The loss of the 'Vanguard' has been the subject of
a great 'correspondence throughout the week. It appears from the letters of Mr. E. J. Reed, M.P. for the Pembroke District, and formerly 4' Naval Constructor" to the.Admitalty, that the system of build- ing ships in cellular departments was never expected to save a ship if the leakage took place in more than one of the large -compartments at the same time. Unfortunately enough, the ram of the Iron Duke' appears to have struck a bulkhead where two compartments meet, and as a consequence, both of them filled at once. Of course, too, since during the ordinary working of a ship it is impossible to keep the water-tight doors which separate one part of it from another closed, it is only when col- lisions are expected,—for instance, when going into battle,—that the cellular construction can be tried to the greatest advantage. When this collision occurred, the water-tight doors were at once shut, by machinery worked from the deck, with the least possible delay, but probablynot soon enough to do full justice to the arrangements, even if two separate compartments had not been penetrated by the same blow. A lively discussion as to whether the ' Vanguard ' can or cannot be raised from the bottom and restored to the Navy, seems to be decided with some probability in the affirma- tive by the favourable opinion of the submarine engineers, Messrs. Siebe and Gorman. It is stated that the Vladimir,' a vessel weighing 5,000 tons, and actually filled with mud,—of which there is no danger with the Vanguard,'—was raised from the bottom by the help of caissons, and the 'Vanguard' does not weigh more when in the water than did the 'Vladimir.'
Previous page
