Tenerife

The Condesito sits in 20m of water just outside the harbour at Las Galletas, in the Canaries off the island of Tenerife, she sank following a storm in September of 1973, engine problems having left her at the mercy of the sea and her proximity to the coast. El Condesito, or the “little count” when translated from Spanish, was a typical coaster, at 41m long she had two For’ard main holds and a smaller Stern hold, and on the 27^th of September, was carrying cement from the Arguineguin cement factory at El Pajar Beach, Gran Canaria, destined for the construction work being carried out at Los Cristianos, hence locally she is known as “The Cement Wreck”

You would not describe the Condesito as elegant and I doubt she would want you to, El Condesito was function over form every way you look, from her no nonsense bow to her rounded stern, she was built to carry as much cargo as a small sub 50m coaster could carry and in an efficient effective manner, enough to profit from Post War austerity whilst building a new future for her owners. Utility was the necessity and the Western World was familiar with frugality, there were no corners cut on Condesito, nor were there frivolities. The Condesito was a workhorse and could be run with minimal crew to eke out slender profits from cash strapped and often shoe-string businesses, as they tried to re-build what had been destroyed during the last 6 years of war in Europe. The previous 3 years of the Spanish Civil War (prior to WWII), didn’t help, as the Spanish economy was at the point of collapse. The Condor Squadron and military support the Nazis had given General Franco had proven a concept of Blitzkrieg, “Lightening War”, emboldening Hitler’s ambitions for a German Empire, which lead into Hitler’s attempt to impose a “1000 year Reich” on Europe, at the cost of anyone and everyone not willing to buy into that ideal

Following the defeat of the Spanish Republicans by General Franco’s Nationalists in 1939, Spain was practically bankrupt. Payments made for arms and support from the various countries and regimes that supported either side had battered the economy, and the various “purges”, street executions of opposition supporters, by both Republicans and Nationalists, would mean large movements of Spanish civilians out of the country trying to escape the violence. It would be international trading that would bring the Spanish economy back to strength, trading with all Europe, and in order to accomplish that, not taking sides with either the Germans or the Allies would be the key

It was into the landscape of political unrest and post-civil war economic austerity that the Astano shipyard had been born in October of 1941. Started in an existing commercial premises on the banks of the Perlio River in Fene by Jose Caruncho (buying a small carpenters yard from Ramon Perez), who, along with his sons Jose & Jacobo, and another half dozen locals, began the repair and, eventually the design and building, of fishing vessels up to 32m in length (Online Resource: fenecom.bogspot.com “Astano in Memory (1), Astano History 1941-2006 1941” Accessed 16/05/2022)

“The company would be controlled as Astilleros y Talleres del Noroeste, SL, in abbreviation it was defined as ASTANO, SL With a duration of twenty years, extendable for the construction and repair of small wooden and steel boats, which would later give way to ships of a certain size. , motivated by the adaptation and expansion of the facilities of its slipway workshops, slipway cars, dry docks and the means of production to the needs of the shipyard” Astano would launch their first fishing vessel a year later in December of 1942, the Comandante Lobo, and by 1943 they had moved from wooden ships to riveted steel hull construction. Astano did well, business was growing and in 1944 they went public as a limited company

El Condesito began life June 22^nd 1945 as the Marujin, sistership to the Rosita Iglesias No2, a Coastal Vessel owned by Enrique Lorenzo registered out of Barcelona, she weighed 168 Tons, and was 41meters from Stern to Bow and powered by a Triple acting Steam Engine pushing 9 Knots through her single prop, but for those of you expecting figures:

The Marujin was a technological leap from her wooden predecessors built at Astano (being a steel hulled, riveted steamship), and would prove her design and serve a long and (presumably) profitable career eventually outlasting her sistership, the Rosita Iglesias (scrapped in Barcelona in July of 1969), by 4 years. It would not be until 1948 that she took on the name we now recognise, El Condesito, when she transferred ownership from Enrique Lorenzo y Compania to the oddly similar Lorenzo Docampo y Compania who would own her until almost the end of her days when, in 1973, she would transfer to Filiberto Lorenzo de Honor……now I am not doubting, for one moment, the legitimacy of these undoubtedly honourable maritime trading edifices…..I am just rather curious as to the continued theme implied by “Lorenzo” in their titles…….however that is another story, bound, and no doubt legally constrained, by the statutes of several sea-faring national interests we will no longer speak of………

The Marujin was originally owned by the Vigo entrepreneur, Enrique Lorenzo Docampo, a businessman who, like so many of his time started with little and worked his way to fortune, first graduating from art school, then working in the Port and later emigrating to Argentina. Enrique returned to Spain in 1915 at 23 and started a workshop making and repairing steamship boilers

By the 1920’s the workshop, known as “La Vulcano” had 40 workers, branching into railway engine boilers in the ‘30’s and elevating Enrique to become a figurehead of local industry and bringing with that wealth and position. In 1941 Enrique and his chief engineer Florencio Garcia de la Riva established a shipyard, initially repairing wooden hulled ships but launching its own steel hulled vessel in 1948 (VigoEmpresa.com “ENRIQUE LORENZO DOCAMPO MEMORY OF A GREAT VIGUES AND UNIQUE MAN” Online Resource: https://www.vigoempresa.com/enrique-lorenzo-docampomemoria-de-un-gran-vigues-y-hombre-singular/ Accessed 18/05/2022). Enrique never forgot his origins, his factory workers were treated well, Enrique funded a co-operative where the Vulcano Factory workers could take out interest free loans to buy houses, and jobs at Vulcano were considered as lifelong, Enrique seems to have been a man of the people, with a philanthropic side, eventually becoming President of the local provincial council

There has been plenty of confusion surrounding the builders of the Marujin, several dive sites and wreck websites continue to state she was built in the Vulcano yards by Enrique’s company, Enrique Lorenzo y Compania, however Lorenzo ordered her built “for” his company, rather than by his company, the reasons seem lost in time, perhaps hidden away in an archive somewhere to this day? The pictures of her launch are distinctly that of the Astano yard, the two buildings noticeable behind the launch party are a clear match for the drawing of Astilleros depicting the yard as it stood in 1943, and even hinting at the sliding doors in the centre of the building. Pictures of the Vulcano yard in the same era would not have had any resemblance as the slipways were not estuarine, as in those at Astillero, but open sea shore at Vulcano. The launch photos of the Marujin also confirm the shipyard slipway at Astillero, the opposite shore of the Perlio river in Fene being clearly visible and again, not in any way resembling the slips of Vulcano. If that is not sufficient for you then the local history of Fene (fenecom.blogspot.com) has the Marujin as Astano yard no NC 007 (although distinctly more Sean Connery’s “Bond” era than Daniel Craig’s)……..

It seems the confusion is easily understood as the current web-site for the Vulcano yard in Spain (Vigo) has a picture of the Marujin docked (see the photo below titled “Marujin Loading at Dockside c1948”) in its “Historical Builds” section (Factorias Vulcano: http://www.factoriasvulcano.com/en/construcciones-historicas “Historical Builds” 1948 Marujin. Online resource: Accessed 25/05/2022) which states: “In 1948, the first vessel built with a 50 metre long steel hulk cargo ship, the MARUJÍN, was delivered.” The key to the confusion being the translation which has the Marujin both “built” and “delivered” the root, it would seem, of the confusion, both in and of itself. Wikipedia does not help as the entry for the Vulcano yard under the 1940’s decade entry (Wikipedia. Online Resource: https://es.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Factor%C3%ADas_Vulcano_S.A.&action=edit&section=2 Accessed 10/06/2022) states “At the end of this decade, specifically in 1948, the Marujín cargo ship, 50 meters long, was launched. The ship was commissioned by Enrique Lorenzo himself and was later sold to Naviera Condal.” Although again there is no mention of “built” or “constructed” in the translation, however, it does rather imply Enrique Lorenzo commissioned the Marujin from his own Vulcano yard……..

I asked both the shipyards directly, to confirm the Marujin construction with documentary evidence, I remained convinced that the Marujin was built and launched out of the Astano Yard in 1945, and that any work on her associated with the Vulcano yard was, at most, outfitting, or perhaps enhancement. There is a good case for such work to have been carried out as the Marujin started life as a steamship, and was later converted to Oil, as Enrique’s Vulcano yard at Vigo began life making boilers for rail engines and work barges, it would not be inconceivable it was the Vulcano yard that converted the Marujin to a Heavy Oil fired engine, however it seems that did not take place until c1967. I was delighted when I received an e-mail from Ainhoa Leal Diaz, the documentation librarian at The Exponav Foundation, custodians of the Astano Yard files. Ainhoa confirmed my belief that the Marujin was indeed designed and built at the Astano Yard as NC7 (Her sistership being NC6) of 1944, launched of course, June 22^nd 1945! “The ship you are asking about, the Marujín, was indeed built in the shipyard of Astano. This statement is supported by the following information:The existence of a document that contains a list of ships built in the shipyard; among them is the name Marujín together with its assigned construction number, NC7” I was very privilidged to be allowed to look through the archive of documents from the Marujin and her sistership Rosita Iglesias No2 and have been allowed to use a couple of the design arrangement drawings from the archive in this piece. The first is the hull blueprint which details the Marujin’s conservative lines and utilitarian draught

The second is the Steering Arrangement detail drawings showing the Marujin’s Stern Deck, Wheel-House, her quadrant and the steering linkages. The detail is excellent, as that presented in these drawings always is, they fascinate me and not only as a result of my early exposure to the Blue Funnel ships of my father’s years in the merchant navy, but as living history. There is something about the hand drawn nature of the blueprints which harks back to an age when people carried out the work rather than computers, now there is nothing wrong with computers, I wouldn’t be able to write these dives up were it not for my PC, but they are impersonal and technical tools, they are not the stuff of tangible physical remains, not hand drawn in inks and graphite’s by skilled human beings, but more the stuff of the ethereal more metaphysical and of the future. Perhaps I just feel more connected to the past than I do the future, perhaps as we age all of us do…….

It appears that in 1948 the Marujin was sold to the shipping company Naviera Condal owned by the Condeminas brothers, and based out of Barcelona. At this point she was renamed Condesito, the name she would carry until her eventual loss. The Condesito was re-registered in Barcelona and began sailing in territorial waters on national routes, (“The Little Count” https://www.sacaletatenerife.com/buceo-en-el-condesito/ Online Resource: Accessed 25/05/2022) “….on several occasions they were in the ports of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria and Santa Cruz de Tenerife although they also made frequent trips to the south” going as far as France and Italy. In February of 1970 the Condesito was again sold, this time for around 2.2M Pesetas, at that time around $38.6k, to Naviera La Palmense, becoming part of a fleet of 7 vessels owned by Filiberto Lorenzo de Honor

So, digging a little deeper into the maritime history of the Canaries and, specifically, Tenerife, it seems the final owner of the Condesito, Filiberto Lorenzo de Honor, was a figurehead and leading entrepreneur of marine trade on the island. Juan Carlos Diaz Lorenzo, writing in Puente de Mando in August of 2018: “For almost thirty years, the name of Filiberto Lorenzo de Honor was part of the maritime environment of the Canary Islands. Since the beginning of the 1960s, he had become the most important of the 20th-century cabotage palm shipowners” (Diaz J. C. “Protagonists of the Sea: The Palmero Shipowner Filiberto Lorenzo de Honor 1911-1999” Puente de Mando Online Resource: https://www.puentedemando.com/el-armador-palmero-filiberto-lorenzo-de-honor-1911-1999/ Accessed 17/05/2021) It is easy to imagine the man himself from the description of Juan Carlos Diaz Lorenzo, a wild child refusing to be constrained by established dogma, and at 9 years old, on the run from school and fascinated by his father’s contacts as a provisioner of local shipping, stowing away on the steamer Viera y Clavijo and ending up as cabin boy and deck hand…….. These were very different days than the cossetted age we find ourselves in today, an age where adventure was still available, even if, in an era where the sun had actually begun setting on the empire, and some of the colonies were actually in open revolt

Filiberto sailed with various steamers, from 1920 the Viera y Clavijo and over the next 20 years others owned and run by the Compañía de Vapores Correos Interinsulares Canarios, then in 1930 with the Compañía Trasmediterránea ending up on Álvaro Rodríguez López’s ship “Sancho II” having become an accomplished ship’s cook by that time. Filiberto changed direction at that point and took up running a hotel in La Palma, it may have been the needs of his hotels and those of his peers and his knowledge of the local steamers and their trades, but something pushed Filiberto into ship ownership. Starting small with a motor-sailer in 1947 Filiberto eventually built a small fleet of ships whilst acting as shipping agent for Naviera La Palmense in Santa Cruz de la Palma, by this time, 1955, his fleet comprised of 7 vessels, Guadarrama, Compostelano, Tío Pepe, Airoso, Aranguín, Nicolás Lafuente and Manen

Right up until the 1970’s Filiberto operated his fleet adapting to the emerging requirements of the islands in typical entrepreneurial style, if it was sand required, his ships carried sand, if it was fresh fish, he acquired refrigerated ships, if it was trucks, Filiberto would make use of the tides and ingenuity to off-load using “thick wooden planks” in the absence of cranage (Diaz J. C. “Protagonists of the Sea: The Palmero Shipowner Filiberto Lorenzo de Honor 1911-1999” Puente de Mando Online Resource: https://www.puentedemando.com/el-armador-palmero-filiberto-lorenzo-de-honor-1911-1999/ Accessed 17/05/2021), these were indeed “different times” as Juan Carlos Diaz Lorenzo has it, quoting Filiberto himself “That was – Filiberto himself recalled -, on the one hand, ignorance and on the other, the desire to make money.”

By 1970 Filiberto’s son, also Filiberto, was now manager of the fleet and bought several ships to supplement it, one of which was the Condesito, acquired in 1970 from the Naviera Condal Company of Barcelona. The Condesito would now find herself shipping cargoes under the ownership of Naviera La Palmense, for Americans, leased out at $300 per day to carry “provisions and water from the palms of Gran Canaria to different farms in the areas of Tarfaya and Agadir. (Morocco).” That wasn’t the only cargo she carried as it is also noted she carried “tubes” and “dynamite” although what type of tubes is not distinct and might easily have been anything from tyres to water pipes. The routes the Condesito sailed broadened too, she would now not only call at Las Palmas, Los Cristianos and Santa Cruz, but wider afield from Barcelona to  the Levant (Istanbul), Spanish Sahara, the Canaries and Cape Verde, adventurous, perhaps even ambitious for a modest 43M, 28 year old veteran coaster…….. 

 The evening of September 27, 1973 should have been no different than any other for the Condesito, she had sailed from the Arguineguin cement factory at El Pajar, Gran Canaria, with full holds of bagged cement, intended to help expand the tourist hotels and infrastructure, and desperately needed to meet the demands of the ever increasing tourist trade on the island of Tenerife. The Condesito was approaching the port at Los Cristianos in what some say was a storm, there are conflicting reports of the events, some describe Condesito colliding with the rocks in the Punta Rasca area, just a mile from her final destination, some suggest the crew abandoned the vessel deliberately, with her insurance to claim, and still others argue that her steering failed and that drove her onto the rocks. I can find no mention of a storm in September of 1973 in the Los Cristianos area, that does not mean a local storm did not occur, there are limitations to any non-native trying to identify events, especially with no local contacts to provide an insight to those long lost news sources from the day, more so as that person is also not a Spanish speaker ………  On the realisation the Condesito was floundering, Local fishermen and maritime services tried to save her, but it seems nothing could be done for the Condesito, she ended up firmly stuck on the rock outcrops of Punta Rasca. The remaining crew, although there is no mention of who or indeed how many, abandoned the Condesito on the morning of the 28^th of September of 1973, when those attempting to save the ship became convinced she might break her back. It only took a few hours more before Condesito lost her fight for survival and slipped beneath the seas where she lies today, broken, and abandoned, save by those she draws in to dive her……….

I dived the Condesito with some of FSAC who had joined me and my family for an early sun seeking dive break April of 2005. As I recall it there was Tracy, Jim, Rob and myself and we used Calipso Diving on the recommendation of Jason, one of my Divemasters and his then girlfriend Nerina, both of whom had moved out to work for Calipso as dive guides for a couple of years, but were back in the UK at the time to see relatives.  My Navy Log records “07/04/05 TENERIFE “Condesito” Los Cristianos Ten minute rib ride out to the right of a small harbour near Los Galetas, past the cactus and palm farm. Spent 15 mins in the gullys with all kinds of small tropical fish – most notable were the pipe-fish the biggest I’ve seen at near 1m long. Some smaller ½ m Barracuda & plenty of Urchins & their small black & blue fish. The Condesito was carrying cement & ran aground near the shore, broken & battered- no bows just the stern but wonderfully sited & a photographers dream. Plenty to get inside for & well worth a few more dives Air In 230 Out 90 Buddy Tim”

Another of my rather short descriptives, lacking much in detail considering I really liked this wreck which I remember quite vividly as being lit marvelously whilst we dived her. She only sits at the deepest in 25 or so meters of water, and the light dances on her making her a very picture perfect wreck. I recall her hull being broken but still in line with her stern at the time and much of it still vertical, there being a host of small fish sheltering amongst the debris

I enjoyed the dive at the time but looking at modern pictures of her she was not as broken when we dived her, I recall more of her hull being upright along her length at least, and her engine not being as exposed as it clearly is more recently. I cannot remember the boiler being exposed to the same extent either, so I have a picture in my mind of more of her structure being almost intact along her hull. Clearly time makes a difference, the photos here are more likely 2020 or so and our dive was a good 15 years earlier, it is hardly strange that she has become far more broken than I recall

Whatever the condition of the Condesito now, she is still an interesting wreck, the opportunities to get in and around her clearly a lot safer than when more of her hull was intact. There was only the one opportunity to dive her at the time, we had another, deeper wreck to visit the next day, so our dive was restricted by common sense and was limited to runs around her and, even then the limited penetration that might have been rewarding on the day, went unmentioned in my log. I recall mainly the deck, and the gully she lay in as dive runs, I remember her prop and rudder, vaguely, but can’t see any sign of them on the shots I can find on the websites and, sadly, Jason has nothing in his photo archive on the little wreck we enjoyed in the flashing of sun-beams, dancing in the shallow gully we found Condesito resting in that April morning in 2005

As ever this piece would not be as complete as it is without the help and generosity of those who have contributed to it. My personal thanks go to Harry Bakker of Aquarius Diving in Tenerife www.aquarius-divingtenerife.com for the use of his excellent photos, and to Ainhoa Leal Diaz of the Exponav Foundation www.exponav.org for the information and blueprints of the Marujin used in the piece

His Majesty’s Submarine HMS M2

HMS M2 was one of four Monitor Class submarines ordered for the Royal Navy in the latter years of World War 1, in fact only one of those ordered would ever see service during that war, HMS M1, a submarine fitted with a single large gun, as all of the class were first intended to be. The use of such a weapon on a submarine platform seems odd today and perhaps was so even back in the day. The logic seems to have been a surface attack using a large gun was far more likely to result in the sinking of an enemy ship than an experimental torpedo, before the start of World War 1 in 1914 there had not been a recorded successful attack from a submerged weapon since the American civil war, when a charge was, literally, rammed into the side of the Yankee USS Housatonic by the Confederate submarine H L Hunley, in February of 1864 (Clive Cussler in Hicks. B: “Sea of Darkness: Unraveling the mysteries of the H. L. Hunley” ISBN-10 1938170601. Spry Publishing LLC, Mar 2015)

The role the M Class submarines, of which only 3 were ever completed, were intended for was as replacements for the last of the obsolete “K” Class steam powered submarines, the M Class being Diesel Electric and far more efficient than their steam predecessors. The weapon platform was operated at near surface depth, the sighting of the gun being crude to the point of “line of sight”. It seems the drill was to achieve periscope depth, line up to the target, and then rise until the gun was out of the water to fire. An absurd sequence considering if the first shot was unsuccessful, or further targets were observed, the sub had to surface to re-load. It must have come as a complete and devastating shock to the admiralty when, in September of 1914 the German U Boat U21, commanded by Kapitanleutnant Otto Hersing, sank the British Light Cruiser HMS Pathfinder off the Firth of Forth in Scotland, becoming the first submarine in history to sink a ship with a self-propelled torpedo

Perhaps it was the outdated concept of operation that doomed the M Class submarine as a weapon platform, perhaps it was the perfecting of the self-propelled torpedo, and the pace of progress in war, outdating the design of the M Class submarines that demanded the Admiralty stopped thinking of submarine warfare as somewhat underhand, and even ungentlemanly (if that even registers in terms of global conflict)? Then again, perhaps it was the fate of the M1, lost in a collision whilst submerged on an exercise in 1925 (only 7 years after the end of WWI and a mere 14 before the outbreak of WWII in 1939), when the Swedish merchant vessel SS Vidar struck her gun, knocking it from its hull mount and opening the hull to water ingress, flooding her and sending her to the bottom of the Channel off Plymouth with all hands lost? Whatever the reason, two of the three M Class submarines were assigned to other roles and their guns removed M2 becoming a submersible aircraft carrier, M3 becoming a minelayer and M4, still under construction was scrapped before completion

The M2 had started life in 1916, from an admiralty order for four K class submarines an order that increased to 17 (6 were built at Vickers & one, K26, a joint Vickers/Chatham build) which was later changed to an order to build to a new Diesel Electric design, and the Vickers Barrow In Furness yard converted K17, 18, 19, (K27 & 28 were cancelled Vickers orders) into “M” Class Diesel Electric Submarines, M4 (K21) was an Armstrong Whitworth build when cancelled & scrapped in build (K+M Class Submarines. Online resource:  http://www.gwpda.org/naval/ks000001.htm Accessed: 20/04/2022). Of these K class submarines it would be K19 that would become the M2, originally fitted with the 12” 40 Calibre Mark IX Gun, as were all 3 of the completed M Class submarines, M2 also had four 182 torpedo tubes as standard. For those of you who love the technical specifications:

So why was M2’s gun removed and for what reason was she fitted with an aircraft hangar and a stowable aircraft? The initial role of the M Class submarines was supposed to be coastal bombardment, appear out of nowhere and shell coastal batteries defending approaches to harbours and strategic coastal cities, I imagine Gallipoli and the Dardanelles were still in the minds of some at the Admiralty at the time of contract, an enemy submarine appearing off Constantinople and shelling the city, or its defences, might have been the final straw that could have turned the campaign around completely. Anecdotal evidence from the time says the Turks were within 8 hours of fleeing to the hills, in truth there is a quote from one of the senior Turkish Generals to that effect from the day (which despite some hours of looking for it I cannot get my hands on it so you will have to take my word for it until I stumble across it again!), suffice to say there was at least some merit in the proposed concept of operations

There was perhaps more merit in the role of commerce raider, a submarine challenge to the supply chains of Germany, surfacing when steamers were inbound and fully laden with war supplies, or bringing imported goods for retail and much needed food supplies for civilian and military uses. Neither role would be undertaken by the remaining M Class submarines, they were not completed in time to see service during the First World War, and would spend their time on exercise or flying the flag for Britain around the world as a show of strength and sea power. Following the loss of M1 in 1925 both M2 and M3 were taken out of service, the Admiralty no longer confident the huge guns were of any use, nor the roles realistic. M2 had her gun removed and was modified to carry an observation plane in a hangar, M3 re-designed to undertake mine laying duties, the large platforms of the M Class seemingly ideal to take such dramatic changes in purpose and function, but still able to submerge and manoeuvre in the anonymity of the sub surface world

The idea of a submarine equipped with a spotter plane might seem odd, it was certainly a novelty at the time and, on her completion in 1927, it propelled M2 into the headlines across the world. The basis of the need might be a little less evidenced, however the concept of a submarine, ahead of the main battle fleet, surfacing out of the depths and launching a lead spotter plane to look for enemy shipping, or potential enemy threats to the battle fleet, clearly has its attractions. The practicalities of such a submerged operation were not insurmountable, the stowing, launching, and recovery of such an aircraft posed significant problems. The aircraft would have to have foldable wings to reduce its width, it would have to be light enough to take off in a very limited distance, and from a potentially unstable platform, after all, submarines were not the largest craft even given the size of the M Class, and they were prone to rolling from side to side in anything other than mild swells

The M2 re-design, proposed by Greenwich in 1916, would take almost the entire width of the Sub’s pressure hull and have a distinctive domed appearance being slightly narrower at the hull joint. There would be a Jib above, capable of a 180’ pivot across the hull to facilitate the recovery of the aircraft back onto the vessel following a flight. The plane would require pontoons to enable it to land back on the sea and position itself for recovery. Perhaps the most challenging of the problems surrounding carrying an aircraft on the submarine would relate to its stowage and deployment. Lift of any aircraft is dependent on the surface area of the wing in relation to its weight and engine power, to fit the available space of the hangar the wings had to be stubby, and they had to fold back on the hull to narrow the planes stowed cross section, that limited the lift generated and, combined with the size and power of the engine, affected the take-off potential significantly. It would take the ingenuity of perhaps the first aircraft catapult launch system, and definitely the first submarine mounted steam launch catapult, to finally ensure the specially designed Parnall Peto bi-plane could take off from its ground breaking submarine platform

The submarine and its hull could take the modification, the Chatham design proved that, the optimal space available when all the parameters had been calculated, gave the plane its dimensions, and an aircraft manufacturer, George Parnall & Company, took on the design. The Parnall Peto began life as prototype N181, built to Air Ministry Specification 16/24 which described a “Submarine Bourne Reconnaissance Sea Plane” with general characteristics:

This gave George Parnall and his team another challenge as the intended crew was 2, this would allow an observer and a pilot, ideal for spotting missions, far from ideal when considering power to weight, to wing area, on a necessarily small aircraft. However, that was George Parnall’s speciality, probably why he was chosen to prototype the requirement in the first place? Parnall specialised in small aircraft and his answer, designed by Harold Bolas, the Parnall Peto, was exactly that. Harold Bolas, design engineer at Parnall’s, proposed a wood and fabric construction, strengthened with Aluminium and occasional Steel, it was originally powered by a Bristol Lucifer Engine giving out 128 Hp, with plywood floats. Graces Guide (Parnall Aircraft, Peto. Online Resource: https://www.gracesguide.co.uk/Parnall_Aircraft Accessed 26/04/2022) has it that it was generally a success, however “….modifications were put in hand and the machine was rebuilt with new wings, metal floats and a 169hp AS Mongoose engine. Tests both on the sea and in the air showed that Bolas had fully met the requirements and it was officially judged to be exceptionally good”

The specification of the Parnall Peto gave it just about enough lift to ensure it could get off the ground, or in this case the M2’s hull, fly a spotting mission with its two occupants and get back to the submarine. This wasn’t an elegant solution it was one born of necessity….compact and bijoux Mostyn….compact & Bijoux

The land trials of the Peto had proven the concept, the steam catapult provided sufficient lift to launch the aircraft, and the jib would allow recovery. In 1927 the M2 had completed fit-out at Chatham and would now take to sea to undergo a more immediate and realistic sea trial, with swells, whitecaps, repetitive submerge and surface trials to check the seaworthiness of the submarine, and the execution of the concept of a stealth platform the like of which had never been seen before

Submarines had occasionally previously carried aircraft, the German U-Boat U12 had sailed to within 30 miles of the Thames Estuary carrying a Friedrichshafen FF29 strapped to its hull. However that was just floated off when the submarine dived, and the plane had to fly back to Zeebrugge itself following its mission over the South Coast. The M2 was an entirely new weapon, one that could appear out of nowhere, in the days before Sonar, deploy its spotter plane, and then lurk at periscope depth awaiting the plane’s return, before lifting it back aboard and sinking into the anonymity of the sea with its aircraft back safe in its hangar. Conditions aboard any submarine of the time were not ideal, there were two shifts of crew in order to carry out “watches” as in any naval vessel, and as a result space was at a premium, even more-so in a submarine than on a Battleship

The M2 seemed to perform well in her sea trials and the aircraft hangar maintained its watertight status throughout, drills became slicker, and the times taken to surface and deploy the tiny Parnall Peto improved with each new exercise. Perhaps the M Class had finally found its place amongst the submarine fleets of the Admiralty, perhaps wars had become far less “gentlemanly” and now, of necessity, were going to be far more clandestine affairs

Deploying the Parnall Peto quickly, in order to maximise the element of stealth and avoid chance encounters with enemy ships, meant preparing her before the submarine was surfaced “The crew of 5 squeezed into the watertight hangar and electric heaters warmed the engine oil.  On the surface, the lowered hangar door was part of the launching ramp and the Peto was pushed onto the ramp and the engine started.  The aircrew climbed aboard as the wings were being unfolded and the sub turned into wind” (Subaeronautical Tales, Para 4. Online Resource: https://www.a-e-g.org.uk/subaeronautical-tales.html Accessed: 01/05/2022). To ensure readiness 24/7, there were two teams of flying crew, and to maintain and launch the aircraft there were 5 mechanics/crew aboard the M2

Contemporary comments have the deployments of the aircraft at around 5 minutes from surfacing. It seems the period between the 1927 conversion completion and 1932 were a continual round of exercises and trials and, on January 26^th of 1932, it seemed just another exercise when M2 and her crew left Portland, in the company of another submarine, to take part in an exercise in the bay area off Chesil Beach

The M2 had sent a radio message at 10:11 that morning to her surface ship the Titania, to announce she would dive at 10:30 (Aviation Safety Network “ASN Wikibase, Occurrence #210792” Online Resource:  https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/210792 Accessed: 01/05/2022). By a twist of fate the M2 had been seen by a passing vessel, the coaster Tyneside, on her way in to dock at Portland:  “That afternoon the coaster Tynesider put in to Portland where the captain told a man at the coaling wharf that he had seen a submarine dive stern first that morning. Later he had seen a surfaced submarine enter Portland and assumed it must have been the same boat. The Tynesider then sailed on to Gravelines and it was not until the evening that the M2 was reported overdue and a search began” (Rod Arnold “The Dugout” Issue 20 May 2020 “M Class Submarines” P19, Para 1. Online Resource: https://www.westernfrontassociation.com/media/11774/dugout-20.pdf Accessed: 01/05/2022)

Nothing more would be seen or heard of the M2 until divers located her hull in 30m of water on the 03^rd February, following extensive searches of West bay, the M2’s last known location. It seemed the M Class of submarines was ill fated, perhaps just like the K Class before them, all further M Class operations were stopped by the Admiralty and Ernest Cox, famed for the Scapa Flow German High Seas Fleet Recovery Operation, was hired to bring the M2 back to the surface to discover what had gone wrong and sent her to the bottom

When Divers located the M2 30m deep in Portland Bay, the hangar door was found to be open, the Parnall Peto was still in its hangar, and several of her hatches were open, what had gone wrong? The two most often proposed scenarios cover the most likely causes, firstly that the hangar door was opened before the submarine had properly surfaced. The second most likely scenario is that the stern hydroplanes, the method the submarine uses to pitch its bow down and drive the hull under the water to submerge, failed in some way causing the submarine to flood the hangar and the main of the hull

There is a third, perhaps less palatable explanation too, if the captain of the Tyneside, who presumably had not seen an M Class submarine before, had identified the stern as the bow……and you will perhaps agree, from a distance the conning tower of the M2 gives the impression the hangar is located behind it…….then the M2 was actually diving as usual, with the hangar doors not fully closed, or worse, the hangar doors failed as the M2 dived and flooded her through the hangar

Apparently there were procedural issues from the outset, the manner in which the M2 maintained her launch state on the surface was unusual, “High pressure air tanks were used to bring the boat to the surface in an awash condition, but to conserve compressed air compressors were then started to completely clear the ballast tanks of water by blowing air into them. This could take as long as 15 minutes to complete. The normal procedure for launching the aircraft was therefore to hold the boat on the surface using the hydroplanes whilst the hangar door was opened and the aircraft launched” (Aviation Safety Network “ASN Wikibase, Occurrence #210792” Online Resource:  https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/210792 Accessed: 01/05/2022)

As far as I can make out the writer of the piece (apologies if I am in error with this), Dr John Smith, makes the conclusion that, if the M2 was using this method to hold surface, then a failure of the hydroplanes would have forced the stern down and dragged the submarine under, as the captain of the Tyneside said he observed, until the hangar flooded and the M2 was beyond saving. There is no doubt the sinking of the M2 could have been caused by a combination of factors, an attempt to improve deployment times, mechanical issues, or just plain human error, whatever the real reason it is unlikely we shall ever truly know exactly how she ended up on the sea bed

The attempts to salvage the M2 were unsuccessful, even Ernest Cox couldn’t get her to the surface, although he came very close, reaching a couple of meters from the surface on one occasion, the weather hindered every attempt and the equipment available to Cox clearly was not up to raising a flooded submarine, from 30m in a series of sets of increasingly bad weather conditions, “The process of making HMS M2 ready for lifting was dogged with a number of severe setbacks. These included bad weather and the parting of the lifting “camels” from the wreck. In fact a total five different attempts were made to raise HMS M2 and they all ended in failure. Finally, in December 1932, plans to salvage the wreck were abandoned.” (Innes McCartney “Lost Patrols: Submarine Wrecks of the English Channel No 3/21, HMS M2 – Aircraft Carrier” P82). In December of 1932 the M2 was finally allowed to rest where she sits today, in Portland Bay. Whatever the reason, the M2 was the final loss of an M Class submarine, the Admiralty could not ignore the repeated failures, and would not tolerate the continued losses, the M Class was abandoned and all remaining craft sold for scrap, including the (up-to that point), successful minelayer M3. M2 is the final, tragic resting place of 58 of her crew, a living memorial to the arms race of the inter-war years, and the ultimate sacrifice of 60 sailors in the service of their country

I dived the M2 in April of 2004 and was lucky enough to have a student with me taking some video, the quality of the video isn’t up to today’s HD standards, but it was early days for your average diver to have a video set-up, it was early days for Brad filming too, but you can see what he shot later in this piece. My Navy Log records: “M2 Portland Dorset  Good descent to the hull with viz @ 5-6m and plenty of life – a great Lobster which came out to play fearlessly! The wreck is splendid with dead man’s fingers everywhere & intact throughout. The bow is odd with cut-outs in the centre. The hangar is silted but we entered for 2 – 3 m then went round the rails & then the conning tower area before ascending. The masts are still in place – remarkably. Buddy Keith Air In 240 Out 100”

As usual, the description is brief noting the main points of the dive. Remembering the dive, I recall trying hard to work out what the launch system was, and how it would have worked, the steam piston tubes were still present but, apart from a basic understanding, the technical details were lost on me. The viz was not bad, it gave enough to see the area you were in, but not enough to get the scale of the wreck. I know I was surprised how long it took to reach the bow and circle back to the conning tower. The hangar was very silted on our dive and it would have been great to see it when cleared, perhaps there are even remnants of the Peto in all the debris blocking it? All I could think at the time was how tragic such an end would have been, I had no idea bodies had been recovered back then, believing there had been total loss. It is clear some tried to escape and, to have been caught in a hatch perhaps indicated the first to attempt to escape failed, and blocked the way for others behind them. At the time the Davis escape gear was a very new piece of kit, I wonder how many would have put faith in it, whatever the circumstances……but we will never truly know

You can watch the edited version of our dive on HMS M2 courtesy of Brad, Considering the conditions on the day it’s a good introduction to the wreck

As ever, the details included here have been supported by the research of others and, for the opportunity to stand on the shoulders of giants, I am indebted to: Dr Innes McCartney, Peter Mitchell (1947-2015) and the infinite resource of the “Tinterweb”

Rosalie Moller

The Rosalie Moller began life in 1910 as the steamer SS Francis, built for the Booth Line of Liverpool by the Clydebank shipyard Barclay, Curle & Company of Whiteinch, Glasgow. The Francis was built to be an intermediate Passenger & Cargo ship, her capacity sufficient to take economic loads whilst able to accommodate some passenger trade. The Francis had accommodation for 17 First Class passengers, 5 x 3 bed cabins and 2 x 2 bed cabins, these would most likely see senior executives of the Booth Line, transiting to Manaus and back, or its premiere customers, (Booth Line had several larger “Tourist” vessels, notably SS Hildebrand & SS Hilary and others… far more luxurious than the SS Francis, for larger scale tourism & Grand Tour purposes) and perhaps some senior managers and foremen, essentially upper management. The SS Francis also had accommodation for up to 76 passengers to her stern in the No 4 Hold area indicated as “steerage”, she was also, ahead of her time, fitted with a “Marconi House” for a telegraph

Barclay Curle & Company, shipbuilders, had a traditional Clydebank Shipyard, typical of the  Scottish opportunists of the Victorian era, a yard having begun with sailing ships and progressed to building Iron, and eventually steel hulled vessels, as the industrial steam age accelerated the industries of Great Britain in the late 18^th and early 19^th century. Founded in 1818, by John Barclay, the yard was successful and, when John died in 1845 the sailing-ship business was taken over by his son, Robert, who took James Hamilton and Robert Curle into partnership as Robert Barclay and Curle. The name changed again in 1863, when Robert Barclay died, becoming Barclay, Curle and Co

The SS Francis was a typical ship of her time, a triple expansion steam engine driving a single propeller shaft, producing some 400 or so nominal horsepower, and giving her a top speed of 11 knots. The Francis was a workhorse, reliable, well designed, and using dependable technology, in order to ensure the Booth Line many years of service, hauling Leather and Rubber in her Four spacious holds, configured Two to her For’ard and another Two to her Aft. The Francis was a good looking, utilitarian ship, economic but attractive in a kind of “industrial” sense, exactly what the Booth Line wanted for the long journey to Brazil and the colonies

Additional Details:

It would only be two years after the successful delivery to Booth Line (in 1912) that the Barclay & Curle Shipbuilding business would be taken over by Swan, Hunter and Wigham Richardson, including the Clydeholm and Elderslie shipyards and dry docks, and the dry docks in Govan. You might remember Swan Hunter Wigham & Richardson built the Port Napier, another Clyde wreck on this site……..another 6 degrees of separation!

Barclay Curle & Co had begun making their own engines in 1857, they were Steam driven, largely triple expansion engines from what I can determine. The SS Francis was certainly fitted with a triple expansion engine, and it was one of Barclay & Curles’ own designs with an output of 401 horsepower, the boiler likely of the Inglis Marine design of 1909, illustrated in the Barclay & Curle trade advert from Graces’ Guide (Grace’s Guide: “Barclay, Curle & Co” illustration 3 “Inglis Marine Boiler”. https:// www.gracesguide.co.uk/ Barclay,_Curle_and_Co Accessed: 09/01/2022) shown below

Triple Expansion engines work by passing steam (from boiling water), under pressure, into a chamber containing a piston, the “Triple Expansion” method makes use of the highest pressure in the smallest cylinder first, the expanding (cooling) steam then passes into a second slightly larger (slightly lower pressure) cylinder, activating a second piston, and then finally the steam moves into the largest, lowest pressure cylinder where it activates a third piston. Following the expansion, or driving, cycle the remaining steam is passed into a condenser which re-cycles it back, as water, to the boiler for re-use. If you want to see an example of a Triple Expansion steam engine sat on the sea-bed, then look up the video of the Torpedo Alley wreck “Caribsea”, which will eventually be loaded on this site………….  Craig and I get to swim around the engine from the Steamer Caribsea, in the Atlantic, on the North Carolina coast, and it gives you some idea of a smaller sized triple expansion steam engine, and offers some perspective of scale  

The Clydeside shipyards mostly relied on the heavy lift cranes at Glasgow Harbour, at the western end of Plantation Quay, for fitting engines, transmissions, and the larger plant into the ships they constructed. The first built was the Clyde Villa Crane, capable of lifting up to 130 tons. (“Finnieston Crane, History” Online Resource:  https://www.scotlandguides.org/tour/finnieston-crane-glasgow-3281.htm Accessed: 18/11/2021) installed in the 1890s in Princes Dock, in front of Govan Town Hall

A sister crane (The Finnieston Crane) was located a bit further upriver on the site now occupied by the City Inn. These cranes would eventually be complimented by “Titan” cantilever cranes, luckily Scotland is proud enough to have kept these reminders of their shipyard history, and examples of the Titans can still be seen alongside the Barclay, Curle & Company buildings and in the Glasgow port

The SS Francis owners, Booth line, were trading in Leather exports, Rubber imports and passenger routes between Liverpool and the Amazon basin. In 1910 the global rubber trade centered around Manaus, 94% of the substance originated from the Amazon region, Amazonia, and this was shipped via the River Negro (Rio Negro) primarily by the Booth Line, the most significant traders in Amazonia, with palatial offices in the town that would not have looked out of place in any British city, typical statement edifices, not unlike those in the City Centre of Liverpool itself

Discovered by Spanish explorers in 1499, the mouth of the Amazon River is 70 odd miles wide, Francisco Orellano sailed it in 1542 and it was settled at Sao Jose de Rio Negrinho in 1699 (“Port of Call, Manaus” Middlemiss, N. Oct 2021 in “Features” Online Resource:  https://www.shippingtandy.com/features/manaus/ Accessed: 20/11/2021). “…….the Rio Negro and Solimoes rivers that combine to form the mighty Amazon leading eventually to the sea. The black waters of the Rio Negro form a black diving line with the brown waters of the Solimoes at the junction, and do not mix together for many miles downstream” The situation and environment conjures scenes from the Roland Joffe film The Mission, not a million miles from the exploration and early settlement of the Amazon Basin, and the challenges met on the Rio Negro I imagine?

Manaus, the capital of the Amazonas State of Brazil, is situated in the heart of the Brazilian rainforest 900 miles inland from the Atlantic coast in an area colloquially known as the “Amazon Basin”…..There is another more descriptive name for the area….”inferno verde” which translates as “green hell’. There were two million square miles of tropical rainforest in the Amazon Basin in 1900, with an average temperature of 25’c, the Rio Negro and its tributaries feed the Amazon River and, as Manaus is only 302 feet above sea level, navigation from the distant South Atlantic using both rivers, allows travel to Manaus by vessels such as the SS Francis. There are two floating wharves in Manaus’ Port (Paredao and Malcher). The Paredao has four deep sea inside and outside berths, the Malcher floating platform is for river passenger craft and fishing boats. The snows of the high Andes melt and flood the Rio Negro in February and March, receding in June. A record 29.97 metres was recorded at Manaus in 2012, (ebb level of 13.63 metres) a range of almost 16m, as a result all waterside properties in Manaus were built on stilts

Founded in 1866 by Alfred & Charles Booth, “Alfred Booth and Company” was a British trading and shipping enterprise, born in Liverpool, that would eventually trade for more than a century. The company was managed well, and grew to become a significant merchant shipping company, with commercial interests in the United States and South America, specifically, in the time of the SS Francis, Brazil and the Amazon Basin

Liverpool, in Victoria’s reign, was a thriving hub of empire, it was also a centre of industrial development, seeing the birth of the railways of Great Britain, the transition from wooden sailing ships, to Iron, and then Steel hulled steamships, and the immense wealth associated with global trade and commerce. Alfred and Charles Booth worked together at Lamport and Holt Shipping Company in Liverpool, they were cousins of the owner, and co-founder of Lamport & Holts, William Lamport. In 1851 Lamport, transferred shares in the SS Nile, a cargo steamship, to Charles Booth and George Holt. Booth, and Holt’s father, later took minority shares in another of Lamport’s steamships, the Orontes, meaning Charles Booth had shares in the Nile and one in the Orontes. In yet another of those 6 degrees of separation George Holt would, with his brother, Alfred, eventually establish the Blue Funnel Line in Liverpool

In 1862 Charles Booth joined his eldest brother Alfred, and invested part of the £20,000 his father (also Charles) had bequeathed to each of his 5 children, on his death, in the construction of two steamships, the Augustine and the Jerome. The Booth brothers’ acumen grew the Booth Steamship Company, slowly building up a substantial fleet, to carry merchandise to and fro across the Atlantic. The enterprise was very successful, becoming a huge concern which had interests in many countries, especially the Amazon River trade of Brazil. Charles Booth was also something of a radical in his time, he was a philanthropist and champion of the poor, devoting 17 years to the study, and detailed reporting, of the grievous social conditions suffered by the Victorian working classes in London. Booth, pictured above in an unusual manner for the time (perhaps specifically to emphasize his “difference” from traditional Victorian gentry), shows him in an almost scruffy, casual pose, tie somewhat adrift, aloof, but with piercing, if distant stare

Charles Booth funded his own research, and his business interests, throughout those years and tirelessly campaigned for the introduction of old age pensions, laying the foundations of Bevan’s welfare state through the influence of the “Beveridge Report” of 1942 on “social insurance and allied benefits” where the post war “home for Hero’s” was supposed to become reality, and the rhetoric espoused nirvana,  “Now, when the war is abolishing landmarks of every kind, is the opportunity for using experience in a clear field. A revolutionary moment in the world’s history is a time for revolutions, not for patching.” (National Archives: “The Beveridge Report and the foundations of the Welfare State” Online Resource: https:// blog.nationalarchives.gov.uk /beveridge-report-foundations-welfare-state/ Accessed 19/11/2021) Charles would remain Chairman of the Booth Line until 1912. Charles Booth retired and passed the chairmanship to his nephew (Charles Booth 1868 – 1938) in 1912, however, in 1915 he returned to help the company get through the First World War, but sadly died in November of 1916 before the war ended. Charles memorial is on a tablet in St Paul’s Cathedral:

By 1914 the Booth Line fleet had more than 30 ships, 11 were requisitioned for war service, Booth Line lost 9 to enemy action, by 1919 only 18 ships remained. There were no more ships built between 1919 and 1927, a ship was purchased from Germany, perhaps the war office reparations fleet, re-named Dominic. The Booth Line renewed another 7 vessels and bought another second hand ship between 1928 and 1935, but in 1931, having given the Booth Line two decades and more of stirling service, between Liverpool and Brazil, with the demise of the India Rubber trade out of Manaus, the SS Francis was about to change ownership….. Not only was the Francis now 21 years old, but the route she had sailed, and the trade goods she had carried, were now dwindled to almost nothing. The monopoly on the rubber tree, (up until then only grown and harvested in the Amazon Basin and Brasilia’s) was broken when, In 1876, British traveler Henry Wickham stole (or exported, depending on your perspective), 70,000 seeds of “Hevea brasiliensis”, also known as the Para Rubber Tree, and seeded areas of Southeast Asia (including Ceylon (Sri-Lanka) and Malaya (Peninsular Malaysia), then under British Empire control), in order to break the Amazon monopoly and gain control of the product for Britain

By the 1920’s it was becoming less and less economically viable to trade rubber out of Manaus, “By the early twentieth century the economy of Manaus entered a downward turn, as managed plantations in Malaysia outperformed Brazilian forest extractors. Whereas in 1909 Amazonian rubber constituted 94% of the world supply, by 1918 it had fallen to 10.9%. The Amazonian rubber boom was over,” (“An End to Difference Imagining Amazonian Modernity at the Dawn of the Twentieth Century” 2018 Chernela, J & Periera, E. P28, Para 2. Online Resource: https:// anth.umd.edu/sites/anth.umd.edu/files/2018chernelaboom.pdfAccessed 14/11/2021). The monopoly the Amazon Basin held over rubber extraction had been effectively, and fatally broken, (“Rubber in Brazil: Dominance & Collapse, 1876-1945” Resor, R. R. Online Resource: https:// www.jstor.org /stable/3113637 Accessed 19/11/2021) “For the first few years of this century, Brazil was the major supplier of rubber to the world. However, the Amazonian wild rubber industry was unable to compete, in either price or quality, with the Asian plantation rubber that began to appear on world markets after 1906. Development of a successful plantation culture in the Amazon seemed imperative, but even with public subsidy, plantations remained an economic impossibility. By 1945 the Brazilian rubber industry, overwhelmed by Asian production, had virtually disappeared”

Chernela and Periera write a succinct and telling obituary on the rubber industry of the Amazon basin and the decline of Manaus as an exporter: “…..with no export commodity to replace rubber, the city entered a period of stagnation. The population contracted to a fraction of its former size, dependent for revenue on the export of a few raw forest products with limited markets” and the Booth Line stalwart the SS Francis was duly sold on to Nils Moller of Moller & Company Shipping, a Shanghai based Swedish Company

Nils Möller, a Swedish sailing-ship Captain, suffered the death of his first wife Jenny in 1859, the effect this had on him must have been very significant as it prompted him to sail his brigantine, the Osaka, to China looking for commissions (Online Resource: https://www.myheritage.com/site-186892972/moller Accessed 14/11/2021). Captain Moller not only found cargoes there, but must also have fared well, as he ended up in an argument with the Swedish government over the right to fly Swedish flags on his ships. It was apparently forbidden for a Swedish national, living abroad, to fly the Swedish flag, and that seems to have caused Nils to register his fleet of ships in Great Britain, more so, he removed the umlaut (double dot) from over his last name, presumably in anger or frustration, and declared himself a citizen of Shanghai!

Nils operated sailing ships from 1882 on the China routes and to Eastern Russia, Japan and the Philippines, sailing out of Shanghai, and he obviously liked the place, settling down and having two more families, one with Alethea Stephenson, and a later one with Hannah Clappison. In 1903 Nils’ two sons took over the business and it was registered as Moller Bros, in 1907 ownership was taken over by Eric Moller and the name changed to Moller & Company. In 1910 the Moller Co bought their first steamship, the same year the SS Francis was launched, Moller Line & Company prospered in Shanghai, opening several subsidiary companies and trading globally, until Moller shipping became the largest fleet of tramp traders in the China Seas, only ceasing to trade in the early 1980’s

The SS Francis was re-named the Rosalie Moller in the tradition of the Moller line, named after one of the Moller children although, to present date (20/11/2021), I can’t find which line of the family Rosalie Moller belongs to. In 1938 the Rosalie Moller was requisitioned by the Admiralty as a collier, transporting Welsh mined coal to a variety of UK Naval Ports. In 1939 she was running between Yokahama and Shanghai and Shanghai and Hong Kong, with occasional trips to Singapore and Haiphong. In December of 1939 The Rosalie Moller found herself directed from Singapore to Calcutta, a return journey which she would repeat in February, departing Singapore on the 22^nd Feb arriving in Calcutta on the 29^th  and returning to dock at Shanghai 27^th of March.  1940 heralded a change of scenery for the Rosalie Moller, there is no movement noted between April & September of 1940, and it is believed she was given a full overhaul around that time

In September of 1940 the routine for the Rosalie Moller changed, and her route was altered to put her in Alexandria, Egypt (via Singapore, Calcutta and Aden), at Port Said for the 12^th of November of 1940. From Alexandria she sailed to Columbo on the 22^nd of November arriving on the 22^nd of December from there she sailed to Sandheads Calcutta on Christmas Eve, arriving on the 31^st December and departing 15^th January 1941 when she sailed to Aden arriving on the 30^th. From Aden she journeyed to Alexandria arriving at Port said 18^th of March, after a quick turn-around the Rosalie Moller was dispatched via Mozambique, South Africa (@ Lourenço Marques, 19^th April), to Port Elizabeth, arriving on St George’s day, the 23^rd of April. It seems there were some repairs carried out there which completed on the 05^th May, not without the mention of “crew trouble”, however nothing more is noted, so what “trouble” that might have been is lost to history….

In July 1941 the Rosalie Moller was re-allocated to S.T.N.8, the Admiralty Collier Service, however it would not be until the 19^th of August that Rosalie Moller sailed again, this time to Durban, South Africa, arriving it seems on the 25^th of August, having been expected on the 21^st and there is a note of repairs in Port Elizabeth 18^th of August to 22^nd of August for some reason? Although she did not know it, it seems time was running out for the Rosalie Moller, her next assignment was to Capetown, 13^th of September, but again there is a note of repairs and dates of the 30^th August and 11^th of September, clearly something wasn’t right with Rosalie Moller, but whatever it may have been, she sailed again from Durban on the 11^th of September bound for Aden, arriving on the 28^th of September

Leaving Aden on the first of October for Alexandria, under the command of Australian Captain James Byrne, and laden with 4680 tons of coal, the Rosalie Moller was to use the Suez Canal to reach Alexandria on the 9^th October, but fate had other plans for her. A collision of ships elsewhere in the canal meant that Rosalie Moller was unable to transit the Suez Canal and was directed to “Safe Anchorage H, Towala” until the way was cleared

On 5th October 1941, German Intelligence reports believed the Queen Mary had been sighted in the area and dispatched 2 Heinkel HE111’s on a search and destroy mission. The Queen Mary had indeed been running from Suez to Trincomalee (Ceylon, modern day Sri-Lanka) under command of her master, Captain Irving. She had completed two trips, carrying troops and supplies, from the 16^th September to 23^rd September, and again from September 24^th to October 01^st…….but the Heinkel’s missed her…..

The Heinkel’s sent to find the Queen Mary were from Kampfgeschwader 26 (KG 26) which translates as bomber wing 26, the nickname of the group was “Löwengeschwader” or Lions’ Wing, taken from the insignia, although the translation reads more closely as “Lion’s Shield”. The Germans formed its Luftwaffe long before it was officially revealed in the Spanish Civil War, KG 26 were part of the then, newly formed, “flieger-Division” which included several different types of aircraft (also JU87’s, JU88’s and ME110’s) specific to different roles. The Heinkel HE111’s were bombers (designed by Siegfried and Walter Günter at Heinkel Flugzeugwerke in 1934), KG 26’s HE111’s were primarily anti-shipping aircraft, under the command of Generalleutnant Hans Geisler as of 03^rd September of 1939. Originally stationed in Germany as part of 10 Fliegerkorps, KG 26 was transferred to Norway in 1940, following the sinking of two of its own battleships, the Leberecht Maas and the Max Schultz (Operation Wikinger, February 1940), and then from Norway to Sicily in 1941 to support the Afrika Korps. Over the 17/18 January 1941, 12 of KG 26’s He 111s were sent to bomb the Suez Canal, however they did not have the range and 1. Gruppe lost seven machines to fuel starvation. On 31 January KG 26 sank the freighter Sollum and minesweeper Huntley, the unit also took part in missions over Malta, losing its first aircraft on 8 February 1941. Those of you who relish research can dig further into KG 26 in the book “Die Spur des Löwen” or “The trail of the lion” in English, (Alex Steenbeck) although it’s a challenge as the book is in German and there is no plan to release an English translation

Personally, I have a problem with the HE111’s as a presence in the Gubal straits, where Thistlegorm and the Rosalie Moller were anchored. As KG 26, 1. Gruppe had already seen (losing 7 aircraft in an attempt to bomb the Suez Canal earlier in 1941), the HE111, with a range of only 680 miles, could not have reached the Gubal area without re-fueling for the return or landing locally.  If the Luftwaffe records are accurate, and for the most part at that time of the war they were better than any allied records, the locations of the X korps KG 26 HE111’s in 1941 are tabled below (X Fliegerkorps in “Air Ministry A.H.B. 6 Translation of Enemy Documents” Online Resource: http:// www.ww2.dk/misc/obmed .pdf Accessed: 20/11/2021). The main of the HE111’s were at Comiso, a distance from Comiso airfield (on Sicily) to Gubal of 1,311 miles, one way. The only aircraft that could possibly have patrolled Gubal would have been those of St.G 3, based in Libya, which are anecdotal (in the comments column) to the records, giving no idea which airfield, how many there were, or from what Korps/Gruppe

Whichever Airfield was used, fate played out her hand, and the Heinkel’s sent to find the RMS Queen Mary on the 06^th of October found only the merchant vessel SS Thistlegorm, sat at anchor, awaiting a passage through Suez to Alexandria, and so they bombed her to the bottom of the Red sea on October 6^th 1941. It is said that the explosion from the Thistlegorm was so massive that it lit up the night sky, exposing another ship lying in Anchorage H, and in a final, bitter irony, the Heinkel’s spotted her and returned on the 8th October to send the Rosalie Moller to the sea bed

The only realistically achievable patrolling by HE111’s would be from Egyptian or Libyan airfields and, although those were sometimes available, they were constantly changing hands as the Allies overran strategic air-fields in offensive actions, or the Germans re-occupied airfields on counter-attacks. Even the authorities at the time had issues with the information available: “Sunk by Heinkel 111 bombers from No. 2 Squadron 26th Kampfgeschwader based in Crete bombing during night of 7-8/10/1941 at Anchorage “H”, Towala, Gulf of Suez (Durban for Alexandria with coal)(until 6/10 the Towala anchorages had been thought to be beyond the range of German bombers)” reported in many of the dive and steamship details for the SS Francis and Rosalie Moller alike, (“FRANCIS, Disposal Detail” Online Resource: http:// www.clydeships.co.uk/ view.php? ref=1616 Accessed 21/11/2021) I have trolled many archives, (the Air Ministry A.H.B 6 Translation, Henry deZeng’s “Luftwaffe Airfields 1935-45 Greece, Crete and the Dodecanese” (https://www.ww2.dk/Airfields%20-%20Greece%20Crete%20and%20the%20Dodecanese.pdf) and several Luftwaffe interest sites too),  but failed to come up with a plausible location for KG 26 to have attacked the anchorages at Gubal, that doesn’t mean it wasn’t KG 26 HE111’s that took down Thistlegorm & Rosalie Moller, it just means there are more pieces to fit in the puzzle!

Rosalie Moller was hit once, on her Starbord side between No4 and No3 hold, her cargo was coal, there was a high chance of a secondary explosion from accumulated dust, this was the Gubal area of Egypt and temperatures are always high, but there was no report of a secondary explosion and casualties were, thankfully, as low as could be hoped for in the circumstances, only two of the crew are noted to have died when Rosalie Moller went to the bottom, it is likely they were killed in the initial explosion

I first dived the Rosalie Moller in November of 2008, I had been told about her a couple of times by divers who compared her to the Thistlegorm, but said Rosalie was better than Thistlegorm. At the time I couldn’t take what was being said seriously, Thistlegorm was the most iconic wreck I had dived, the idea that the wreck of a Steamship, carrying a cargo of coal, could be better than Thistlegorm with all her splendor and variety was, to say the least, stretching my imagination….. But I would get to find out, Craig and I had just completed the “three dives in one” on Abu Nuhas, using nitrox to extend our dive times and keep the deco manageable, and Rosalie Moller was next up on the Liveaboard itinerary

The little Red Log was full, the Rosalie Moller was one of the first couple of wreck dives I wrote up in the Green Navy Log and it records: “26/11/08 ROSALIE MOLLER – EGYPT This is the second raid victim of the Thistlegorm saga being spotted by the returning Heinkel HE111 who went back the next day and sank her at anchor we dropped straight down to the prop which is very large with the stern & rudder making a great sight round the port side and up to mid ships to drop into the hold in front of the collapsed engine room. Sadly a diver died when this collapsed early in this year. We swam through into the next hold towards the bridge and then under the collapsed funnel. We went down the bridge deck corridor past the tool room and captains bath. Round over the stern & to the starbord bridge deck corridor and through that to pass over the holds & run to the mast and on to the bows. The bow winches and hatch covers are awesome looking back from the bow light post. Shoals of Glass fish all over the wreck being attacked by Trevally – lots of Fusiliers and other fish about – literally alive with fish. Back to the mast and then over the bridge to start deco an amazing dive a fantastic wreck. Air and 50% Buddy Nick”

I have to say, the sight of Rosalie Moller, appearing out of the blue haze as we descended the shot line, was impressive. Whilst Thistlegorm is a very damaged ship, a large area of her stern essentially blown off her hull, and a mass of tangled and rent metalwork where her cargo holds burst and her decking peeled back, Rosalie Moller is a complete ship, she looked as if she could have been sailed away, although her funnel lay over to her Port side the rest of her was just as she sank in October of 1941. As Rosalie is a deeper wreck we needed to see as much as we could without getting into too long a deco requirement. As is always the case, first dive on a new wreck is a tour and look around, we dropped to the prop first, it’s the deepest part of the wreck at 50m or so and, as always a main attraction of any wreck, Rosalie has a wonderful Prop & Rudder set amidships as can be seen in Derek’s photo. The return to her deck and subsequent tour is written up without much mention of the huge shoals of glass-fish we encountered and the multitude of life aboard her. Although Rosalie Moller has not a massive amount of soft or hard corals on her she teems with fish of small to mid-size, almost everywhere you go, but especially around her mast base, I have yet to see much in the way of the larger fish on her though

The superstructure is all there, Rosalie has great companionway swims for those diving her initially, and there is plenty of space in her holds to drop down a level to safely explore a little further too. The funnel, brought down by the most idiotic of skippers in 2001, in an attempt to pull the steam whistle away by tying a line to it and towing it off the funnel, now lies over to her Port side and you can look right down the length, it’s a temptation, and an effort not to try to swim through, but that’s another rather reckless thought considering the stiffeners within……  I loved Rosalie Moller more with every minute, it was beginning to be apparent why some considered her better than Thistlegorm, I still wasn’t sure of that at this point, but the complete nature of the wreck, the minimal damage (her No3 hold has the bomb hole which sank her and which would become an entry point in later dives on her) to her throughout, and the opportunities to see all of her as she had been on the day, a time-capsule, immediate and undeniable…..Rosalie Moller had made her impression on me

In 2010 I had the chance to dive Rosalie again, this was off the Tornado Fleet Vessel MV Hurricane, another great boat and one who’s captain was excellent, allowing us to choose our dive-sites within the areas he was scheduled to travel, there will be more on that in other wreck dives on here in the future…. But this was Rosalie Moller in April of 2010 and the Green Navy Log tells us “ Gubal Island “ROSALIE MOLLER” I love this wreck –tragically the stern mast is now down but still intact as the day she was hit by Heinkel HE 1111’s down the shot and along the starboard rails to the bow to 42m & then back up to the bow winches & into the forward hold along and between holds to come out on the deck just in front of the funnel across the bridge & along the starboard companionway & into the galley past the stove and out @ centre deck facing the stern passing a huge Lion Fish & tiny Peppered Moray. Dropping into the stern hold to cross and come out of the blast damaged deck & raise up onto the main deck again across the downed mast by the two huge winches & on up to deco for 29 mins Viz 10-15m buddy Craig Air In 200 Out 100” …….

I think by this time that if anyone had asked me which was my favourite Red Sea wreck it would be Rosalie Moller, the sheer exuberance of diving her, her near pristine condition, and the fact fewer divers dived Rosalie at that time would have been enough to swing it for me. I hated the fact that inconsiderate, no, moronic dive skippers were attaching their craft to such points as masts and funnels, rather than far stronger points such as mooring bollards. I hated the fact that after a mere 2 years the stern mast had been brought down, I hated the fact that someone was moron enough to try to drag a steam whistle off a funnel using a boat to try to wrench it away…….All these things, and far more, are really things that diving as an industry needs to address…… If any dive boat skipper was to do such things in the Great Lakes of Canada and the USA they would be prosecuted, small wonder there are still wooden wrecks with telegraphs and bells still in place in those lakes……what future is there for wreck diving in the Red Sea…….

My next dives on Rosalie Moller would be in 2013 and another amazing skipper, this time Blue O2 off “Melody” another excellent and modern Liveaboard with everything you could expect and great food too, no chance of coming back slimmer off this trip! But I digress… the Green Book says: “30/07/13 NIGHT DIVE – ROSALIE MOLLER- RED SEA! This is the first time I know that anyone has done a night dive on Rosie!! What a privilege it is! Down a shot to the No 4 hold at the stern then round the stern deck house along the starboard rail the full length of the ship with all the deck rails festooned with brittle star anemones & fan corals all out and blazing with colour the whole way. Past the holds to the Bridge deck accommodation & the lifeboat davits, past the winches & on to the bow over the fallen mast area & bomb damage to the bow deck house (chain locker) & over those to the bow itself then back to the main for’ard mast where the shot was for ascent. Great view of the bow as we ascended to deco & a whole sky of stars as we surfaced MAGICAL DIVE Air In 200 Out 100 Buddy Craig”   It should be clear by now that Rosalie Moller was without doubt my favourite dive, no two ways about that, she had just had an effect that still lasts to this day, if I could only dive one wreck ever again then, to this day, it would be Rosalie Moller. I should add that surfacing to a completely cloudless and beautifully moonlit sky, with the heavens lit across the whole horizon with tiny twinkling stars was like nothing on Earth….the feeling of being in the sea, but beneath the heavens on a tiny rock in one of, who knows how many Universes, was just……..well……..indescribable really, I truly lack sufficiently eloquent or profound enough words

The Captain of Melody asked if we would like to stay for a second dive the next morning or depart first thing, I don’t think a soul on board wanted to leave Rosalie Moller so the next morning, bright and early, we were back down to say farewell……. “ROSALIE MOLLER – RED SEA- A daytime return to the stern and first off the shot at No4 hold over the steering room & down the port side to go through the prop & rudder a run back over the starboard side to look and dive through the small galley (stove or bench) and then into the hatch to access the lower deck for a run from Port to No3 hold & across the decks to exit the bomb damage @ No ¾ hold. Through the blast hole & over the mast & deck to pick up the shot & deco out Air In 200 Out 100 Buddy Craig” This was one of those “Even better than that” Fast Show days as we managed to convince the captain to stay on Gubal until after lunch and allow us a third dive on Rosalie……could life get any better…… “31/07/13 Rosalie Moller – Red Sea Second day dive this time the bow area – down the bow shot to look at the Hawsed Port anchor then through the forecastle chain lockers & winch gear to drop down into No1 hold & pass through to No2 hold then up into the Bridge accommodation area, through the galley & workshop & across to the store & bunk rooms then out at the bridge front to do the funnel & the bridge roof before heading down the centre line over the midships & stern to deco on the stern shot – an excellent dive!! Viz 10m Air In 200 Out 100 Buddy Craig”

There were several more dives on Rosalie taking similar routes in 2015 “02/08/15 Rosalie Moller Red Sea an early start on Rosalie my favourite Red Sea dive down to the stern & a drop over to see the prop – three of four blades intact – 1 missing. We swam gently up the starboard side to the bomb damage & used it to enter the stern holds & swim round the tween decks to exit by the crew & officers bridge accomm block – down the gangway & out to the funnel & if I had no side-mount I swear I could do the funnel end to end! Swam in and round the bridge & forward hold for a while up & down the deck to swim the opposite (port) gangway & across the deck to the forward hold then on & up the bridge to the shot line & up to 6m for 30 minutes of deco which we incurred as we spent a fair part of the dive @ 35m plus! Deco was made easy when we were joined by 2 or 3 Bat Fish & then tiny jellies which ended up as a huge shoal passing us! Air In 220 Out 75 Viz 20m Buddy Craig”

No one quite shows a wreck like Rico Oldfield, of all the illustrators I have seen in 30 plus years of diving Rico is the one who captures a wreck as she sits, as she looks and feels to a diver. The routes I have taken on Rosalie could be traced on Rico’s stunning representation of Rosalie, but why spoil a great work with a bunch of squiggles? I will leave the reader, should they wish, to trace the routes I have described on the marvelous and most iconic of Red Sea wrecks. I have at last come clean and, as you have just read, described Rosalie Moller as “my favourite Red Sea wreck”, I apologise to all the other wrecks in the Red Sea, as most of those are pretty magnificent too, but Rosalie has that “something” which is hard to describe but stands her out from all others. I suppose it is easier to look at in this way, if you sign up for a Red Sea wreck diving Liveaboard you are pretty excited and the anticipation is high enough, but if the skipper hasn’t got Gubal Island on the itinerary you feel let down, it’s not that you won’t enjoy the dives, it’s not that you won’t have a great time, it’s just there will be “something” missing…..the Cherry on the top…..that’s what Rosalie Moller is…….the Cherry on the top of the Red Sea wrecks   

My last dive on Rosalie was taken on the afternoon of the 02^nd August of 2015 and the Green navy Log records: “02/08/15 ROSALIE MOLLER Gubal Island Red Sea this tour began at the stern but going for’ard we swam the starboard side to the bow & then swam in to the hawsed anchor & over onto the bow deck where we ran the chain lines & dropped between decks in the for’ard hold – a swim round that then to the bridge & in & out over the galley & through to the mess bathroom & down & out to the funnel  we spent time over & round the funnel & then over the decks to swim back through the gangway on the starboard mess deck – into & out the bridge & round the mast to end at the stern line & on up to deco – a wonderful dive captured on go-pro  – let’s see if it comes out!! Air In 220 Out 100 Buddy Craig”

Well…..shall we see if the video came out ok?

As ever this piece is only possible with the help of those who contribute most to it and I am indebted to Derek Aughton & Margaret Blair for their photos, to Craig Toplis for his patience, to Rico Oldfield for his illustration and to Roger Hull and the National Archives for their assistance with data & records

SS Breda

The Breda was a typical steamship of her time and named after a city in the Nederlands (Holland) in the North Brabant province of southern Holland, she had her keel laid on 16 December 1919 at the Nieuwe Waterweg Scheepsbouwmaatschappij (“New Waterway Shipbuilding Company”) yard at Schiedam in Rotterdam. Breda was constructed for the Koninklijke Nederlandsche Stoomboot Maatschappij (“Royal Netherlands Steamship Company”) following completion, she was launched on the 2^nd of July 1921, her fit-out was completed 10^th  December 1921. The Koninklijke Nederlandse Stoomboot-Maatschappij (KNSM) which translates, in English, to The Royal Netherlands Steamship Company, was based in Amsterdam from 1856 to 1981. It was once considered the largest company in Amsterdam, and was one of the top five shipping lines in Holland. The company operated mid-sized freighters similar to the Breda, with most having additional passenger accommodation. KNSM at its peak in 1939 and at the outbreak of World War II, had 79 vessels, 48 of which were lost during World War II, many, like the Breda, were requisitioned for service with the Allied forces as transports

The Nieuwe Waterweg, (New Waterway in English) was excavated out of sand dunes at Gravenzande in 1872 and ran for 4.3 Km to provide the last part of Rotterdam’s connection with the sea. In 1877 the passage was significantly widened and deepened, and a new waterway reached the end of the dam that it shares with the Calandkanaal, where the Maasmond starts, making it now around 7 km in length. Today it is better known as the Hoek van Holland (Hook of Holland)

The Netherlands have been using Rotterdam for hundreds of years to build ships for commerce, and (out of the Dutch Admiralty Yard on the Haringvliet & Delfshaven), for military use too. The yards were initially financed by well-known Dutch families such as the Mees and Hoboken’s and, up to the end of the First World War, very successful on behalf of their investors too. In 1918, just after the Breda’s completion, the Dutch shipyard employed around 4700 in shipbuilding and its associated activities. For those of you who love the technical detail

The Breda was powered by two steam turbine engines, a high and a low pressure engine, by Metropolitan-Vickers, founded in the UK in 1899 as British Westinghouse. In 1917 Metrovick was formed to address problems with the degree of separation needed to isolate UK concerns over the USA involvement in British Westinghouse. The need came about in order to avoid issues surrounding bidding and awards of government contracts. British Westinghouse, up to that point, was a subsidiary of the Pittsburgh, USA based “Westinghouse Electric and Manufacturing Company”. Following the purchase of equipment and titles British Westinghouse became a subsidiary of Metropolitan-Vickers in 1919. The Metrovick steam turbines, state of the propulsion art in the day, gave Breda a top speed of 15 knots (28 km/h; 17 mph). She had five cargo holds, and could also accommodate up to 16 passengers

Whilst it was Charles Parsons who invented the modern steam turbine in 1894, the basic principal was harnessed in a design so ancient as to have been described in Roman times by a renowned experimenter & writer called Hero, (c10 AD to c70 AD) it was named “Aeolipile” and  was just 2 x 90’vent pipes, mounted opposite each other on a copper sphere, mounted on a rotating shaft through its centre which, when the reservoir below is filled half full of water, and heated over a fire until the water boiled, forced steam out of each vent, making the sphere spin on its shaft

Parsons design, a central shaft with small vanes along its length (arranged around the shaft radially, when allowed to pressurize with steam along its length, expended its energy driving the shaft round),  had revolutionized steamship speed in the 1900’s, from the first example, “Turbinia” unveiled at the Spithead review in 1897, the Steam Turbine had practically consigned compound steam piston engines to obsolescence. Designed & built by Charles Parsons in 1894, Turbinia embarrassed all other ships at Spithead when Parson’s showed her, completely unannounced, and evaded the review security boat by completely outpacing it, in front of the whole admiralty, and Edward VII, the Prince of Wales. Turbinia’s stellar performance on that day ensured the next generation of steamships, including the Breda, would nearly all be turbine powered

There is a little I can find on the SS Breda between the wars (although it doesn’t help that I don’t speak Dutch), she missed the First World War, which finished in 1918, however, as she was built for Koninklijke Nederlandsche, it can be assumed that a fair proportion of her employment would have been the transportation of raw materials for the Iron & Steel industry to and from Ijmuiden on the Dutch North Sea coast. The journeys I can find some detail on, and could probably dig a little deeper into have the Breda on a regular South America to Liverpool route

1924 the initial Port of departure for SS Breda being Corral, in Southern Chile, would probably mean a cargo of nitrates, the major export of Southern Chile at the time according to Robert Lane (Division of US Regional Information) ,  & Spencer Green (US Trade Commissioner to the West Coast) in their 1928 publication on Pacific & South American trade (Greene, S. B & Lane, R. M “Trade of the Pacific Coast States with the West Coast of South America” Trade Information Bulletin 525 P12 1928 Online Resource. Accessed 08/11/2021)

It can, perhaps, again be assumed that the export of Iron & Steel pipework from the Nederlands to Chile and South America also makes sense, although without cargo manifests the definitive answer cannot at this point be given. Trade is always a two way street, no ship wishes to undertake a voyage “in ballast” unless they really “must”, so an assumption of return cargoes of Lumber, Bananas (Cristobel Colon, Panama) and Nitrates seems reasonable. By 1937 Chile has an increased export portfolio and increasing output too, the January, May and September trips of the Breda could have had any of a dozen or more cargoes, however it is interesting to see Copper (a material commonly used in the manufacture of pipes) is one of the “majors” noted in the 1940 Commerce Report (“The Port of Valparaiso, Foreign & Coastwise Trade of Chile Feb 10, 1940 P145 Online Resource: www.google.co.uk / books / edition / Commerce _Reports Accessed 08/11/2021)

Koninklijke Nederlandsche (now part of the modern day Tata group) begins its history on September 20^th, 1918, when “Koninklijke Nederlandsche Hoogovens” was founded in The Hague, Holland. It was created to “……enable Dutch industry to become less dependent on imports” (Tata Steel Editorial “History of Koninklijke Nederlansche Hoogovens” Online Resource: https:// www.tatasteeleurope.com/sites/default/files/History_ KH.pdf  Accessed 02/11/2021). It made sense to establish an Iron & Steel company in Holland, it is very central in wider European terms, has excellent coastal and inland canal access, and therefore sits well for import and export of raw materials and final product. “By the mid 1930’s, Hoogovens had become the largest exporter of pig iron in the world. In 1936, they began producing cast-iron pipes. Steel production began in 1939, using open-hearth furnaces. In 1941, Hoogovens acquired Van Leer’s Walsbedrijven, a rolling mill that was renamed Walserij Oost (East Rolling Mill)”. So, it again makes sense that a ship with the capacity of the SS Breda, would be employed by her owners in a manner befitting their business needs, the import of raw materials for Iron & steel manufacture and the export of finished product from that industry

It is equally possible the Breda carried cement products “….In 1930 the cement factory, Cemij, a subsidiary enterprise, was formed in collaboration with ENCI, to produce blast furnace sealants. By this means a competitive war between the Dutch cement producers Hoogovens and ENCI was prevented, and independence from foreign competition achieved. Compared with pig iron turnover, sales of by-products were stable, and were sufficient to cover Hoogovens’s fixed expenses.” (Editorial in “International Directory of Company Histories, Koninklijke Nederlandsche Hoogovens En Staalfabrieken NV” Online Resource: https://www.encyclopedia.com/books/politics-and-business-magazines/koninklijke-nederlandsche-hoogovens-en-staalfabrieken-nv Accessed 02/11/2021)

By 1920, due to the increased requirement for shipping materials and people, for re-construction projects after the devastating effects the war had seen, the number of employees in shipping had almost doubled to around 7500 people, that meant almost 40 percent of all Dutch shipbuilding production came from Rotterdam. That situation had peaked and following 1920 there was far less demand on Dutch shipping and the industry needed to adapt, in 1925 RDM bought the shares of Nieuwe Waterweg in Schiedam and brokered a merger between the largest shipyards at Wilton and Fijenoord. Information taken from Allard Schellen’s Piece ( Allard, S: “The end of the great shipbuilding industry in the region” vergetenverhalen.nl 23/09/2015 Online Resource: Accessed 03/11/2021) tells us the measure was less successful than anticipated, the 1929 crash on Wall Street exacerbated the problem, less was being imported by the USA as its economy tanked. Wilton-Fijenoord laid off 8,000 employees in 1929, and many smaller companies simply went to administration, RDM did survive, but not unscathed. As Europe plunged towards a second World War in the late 1930’s Germany had its eyes on the shipyards of Rotterdam, when war finally broke out in 1939 and Germany invaded Holland it took over  the yards and port of Rotterdam, and production was begun under the Nazi regime to manufacture for the Kriegsmarine

When Germany eventually invaded the Netherlands in May 1940 the Breda’s Captain, Johannis Fooy, fearing capture and the loss of his ship to the Germans,rather than doing nothing and letting the Breda fall into the hands of the Nazis, slipped Breda out of Antwerp and took her to Britain. On arrival in Newcastle the Breda was requisitioned for the war effort and given to the P&O Line to manage, she was also armed, although only with a single 4.7-inch (120 mm) gun. Fate was not going to be kind to the plucky steamship despite her gutsy escape from the German’s they were not going to let her escape quite so easily it would seem, fate bringing her, on 23 December 1940, to anchor off Oban, one of a convoy of 100 ships sitting in the Firth of Lorn, eventually bound for Bombay

The Breda was built to carry optimal quantities of cargo along with her potential 16 passengers, “She had 3 decks, a cruiser stern and a flat bottom.  The bridge lay between the second and third of the Breda’s five holds, and contained the radio and navigation rooms, officer’s accommodation and cabins for 16 passengers.  Aft of hold 3 lay the engine room whose four boilers were originally coal fired, but were converted to oil in 1938.  These produced steam for two turbines with double reduction gearing to a single screw.  Her service speed was 11.8 knots, and fuel consumption ran at 36 tons of oil per day.  The stern housed accommodation for the 37 crew.  On the main deck is the steering gear, with the emergency steering position on the deck above.  This had originally been open to the elements, but a platform was erected above this position to carry the gun which was fitted during the war” (J Banks Editorial: “The J Banks cargo of SS Breda” On Line Resource at https:// www.jbanks.co.uk/about-us/history/the-j-banks-cargo-of-ss-breda Accessed: 03/11/2021)

On Christmas Eve 1940, the Breda was bombed during a German air raid on Oban roads, while waiting to join a convoy from London to Mombasa and Bombay.  The aircraft were Heinkel’s He 111 bombers based at Stavanger, Norway, which flew across the bay, and straddled the Breda with four 250-kilogram (550 lb) bombs. Although not directly hit, the pressure of the explosions ruptured a water inlet pipe, and the engine room flooded,  eventually depriving the Breda of all power. Luckily Captain Fooy managed, just, to beach Breda on the limits of shallow water in Ardmucknish Bay. The next day, only part of Breda’s cargo had been offloaded when a storm swept in and moved her into deeper water where she now sits with her stern at around 26 metres and her bow near 15m at 56°28′32″N 5°25′04″W

Breda had been loaded with a varied, general cargo, a comprehensive listing can be found, with a little digging, on the J Banks & Co Ltd (originally of Willenhall, Manchester, but now based in Featherstone, Staffordshire) web-site, I am not sure some of this content has not been “borrowed” from one of the dive centre sites so I quote it here, on that basis: (Editorial “The J Banks Cargo of SS Breda” https://www.jbanks.co.uk/about-us/history/the-j-banks-cargo-of-ss-breda/ On Line Resource: Accessed 03/11/2021) “At the time of her sinking, the Breda was carrying a very mixed cargo, consisting of 3000 tons of cement, (now set solid), 175 tons of tobacco and cigarettes, (very soggy and hard to smoke), 3 Hawker and 30 de Havilland Tiger Moth biplanes.  Aircraft engines, propellers, windscreens, instruments and various other parts have been recovered.  The aircraft, which are now hard to recognise, are stored in holds one, two and three. Sandals with leather uppers and rubber soles, medical supplies, including kaoline in what may best be described as square-shaped Mk 1 waisted Coca Cola bottles, batteries, wide strips of leather, tyres, telephone pole insulators, lengths of solder, black boot polish and innumerable other items have been recovered from hold No1. On the deck alongside hold 2 lies an upside down 4×4 vehicle with the tyres still fully-inflated.  Another similar vehicle has fallen from the deck to the bottom of hold 2, which also contains aircraft and beer bottles. Hold 3 contains aircraft, tin lids, tyres, barrels containing stoneware bottles of Stephens blue ink, (how many divers can claim to have dived in in?), dental supplies, including what appears to be drinks coasters, but which are actually material for taking dental impressions, and the pink material for making gums of false teeth.  Regretfully, all efforts have so far failed to find the material for making gold fillings. Hold 4 contains truck spares, gas masks, spectacle lenses, fire hoses, the spare propeller, (cast iron), trolley compressors with brass, double-acting cylinders (for inflating tyres), brass fire extinguishers, aircraft batteries, and between holds 4 and 5, the 3000 tons of cement. Square porthole glasses of two different diameters, individually separated by pages of a 1940 Dutch newspaper were also recovered as recently as 1989.  The newspaper was still legible, and included the pages giving the BBC radio programmes.  Brass oil lamps with gimballed brackets cast in the shape of dolphins were also recovered at the same time. Apart from more of the cement, hold 5 contains bicycles, electrical equipment including switches, fuses and GEC ceiling fans, along with bales of hay for feeding the 10 horses, reputedly belonging to the Aga Khan, which was also part of the cargo.” It is a matter of record that the war office tried, wherever possible, to spread cargo’s throughout convoys to ensure as many ships that survived the journeys through the U Boat Wolfpacks, carried as much variety as practical for the supply of those in need, a common sense approach driven out of a necessity to supply under extremes of circumstance and borne out by the hugely varied Breda cargo

For those of you who rest better knowing an animal’s fate, rather than having it left to the imagination, there is a record of the animals of the Breda’s cargo, including the Aga Khan’s horses, (wartime reparations paid in barter by any other name) the J Banks piece details: “……When the Breda was beached, the horses were either released to swim ashore, or the horse boxes drifted off with the horses still inside.  One of these boxes came ashore near Ledalo Spit, with a horse still inside and a very distraught dog standing on top of the box.  They were rescued by Mrs Mary Mac Niven, wife of the caretaker at Dunstaffnage Castle.  Not all of the horses survived, but at least one was kept in the old smiddy adjacent to the cemetery at the southern edge of the village of Benderloch. The last survivor of the horses died in the Oban area in 1961. Sometime after sinking, the body of a monkey was found in the grounds of Letterwalton House, a few miles north of Benderloch.  Around its neck was a collar bearing the inscription “SS Breda””. I believe that the horse Mary Mac Niven saved was called “Bradshaws” and was one of the Aga Khan’s 10 racehorses on board the Breda when it sank. Mary was honoured by the Royal Humane Society for her efforts in saving the horse, which she rowed out to, as it was still tethered in its container afloat in the bay. Now the details regarding the monkey are often referred to as “local legend” which means either the truth of the matter has been lost locally over time, or that the story is seen as rather fanciful, either way it is not for the likes of me to judge!

The sinking of the Breda was another of those rather unfortunate events, the German Heinkel HE111 bombers had overshot their intended industrial targets and headed for the shipping routes around the West of Scotland as secondary targets of opportunity, although the bombing did not result in a direct hit, Breda suffered pressure wave damage, through her hull, in the form of ruptured plating and a fractured cooling water inlet pipe, taking in water. Breda still managed, under her own power, to make it to the east shore of Ardmucknish Bay, Captain Fooy, exhibiting remarkable cool in the circumstances, drove her into a shallow submerged shelf which extends 600 yards out to sea at a depth of only 6 metres.  Any further out from land and the bottom slopes quickly to over 30 metres.  Breda managed to sit on this shelf long enough for some cargo to be removed, however in another unfortunate event, a storm reached across the Bay and, just when the Breda had looked safe and her cargo recoverable, fate and the storm forces took her out and deeper under the waters of Ardmucknish bay

For some time after, until the 1960’s in fact, her goalpost foremasts were visible above the surface at low tide, but in 1961 the Royal Navy swept the Breda with towed wires and removed the goalposts along with the bridge, funnel, and forepeak to give a swept clearance of 28ft, the reports from HMS Shackleton (“Breda: Ardmucknish Bay, Firth Of Lorn” Online Resource https://canmore.org.uk/site/102573/breda-ardmucknish-bay-firth-of-lorn Accessed 05/11/2021) telling us: “The site was wire swept clear at 5.4 metres but fouled sweep at 6.1 metres. The least depth by echosounder was 8.22 metres. To the seabed is 22.8 metres. There is no scour. One sweeping sinker distinctly fouled a large piece of wreckage at 6.1 metres”, (HMS SHACKLETON, 25 July 1960) and “The site was again swept and it cleared at 8.22 metres, but fouled at 8.5 metres. The site was wire sweep to a least echosounder depth of 9.1 metres. To the seabed is 21.9 metres. The wreck twice cleared at 8.22, but three firm fouls were obtained at 8.5 metres. These were examined by divers. The highest point appears to be remains of after superstructure. A mast was sighted lying athwartships on the well deck”.(HMS SHACKLETON, 31 July 1961)

The superstructure remnants are now lying in the mud off the port side of the ship, you can see the stern goalposts lying back in the superb ADUS scan, from the Scottish Association for Marine Science Facebook page, from the Norbit iWMBS multi-beam sonar system above (Online Resource: https:// www.facebook.com/ SAMS. Marine/ photos/ pcb. 3653148651371407/3653146174704988 Accessed: 05/11/2021). The gun mounted on the platform structure at the stern was presumably also removed by HMS Shackleton’s divers at that time. It was not until 1966 that the Breda was rediscovered by divers from Edinburgh BSAC, and despite her bridge, derricks and funnel having been lost from the wire dragging of the Navy, otherwise she looked pretty much undamaged. Of course finding a “new” wreck sometimes brings its own issues and, from the J Banks piece: “Blasting by Oban Divers removed the bronze propeller in 1968 and further blasting has since removed most of the remaining superstructure, improving access to the lower decks and engine room.  The copper degaussing cable, for protection against magnetic mines, was also recovered by Oban Divers, and the insulation burned off on Eilean Mor”. I cannot confirm further blasting occurred on the decks, there is no reference other than the J Banks piece that I can find, but as BSAC did, in the early years, have an (albeit short lived), “underwater explosives” course, it is a very real possibility

The legacy of the Breda is not confined to the wreck itself, items of the cargo have been recovered, there are many noted, including Windshields from one of the de Havilland Tiger Moth biplanes, banknote paper destined for the Bank of India for 10 Rupee banknotes and, bottles, tiles, pages from an atlas, still coloured, a huge variety, the link to J Banks & Company, Brass “Button Sticks”, and yes, I am old enough (Just) to have used one of these to lift the buttons on No2 Dress Uniform & polish them, something I think may now be unique to the military, and was still the practice until recently, if a former Life-Guards colleague & friend is correct!

The J Banks editorial details how the button sticks are used far better than I could: “…..In 1992 a diver found a wooden crate, we believe in hold No 1.  Whilst the timber crate was rotting away, the diver originally thought the box contained Gold, but in fact was Brass Button Sticks manufactured by J Banks. The Brass Button Sticks were used to protect the fabric of a uniform or coat whilst cleaning buttons. The stick would be placed behind a button, the polishing cloth could make contact with the button and the stick would prevent the fabric from being damaged.  The sticks were stamped with J Banks & Co Ltd Willenhall and the diver traced them back to us and returned a handful that we still have today on display.” (Editorial “The J Banks Cargo of SS Breda” Online resource: https://www.jbanks.co.uk/about-us/history/the-j-banks-cargo-of-ss-breda/ Accessed 04/11/2021). I have half a mind to drop in to take a look at the button sticks and see if J Banks & Co might part with one, their Featherstone base is not far from me (in Uttoxeter) and it would be a great souvenir of my past on two levels!

The 10 Rupee unprinted banknote shown above bears a copy of the watermark “Reserve Bank of India – 10 Rupees” and a profile picture  of the head of George VI. The manufacturer, Portals, owned by the Bank of England, manufactured special paper for the printing of the Indian banknotes, watermarked with the portrait of King George VI. The transportation of unprinted banknote paper was an attempt to deter theft, the printing would be carried out on safe arrival at destination. The wooden boxes carrying the banknote paper had degraded during their 30 years or so immersion in Ardmucknish Bay before their recovery sometime in the 1970’s and the edges of the uncut sheets were a little ragged, the sheet in the New Zealand auction house catalogue above is in remarkable condition when all is considered

I dived the Breda in August of 2004, in what I described at the time to Brad, one of my dive buddies, as “marginal” conditions, the Puffin Divers location was being swept through by high winds and very choppy seas, it was going to be a lucky window to get on Breda and dive her……but we went for it, we were lucky too and the little Green Navy log records: “…29/08/04 BREDA Ardmucknish Bay Oban Descent down shot line in very green but clear water down to the starboard side & probably no 3 hold – broken up with swim throughs & cement bags forward & to the sides. Plenty of deck & machinery evident & two sets of broken hold ladders. Swim the line back to the shot & over the side to 22m at the sea bed towards the stern – several large Pollack & masses of tube anemones great dive – plenty left to do Air In 230 Out 180 (Eanx 32) Buddy Sam”

I had no means of recording the dive other than my ramblings in the log, I couldn’t afford the exotics of an underwater camera set-up and these were the days way before I could even imagine a Go-Pro, but Mark Kirkland’s superb Black & White shots from a dive on her perfectly match the feel of our dive, which I remember very well as the viz was not brilliant, down to a couple of meters as a result of the weather over the days we were there, but I tied off my run reel, as matter of course on a new and un-dived (to me) wreck, and we started up along her from the stern around the mid-ships. Breda was an eerie wreck in the viz, calm and Green, the Green you get in Stoney Cove when the Algae is in bloom, but darker as a result of the higher Tannin content from wash-off & percolation locally. The atmospheric nature of the dive, and the occasional tying off of the line, as we made our way forward was a slower process and meant not quite so much exploration of the Breda, she is also a mass of twisted metal due to the wire sweeps the Navy completed, but her decks and fittings are still clear and recognizable and our run along her was great fun, trying to figure out exactly where we were on her length, and peering into the hold spaces which we did not enter in the circumstances. Breda is another of those wrecks I’d love to go back and do again, there is plenty to explore in and around her 122m hull

I am, as always, indebted to the photos & scans contributing to the additional detail in this piece, notably, Norbit and ADUS for the use of their stunning side-scans & sonar work and particularly to Mark Kirkland and Steve Jones for their amazing Black and White shots of Breda