Tuesday 14 August 2018

Diving with the Pisces Submarine (1969 article)

I am currently busy with my next Loch Ness Monster book, so blog postings have been a bit less frequent. But it is time to delve into the archives and surface with one of those interesting articles that I occasionally encounter during my searches at virtual and real libraries. This article from Diver Magazine of September to October 1969 details an excursion into the depths of Loch Ness with the Vickers Pisces submarine. We know about Dan Taylor's yellow Viperfish, but the Pisces was also there at the loch during those busy year of 1969. Readers may wish to speculate on what they struck during the dive and those interesting craters and I refer them to this previous article.




(Pisces on the surface of the Loch, with a diver securing the lifting tackle. The author in the pilot's position.)

IN THE MONSTER'S LAIR

Arthur Bourne, chairman of the Exploration Group of the Ocean Resources Conservation Association, describes his journeying into the depths of Loch Ness in the Vickers' submersible, Pisces. The monster did not appear, but a mystery did develop.

The veil of mystery that has covered Loch Ness is beginning to lift. The Loch which is part of that great Caledonian fault which effectively divides Scotland into two and gives that characteristic shape to the Highlands has for a long time remained something of an enigma. It has been variously described as bottomless, having deep holes connecting with the sea, and even of being so deep that there is air at the bottom in which people are living in the sort of "Brigadoon" world. If we ignore the persistent belief in a somewhat ambiguous monster and the current burst of enthusiasm for Loch Ness monster hunting, there has been little attempt to get to grips with its mysteries.

Apart from some echo soundings and sporadic sampling of the Loch bottom with grabs, little has been done to explore its depths and to see what is down there. The fortunate choice of the Loch by Vickers Oceanics as the site for the demonstration trials of their submersible Vickers-Pisces has enabled some information on the structure and contents of the Loch to be built up. In fact, Pisces has proved beyond any doubt the point that there is no substitute for man when it comes to exploring the bottom of the sea or as in this case the bottom of a deep Loch. The automation leaves much to be desired. The bottom of the Loch seems to be generally covered with a deep layer of extremely fine sediment. So fine is it that when the skids of the sub touch it they plough in, and it billows up obscuring the view from the ports.

The tiny particles of matter reflect the light from the two 1000 watt quartz iodine lamps. In the area we examined the undisturbed sediment covered what appeared to be a wide level plain with very clear ripple marks on its surface, not unlike the sand at the ocean's edge, the difference being that this was at 800 ft and in fresh water. As one would expect there is very little life at this depth. However we did see some very small white eels, and one of the members of the crew during a previous dive had seen an odd little creature seemingly jetting itself along the bottom.

A great many more dives will need to be made and a systematic bottom survey carried out to get any real picture of the Loch's bed, but at around £1000 per day this is not likely to happen just yet. Another feature of this plain is a number of horseshoe-like craters. the walls of which were quite high. The sediment covered what could be described as the leeside with gentle slopes; those on the "windward" as expected were steep. This and the ripple marks quite clearly indicate a current of sorts at this depth and a moment with the motors switched off soon verified this observation, because the machine would slew round and drift broadside on to the current — at about two knots.

During one excursion we examined one of the horseshoe craters. We entered the open end and examined the walls of sediment that surrounded us. Then we attempted to raise ourselves gradually over the lip. It was higher than we thought, we kept hitting it and disturbing the sediment each time. We explored its contours and then when the echo sounder was registering 10 ft of clear water beneath the craft, we hit something, with a resounding crash, that reverberated through the sphere. It seemed as if we had hit a metal object. Carefully the sub was manoeuvred so that we could examine the water just below us, but we could find nothing. I thought that we had hit the lip of the crater and the arm had gone through the sediment (which for some reason was not picked up by the sonar) and hit the rocky ridge which, presumably, these craters must have.

Later, on the surface, we found in the working parts of the arm pieces of shattered sedimentary rock similar to sandstone which are now being examined by geologists. This does not explain why we registered clear water beneath us and the peculiar nature of the sound. When you hit rock you know it for the dull thud it gives, but this was a definite metallic crash. Not only did the sonar register nothing beneath or around us, but we could not see anything either, even with very careful manoeuvring and using our high-powered lights. We could have picked up the sandstone when we ploughed through the sediment earlier. We will probably never know what we hit. Throughout all the trials this was the only time that Pisces struck with anything like this kind of force.

Other crews have reported something hitting the vessel during previous dives which couldn't be explained. It is not impossible that tree trunks floating at great depths may be encountered and be sucked towards and bump into a craft during its descent. In fact tree trunks were found on the bottom. But it must be admitted that they couldn't have caused the jolt that we experienced. Loch Ness like other lochs, lakes and even the seabed seems to have been used as a dumping ground for anyone's unwanted rubbish from old Morris engines to muskets of the '45. Also there was a wreck of an old sailing collier with its mast still standing. Like most lochs this one does not have a great deal of life in it. It is far too deep and with too small a surface area, though there are fish and plankton in the surface waters.


The author can be contacted at lochnesskelpie@gmail.com

But beyond 15 to 20 feet, where there is no light, very few fish are encountered and the very few bottom living eels described above would hardly provide enough food for any reasonable sized animal. Even a filer feeding mammal like a whale, or a fish like the basking shark could not live for long on the plankton of Loch Ness. A fish-eating mammal, reptile or fish of the size generally credited to the Loch Ness monster would soon find itself out of business. The dives of Pisces have proved that the submarine is capable of very neatly controlled movements and is able with its hydraulic arm to pick up specimens from the Loch bed. It is ideally suited for explorations of this sort. Its two 3hp motors are more than adequate to cope with bottom currents of up to 3 knots, while at the same time giving the pilot a high degree of manoeuvrability.

The buoyancy and trim controls are also very sensitive, in fact one tends to fly this machine rather than drive it. It is beautifully designed for hovering lust above the bottom, especially when one is trying to examine a rock structure or some other object. In this position one can use the hydraulic arm to lift a rock, examine some debris or with a suitable sampler to take specimens of sediment. The total impression that one gets when riding in this machine is of complete safety and freedom. This is a very unusual quality in a submersible. Particularly those in which the crew's quarters are housed in a steel sphere as they are in Pisces.

Here, any scientist, even if he hasn't been in a submersible before, can feel quite relaxed and thereby concentrate his efforts on recording his observations and carrying out his experiments. My own explorations, short though they were, were carried out with this complete feeling of security which was engendered by my faith in the machine and confidence in my companions. Vickers have a very highly trained unit comprising pilots, observers, engineers and divers. And equipped with these machines they will be able to perform almost any task at continental shelf depths and even beyond. 

24 comments:

  1. Just in case Tony Harmsworth missed my questions amidst the 100+ comments in the last article:

    1. What is the provenance of the vertical sonar trace on page 160 of "Loch Ness, Nessie and Me"?

    2. In his book he discusses an AAS sonar trace and says "Directly right of that is a thick black vertical line which is the transducer itself." Just to clear this up, how can a sonar device appear on its own sonar trace if it is behind the beam?

    Thank you.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Very interesting article. I am a bit unsure what the comment means regarding the arm and the crushed rock. The jolt received suggests that this was not as a result of a collision between the arm and the surrounding landscape, given the author clearly found this to be a large and unusual impact. It's interesting that he refers to other lochs, suggesting that he had diving experience in various locations, and the fact that other crews had mentioned large metallic type impacts. So this seemed to be an experience unique to Ness, as far as they were concerned.
    Going past the otherworldly explanations, I wonder could they have triggered small explosions from dumped ammunition, causing a metallic type sound in their sub? It's unlikely, but any other explanation I can think of is more unlikely....

    ReplyDelete
  3. Isn't this the sub that made a sonar contact with something, and when they closed in it moved off?

    And isn't this the sub that went down to a depth of over 800' and sounded a depth of over 900' in the loch?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Couldn't help but think of the “Lost World” themed movie genres in the opening of the article describing caverns and people inhabiting an inner world realm. Sure gives a gloomy prospect for the amount of food available for a large herd of breeding Nessies!. But then again, aren't there fish always coming in from tributaries or water inlets constantly and fisheries that maintain a stocked Loch Ness? Just saying.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Fish stocks are one of the reasons Ted Holiday gave up on these creatures being flesh and blood. Possibly his excursions to the west of Ireland clinched the deal, with small lakes that could not possibly contain large predators. And yet they were witnessed by upstanding citizens time and time again. Actually coming from Northern Ireland, I hadn't even hear of a lake monster tradition here. But Holiday's enquiries are hard to ignore.

      Delete
    2. If you add the salmon migration to the overall stock in Loch Ness, the picture is different and there is enough food. The loch has a relatively small biomass for its size, BUT the predators are sparse and the overall food supplies are high enough to support a small colony if we include migratory fish. There’s nothing to say that the Loch Ness animals require a consistent food supply throughout the year. They may feed up extensively during the salmon run then sustain themselves through the rest of the year on more meagre supplies.

      Delete
    3. I agree there are knowns and unknowns with regards animal metabolism etc. Roland put forward an argument for it previously, and in the book Searching for Morag, a whole chapter is devoted to the ecology of Morar, written by a young biology (or zoology?) doctor (probably young enough to have an open mind). I have no idea, and defer to people who know their stuff. The Irish lakes are a different story, however. The creatures were were smaller than Nessie, but some of the lakes were so small it called a whole lot into question. Yet the eyewitnesses remained.

      Delete
    4. Those Irish lough tales were rather different and did not generally involve multiple eyewitnesses often at the same time, as we know happens at Loch Ness.
      Regarding food availability in Loch Ness, I think plenty of sceptics lazily dismiss the loch as being incapable of supporting large animals due to low biomass without actually looking at the conflicting research results. It’s an easy approach to take if it suits one’s sceptical narrative. Roland’s analysis on the subject seems sensible to me, I’ve not seen anyone successfully dismantle it.

      Delete
    5. I take your point on the biomass in Ness, but regarding the Irish sightings, I think there were plenty of multiple witnesses. The ones that were historic could he coloured by time, but the current (as of 1950s, 60s) sightings seemed quite convincing to me.

      Delete
    6. Can you cite an example including reference please?

      Delete
    7. Georgina Carberry, librarian and angler, along with 3 friends, Lough Fadda, 1954 (The Dragon & The Disc p36-39). A detailed sighting including the head of a creature.

      Rev E.C. Alston, Edmund Foyle, Capt. Lionel Leslie, Lough Fadda, 1965 (The Dragon & The Disc p39). After using explosives to try to drive any creatures to the surface, a black threshing mass surfaced 10 seconds later and sank again. Witnesses were satisfied that this was an animate object given the movement.

      Stephen Coyne & family (7 total), Claddaghduff, 1968 (The Dragon & The Disc p49). 12 foot long creature similar to the Ness reports, appeared to be drawn to the family's dog. A separate report of a creature here was made by Thomas Connolly

      Father Quigley, Father Murray, Father Burke, Lough Ree, 1960 (The Dragon & The Disc p64, Arthur C. Clarke's Mysterious World Episode 6). A smaller Ness like animal, seen clearly.

      Delete
    8. Martin, maybe we ought to depth charge Nessie to the surface if she won't cooperate....Just kidding. Reminds me of a reported incident during WWI, I read once in one of the numerous sea serpent books and I think Tim Dinsdale mentioned it in one of his later books, Monster Hunt, I believe, I'm not sure of that though. Anyway, it tells of a reptilian creature brought to the surface during a sinking of a British ship. Very bizarre. The story is also told in this YouTube video:

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zXJJSReC_2I

      Delete
    9. I know the case John. And that's a good little documentary too. Unfortunately it all seems (as per usual) very hard to prove. A height of 80ft in the air for such a large animal would require an enormous upward force, especially through the water. One would suspect that smaller debris would attain a height many times higher than this under these circumstances. Not being an explosives expert, I'm not sure. But it sounds like this would not have been a normal explosion if this is a true account.
      Brings me to thinking of British WW2 activities in Ness, and what the military actually know. According to Nicholas Witchell, the army were forbidden discussing any incidents, although he did publish one in his book. I wonder how many official reports there are from this time, and I wonder if we could get access to them?

      Delete
    10. Yeah, Oh well, as PT Barnum once said "Believe it or not!"

      Delete
    11. Oh, wait a minute, I got my showmen mixed up. Ripley said "Believe it or not!" Barnum said "There's a sucker born every minute" or something like that. And we're probably suckers for believing such a tall tale! LOL

      Delete
    12. It's a tall tale alright John. 80ft tall, possibly.

      Delete
    13. I think the mistake everyone seems to make regarding available food in Loch Ness for Nessie is that we are not starting with a lake and saying "are there enough fish/eels/etc to feed a group of large predators?" We are starting with a lake that has for decades had a group of large predators in it already; that is to say what we see is what is left. And as John points out there is more food/fish being added to the Loch all the time...

      I've never heard the "Brigadoon" theory before. Where does that come from?

      Delete
  5. The sighting by the three Irish Priests on Lough Rhee in 1960.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. According to Wikipedia the surface area of Lough Ree is 41 square miles. That’s pretty big, it’s not like a monster being reported in a garden pond.

      Delete
    2. The Coyne Family's sighting was from a pretty small lake.

      Delete
  6. Regarding some original points made, I wonder if a Freedom of Information request could be made regarding the MOD's activities in Ness over the wartime period? It might shed some light on things.

    ReplyDelete
  7. It’s always been my ambition to explore the depths of Loch Ness in a submarine since I was a child. Does anyone know if there’s any way of buying a ticket onboard a commercial sub trip?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There was a commercial sub there for a short time back in the 90s I think it was. It wasn't very successful. I think after the initial novelty wore off there wasn't much take-up for a 2 hour trip through pitch black water to switch lights on at the bottom and see nothing but gloom.

      I believe it moved to Windermere for a spell then shut down.

      Delete
    2. Oh dear. Yes I think the experience would need to include a forward sonar beam with the possibility of closing in on any target. Being stuck in gloom without any feeling of the water extending away from the sub would be unpleasant I’d imagine.

      Delete