R. S.

Bates

Report on the Expedition to Atlantis

05/19/05

May 19, 2005

To: Officers, First Source Enterprises, LLC.
From: Commodore Robert Stanley Bates, USMM Expedition leader
Via: President, First Source Enterprises, LLC
Subj: Expedition Report, Voyage to Atlantis November 7- November 13, 2004
1. Purpose. The purpose of this report is to document the details of the participants,
equipment, navigation and significant events from November 7 through November 13,
2004 relative to the voyage to Atlantis, located in the position indicated by author
Robert Sarmast in his book Discovery of Atlantis, The startling case for the Island of
Cyprus.
2. Mission. The mission of the expedition, as stated in the Voyage Plan dated August
24, 2002, is to explore the area of Atlantis/Eden by state-of-the-art electronic means,
gather, process and store all possible meaningful electronic data for interpretation and
presentation, provide records to support written documentation for publication,
produce a media documentary of the voyage and place a capsule and buoy with
appropriate enclosures to herald the discovery, in a significant position on the sea
floor. (See enclosure 1.)
3. Participating Companies and Organizations. The following is a list of companies
that participated in, and made significant contributions, to the expedition:
A. FSE (First Source Enterprises, LLC), Tallahassee, FL
B. EDT Towage and Salvage Co. Ltd., Limassol, Cyprus
C. IFREMER (Institut Francais de Recherch pour LExploitation de la Mer)
D. Phoenix International, Landover, MD
E. GSE Rentals, Aberdeen, United Kingdom (Scotland)
F. The Scotia Group, Dallas, Texas
G. Greenberg Traurig, P.A.101 East College Ave. Tallahassee, Florida
H. Ince & Co., Rechtsanwaelte and Solicitors, Hamburg Germany
I. Square Circles Publishing, 3890 Vista Campana South #13,Oceanside CA
J. Mind, Body & Spirit, Inc. 101 E. College Ave. Tallahassee
K. Aquatec Innerspace Operations, Ltd., Limassol, Cyprus
L. MSC (Mediterranean Shipping Company, S.A., Geneva, Switzerland)
M. UPS (United Parcel Service)
N. CTO (Cyprus Tourist Organization)
4. Platforms. The primary platform used in this expedition was the Motor Tug M/T
FLYING ENTERPRISE, Official IMO Number 7212482, call letters P3NQ2, and
was built in 1972 by American Marine Corp. New Orleans, LA and was rebuilt
(converted/lengthened) in 2000. It is 52.80 meters in length, 11 meters molded
breadth, and 3.35 meters draft. It is 562 Gross Tons and 168 Net Tons and has a range
1

R. S. Bates

Report on the Expedition to Atlantis

05/19/05

of 13,000 miles at 10.5 knots. It is owned by EDT Transport and operated by EDT
Towage and Salvage Co., Ltd. of Limasoll, Cyprus. . The engineering plant consists of
two Stork Werkspoor 825 kW main engines (re-engined in 1985); two 75 kW 220V
60Hz and one 45 kW 220V 60Hz auxiliary generators and one185 kW GM 8V71 bow
thruster. For accommodations, it is equipped to carry 27 persons total, which include 9
ships crew and 18 charterers. (See Personnel section of Enclosure (11)). At the time
of the expedition Captain Duncan MacKenzie was in command. For an exploratory
mission, it has a Survey room located in conjunction with the navigation bridge. It has
2 radars, gyrocompass, DGPS, autopilot and Nevtex. It has various means of
communication with VHF, Inmarsat B, Inmarsat M, Inmarsat C and a mobile phone to
Cyprus. For the comfort of the charterers and crew, it has a laundry room with two
industrial washing machines and two tumble dryers, and the ship is fully airconditioned throughout. Ideally located in Limasoll, and perfectly suited for the
purpose, it qualifies as a medium size research vessel with winches, cranes and an Aframe for the deployment of underwater equipment. Enclosure (2))
Assisting vessel was the Motor Tug M/T EDT ARES, owned by Phileas
Shipmanagement and operated by EDT Towing and Salvage Co., Ltd. of Limassol,
Cyprus, IMO Official Number 9130755, principal dimensions are 80.30 meters length
over all, 13.40 meters beam, 5.50 meters depth to main deck, 1728 gross registered
tons and 518 net registered tons giving her a 4.30-meter draft. She was built in 199 by
Northern Yard, Gdansk, Poland and rebuilt (converted/lengthened) in 2002. Her call
letters are P3MJ8; She has accommodations for 50 persons and, at the time of the
expedition, was commanded by Captain Dionisios Tritsapolis. The engineering plant
consists of two Wartsila 8L20 1,330kW main engines connected on single controllable
pitch propellers in Kortnozzle; two 1250 kW Caterpillar 3,306 auxiliary generators
and two Brunvoll bow thrusters, one tunnel and one retractable and two Brunvoll
tunnel stern thrusters. She has a cruising speed of 14 knots. (Enclosure (3))
The earliest bathmetric data acquired in the area of interest came during 1987 from
Voyage No. 5 of the Russian Research Vessel AKADEMIK NIKOLAY
STRAKHOV, a general-purpose research ship built for the Institute for Geochemistry
and Analytical Chemistry of the Russian Academy of Sciences. The ship has an Official
IMO Number 8211174, was built in 1985, It is 75.50 meters (247.5 feet) in length,
14.7 meters (48.2 feet) molded breadth, and 4.50 meters (15.4 feet) maximum draft. It
is 2600 Gross Tons and has a cruising speed of 12 knots. (See Enclosure (4)).
Prior to the expedition, important bathymetric data was obtained from the
IFREMER French Research Vessel LE SUROT acquired during an expedition from
October 29 to November 15, 2003. The ship has an Official IMO Number 7360368,
was built in 1975 and modernized in 1999. It is 56.34 meters in length, 11 meters
molded breadth, and 4.10 meters maximum draft. It is 946 USM Gross Tons and has
an average speed of 10 knots. The refit of the ship in 1999 provided an opportunity to
totally upgrade all its scientific equipment. The performance of the new equipment is
consistent with requirements for refocused cruises on the continental shelf, to the
bottom of the slope, limited to depths of 4000/4500 m. (See Enclosure (5)).
5. Side Scan Sonar Equipment. One of the best systems for imaging large areas of
the ocean floor is side scan sonar. The basic concept is much the same as the basic

R. S. Bates

Report on the Expedition to Atlantis

05/19/05

echo sounder; however, side scan sonar instruments are towed behind ships and often
called towfish or tow vehicles. This technology uses a specially shaped acoustic beam,
which pulses out 90 degrees from the path on which it is towed, and out to each side.
Each pulse provides a detailed image of a narrow strip directly to either side of the
instrument. The topography of the ocean floor and underwater objects reflect the
sound energy to hydrophones on the tow vehicle. These reflections are amplified,
processed and displayed as images. Some of the sound that is emitted by side scan
sonar is absorbed by the seafloor; the rest is reflected or scattered back in different
amounts, which leads to different images of the seafloor. For example, hard objects
such as rocks and metal will reflect strong signals while softer features such as mud
absorb sonar energy and produce lighter acoustic returns. Side scan sonar technology
provides high resolution, almost photographic quality imagery of the seafloor. It is
commonly used in industry to locate pipeline or cable routes, and to search out small
but specific objects that need to be found, such as shipwrecks, mines, or downed
aircraft. Side scan sonar is sensitive enough to measure features smaller than 10 cm
(less than 4 inches) on the seafloor. It is also useful when accurate maps of large
sections of seabed are needed. The instrument by which the investigation of the
mission area was surveyed is the Modified Geoacoustics 941 Transceiver and 942
Subsea multiplexor. The Transducers are 2000m rated Neptune T120/121. These
components were mounted on a GeoAcoustics 136 Towfish (formerly the
COMPASS) and the towfish is labeled as the GeoAcoustics 136S Towfish when it is
fitted with sidescan mounts. (See Enclosure (6)). The cable fitted was 5500m of
Rochester A302799 11.3mm double armored coax.
6. Sonar Processor The CODA sys dualSense processor from Coda Technologies is a
multiple trigger system. This state-of-the-art system is capable of simultaneous, yet
independent data display, processing, and interpretation of digital data from side scan
sonar and shallow seismic applications. This real-time sonar data management solution
is used for hydrographic survey acquisition, processing and interpretation. Providing
both internal and external triggering along with multi-sensor data inputs and a variety
of easy-to-use display control, storage, and processing features, the CODA sys
dualSense is a completely integrated solution with the complete CODA soft range of
acquisition and play back software. The CODA sys system allows the user to program
a navigation string and monitor the survey progress on-screen and in real-time as each
ping return is geo-encoded with position, time, and other selected navigation data.
Specifications for the Coda DA200 (Dualsense) sonar processor are attached. (See
Enclosure (7)) The original line files, recorded on DVD, contained the raw line files
in xtf format. The line files have the navigation information embedded within them,
which is same way the initial geotiff images (georefernced map image), were produced.
The position recorded on the data is the position of the tow fish, this position was
calculated by the navigation software when the manual lay backs were entered.
7. Sonar Winch and Power Pack Equipment. The winch is a one design produced
by MPD in the UK and designated GSE DEEP TOW WINCH 6000M - RMWH05. It
has a 75kW 3 phase, 50 or 60Hz 415/440v power pack with an automatic level wind
system. (See Enclosure (8)) The winch was installed on the Flying Enterprise and
welded securely to the deck on the scheduled sailing day, Sunday, November 7, 2004.
The winch is made up of two parts, the winch itself and the power pack. There are
3

R. S. Bates

Report on the Expedition to Atlantis

05/19/05

several electrical and hydraulic connections between these two units for the winch to
operate. During the set up, some serious difficulty was experienced in getting the
hydraulic couplings to mate and lock securely, probably caused by the hydraulic oil
expanding in the heat. Once some oil had been drained from each of the three hoses
they finally mated. In the course of events leading up to the final connection of the
hydraulic lines, the feeder valve was closed from the oil tank on the power pack. This
was to ensure that there was no pressure on the couplings when trying to connect
them. Unfortunately the feeder valve was not re-opened when the winch was powered
up with the result that there was a loud pressure release sound coming from the
motor/pump area (on the power pack) and the return line pressure gauge was
damaged. The gauge was replaced but caution was warranted when restarting the
winch in case the motor and/or pump had been damaged. If they were damaged and
were run, they may have been rendered beyond repair. Addressing the most likely
problem, the hydraulic pump was removed from the winch, stripped down, checked
and re-built. Since no fault was found with the pump at that time, it was re-fitted to
the winch. A thorough visual check of the motor was then carried out and no signs of
damage could be seen. To carry out any work on the motor itself would have involved
an inordinate amount of time and the use of some heavy lifting gear. The decision was
then made to purge the system of any air that might have become trapped and to try
starting the winch. Once this procedure had been completed the winch was run and
tested. The system was in working order and the winch and power pack were ready by
the early morning hours November 8, 2004.
8. Areas of Investigation and Exploration: The general topography of the survey
area is comprised a centrally located oblong mound or (Acropolis) hill approximately
100m. high off the bottom, approximately 2.8 km. long by 600m wide and bordered by
a relatively flat plain with low hills to the north and south with the possibility of an
ancient river bed along the south side. The remains of two ridges, smaller in height
than the central mound and about a mile wide at their widest points divide the survey
area in two; a northern section and a southern section. The two co-linear ridges are in
direction that roughly follow the ENE-WSW axis of the central (Acropolis) hill and
adjoin the central hill. The ridge to the east of the central mound is thought to be the
most pronounced and leads to a secondary target of interest. The ridge to the west of
the central mound terminates in a mud volcano approximately 6.2 nm from the central
area. The nature of the bottom is unknown, but a survey in adjacent areas indicates the
possibility of a silted clay bottom. At the outset, it was reasonable to assume that
megalithic stones or megalithic stone structures could be present in the survey area
especially on and around the central sector.
The initial survey plan for the primary target was based on the bathymetric
multibeam scans (less than half of the beams giving useful data) conducted by the
Russian academician Andrei L. Knipper from the Russian survey vessel AKADEMIK
NIKOLAJ STRAKHOV in 1987 and 1990. (See Fig. 1 of Enclosure (9)). In 1994,
the data were made available to the international community in a research paper by Dr.
John K. Hall addressing the bottom relief of the Levantine Sea. The topography was
indistinct at best, and the navigation associated with the data was somewhat suspect.
Based on that preliminary data, a position of the central area of exploration was
estimated by Robert Sarmast to be in the vicinity of 34.8 N, 35.0 E. In July 2004,
nautical charts from both the British Admiralty (UK) and the National Oceanographic
4

R. S. Bates

Report on the Expedition to Atlantis

05/19/05

and Atmospheric Administration (US) were consulted in an effort to verify the central
position. The chart analysis, with only relatively few soundings, still indicated that the
central elevated target area appeared to be located at 34.85N, 35.01 E. The position
was predicated on what appeared to be the presence of a ridge or burm that ran
through the central sector from Syria toward a point south of Cyprus. The axis
appeared to be in an ENE-WSW direction: 082 T (True) - 262 T. It appeared that no
like formations existed in the distant past on axes nearly perpendicular to the ENEWSW axis, such as a NW-SE ridge, structure, canal or walls in that direction. As a
result, the contour lines followed a general NE-SW pattern. It was this pattern that
dictated that the deployment and operation of sides can sonar should be along course
lines on nearly NE-SW bearings.
Later in July of 2004, through a contact that Robert Sarmast made with a principal
investigator from IFREMER, more definitive data, with much better navigational
information, was requested for an area fifteen (15) nm (nautical miles) square around
the Acropolis hill. The request used coordinates for an area of exploration, centered on
coordinates 34 51' N, 35 01' E and bounded by the approximate coordinates
(3458.5N, 3451.9'E), (3458.5N, 3510.2'E), (3443.5'N, 3510.2'E), (3443.5'N,
3451.9'E). The data requested represented only a portion of the data taken from the
bathymetric multibeam sonar survey by the French Research Vessel (R/V) LE
SUROT during a voyage from October 29 to November 15, 2003. (See Fig. 2 of
Enclosure (9)). The participating institutions on that voyage of the R/V LE SUROT
consisted of the Universities of Perpignan, Toulouse, Bordeaux, (France) Hamburg,
(Germany) and Tishreen (Syria). During that expedition, two scientific subjects were
under study: 1) The geodynamics of a convergent/transcurrent system in the zone-relay
between the Arc of Cyprus and the Is-Anatolian fault. The structure of this zone and
its geodynamic evolution, under the influence of the movements of three plates were
under consideration. 2) The second topic related to sedimentary dynamics, in those
two areas of seabed, generated by the activity of the arc of Cyprus and the activity
along the Levantine continental terrace. The acquisition of bathymetry and the acoustic
reflectivity data was an integral part of the research within in an area bounded between
latitude 3348'N and 3554'N and between longitude 03436'E and 03554'E. Since
the request from Robert Sarmast was specifically for marine archeological research,
and was not related to either of the IFREMER's studies, the request was granted.
On September 1, 2004, Robert Sarmast received the requested data from
IFREMER and he forwarded it to Patrick Lowry of The Scotia Group, Dallas, Texas
who returned three dimensional (3-D) graphic modeling software supporting Robert
Sarmasts claim of the existence of megalithic stones or megalithic stone structures in
an area bounded by the coordinates (3449.6N, 3458.8'E), (3449.9N, 3501.2'E),
(3449.0'N, 3501.0'E) and (3448.0'N, 3459.9'E). The 3-D graphic display model of
the data in that area provided imagery appearing to be a 3700 meter long, 8 meter tall
wall structure to the north (Wall 1) and a 2800 meter long, by 500-800 meter wide,
megalithic irregular tabular structure on a low, 110m. rise, or (Acropolis) hill, to the
south (Main 3). Also in evidence were canallike ducts at the base of the irregular
structures on the low hill which were leading off the hill on the north side. It was this
area that became the primary target. It should be noted that the 3-D representation
exaggerated heights by a factor of 10. (See Figure 1 and Figure 4 of Enclosure (10)).
In the analysis, reference is made to Wall 1 for the wall and Main 3 for the

R. S. Bates

Report on the Expedition to Atlantis

05/19/05

(Acropolis) Hill and immediate environs with the number of meters from datum on the
established navigation grid. (e.g. Wall 1+150 or Main 3+3375)
A secondary target, identified by Robert Sarmast from the bathymetric multibeam
scans by the Russian survey vessel AKADEMIK NIKOLAJ STRAKHOV during
1987, some 18 miles distant from the primary target at 35.0 N 35.3 E, was to be
investigated with low-resolution side scan sonar. In the analysis, it is referred to as
TGT 1. (See Figure 2 of Enclosure (10)).
A tertiary target suggested by the IFREMER data in the southwest corner of the
15 nm by 15 nm square provided a comparison of the general topographical
upwellings in the area, and was deemed to be a characteristic mud volcano, common
to the area. From the primary target it is 6.2 nm in a south westerly direction located
at the approximate position of 34 48' N, 34 53' E. In the analysis, it is referred to as
Summit 1. (See Figure 3 of Enclosure (10)).
9. Sonar Procedure for Exploration. With the position, topography and orientation
of megalithic stone sites well defined, the basis for the expedition and the plan for a
detailed examination with side-scan sonar emerged in two phases. First, a lowresolution 100 kHz scan of the targeted area along the wall structure to the north, the
megalithic structure on the (Acropolis) hill, and if possible the secondary and tertiary
targets using low-resolution. The purpose of this phase was to confirm coordinates and
examine the topography and nature of the targets. From those results, targets of
interest were to be determined for the second phase of the expedition using 500 kHz
high-resolution scans.
Under this plan, the Phoenix International team led by Tim Weller conducted the
initial two sidescan swaths along the northern megalithic wall structure (Wall 1) of
the primary target, the first side scan swaths to historically record the nature of the
stone structure. With a fairly regular bottom, they were safe initial swaths,
approximately 20m above the target and preliminarily verified the position of the
object under investigation. Towing speed was approximately 2.5 kts. using lowresolution (100 kHz) sidescan sonar for a 400m. (350m, effective) wide swath. Target
depth was approximately 1,500m and the towfish was approximately 4,600m astern.
The parallel navigation lanes were planned to overlap by 25m with the intent to
produce a seamless mosaic of the wall structure on an axis of 067-247 degrees true.
However, the final results of the two scan lines did not reflect the desired separation,
and, in fact, were nearly collinear.
At the conclusion of two scans of the megalithic wall, the towfish cable was
shortened to 2,400m at the end of the second pass along that wall. During a torrential
downpour from a passing rain cell, an accidental flooding and shorting of the deck
generator associated with the sonar winch assembly rendered the winch inoperable by
any means, and the towfish was perilously deployed with no mechanical means to
shorten the tow cable or bring the towfish aboard. Maneuvering the towfish toward a
rendezvous point near Cyprus enabled a correction of the problem when the M/V EDT
ARES delivered a replacement generator. The evolution took 21 hours and 24 minutes
from the time the first generator quit, to the running of the replacement generator. Tim
Weller was heard to say he "never saw a mission recover like this."
Returning to the area of investigation, an early deployment of the towfish enable a
single low resolution scan of the tertiary target (Summit 1) as the ship and towfish
proceeded to the primary target (Main 3) over the (Acropolis) hill and associated
6

R. S. Bates

Report on the Expedition to Atlantis

05/19/05

megalithic structures. Seven low-resolution scans were conducted over the primary
target at the (Acropolis) hill on an axis of 051-231 degrees true. Without a mosaic of
the data, an accurate picture was not available, and a single track of isolated traces did
little to verify the nature of the structure. As a result, the vessel and towfish preceded
to the secondary target (TGT 1) where two low-resolution scans of the secondary
target were conducted. A third line, (Wall 1+350), was also conducted to gain greater
coverage of the megalithic wall structure.
Upon completion of the low resolution 100 kHz scans of the three targets of
interest, the next phase involved high resolution (500 kHz) side scans with a 150 m.
wide swath to survey the centrally located (Acropolis) hill top area with the irregular
tabular structures. The hill is approximately 300 feet (110 m.) high. Its 2800 meter
long by 500-800 meter wide megalithic structure is in the vicinity of the connecting
coordinates (3449.0'N, 3501.0'E), (3448.0'N, 3459.9'E). Towing speed was
approximately 3.0 to 3.5 kts. along parallel navigation lanes. Navigational charted
depth in this area in approximately 1450m. Upon the completion of two highresolution scans, the allotted time had expired and the data acquisition phase was
complete. (See Enclosure (11) Commodores Log)
10. Legal Considerations. Prior to the expedition, the law firm of Greenberg Traurig,
P.A. requested legal advice from consultants, Ince & Co. of Hamburg, Germany, for
this and any future voyage to the Atlantis area. The response is included as Enclosure
(12) and describes the various lines of demarcation in territorial waters and high seas
over which jurisdiction may be exercised by bordering countries. The guidelines are
general and speak mainly to archaeological artifacts. During the present voyage, no
attempt was made to make contact, by any mechanical means, with the seabed or any
megalithic structures found on the seabed. The waters explored were International
Waters and all protocols, treaties and laws were fully observed. With evidence of
megalithic stones or megalithic stone structures, a Remote Operating Vehicle (ROV), a
sub-profiler, and a coring apparatus are the next indicated methods of survey in a
concentrated area around the Acropolis Hill. Details and plans are will be determined
based upon a study of the results of the side scan survey. Applicable legal
considerations will be applied to the voyage.
11. Financial Considerations. The financial considerations for the project represent a
truly remarkable part of the expedition. The generosity of a great number of
individuals, companies and organizations made possible the expedition, that in
actuality, cost between five and ten times the amount reflected here. A more precise
accountability is part of FSE records and only an overview of the financial
considerations will be discussed in this report.
12. Still-Photography and Digital Video Documentation of the Voyage. A team
devoted to still photography and video motion pictures, to document the voyage as
completely as possible, was embarked during the entire expedition on the M/T Flying
Enterprise. Numerous still pictures were taken with a variety of cameras by the team,
and in excess of 50 hours of DVD raw footage was shot during various evolutions.
Cameraman Mark Greer collected the majority of the still photographs. The raw DVD
footage was taken to England by Janelle Balnicke but as the sole property of FSE, the
entire collection of raw footage will remain with under the control of FSE at the
7

R. S. Bates

Report on the Expedition to Atlantis

05/19/05

offices of Greenberg Traurig, P.A.of. Tallahassee, Florida. The specific use of the still
photography and DVD footage will be determined and released consistent with the
corporate plans of FSE.
13. Commodores Assessment. The first voyage to Atlantis for the scientific study of
the remains of this great civilization was made possible only by the hard work and
sacrifice of a large number of outstanding individuals. Their stories are sagas in
themselves and may one day be made available for all to read. Thanks to their efforts,
the release of the first side scan images of this historic site present the most credible
evidence of man-quarried, man-built megalithic structures, the remains of which are
consistent with measurements and descriptions of various documented sources. (See
Enclosure 15). From a scientific and archeological prospective, the first voyage to
Atlantis was an unprecedented success of enormous historical value. With over a
decade of research and publishing by Robert Sarmast, coupled with over two years of
planning by him and his team, the first expedition has indeed brought the debate over
its existence closer to a conclusion than ever before and has established the foundation
for further monumental discoveries. The side scan imagery will be scrutinized by a
great number of scholarly individuals, many of whom, such as Dr. John K. Hall, will
contribute corroborating analysis to Sarmasts Discovery of Atlantis. To all who
contributed to this first expedition, you have earned your place in history on a voyage
to which all can say, Well done!

/s/ R. S. Bates
Enclosure (1): Voyage Plan prepared in 2002
Enclosure (2): The M/V FLYING ENTERPRISE
Enclosure (3): The M/V ARES
Enclosure (4): Russian Research Vessel AKADEMIK NIKOLAY STRAKHOV
Enclosure (5): French Research Vessel LE SUROT
Enclosure (6): GeoAcoustics 136S Towfish
Enclosure (7): The CODA sys dualSense processor
Enclosure (8): GSE DEEP TOW WINCH 6000M - RMWH05
Enclosure (9): Survey tracks AKADEMIK NIKOLAY STRAKHOV and LE SUROT
Enclosure (10): Various multibeam and side scans images
Enclosure (11): Commodores Log and Participating Personnel
Enclosure (12): Legal considerations from Ince & Co., Rechtsanwaelte and Solicitors
Enclosure (13): Cyprus Mail 8-25-04
Enclosure (14): List of the investors and contributors
Enclosure (15): Side-scan images