Assistant Superintendent, Chatham on 18th November describes the damage to Adventure which could be seen once she was in dry dock:-
Extent of flooding 23-76 to above lower decks, 76 - 103 to platform deck. It has been necessary to restrict drainage of flooded compartments in dock in order to control the large quantity of free oil fuel trapped therein. Following is a brief report of extent of damage in so far as above conditions permit.
Centre of damage about 60 station port side. Extent of major damage 54-70 port side, outer bottom, all decks up to and including main deck opened up and extensively wrecked. One strake of upper deck ripped up. Heavy distortion of outer bottom, frames, etc. extends from 54-87 keel to main deck port side, minor distortion of outer bottom extends forward to 32 station port side. Starboard side distortion of outer bottom, frames, etc. extends from 52-60 station keel to just above lower deck, keel set up at 44-76, maximum 10 inches. Main bulkheads 54 distorted, 68 destroyed 78 leaking. Following compartments wrecked oil tanks and all compartments M L and port 54-78 up to under side of upper deck. C.O.2. machinery wrecked. Mechanical gearing in lower steering position out of action. Electrical equipments in transmitting station. Lower steering position, battery room and forward gyro compass wrecked. All l P cables forward of 78 wrecked. Aft of 78 minor electrical defects only and no serious damage to ring main cables or control gear. Damage to gun mounting is mark V multiple pom pom cannot be trained, forward pusher hoist distorted. Rangefinder on forebridge damaged. Mr. Offord, Chief Constructor, D.N.C. Department, has inspected damage and has photographs.
The photographs mentioned are probably a better way to appreciate the extent and severity of the damage. Some of these are reproduced below.
 | Damage to Adventure's hull |
 | Damage to Adventure's hull |
 |
Damage to internal compartment |
A report from Mr Offord, the Chief Constructor on 21st November describes the damage to the hull:-
The exterior damage consisted of a hole about 20 ft. long, extended from the 14 ft. waterline down to the garboard strake on the port side. The centre of the damage was at about 62 Station for about 20 ft. Abaft this main damage was a heavy indentation extending from the keel to the turn of bilge. Also approximately opposite this main damage on the starboard side, namely at 54 Station, was extensive buckling extending from the waterline to the turn of bilge, from whence it ran aft to join the main damage on the port side. Further forward, namely at about 36 Station, and on both the port and starboard sides of the vessel, were heavy indentations.
The main damage, namely at 62 Station, port side, was immediately under an oil fuel tank, above which was the C.O.2. machinery compartment. On the centre line in this position was the 4.7" magazine and over it the ammunition lobby. Further aft on the platform deck was the lower steering position and the transmitting station. The longitudinal bulkhead between theoil tank and the magazine was forced back towards the middleline and the lower portion of the outer bottom plating folded back against it. The platform deck forming the floor of the C.O.2 machinery compartment was missing, as also was the lower deck forming its roof. The contents of this compartment were completely wrecked and the coil of the evaporator was found on the upper deck. The main deck over was ruptured and the two portions turned back, one towards the ship's side and the other towards the middle line.
Mr Offord goes on to comment on the causes of casualties:-
There was no direct evidence of any casualties due to noxious gases. Although there were many cases of broken legs there were none of these which could not have been explained by falling debris, etc. i.e. none could be directly attributed to the upward thrust of the ship. The extraordinary amount of wreckage in the direct line above the explosion would lead one to suppose that no human being could have remained alive in the vicinity, and yet, the majority of the crew who were there escaped. For example, the transmitting station was manned and all but three men escaped.
In the closing paragraphs he discusses the possible nature and position of the mine which caused the damage:-
There seems little doubt but that the damage was caused by a non-contact mine, although it must have been caused by one relatively near to the ship, i.e. not a ground mine. An approximate estimate is a 500 lb. mine at about 10ft. and in a position indicated on the sketch. Important evidence that the explosion was not a contact one arises from consideration of the extent of indentation on the outer bottom plating, as referred o above, namely as far forward as 32 Station.