Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1911-03-17
ENGAGES THE CRITICS.
Discussion of British and Ger
man BattIeships.
VIEWS OF NAVAL EXPERTS
Example of the British in Putting
Many Heavy Guns on the
Dreadnoughts Followed.
eign Correspondence Of Tue Star.

Foreign Correspondence Of Tue Star.
BERLIN. March 3, 1911.
\ good deal of discussion is taking place
on the relative merits of German and
British warships. The discussion is the
result of the wide publicity given to the
criticism OF British battleship designs
published in a London morning news
paper. This criticism was telegraphed
here in detail.
German experts are not inclined to take
too seriously any general impeachment
of another states shipbuildng. They re-
member that only a few years ago the
greater part of the American navy was
condemned as unseaworthy by maya
zine writer inspired by particular school
of experts. and that the impea ched ships
nevertheless proved their quality in a
voyage to the Pacific. Germany, too, has
her own school Of critics who are dis
contented with German building. Only
two years ago Admiral Galster predicted
that the marine department. would prove
unable to build successful dreadnought,
and the ships which have since been
launched have by no means satisfied
every one.
Despite this cautious attitude the gen.
eral opinion in naval circles is that the
criticism directed against the armament
OF the first British dreadnoughts is to
some extent justified. The German ma
rine department has always stood for Il
strong secondary armament The Ger
man battleships built Immediately before
the dreadnOusht era had secondary arma-
ments OF 11-centimeter guns.
The Secondary Armament.
When the first dreadncushts of the
Nassau class were designed the idea OF
having a weak secondary armament like
that Of the first British dreadnought was
rejected on grounds of experience &C
auired in the Russo-Japanese war, and
the Nassau was given a secondary arma-
ment of 15-centimeter guns.
In addition, the Nassau class was
armed with sixteen S.S-cm. guns, SO that
better provided than the first dread
nought. The 10.2-cm. gun in the sec
ondary armament Of the next British
dreadnoughts is regarded here as too
weak. A naval writer in the Taegliche
Rundschau says that the German adj
miralty regards secondary artillery from
the point of view of its Use against the
unarmored or weakly armored parts OF
opposing battleships. and by no means
merely from the point of view Of its use
on the enemy's minor craft. Hence the
rela lively large caliberS adopted.
The criticism that the dreadnoughts
carry too many heavy guns is regarded
here as going into the very nature of
the dreadnought type In adopting the
type, the German admiralty did not ques-
ton this, and armed the Nassau ships
with twelve large guns, as against the
British ten. 1t is not believed here that
the new tendency to build larger guns
will lead to any material decrease Of the
number carried on single ships. The
prevalent idea among naval men is that
the increased weight will be provided for
by increased displacement. Whether Ger
many will increase the caliber of her fu-
ture guns to "a or, S5 en-. In order to keep
pace with England and America is very
doubtful. In gun size Germany has in
the past kept behind England, fact
which is ascribed to confidence in the
superiority of German-made guns.
Capt Pustau believes that the present
craze for increased size and power may
lead to reaction. England, at any
rate. has not profited from the dread
nought policy, he says.