Underwater_Alex

Glad to see this discussion continuing. To update my progress, I have published this story now in Diver Magazine UK (October 2014) and most recently in a Scandinavian scuba diving magazine. I plan to get it out in many more European scuba titles, when I have time. As the information in this thread really is something new to the Scuba Diving world and I think it is really important to get it out there - it greatly enhances people’s enjoyment of visiting the wreck. These are the opening spreads from the two magazines. HMVF is an integral part of my story as you can imagine - I’ve enlarged quotes from the articles above! I am also presenting this adventure at the London International Dive Show next weekend at ExCel (the same 45 minute talk on both days): http://www.diveshows.co.uk/visitors/p148897-speaker-presentations.htmlTalk is free once you are in the show. Best way to attend is with the combined ticket with Outdoor Show: http://www.diveshows.co.uk/visitors/p216906-1-ticket4-shows-book-now-and-save!.html I will also talk about this project (as well as 2 or 3 other projects) in a FREE talk I am giving next month at the Royal Geographic Society (South Kensington) - 4th March. You need to register for tickets: http://www.londondivingchamber.co.uk/index.php?id=events&page=3 Alex

And a few more snaps:

I went down yesterday and really enjoyed the show and the weather. I think this is The Auck's UC.

Thank you again for all the replies. That has got pretty much everything sorted out. The next stage is two fold. First to make a list of things to check next time I am on the wreck. A clear one are the Norton bikes - to see if they all conform to the pre-war type. Certainly there seem to be many with the upwards swoop of the exhaust Are there any other things people would recommend I look for/photograph to help differentiate between vehicle specifications? And the second part is for me to see and photograph some of these vehicles for real. Please can you suggest some historic military vehicle meetings (and museums/collections) that would be worth attending to get the chance to see these vehicles for real? I live in Peterborough, which is pretty central. However, I am travelling a lot for work through the summer, so a few suggestions would be good. Many thanks for the continued help and support. Alex

Here are some more detail images of the Albion refuelling trucks (AM463). Back of the cab where the hoses come up: I am not sure what these bits are for? Guessing part of the fuel mechanism: Note that in the background there seems to be another pillared trailer/vehicle. I've not got any more info or photos of that background - maybe Tony Edge has some more detail on that (hold 1, lower level). And on the subject of details. This is one of the Bedford OY lorries. This one seems to be fitted out for a specific purpose, does anyone know what these are for: And then finally, there is this vehicle in hold 1, squashed under a collapsed piece of deck, I don't know what it is: Not a lot to go on and it is not possible to photograph it from other angles, here is another photo anyway: Thank you again for any help. Alex

I'd not considered that truck before, and it certainly seems to match many of the details and I don't see anything specifically ruling it out. The only comment I'd add on that ID is that the vehicles on the Thistlegorm don't seem that big, but that's maybe because so much has been ripped off them. :-( Thank you again. Alex

Yes, they are soldierfish. Fish are my area of expertise! This species of soldierfish is found only in the Red Sea, it is known as the Red Sea soldierfish, blotch eye soldierfish or crimson soldierfish. They shelter in the holds during the day and come out to feed on plankton at night. Alex

OK, and now the ones that Tony Edge posted about earlier - that I have really struggled with, every time I think I have an idea, there is always something on them that does not add up. Also I am not sure that they are all the same (because of my inexperience and also the vehicles are in varying states of completeness, or incompleteness), but my guess is that they are all the same. Distinctive features are tall radiator with cap on top. Front wheel arches attached to the bonnet. Spare wheel attached n the right hand side. Lights either side of radiator. Three spoke steering wheel - now all stolen. Two seaters with flat load bed behind (on the Thistlegorm, this is often filled with BSA motorbikes). If you watch Cousteau's original 1955 footage from the wreck, you can see that they had a square windscreen, split into 4 pains of glass. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RPBwwOzP3sA - these cars are on screen for about 5 second at around 03:12. There are lots of these on the wreck, on the upper level of hold 1 and 2. Below are photos: This is the same one as in Tony's photo (post #41) This one has different tyres to the others:

Fantastic diagnosis and information. Wow! Just to be sure, is this the handle that allowed you to make the positive ID? :shocked:

Yes, I'll do those in my next post, Tony. They are one of the most prominent and common vehicles on the Thistlegorm, so I am sure there is correct ID out there somewhere! I don't have a clue what they are and indeed if they are all the same. They are all in vary states of vandalisation! So I have a range of images and each image helps build the picture of a complete vehicle. I discounted WOT-2 for them because the radiator filler cap is ontop of the radiator, whereas it is more set back on the WOTs. I'll post them later on today. Alex

The next trucks are the Ford/Fordson WOTs. There are twelve in the lower level of hold 2, in two rows of three on each side. They all face towards the bow in a symmetrical layout. What is the difference in calling them Ford or Fordson? These are also probably the most photographed trucks on the wreck because they are in one of the spacious areas of the hold, so just about every visitor swims over these. The front row on each side has Norton 16H motorbikes loaded onto them. The second row are more buried by material, including rifle boxes, wellington boots etc. The diving magazines/books have regularly labelled these as Bedford trucks! And I have been guilty of propagating this incorrect information - the mistake of thinking that books written specifically about the Thistlegorm are sources of reference. I also struggle to know the difference between WOT 1, WOT 2 and WOT 3. From looking at all the pictures, I think that these are WOT 3s. The first row of two rows always look bigger than the second row, although the other details of the trucks look the same. Maybe the floor of the hold was lower where the second row are. It is very dark in this area of the hold and the trucks are buried in a lot of detritus. So it is easy to be confused. This is the classic view of two of the Ford WOT3s. This is the front row on the port side, middle truck of the three in the foreground. This is the same truck from the other side: And this is the most central of the first row of the three port side WOTs: These all have motorbikes on their backs. The ones above are all from the front row. As I said above, I always feel that the second row are a bit smaller than the front row, but this could be an illusion, because they are more buried, or the floor of the hold is lower, or perhaps have different wheels? These are the three front row WOT trucks on the starboard side, with nortons in the back. 1 is the outermost, 3 is closest to the centre of the ship. 4 & 5 are the second row of WOTs. I think this photo does show that the tops of the cabs of the second row appear much lower than the front row. This is the central truck on row two, starboard side. This is the inner most one on the starboard side, still row two. Here are the same two again, with lighting inside the second one to give the image more visual depth: And this one is the middle truck on the port side, row two: Are these all the same? And are they all WOT3s?

The next vehicle is the Morris CS 8 light truck, which I am pretty confident I have ID'ed correctly because of its distinctive shape, especially bonnet. There are on the upper deck of holds 1 and 2. I am not sure how many there are as I have never counted them - my guess would be 4-6. The distinctive shape of the bonnet is very characteristic. Plus separate wheel arches and different tyres to the other similar sized vehicles on the wreck. I think that is the starting handle at the bottom of the radiator. Here are a pair of Morris CS 8, nose to nose: This is the right hand one from the photo above. Part of the headlight is still there: And another one: As with the other posts, please let me know where I am wrong.

Wow, lots of great progress. Thanks Ted. That is excellent information. Thanks for the input despite your computer problems at the moment, it is especially valuable as you've done this all before and have seen them underwater, rather than just in photos, plus back then, the vehicles were in better condition too. That Leyland Retreiver is a great one. My uneducated eyes hadn't even noticed it was different! Alex

That picture looks very close to me. Has the spare wheel and wheel arches. :-)

Here is an embedded photo of the large lorry that Tony linked above: Some references say that the largest vehicle on the wreck is a Tilling Stevens TS19? This is the largest vehicle, but I don't have an ID for it. Alex

Hi Ted, I read your comments on this on this forum last year and searched high and low for your findings report. Searching "Thistlegorm and Crossley" brings up nothing on the Internet outside this site - and as far as I know - you and your son are the only ones to correctly ID Crossley Q (so it should be an ideal search tool for the article), which makes me think that your son's article was published in print and has not been put up on the internet. I also contacted my friend Paul Colley (mentioned above by Tony) - and he pulled RAF strings to try and find any thing there for me (as President of the RAF Sub Aqua Association and retired Air Vice-Marshall) I was hoping he'd be able to unearth it on the RAF side. But no luck. If you have a copy - in any form - I 'd absolutely love to see it as it would answer so many questions for me. Alex

I think I'll stop my blitz of posts until later, so that there is time to comment on these latest conclusions. Here are some photos of these vehicles, which I didn't know what they were before. They have a very distinctive cab, with a flat room, split screen (into two) and two side windows. The large wheel on the side, i think is an attached spare, although can't be sure. This is a different vehicle of the same kind, which also has the wheel on the side, probably! I can find a photo of an Albion from the right side to see if there is a wheel attached. I presume that the spring like tubing is the refuelling apparatus. Which is consistent with Tony's ID. There is very little space around these vehicles, like most places on the wreck, so it is hard to get far enough away from the to get them in the frame. But this shot shows the bonnet is v shaped and that the wheel arches are attached to the body. The photos I have seen of the Albion show a bonnet profile like this, but I think that the wheel arches are separate. Maybe the design evolved over time? This photo was taken from dead ahead - which is almost an impossible view because the truck is parked against the bulkhead of the hold. I couldn't look through my camera to take this and just had to hold it back against the wall with the widest possible lens attached. Remember all these photos show distortion from the very wide fisheye lenses used.

That's exciting. I think that this the one you mean: I don't think I have any other images of it (that I have kept), so other angles will have to wait until my next visit. It is starboard side, hold two, lower level.

Hi Tony, That's brilliant. I have been completely stumped on what those are - I'll post my images of them too. The one you've posted has my light inside (although it is not my photo, but taken by my friend Damien on one of my photography workshops)! Alex

Another distinctive truck/lorry is the Crossley Q, which most diving literature incorrectly lists as a Matador, which also has an arched roof. But has completely different windows. I had never heard of a Crossley Q before discovering it mentioned on this forum and since there are at least 8, I think, of these lorries on the Thistlegorm. It is amazing that such a numerous vehicles had been mis-ID'ed for so long. As soon as you compare the windscreens of the AEC Matador and Crossley Q with the Thistlegorm vehicles, it is clear what they are. I have been using the fact that the windscreen is 4 piece on the Matador and 2 piece on the Crossley. Also the Crossley windscreen is horizontal along the bottom, while the Matador 'screen slopes downwards slightly as it goes out. One of the books I have says the Crossley Q was used by the RAF, which along with all the plane bits (wings, engine cowlings, exhaust, accumulator trolleys, pundit lights etc) is why I think so much of the cargo was bound for the RAF. I have never paid that much attention to the Crossley Qs on the Thistlegorm, because none are well positioned for photography. The cabs of almost all of them are parked against and covered in the debris in the centre of hold 2, lower level. Crossley Q windscreen: View from rear of a pair of Crossley Q lorries, buried in debris: This one is deeper in the hold and more exposed on the front, although has lost the top of the cab: [EDIT - discussion further down in this thread, pages 3 & 4, suggests that this particular vehicle is a Leyland Retriever] These two Crossley Qs are on the opposite side to the two above, you can also see (Bristol?) plane engine covers:

Now I want to start going through the larger vehicles (cars/trucks/lorries) on the wreck. Some are easy to ID being intact and distinctive. Some I cannot ID and I am really excited to hear suggestions from the forum. Starting with the Bedford OY lorries. Although one of the most commonly quoted vehicles associated with the wreck, there are actually only 4 on the Thistlegorm (from memory). All at the rear end of the upper level of hold 2. On the port they both face aft, on the starboard side one faces aft, one forward. Curvy cap and square front grill make these easy. This is aft facing one on the starboard. The other one is behind, facing forward. And this is on the port side, where there are two facing aft. This is the forward facing one on the starboard: And here are two shots of them that I really like. My goal is usually to take visually interesting shots, like these, rather than just ID type shots, which is a main reason I don't always have clear shots of all the vehicles. This is the pair on the port side, showing the cabs, which both have steering wheels still. I had placed an additional light in the second cab, so you can see the details of it through the window of the first: And this is a more arty version of the same two Bedford OY's, this time looking from one cab, through to the other, where I had placed a light: Alex

Thank you for the continued encouragement. The Norton exhaust is certainly interesting and I will check that on my next visit to the wreck. Although I have photographed the Thistlegorm many times, I have not photographed there since understanding exactly what is what. I know the wreck very well and know exactly where every vehicle is, I just didn't know what they were. That is a big part of this project for me - as it will be great to return there and know what everything is and hopefully a few new things might crop up. To answer a couple of questions from 79x100, all the bikes I have seen on the wreck are fully assembled and were loaded onto the flatbeds of the various trucks. Also, I don't think that any cargo was unloaded in Cape Town. I am also amazed that this hasn't been done before, or if it has that the information is not widely available and incorrect information is continually circulated. I can't believe that nobody has even done a decent survey of the holds. It wouldn't take more than about 30 mins to map and count the main vehicles. I agree with Tony and also suspect a RAF connection for a lot of the cargo.

Thank you for the friendly welcome and encouragement. I am just going to do the motorbikes tonight. All the existing literature on the Thistlegorm says there are three types of bikes on board: Norton 16H BSA M20 Matchless G3Ls Most bikes are not in good condition, most missing seats, mudguards, handlebars, lights, badges etc. But the Matchless should at least be easy to differentiate as it has just a single fork on each side of the front wheel. I have not photographed one bike on the wreck that I think is a Matchless (although that doesn't mean they are not there). The Norton and BSA are very similar and I have learned to differentiate them by the front forks and front brake. They both have two forks on each side, but on the Norton 16H they are similar thickness and on the BSA M20 they are thick and thin. Also the BSA has the brake on the right and the Norton on the left. This is what I take to be a BSA M20. Forks noticeably different thicknesses. Break on right of the front wheel. These are things I have noticed for myself. So I would like to know if these are consistent differences (I think they are) and also are there any other good differentiators, bearing in mind the conditions of the bikes? This is the same bike, with the Missus looking on: I have also noticed that on the two levels of the Thistlegorm holds the BSAs are on the upper level and the Nortons are on the lower level. In both cases they are usually loaded in the back of trucks. This is another BSA M20, I think, in better condition (although not as well positioned for photography): And these ones, also BSAs, are some of the few with headlights still attached. These are in a narrow, hard to reach section of the hold: And another BSA M20, I think, with a nice view of the exhaust pipe: I have less photos of Norton's because I had never been able to tell them apart. So I focused my photography on the upper deck motorbikes, because as a diver I can spend longer there, being a bit shallower. But these, I believe are Norton's, with break on the left: And some more Norton's: I am pretty confident that I am getting these correct. But confirmation and corrections are what I am after! Alex

Quick note about photography. I have always photographed the wreck with the intension of making nice pictures, rather than recording all the different artefacts and vehicles. Of course the vehicles are the main story of the wreck, but I choose photograph the ones that are well positioned to make good photos, rather than perhaps the more historically interesting ones. Also I tend to shoot them from angles that make for good images, rather than perhaps show the useful features for ID (which I don't know anyway)! Also in the confines of the wreck I have to use very wide lenses including fisheye lenses that do distort how the vehicles look. So bear that in mind when looking at the photos, below. Quick note about condition of the wreck. Anything that has been in the sea since the war is now starting to deteriorate significantly. But the Thistlegorm's cargo has also been, very sadly, pulled apart by idiots, after a souvenir. It is only the very occasional one, but with lots of divers (it only takes 1 in a 1000) and the damage mounts up is very depressing. And makes ID even harder. So also bear this in mind when looking at the photos. Also sadly, this is still going on. I took this picture in 2009, of one of the few steering wheels still in place. By my next visit in 2010, this wheel had been stolen. More to follow. I will start uploading photos of the various vehicles I have photographed over the next day or so.

Hello, My name is Alex and I am an underwater photographer (www.amustard.com). I first found this forum last year, when trying to make sense of the vehicles in the Thistlegorm wreck. I joined last week because I am hoping for some help on IDs. This discussion in particular (http://hmvf.co.uk/forumvb/showthread.php?28901-Interesting-MV-Thistlegorm) was a revelation for me. I was really struggling to identify the British World War II vehicles I had photographed on the wreck as the identities given in just about all Scuba diving magazines and books on the wreck didn't seem to make sense. There is so much incorrect information and very little correct information out there on the vehicles in the cargo. Ted's post was the first one that convinced me that this needs to be sorted out in the diving world. A great example of this is if you google Crossley Q and Thistlegorm! Just one result comes up that isn't from this forum and this is one of the largest and most numerous trucks on the wreck. Even the Ford WOTs rarely get a mention! I have raised this socially with a couple of the wreck experts in the scuba diving world - and basically been given the cold shoulder. I don't have background as a "wreck detective" - so they are not willing to admit that they might be wrong. So I am keen to prepare a water tight case! My reason for posting is to: 1) get help with IDs to correctly identify all the main vehicles in the holds. Also if there is anything we can't ID, I am back there again in June and photograph/measure etc the appropriate features 2) learn how to differentiate vehicles, so I can make a proper drawing of the layout of the holds as the plans that exists in the books are not just wrong in IDs, they actually show less than half the vehicles in the holds and they get repeated in book after book, article after article! 3) then I when I know what the main vehicles are, I want to attend some of the MV rallies this summer and take pictures of restored vehicles from the same angles as my underwater pictures, so nobody can argue about the IDs! Plus after all the research I have done, I have really got the bug to go to a meet! Just to set the scene and to check that I know how to share photos on the forum, here are some externals of the Thistlegorm: The Stern The bow (she's a big ship): Stanier 8F Locomotive: Train water tanker: Hopefully, that has all worked. Alex