HNLMS Java - BR

[regiamarina]

Hey All

I figured I would try and get the ABDA forces rolling so here's the Java.

HNLMS Java


Hull: 27 Speed: 8 FC: Std AV: 8 SAV: 2 AA/ASW: 3/0
Move Step: Cruiser Shoot Step: Cruiser

Secondary Battery Layout:
Size Guns/Turret #Turrets Arc of Fire
5.9”/50 1 2 F/P/S
5.9”/50 1 3 P
5.9”/50 1 3 S
5.9”/50 1 2 A/P/S

Gun Data:
Size S M L X Pen Dmg
5.9”/50 10 20 30 40 3 3

Aircraft:
1 x Recon, 1 x Flt Ops.

Some notes are:
1. I found mixed numbers for the standard displacement but I took the concensus to be around 6600ton mark rather than the highest which was just over 8000ton. This gives the noted Hull points.
2. SAV I was uncertain of as the Java had quite thin belt armour but fairly good machinery and magazine armour so I matched it as closely as I could to others around the 2" belt armour mark.
3. AA is a best guesstimate as 4 x 13pdr and 4-8 0.50Cal machine guns did not seem that much.
4. ASW seemed to be non-existant on this ship but my info on this area is very little so happy to hear any thoughts on this.
5. I couldn't find any data regarding the 5.9" guns so had to jimmy them in as best I could between the Japanese 5.5" guns and the older British 6" guns. No idea if I'm even close with these.

Hope this ship helps your ABDA forces to victory. Will post the Tromp, De Ruyter and Van Ghalen when I get a chance.

Martin

[afilter]

Martin,

Looks like a great start.

Did you have an online resource or is the data from a book? If you include the resources we can help check the stats.

I look forward to seeing the others. I encourage you to start a seperate thread for each.

One of my personal goals is to get stats for every model WotC has that is not currently in NT. Your line up will take care of several of them.

Thanks for posting

[regiamarina]

Afilter

the sources I used were a mix of my own library and a few websites. The websites were:

navalhistory.flixco.info/H/93745x263540/259869/a0.htm

www.warshipsww2.eu/staty.php?language=E&usefr=fryes

I intend to start a new thread for each ship as you've done so people can easily find the ship they are interested in. I can't seem to get the tables to line up with the headings above though so I might have to fiddle with this to make it easier to read.

Martin

[shigure]

Based on what I have found the Java came in at about 6,670 tons standard displacement. The 8,000 tons must be a full load displacement.

For the 5.9"/50 caliber guns, this was a Bofors (Swedish) built gun that had an AP shell weight of 103 lbs. with a range of 23,300 yards at 29 degrees or out to 30,000 yards at 45 degrees. The muzzle velocity was 2,953 fps.

I would say these guns are similar to the 5.9"/55 caliber SK C/28 weapons used on the WWII German Panzerschiffes, Scharnhorst, & Bismarck classes. The APC shell weight was 99.87 lbs. with the following range of 25,153 yards at 40 degrees elevation. Muzzle velocity was 2,871 fps.

This info. is available at:
www.navweaps.com/
Look in the naval weapons section. Resource info for each gun is listed at the bottom of each weapons data sheet.

[regiamarina]

Cheers Shigure

That is a great website, I've used it before for it's OoB section but completely forgot to check it for this.

I really don't know what displacement they were listing with the 8000ton but I'm glad others can confirm the 6670ton displacement that I have found most commonly listed.

I am usually a bit wary of trying to match guns to the German ones because the German ones were very modern and usually tooled to a higher caliber so fired with a bit more range and power however from the specs you've listed I wasn't far off. The extra range of the German guns is shown in the rules with their 11/22/33/44 range brackets but the guns have the same penetration and damage, so that's looking good.

Any thoughts on the AA, ASW or the SAV?

Martin

[shigure]

Greetings Martin,

Yes this is a very good site for weapons info. as they list many different sources for their gun data. Glad you enjoyed the OOB section as I supplied many of the OOBs for the WWII section.

For AA, my sources show the 4 x 3" (13 pdr) were replaced with 6 x 40mm in Sumatra and 8 x 40mm in Java during their refits in 1943-35. 4 x 12.7 mm AA guns are also listed. The Dutch seemed to be a little ahead of the rest of the world in adapting the 40mm Bofors mount for shipboard AA use. The De Ruyter had 5 twin mounts and the Jacob Van Heemskerck had 4 twin mounts. So we will have to look around to see what vessels had a similar AA outfit.

Hope the floods have subsided in Queensland. Here were are dealing with anywhere from 15 to 20 inches (38 to 50 cm) of snow that has closed roads and airports .

[regiamarina]

Hey Shigure

always found great OOBs on that site, really well done.

The only ships I'm familiar with that have AA similar are the smaller French destoyer classes such as Aigle and Guepard having only 4 x 37mm AA guns. They have an AA rating of 1 in the rules so doubling their AA number to get the 8 x 40mm AA guns would give a number of 2. Maybe two is the right number afterall even if I had the wrong AA outfit.

The floods are subsiding in Queensland though they did get hit by one of the largest cyclones(you guys call it a hurricane) in Australian history a few nights ago so I don't know what Queensland did to annoy God but boy is he mad. I think it was about the same category as Katrina. I've seen the snow storms on the news with all the traffic clogged up and drivers needing rescuing and all the roofs collapsing under the weight of all the snow. Maybe you'll get a day off to do some painting?

Regards
Martin

[shigure]

Hi Martin,

The French 37mm/50 does not seem to match up well with the Bofors 40mm/56 gun. The French gun only had an effective range of 5470 yards vs. 11,000 yards for the 40mm (effective range was listed at 3,200 yards). Rate of fire of the 37mm was 15-21 rpm vs. 120 rpm for the 40mm. So I would rate the Java's AA at least a 3 due to the superior fire rate of the Bofors. What do you think?

[regiamarina]

Hmm on this I would agree that a 3 could certainly be acepted but I wouldn't rate it higher. Looking closer through some of the other ships with 2, 3 and 4 AA ratings I would agree the Java should be a bit higher than a 2 so a 3 makes sense, still seems a bit weaker than the 3s but you can't have a 2.5. I personally wouldn't rate it a 4 as some of the ships rated as 4 have some truly tough AA. Exeter for example is rated as a 4 and was armed with 8 x QF 4" guns, 8 QF 2" guns(these are about the same as 40mm bofors), and has 2 x 20mm Oerlikons as well. This to me would throw at a higher volume of lead than the Java would be capable of.

[shigure]

Personally, I could live with a 2 for AA on the Java. The 40mm was an excellent medium range weapon but the Dutch ships had no long range (3" or 4" heavy AA) weapons.

I see you live in Australia. I own an Australian built car (Pontiac G8 GT which I believe is the same as a Holden). It is a great vehicle and the American built 6.0 Liter V-8 makes it a lot of fun to drive.

[regiamarina]

AA was always a best guesstimate. Trying to balance out long versus short range, sheer volume of lead and finding at least similar equipped ships made for plenty of reading. I have rarely used AA in my games so this may end up being a mute point from my perspective but I think we're about right at somewhere between a 2 or 3 rating for AA. A 2 could be easily justified as the Dutch had no long range AA on their cruisers, no dedicated 3"-4" guns or no DP guns. But on the other hand 8 x 40mm bofors and 4 x 0.50cal mgs as back up is a bit more AA than most ships had early on in the war. I think if people decide that the lack of long range AA is a big hinderance then they should probably use a 2 rating, where as if they think the 40mms more than make up for it then they can use the 3 rating.

Yes we have 3 types of cars in Australia, Holden, Ford, and Not Holden or Ford.

Martin