The procurement record is incomplete, so historians can disagree about the likely winner. Participants' views have to be interpreted rather than read as a final award. This account also relies on English-language sources and translations because the available Dutch material was not read directly, and it avoids hard claims where no solid book is available. The caveat separates documented specifications from the judgment that Germaniawerft probably fit the brief best while Vickers held the delivery advantage.
Notable Point · 10:49-11:17
Why the winning design remains uncertain
Incomplete surviving evidence and reliance on translated sources make the likely winner a reasoned judgment rather than a settled contract result.