New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1900-06-25
TURRETS FOR WARSHIPS.
INTEREST IN ACTION OF SECRETARY
LONG IN VIEW OF DECISION
OF RODGERS BOARD.
rBr TELEGRAPH To THE rR1BUxr.I


Washington June 24-NavaI officers are
eagerly specializing upon Secretary Longs
ton tomorrow in regard to the armament Of
the five great battleships. According to this de-
cision announced as soon as Congress author
tied two additional ships, the Secretary gratiied
the whole service by declaring that they should
be Identical IN all respects with the New-Jersey.
the Pennsylvania and the Georgia. authorized
by the preceding Congress. thus making a single
class Of the highest type embodying all the best
lessons of the Spanish war and the experienced
judgment of American designers. affected by
marked naval tendencies common TO all navies.
The chief controversy over the designs for the
Pennsylvania class, over which the Construction
Board had spent a year in discussion had been
the two story. or superimposed. turrets, Of the
elliptical balanced variety. already installed
the Kearsarge and the Kentucky. where, so far
as their structural features are concerned. they
have left nothing TO be desired; their operation
in actual practice having been vastly superior
to the single. circular unbalanced turrets of the
Oregon, the Iowa and other ships.
The Construction Board decided, by vote Of
to l. that two story turrets should not be
placed on the new ships for purely military
sons, but left a saving clause in the spectfca-
lions by which this could be reconsidered within
six months after the contracts were signed. In
stead of the two story turrets. carrying pair
Of Fights above pair Of twelves, the majority
design provided single turrets fore and aft. each
carrying pair Of twelves. and put four smaller
turrets, each carrying a pair of Fights the
broadsides, somewhat after the distribution Of
the main battery common to the Oregon type
and most of the earlier European vessels OF
this class.
NEW BOARD FOR TURRET QUESTION.
As the Construction Board was chiefly COM
nd had baaT1
governed In its decision mainly by tactical con-
sideratiOns those of a structural character hav-
ing been completely indicated in the Kear-
sarge which. with the Kentucky. her sister ship,
is admittedly to-day the greatest fighting ma
chine afoat Secretary Long increased the Bu-
reau Board by the addition Of nine members
skilled in tactical evolutions and experienced in
actually fighting modern ships, and ordered an
exhaustive review of the turret question, with
final recommendation.
This Board. consisting OF Rear Admirals
Rodgers, Melville, O'Nelll Bradford and Barker,
Captains H. c. Taylor. Clark. Sigsbee and Chad
wick and Naval Constructor D. W. Taylor. repre-
senting Rear-Adrniral HichbOrn, chief construc-
tor. one OF the regular members of the Board who
was absent from Washington, decided in favor
Of the two story turret, as announced IN The
Tribune on Thursday last. The report OF the
Board was signed by all the members. who
Ings and the seals on the report are not 20 be
broken before tomorrow.
Everybody in the Navy however. knows what
the Board thought about the matter. and for
that reason vast amount Of curiosity Is mani
tested as to whether Secretary Long will follow
out his expressed determination TO have all five
Of these splendid ships exactly alike, and there
fore armed with two story turrets. or If ne Will
consent 70 a compromise by which three OF
1o+a av,H tha OIL fvVO
vided with the older form Of single story tur-
rets common 10 all battleship designs OF sixteen
years ago For 1t turns out that the huge
Board, after four days ardent discussion and
after deciding emphatcally on the superiority
of the two story turrets finally agreed with
practical unanimity on a recommendation to
that effect.
TWO PLANS SUBMITTED.
The two plans sent before the Rodgers Board
by the Secretary Were First. that Of the ma
jority, calling for the twelves IN pairs in bow
and stern turrets and the eights in pairs in four
turrets. OF which two were each broadside;
and second. that Of Admiral Bradford, for the
same number Of guns Of each caIibre. pairs OF
Fights being superimposed the twelves, while
one pair of Fights In turret was placed amid
ships on each beam. on the simple question OF
disposition the Board favored the Bradford
arrangement by vote OF 10 <, Admiral
Barker refraining from taking either side. as he
leaned toward q combination OF bc-h plans.
on this vote, the crucial one OF the whole
matter. II related wholly 10 the tactical ad-
vantages OF the two story turret and us ire.
mendOus concentration OF fire. the majority or
the Construction Board had made a net gain or
one vote while the two story turrets had gained
six votes Another vote was taken on a propo-
sition TO dispense with the S-inch amtdships tur-
rets Of the Bradford plan. and this was defeated
by the same vote the first one. Then II ap-
pears that the supporters OF the double turret
relented for the third vote was on a proposition
rhraa VII p
rets on the Bradford plan and two ships with
one story turrets on the eill-Hichborn-M Mel
ville-SIgsbee plan. and this was adopted by
vote OF 10 TO l. Constructor Taylor alone record
ing himself against the compromise.
FINAL DECISION BY SECRETARY.
Iust What IS o be gained hx the conproniss