when she failed to show to the depot ship. Stoker was then refused to go out again, and was also questioned as to what and where he had patrolled the previous day. It seems AE2 was also late getting in the night before which started a few questions of where is she? She of couse reponded to her calls, AE1 did not.

[Peter.J.Richardson]

One of the most interesting (& in my view), important documents I have seen for a number of years.
Now for a photo of the, 'Kolonialgessellschaft'!
The 'Kolonialgessellschaft' carried a 5-barreled Nordenfeldt quick-firer on the bow. See photo of similar attached.
They fired a 1 pound projectile.
Could this have inflicted any real damage to the AE1?
Can any experts out there to offer an opinion?
The 'Warrego' discovered the 'Kolonialgessellschaft' burning on a reef in the 'Bainings North Coast', on the 17th, I think.
The Nordenfeldt was found removed from the gun support and thrown into the hold.
One shell was discovered to have been fired.
From a distant reference in my memory, I thought that the Nordenfeldt was brought back to Rabaul.
But now I can't find any reference to this.
A shot fired into the saddle ballast tanks of the AE1, plus a decent blow by the 'Kolonialgessellschaft' to the hydroplanes, may have just been enough to send AE1 to the bottom.
Maybe not even immediately.
For some reason though she was never able to surface.
Does anyone know whether the 'E' class carried any disposable ballast?
Regards for now, Pete

[Jackaroo]

Hi Steve,

all they have on HMAS AE1 in the Australian War Memorial is this model and a small description on her loss.

As for the model, it is definitely not even a Group 1 Type E Class submarine which AE1 was. This model has 2 x bow tubes, not one, the conning tower, (fin), is of the smaller type and not the large one AE1 had, the Hydroplane guards are more in line with a Group 3 E Class, and the wireless aerials are from boats E18 onwards.

Maybe they need to be told!

I am sure you and Peter will let them know :D

AWM would never admit it got it wrong re naval items.

[BALTICSUBS]

am sure you and Peter will let them know

AWM would never admit it got it wrong re naval items.

I think i just might, but will do it with a detailed document or else it will be in the reject basket!

[Jackaroo]

am sure you and Peter will let them know

AWM would never admit it got it wrong re naval items.

I think i just might, but will do it with a detailed document or else it will be in the reject basket!


Or build the model proper and swap it! :eek::D

Good luck with the detailed document mate :)

[Peter.J.Richardson]

Not too sure about just walking in and swapping it.
However, if anyone can direct me to a very good model maker, I will commission a new and very accurate model for donation.
Spend the time & effort to get it right.
Kind regards, Pete

[BALTICSUBS]

Hi Peter,

i looked into this, there is a chap in England who gave me a quote for a Group 2 E Class boat, the quote was for a 1/72 Scale and was resonable i thought, around 1000 pounds, but only from memory. He sent me some photos of his work which was excelent. I still wnat one but as you know i've been up o my neck with other things.

Just google this.

Ian Ruscoe - United Kingdom - Email, Address, Phone number

[Jackaroo]

Have a look at this website you might find someone here in AUS that can build one for you.


http://www.taskforce72.org/

[BALTICSUBS]

Thanx Jackaroo, i've seen this mob before, they look good at their trade!

[Peter.J.Richardson]

As it is Sunday, I might take the opportunity to upload some items that may be of interest.
Also the Gold Coast 'Titans' defeated the Melbourne 'Storm' 20 to 16 at Skilled Park yesterday. Well done Matty Rogers!
This article on the AE1 was written for Air Niugini. Published in the May 1995 issue of the 'paradise' in-flight Magazine, I think.
I was living in S'pore at the time and planning my return to Rabaul with Draeger as the main sponsor.
This was in 1994. I was to use their re-breathing equipment.
This led to my first article for Asian Diver in April 1994.
But as the volcanoes erupted in September, all hopes of continuing were dashed.
And as had happened on previous eruptions, Vulcan & Matupit orchestrated a double act.
I knew then that the harbour topography would be changed forever.
My friend, Ewen Fenwick confirmed as much soon after.
He & Peter Cohen could not find the 'Hakkai Maru' location. It was now under the new Vulcan footprint.
Air Niugini were also going to help. So they asked for an article.
Not much on the AE1 has changed since.
This new research drive will hopefully turn up something.
Regards, Pete

[Peter.J.Richardson]

'Friends of the AE1'
Thanks to John Stoker & Cmdr. Shane Moore, Submarine Museum, Garden Island, Sydney.
Attached, the medals of Lt. Cmdr. Thomas Fleming Besant, AE1.

Kind regards, Pete

[Peter.J.Richardson]

'Friends of the AE1'
The attached letter was written by Alec Broughton Doyle.
An interesting letter in the context of his life's work.
http://adbonline.anu.edu.au/biogs/A170331b.htm

One of my biggest questions has been, 'What exactly did the 'Parramatta' do on the afternoon of 14th September 1914?"

Not only are the AE1 submarine movements questionable, so were the movements of the 'Parramatta' after losing sight of the AE1.
'Parramatta' Log - 3.45pm 'Stopped' 4.0pm (no entry) and 4.15pm 'Proceeded'.
What does this mean? Why did 'Parramatta' stop?
We can assume the bridge telegraph was pushed to the 'Stop' position. See photo attachment.
Engines clutched to neutral, vessel drifting.
And 'Parramatta' had lost sight of the AE1 in the afternoon haze.

As a betting man I would say that this is very close to the time that AE1 met her fate.
Any experts out there want to have a stab at an acceptable explanation for the actions of 'Parramatta'?

And this is only the beginning. 'Parramatta' was to be the patrol escort for AE1 that day.
Regardless of the nonsense with signals & orders that Monday morning, why didn't 'Parramatta' follow AE1 south from Berard Point?
And escort AE1 to the stationed guard ship, at least.
AE1 was due back in Rabaul that evening. 'Parramatta' at Herbertshohe.
Both vessels were due at their billets by 17:30 hours.

The Keith referred to in Alec-B-Doyle-3, is Keith Hodgson, son of Aubrey Hodgson, Signalman on the SS Aorangi.
(Keith, now 90 years young lives in Sydney)
Aubrey had a personal conversation with W. G. Ewald Reuschel when he was brought onboard as a prisoner.
This is when Reuschel claimed to have sunk the AE1.

Kind regards, Pete

[BALTICSUBS]

Hi Peter,

HMAS Parramatta definitely stopped for the period of 30 minutes at a time when most believe AE1 was lost. The problem with log books is that they give correct times and dates, but any added information from this era is totally reliant on the enthusiasm of its author. Some say very little, some list the comings and goings of crew, HMAS Parramatta’s are very sparse of real detail, however, I do have most of her log over this whole period, and when on patrol she would slow to around 4 knots, but she would never stop like shown in her log on the 14th, so it is a little strange, and that is was not mentioned in his report.

I’m looking at some other aspects of this incident, when asked during the search where AE1 was last seen, a general comments was St Georges Channel, but in one reply Parramatta gives a position further north of where it was marked on the report map, maybe a mistake, maybe not. I have heard a rumour of an elderly crewman from Parramatta speaking of hitting a log, of which he said it could have very well been AE1. But these type of comments are pure speculation. I'm also chasing down a patch of oil sighted, but this of course with strong currents could be a long way from the sinking after the event.

The reason AE1 went way off her designated course could most likely be the result of a sighting of a Steamer off Duke of York Islands the evening before the loss of AE1. I still need some work around what steamer this could have been so best not to comment too early and a trip to Sydney required, but there was a sighting, that is for sure. There are many references to a vessel possibly hiding there, and now we may know why.

One thing that is also striking, why did when Parramatta lose sight of AE1, had she not gone in the same direction after her, and went the opposite way around the top of the Duke of York Islands.

I can also see the Admiral’s report is out about 3 hours from when he ordered the search as opposed to when it actually happened.

Alarm was raised by Stoker in AE2 at around 2000 hrs, HMAS Parramatta did not go out until 2330 hrs.

HMAS Australia tried calling AE1 by wireless 3 times after AE2 raised the alarm, but there was no answer.

[BALTICSUBS]

For those who haven't seen it already, a 10 min. video on the search for the AE1 (a 2007 story on ABC Foreign Correspondent).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SvqGJ6qbGUQ

[Peter.J.Richardson]

Thanks for the info D B.
Attached is my first article written in 1994 for the 'Asian Diver Magazine' in Singapore.
Regards - Pete

[Peter.J.Richardson]

My apologies for attaching .pdf files.
Here are the .jpg

[BALTICSUBS]

O.K. Jackaroo, i have sent the Australian War Memorial some details on why they should remove that silly model and commision a new one.

Will let you know the reply!

[culverin]

Re # 33 and #34
How soon after AE1 vanished did Parramatta next go into a dock.
A (tree) log is mentioned, did a diver go down, was there prop damage, leaks
or any other suspicious events that parramatta did not report or record.
The weather was hazy, that can mean many things, but over time the Australians have had a good record of disseminating fact from fiction.

[BALTICSUBS]

Re # 33 and #34
How soon after AE1 vanished did Parramatta next go into a dock.
A (tree) log is mentioned, did a diver go down, was there prop damage, leaks
or any other suspicious events that parramatta did not report or record.
The weather was hazy, that can mean many things, but over time the Australians have had a good record of disseminating fact from fiction.

I hope to check soon what you mention, re her dock entry. The log mentioned is something that more info is needed. I have no concrete evidence that this happened, just that i was told when an ageing crew member was asked, he made this comment.

You will notice the letter written by Alec Doyle he gives a different time to when they last saw AE1, I have also seen a wireless report during the search, that when Parramatta was asked directly, the answer for the last sighting was further north.

Having said all this, we could be dealing just with inexperience of the Australian Navy. If there was any cover up from Parramatta it would seem from the point of view AE1’s British Commander was treating the Australian Commander of Parramatta with snobbery, going off and not letting your escorting destroyer know, the destroyer then trying to carry out orders by patrolling to the south and at the same time trying to keep in touch with the submarine. Me, I would have been peeved with Besant’s behaviour on AE1. Parramatta when she last saw AE1, said she was thought to be heading back to base. But no direction was given. AE1 could have gone along the south coast, or she could have gone home along the northern coast and around the top of the Islands. This is the way that Parramatta went when AE1 was out of sight. Was AE1 going this way? If not Parramatta’s commander seemed to have had enough of Besant and was even late getting in. When he did get in he did not even bother to ask if AE1 was safely back. I think this is more what could be covered up, something happened to AE1 and the destroyer ordered to be with her was nowhere to be found.

The Admiral says in his report he ordered a search at 2000 hrs, not correct, this was done nearly 3 hours later! So they searched in the dark.

My understanding of this is simple, when last sighted AE1 was doing everything right, safely staying away from the coast. Had she continued on to base along the southern coast she would have continued this safe practice and got home, and without diving. Simply put, something was decided by Besant that caused the submarine to be put in an unsafe situation. If navigation issues, we should not be looking at Besant but his 3rd Officer. And there were uncharted coral patched up there!

[culverin]

It is widely known that these E class boats were the first to incorporate subdivision. They had two internal bulkheads, consequently three compartments. In the event of mishap this arrangement was to prove catastrophic, with an end compartment flooding or flooded, this then has the effect of turning her into an uncontrollable pendulum, which in deep water would see the rapid demise of boat and crew.
The E4 collision with E41 on 15-8-1916 in the shallow North Sea amply illustrated this shortcoming.

[BALTICSUBS]

It is widely known that these E class boats were the first to incorporate subdivision. They had two internal bulkheads, consequently three compartments. In the event of mishap this arrangement was to prove catastrophic, with an end compartment flooding or flooded, this then has the effect of turning her into an uncontrollable pendulum, which in deep water would see the rapid demise of boat and crew.
The E4 collision with E41 on 15-8-1916 in the shallow North Sea amply illustrated this shortcoming.

Totally agree. If this does indeed not prove to be a German vessel i am researching another angle of her loss that would have her sink in a previously unheard of location. I believe had she struck uncharted coral she would be in more trouble going from shallow to deep water that the other way around. In shallow water she would be locally known for being a great fishing spot. As you mention, had AE1 dragged herself across uncharted coral, and it was there, she only needed to gash one end of her hull and these compartments you mention could send her into the deep. We must remember HMAS Yarra did exactly this the following day whilst searching for AE1 and smashed one shaft, and a second prop, and her draft was around 8ft as apposed to AE1's 12.5 ft. A gash in her stern, combined with prop damage whilst crossing from shallow to deep water is all it would take.

At the end of the day, AE1 needs theories thrown up with backing of the known evidence. I have no doubt Besant was trying to sniff something out which explains his behaviour, and i'm pretty sure i know why, just need some more work around this. Had he kept going on the south coast of Duke of York Islands and keeping the safe distance from shore he would not have been lost.

From my understanding the E Class just had frames, the external plates were part of her longitudinal strength, certainly not constructed like an aircraft with Frames and stringers. The weak spot in the hull of the E Class was around her beam tube area.

Interesting you note E4, my great grandfather was thrown on her after she was raised and put back ino service, a little errie. She seems to be plagued with problems in her 2nd life and was retired before the war ended.

[culverin]

Hello Balticsubs,
The E class boats were of course the saddle tank type, the circular pressure hull surmounted both sides by the tanks. These were not only there for the boats buoyancy on the surface, but included the oil fuel, and was the preferred type for RN subs. By its nature the pressure hull functions in a different manner to a ships hull irrespective of whether it be longitudinal or transverse construction. Consequently if pierced or leaking it can prove fatal quite quickly.
Ballast tanks can take quite severe damage and whilst dived will be inconsequential. However when surfacing or on the surface the loss of buoyancy can become a serious issue, but not in itself always lead to the boats loss.
HMS TALLY HO in WW2 had a famous encounter with a Japanes patrol boat which almost entirely destroyed her tanks down one side, but she made it home.
Surface buoyancy of the E class was good for its time.
The issue of Weaknesses by their beam torpedo tubes would not be an issue, as with any tt it is always ensure either outer or inner tube door IS SHUT, irrespective of whether it is dry, flooded or loaded.
The RN also had a class of boats called the G class and these were of the double hull type, they need not concern us here, but they were equivalent to the E class, but came a few years later and also proved a success.
Needless to say saddle tanks in the RN won the day,despite their known failings.

[BALTICSUBS]

Hi Culverin,

thanks for that. Do you have any theory re AE1? I'm starting to think the only way of ever finding her is to have a vessel stay up there until the job is done, financed by the Goverment.

They did find oil up there during the search, but dismissed it what could normally found with large ships transversing the area, and i can't find exactly where they saw it. I can see a gash in her stern compartment and flooding there as fatal from what you say.

ADDED INFO; Culverin waht do you think of the gun and possible damge it could cause re post #23 from Peter?

[Peter.J.Richardson]

Dear Culverin,
Your comment - "By its nature the pressure hull functions in a different manner to a ships hull irrespective of whether it be longitudinal or transverse construction. Consequently if pierced or leaking it can prove fatal quite quickly."
This immediately begs my question;
Do you think that a 1lb projectile from something like a Nordenfeldt be destructive enough to cause stress to the AE1?

You will know my thoughts & my theory regarding the 'KG' & possible German involvement in the loss of the AE1.
Can you offer further comment?

Reuschel stated that when he was in charge of the 'Kolonialgesellschaft' he fired at, sunk & then ran over the AE1.

The Admiral explained away the used casing found on the 'KG' as due to the fire.
I wonder??

Kind regards, Pete

[culverin]

AE1 WRECK or WRECKAGE
If lost when the pressure inside the pressure hull equalled that of the water pressure outside, you will be searching for an intact wreck, allowing for 96 years on the bottom.
If she dived with her pressure hull intact to her crush depth where the external pressures increase the deeper you go, you will not find a wreck, but a debris field which will vary in size dependent on water depth and consequently looking for large amounts of wreckage varying in size. Very difficult, even with current technology.
It is important to remember no one knew these boats safe diving depths and of course there can be no survivors to tell you their crush depth. It was simply guess work learnt from experience, and applied to all boats through to the 1930s. Yes it literally was guesswork.
The E class were the best, but they could not defy science.

[BALTICSUBS]

The deepest i can recall was E12 in the Med at 220 ft. But would have to check on that.

That would have been right off the guage.

[Peter.J.Richardson]

I believe I have seen a photo of the depth gauges somewhere.
Either of the AE1 or AE2.
And if memory serves me, they only go to 100 fsw (feet of seawater).
Can we source any photos?
Regards, Pete

[Bear]

I have seen the same photo and I'm fairly sure it was of the AE2's depth gauges. The photo was shown somewhere in a book or article to emphasise that AE2 went a long way below her recommended maximum depth.
I think it was in 'Beneath the Dardanelles' by Vecihi and Hatice Hurmuz Basarin, a book I got from the library. (not worth purchasing in my view)

[culverin]

re # 45
I am neither an armaments or ballistics expert, however there are many differing shell types, and each has a pretty specific purpose. A 1lb shell of whatever type , if only striking or even penetrating a saddle or ballast tank, or most other surface features is unlikely to be a major issue, however, penetrating the pressure hull puts an entirely different perspective on things, and also the rudder, and to a lesser extent the aft planes.
Any sub co fired on whilst surfaced with no gun would almost certainly try to evade the action, which means diving, if practical. Only in the following minutes would the crew establish what damage had really been sustained and take the appropriate action to stabilise the situation, if any were needed. Only then could thoughts of retaliation be planned.
However if he were unable to dive you have somewhat of a dilemma, if you are religious you will know where i am coming from.

[BALTICSUBS]

Yep 100 Ft was the max shown on the gauge. I have noted on some patrol reports they considred 95 feet as max, but they went deeper than this on a few occasions. In the diary of one chap he says E12 went beyond 200, so how do they work that out? Maybe sitting on the bottom of a known depth?

[BALTICSUBS]

And another.

[Don Boyer]

I don't know for a fact what they would do on an older sub like this one in question, but I do know that when Capt. O'Kane did the famous "test" dive on Tang during her trials in 1943, they were able to determine their exact depth (beyond the depth gauge reading) by reading the external sea pressure off various gauges in the ship and doing the math.

I would bet that earlier subs could do the same.

Regards,

[BALTICSUBS]

I don't know for a fact what they would do on an older sub like this one in question, but I do know that when Capt. O'Kane did the famous "test" dive on Tang during her trials in 1943, they were able to determine their exact depth (beyond the depth gauge reading) by reading the external sea pressure off various gauges in the ship and doing the math.

I would bet that earlier subs could do the same.

Hope they had good dry cleaners as a change of pants would be the order of the day!

[Peter.J.Richardson]

In the commercial diving industry, we calculate 1 fsw (foot of seawater) as equal to .5 psig (psi gauge).
The actual is 1 fsw = 0.4335 psig.
I am sure that these submarines would have had reference to external hull pressure, just as we do in a diving bell.
This would then allow the CERA (Chief Engine Room Artificer) to calculate actual depth, external.

Regards, Pete

[culverin]

Some depths i have established that the first eight E class operated at. All of these are in British Imperial, Where 1 foot equals 12 inches, these figures are in feet and are the keel depth:-
20 - periscope depth.
50 - comfortable dived depth, and below keels of largest ships.
70 - depth to avoid attack, and still a very comfortable depth to be.
120 - frequently bottom depth if operating inshore.
140 - very creaky, a reluctance to venture much further

[BALTICSUBS]

Some depths i have established that the first eight E class operated at. All of these are in British Imperial, Where 1 foot equals 12 inches, these figures are in feet and are the keel depth:-
20 - periscope depth.
50 - comfortable dived depth, and below keels of largest ships.
70 - depth to avoid attack, and still a very comfortable depth to be.
120 - frequently bottom depth if operating inshore.
140 - very creaky, a reluctance to venture much further

Sounds pretty right, i have one from a Group 2 boat where they are saying in the patrol report they were at max being at 95 ft.

I remember reading this in the diary of Lt Cdr. Francis Goodhart who commented on this, but this is off Wikipedia, HMS E12 became trapped in anti submarine nets in the Dardanelles. Her forward hydroplanes became entangled which sent her down to 245 feet. At the time, it was the greatest depth achieved by any British submarine. E12 managed to surface only to come under fire by shore batteries. She avoided further damage.

Unfortunately for AE1, we are talking thousands of feet once cleared of the inshore areas. She had a long way to go before hitting the bottom had she been out of control.

[culverin]

hello balticsubs # 57 last para (thats last paragraph not parramatta)
Check my post # 46
it explains what you would find or otherwise.

[culverin]

LOST RN / RAN BOATS OF WW1
AE1, at this time, remains the only RN / RAN boat missing and whose whereabouts are unknown OUTSIDE of the British Continental shelf area.

[culverin]

On 10-10-1914 it was reported that :-
E class submarines are suffering from SEVERE straining of hydroplane shafting and leaks in locality of hydroplane guards, and has ALWAYS been a weakness, and is being rectified on all boats at earliest opportunity, as and when boats are available between patrols or docking for other individual boat rectification work. Bearing in mind their diesels were always playing up, but much of that work could be done at sea, simply knock down one cylinder at a time and do it in situ.
It is not clear if this just affected the first group, inc AE1, or later ones too.
This refers to the forward area, not aft, but by this date she had already vanished.
There is another area giving trouble but i need to find out more before proceeding without the facts.

[Peter.J.Richardson]

That is interesting.
Are you able to scan the document? Or quote a source?
I did also run across a rumour that AE1 ended up in the mud in S'pore.
This was during her voyage out of course.
Some years ago I looked in the S'pore 'Straits Times' archives for any references.
But only found information as to the arrival of the AE1 & AE2.
And it was never mentioned in any of Besant's reports that I am aware of.
Regards, Pete

[culverin]

REF# 60 and 61
Information relevant to this is in:-
ADM 137/1946 which is held at the National Archives Kew (England)
It is papers from the Naval Historical Section on behalf of the Board of Admiralty etc etc.. but covers a number of items / issues.
This however was Keyes / Jellicoe and dated 10 -10 1914, incorporating those points as per my # 60.

[BALTICSUBS]

On 10-10-1914 it was reported that :-
E class submarines are suffering from SEVERE straining of hydroplane shafting and leaks in locality of hydroplane guards, and has ALWAYS been a weakness, and is being rectified on all boats at earliest opportunity, as and when boats are available between patrols or docking for other individual boat rectification work. Bearing in mind their diesels were always playing up, but much of that work could be done at sea, simply knock down one cylinder at a time and do it in situ.
It is not clear if this just affected the first group, inc AE1, or later ones too.
This refers to the forward area, not aft, but by this date she had already vanished.
There is another area giving trouble but i need to find out more before proceeding without the facts.

E Class did suffer from leaks in the Hydroplane glands, but they don't seem to be of the magnitiude of causing a vessel to be lost. On their way to Australia, AE2 threw a blade from a badly made prop, but she also lost one of her forward hydroplane guards. These gurads were riveted on and when lost would also cause leaks, but again only leaks. AE2 was not modified before leaving England, AE1 was. You can see by the photo of her in dock in Sydney that the hydroplane guard mod has been done, and that is the installation of the support strut. There are documents in the Australian archives that cover this issue, and also Besant was worried that a large amount of seaweed could be caught between the guard and hydroplane thus causing them to be locked in the down position.

In late 1915 the submarine E9 had been been side swiped by E19. When Max Horton went to sea on his next patrol, the inspection after the hit, failed to pick up that E9's rear Hyroplane shaft had infact sheared. It was only noticed after they dived while on patrol that they had no rear hydroplanes. Although it effected control, they had no problem surfacing and so forth and went back to base.

Diesel engines played up all the time, but they always fixed them as they went.

If current research elimintes the German vessel, then i believe much of what Lt Cdr Stoker said, he found it hard to belive that Besant would carry out a dive at that time. He has hit something, or something has hit him, this is also the finding of historians withing the Australian War Memorial. So i guess for hydroplanes to become a problem we have to assume AE1 did dive, or was made to dive.

[BALTICSUBS]

I am sure you and Peter will let them know

AWM would never admit it got it wrong re naval items.

These were your words Jackaroo, well I got my answer today, and you guessed it, I'm wrong and they are right, not only that but AE1 had 2 bow tubes and not one.

Yep time they go the detailed primary source myth busting document.

[Jackaroo]

I am sure you and Peter will let them know

AWM would never admit it got it wrong re naval items.

These were your words Jackaroo, well I got my answer today, and you guessed it, I'm wrong and they are right, not only that but AE1 had 2 bow tubes and not one.

Yep time they go the detailed primary source myth busting document.

Thanks for the update Balticsubs.....

[BALTICSUBS]

They got someone onto it that knew more and they concede the model is not like AE1. The Navy has also not given up hope of finding AE1 either.

Here is a colourized shot of AE1 & AE2.

[Jackaroo]

They got someone onto it that knew more and they concede the model is not like AE1. The Navy has also not given up hope of finding AE1 either.

Here is a colourized shot of AE1 & AE2.

Nice photo that looks alongside Garden Island?

[BALTICSUBS]

Nice photo that looks alongside Garden Island?

Yep!

[BALTICSUBS]

Nice window in the Navy Chapel in Sydney, i think they have list the 4 of the date, should be 14th not the 1st of November.

[BALTICSUBS]

Some info captured from S.M.S. Planet in 1914 & translated.

[Porridge]

Hoping this is the right place to ask - anyone know of any internet site/resource where I might find blueprints of AE1. I have been searching quite a bit and have found nothing specific - mostly photographs revealing what's above the waterline and a side shot of a museum model.

I'm particularly after cross-section drawings at this stage in order to re-construct the hull shape correctly. I could dimension off the photos and use the ol' eyeball plus lots of speculation, but that's really not an option I'd like to visit just yet. Any suggestions or links (drawings or blueprints would be good) in relation to my above queries would be greatly appreciated.

Cheers.

[Peter.J.Richardson]

Porridge,
I guess a number of ppl here would have the Naval Drawings.
The 'Docking Plan' may be of some use to you.
I have a set of 5 in .tif format.
Heavy duty, so need to email individually.
Write to me at peter.john.richardson@gmail.com & I will email them to you.

Kind regards, Pete
http://www.ae1submarine.com/

[Peter.J.Richardson]

In line with my research, and my theory regarding possible German involvement in the sinking of AE1, here is the first photo of the 'Kolonialgesellschaft' that I have managed to locate in 22 years of researching the AE1 & Rabaul at the beginning of WWI.
Photo Notes
(40) Dampfbarkasse, Ufer Karadjundo, Ende Juli 1913 klein
[Small Steam Launch, Karadjundo Bank, Ende July 1913]
Note: The Angoram-speaking village of Bien, also called Karadjundo on the River Bien.

[Peter.J.Richardson]

Another photo of the 'KG' in 1913.
Abfahrt der Expedition von Malu, Sepember 1913 [Departure of the Expedition of Malu, September 1913]

My previous photo of the 'KG' may not have attached correctly.
Now here in a thumb-nail.

Pete Richardson
http://www.ae1submarine.com/

[Peter.J.Richardson]

Here is something slightly off the subject, but might appeal to some of the readers.

1914 (October 13th) cover to Mrs. R.J.A. Travers, Sydney from her husband Staff Captain J. Travers.
Endorsed 'On Active Service' & franked by 1914-15 New Guinea (GRI Overprint) 2 Shilling on 2 Mark blue, 4 mm spacing from setting 1 position 2, tied by a very fine strike of RABAUL, type 1 two line datestamp in violet.
This was four days prior to the Official Issue on October 17th.
With typed certificate on reverse "I hereby certify that the stamp attached to this envelope is one of the original stamps of the 16 sets issued by the Military Govt. of New Guinea. Dated October 1st, 1914" & signed by Capt. Walter Fry, Treasurer.
One of only nine (9) covers [all to Mrs Travers, and each with a different value stamp] known with this pre-release type 1 RABAUL cancel.
Superb & Unique. (BPA Certificate 1982)

Pete Richardson Collection

Kind regards, Pete
http://www.ae1submarine.com/

[culverin]

I frankly think those attempting any search for this lost boat and crew are onto a hiding for nothing.
Let their ghosts remain and God save the King.

[BALTICSUBS]

I frankly think those attempting any search for this lost boat and crew are onto a hiding for nothing.
Let their ghosts remain and God save the King.

That won't happen, the RAN wants to find her, reason, same as HMAS Sydney, to bring closure to the families, and recently being involved in a similar case, all I can say it was worth it, they should not be forgotten so easily.

[Peter.J.Richardson]

The actual phrase is "on a hiding to nothing".
To be faced with a situation which is pointless, as a successful outcome is impossible.
"They will, like the man who was on a hiding to nothing the first time Tom Sayers saw him, ‘take it lying down’."

In this case, if the RAN really is serious, they will find it. I do not think that it is impossible.
I only hope that "witness marks" from an external survey will reveal some facts to help solve the mystery of her sinking.
The RAN search equipment should be up to the task. The commercial industry would have an edge on the Navy gear, but they should be able to cope.
And because they lost a 'towfish' last time out, this should not make them gun shy of putting in a 110% effort now.
And why should the relatives of the AE1 be denied a decent, well organised search?
Maybe get David Mearns involved if they want to. His track record is pretty good.
This time, the RAN needs to do it right, if they want to be the first to discover AE1.

Pete Richardson
http://www.ae1submarine.com/

[Porridge]

Hi Peter

Thank you so very much - the docking plans will help considerably
and will certainly email you later regarding the set of plans. I like
your website btw; it is very informative, quite thorough and hope
you never give up on your efforts in keeping the site going.

Regards and Keep Smiling Through!

Hans

[JOHN STOKER]

Well Dear Friends. Its getting very near to the time 96 years ago that the AE1 went down, and still no one has found her. No one has said a service over her, 35 men still have not had a decent service over them. Thank God there are decent men who care for them and would like them to be found.

Like the Hymn [O hear us when we cry to thee for those in peril on the sea.]
Let it be [ For those who are lost beneath the sea ] One who cares.

[steve roberts]

Hi John.I back you 100%.These men deserve to be found and a close put to their fate.I hope the search is never given up.Particularly as an ex-submariner my self.
Many Many Regards Steve.

[astraltrader]

Always my favourite shot of AE1 taken by Allen.C.Green.

[BALTICSUBS]

Hi John,

I have recently been going through all the signal logs, and log books of every vessel up there at the time and have done a time line of events.

Some points of interest were.

The search for AE1 did not begin when the Admiral stated, it was something like 3 hours later in complete darkness. Oil was sighted, but had been dispersed.

A Steamer was sighted of the Duke of York Islands at 1800 hrs on the 13th, Yarra sent a signal that she was going to investigae, but the destroyers were told to stick to their orders, so Yarra went back and changed guard ship duties with Parramatta who did not list sighting a steamer, so what happened to this steamer? Did AE1 go sniffing for it? Besant's behaviour suggests a possibility of this.

There has been a lot made of HMAS Encounter moving back into Rabaul as though this was tied into where AE1 was supposed to go for her repairs that night. Encounter moved back to the Bee Hives so as to take on HMAS Sydney's task of the guardship in Rabaul, with Sydney going to sea that night. The vessel that raised the alarm was AE2 which was tied to Upolu, this was at 2015 hrs, so this is where AE1 was heading, and i can see the submarine engineer had been arranging supplies from HMAS Australia that day. HMAS Australia then tried calling AE1 3 times from 2020 hrs to 2030 hrs, there was no answer.

There was so much made recently of a wreck in Rabaul where a diver claims he saw AE1, this location was right under the nose of the Guadships at the Bee Hives. So a little hard to believe from my point.

Upolu offered the suggestion AE1 did not want to enter Rabaul at night in case she was fired on by the guard ship, and was waiting outside the harbour.

HMAS AE2 was also overdue the previous day, the 13th. When HMAS Yarra was asked where is AE2, she should be in by now, Yarra had no idea and presumed she had made it back, so things seemed a little loose up there.

Everybody assumes AE1 was heading westwards when last sighted, but Warren gave no direction, just that he presumed AE1 was going home. If Warren's orders were to escort the submarine, you will notice that when he did lose sight of her, he stopped for 30 minutes via her log, then went around the northern part of the Islands, not the southern part. The search also concentrated at the start on the northern side.

The British concluded AE1 had been mined.

I do not subscribe to the theory AE1 carried out a practice dive, the enquiry into the grounding of HMAS Yarra the following day while searching for AE1 is enough insight to make an educated guess of what happened, Yarra was in a safe situation, but then struck an uncharted reef, smashing her props, and this situation was due to a navigation error and not following a designated passage, but i can see the mistake, he had clearance of depth via his charts, and the reef was not marked. This area would be a disater for a submarine, it was the crossing of shallow to deep water, and AE1 had a deeper draft that Yarra, smashing her props with a gash in her hull would be the end. AE1 was in a safe situation re distance from shore when last sighted, and keeping this distance he should have retuned safely. So AE1 must have gone from a safe situation to an unsafe situation, and that would be going closer in while searching for something. Dive, only if she had to, due to a threat or vessel.

A summary of what i have found is simple, today we know no more on the fate of AE1 than they did back in September 1914. The only way to find her wreck or remains, is time, money, & simpley mowing the lawn with sonar, and that = Govermant funding. And the best place to start is where she was last sighted.

DB

[JOHN STOKER]

Hi DB
That was a very good report. How was it that the log differs from what the Admiral said. And did they not interrogate the.POW on his claim that he rammed AE1. You can bet your last dollar that he was visited by intelligence officers and they would have to submit there findings in a report just like every one else.

To find AE1 should be one of the most important thing the Government of Australia can do. And like you say,start at the place she was last sighted. There is a cover up some were.?

John

[astraltrader]

Thanks DB that was most interesting.

[BALTICSUBS]

Thanks Terry,

John,

Sometimes when we write reports and so forth we don't get all the details right. There are some difference between reports and then compared to Primary source signal logs and deck logs. That is normal I would think, and that is why I use this method, it always use cuts reports written after events to bits.

No I don’t think anything is hidden, if you were to read through the Time Line I created it is everything that was said at the time between vessels, they simply had no idea what had happened, everything beyond what was said that day is pure speculation, but like the rubbish that surrounded HMAS Sydney, it holds little weight as even Stoker could only speculate.

Another chaps name has come up in command of the German vessel, but nothing can be found of him. The German vessel theory can’t be proved or disproved, that is currently where that has to be left. The signalman that spoke to the German about AE1, when you read on with what he said, he still was not sure if he was having his leg pulled. Many people spoke of this gunboat doing the job, but as with everything, there is a missing link of evidence.

At this stage the only thing that can change anything in the way for research is another sighting of AE1 after Parramatta last sighted her, this does seem unlikely at this stage, so the stance that has to be taken is the reason Parramatta lost sight of AE1 is because she had sunk, and this area has to be made the Number 1 search area. What else can you do? Eliminate that area and move to the next.

One thing with my work on E18, there were many comments made in diaries and so forth on her fate, about 13 from 15 are rubbish, but 2 were so correct they vitually word for word described what happened, and one, was written before she was lost, and described exactly what was going to happen.

[BALTICSUBS]

Hi All,

with all the unseen hard work going on behind the scenes of the group dedicating itself to finding and honouring the gallant crew of HMAS AE1, we must take a pause to remember today as being the 96th anniversary of her mysterious loss.

Her loss would have occurred in the small time frame of between 1530 hrs & 1800 hrs on the 14th of September 1914, but where and when the tragedy occurred is the great mystery, there simply is just no clue to where they went after the last sighting.

We will remember them.

[JOHN STOKER]

Hi Palls
To-day is a sad day. We will never forget the brave men laying in a place that with the grace of God will soon be found. The words of the23 Psalm come to mind. Pray for the souls of the lost men.
We will never forget

John

[Jackaroo]

Hi All,

with all the unseen hard work going on behind the scenes of the group dedicating itself to finding and honouring the gallant crew of HMAS AE1, we must take a pause to remember today as being the 96th anniversary of her mysterious loss.

Her loss would have occurred in the small time frame of between 1530 hrs & 1800 hrs on the 14th of September 1914, but where and when the tragedy occurred is the great mystery, there simply is just no clue to where they went after the last sighting.

We will remember them.


Thanks DB
Lest we forget.

[Peter.J.Richardson]

Dear All,
Here are some photos of my latest acquisition.
Mike Bass of Cutting Edge Models has made an excellent representation of AE1 that I can add to my collection.
Many thanks to Mike for his excellent work.
http://home.iprimus.com.au/mbass/index2.html


Pete Richardson
http://www.ae1submarine.com/

[Jackaroo]

Excellent model of AE1. Mike also made a model of the AE2.

[culverin]

Have there been any further developments, plans or ideas for continuing a search for AE 1.

Is it being treated as an ongoing scheme, or a random one only.

What bearing has the Sydney success had on the outlook here.

[Peter.J.Richardson]

Morning,
Best have a look at the AE1 Inc. web site - http://www.ae1.org.au/
A lot of information gathering & I am still looking for clues in Germany.
But nothing to add to the mystery as yet.
Quite a lot happening during the Centenary Years as well.
Regards, Pete Richardson
www.ae1submarine.com

[peter schofield]

The Times, 8 October 1914 – The Loss of the Australian Submarine

The Secretary of the Admiralty regrets to announce that a telegram has been received from the Commonwealth Naval Board of Administration stating that the undermentioned officer was lost in Submarine AE 1 in addition to those already reported.

Lieutenant Charles L Moore, RN.

Lieutenant Charles Lewis Moore entered the service as a cadet in 1905 and was promoted to the rank of Lieutenant in 1911. He was qualified in submarine duties and had been lent for duty under the Australian Government.

[Peter.J.Richardson]

Peter,
Are you sure this is 1918? And not 1914?
I have never been able to find any family or even a photo of Lt. Charles Moore.
His brother became an Admiral I believe.
Regards, Pete Richardson
www.ae1submarine.com

[peter schofield]

Peter,
Are you sure this is 1918? And not 1914?
I have never been able to find any family or even a photo of Lt. Charles Moore.
His brother became an Admiral I believe.
Regards, Pete Richardson
www.ae1submarine.com

Appologies 1914 is correct

[peter schofield]

The Times Wednesday 3 May 1905
Midshipman CL Moore to the Leviathan to date 15 inst

The Times Saturday 3 November 1906
Midshipman CL Moore to the Bacchante, not dated

The Times Thursday 20 February 1908
Midshipman CL Moore to the Bulwark, to date 18 February

The Times Monday 19 April 1909
14 April - Acting Sub-lieutenant to Sub-lieutenant CL Moore

The Times Saturday 12 March 1910
Sub-lieutenant CL Moore to the Black Prince on commissioning

The Times Monday 3 April 1911 - Naval Promotions
Promoted to Lieutenant: - CL Moore dated 1 April

The Times Saturday 12 August 1911
Lieutenants: - CL Moore, GE Burton, H.F.M Peto, GD Sharp to the Arrogant, additional for course of instruction in submarines, to date 15 August

[culverin]

For a long time now i have repeatedly returned to this AE1 loss.

As each day goes by i am of the opinion that the speculation to her loss should cease, as little will be learnt without any evidence.

Many learned, and authoritative individuals have spoken since her demise.
Many issues do not add up, my principle concern being her stbd main motor, which seems to generate little interest.

However, should not the next search concentrate more using magnetic rather than sonar equipment. It would result in a fairly quick and efficient means of highlighting all potential targets, which sonar could not initially achieve.

[BALTICSUBS]

For a long time now i have repeatedly returned to this AE1 loss.

As each day goes by i am of the opinion that the speculation to her loss should cease, as little will be learnt without any evidence.

Many learned, and authoritative individuals have spoken since her demise.
Many issues do not add up, my principle concern being her stbd main motor, which seems to generate little interest.

However, should not the next search concentrate more using magnetic rather than sonar equipment. It would result in a fairly quick and efficient means of highlighting all potential targets, which sonar could not initially achieve.

I too have always said only time & money will find her. I have concluded AE1 was hove too or holding a small position in regards to area, and this is the reason why Warren from HMAS Parramatta does not give a course or speed of AE1 when she was last seen and anything in regards to where she went can only be speculation.

One thing is certain, she is down there, and once her wreck is found then we can apply the theories why. Admiral Patey ordered an inquiry but only got a limp report from Warren, and guesses from Stoker. He also only gives Besant a little comment on being north of where he was supposed to be.

AE1 was suffering from clutch problems that only affected her R/H engine while submerged. There seems to be a common theme running through AE1's loss as to why there was no proper inquiry, Patey could expect some blame, same as Warren, and also Besant and possibily they let it go.

Patey should never have let himself be talked into letting AE1 go out to sea with defects when he had AE2 on hand.

Besant went to sea with this defect, he also does not use his escort in HMAS Parramatta the same way AE2 & Yarra were used the previous day. Stoker was senior the previous day, they were ordered to guard the approaches into Rabaul, AE2 & Yarra followed these orders perfectly. Where AE1 was last seen Besant had left the gate wide open and was not following his orders and only got a mild comment from Patey saying he was far north of his beat, and Besant was also not using & communicating his intensions to Parramatta.

When Parramatta lost sight of AE1 he stopped for 30 minutes & then headed around the top of the Duke of York Islands, WHY? No one ordered him to do this, part of his orders were to escort AE1, did he think AE1 went this way? We may never know. Parramatta's log that remains is only a fair log, her signal books are missing which is annoying considering all other vessels up there at the time have all their signal books available.

I have also been looking into the experience of Besant.

[glojo]

However, should not the next search concentrate more using magnetic rather than sonar equipment. It would result in a fairly quick and efficient means of highlighting all potential targets, which sonar could not initially achieve.Maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow, but as each year goes by the technology improves for the detection of metals on or below the sea bed.

My prayers are that hopefully the Australian Government will never forget this lost submarine and the search will always be considered when testing new technologies.

[BALTICSUBS]

For a long time now i have repeatedly returned to this AE1 loss.

As each day goes by i am of the opinion that the speculation to her loss should cease, as little will be learnt without any evidence.

Many learned, and authoritative individuals have spoken since her demise.
Many issues do not add up, my principle concern being her stbd main motor, which seems to generate little interest.



The reason which i forgot to mention as to why people keep throwing up the speculation is simple, this needs Goverment funding, and it is all designed to create interest and make sure she is not forgotten.

[flinders46]

With the 97th anniversary coming up of the lost of AE1 - anything and everything should be done to finally lay to rest the crew - I have read all the threads and have learnt so much and I to would like answers to many of the same questions -

[flinders46]

I have worked at the HMAS cerberus Museum for 9 years -not once in this time has there been a memorial service that I am aware of -

[bbragg2]

Try this site
http://www.ae1.org.au/AE1-Memorials.php

[JOHN STOKER]

Well at last they are doing some thing. There is a new team in place, and for a start they have had a Memorial service at Garden Island Sydney. 14-9-2011
A lovely Memorial was unveiled next to the one to AE2. The lot can be seen on WWW.ae1.org.au/AE1-Memorial.php I also was there, and family of the lost ones from all over Australia and the U.K. There is going to be help from the Gov. and others. Any help from any one is welcome. Its any help writeing letters on the web, or twitter, any thing, if we keep pushing things will happen, we all need help some time, the men in AE1 need it before 100 years come to pass. One ordinary seaman John Stoker

[BALTICSUBS]

Item on AE1


http://www.smh.com.au/national/race-to-solve-the-ae1-mystery-20120128-1qmy7.html