voyager hmas

• International edition
• Australia edition
• Europe edition

Voyager disaster: 'The coxswain said "Sorry lads, we're done for" and sang Abide With Me'

Exclusive: After 54 years Alan Hellier tells the story of his escape from Australia’s worst peacetime military disaster – and how he still believes the full truth is yet to come out

A lan Hellier still has the watch he was wearing on the night of Australia’s worst peacetime disaster in the military. It has been stopped since 8.54pm on 10 February 1964, the minute he was submerged in waters of the Pacific along with fellow crew members on HMAS Voyager, fearing – expecting – that he wouldn’t get out alive. He was probably the last to escape.

Hellier, a senior radio operator, had just finished his shift and was sitting at a table in the Voyager’s cafeteria when the destroyer was struck and cut in two by the much larger aircraft carrier HMAS Melbourne. He heard a loud bang, and the force of the impact catapulted him towards the steel base of a gun, badly cutting his head.

The front section of the ship rolled over onto the side and then righted itself, but then water suddenly poured into the room. As the water level rose fast, it became clear the ship was sinking.

“The coxswain turned round and said, ‘I’m sorry, lads, we’re done for,’ and started singing Abide With Me,” says Hellier.

But Hellier had discovered a small hatch in a wall behind some lockers in the officers’ mess a few months earlier, when the ship had been in Williamstown dockyard during a refit. His head wound bleeding profusely, he made his way towards the hatch.

“The water was up to our waists when I decided to take off.

“I knew where there was a very small hatch. I headed for that because I thought I was small enough to fit through.

“It was bedlam. There were bodies everywhere and people screaming. They had drowned on impact because the water was rushing in and they got knocked over.”

The Voyager submerged and his watch stopped.

“People were in front of me. I helped push a couple in front of me through the hatch. I just said, ‘Go! Go! Go!’,” he said.

“I turned around and there was no one else coming out. One body floated past me. I was last out.”

Hellier surfaced and swam. “I got out and got myself free and then turned around. The bow was there, and it went down, and came up again. Then it went down forever. Once she bobbed the second time no one got out.

“It was a moonlight night. The water was warm.”

Eighty-two of the Voyager’s 314 crew were killed on impact or drowned, trapped in the bow section which sank only 10 minutes after the collision. The stern section of the ship remained upright and floated for about two hours, allowing other crewmen on board to jump into the ocean, swim to HMAS Melbourne and climb scramble nets onto the aircraft carrier.

The episode, off the coast of Jervis Bay in New South Wales , is infamous and the subject of two royal commissions. But Hellier still believes the full truth has not been uncovered.

The second royal commission was ordered in response to claims by a senior officer that Voyager’s captain Duncan Stephens, who died in the disaster, was frequently drunk and unfit to command the ship. In the hours before the collision, it emerged, Stephens ordered a triple brandy which a steward took to him. But Hellier says he knows the captain did not drink the brandy. “The triple brandy was for me.”

Hellier says he worked closely with the ship’s officers in the officers’ sea cabin, encrypting and decrypting messages. That day he vomited in the captain’s cabin and Hellier says the captain ordered the brandy for Hellier to settle his stomach. Hellier drank it. “I knew him well. I spoke to him every day at sea. I know he definitely never drank at sea and never on the bridge,” he said.

Hellier did not give evidence about the triple brandy to the royal commissions, claiming he was told by a lawyer to be very careful what he said in evidence.

“The QC said ‘You’ve got to be very careful what you say because you’ve got a lot of career to go in the navy and you’ve got a wife and young children and you’ve got to think of the good of the service’.”

Hellier says he understood the instruction as code for: “Be very careful what you say because it will come back to bite you on the arse.”

Now 81, Hellier lives in Brisbane. He has agonised in silence, bound for 50 years by the official secrets provisions he had to sign as a naval radio operator. But he is determined now to put the record straight as far as possible. He believes critical information was kept from the royal commissions, that faulty communications equipment may have been a contributing cause of the collision, and that the deaths of his fellow crewmen more than half a century ago may have been avoidable.

Hellier was one of the longest servicing crewmen on the Voyager at the time, a veteran of 10 years in the navy. He served in naval wireless stations in Canberra, Darwin and a British naval base in Singapore, he had sailed with the Voyager for 18 months before the collision, including nine months of exercises as ship’s main wireless officer plying from Japan to India. It was during this voyage that the Voyager’s UHF tactical primary radio circuit was plagued by unpredictable dropouts of its signal.

“We always had one problem with this transmitter,” he says. “The senior ship gives all the directions on that frequency for course and speed and to change positions.”

At the end of 1963, most of the crew left the Voyager . The ship was refitted at the Williamstown naval base and recruits were posted to the ship for training in 1964. It was there that Hellier discovered the hatch that saved him. During the refit, the UHF transmitter was taken off the ship for routine testing and returned approved for service, despite Hellier asking for it to be replaced.

“They only changed the aerials on it. The signal would just drop out,” he says.

When the Voyager put to sea in February 1964 Hellier says the tactical primary circuit was still faulty. Hellier’s knowledge of procedure also gives a clear indication that the manoeuvre during which the Voyager was crossing the path of the Melbourne at the time of the collision, was unprecedented.

Evidence given to the royal commissions indicates the Voyager was travelling away from the Melbourne to loop around to the right into its formation position, when it suddenly and inexplicably turned left, into the path of the Melbourne.

Hellier believes the cause of the collision could have been a misinterpretation of a course and speed direction given by the Melbourne, possibly complicated by a drop out of the radio signal. “The transmitter could have dropped off for a split second. The transmission could have been garbled,” he says.

If the Voyager had been given a course and speed that would steer it across the bow of the Melbourne, Voyager should have queried it because that was never done, he says.

If Voyager was directed to the other side of the ship, its procedure was to fall behind and move into the other position, not cross the bow of the larger ship, Hellier says.

“We had never been asked to cross the bow of an aircraft carrier. Very often they do give wrong directions. You always have to be on the ball when you’re working with a carrier. If you got that order, you’d automatically query it and ask the skipper.”

Hellier gave evidence to both of the royal commissions that were held into the disaster: the first within months of the collision, in 1964, and the second in 1967.

Although he was questioned, Hellier believes his evidence was disregarded because he was only 28 at the time, despite his having 10 years of experience in communications in the navy, and that his specialised knowledge of the Voyager’s communications systems was not adequately placed before the royal commissions.

After the collision, the Melbourne let down lifeboats for the Voyager survivors, and lowered scramble nets over the side for the sailors to climb up the side of the aircraft carrier. Hellier climbed into a lifeboat. It was half full of water, so he got out again and found another lifeboat. This one took him to the side of the Melbourne and he climbed the scramble net to safety. The bow of HMAS Melbourne was badly damaged but was seaworthy enough to steam slowly to Sydney.

From there, Hellier travelled by train to Brisbane, where he was reunited with his wife.

Voyager survivors were given a mere seven days survivor’s leave before being given new postings. Hellier was posted to sea on the navy frigate HMAS Quiberon and remained in the navy for 12 years, rising to the rank of a petty officer. He left the Navy when he could no longer cope with being in confined spaces. He became a postman for the rest of his career.

On 10 February at Jervis Bay, the Huskisson RSL will hold its annual reunion for Voyager survivors and the families of those who died. And in Brisbane, Hellier will gather with close friends who survived the Voyager disaster and remember those who perished without warning in the hell of those warm, moonlit waters.

• Royal Australian Navy
• New South Wales
• Australian military

Most viewed

• Skip to primary navigation
• Skip to main content
• Skip to primary sidebar

Naval Historical Society of Australia

Preserving Australia's Naval History

The HMAS Melbourne-Voyager Collision: A Tragedy that Damaged and Reformed

A.N. Other · Dec 28, 2016 · Print This Page

By MIDN Mollie Burns, RAN – NEOC 54 Naval Historical Society Prizewinning Essay

Introduction

The collision of HMAS Melbourne  and HMAS Voyager  remains the Royal Australian Navy’s (RAN) worst peacetime disaster. Occurring off the New South Wales coast in 1964, the aircraft carrier Melbourne  and destroyer Voyager  were engaged in night flying exercises when Voyager  inexplicably turned in front of Melbourne ’s bow. The destroyer was cut in half and sank; of a company of three hundred and fourteen, eighty two men were killed (Spicer 1964). For the flagship and escort to collide in home waters and calm conditions with such heavy loss of life shocked the RAN and Australia.

The collision heavily damaged trust in the RAN and its standing with the Government and Australian public. Two Royal Commissions were convened over the incident, however, the investigations were poorly handled and compounded the detrimental effects of the incident.

The collision and its aftermath is of massive significance to the RAN and eventually led to large training, operational and cultural changes. This essay examines the impact such serious incidents have on the public and parliamentary perception of the RAN, and the impact it had internally. It also reviews improvements to Officer of the Watch (OOW) standards, Command Team training and operational procedures.

Impacts on the RAN’s Reputation

Serious maritime/naval accidents can cause immense damage to the public and government perception of the RAN and the trust placed within the organisation. This damage comes from various sources.

Faith in the RAN’s competency is lessened when serious incidents occur. A key factor is what errors, failings or lack of knowledge may have led to the event. This has widespread implications up to the international level; a finding of negligence would impact standing with allied naval forces.

Secondly the handling of the incident affects public perception. This involves how information is communicated immediately after the incident, the transparency of the investigation process and any actions taken as a result.

Finally, the RAN is judged on the manner in which it treats individuals involved. This includes post-incident care and ensuring a fair review process for members.

Even prior to the collision, the RAN was under increasing public and parliamentary scrutiny (Frame 1992). The service was balancing multiple goals, struggling to define its organisation and role in post-war Australia and had suffered multiple serious incidents.

The RAN was compromising between several constraints and aims. Firstly, the fleet had been in material decline since the Second World War and was aging rapidly (Frame 1992). Whilst rising tensions in Indonesia had resulted in some investment, it was also forcing ships through rapid work–up exercises such as those Melbourne and Voyager were engaged in (Frame 1992). In addition, Frame (1992) states the RAN was under pressure to prove herself to the two major allies, the Royal Navy and United States Navy. Finally, questions were being raised in Australia about the role and relevance of the RAN.

The RAN had not assisted itself in responding to these queries by becoming an increasingly insular organisation (Frame 2005). The ‘silent service’ was still a very British institution, particularly in the officer branch. Inherited traditions shaped the culture and young adolescent officers were indoctrinated into the naval way of thinking and acting during their four year education at the Royal Australian Naval College. More advanced training was generally undertaken at similar British institutions. Consequently, RAN officers were very familiar with naval practices but less so with civilian procedures. The Navy itself was primarily directed by the increasingly powerful Naval Board (Frame 1992). Frame (1992) highlights the separation of the RAN from government; independence the RAN viewed as strength. However this clear divide between RAN leadership and government led to RAN officers and the Navy being viewed as arrogant and unwilling to accept external review (Frame 1992).

The harshest scrutiny, however, arose from a series of escalating incidents and the associated fatalities (Frame 2005). This culminated in 1963 with the drowning of five junior officers who were sent on a twelve hour, out–of–sight sailing exercise in dubious weather (Frame 1992). While the Captain involved was initially convicted at the resulting court martial, this was overturned by the Naval Board who effectively sent the Captain on a promotion course (Frame 1992). The lack of accountability and action by the RAN disgusted Parliament and the public. Trust in the organisation and its self–management was quickly eroding.

Into this environment, the Melbourne – Voyager  collision stunned Australia and further damaged the failing reputation of the RAN. That one RAN ship could effectively slice another in half with such a loss of life in home waters during peacetime was shocking (Four Corners, ABC Television, 10 February 1992). Furthermore, these deaths were not ‘a sacrifice for the country’s defence … [but resulted] from human error or negligence’ (Frame 1992).

The consequential falls in recruiting demonstrated the lack of faith in the RAN (Frame 1992). Despite a heavy recruiting campaign commencing almost immediately after the incident, numbers were significantly lower and did not recover for several years indicating the persistent nature of the damage to the RAN’s reputation (Frame 1992).

The negative perceptions of the RAN and their longevity were compounded by the handling of the collision.

While the RAN expected a Naval Board of Inquiry, public and parliamentary mistrust, frustration at the information flow and the need for an impartial review resulted in a Royal Commission being convened (Frame 1992).

The Commission was characterised by a hostile approach to witnesses and the initial report is poorly regarded (Frame 1992). It highlights the unsuitability of a Commission as means of investigation and lack of naval knowledge held by the civilian investigators (Frame 1992, Ferry 2014). It also contentiously held Melbourne’s Command Team partially responsible for failing to prevent the collision, leading to the Captain’s resignation (Spicer 1964). , a finding overturned in the second Royal Commission after the resignation of the Captain involved (Hall 1982).

The second Royal Commission was driven by parliamentary backbench campaigning against a reluctant Government and Naval Board (McCarthy 2015). It overturned the Melbourne finding but, again, was unable to determine the cause (Hall 1982). Both investigations were drawn out, controversial and a source of additional pain (Frame 2005).

Internal relationships within the RAN were also damaged by the treatment of members involved.

Voyager survivors, who had been through a horrific experience, lost the ship that they lived aboard and any possessions, were granted a week of leave to return home before being posted to a sister ship (Four Corners, ABC Television, 10 February 1982). There was minimal post-collision mental care or recognition of trauma. In later years, many compensation cases were raised and, since 1964, the RAN has improved greatly in this field (Anderson 1993).

Tension also arose from the treatment of members during the investigations, particularly the Melbourne Command Team. They were viewed as scapegoats and the Naval Board was seen to have abandoned or sacrificed its members (Hall 1982). This view was compounded by Captain Robertson’s resignation and Hall (1982) describes the tension caused within the mid-officer ranks.

As with any serious maritime/naval accident, the Melbourne-Voyager collision significantly damaged the RAN. It also highlighted numerous deficiencies, particularly those occurring on the ship’s bridge, and forced critical review and improvement.

Impacts on OOW standards and Command Team training

When Melbourne  and Voyager  collided, both bridges were manned by their respective Captains, navigators, OOW and various lookouts. Whilst the exact cause of the collision has never been determined, it is clear there were multiple failings on one or both bridges.

Oxenbould (2004) asserts that the insufficient lookout on Voyager , criticised in both Commissions, was the main reason the ‘collision was not prevented’. Voyager’s  most experienced watchkeeper was absent, their OOW was inexperienced and the key lookout was on his first sea voyage (Oxenbould 2004). Furthermore, Oxenbould (2004) argues the inexperience of the both bridge teams in working together on their respective ships also contributed. On that night, Captain Stevens aboard Voyager  was the only “old hand” on either Command Team (Frame 1992). Every other officer had been recently posted onto Melbourne  or Voyager  and this was their first night at sea in company in over five months (Oxenbould 2004). It is likely this inexperience and unfamiliarity contributed in some way to the collision. Hence, while the primary cause can only be speculated on, the collision had clear implications for the standards of the OOW and Command Team training and preparation.

A range of measures were introduced after the collision to address the deficiencies that became evident.

There was a lack of formal qualifications for an OOW on given platforms and different evolutions, and no measure of their experience, platform training and currency (Ferry 2014). Objective platform qualification and periodic retesting combined with the use of advancing technology in the Bridge Simulator have greatly improved OOW training (Oxenbould 2004). Complex evolutions can now be simulated for practice and the ‘inexperienced [who] must gain experience’ (Spicer 1964) can first do so in simulated settings.

Furthermore, alterations to workups ensure they are of structured to progressively build up; close-quarters night flying exercises would not occur on directly after a long refit with new command teams (Oxenbould 2004). Such exercises would be practiced in the daylight hours initially after graduation from simpler manoeuvres; from this perspective the Melbourne-Voyager exercise program has little apparent preparation and seems overly ambitious.

Independent trials and tests are also conducted before operational workups to assess basic drills and safety procedures (Oxenbould 2004). Following any major change in Command Team, such drills are conducted before a ship goes to sea to ensure cohesion, competency and efficiency on the bridge (Oxenbould 2004).

Operational and Procedural Changes

In addition to improved OOW and Command Team training, practices relating to communications, escort ships and rescues were refined.

In regard to ship-to-ship communications, speculation that the collision may have been caused by misinterpreted signals resulted in the confirmation of ambiguous signals being encouraged (Frame 1992). Quick challenges were made mandatory if a ship’s course was not understood or caused concern (Oxenbould 2004). Ships conducting similar evolutions were also to be assisted from their Operations Room, something that did not occur on the night (Ferry 2014).

Furthermore, rigid regulations for operating with Melbourne  were released (Hall 1982). For example, a clear zone was established 2000 yards ahead of the carrier which escorts were not to enter without express permission and turns toward Melbourne  to take up station were prohibited (Oxenbould 2004).

Safety and rescue also became a higher priority; on the night, poor swimming ability likely led to several deaths and helicopter rescue was underused (Ferry 2014). Furthermore, some escape hatches on Voyager failed to open and lifejackets were not readily available (Chapman 1979). The RAN swimming standards were raised in response and escape and rescue procedures strengthened and practised (Ferry 2014).

Cultural Significances

In addition to procedural changes, the collision eventually forced the somewhat-reluctant RAN through positive cultural change (Chapman 1979). Safety, constant improvement and professional discipline became key goals.

Improvements in Command Team training also shifted the responsibilities of the Captain and surrounding officers. Whereas previously a Captain was rarely questioned and had almost autonomous power, all members of the bridge were encouraged to raise any concerns (Ferry 2014). Similarly, Captains were under more stringent medical reviews (Frame 1992). The Captain did not lose responsibility, but was more accountable and supporting members were empowered.

This was only one aspect of the significant cultural change the RAN underwent. Prior to the collision, the RAN was relatively isolated and self-contained; this led to a glaring cultural clash during the Royal Commissions (Frame 2005). The RAN officers lacked knowledge of the process, deferred to rank and honour while failing to raise key points and were often naïve in the face of a hostile investigation (Hall 1982). The need for the RAN to have stronger relationships with government and be more aware of civilian processes was evident. It would also need to become accustomed to external reviews. In building these connections, the RAN became a more open and transparent organisation with greater public and parliamentary accountability.

The Melbourne-Voyager  collision is one of the RAN’s most devastating disasters. For so many men to be killed in a training exercise severely damaged the RAN’s standing with the Australian Government and public. It also highlighted numerous weaknesses and OOW standards, Command Team training and operational procedures were improved as a result.

The collision also spurred the inertial RAN through significant cultural change with an increased focus on safety and the correct following of procedures. These reforms eventually led to the RAN becoming a more open and accountable organisation. Whilst the collision itself is one of the service’s most damaging events, it and the resulting alterations laid the foundations for many practices of the modern RAN.

Bibliography:

Anderson, D., 1993, The Voyager disaster: a 30 year saga, Issues brief number 6, Parliamentary Research Service, Canberra.

Chapman, A.I., 1979, The ‘Melbourne’ collisions: ‘Voyager’, 10th February 1964, ‘Frank E. Evans’, 3rd June 1969, a treatise of analysis and opinion, Department of Defence, Canberra.

Ferry, D., 2014, HMAS Melbourne/Voyager collision: cause theories and inquiries (with aspects of the HMAS Melbourne/USS Frank E. Evans collision), Headmark, 151, p 2-16.

Frame, T., 1992, Where Fate Calls : the HMAS Voyager tragedy, Hodder & Stoughton, Sydney.

Frame, T., 2005, The Cruel Legacy: the HMAS Voyager Tragedy , Allen & Unwin, Crows Nest NSW.

Hall, T., 1982, HMAS Melbourne , Allen & Unwin, Sydney.

HMAS Voyager: the cruel legacy, 1992, Four Corners, Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC).

McCarthy, E., 2015, John Jess, Seeker of Justice: the Role of Parliament in the HMAS Voyager Tragedy , Sid Harta Publishers, Victoria.

Oxenbould, C., 2004, The Sinking of HMAS Voyager: What Happened ?, The Sydney Papers, 16 (2), p 103-110.

Spicer, J., 1964, Report of Royal Commissioner on loss of HMAS Voyager: Melbourne, 13th August 1964 , Commonwealth Government Publisher, Canberra.

• Research – We can help!
• Naval Heritage Sites
• Garden Island Dockyard Heritage Tour
• Members Area

Touching tribute for Voyager survivors

20 February 2023

On the moonless night of February 10, 1964, aircraft carrier HMAS Melbourne sent a signal to Fleet Headquarters in Sydney, which read only ‘ Voyager is sunk’.

The ship had collided with Daring-class destroyer HMAS Voyager and sliced it in half during a training exercise, 20 nautical miles from Jervis Bay, NSW.

Almost six decades later, the Voyager Mess at HMAS Creswell aims to ensure Navy’s worst peacetime disaster is remembered.

It is the first time in Navy’s history a warrant officer and senior sailor mess had been named.

Previously the only naval messes to bear names were a combined warrant officer and senior sailor mess and wardroom.

Warrant Officer Andrew Jocumsen, who proposed the name change when he was mess president, said it was due to Creswell’s relationship with Voyager survivors.

“Many survivors were bought to Creswell because it was the closest Navy base, so a lot of them hold this place dear in their heart,” he said.

A commemorative plaque was unveiled at the mess by Brian Hopkins, a Voyager survivor and president of the Voyager Survivors Association, on February 9.

Mr Hopkins said he and other survivors were chuffed Voyager’s name and story would live on.

“For me and my shipmates, we felt it was like a shot in the arm, that the Navy would honour Voyager in that way,” he said.

“It’s not only recognition of Voyager but also a salute to the rescue teams, a lot of which were organised out of Creswell .”

The name change followed renovations to the mess, completed in 2021 as part of the Navy Capital Works Program.

While the outside was untouched due to the building’s heritage listing, its interior was renovated to include a new bar, lounge, dining and outdoor entertainment area.

“Everyone walks in, looks around and says this is one of the best messes in Australia, and I agree,” Warrant Officer Jocumsen said.

“The outside of the building is over 100 years old, but inside it’s a fantastic, modern, fit-for-purpose facility.”

After the ceremony, Voyager survivors and their families were welcomed for the annual survivors mess dinner.

“We lost 81 uniforms and one civilian that night, but we have lost more than that number since, around 86, bearing in mind the youngest survivor is around 76 years old,” Mr Hopkins said.

Warrant Officer Jocumsen said plans were in place to centralise all memorabilia related to Voyager at the mess and make it a single repository.

The collection includes the original signal sent by Melbourne during the incident and will be displayed alongside other items for next year’s 60th anniversary.

Related services

Recommended stories.

Missing World War 2 bomber and crew found

Air Force has positively identified a 100 Squadron WW2 Beaufort aircraft, which went missing in 1943.

Around Australia in 44 days

Adventurer Michael Smith set off to recreate the first circumnavigation of Australia by seaplane on the day two Air Force pilots did it 100 years…

Army’s youngest corps turns 30

The Australian Army Public Relations Service celebrates 30 years of contributions to the defence and protection of Australia’s national interests.

• Content Reports

Search form

• Ship Histories
• Aviation Histories
• Base Histories
• Biographies
• Customs & Traditions
• Publications

You are here

Hmas voyager (i).

In 1933 the Admiralty agreed to loan the Flotilla Leader Stuart (I) and four V and W Class destroyers ( Vampire (I), Vendetta (I), Voyager and Waterhen (I)) to the Royal Australian Navy as replacements for the S Class destroyers ( Stalwart , Success , Swordsman , Tasmania and Tattoo ) and the Flotilla Leader Anzac , then due for scrapping. Voyager and the other four ships commissioned in the Royal Australian Navy at Portsmouth on 11 October 1933 to form the Australian Destroyer Flotilla, later to become famous as the 'Scrap Iron Flotilla'. Voyager was commissioned under the command of Lieutenant Commander George Stewart RAN .

The Flotilla departed Chatham, under the command of Captain AC RN (in Stuart (I)), on 17 October 1933 and, proceeding via Suez, reached Singapore on 28 November, Darwin on 7 December and Sydney on 21 December 1933.

The next two years of Voyager 's service followed the normal pattern of a Squadron destroyer in Australian waters. Training exercises, spring cruises, a run to New Zealand in March 1935 and long periods in Sydney Harbour sums up the routine for Voyager in the early 1930s.

On 14 April 1936 Voyager paid off into Reserve to be replaced by Waterhen (I) in the Flotilla. Two years in Reserve at Sydney ended on 26 April 1938 when Voyager recommissioned under the command of Lieutenant Commander James Morrow RAN . Following her recommissioning, Voyager spent most of the remainder of 1938 in Queensland and New South Wales waters.

In October 1938 she arrived in southern waters, reaching Melbourne at the close of the month and returning to Sydney on 10 November. February and March 1939 were spent in Tasmanian waters, followed by exercises in Victorian waters, finally returning to Sydney on 28 April. The months remaining before the outbreak of World War II were spent in Queensland and New South Wales waters.

On 14 October 1939 Stuart (I), Vendetta (I) and Waterhen (I) departed Sydney for Singapore, proceeding via Darwin and Lombok Strait. The same day ( Vampire (I) and Voyager departed Fremantle to join company at Singapore. The Flotilla was under the command of Commander HML Waller RAN (Commander (D)), in Stuart (I).

It had been intended to base the destroyers at Singapore for a period of training but, while the Flotilla was still at sea, it was decided that after a brief stop at Singapore it should proceed to the Mediterranean. The two ships ex Fremantle arrived at Singapore on 21 October 1939 where they were joined on the 29th by Stuart (I), Waterhen ;(I) and Vendetta (I).

The Flotilla sailed from Singapore on 13 November 1939 but split up en route and consequently the ships did not all reach Malta at the same time. Voyager arrived on 24 December 1939. From 2 January 1940 the Flotilla formed the 19th Destroyer Division for service with the Mediterranean Fleet.

At this period of the war, British and French naval supremacy in the Mediterranean called for only routine escort and patrol duties, interspersed with fleet exercises. Nevertheless, the Australian destroyers were kept busy with their routine of escort and patrol work, singly and in pairs, which took them from end to end of the Mediterranean.

Voyager commenced operational service in the Mediterranean escorting convoys from Malta to Marseilles convoys. She sailed from Malta on New Year's Day, 1940, bound for Marseilles. On 11 January 1940 she entered Alexandria Harbour for the first time in World War II, departing the following day escorting a Malta convoy.

In February and March the pattern was much the same and on 24 March Voyager 's crew had their first glimpse of the 'Rock' when they entered Gibraltar to provide screen for the carriers HMS Ark Royal and HMS Glorious en route to Alexandria.

Voyager commenced a refit at Malta on 5 April, spending the remainder of the month in dry dock. Escort duties recommenced on 3 May when she sailed for Alexandria in company with Vendetta (I) and Waterhen (I), escorting HMS Resource to Alexandria. The period of 5 to 20 May saw Voyager almost constantly at sea, on escort patrols and fleet manoeuvres with brief spells in Alexandria. On 20 May she joined the escort of the French warships Tourville and Boulogne en route for Bizerts. May closed with the destroyer back in Alexandria.

On 27 May the 19th Destroyer Division ( Stuart (I), Vampire (I), Voyager , Vendetta (I) and Waterhen (I)) and the 20th Destroyer Division (HM Ships Dainty , Diamond , Decoy and Defender ) combined to form the 10th Destroyer Flotilla under the command of Commander Waller.

The entry of Italy into the war on 10 June 1940 and the collapse of French resistance on the 22 June completely changed the naval situation in the Mediterranean. Formerly, all coastlines were either Allied or neutral, and the Anglo-French fleets were in undisputed command of the seas. Now all coasts except those of Egypt, Palestine and Cyprus in the east, Malta in the centre, and Gibraltar in the west were closed to the Royal Navy. Moreover, the Allies had lost the support of the French fleet, which had provided seven capital ships and nineteen cruisers, and had acquired a new enemy in Italy with her menacing naval potential. Her fleet boasted five battleships, 25 cruisers, 90 destroyers and nearly 100 submarines. It spelt the beginning of a long and bitter struggle for control of the Mediterranean, first against the Italian fleet and Air Force (neither of which proved the menace expected) and later against the much more formidable German Luftwaffe whose dive bombers took grievous toll of British warships before they were finally driven from the skies.

For more than a year the 'Scrap Iron Flotilla' took part in the struggle for possession of the ancient sea route linking east and west.

The Italian submarine fleet represented a formidable threat and it was as a counter weapon that Voyager 's initial role against the Italians took shape. On 13 June 1940, off Alexandria, Voyager contacted and attacked a submarine with two patterns of depth charges. The submarine immediately surfaced and Voyager opened fire forcing it to submerge. More depth charges were dropped, but the submarine, in spite of prolonged attack, escaped. On 17 June in company with Vampire (I) off Alexandria, a second contact was made but a series of attacks again failed to destroy the enemy.

Anti-submarine patrols continued through the hot Mediterranean June days. At sea off Crete on the evening of 27 June and in company with several destroyers of the 10th Destroyer Flotilla, the submarine Liuzzi was sighted on the surface. She promptly dived but HM Ships Ilex , Dainty and Decoy soon gained contact and forced her to surface. After a brief exchange of fire between Dainty and Liuzzi the Italian surrendered. Voyager thereupon lowered her whaler and rescued thirteen survivors before the submarine was finally destroyed by gunfire.

Early in the morning of 29 June, at 0505, the anti-submarine group were maintaining patrol west of Crete when a submarine was sighted on the surface. She promptly dived and in spite of depth charge attacks by Voyager , Ilex and Defender , apparently escaped. An hour and a half later, the submarine Uebi Scebeli was sighted on the horizon. Dainty and Ilex closed, attacked and sank her after rescuing survivors. In the evening of the same day the destroyers returned to Alexandria where Voyager landed her prisoners.

On 30 June, the day that Voyager returned to Alexandria from her first brush with the enemy, Vice Admiral Sir James Somerville hoisted his flag in HMS Hood at Gibraltar in command of Force H, hastily constituted to bolster Mediterranean sea power to meet the new threat. It comprised HM Ships Hood , Resolution and Valiant , the aircraft carrier HMS Ark Royal , the cruiser HMS Arethusa and seven destroyers. After operating against the French fleet at Oran in the first days of July, Admiral Somerville was ordered to attack the west coast of Italy, either Sicily or Sardinia, to create a diversion during the movement of Mediterranean convoys covered by the fleet.

The Mediterranean Fleet sailed from Alexandria on 7 July to cover the Malta to Alexandria convoys and with it sailed three of the Australian destroyers; Stuart (I) screening the 7th Cruiser Squadron and Voyager and ( Vampire (I) on the screen of the battle fleet and HMS Eagle . The following day, 8 July, the fleet was heavily attacked from the air and Voyager began to learn the value of violent evasion tactics. In spite of the enemy effort (some fifty bombs fell near HMS Warspite ), only the cruiser Gloucester sustained a direct hit.

Early on 9 July reconnaissance reports indicated the presence of strong enemy forces including two battleships. At 1510, off the Calabrian coast, Admiral Cunningham's Flagship, Warspite , sighted six enemy 8-inch cruisers and a number of destroyers. Four minutes later Neptune sighted the main Italian battle fleet. At 1520 the Battle of Calabria began.

Voyager 's role throughout the brief inconclusive engagement and the subsequent pursuit of the Italian fleet to within 25 miles of the Calabrian coast, was that of screening destroyer to the carrier Eagle . In the subsequent land based heavy air attacks Voyager continued to screen the carrier. She suffered no damage proving once more how ineffective high level bombing was against the small fast moving target. As Admiral Cunningham commented "high level bombing even on the scale experienced during these operations, yields few hits and is more alarming than dangerous".

The morning of 10 July saw Voyager detach from the fleet for Malta to escort an Alexandria bound convoy. However, there was no respite from the bombers, six heavy attacks developing before the ship entered Alexandria five days later. A brief spell at Alexandria ended on 25 July when she sailed escorting convoy bound for Port Said, then to Malta and back to Alexandria on the last day of July.

The first week of August 1940 was spent in Alexandria followed by the escort of a series of Port Said and Haifa convoys. On 30 August Voyager sailed on the screen of the battle fleet during the passage of Mediterranean reinforcements, HM Ships Valiant , Illustrious , Calcutta and Coventry . After an uneventful cruise, Voyager reached Malta on 2 September where she was under refit until the last day of the month when she proceeded on the screen of the fleet for Alexandria.

The first weeks of October followed the established pattern of convoy escort, screening the fleet, days in Alexandria Harbour and anti-submarine patrols. On 25 October Voyager joined the 1st Battle Squadron (Rear Admiral HB Rawlings) during operations covering the passage of AN5, a Port Said to Dardanelles convoy, including the screening of Eagle for the attack on Maltezana aerodrome, Stampalia. At sea on 28 October her crew were told of the invasion of Greece by Italian forces.

On 29 October Voyager sailed from Alexandria escorting a convoy for Suda Bay in Crete to establish an advanced fuelling base for the reinforcement of Greece. Arriving on 31 October Voyager , Vampire (I) and Waterhen (I) began anti-submarine patrols during net laying operations by HMS Protector . The following day Voyager joined the battle fleet for passage to Alexandria, adding her quota of fire in driving off a series of torpedo bomber attacks en route.

On 5 November she was at sea again escorting a Malta convoy, returning to Alexandria on 13 November to begin nine days of boiler cleaning. The escort of another Malta convoy began on 23 November, the passage being marked by the usual air attack. Three successive torpedo bomber attacks were driven off without damage to the convoy. At 08:00 on 26 November Voyager and convoy entered Malta Harbour. Eight hours later the Australian destroyer was once more at sea, escorting a convoy for Alexandria, where she arrived on 10 November.

December began with convoy to Piraeus in Greece, with Voyager returning to Alexandria 9 December. On this day the British Army under General Wavell began its offensive in the Western Desert. The immediate object of the operations ashore was the destruction of enemy forces contained in the Nibeiwa/Tummae area followed by a northward drive to Sidi Barrani on the coast, thus isolating Maktila Camp which represented the Italian Army's most advanced camp in Egypt. The naval role during the first stage of the operations was to provide harassing fire at Maktila and Sidi Barrani, and this was begun by the monitor Terror and the gunboats HMS Aphis and HMS Ladybird , supported by the destroyers HM Ships Jervis , Janus and Nubian during the night of 8/9 December.

On 10 December Voyager sailed from Alexandria screening the battle fleet ( Barham , Valiant , York and Illustrious ) for the bombardment of Bardia, but were prevented from shelling the Italian positions by low visibility. Bad weather also stopped a projected attack on El Adem airfield by aircraft from Illustrious . On 13 December the fleet returned to Alexandria.

On 14 December Voyager joined the Inshore Squadron screening Terror in the bombardment of Bardia for the following three days. One minor casualty occurred when Voyager was straddled by the Italian shore batteries. Ordered to return to Alexandria late on 17 December, Voyager there embarked half a company of British Commando troops, picked up more troops at Mersa Matruh and landed the entire group at Sollum, which fell to the British forces on 16 December.

During the remainder of December the work of the D10 destroyers ( Vendetta (I), Voyager , Waterhen (I), ( Vampire (I) (Captain D10), Diamond and Wryneck ) supporting the campaign in the Western Desert was confined to patrol and escort duty. On 26 December Waterhen (I) captured the enemy schooner Tireremo Diritto trying to enter Bardia and on 29 December Voyager intercepted the schooner Zingarella engaged in transporting British prisoners of war from Bardia to Tobruk. Dainty also captured two schooners on the night of 21 December.

In January 1941 the Mediterranean Fleet continued operations in support of the Libyan offensive, Operation MC5. On 2 January naval support for the assault on Bardia began when Force W ( Terror , Aphis and Ladybird ) opened harassing fire in preparation for the Australian attack from the south. This was followed by sustained bombardment the following day from the 15-inch armament of Warspite , Valiant and Barham . Two days later Bardia fell, and with it some 25,000 prisoners fell into Allied hands.

Voyager and Dainty represented the 10th Destroyer Flotilla's participation. Voyager (Captain D10) sailed from Alexandria on New Year's Day 1941. On 2 January she supported Force W in the bombardment of Bardia. Afternoon attempts (45 bombs were aimed at Voyager and Terror ) by the Italian Air Force to terminate the bombardment proved as unsuccessful as previous attempts to drive the Navy from the Libyan coast.

Early in the morning of 3 January Voyager joined the battle fleet screen off Sidi Barrani for the full scale bombardment of Bardia. In the ensuing shelling of the Italian positions the battleships engaged the northern sector while Voyager and Dainty engaged shore batteries on both sides of the harbour. On completion of the bombardment Voyager returned to Alexandria to escort a convoy for Sollum before beginning five days boiler cleaning at Alexandria. On 11 January Voyager joined the battle fleet for screening duties during large scale convoy operations.

A new note had sounded in the Mediterranean campaign with the advent of the Luftwaffe. On 10 January German aircraft made their first attacks against the Mediterranean Fleet and showing far greater skill and determination than their Italian allies succeeded in seriously damaging the carrier Illustrious with six direct hits. The following day, 11 January, dive bombers again attacked the fleet, sinking the cruiser Southampton and damaging Gloucester . Thus in two days the Germans caused more damage to the fleet than the Italians in six months of warfare.

Voyager returned to the Libyan coast on 15 January to take up intercept patrols and support to advancing British Forces while Force W ( Terror , Gnat and Ladybird ) continued to harass the enemy. With the fall of Tobruk on 22 January Voyager withdrew to Alexandria, returning five days later on 27 January to resume operations.

In February Voyager continued her Libyan patrols, operating mainly off Tobruk and Benghazi after the capture of the latter port on 6 February. For the forces at sea there was little respite. Air attack, the constant menace to the Inshore Squadron, accounted for the loss of Terror off Derna on 22 February and Dainty , of the 10th Flotilla, off Tobruk two days later. In March German intervention in Greece became an ominous probability and it was decided to reinforce the Greek Army to the limit of capacity. The decision imposed a further heavy commitment on the Mediterranean Fleet with the responsibility of the safe conduct of the convoys.

On 6 March Operation LUSTRE, the reinforcement of Greece, began and Voyager at sea on the screen of the battle fleet covering the first convoys played her small part along with her sister ships and HMAS Perth (I). The troop movements were a continuous operation with convoys at three day intervals from Alexandra with personnel in cruisers and material in merchant vessels. Perth (I) in two lifts transferred 1,221 troops. Voyager , besides operating on the screen of the fleet and on anti-submarine patrol, escorted two Piraeus bound and two Piraeus to Alexandria convoys. En route to Greece on 28 March torpedo bomber attacks failed to damage the convoy or escort, though one torpedo passed uncomfortably close along Voyager 's port side.

Concurrently with the Greek operations the flow of supplies was maintained to the army in the Western Desert. In these operations during March Voyager assisted when she escorted a convoy to Tobruk, leaving Alexandria on 17 March.

April 1941 opened on the 6th with the German invasion of Greece in force. The Royal Navy in the Mediterranean was thus faced with the prospect of further heavy responsibilities. At the same time the Battle of Matapan had been fought and won, ending Italian attempts to intervene at sea with the fleet. As Admiral Cunningham commented "I am glad to think that we were able off Matapan to teach them a lesson which kept them out of the ring for the rest of the year".

Operation LUSTRE continued for the first three weeks of April in the face of mounting air attack by the Luftwaffe. There was only meagre fighter protection for the convoys in the vicinity of Crete and the Piraeus approaches. Thus in spite of the Navy's efforts losses increased. To 18 April twenty-five ships were lost, but only seven in convoy at sea. All but two were empty and south bound and 58,364 troops and their equipment had been safely landed on Greek soil without the loss of a single man.

In common with most of the escorting destroyers, Voyager suffered her share of attack from the air during this period. On 1 April she sailed from Piraeus escorting a convoy of nine ships southward. Attacked by German bombers the following day, two ships, Homefield and Coulourasxenos , were damaged beyond salvage. Voyager rescued the crews of both vessels.

In the Western Desert disaster struck the Allied campaign with the launching of the German counter offensive under Rommel at the beginning of April. Benghazi was lost on 3 April, Bardia on 12 April and by the following day the British Army found itself back on the Egyptian frontier. The Navy, heavily committed, gave what help it could. The Inshore Squadron including Vendetta (I), Waterhen (I) and Stuart (I) endeavoured to harass the enemy and the cruiser Gloucester bombarded Bardia twice. Special efforts were made to prevent men and materials crossing the Mediterranean to bolster the enemy potential.

Voyager 's part in these Libyan harassing operations began on 19 April when she sailed from Alexandria as part of the escort of a force sent to raid Bardia. The troops landed from Glengyle succeeded in demolishing shore dumps and except for 67 men who had to be left behind, safely re-embarked for the return to Alexandria.

On 21 April, the Greek cause lost, it was decided to evacuate the British Forces. In anticipation preparations had been made to set in motion Operation DEMON, the evacuation of Greece. The problems were many and the conditions ashore in Greece chaotic. Excluding the cruiser Gloucester and four destroyers based at Malta, all the light forces of the Mediterranean Fleet were called in to assist.

The evacuation began during the night of 24/25 April 1941 and continued for five nights, with the further rescue of small groups for two more nights. Some 1300 troops were taken out before Operation DEMON began, followed by 16,000 from Raphtis and Nauplia and Raphina, 5750 from Megara, 4320 from Monemvasia and some 19,500 from various points on the coast. At Kalamata, where Perth (I), Phoebe and three destroyers were ordered to embark 8,000 troops, only 450 were rescued. A German column ahead of the main force entered the town, captured the Sea Transport Officer and his staff and so disorganised the evacuation arrangements. Perth (I)'s captain and senior officer was then some ten miles off the coast. Reluctantly he decided to order the force to withdraw. Later that night, however, four destroyers rescued 450 troops from the groups awaiting succour on the beaches to the south east of the town.

Voyager 's part in the evacuation began on the morning of 24 April when she cleared Suda Bay in company with Calcutta , Stuart (I), Salvia and Hyacinth and the transports Glengyle , Glenearn and Ulster Prince . Air attack en route by German Junkers scored one hit on Glenearn . At sunset Phoebe joined the escort and Voyager and Hyacinth detached for Nauplia escorting Ulster Prince where they anchored in the evening, followed an hour later by Phoebe , Stuart (I) and the transport Glenearn .

Shortly before midnight 301 personnel embarked in Voyager , including 160 nursing sisters. Embarkation continued in other ships throughout the night. At 03:50 Glenearn , Phoebe , Stuart (I) and Hyacinth sailed for Suda, followed at 08:07 by Voyager (maintaining an anti-submarine patrol), Perth , Calcutta , Salvia and the transport Glengyle . All ships reached Suda undamaged. The Nauplia lift ended Voyager 's part in the embarkation operations. For remainder of the period she was escorted convoys between Suda Bay and Alexandria.

The setback in Libya was not all on the debit side. In his withdrawal General Wavell decided to attempt to maintain a toehold on the coast. A strong garrison was accordingly established in Tobruk. Aided by the Navy, all the German efforts to dislodge the garrison proved unavailing, in spite of Goebbels' epithet of 'RATS'.

The supply of the beleaguered troops maintained under constant air attack resulted in the organisation of the 'Tobruk Ferry'. The cost at sea was heavy with HMAS Waterhen (I) being one of the victims. Nevertheless the Navy maintained a regular supply averaging 400 tons a day besides reinforcements and the evacuation of the wounded. On 5 May 1941 Voyager made her first contribution to the frustration of the investing German Army when she sailed from Alexandria with troops and ammunition and returned the following day carrying 250 troops.

Voyager now returned to the operations proceeding to the north. Greece was gone but Crete remained in British hands. On 9 May she reached Suda Bay to join Flamingo and Auckland as convoy escort to Alexandria, departing again on 18 May, escorting Glengyle which was carrying reinforcements.

On 23 May the fleet, then operating to prevent sea borne landings in Crete, was ordered to withdraw towards Alexandria after losing the cruisers Gloucester and Fiji and four destroyers, Juno , Greyhound , Kelly and Kashmir . On the previous day Voyager joined the screen of the 1st Battle Squadron after searching for survivors from Fiji .

On 27 May, on the eve of the evacuation, Voyager detached and entered Alexandria to begin operations to Tobruk. The 'Tobruk Ferry' occupied Voyager throughout June 1941. Five runs were made from Alexandria to Tobruk and return. Another five voyages were made from Mersa Matruh to Tobruk and return. On 29 June she reached Alexandria for docking, a weary ship trembling in every plate.

Voyager 's Mediterranean service was now drawing to a close. On 12 July she made one last run to Tobruk. She experienced engine trouble and limped into Alexandria the following day. It marked the end of eighteen months service under constant pressure.

On 24 July Voyager cleared Alexandria Harbour for the last time en route for Australia. She arrived in Sydney on 25 September 1941 after an absence of 751 days. She was placed in refit which was completed on 3 March 1942.

Following a period of post refit trials and exercises, Voyager commenced her first operational duty of the Pacific War on 19 April 1942 when she escorted HMT Queen Elizabeth on the east coast. Further coastal escort duties followed before post refit defects required her to dock in Sydney. This occupied most of May.

Voyager arrived in Fremantle on 6 June 1942 and was based there for a short period as an escort destroyer. On 25 August 1942 she arrived in Darwin, where many of her crew had their first acquaintance with hostile aircraft.

Voyager was based at Darwin in September. On 22 September she embarked 250 reinforcements for the Timor guerrilla forces and sailed for Betano Bay with the intention of landing the troops at last light and then withdrawing.

During disembarkation operations the following night, 23 September, Voyager ran aground on the beach in Betano Bay. At 12:45 the next day she was sighted by a Japanese reconnaissance bomber escorted by a fighter. Defiant to the end she shot down the bomber, but since the inevitable following attack was expected it was decided to abandon ship. The first of a series of bombing raids began mid afternoon, such that by the evening there was no alternative but to detonate demolition charges, thereby destroying the ship. On 25 September HMA Ships Kalgoorlie and Warrnambool (I) safely evacuated Voyager 's ship's company.

On 4 November 1999, the RAN 's Hydrographic Office Detached Survey Unit (HODSU) reestablished the location of the wreck of Voyager using a Klein side scan sonar while conducting a survey of Betano beach in support of INTERFET operations in East Timor. Little of the wreck remains and what does is exposed at low tide.

Further reading

'Scrap Iron Destroyers: The Story of HMA Ships Stuart, Vampire, Vendetta, Voyager and Waterhen' by LJ Lind and A Payne - published by the Naval Historical Society of Australia, Garden Island, 1976.

To fight and win at sea.

Utility Links

• Accessibility
• Privacy Policy

Footer Info

Fifty years on, survivors commemorate Voyager disaster

The 50th anniversary of australia’s worst maritime disaster was commemorated today in new south wales..

The HMAS Melbourne at sea, probably following a collision with the destroyer HMAS Voyager in February, 1964

Share this with family and friends

Recommended for you

Clock is ticking: The Australian island facing an uncertain future

Immigration policy

Who was Joel Cauchi, the Queensland man who carried out the Bondi mass stabbing?

Anthony Albanese calls for calm after 'terrorist act'; police say rioters 'will be prosecuted'

News and Current Affairs

Anthony Albanese says Bondi 'Bollard Man' can stay in Australia 'as long as he wants'

Sydney Stabbing

The unexpected cost that could add $500 to your Bali trip

Vaccination

Bondi attacker was known to police, no early indication of terrorism

Emergency Evacuations

Refugee who died defending others among six victims of Bondi stabbing attack

What was thought to be a 'significant' COVID-19 milestone wasn't at all

Get sbs news daily and direct to your inbox, sign up now for the latest news from australia and around the world direct to your inbox..

Morning (Mon–Fri)

Afternoon (Mon–Fri)

By subscribing, you agree to SBS’s terms of service and privacy policy including receiving email updates from SBS.

SBS World News

• Vessel Reviews
• Passenger Vessel World
• Offshore World
• Tug and Salvage World
• Maritime Security World
• Specialised Fields
• Marine Projects World
• Small Craft World
• Tanker World
• Dry Cargo World
• Boxship World
• Aquaculture World
• Trawling World
• Longlining World
• Seining World
• Potting World
• Other Fishing Methods
• Regulation & Enforcement
• Feature Weeks
• Classifieds
• Book Reviews

OPINION | HMAS Voyager (II): remembering the 82 fallen, and so many who would never be the same again

This last February 10 marks the 60th anniversary of the loss of the Royal Australian Navy destroyer HMAS Voyager (II), which sank 20 nautical miles south-east of Jervis Bay.

Of the 314 crew of Voyager , 82 were lost that night in Australia’s worst peacetime military disaster. Many more lives were altered forever. We are a maritime nation and yet our maritime history is often forgotten. We must remember the loss of Voyager on the night of February 10, 1964.

The destroyer was escorting HMAS Melbourne (II), Australia’s last aircraft carrier, as it carried out flying operations. Both ships had recently emerged from refits. Voyager was the “plane guard”, positioned 1,000 to 2,000 yards off Melbourne ’s port quarter to recover the crew of any aircraft that might ditch.

Following a series of manoeuvres, Voyager ended up out of position on Melbourne ’s starboard bow and was required to resume her station. How and why Voyager ended up in this position remains unclear 60 years on, although there are many theories. In truth, we will never know as most of the bridge team were lost that night.

“Many stories of heroism emerged from the hellish night.”

Presumably attempting to resume her station, Voyager was seen to alter to starboard away from the carrier, and then back to port towards it. The 3,600-tonne Voyager crossed the bow of the 20,000-tonne Melbourne . There was little time to react and despite attempts to avoid the collision in the final seconds, the two ships collided at 20:56. Melbourne ’s bow struck Voyager aft of her bridge, severing the ship. Voyager ’s bow passed down the port side of Melbourne , sinking within 10 minutes of the collision. A recovery operation was immediately launched by Melbourne , which was joined by several vessels from HMAS Creswell, in Jervis Bay.

Many stories of heroism emerged from the hellish night. Midshipman Kerry Francis Marien survived the collision but left the relative safety of his life raft and was last seen swimming towards the rapidly sinking bow of Voyager to search for survivors struggling in the water.

Chief Petty Officer Jonathan “Buck” Rogers was trapped in the forward section of the bow. Realising he was too big to get through the small escape hatches, Buck took charge of trying to help the 50 sailors trapped with him to escape. And when escape was no longer possible, he was heard leading those trapped there in prayers and hymns. There are many stories of heroism from that night, of the brave men of the Royal Australian Navy rising to the occasion to save the lives of shipmates and friends. Stories that we know, and stories we will never know.

“We must also remember the brave men lost in peacetime as they trained to defend their country.”

In the years that followed the loss of Voyager , the national conversation was dominated by the controversy. The incident was followed by two royal commissions and many theories and books on how and why such a horrific peacetime loss of life could occur.

It is of course important to understand why Voyager was lost and where accountability lies. Whilst we should never lose sight of the many hard lessons learnt, on the 60th anniversary we should focus our thoughts on the brave sailors who died and those who survived but whose lives were never the same.

The sea is a perilous place; it does not recognise a distinction between wartime and peacetime. Every time our naval ships set sail, they put themselves at the mercy of this unforgiving environment. For centuries, the oceans have rallied against those who seek to tame it, and operating in this environment will always be dangerous. Preparation in this domain for the possibility of conflict requires the women and men of our navy to practise the operations and procedures that they will rely on in wartime. There is always risk, and they embrace it daily.

When we think of our military heroes we talk of those on the Kokoda track and the trials of Gallipoli and the Western front. They all rightfully deserve a place in the collective memory of our nation and remind us of what war really means, especially in this time of global tensions that permeate all aspects of international and national security.

On the anniversary of Voyager ’s loss we must also remember the brave men lost in peacetime as they trained to defend their country. They too are our heroes, and they died in the service of our nation.

Article reprinted with permission from the Australian Strategic Policy Institute’s analysis and commentary site The Strategist .

Related Posts

Jennifer Parker

• Previous AWARDS 2023 | Best Medium Fish Farm Support Vessel – San Little Glory – Southern Ocean Solutions
• Next COLUMN | Quick updates: Total buys a rig; Trident cans a rig; Standard sales succeed and fail; Saipem wins and loses corruption battles; Sapura hit with wind arbitration [Offshore Accounts]

Baird Maritime , launched in 1978, is one of the world's premier maritime publishing houses.

The company produces the leading maritime new portal BairdMaritime.com , home of the world famous Work Boat World, Fishing Boat World, Ship World, Ausmarine, and Commercial Mariner sub-sites, and the industry-leading ship brokerage platforms WorkBoatWorld.com and ShipWorld.com .

Contact us: [email protected]

© Copyright - Baird Maritime

• Terms & Conditions
• Advertise with Baird Maritime
• Submit News/Leads

Popular searches

Popular pages.

HMAS Voyager – tragedy and courage

Manoeuvring ships at sea is an exacting task, one that requires skill, experience and concentration and undertaking such exercises in night time conditions adds to the risk. Fifty years ago, on the night of 10 February 1964 one such exercise went horribly wrong.

HMAS VOYAGER pennant flag. ANMM Collection gift from M Hampson

The Royal Australian Navy was undertaking routine exercises off Jervis Bay on the NSW south coast and was ending the day with night flying exercises for the aircraft of the carrier HMAS Melbourne . The Daring class destroyer HMAS Voyager (sister ship to the museum’s Vampire ) was in the role of plane guard, or rescue destroyer. Voyager ’s job was to pick up any airmen if the exercise went wrong and they crashed. It was also the destroyer’s job to stay clear of the aircraft carrier.

The exercises were going well until the start of the 8.40 pm manoeuvre. Melbourne ’s commanding officer Captain Robertson ordered Voyager to take her position – behind Melbourne and off to the port (left) side. At that stage Voyager was sailing just ahead of the carrier on the starboard (right) side. She immediately turned to starboard as if to loop around behind the carrier into position; but then turned to port. The bridge crew on Melbourne thought she was going to turn to starboard again undertaking a fishtail or zigzag course to slow her momentum. But by the time they realised Voyager was still turning to port – and therefore would pass in front of Melbourne – it was too late to avoid a collision.

Captain Robertson immediately ordered Melbourne full astern; Captain Stevens ordered Voyager full ahead hard a starboard in a futile attempt to avoid each other. But the momentum and size of the carrier meant it was physically unable to slow or change course enough to avoiding hitting Voyager . And hit the destroyer she did – just aft of the bridge and slicing Voyager in two. The senior officers on the bridge of HMAS Voyager were killed on impact.

Within seconds Captain Robertson had ordered boats into the water, nets over the side of the carrier for survivors to clamber up and helicopters into the air. In this state of confusion, darkness and panic training swung into place and true heroes were made. The bow of Voyager had heeled sharply onto its starboard side and then turned upside down. Some 60 men were in the forward cafeteria and as water poured in they tried to get out through the escape hatches – but some wouldn’t open. The senior sailor of Voyager was Jonathan ‘Buck’ Rogers and he took control of the situation, sending sailors to hatches that would open and trying to open the jammed ones. When he realised that it was too late he was heard leading the men in prayer. The bow section sank completely in just under 10 minutes. Meanwhile the aft section stayed afloat, sinking slowly, until just after midnight.

Of a ship’s complement of 314, 82 men were never to return home. 

The survivors who were plucked from the water were covered in fuel oil, vomiting, cut, bruised, and broken and in shock. Within 15 minutes the first survivors were being taken on board the carrier. Some were taken directly to HMAS Creswell in Jervis Bay while Melbourne steamed to Sydney – and that is the iconic photograph most people remember, Melbourne’s damaged bow.

In the decades that followed, public scrutiny of private lives and naval procedures kept the tragedy in the news. There were two Royal Commissions, the first acknowledging the lack of a proper lookout and response on the part of the Voyager bridge officers but also criticising the Melbourne bridge crew for not questioning the course Voyager was taking. The second Commission exonerated the Melbourne men – too late though for Captain Robertson who had resigned from the navy – and concluded the collision was due to a mistake by Voyager and that Captain Stevens was medically unfit for command at the time. He had been suffering from a duodenal ulcer and was at times apparently self-medicating with alcohol. As none of Voyager’s bridge officers survived the collision we may never know why the port course was taken.

After the Royal Commissions, the Naval Board put into place a series of reforms and safety changes on board ships and reviewed many of its policies and procedures. It was also made accountable to the wider government and public community.

For many of the men of Voyager and Melbourne and their families this has been an ongoing struggle. The survivors were given seven days’ leave, replacement uniforms and vouchers to get home. And then they returned to duty and were deployed to other RAN ships. Many suffered flashbacks and nightmares, anger and alcohol issues, problems with confined spaces and obsession with safety measures. Life was never the same again. Compensation claims were initially dismissed by the High Court but this was overruled in 1982. In the 1990s both Voyager and Melbourne men and their families pursued claims against the Government in court, with the last case being closed in 2009 – 45 years after the tragedy unfolded.

Wristwatch worn by Mike Hallen on the night of HMAS VOYAGER and HMAS MELBOURNE collision. ANMM Collection Gift from M W J Hallen

The men and women of the Royal Australian Navy work and train in an exacting and dangerous environment and deserve our respect. Today we mark the worst peacetime loss for our navy – may it never happen again.

Lindsey Shaw Senior Curator (retired)

Share this:

• Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
• Click to print (Opens in new window)
• Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)

Discover more stories from a unique range of contributors...

Donate Today

HMAS Voyager (II) Dinner

Mr Matthew Anderson PSM, Director of the Australian War Memorial

Distinguished guests, ladies, gentlemen and HMAS Voyager survivors

We have just read the names of the 82 members of HMAS Voyager II (including the dockworker) who lost their lives, about 20 nautical miles from here, on that fateful night of 10 February 1964.

We acknowledge the survivors here tonight from both VOYAGER and MELBOURNE and the event that changed their lives – and those of their loved ones - and continue to reverberate to this day.

And as we say at the Memorial every night, we also honour those here who have served, those still serving, and the families that love and support them.

82 men lost.

232 survived.

50 percent were aged between 17-19, and many were on their first time at sea.

The survivors lost a quarter of their shipmates in a matter of minutes.

It has been said this was Australia’s worst peacetime disaster.

I would like to reflect on the term ‘peacetime’. In my experience of the Royal Australian Navy, you are always in one of two states: at war, or preparing for war.

In 1964 we were in the midst of the cold war, and Australia’s focus was on South East Asia.

Voyager had just come out of refit, and Melbourne was also recently out of the dock.  

It was the first time in 6 months either ship had worked in close company with another.

It was a moonless night but the skies were clear.

Recovering Fleet Air Arm aircraft from Albatross, both ships were only running navigation lights.

Because they were preparing for war.

For the current serving members of the RAN here this evening, I’d like to paint a picture of the operating tempo of the RAN at the time.

The RAN’s contribution to the Far East Strategic Reserve (FESR) (a joint military force of British, Australian, and New Zealand armed forces, conceived as a forward defence point protecting interests in South East Asia from communist threats) included an annual visit from an aircraft carrier: Melbourne. Voyager was usually involved in these deployments.

Established in the 1950s, FESR became particularly important in the early 1960s with the Confrontation between Indonesia and Malaysia over the creation of the Federation of Malaysia. As early as 1961, Indonesia had threatened to block the right of free passage through the waters of the Indonesian Archipelago. 

The period of the disaster also coincided with Australia’s early commitments to the Vietnam War: the arrival of the Australian Army Training Team Vietnam (AATTV) in July and August 1962 – by February 1964 we had more than 200 soldiers in Vietnam; and in August 1964 the RAAF sent a flight of Caribou transports to the port of Vung Tau.

But with regard to the Melbourne and Voyager they too had been busy throughout this period. 

1959 Exercise FOTEX, a weapon training period designed to provide an opportunity for Commonwealth ships on the Far East Station to work up their weapon efficiency prior to Exercise SEA DEMON, a challenging SEATO exercise, involving 27 surface ships, three submarines, naval and land based aircraft from member nations. 

1960 SEATO Exercise SEA LION involved more than 60 ships and 20,000 sailors, representing all eight SEATO members

1961 Commonwealth Maritime Exercise JET 61 in the Indian Ocean, 24 February-10 March 1961, which saw 25 warships from Australia, New Zealand, United Kingdom, India, Ceylon and Pakistan participating.

Again, this is the backdrop – the operational tempo or battle rhythm – as to why HMAS Melbourne with HMAS Voyager as its Rescue Destroyer or Plane Guard were 20 miles away, off the coast of Huskisson in the East Australia Training Area.

In preparing for tonight, I read the Royal Commission Reports – both of them – to understand what happened that night. Such was the magnitude of the loss, and the shock to both the Navy and to Australia – the loss of HMAS Voyager is the only event in Australia’s history that has been the subject of two Royal Commissions.

I have listened to historical podcasts, watched youtubes, spoken to historians, retired Admirals and young officers.

And yet, it’s fair to say, while we know what happened that night, we can never, conclusively, know why, because Captain Roberts, his Navigator and the Officer of the watch were all killed in the collision.

But if the survivors can take any comfort from the event, it’s that the lessons were learned – the hardest possible way – on that fateful night on 10 February 1964. 

Changes have been made to prevent a similar occurrence. 

RAN procedures were created for challenging another ship that was seen to be manoeuvring dangerously, or which had transmitted an unclear manoeuvring signal.

Rules for escort vessels operating with Melbourne were developed and promulgated.

Among other instructions, these rules banned escorts from approaching within 2,000 yards of the carrier unless specifically instructed to, and stated that any manoeuvre around Melbourne was to commence with a turn away from the carrier.

The new rules were applied to all ships that sailed in concert with the carrier, including those of foreign navies. Of course the Melbourne’s collision with the USS Frank E Evans in 1969 proved once again the life and death nature of effective bridge watch keeping. 

I spoke with LEUT Bryce O’Hara, currently ADC to the Minister of Defence and, without prompting, he could speak to the lessons learned of the Voyager disaster and its echoes to bridges of HM Australian Ships to this very day.

Government has just concluded a Defence Tribunal Inquiry into medallic recognition of those killed or wounded in service (including for families of the deceased) and Committee Member, Rear Admiral James Goldrick told me was in part to address the unfinished business of both the Voyager disaster and the Blackhawk crash of 1996 and the failure to provide due recognition to those killed and injured.

But speaking of recognition, tonight we remember and pay tribute to the remarkable acts of heroism on that dark night.

The Imperial George Cross and the Australian Cross of Valour are our nation’s highest former and current awards for bravery outside combat.

The George Cross was instituted by King George VI in wartime Britain during the Blitz. So moved was the King by the courage and sacrifice shown by civilian and uniformed alike that he created the George Cross to sit beside its military counterpart, the Victoria Cross.

This book, For Gallantry contains the profiles of Australians from all walks of life, who have been recognised for actions of outstanding physical and moral courage.

Among them: a tram conductor who sacrificed his life to warn others as his tram hurtled out of control; a Chief Petty Officer who remained with his trapped young seamen,  giving them comfort even as their ship sank to the sea floor; a farmer who used his body to earth a high voltage current to save the life of a young child; a geologist and a police constable who braved the terrible aftermath of terrorist bombings to help the injured and dying; prisoners of war who died rather than betray their ideals; a dental student who went to the aid of a swimmer during a frenzied shark attack.

These are all stories that demonstrate that Australians do not need to go to war to display astonishing acts of bravery.

I acknowledge Rhonda Jones here tonight, daughter of CPO Jonathan ‘Buck’ Rogers, and present her with this small gift that chronicles the gallant company kept by her father. We are honoured to preserve his medals, and tell his story, in the Hall of Valour at the Australian War Memorial. 

Chief Petty Officer Jonathan Rogers joined the Royal Navy in 1938 when he was 18. He was awarded the Distinguished Service Medal for coolness and leadership while serving as coxswain of Motor Torpedo Boat 698 in actions off Dover on the nights of 23 March and 23 May 1944. After the war he came to Australia and joined the RAN.

On the night of the disaster, Rogers was one of more than 50 men trapped in darkness in a compartment of the sinking forward section. He took control and tried to bring calm. Not everyone would be able to get through a small escape hatch; being a large man, he had no chance at all. “He was more intent on getting the younger chaps out first,” said a survivor. The forward section sank about ten minutes after the impact. Rogers was heard leading his remaining doomed comrades in a prayer and a hymn during their final moments.

Rogers was posthumously awarded the George Cross, “for organising the escape of as many as possible and encouraging … those few who could not escape … to meet death alongside himself with dignity and honour”.

Midshipman Kerry Francis Marien was born on 7 May 1944 at Wyong, NSW. He grew up in southern Sydney, and was educated at Marist Brothers College at Kogarah. He joined the RAN College, at Jervis Bay in January 1960, graduated and was promoted to midshipman in 1963. He undertook training in the aircraft carriers HMAS Melbourne and HMAS Sydney before joining Voyager, for further training, in early January 1964.

After the collision, Marien managed to get clear of the aft section and into one of Voyager’s inflatable life rafts. On seeing other survivors in difficulty in the water around him, he chose to re-enter the water to render assistance.

The last person to see Midshipman Marien alive reported that he swam up to him and asked whether he needed any help. On replying that he did not, he saw Marien swim in the direction of the severed forward part of the ship, which it is thought he may have entered. The forward section sank soon after and Midshipman Marien was not seen again. His body was never recovered and he was one of the 82 men from Voyager listed as missing or killed that night.

In recognition of his gallantry in attempting to save life at sea Midshipman Kerry Francis Marien was posthumously awarded the Albert Medal Second Class (Bronze) on 19 March 1965. His medal is on display here in the museum at HMAS Creswell.

Electrical Mechanic (Electronics) First Class William Joseph Condon was awarded the Albert Medal for Gallantry in saving life at sea, remaining at his post to the end in the sinking ship, holding the emergency lantern to show others the path to the escape scuttle and losing his life.

The awards were listed in the 19 March 1965 issue of the  London Gazette , along with one  George Medal , five  British Empire Medals  for Gallantry, and three  Queen's Commendations for Brave Conduct  for Voyager personnel.

On 4 December 2015, it was announced that the support centre for the  Canberra-class amphibious assault ships  would be named after the CO of HMAS Melbourne Captain Robertson.

Every night at the Memorial’s Last Post Ceremony we honour one of the nearly 103,000 Australian women and men who gave their lives for us, for our freedoms and in the hope of a better world.

When Naval personnel are being honoured, we recite this verse of Binyon’s Ode For The Fallen

They have no grave but the cruel sea, No flowers lay at their head, A rusting hulk is their tombstone, Afast on the ocean bed.

But on this point, and on this night, I would add one caveat – they do have a grave other than the cruel sea– and to quote the French philosopher Andre Malroux:

‘The most beautiful grave is in the memory of the living.’

Tonight we honour those who lost their lives on HMAS Voyager and the survivors.

We honour them with our memory; that most beautiful of graves.

Lest we forget.

Last updated: 28 February 2022

• Back to Speeches

HMAS Voyager disaster: Archives reveal stories of heroism, tragedy

On the evening of February 10, 1964, the worst peacetime disaster in Australian maritime history unfolded off the New South Wales south coast.

During a naval training exercise HMAS Melbourne, an aircraft carrier, collided with the destroyer HMAS Voyager, shearing the much smaller vessel in half and killing 82 of the Voyager's crew.

Take a look at how the story unfolded at the time.

'Naval ships collide: Voyager sunk'

Within hours, the Voyager had sunk to the bottom of the ocean, as officials launched frantic efforts to rescue the crew.

The forward section of the ship split aft of the bridge and turned turtle.

I found myself climbing upwards with water pouring in and chairs and seats falling everywhere.

Water kept cascading down. I saw a hole in the forward section of the forward room and out I went.

Panic-stricken families clamour for news of loved ones

As news of the disaster spread families rushed to Garden Island in Sydney, where HMAS Melbourne limped into port carrying the sailors that had been rescued from the Voyager.

I heard a news flash about a collision between Voyager and the aircraft-carrier Melbourne.

I ran to a neighbour's and rang the Navy. The couldn't tell me anything about John.

At 7.00am I learned from the Navy that John was safe... Perhaps they'll be able to tell me more news of him here.

Sailor stays behind to save lives

One of the stories to emerge from the sinking was that of Chief Petty Officer Jonathan Rogers, who was awarded the George Cross for fighting to save as many people on board after realising he was probably too large to fit through the escape hatch.

I could hear the coxswain, CPO Rogers, in the forward cafe, organising the escape of all the young fellows on the ship.

I could hear him telling them not to panic, and he led them in a prayer and a hymn. Later on I heard him say to Leading Seaman Rich, 'I can't get out. You get all the young fellows out of the hatch'.

The last thing that I can remember Coxswain Rogers saying was, 'Well, the water's beat us'. I did not see him again after this.

Survivors told to move on

Beyond a week's leave, there was no counselling or support for the emotional damage the ordeal inflicted on survivors.

'Get back to duty. Get back on the horse. It'll be all right. You'll be all right'. But unfortunately we weren't because most of us bottled what happened up. We didn't have anyone to talk to. All of us, I'd say, turned to alcohol.

Welcome to the HMAS Voyager Survivors Association

For Survivors, Friends & Family.

Bluey Ducker 0414 953 355

Alex Hagerty 0414 496 351

Upcoming Events

2018 reunion husskission rsl (club jervis bay).

Our annual reunion in Jervis Bay is on again, keep the date free. Family & Friends Welcome.

Weekend of the 10th of February 2018

http://clubjervisbay.com.au

2018 Anzac Day March Sydney

Join us for the our annual Anzac Day March in Sydney

Wednesday 25th April 2018

Refreshments at the Crown Hotel - Goulburn Street Sydney http://rslnsw.org.au

HMAS Voyager (II) Memorial Park

Huskisson RSL Jervis Bay

Voyager Point NSW

Voyager Point is a suburb located on the Georges River in South Western Sydney 

Voyager Park & Memorial NSW

Hmas cerberus hmas voyager ii memorial.

Located at Sirius Road and Orlando Crescent in the Suburb of East Hills in Sydney.

HMAS Voyager II Trophy - Anti Submarine Warfare Trophy

Memorial featuring a bronze statue of a sailor on a stone cairn.

Devonport Maritime Museum Tasmania

The memorial reads: "The naval destroyer HMAS Voyager (II) was lost on the night of 10 February 1964 in a collision with the aircraft carrier HMAS Melbourne (II). Nine Tasmanians were serving on the Voyager (II), four of whom were among the eighty-two men who died that night:

• AB Neil Benjamin Brown
• Ordinary SMN John David Clayton
• Ordinary SMN Graham Dennis Fitzallen
• Leonard Charles Lehman (cook)"

Lost with HMAS Voyager (II) was the Otranto Shield for Torpedo, the tactical anti-submarine warfare trophy that she had won in 1963. On 10 February 1984 the RAN instituted the HMAS Voyager (II) Trophy for anti-submarine warfare proficiency, to be awarded annually to the "...escort which in the opinion of the Fleet Commander has achieved the best and most consistent anti-submarine sensor and weapon performance during the year."The inaugural winner was the guided missile frigate HMAS Canberra (II) for the year ended 1983. The most prolific winners have been HMAS Darwin with five awards and HMAS Perth (II) with four.

Ship Details

Hmas voyager ii.

Darling Class, Destroyer, D04. Motto: Quo Fata Vocant (We go where destiny calls)

Laid Down 10 October 1952 & Launched 1 May 1952 and Commissioned 12 February 1957. Lost at Sea on 10 February 1964.

Specifications

320, including 20 officers

390 feet in length, displacing 3800 tons, 33 knot top speed, 3700 mile range.

Two foster wheeler boilers, English Electric geared steam turbines (twin shaft) generating 54000 horsepower.

6 x 4.5 inch Mk V gun in 3 twin turrets, 6 x 40mm Bofors in 3 twin mounts. 10 x 21 inch Petad torpedo tubes. 1 x tripled barrelled 'limbo' anti submarine mortar.

HMAS Voyager (II)

Hmas voyager ii - background.

Advances in destroyer design in the United Kingdom during the mid to late 1940s resulted in the design of the Daring Class, originally described as light cruisers. The Australian built Daring Class destroyers were similar to the eight similar vessels being built for the Royal Navy, but with modifications for Australian conditions, with good ventilation and air conditioning being a priority.

Four Darings were initially ordered for the RAN, although only three, Voyager (II), Vendetta (II) and Vampire (II) were eventually completed. Voyager (II) was ordered on 3 December 1946 from Cockatoo Island Dockyard, and became Ship Number 188 on their records.

The Darings were built in sections, upside down from the centre, then rolled onto the slipway. They were the first prefabricated all-welded ships to be built in Australia, and used light alloys extensively both in the superstructure and in interior sub-divisions and fittings. At the time they were the largest conventional destroyers to be built for the RAN.

Construction of the ships was delayed due to industrial disputes, skilled manpower shortages, and delays in the supply of materials and vital machinery drawings from England. Between ordering and completion, the cost of each Daring increased from £2.6 million to almost £7 million! Voyager (II)'s final cost was over £6,750,000.

The Daring Class brought a new standard of accommodation to the RAN with air-conditioning, cafeteria messing and bunks instead of hammocks.

The Darings were designed and built as versatile, multi-purpose 'Gun Ships' with three separate weapon control systems to control the main and secondary armament. In the Naval Gunfire Support mode for example, the main Gunnery Fire Control System was capable of providing very accurate and rapid fire to a range of nine nautical miles (18,000 yards) in normal mode and in excess of ten nautical miles (20,000 yards) in extended range mode. At a rate of fire of 16 rounds per gun per minute, the Darings were capable of firing up to 100 x 4.5-inch shells per minute, with each standard high explosive shell weighing 56-lbs.

Voyager  (II), the first ship to complete, mounted three twin 40-mm Bofors, one either side of the bridge superstructure, and the third abaft the second funnel. Both Vampire  (II) and Vendetta (II) were completed with two single mounts abreast the superstructure and two twin mounts (one on each beam) abaft the second funnel.

An Innovative Warship

Innovative features of hmas voyager ii.

Voyager (II) is the first of three "Darling" Class ships to be placed on order with Australian Shipyards by the Australian Commonwealth Shipping Board. This class of ship is a departure from the conventional destroyer both in general design, armament, and number of personnel carried. 

She has the striking power of a light Cruiser (the disposition of her main armament being typical of that type of ship), coupled with the latest anti-submarine weapon and detection devices. Furthermore, her manoeuverability is superior to that of even the most modern conventional destroyer, owing to the fitting of twin rudders. 

The other two ships of the class, in varying stages of construction, are Vendetta (II) and Vampire (II). ... The ship carries two 25-foot motor-cutters powered by diesel engines, a 27-foot sailing whaler for use as a sea boat, and a 14-foot sailing dinghy for recreational purposes. 

War experience has shown that boats were vulnerable to damage by bomb and shell splinters, with the result that they were usually unserviceable if required for life-saving purposes. Voyager (II), therefore, carries the latest type of inflatable life raft. When not in use, these rafts take up very little space on deck, but when inflated, they will comfortably hold 20 men each, and in addition afford complete protection against the sea and elements. Sufficient of these rafts is carried to accommodate the entire ship's company. In addition, a Land Rover is carried for transport for the Postman and for general official duties. It is stored on the upper deck at sea. ... 

Voyager (II) is propelled by two out-turning propellers, each propeller-shaft being driven by its own high pressure, high-temperature turbine unit through double reduction gear. Steam for these turbines in provided by two Foster-Wheeler controlled superheat waterwall boilers ... Fresh water for boilers and for domestic use is produced by two Caird and Rayner evaporator units, which are capable of a rate of 100 tons a day. Main machinery and boilers are arranged in what is known as "The Unit System" i.e., each shaft is driven by its own engine room and boiler room, though these can be inter-connected if required. Action damage to the main machinery is therefore more localised than in the conventional destroyer arrangement of only one engine room.

Copyright © 2023 HMAS Voyager Survivors Association - All Rights Reserved.

Webmaster 0409 429 740

This website uses cookies.

We use cookies to analyze website traffic and optimize your website experience. By accepting our use of cookies, your data will be aggregated with all other user data.

Travel Itinerary For One Week in Moscow: The Best of Moscow!

I just got back from one week in Moscow. And, as you might have already guessed, it was a mind-boggling experience. It was not my first trip to the Russian capital. But I hardly ever got enough time to explore this sprawling city. Visiting places for business rarely leaves enough time for sightseeing. I think that if you’ve got one week in Russia, you can also consider splitting your time between its largest cities (i.e. Saint Petersburg ) to get the most out of your trip. Seven days will let you see the majority of the main sights and go beyond just scratching the surface. In this post, I’m going to share with you my idea of the perfect travel itinerary for one week in Moscow.

Moscow is perhaps both the business and cultural hub of Russia. There is a lot more to see here than just the Kremlin and Saint Basil’s Cathedral. Centuries-old churches with onion-shaped domes dotted around the city are in stark contrast with newly completed impressive skyscrapers of Moscow City dominating the skyline. I spent a lot of time thinking about my Moscow itinerary before I left. And this city lived up to all of my expectations.

Travel Itinerary For One Week in Moscow

Day 1 – red square and the kremlin.

Metro Station: Okhotny Ryad on Red Line.

No trip to Moscow would be complete without seeing its main attraction. The Red Square is just a stone’s throw away from several metro stations. It is home to some of the most impressive architectural masterpieces in the city. The first thing you’ll probably notice after entering it and passing vendors selling weird fur hats is the fairytale-like looking Saint Basil’s Cathedral. It was built to commemorate one of the major victories of Ivan the Terrible. I once spent 20 minutes gazing at it, trying to find the perfect angle to snap it. It was easier said than done because of the hordes of locals and tourists.

As you continue strolling around Red Square, there’s no way you can miss Gum. It was widely known as the main department store during the Soviet Era. Now this large (yet historic) shopping mall is filled with expensive boutiques, pricey eateries, etc. During my trip to Moscow, I was on a tight budget. So I only took a retro-style stroll in Gum to get a rare glimpse of a place where Soviet leaders used to grocery shop and buy their stuff. In case you want some modern shopping experience, head to the Okhotny Ryad Shopping Center with stores like New Yorker, Zara, and Adidas.

Read Next: Things To Do on Socotra

To continue this Moscow itinerary, next you may want to go inside the Kremlin walls. This is the center of Russian political power and the president’s official residence. If you’re planning to pay Kremlin a visit do your best to visit Ivan the Great Bell Tower as well. Go there as early as possible to avoid crowds and get an incredible bird’s-eye view. There are a couple of museums that are available during designated visiting hours. Make sure to book your ticket online and avoid lines.

Day 2 – Cathedral of Christ the Saviour, the Tretyakov Gallery, and the Arbat Street

Metro Station: Kropotkinskaya on Red Line

As soon as you start creating a Moscow itinerary for your second day, you’ll discover that there are plenty of metro stations that are much closer to certain sites. Depending on your route, take a closer look at the metro map to pick the closest.

The white marble walls of Christ the Saviour Cathedral are awe-inspiring. As you approach this tallest Orthodox Christian church, you may notice the bronze sculptures, magnificent arches, and cupolas that were created to commemorate Russia’s victory against Napoleon.

How to Get a Decent Haircut in a Foreign Country

Unfortunately, the current Cathedral is a replica, since original was blown to bits in 1931 by the Soviet government. The new cathedral basically follows the original design, but they have added some new elements such as marble high reliefs.

Home to some precious collection of artworks, in Tretyakov Gallery you can find more than 150,000 of works spanning centuries of artistic endeavor. Originally a privately owned gallery, it now has become one of the largest museums in Russia. The Gallery is often considered essential to visit. But I have encountered a lot of locals who have never been there.

Famous for its souvenirs, musicians, and theaters, Arbat street is among the few in Moscow that were turned into pedestrian zones. Arbat street is usually very busy with tourists and locals alike. My local friend once called it the oldest street in Moscow dating back to 1493. It is a kilometer long walking street filled with fancy gift shops, small cozy restaurants, lots of cute cafes, and street artists. It is closed to any vehicular traffic, so you can easily stroll it with kids.

Day 3 – Moscow River Boat Ride, Poklonnaya Hill Victory Park, the Moscow City

Metro Station: Kievskaya and Park Pobedy on Dark Blue Line / Vystavochnaya on Light Blue Line

Voyaging along the Moscow River is definitely one of the best ways to catch a glimpse of the city and see the attractions from a bit different perspective. Depending on your Moscow itinerary, travel budget and the time of the year, there are various types of boats available. In the summer there is no shortage of boats, and you’ll be spoiled for choice.

Travel Itinerary for One Week in Beijing

If you find yourself in Moscow during the winter months, I’d recommend going with Radisson boat cruise. These are often more expensive (yet comfy). They offer refreshments like tea, coffee, hot chocolate, and, of course, alcoholic drinks. Prices may vary but mostly depend on your food and drink selection. Find their main pier near the opulent Ukraine hotel . The hotel is one of the “Seven Sisters”, so if you’re into the charm of Stalinist architecture don’t miss a chance to stay there.

The area near Poklonnaya Hill has the closest relation to the country’s recent past. The memorial complex was completed in the mid-1990s to commemorate the Victory and WW2 casualties. Also known as the Great Patriotic War Museum, activities here include indoor attractions while the grounds around host an open-air museum with old tanks and other vehicles used on the battlefield.

How I Planned My Trip to Vietnam

The hallmark of the memorial complex and the first thing you see as you exit metro is the statue of Nike mounted to its column. This is a very impressive Obelisk with a statue of Saint George slaying the dragon at its base.

Maybe not as impressive as Shanghai’s Oriental Pearl Tower , the skyscrapers of the Moscow City (otherwise known as Moscow International Business Center) are so drastically different from dull Soviet architecture. With 239 meters and 60 floors, the Empire Tower is the seventh highest building in the business district.

The observation deck occupies 56 floor from where you have some panoramic views of the city. I loved the view in the direction of Moscow State University and Luzhniki stadium as well to the other side with residential quarters. The entrance fee is pricey, but if you’re want to get a bird’s eye view, the skyscraper is one of the best places for doing just that.

Day 4 – VDNKh, Worker and Collective Farm Woman Monument, The Ostankino TV Tower

Metro Station: VDNKh on Orange Line

VDNKh is one of my favorite attractions in Moscow. The weird abbreviation actually stands for Russian vystavka dostizheniy narodnogo khozyaystva (Exhibition of Achievements of the National Economy). With more than 200 buildings and 30 pavilions on the grounds, VDNKh serves as an open-air museum. You can easily spend a full day here since the park occupies a very large area.

Places to Visit in Barcelona That Aren’t Beaches

First, there are pavilions that used to showcase different cultures the USSR was made of. Additionally, there is a number of shopping pavilions, as well as Moskvarium (an Oceanarium) that features a variety of marine species. VDNKh is a popular venue for events and fairs. There is always something going on, so I’d recommend checking their website if you want to see some particular exhibition.

A stone’s throw away from VDNKh there is a very distinctive 25-meters high monument. Originally built in 1937 for the world fair in Paris, the hulking figures of men and women holding a hammer and a sickle represent the Soviet idea of united workers and farmers. It doesn’t take much time to see the monument, but visiting it gives some idea of the Soviet Union’s grandiose aspirations.

I have a thing for tall buildings. So to continue my travel itinerary for one week in Moscow I decided to climb the fourth highest TV tower in the world. This iconic 540m tower is a fixture of the skyline. You can see it virtually from everywhere in Moscow, and this is where you can get the best panoramic views (yep, even better than Empire skyscraper).

Parts of the floor are made of tempered glass, so it can be quite scary to exit the elevator. But trust me, as you start observing buildings and cars below, you won’t want to leave. There is only a limited number of tickets per day, so you may want to book online. Insider tip: the first tour is cheaper, you can save up to $10 if go there early.

Day 5 – A Tour To Moscow Manor Houses

Metro Station: Kolomenskoye, Tsaritsyno on Dark Green Line / Kuskovo on Purple Line

I love visiting the manor houses and palaces in Moscow. These opulent buildings were generally built to house Russian aristocratic families and monarchs. Houses tend to be rather grand affairs with impressive architecture. And, depending on the whims of the owners, some form of a landscaped garden.

During the early part of the 20th century though, many of Russia’s aristocratic families (including the family of the last emperor) ended up being killed or moving abroad . Their manor houses were nationalized. Some time later (after the fall of the USSR) these were open to the public. It means that today a great many of Moscow’s finest manor houses and palaces are open for touring.

20 Travel Tips I’ve Learned From Travelling The World

There are 20 manor houses scattered throughout the city and more than 25 in the area around. But not all of them easily accessible and exploring them often takes a lot of time. I’d recommend focusing on three most popular estates in Moscow that are some 30-minute metro ride away from Kremlin.

Sandwiched between the Moscow River and the Andropov Avenue, Kolomenskoye is a UNESCO site that became a public park in the 1920’s. Once a former royal estate, now it is one of the most tranquil parks in the city with gorgeous views. The Ascension Church, The White Column, and the grounds are a truly grand place to visit.

You could easily spend a full day here, exploring a traditional Russian village (that is, in fact, a market), picnicking by the river, enjoying the Eastern Orthodox church architecture, hiking the grounds as well as and wandering the park and gardens with wildflower meadows, apple orchards, and birch and maple groves. The estate museum showcases Russian nature at its finest year-round.

12 Stunning National Parks and Regional Parks In France

If my travel itinerary for one week in Moscow was a family tree, Tsaritsyno Park would probably be the crazy uncle that no-one talks about. It’s a large park in the south of the city of mind-boggling proportions, unbelievable in so many ways, and yet most travelers have never heard of it.

The palace was supposed to be a summer home for Empress Catherine the Great. But since the construction didn’t meet with her approval the palace was abandoned. Since the early 1990’s the palace, the pond, and the grounds have been undergoing renovations. The entire complex is now looking brighter and more elaborately decorated than at possibly any other time during its history. Like most parks in Moscow, you can visit Tsaritsyno free of charge, but there is a small fee if you want to visit the palace.

How To Stop Procrastinating When Trip Planning

Last, but by no means least on my Moscow itinerary is Kuskovo Park . This is definitely an off-the-beaten-path place. While it is not easily accessible, you will be rewarded with a lack of crowds. This 18th-century summer country house of the Sheremetev family was one of the first summer country estates of the Russian nobility. And when you visit you’ll quickly realize why locals love this park.

Like many other estates, Kuskovo has just been renovated. So there are lovely French formal garden, a grotto, and the Dutch house to explore. Make sure to plan your itinerary well because the estate is some way from a metro station.

Day 6 – Explore the Golden Ring

Creating the Moscow itinerary may keep you busy for days with the seemingly endless amount of things to do. Visiting the so-called Golden Ring is like stepping back in time. Golden Ring is a “theme route” devised by promotion-minded journalist and writer Yuri Bychkov.

Having started in Moscow the route will take you through a number of historical cities. It now includes Suzdal, Vladimir, Kostroma, Yaroslavl and Sergiev Posad. All these awe-inspiring towns have their own smaller kremlins and feature dramatic churches with onion-shaped domes, tranquil residential areas, and other architectural landmarks.

Two Weeks In Thailand: The Perfect 14-Day Itinerary

I only visited two out of eight cities included on the route. It is a no-brainer that Sergiev Posad is the nearest and the easiest city to see on a day trip from Moscow. That being said, you can explore its main attractions in just one day. Located some 70 km north-east of the Russian capital, this tiny and overlooked town is home to Trinity Lavra of St. Sergius, UNESCO Site.

You Will Also Like: 3-Day London Itinerary

Sergiev Posad is often described as being at the heart of Russian spiritual life. So it is uncommon to see the crowds of Russian pilgrims showing a deep reverence for their religion. If you’re traveling independently and using public transport, you can reach Sergiev Posad by bus (departs from VDNKh) or by suburban commuter train from Yaroslavskaya Railway Station (Bahnhof). It takes about one and a half hours to reach the town.

Trinity Lavra of St. Sergius is a great place to get a glimpse of filling and warming Russian lunch, specifically at the “ Gostevaya Izba ” restaurant. Try the duck breast, hearty potato and vegetables, and the awesome Napoleon cake.

Day 7 – Gorky Park, Izmailovo Kremlin, Patriarch’s Ponds

Metro Station: Park Kultury or Oktyabrskaya on Circle Line / Partizanskaya on Dark Blue Line / Pushkinskaya on Dark Green Line

Gorky Park is in the heart of Moscow. It offers many different types of outdoor activities, such as dancing, cycling, skateboarding, walking, jogging, and anything else you can do in a park. Named after Maxim Gorky, this sprawling and lovely park is where locals go on a picnic, relax and enjoy free yoga classes. It’s a popular place to bike around, and there is a Muzeon Art Park not far from here. A dynamic location with a younger vibe. There is also a pier, so you can take a cruise along the river too.

How to Save Money While Traveling in Europe

The Kremlin in Izmailovo is by no means like the one you can find near the Red Square. Originally built for decorative purposes, it now features the Vernissage flea market and a number of frequent fairs, exhibitions, and conferences. Every weekend, there’s a giant flea market in Izmailovo, where dozens of stalls sell Soviet propaganda crap, Russian nesting dolls, vinyl records, jewelry and just about any object you can imagine. Go early in the morning if you want to beat the crowds.

All the Bulgakov’s fans should pay a visit to Patriarch’s Ponds (yup, that is plural). With a lovely small city park and the only one (!) pond in the middle, the location is where the opening scene of Bulgakov’s novel Master and Margarita was set. The novel is centered around a visit by Devil to the atheistic Soviet Union is considered by many critics to be one of the best novels of the 20th century. I spent great two hours strolling the nearby streets and having lunch in the hipster cafe.

Conclusion and Recommendations

To conclude, Moscow is a safe city to visit. I have never had a problem with getting around and most locals are really friendly once they know you’re a foreigner. Moscow has undergone some serious reconstruction over the last few years. So you can expect some places to be completely different. I hope my one week Moscow itinerary was helpful! If you have less time, say 4 days or 5 days, I would cut out day 6 and day 7. You could save the Golden Ring for a separate trip entirely as there’s lots to see!

What are your thoughts on this one week Moscow itinerary? Are you excited about your first time in the city? Let me know in the comments below!

JOIN MY FREE WEEKLY NEWSLETTER!

Email Address *

YOU WILL ALSO LIKE

10 Dishes You Must Try When Going To Moscow

15 Fantastic and Easy Day Trips Close to Moscow

When Is the Best Time To Visit Russia

24 comments.

Ann Snook-Moreau

Moscow looks so beautiful and historic! Thanks for including public transit information for those of us who don’t like to rent cars.

MindTheTravel

Yup, that is me 🙂 Rarely rent + stick to the metro = Full wallet!

Mariella Blago

Looks like you had loads of fun! Well done. Also great value post for travel lovers.

Thanks, Mariella!

I have always wanted to go to Russia, especially Moscow. These sights look absolutely beautiful to see and there is so much history there!

Agree! Moscow is a thousand-year-old city and there is definitely something for everyone.

Tara Pittman

Those are amazing buildings. Looks like a place that would be amazing to visit.

Adriana Lopez

Never been to Moscow or Russia but my family has. Many great spots and a lot of culture. Your itinerary sounds fantastic and covers a lot despite it is only a short period of time.

What was their favourite thing about Russia?

Gladys Parker

I know very little about Moscow or Russia for the\at matter. I do know I would have to see the Red Square and all of its exquisite architectural masterpieces. Also the CATHEDRAL OF CHRIST THE SAVIOUR. Thanks for shedding some light on visiting Moscow.

Thanks for swinging by! The Red Square is a great starting point, but there way too many places and things to discover aside from it!

Ruthy @ Percolate Kitchen

You are making me so jealous!! I’ve always wanted to see Russia.

Moscow is in my bucket list, I don’t know when I can visit there, your post is really useful. As a culture rich place we need to spend at least week.

DANA GUTKOWSKI

Looks like you had a great trip! Thanks for all the great info! I’ve never been in to Russia, but this post makes me wanna go now!

Wow this is amazing! Moscow is on my bucket list – such an amazing place to visit I can imagine! I can’t wait to go there one day!

The building on the second picture looks familiar. I keep seeing that on TV.

Reesa Lewandowski

What beautiful moments! I always wish I had the personality to travel more like this!

Perfect itinerary for spending a week in Moscow! So many places to visit and it looks like you had a wonderful time. I would love to climb that tower. The views I am sure must have been amazing!

I was lucky enough to see the skyline of Moscow from this TV Tower and it is definitely mind-blowing.

Chelsea Pearl

Moscow is definitely up there on my travel bucket list. So much history and iconic architecture!

Thumbs up! 🙂

Blair Villanueva

OMG I dream to visit Moscow someday! Hope the visa processing would be okay (and become more affordable) so I could pursue my dream trip!

Yup, visa processing is the major downside! Agree! Time and the money consuming process…

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

• Privacy Overview
• Strictly Necessary Cookies

My website uses cookies so that I can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to my website and helping me to understand which sections of Mind The Travel you find most interesting and useful.

You can adjust all of your cookie settings by navigating the tabs on the left hand side.

Strictly Necessary Cookie should be enabled at all times so that I can save your preferences for cookie settings.

If you disable this cookie, I will not be able to save your preferences. This means that every time you visit my website you will need to enable or disable cookies again.

Gorky Park and Sparrow Hills: Green Lungs, place to relax and meet

Gorky Park and Sparrow Hills

The history of the gorky.

The park was built in Soviet times between the two world wars and named after the author Maxim Gorky at the time. Up until the turn of the century, the area not far from the center was only a residential area with huge estates and then, in the turmoil of the civil war and shortly afterwards, served as an illegal landfill where citizens and entrepreneurs disposed of their garbage. After intensive cleaning in the early communist years, the site was first used as an agricultural exhibition in the mid-1920s until the Moscow City Council decided to set up a park here that was accessible to all citizens of Moscow. After all, this was supposed to take a full ten years of construction. Throughout the entire Soviet period, the park was incredibly popular and familiar to every Soviet citizen, whether from Moscow or not.

Rebirth after basic renovation

However, after the end of the Soviet Union, the area fell into disrepair – cheap hustle and bustle like shooting booths and slowly rusting rides shaped the sad picture. Only outsiders got lost in the park, which lived more from its reputation than from the sad reality. Only with the fundamental and just as expensive renovation in 2011 did the Gorky become the park it was once loved by the locals. Especially the promenade along the river with its large sunbathing areas in summer and the numerous ice rinks for ice skating in winter now attract thousands of locals to Gorky every day. Countless food and café stands scattered across the site provide visitors with everything imaginable – from Georgian delicacies, a decent café to traditional Russian kvass, or ice cream and smoothies in summer.

Concerts, art and privacy place

Even bigger crowd pullers are just the concerts in the park and these have a long tradition here. In 2018 alone, David Guetta, the Red Hot Chili Peppers, the Killers and Lana del Rey performed numerous international music greats Open Air. But even outside the big events there is always something to see in the Gorky. The modern art center “Garage” (website https://garagemca.org/en ) in the park holds regular art and design exhibitions. In addition, the art center gave the park the largest children’s playground in all of Russia for its 90th birthday in 2018. Numerous play equipment, including 29 different swings alone, are the perfect place to spend a few hours with the youngsters. Pedal boats can also be rented at several locations in the park, for example at the Andreevsky ponds, which is also suitable for children. Sports courses for adults are held regularly in the park. From jogging to yoga or Pilates there are organized courses – beach volleyball fields, soccer fields and an open air fitness studio offer further opportunities to do sports. Afterwards, beer gardens invite you to linger – all of this happens primarily in the central part of Gorky Park, known as the Neskuchny Garden. Would you like to experience Gorky Park and the magic of Moscow by yourself? Then you need a visa first – you can find out how to get it here !

Away from the central part: Muzeon and Sparrow Hills

In the section called Muzeon north of the Crimean Bridge there are over 1000 statues, Soviet monuments and modern art facilities. This open-air museum-like section of the Gorky invites you to take a walk that takes you past oversized and pompous Soviet busts as well as avant-garde art objects of the 21st century. Surrounded by statues of Lenin, this section looks partly surreal. The Stalin statue in particular, which had its nose removed, magically attracts visitors. For photographers, the sometimes slightly rusty busts and remains from the Soviet era offer great motifs. If you’d like to improve yourself as a promising photographer, you can even take a photography course in the park at Photoplay ( https://photoplay.ru/courses/workshop/photoplayatgorky.html ) At 2900 rubles, i.e. just under $ 41, this is significantly more affordable than comparable products in Asia or Australia. No wonder this section is considered an Instagram paradise for Moscow’s exploding hipster scene. Events are also held time and again in the Muzeon – for example, the warm months over and over here are held cinema screenings outdoors. Russian classics such as international cinema are shown. You have absolute peace in the Sparrow Hills, which also belong to the park but are spatially separated from the other part. About four kilometers further along the Moskva River out of town is this section of the Gorky Park, which is largely natural. There, just opposite the large Luzhniki Stadium on the other side of the Moskva River, where the Olympics and the World Cup finals have already taken place, there is another privacy place in the middle of Moscow. At the highest point of the Sparrow Hills, to which a cable car leads, you have a fantastic view of Moscow.

Alexander Popov

Welcome to Russia! My name is Alexander, I was born in Moscow and I'm a passionate tour guide. I want to share my passion for Russia and my hometown with you. On my website you will find useful information to make your individual trip to Russia as interesting as possible.

Moscow’s Top 13 – The Main Attractions of the Russian capital

Moscow’s best free city tour, you will also like, traveling‌ ‌in‌ ‌russia‌ ‌–‌ ‌how‌ ‌safe‌ ‌it‌ ‌is‌..., choosing the best guide for a free and..., moscow subway: the most beautiful subway in the..., where to stay in moscow, the museum of cosmonautics and the planetarium in..., the lenin mausoleum – an absolute must visit..., shopping in moscow: gum, izmailovo, arbat, passage, the kremlin in moscow: how to buy tickets, bolshoi theater in moscow: history, tickets and tours, st. basil’s cathedral in moscow: visits and tickets, leave a comment cancel reply.

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

@2019-2020 - Moscow Voyager. Alexander Popov

We use cookies to provide you with a better experience. By continuing to use our site you accept our cookie policy. Accept Read More