Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1907-01-18
centrate is inherent In the design of the

centrate Is inherent IN the design OF the
large vessels.
1.-The squadron Of large vessels must of
course be able to choose its own distance
and relative position, which it can always
do. because Of the greater speed that can
be given to vessels Of large displacement.
The same is true. though to a less degree.
when we compare vessels having a broad
side Of four Pinch guns, (the ordinary
battleships) with those having a broadside
Of ten 12-inch guns (the battleships pro-
posed. From the above 1t seems evident
that from the point of view Of naval eff
cheney alone, we should build vessels each
mounting as many heavy guns as prac-
ticable. That is to say, II 1t be decided
that our naval force should be increased
by broadside fire of forty heavy guns
then efficiency demands that we build four
high-speed ships, each having a broadside
fire Of ten Pinch guns. rather than
greater number Of smaller ships having
broadside fire Of four 12-inch guns each.
= .'For the reasons given above, a squadron
of vessels each having a broadside fire
of twelve or more heavy guns. would be
more powerful than squadron having the
same number of guns mounted on vessels
having broadslde of ten guns each; and
the sole reason for not advocating more
than ten guns on a broadsde is that such
vessels are not at present necessary, as
none of the vessels of our possible enemies
have a greater offensive force. The prin-
ciple, however, holds good that, given the
same number of Pinch guns in each of
two squadrons, the squadron having the
most guns on each of it's vessels (and con-
sequently the greatest flexibiity in maneuv-
ering and concentration of fire. Will be the
more powerful. assuming skill in marks
manShip tactics, etc, to be equal.
The Question of Economy.
while the question of economy should
not be allowed to diminish the naval force
the number of effective guns) required for
national defense, it may, nevertheless, be
cd al 11- ba q
naval force by a broadside fire of, say, forty
Pinch guns at considerably less cost by
building ships having a broadside fire of
ten heavy guns each than by building a
greater number of smaller ships each hav-
ing less broadside fire.
For example, four large vessels mount
ing forty heavy guns, would cost about
$40 100000, whereas ten small ships mount
ing the same total number of heavy guns
would cost about s7G,O0O.000. Moreover,
though a large ship consumes more coal, a
small ship having large number of small
guns (6-inch, etc) actually requires more
men and officers than large one having
heavy guns only, and consequently each
small ship costs at least as much to main
tain and to repair. For eXamp e, the COM
plement of the Dreadnaught, of 10, 900 TONS
is G}0 officers and men. while that of the
louisiana of 10000 TONS is about $50
Therefore, for the sum that it would cost to
maintain ten small ships could maintain
a squadron Of four large ones that would
be greatly superior in tactical qualities, to-
tai effective hitting capacity, ability to fight
the guns in heavy sea, speed protection,
and the inherent ability to concentrate it's
gun fire land which, therefore, could read
lily defeat the ten small veSsels), and make
yearly saving of over four millions in
maintenance, not to mention saving of
about THIRTY mil ions, or over 40 per cent
in the original cost, and we would require
fewer men and officers to handle the more
efficient fleet.
I'm addition to the above-indicated tacti-
cal qualities of large vessels, they also pos
sess the great advantage of carrying their
guns at a considerably greater height above
the water, thus ena bling them to fight them
effectively when some of the guns of vessels
of lower free board could not even have
their ports open. For example, the Michi-
gan and South Carolina are defective in this
respect, having their forward turret guns at
a height of only twenty-four feet above the
water. while those of the British Dread
naught are at height of about thrty-five
feet.
''-All first class foreign maritime nations.
including. for example. Eng and, Russia
and Japan, are now laying down or prepar-
ing to lay down. high-speed battleships of
from $1,000 to 10000 tons displacement.
with main batteries composed exclusively
of heavy guns.
ut is, therefore, manifest that an adher-
ence on the part of tbs country to the
smaller types of low free board ships with
mixed batteries and few heavy guns would
manifestly place us at a great disadvan-
tage. because We would he paying more
per 12-inch gun of broadside fire than our
rivals and these guns would be less eff
fective in battle.
Il inclose a copy of a discussion on this
subject by Lieut.. Commander William S.
Sims, of the United States navy. an officer
whose signal service to our navy in the
deve opment of its Workmanship can not
be overstated"