im after information on the service of h.m. s orpheous lost in the mediterranian in june 1940. also there are 2 diffrent accounts about how she was sunk one theory mentions a mine and the other story mentions sunk by the italian navy ship turbine which story of the sinking is correct
im after information on the service of h.m. s orpheous lost in the mediterranian in june 1940. also there are 2 diffrent accounts about how she was sunk one theory mentions a mine and the other story mentions sunk by the italian navy ship turbine which story of the sinking is correct Hi izzy, my reference gives Odin and Orpheous both leaving Malta on the 10th of June. Odin was sunk on the 13th by Italian Destroyers Strale and Baleno. Orpheous was sunk on the 16th off Tobruk by Italian Destroyer Turbine. Brian
sorry about the delay in answering but the date i have for orpheous sinking is 29/06/1940 Hi Izzy, my Reference is "Chronology of the War at Sea 1939 - 1945" 3rd Edition, page 27. By Jurgen Rohwer 2005. Brian
IZZY, ORPHEUS, (note correct spelling)sunk ??? date given 29 June, is `paying off date'. The boat was os the `Big O' class - Ocean going - hence when operating in the clear blue waters of the Med she was `too large' !! So easy to sight especially by A/C. RESURGAM Sadsac
Hi, I have read both accounts and cannot say which is true but just to balance things up heres the mine theory and a link to the site. HMS Orpheus 19 June 1940 Possibly sunk off Tobruk by a mine HMS Orpheus was the third submarine to be lost in the space of a week. Although the cause of her loss is not certain, it is believed that it was due to a minefield off Tobruk. The O-class boats had a fairly heavy armament, but at the expense of handling quality. Based on the earlier L9 group, the O boats represented a considerable increase in size on previous boats. The Odin, Otus, Olympus and Orpheus served in the East Indies and then went to the Mediterranean in 1940, joining Oswald and Osiris. The Oxley - built for Australia, like the Otway - had been sunk in error, by HMS/M Triton, off Norway. The older Oberon, persistently troubled by mechanical unreliability, was only capable of training duties. On 14 June 1940, only four days after Italy's entry into the war and while operating out of Malta, the Odin was sunk in the Gulf of Taranto by the Italian destroyer Strale. Orpheus was sunk off Tobruk by the Italian destroyer Turbine two days later, Oswald was sunk by the Italian destroyer Vivaldi south of Calabria on 1 August 1940, and Olympus was mined off Malta on 8 May 1942. Osiris and Otus were scrapped at Durban in September 1946. The boats used in the Mediterranean were employed, at one time or another, on ferrying duties to and from Malta and then training for ASW aircraft. Regards Verrieres Submarine losses 1904 to present day
just had this email in admin account. To whom it may concern I happy to annonce that the lost Orpheus sub-marine have been found by Tobruk citizen young diver called Nasser Said Kaeralah. The evidence of the submarine was recorded in a vidio tape and submitted to the british high mession in Benghazi MR Angues. For more detail informartion contact me. I have asked them to join forum & post more .
Owen very intresting but i was under the assumption that the Sub had been found a few years ago.I Googled H.M.S Orpheous a few years ago and found an Italian diving site that had pictures of the wreck.I look forward to future developments.
Owen very intresting but i was under the assumption that the Sub had been found a few years ago.I Googled H.M.S Orpheous a few years ago and found an Italian diving site that had pictures of the wreck.I look forward to future developments. Dear owen, your freind izzy assummption, thatThe orpheus was found in an itlian diving site as a picture is very intersting . However I wander if the picture showing the submarine laying deep in the botom of the sea, or just a normal picture. please give me the name of theItalian diving site . We have a 15 minutes vidio tape of the sanked submarine. We manged to get into the kitchen where we took a few cupes, dishes and some empty win bottles. We can not at the momement get into all the rooms as they are tightly closed. We need professtional people to open all rooms. because of pumps. Dr Abdulla
Dr Abdulla welcome to the forum. The mentioned diving site is called Abysso although im not sure if it is Italian.The site is a Marine Biology,Archeology History and Diving.The printout that i have from the site is dated 2005. There were a few images on the site but only a few mentioned the Orpheous.
Dr Abdulla im a bit alarmed rereading your comments regarding the Orpheous. The Submarine is the last resting place of the crew and should be left alone.You mention you have entered the craft and taken various items are these going into a museum ? I do hope that any remains are left alone as this is a war grave. If this is a genuine Archelogical survey i welcome your findings. I do hope that you take my comments in good faith
I echo izzy's comments about going into the sub . The wreck is a wargrave & should be respected as such.
Dr Abdulla, if the wreck hes been positively identified as that of the Orpheus then in my opinion (as a diver) no attempts should be made to enter the wreck or to remove artefacts. If it is the Oprheus then it is a wargrave and should be respected as such. Removal of any items should be classed as criminal activity unless official authorisation is granted and, if it is a British wargrave, I think such authorisation is most unlikely. In addition removal of any items from wrecks without authorisation destroys the site for future divers.
Dear Izzy,owen and Mike L Please do not missunderstand me. We all respect the grave yard. the items that were taken were only a cup, dish and som empty bottels. they were just laid in the sand near the submaring. We have contacted the british mission and show them these items. The submarine is still as it is. No attension what so ever to take any belonging. We went to the british mission in Benghazi as a good faith from our side. My friend Nasser is a professtional diver and he is a member of Tobruk mesum, he was authorized by Libyan official to see into this discovery> We are hoping that you cooperate with us to make this submarine a historical place and tourism site for the british divers. The dishes and cups will be at the Tobruk mesum. finally I think before you draw any conclusion you must understand that no body can enter the submarine, because its toally close ( sealed). So we most all work together as one team and see how we can deal with matter professtionally and to the stisfaction of all parties. all the best Dr Abdulla
Dr Abdulla in your first post you Quote WE MANAGED TO GET INTO THE KITCHEN where you took a few items now you state you found them outside the wreck.Im still a bit confused about that remark. I don't want to sound petty but i do hope that you understand my concern.
This is an interesting thread and one I might be able to add some clarity to in my experience as a amature nautical archaeologicst and scuba diver that has completed a number of underwater surveys of WW2 wrecks along the South Coast of England the latest of which could be regarded as a 'war grave'. (HMLCT427 was lost with all hands on 7th June 1944 as she approached Portsmouth). In my engagement with the 'Authorities' in seeking the legal protection of this wreck a number of facts have come to light which I would like to share with you. I'm must stress I am not an expert in wreck law but I have been engaged with a number of legal experts and the MOD so here's the position as I understand it - Firstly the term 'War Grave' does not (sadly) relate to ships or vessels that have been lost at sea. War Graves come under the Commonwealth War Graves Commission Royal Charter and only apply to the last resting place of servicemen on land. The term 'Military Maritime Graves' is used to describe the wrecks where servicemen lost their lives during periods of conflict. This means that there is no automatic protection of these wrecks (in UK law) other than that which applies generally to wrecks. There was an interesting Government Consultation document http://www.divetheworld.com/Library/GovPapers/maritime_graves.pdf issued some time ago covering these issues. In UK waters the recovery of 'wreck' including the removal of any items from a wreck are to be reported to the Receiver Of Wreck. It’s the Law - No matter how small or seemingly insignificant, all wreck material raised from the seabed must be reported to the Receiver of Wreck (under s. 236 of the Merchant Shipping Act 1995). This also applies to wreck landed in the UK from outside UK territorial waters. MCA - Receiver of Wreck There are a number of wrecks which have received legal protection under the Protection of Military Remains Act where wrecks can be classified as either 'Controlled Sites' - access very strictly controlled with pretty much no diving whatsoever (HMS Royal Oak), or 'Protected Places' diving permitted but on a no touch/take/penetration etc basis with individuals subject to prosecution fines etc if these are breached. Examples are HMS Swordfish and SS Mendi. The criteria for protection under the the PMRA is quite limited and there are not many wrecks proected as a result. Despite 13 men loosing their lives, the case for protection of LCT427 under PMRA was not considered to be strong and I was advised that the better chance lay with a nomination to English Heriatge for the wreck to be protected under the Protection of Wrecks Act 1973 as a 'Historic Wreck'. A nomination has been made and if successful this will be the first WW2 wreck to be protected under this legislation. A 'Historic Wreck' does not necessarily have to involve loss of life but is considered of major historic value - for example the Submarine A1 which was lost under remote control suffered no loss of life but is considered Histoic because it was the first all British designed and built submarine. I would like to stress that during our survey of LCT427 nothing was removed, we did not enter the wreck and we treated it in all respects as if it were protected under the PMRA (even though it isn't). In November last year we held a memorial service for thos lost on LCT427 and more than 40 relatives and veterans representing 7 of the crew attended along with members of our dive club. When you stand alongside relatives and comrades to lay wreaths over the place these brave men were lost you realise the importance of protecting these wrecks from less respectful 'trophy hunting' divers but also damage from trawlers, mineral/aggregate extraction or dregding/channel clearance/sweeping etc. In my opinion only properly authorised removal of artefacts should be allowed for any wreck, particularly where the wrecks have involed loss of life - in the service of their country or not. The majority of wrecks involve loss of life and my assumption is always to treat a wreck that way. There have also been some real tragedies which highlight the issues, such as the Salem Express in the Red Sea, where hundreds of men, women and children lost their lives when a ferry sank carrying people to a religeous festival. The prams, suitcases, shoes and personal belongings remain a reminder of the tragedy. Naturally there is a lot of unease by Egyptians to diving the site. Contrast this to the iconic wreck of the Thistlegorm much dived by tourist of all nationalities - where British lives were lost during WW2 when the ship, carrying supplies to the British Army in North Africa was bombed and sank. I liken diving on a wreck where people have lost their lives to visiting a grave yard. It's a way of finding out about history, it's a way of paying you respects etc and is normally a place you can visit freely. However - I would not consider defacing a grave stone, removing items from the grave yard - or opening a grave to look inside. Unfortunately other countries have different laws - but the British Government has tried to act as best it can to protect some British wrecks overseas where there has been loss of servicemen. The wrecks of the South China Sea and the Falklands are protected but the law (as I understand it) is limited in that it can only be applied to British divers. I am saddened (but sadly not surprised) by the behaviour of other divers. As a diver for 10 years I have seen a change in attitude by the majority of divers I meet and perhaps in time, artefact removal or interferrance of wrecks will become as unacceptable behaviour as drinking and driving etc. Perhaps Dr Abdulla and his colleages/fellow divers would like to think again about his activites though I am unsure what legislation applies in Italian waters. Relatives and veterans organisations could consider writing to the Italian authorities (copy to MOD/UK Embassy?) to protest at the removal of artefacts. Sadly this is unlikely to be an isolated case. Ali
Dr Abdulla, Alison, thanks for your replies. Hopefully we can discover more about this wreck in detail and the limitations on diving and removal of artefacts that exist for the site. Mike
It's gone all quiet on this thread lately just wondering if there is/was any more news on the finding of the wreck.
