[7][8] Rickover felt that modern advancements made in naval engineering could shed light on this supposed mystery, but due to his obligations as an admiral, he did not have the time to browse the voluminous government records, newspaper articles, and reports that discussed the Navy's 1898 and 1911 investigations.

[11][12] Richard P. Smyers, in a 1976 review for Warship International, called the monograph a "completely researched and scholarly ... account" of the Maine's destruction; he further complimented it for being "interesting and readable".

"[14] Writing in 1977 for the Naval War College Review, the historian Graham A. Cosmas contended that Rickover et al. "[come] about as close to settling the question as is possible this far away in time from the actual event".

While noting that the book was unlikely to "radically alter" an understanding of the Spanish–American War, Cosmas stated that "Rickover's analysis simply furnishes expert confirmation" that the Maine was destroyed by accident.

Naval Academy midshipman Alex Roland declared that "Admiral Rickover has presented an informed and convincing case for what [many] have believed all along: There is no evidence that a mine destroyed the Maine."

While Roland did critique the work's length and contend that its arguments sounded "too much like [Rickover's] testimony before Congress during the last quarter century to be mistaken for impartial historical judgment", the reviewer nevertheless complimented the author for writing a study that, at least in part, argued that the U.S. Navy was responsible for the loss of the Maine.