THE COMING SHIP-OF-WAR.

Samoa Times and South Sea Gazette, Issue 5, 3 November 1877, Page 2

THE COMING SHIP-OF-WAR.

(From the " United ServiceNfiazette.") THE paper read by Mr. Scott Rijfesell on the " Development of our Modem War Fleet," at the Royal United Service institution, and the discussion of which wius continued and concluded, opens out quite a new field of Naval Architecture. Instead of building a ship with heavy outside armour, and dividing her thin iron bottom into numerous compartments, Mr. Scott Russell proposes to plate the armour inside the ship, and to divide

her into a number of water and air tight casemate batteries, each casemate to contain one gun, and to lie perfectly independent for it s RU p p iy „f <10w ,i,.;. .shot, shell, &c., „f any other casemate, or' in tart, of any other portion of the ship. In addition to this divergence from the I present hard-and-fast rules which govern I **? '!'•%'»* of our ironclad ships, this able Naval architect proposes the substitution of steel for iron, a new form of how and ram, different appliances for steering, different sized and shaped ports --m fact, Mr. Scott Russell's proposed ship would bo altogether, both externally and Internally, different from listing types. The suggestion of casemates is new and appeals to be thoroughly practicable. A very old subscriber of our own. Captain Wilson, K.X., has for many years, however, througl r own columns and otherwise, ndvojuted the armour-

plating l-oing placed inside instead of outride the shell of the ship. 11l respect to the present mode of securng the iron armour-plates by bolts, necessitating bolt -holes, and thus materially weakening their resistance to shot, Mr. Scott Russell proposes to build up the structure that the four edges of each, plate shall fall one into the other, one plate forming I the front of each casemate, the interior of which is to be 18 feet wide and 20 I feet long, or proportionate to the size of | the gun to be placed in it. In fact, the armour-plates, instead of being bolted to, are to be incorporated within the structure of the ship herself. It is however, impossible here to describe satisfactorily Mr- Scott Russell's design, a correct'idea and appreciation of which can only be derived from the drawings of the ship proposed. To use his own words:—" This system of incorporating the steel armour" or iron armour inside the hollow walls of the ship's side would add to the strength of the ship's structure, and the ship's structure wotlld enclose the armour, without piercing it with holes and making it crack ; and if it were cracked by some extraordinary forces, the two or more pieces of the cracked plate would still, be secured fast in its place, and would still be there to receive the blow of the next shot, with diminished strength, but not destroyed nor removed. This, I tliink, will be the way, in union with casemates, to make both the ship the strongest and safest, and the armour most effective, secure, and durable." It has been too much the fashion of the Admiralty,'and amongst those who value the theory of science rather than the possibility or the results of its practical application, to ignore the opinions of Naval officers in connection with naval architecture. Mr. Scott Russell is strongly of opinion that the naval officer and the naval architect could and should work together. This can hardly be said to have been the principle upon which the designs or the construction of our ships-of-war have hitherto been carried out. For all practical purposes, the opinions of naval officers as to the types of ships that should or should not constitute the fighting force of the country are never sought for, never asked. There were two naval officers only on Lord Dufferin'scommittee, and although their suggestions and recommendations were so coldly received, some of them have since been practically adopted. Ciive the navy the opportunity of expressing what ships are wanted, and there can he no doubt that naval architects would be able to design and to build thein.

Notwithstanding an able and highly qualified naval officer holds the pest of Controller of the Navy, and is at the head of its constructive department, the (.lenient of the service is ton much left out ot tnu _ * muLtl i F tin- civilian too much preponderates. There is a plain duty for each to perform, namely, the navy to say what it wants, and the naval architect to provide what is wanted. At present, science, so called, as represented by the latter, decides both, and the result is failure, audaciously attributed to the ignorance of the naval officer. Possibly when some other Power less able to afford the cost than ourselves possesses itself of a casemated ship on the designs of .Mr. Scott Russell, the English Admiralty may think of following suit. It is the duty of the navy, of the officers who have to right the monsters of the present type, ami upon whom the defence of the country and the upholding of its honor depend, to make their opinions heard and respected in regard to tins unmanageableness of many of the science-run-mad productions" they are called upon to command. It is not sufficient to say the naval architect will provide any type of ship the naval officer wants if the naval officer is not invited or permitted to express such wants.