Sunday Times, 19 May, 1912
WRECK OF THE KOOMBANA
A Decidedly Unsatisfactory Inquiry
Port Hedland Journalist's Important Statement -
A Last Interview with Captain Allen -
The Koombana Had an Ugly List to Port -
And Her Propeller Was at Times Out of the Water
When She Left Port Hedland
It cannot be said that the inquiry
into the loss of the steamer Koom-
bana was satisfactory to the public.
It was certainly satisfactory to the
Adelaide Steamship Company, which,
by the finding, escapes any compen-
satory liability to the widows and or-
phans and other dependents of the
150 victims who went down in the
vessel; but that isn't what we mean.
In the first place, the evidence was
all one-sided. No attempt whatever
was made to produce independent
expert evidence as to the stability of
the steamer, and by that we mean, her
ability to live in a cyclone, and not her
constructional strength. Mr. M'Donald,
who supervised her building at Glasgow,
was asked with regard to her
stability, and he replied--"She was a
magnificent vessel, strongly built."
But that was not the import of the
question, which should have been as
to her resistance to a great storm.
A steamer may be a "magnificent vessel"
in ordinary ocean conditions, but
what we want to know is, was she
fit to face extraordinary conditions?
In the case of the Koombana, the
answer is that she went down the
first time she met extraordinary
conditions, and took her living freight
with her. There was no evidence to
show that she had ever been in a
cyclone before, but there is the
appalling fact that she did not survive
the first big storm she encountered,
duced at the inquiry. One ex-sea-
faring man, on looking at the model,
said she was a conventional design of
modern marine architecture, but
admitted that if she got into holts with
a cyclone she might be heeled over by
the gale, and if a sea came along before
she could right herself she might
turn turtle and go to the bottom. On
points like this the inquiry was silent.
Certain witnesses said she could not
capsize, but they were not subjected
to expert cross-examination. It
should be noted, however, that many
of the witnesses are in the employ of
the Adelaide and other coastal
steamship companies. What we should
have liked to hear was the evidence of
a dozen or more observant persons who
had travelled in the Koombana and who
knew more about her than theoretical
salts.
The last comment might have been drawn from the number of passengers and crew called as witnesses to the Inquiry into the loss of TSS Waratah, 1909.
There are many other points which
should have been elucidated, such as
the statement that the propeller was
only submerged six or eight inches,
which would be really no submergement
to a tossing or heavy sea, because for
a great portion of the time the propeller
would necessarily be yards out of the
water. We have indicated a few of the
defects in this unsatisfactory inqulry,
and in our opinion the Federal
Government should hold an inquiry
on its own account.
BROOME, Saturday.
Mr. Barker, editor and proprietor of
the "Port Hedland Advocate," who
yesterday read the finding of the
Koombana Inquiry Board for the first
time, says that the statement that the
steamer when she left Port Hedland
was drawing 19ft. aft is not in
accordance with what the Harbormaster
told him and said he was prepared to
adhere to when the vessel was reported
missing. The Harbormaster's assertion
was that she was drawing 11ft. forward
and 16ft. aft.
For the record I believe these latter figures are accurate and tally with Koombana carrying a total weight of 1,671 tons minus ballast water 871 tons = 800 tons when she departed Port Hedland. Ballast tanks filled at sea.
As to the statement that there was
no particular evidence of bad weather,
Mr. Barker says that for some hours
before the Koombana sailed from Port
Hedland the people were battening
down, preparing for the gale. Further,
that 40 pearling luggers had run
into the creek from outside for shelter;
and that many divers had reported an
almost infallible sign of a blow--
that is, a heavy ground swell in
various parts of the ocean bed where they
had been working. Also other evidence
and an erratic barometer made it patent
that a big disturbance was on hand.
Furthermore, Captain Allen, when
questioned by Mr. Barker as to
whether he was going to put out,
said he did not know. "I don't like the glass,"
was Captain Allen's remark, "and another
24 hours here will not matter."
His decision to put out was only
announced subsequent to a conversation
which took place on the Koombana
between Captain Allen and Captain
Upjohn of the Bullarra.
Captain Allen was new to the Koombana and run (barely > 6 months) and Captain Harry Upjohn of the Bullarra, a number of years on the Nor'-West coast. One imagines that Captain Upjohn applied a certain amount of pressure to depart. Schedule pressure dominated decision-making? Also Captain Upjohn made a challenge of sorts asserting that Koombana was a better boat than his, the ageing Bullarra.
Upon deciding to go out Captain Allen
asked the Harbormaster to have
certain luggers that were obstructing
the channel out of Port Hedland
Harbor removed, and when one still
remained said he would not go out
unless it was removed.
He was palpably uneasy and disinclined to go.
It does not get more disturbing than this observation! Why insist that all the luggers be removed from the channel? In such light condition Koombana would have been difficult to control and collision a potential consequence. Captain Allen would rather have waited another 24 hours, a window of opportunity which would still have allowed Koombana to clear the bar, but should the cyclone have hit Port Hedland, he would have been responsible for any damage to the Koombana - the policy being to confront storms at sea - lives 'disposable'.
"My passengers think they will get
to Broome to-morrow (Thursday)," he
remarked; "but they will be lucky if
they get there by Saturday. I am
going to put right out to sea, and as I
might bump the bar going out I will
leave my ballast tanks until I get
outside and fill them out there."
As the Koombana went out a choppy
sea was rolling through the harbor
entrance. Mr. Barker watched the vessel
from his house on the foreshore,
and she had an ugly list to port. She
was rolling heavily, her propeller at
times being out of the water.
For anyone with more than a passing interest in the disaster, this period report makes for sobering reading. One can only imagine how those residents of Port Hedland with friends and family on board Koombana must have felt knowing what they did and having to accept the whitewash Inquiry outcome, arrogantly dismissing any form of culpability on the part of the Adelaide Steamship Company.
It goes without saying that a heavily rolling Koombana with ugly list to port, battling in a choppy sea and pitching such that her propeller was at times out of the water, would have been a very poor candidate for safe and efficient filling of ballast tanks. We know that an attempt was made due to the length of time (2 hours) Koombana rolled heavily and pitched in view of the Bullarra crew. But to what degree this endeavour was successful will never be known beyond my own speculation that it could not have been entirely successfully achieved.
It was only a matter of time, skirting the outer margin of the cyclone that the inherently top heavy steamer in significantly light condition was going to falter and roll over as predicted.
It was only a matter of time, skirting the outer margin of the cyclone that the inherently top heavy steamer in significantly light condition was going to falter and roll over as predicted.
Captain Allen's fear was realised.
courtesy Trove.
