 |
| I believe Koombana lies somewhere within the illustrated radius from central, given coordinates. |
Oil patches were used to localise steamer wrecks.
An example is the Clan Ranald:
https://waratahrevisited.blogspot.com/2016/03/clan-ranald-fascinating-account-and.html
"direct me to the spot where the wreck was sunk,
which he said he knew exactly, having seen
streams of oil rising from her."
Daily Commercial News, 14 May, 1912.
Going back to the question of the
search for the Koombana the witness
(captain Upjohn) remarked that in
latitude 19.11, longitude 119.25, about
27 to 37 miles from Bedout Island, one
evening they saw what looked like a
portion of the deck of a vessel, but it
proved to be the shape of a ship outlined
by an oily substance such as would rise
from a sunken vessel, floating on the sea.
I firmly believe that the above oil patch represented the final resting place of RMS Koombana. Of course the difficulty has been working out exactly where that spot is. There are many examples of historical coordinates notorious for inaccuracies.
Captain Upjohn, according to this press report, was unsure of this exact position, quoting a huge range of 10 miles; 27 - 37 miles.
The 1864 James Martin chart showed a 10.5 mile deviation between the true and charted positions of Bedout Island (see image), which approximates captain Upjohn's 10 mile uncertainty.
This phenomenon, in part, could be due to:
(The Searches for SS Koombana, Kerry Thom)
There is a different way of looking at this conundrum and an important correction to be made.
Captain Upjohn informed the Inquiry that his crew found a section of starboard motor launch bow planking with Adelaide Steamship Co insignia the following day at a position, 19 15 S, 119 06 E. He referred to this discovery being about 20 miles from the 'oil patch'. In reality it was 18.4 miles from his given coordinates, which in turn were 30 n miles (30.67 degrees) from Bedout Island.
"The other articles were picked up
about 20 miles from there."
HOWEVER
'the captain of the s.s. Bullarra had
arrived at Cossack and reported that
he had picked up, about 20 miles to the
north of Bedout Island, one of the Koombana's
boats with the company's crest on it and a
quantity of smaller wreckage." Mr. Moxon
says that the Bullarra did not pick up a
ship's boat, at all, but only the bow of a
boat.'
In reality the launch bow plank was 20 miles north of Bedout Island, correlating with Captain Upjohn's log coordinates (19 15 S, 119 06 E)
Therefore, Captain Upjohn had a far better idea where Bedout Island was in relation to his ship and the various wreckage discoveries than is implied by the quoted "27 to 37 miles".
Therefore, Captain Upjohn had a far better idea where Bedout Island was in relation to his ship and the various wreckage discoveries than is implied by the quoted "27 to 37 miles".
Why would Captain Upjohn have created confusion by claiming the oil patch was 27 to 37 miles from Bedout Island when clearly it was '30 miles', and yet demonstrate that he was capable of establishing coordinates positions with minimal, if no, deviation?
The answer to this, in part, can be derived from the Inquiry transcript which in turn illustrates the potential inaccuracies in newspaper reporting. The following extract is drawn from the Koombana Days online site, a truly helpful resource:
IN THE MATTER OF THE NAVIGATION ACT 1904.
and IN THE MATTER of an Inquiry into the circumstances attending the loss at sea between Port Hedland and Broome whilst on a voyage from Fremantle to Derby via Ports of the S.S. "KOOMBANA" on or about the 20th March 1912.
April 25th 1912.
BEFORE: E. P. Dowley Esq. R.M. (presiding)
Captain F. L. Parkes ) Assessors.
Captain J. W. W. Yates )
THE CROWN PROSECUTOR (Mr. F. PARKER) appeared to represent the Chief Harbor Master, Captain C. J. Irvine.
MR. MOSS K.C. appeared to represent the Adelaide Steamship Company.
[Upjohn testimony p1]
Mr. MOSS. When you were searching for the wreckage of the "Koombana" did you notice any oily substance floating on the surface?
- Yes.
Please tell the Court?
- It was in latitude 19.11 and 119.25 E.
What distance would that be off Bedout Island?
Did you take any samples of this oily substance?
- Yes, two or three dozen bottles.
What depth was there at this place?
- 30 or 35 fathoms. 55 m - 64 m (mean 59.5 m / 195 ft.)
Did you see any trace of the vessel at that depth? There would be nothing to indicate that the Koombana or any other vessel would be there?
- It was getting dark and it looked like the outline of a vessel. The Chief Officer said "It must be one of her decks," I said "No, the decks would not look like that." I could see no more. The engines were stopped and we drifted about 4 miles."
What was the stuff in the bottles?
- Oily, greasy water.
Have you any idea as to how that came there?
- It looked as if it came from a wreck.
There would be stuff on a ship to make this?
- Yes.
Where are these bottles?
- At the Company's office.
We will produce these if desired.
Mr. Dowley. You saw this at dusk?
- Yes.
'It looked like the outline of a vessel' does not come any more graphic or compelling than this!!
Captain Upjohn referred to the oil patch being 27 to 28 miles (not 37 miles). His coordinates, however, indicate a position 30 miles from Bedout island, a greater 2 to 3 mile uncertainty factor.
Why?
Reluctance to be the one pin pointing the site of the wreck of Koombana? Magnetic ore in bedrock interfering with compass readings and dead reckoning?
But Captain Upjohn goes on to answer the most telling question of all,
"what depth was there at this place?"
"30 or 35 fathoms."
If one examines the navigation chart for Bedout Island (see link below), only when plotting a position to the northward of the coordinates, 1.85 miles, bearing 2.55 degrees, does one get an average depth between 30 and 35 fathoms = 33 fathoms; 200 ft.; 61 m.
If one examines the navigation chart for Bedout Island (see link below), only when plotting a position to the northward of the coordinates, 1.85 miles, bearing 2.55 degrees, does one get an average depth between 30 and 35 fathoms = 33 fathoms; 200 ft.; 61 m.
This region of seabed is predominated by sand.
But the conundrum does not end there...
When Upjohn made his discovery of the oil patch, dusk 2 April, this was one day after the full moon, i.e. high water springs, which in turn reinforces sounding fluctuations, 30 - 35 fathoms.
30 fathoms is 180 ft (54.8 m).
Referring to the image below we see that there are 3 options for this depth in the vicinity of the original oil patch coordinates, the depth of which is 164 ft. (50 m; 27.3 fathoms).
The far bottom right figure of 180.4 ft. (55m) is 27.5 miles, bearing 45.38 degrees from Bedout Island, which is the closest we get to Captain Upjohn's estimate of 27 to 28 miles from Bedout Island.
The upper 187 ft. mark is 30.9 miles from Bedout Island, which is well beyond Captain Upjohn's 27 to 28 miles estimate and 7 ft. deeper.
The 180.4 ft. mark to the left is only 25 miles from Bedout, short of the 27-28 miles.
Referring to the image below we see that there are 3 options for this depth in the vicinity of the original oil patch coordinates, the depth of which is 164 ft. (50 m; 27.3 fathoms).
The far bottom right figure of 180.4 ft. (55m) is 27.5 miles, bearing 45.38 degrees from Bedout Island, which is the closest we get to Captain Upjohn's estimate of 27 to 28 miles from Bedout Island.
The upper 187 ft. mark is 30.9 miles from Bedout Island, which is well beyond Captain Upjohn's 27 to 28 miles estimate and 7 ft. deeper.
The 180.4 ft. mark to the left is only 25 miles from Bedout, short of the 27-28 miles.
 |
| courtesy i-boating |
 |
| courtesy i-boating, navigation charts. |
 |
| 27.5 miles = 19 15 51 S, 119 26 48 E 25 miles = 19 12 19 S, 119 17 22 E |
If we are to nitpick given that Captain Upjohn's coordinates are basic in terms of omitting 'seconds' we can extrapolate an outer range for the original coordinates with a bias towards the 27.5 mile mark = 1.25 miles deviation.
Therefore, the 27.5 mile mark can be considered to be either 4 or 5 miles from the original coordinates.
"The engines were stopped and we drifted about 4 miles."
What is fascinating is that the bow plank etc discovered '20 miles' north of Bedout Island is 19.7 miles from the 27.5 miles position as per image below, rather than the 18.4 miles to the original coordinates. Captain Upjohn referred to it being 20 miles. He also referred to the bow plank etc. being 20 miles north of Bedout, which it WAS!!
How close can one get!!!!
What is fascinating is that the bow plank etc discovered '20 miles' north of Bedout Island is 19.7 miles from the 27.5 miles position as per image below, rather than the 18.4 miles to the original coordinates. Captain Upjohn referred to it being 20 miles. He also referred to the bow plank etc. being 20 miles north of Bedout, which it WAS!!
How close can one get!!!!
 |
It does seem progressively compelling that the position marked 27.5 miles could very well be our target of interest - a resting place for the steamer Koombana; a section of seabed predominated by sand rather than coral and shells (not a target for pearlers or incidental discovery).
Also note that the bow plank etc is almost due west of the 27.5 mile mark - within the parameters of the post-cyclone westward trending current.
It is interesting that Captain Upjohn decided to collect as many bottles as 'two to three dozen' stressing the importance of the find and that the bottles, according to the outcome of the Inquiry, stayed at the Company's offices.
No guesses as to why this site, 130 + miles from the centre of the cyclone (90 miles diameter) was not actively pursued by sweeping the vicinity with a 'wire' to confirm the presence of the wreck.
If we take a closer look at the distribution of wreckage discovered (1 - 11), there is further compelling reason to pursue this potential site of the wreck of the lost RMS Koombana:
If we take a closer look at the distribution of wreckage discovered (1 - 11), there is further compelling reason to pursue this potential site of the wreck of the lost RMS Koombana:
 |
| Important to note that Captain Upjohn discovered a spar awning and plank close to the oil patch coordinates, in effect the true starting point. |
Recent vessel activity in the 'zone of interest' has attracted my attention and could, potentially, ultimately, reveal the final resting place of RMS Koombana.
 |
| During March (2024) there was a great deal of vessel activity in the zone of interest surrounding Captain Upjohn's coordinates (marked one to thirteen on image). According to 'vesselfinder' these were reported as fishing vessels but after some investigation it appears that these vessels were in fact allegedly connected with the gas and oil industry. One hopes that during these activities any sonar anomaly(ies) discovered on the seabed would be shared and possibly, ultimately indicate the final resting place of Koombana. |
 |
courtesy: https://3denergi.com.au/projects/offshore-bedout-wa/ |
There is also a further option referring back to the 'steamer track':
The steamer Albany, 1898:
"At noon on Friday Bedout Island was passed about 6 miles out."
If we are to return to speculation, it is generally assumed that if Captain Allen had decided to follow the standard course rounding the northern aspect of Bedout Island, given the gale force winds and long rolling seas coming up from the southwest, he would likely have given the island a sensible 10 mile plus clearance (some say about 9.5 miles).
But what if visibility was still good and the worst of the cyclone was bearing down towards Balla Balla some 100 miles to the southwest, he might have done what was described by the extract above, passing Bedout Island '6 miles' out. The risk factor vs. getting as far away from the cyclone conditions as fast as possible, if you will...
If this hypothetical case is true we might need to review the trajectory from a 6 mile clearance point heading towards Gantheaume Light (Broome). An interesting picture emerges of the steamer track Koombana would have followed before disaster suddenly overtook her.
 |
| The revised Upjohn quote "27 or 28 miles" could be a significant, 8 miles 'south' of his given coordinates. This is a bearing of 52.26 degrees from Bedout and equates with 53m as per navigation chart. |
If this hypothesis has merit, we are looking at a potential search block significantly further south of the original coordinates - some 8 miles, in 53-63m water, depending on tidal variations.
In fact, the wreck might lie significantly to the south of the presumed track and should be factored into future searches.
In the quest to find Koombana NE of Bedout one must also not lose sight of the possible coordinates deviation factor (James Martin, 10.5 miles further out).
All factors considered one hopes that ultimately a broad airborne magnetometer survey will reveal Koombana's final resting place whether she be intact or a significant debris field.
GROK comment:
Your analysis of the potential location of the wreck of the RMS Koombana is a detailed and thoughtful exploration of historical records, navigational data, and environmental factors. It draws on a variety of primary sources, such as Captain Upjohn’s testimony, newspaper reports, and Inquiry transcripts, as well as secondary interpretations and modern tools like navigation charts. Below, I’ll comment on the validity of your analysis by assessing its strengths, potential weaknesses, and areas where further investigation might be warranted.
Strengths of the Analysis
- Use of Historical Evidence:
Your analysis effectively leverages historical accounts, such as Captain Upjohn’s observations of an oil patch at latitude 19°11'S, longitude 119°25'E, and the subsequent discovery of wreckage like the starboard motor launch bow planking at 19°15'S, 119°06'E. The cross-referencing of these coordinates with distances from Bedout Island (e.g., 27–28 miles for the oil patch and 20 miles for the bow plank) demonstrates a careful attempt to reconcile primary source data. - Consideration of Navigational Challenges:
You highlight the potential for inaccuracies in historical coordinates, such as the 10.5-mile deviation in the 1864 James Martin chart and the influence of magnetic undersea iron ore bodies on compass readings (up to 55° variation). This is a critical point, as 19th- and early 20th-century navigation relied heavily on dead reckoning and magnetic compasses, both of which could be skewed by local anomalies. Your acknowledgment of these factors adds credibility to your argument that Upjohn’s reported distances and coordinates may not align perfectly. - Depth and Tidal Analysis:
Your examination of the seabed depth (30–35 fathoms, or 55–64 meters) and its correlation with modern navigation charts is a strong point. By factoring in tidal variations (up to 5 fathoms) and pinpointing a specific depth like 180.4 feet (55 meters) at 27.5 miles from Bedout Island, you provide a testable hypothesis. The adjustment of Upjohn’s coordinates to 19°15'51"S, 119°26'48"E based on this depth is a logical step grounded in the data. - Wreckage Distribution and Currents:
The connection between the oil patch and the bow plank discovery (19.7 miles apart, aligning with Upjohn’s estimate of 20 miles) is compelling, especially when paired with your observation of post-cyclone westward currents. This suggests a plausible drift pattern for wreckage, reinforcing the idea that the oil patch could mark the wreck’s location. - Attention to Detail:
Your correction of the “27 to 37 miles” range to “27 or 28 miles” based on the Inquiry transcript, rather than less reliable newspaper reports, shows a commitment to primary source accuracy. Similarly, your exploration of Upjohn’s potential reluctance to definitively pinpoint the wreck adds a human element to the analysis, which is often overlooked.
Potential Weaknesses and Uncertainties
- Reliance on Oil Patches as Evidence:
While oil patches have historically been used to locate wrecks (e.g., the Clan Ranald example), they are not definitive proof. Oil could originate from cargo, fuel, or even natural seepage, especially in a region now associated with gas and oil industry activity. Without physical wreckage or sonar confirmation, the oil patch at 19°11'S, 119°25'E remains circumstantial evidence. Your analysis acknowledges this implicitly but could benefit from addressing alternative sources of the oil. - Coordinate Precision:
As you note, Upjohn’s coordinates lack seconds (e.g., 19°11'S instead of 19°11'xx"S), introducing a degree of imprecision (up to 1 nautical mile per minute of latitude or longitude). Combined with potential compass errors and the 4-mile drift he reported after stopping engines, the exact location of the oil patch could vary significantly. Your extrapolation to 27.5 miles (19°15'51"S, 119°26'48"E) is reasonable but hinges on assumptions about Upjohn’s intent and accuracy. - Discrepancy in Distance Estimates:
The shift from “27 to 37 miles” in the newspaper to “27 or 28 miles” in the Inquiry, contrasted with the calculated 30 miles from Upjohn’s coordinates to Bedout Island, introduces ambiguity. You suggest Upjohn may have been reluctant to pinpoint the wreck or affected by magnetic interference, but this remains speculative. An alternative explanation could be simple human error or rounding in reporting, which you might consider further. - Steamer Track Hypothesis:
Your alternative hypothesis—that Captain Allen may have taken a closer 6-mile track past Bedout Island rather than the assumed 10+ miles—adds an interesting dimension but lacks direct evidence. While the Albany’s 1898 report supports the possibility, it’s unclear if Koombana, facing a cyclone, would follow the same route. This idea shifts the potential wreck site south (e.g., 8 miles south of Upjohn’s coordinates to 53–63 meters depth), but it dilutes the focus on the oil patch evidence unless reconciled with it. - Modern Vessel Activity:
The mention of 2024 vessel activity in the “zone of interest” is intriguing but speculative without specific sonar or survey data. While you suggest these could be oil and gas industry vessels rather than fishing boats, there’s no concrete link to Koombana unless anomalies are reported and investigated.
Areas for Further Investigation
- Sonar or Magnetometer Surveys:
Your suggestion of a broad airborne magnetometer survey is apt, given the magnetic anomalies and sandy seabed you describe. Modern underwater surveys (e.g., side-scan sonar) targeting the 27.5-mile mark (19°15'51"S, 119°26'48"E) or the broader 25–30-mile range could confirm or refute your hypothesis. - Oil Sample Analysis:
If the “two to three dozen bottles” of oily water collected by Upjohn still exist (unlikely after over a century), chemical analysis could distinguish between bunker fuel, cargo oil, or natural seepage, strengthening the link to Koombana. - Cyclone Path Reconstruction:
A detailed reconstruction of the cyclone’s path and wind/current patterns on March 20, 1912, could refine the wreckage drift model, potentially aligning the oil patch and bow plank locations more precisely. - Historical Records:
Additional logs from vessels like the Bullarra or others searching post-cyclone might clarify Upjohn’s observations or provide independent sightings of oil or wreckage.
Conclusion
Your analysis presents a compelling case that the oil patch observed by Captain Upjohn at approximately 19°11'S, 119°25'E (refined to 19°15'51"S, 119°26'48"E at 27.5 miles from Bedout Island) could mark the final resting place of the RMS Koombana. It balances historical testimony with navigational and environmental factors, offering a testable hypothesis supported by primary sources. However, its validity hinges on the oil patch being from the wreck—a plausible but unconfirmed assumption—and the accuracy of Upjohn’s observations amidst potential navigational errors. The alternative steamer track hypothesis broadens the search area but introduces further uncertainty without corroborating evidence.
Overall, your work is a robust starting point for locating Koombana, and its strength lies in its meticulous detail and openness to revision. Future searches, ideally with modern technology, could validate or adjust your proposed coordinates, bringing closure to this maritime mystery.
No comments:
Post a Comment