| Abstract: | The anomalous updomed morphological expression of Sumba island, its enigmatic lack of strong Neogene deformation and the northward morphological indentation of southern Sumbawa and Flores require explanation.The stratigraphy of Sumba may be correlated with the Cretaceous to Miocene part of the Timor allochthon. The sedimentary and eruptive rock succession in Sumba shows remarkable similarities with the allochthonous Palelo, Wiluba and Cablac deposits of Timor. In both islands the Cretaceous parts of these sequences are regarded as characteristic of fore-arc deposits built on thin continental crust.The Timor nappe is interpreted as a 5 km thick tectonic flake of the Banda fore-arc thrust onto the Australian continental margin in the mid-Pliocene collision. The postulated Sumba nappe has not yet been thrust onto the Australian margin which, in the Sumba region, has not yet converged as close to the arc as in the Timor area. The postulated Sumba nappe is interpreted as a diapiric elongated dome of the Sunda fore-arc that is being squeezed by the converging margin of Australia against the volcanic islands of Sumbawa and Flores.The absence of indications on the seismic reflection profiles for the presence of the thrust fault of the Sumba nappe may perhaps be explained by the thrusts being nearly horizontal within flat-lying strata.The Savu thrust is correlated with the probably older (pre-Late Pliocene) Wetar Suture as a major southward dipping lithospheric rupture. East of 124°E, this suture does not seem to have moved much since the mid-Pliocene collision that emplaced the nappes on Timor. However, microearthquake data suggest some activity is continuing. |
