No_5_October_and_November__1938 — Page 28

36

Hong Kong Builder

With modern buildings the incendiary bomb seems to be the least dangerous of the three types, and the casing of steel against fire is also good protection against these bombs.

But unfortunately only a small proportion of buildings are of modern construction, and even those erected during recent years have not been designed from the point of view of aerial defence. Indeed, for years to come, the great majority of our buildings will be of a type highly vulnerable to air attack; and with most buildings-small domestic property forms the majority of buildings—no adequate defence can, or ever will be devised. A nation of houses with dug-outs in every garden is not a very pleasing picture; and when we think of this we have no little sympathy with Mr. Bush's outburst at the R.I.B.A. against the whole But though fatuous, enemy 'planes may one day be over our heads, and at the R.I.B.A. Conference Mr. T. E. Scott and Mr. Eric Bird

fatuous business of war.

had to assume a realist attitude, and their lectures gave an excellent account of the latest ideas in structural A.R.P.

In all this recent talk of A.R.P. we have noticed one curious omission; there has been little or no mention of camouflage. At the end of the War, the subject of camouflage was becoming of increasing importance, and as air attack is now the most feared method of warfare, Indeed, it should be considered to be the "fourth arm,” camouflage should be receiving increasing attention.

and as the subject is of special concern to architects, we hope to say more about this subject in the future. Yet we do fear, in view of an apparently increasing international immorality, that perhaps camouflage may not matter after all, and that bombs will be dropped indiscriminately in the hope, of the raiders, that they will do their worst. But we can only hope for the best, and do our best to face the worst.

房菜,