The Hawaiian star. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu]) 1893-1912, 1908-02-11
NAVY DEFENDED
ON TECHNICAL
GROUNDS
SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN DISCUSSES
BATILESHIPS FROM STAND
POINT or MECHANICS.

States navy put forward by Henry
Reuterdahl iu the January number O..
McCmre's Magazine Mr. Ruuerdan.
Us held accountable for absurd mis-
. statements" and the general views OF
the marine artist who. at the outset
of his article. admitted that some of
his remarks might seem too extraor-
binary TO be credible. are d0utcd a-
misleading and preposterous
Within the last fortnight numerous
navy officers, some high I'm rank. have
( publicly resented the main points I'M
Mr.. Reuterdahl's opinionatiye expires
sions, and sought to explode most of
his expressions of fact The Scientific
American takes mp his charges seria-
tim, and undertakes 20 show that they
are either gross eEageerauJns on who'll
Iy baseless.
As ground for am understanding OF
the controversy it may De noted that
AFR. Beuterdahl declared.
That the fighting ships of the Amer
lean navy have an entirely too low
freeboard and lack sufficient armor
protection above the water line.
That the big gun turrers are vulner-
able for two reasons: The gun port
openings are so large as TO make it
possible for an enemy TO drop Pinch
shells through them with ease: they
connect by a shaft directly with the
powder handling room and magazines.
so that burning powder sparks are
likely TO cause accidents fatal TO crew
or ships at any time when guns are i'm
operation
That the system Of promotion in the
navy is wrong, officers reaching the
highest rank at the time when they
are so old as to De AT the retirement
age.
That there have been only ten days
of actual battle drill in the navy in the
last nine years
That the navy is run by an anti
quated bureau system and by men who
are impractical theorists and will not
accept new, advanced ideas. because ii
would be a confession Of past stupid
( ity.
I That naval constructors are cOutinu-
ally five years behind the times. so
that every new battleship is obsolete
when launched
These were some of the main points
advanced by Mr. Reuterdahl, to most
of which reply is made The Scientific
American says:
We have previously proved that SO
far from his being ignored. the sea-
going officer has been in the majority
on the various boards which have de
termined the leading characteristics
Of our vessel Our ships, particularly
/ those built since the Spanish War
embody the ripe experience Of the
ablest men in the various branches Of
/ the naval service.
! Yet we are asked by Reuterdahl TO
believe that the ships of the battle
fleet in the United States are exactly
4 in the same condition as the Russian
ships at Tsushima; that the guns,
mounted at low elevation, pTOtrude
! from yawning gun ports, into which
volumes of water will pour in a sea-
Iway, and through which shells will
enter and burst, killing the gun crews,
cutting the ammunition hoists TO
| pieces, and blowing up the magazines;
that the whole of the thick armor belt
| is generally below the Waterline, ana
that shells would blow in the thinly
armored sides above the submerged
belts; that our ships are without tor
/ pedOes and torpedo tubes, and without
suitable guns to fight off the enemy s
! destroyers, and so forth and 50 on
the upshot Of it all being that our
| navy is IN no condition TO go to war,
and, therefore, we suppose, must be
considered as Of practically no conse-
| quence at all.
II is pointed out that it. has long
/ been recognized among naval experts
| that all criticisms and comparisons OF
ships, if they are to have any value,
must be referred 10 some common
standard comparison being made only
between ships Of the same date and
displacement, and all questions OF
draft, treeboard and height of guns
must be referred to some common wa
terline. An underlying fallacy, said TO
yitiate Mr. Reuterdahrs criticisms, Is
that this essential principle has been
| ignored,
Contrary to that writer's declaration
that 'of all our battleships not one
/ shows The main armor belt six inches
above the water when fully equipped
and ready for sea- it Is shown that
| our ships, including those now build
ing, expose from rs inches to II feer.
6 inches of thick armor above the wa
terline when fully equipped
The absurdiy of talk about sub
merged armor belts was shown recent
~ when naval officer declared that
the Virginia started from navy yard
with the top of her belt two feet be-
low the water Az a normal load, the
] Niruipia 1igpIa1pe I , Onn t,pg hon TON