Records, by Admiral of the Fleet, Lord FisherFisher, John Arbuthnot Fisher, Baron
History
Records, by Admiral of the Fleet, Lord Fisher
Fisher, John Arbuthnot Fisher, Baron
Admirals -- Great Britain -- Biography; Fisher, John Arbuthnot Fisher, Baron, 1841-1920; Great Britain. Royal Navy
It means that the Naval Officer of the future will regard machinery,
mechanical work, and mechanical problems as his “bread and butter.” He
will think no more of handling machinery of any sort than the ordinary
mortal does of riding a bicycle; guns, gun-mountings, torpedoes, and
electrical instruments and machines he will regard as special types,
but differing no whit in principle from the primitive stock. Mystery
will disappear. At present it is an unfortunate thing that departmental
jealousy leads the members of each and every department of the
Service to make a mystery of their particular speciality. The Gunnery
Lieutenant, Torpedo Lieutenant, Engineer, and Marine Officer each
resent discussion by “outsiders” of any point in connection with their
speciality, as a piece of unwarrantable presumption, with the result
that each knows all about his own job, and pursues it diligently,
taking care not to poach on anybody else’s preserves, but without any
regard as to whether the Service might not gain in efficiency by a
little more co-operation and collaboration.
From one point of view they are right in being exclusive, because they
know that no one else knows anything about their work, and therefore
discussion with “outsiders” is mere waste of breath, but in future all
this will be changed. Specialities will disappear; the Naval Officer of
the future will see no greater difference between a gun-mounting and a
torpedo, than an Engineer sees between the main engines and the feed
pump.
However, although specialities will disappear, it will always be
necessary to have “experts” in each department. We shall still require
our Lieutenants G., T., and E.; but as at the present time when a
Lieutenant G. is promoted to Commander he drops the G., so also it
seems logical to conclude that the future Lieutenant E. on promotion to
Commander should drop the E.
It is absolutely safe to predict that the Naval Officer of 50 years
hence will smile when he reads that his forefathers had to have an
officer of Commander’s rank appointed to a ship solely for charge of
the main engines. Foreigners gasp when they hear that Lieutenants of
two or three years standing command our destroyers; in other navies
destroyers are usually commanded by Captains de Corvette; and then we
smile when we remember youngsters like Lieutenant Rombulow-Pearse of
the “Sturgeon,” who rescued the crew of the sinking “Decoy” in a gale
of wind, with only his small whaler to help him, and with the loss of
only one man, who disappeared nobody knows how.
The ideal complement of officers of the future therefore will be: 1
Captain, 1 Commander, 1 Lieutenant G., 1 Lieutenant E., 1 Lieutenant
T., 1 Lieutenant M., 1 Lieutenant N., 1 Lieutenant P., and as many
other watchkeepers as necessary.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account