Warships. Cruisers. Handsome loser


Yes, since January 1 of this year, a country such as Holland has not officially existed, so our story about the light cruiser of the Netherlands Navy "De Ruyter".


It so happened that, having started the story with the participants of the battle in the Java Sea from the Japanese side, it turned out to go to the opposite side. Exeter was the first, and now it’s the turn of another participant: the light cruiser fleet Netherlands De Ruyter.

Netherlands. Holland. The neutrals in World War I, who managed to slip through, despite the fact that the Dutch ships sank all sides with great pleasure, and the colonies robbed in the same way.

In general, with regard to the fleet, the Netherlands needed the fleet. Not only to confront external enemies, but also to protect their own large colonies.

It must be said that the Japanese empire looked at the Dutch colonies rich in oil, tin and rubber with interest, somewhat imagining themselves and believing in their own invincibility.

The Dutch, understanding the brewing problems, decided to create a fleet to protect their colonies. Mainly to protect Indonesia. The main role in protecting marine areas was assigned to submarines (32 units), and 4 cruisers and 24 destroyers had to cover them. True, as a result of the ensuing crisis, funding was reduced, and more than once.

So to the existing cruisers "Java", "Sumatra" and destroyers had to finish the cruiser, 4 destroyers and 6 submarines.


Light cruiser "Java"

So there was an assistant to "Java" and "Sumatra", the cruiser "De Ruyter". The crisis, which was walking around Holland, did not allow building something Washington. There was actually enough money for a light cruiser, which they planned to equip the family with 150-mm guns.

The De Ruyter was laid down on September 14, 1933, launched on May 11, 1935, and entered service on October 3, 1936. February 27, 1942 was torpedoed and sunk in a battle in the Java Sea.

Warships. Cruisers. Handsome loser

Displacement:
- standard 6442 t;
- full 7548 tons

170,8 length m.
Width m 15,7.
Draft 5,1 m.

Booking:
- board: 30-50 mm;
- deck: 30 mm;
- towers: 100 mm;
- barbettes: 50 mm;
- cutting: 30 mm.

Engines: 2 Parsons, 6 boilers, Yarrow, 66 liters. from.
Speed ​​32 knots.
Cruising range: 11 miles at 000 knots.

Armament:
3 x 2 and 1 x 1 guns of 150 mm;
5 x 2 anti-aircraft guns 40 mm;
4 x 2 machine guns 12,7 mm;
2 machine guns 7,7 mm.

Aviation group: 1 catapult, 2 seaplanes.


Designers from the Krupp firm firmly attached themselves to the creation of the ship, therefore the features of the cruising series “K” are clearly traced in the design of the ship. The reservation scheme was very similar to Cologne, but the experience of building Java allowed us to create a more modern model when the case was recruited from armor plates.

We did a fair amount of work on contours, and in general paid enough attention to hydrodynamics, as a result of which the cruiser turned out to be nimble. Moreover, with the same power plant as Java, De Ruyter was 2 knots faster. Plus, the turbines could be forced, and then for 15 minutes the cruiser could reach a speed of 33,4 knots.

The ship was divided into compartments by 21 bulkheads. Each compartment was equipped with a system to remove water in case of flooding.

In addition to a comprehensively thought out system to ensure the unsinkability of the ship, it had a powerful fire extinguishing system. Powder and shell cellars, boiler rooms were equipped with a fire irrigation system. And to extinguish the fire could be several ways at once:
- sea water from the hose system;
- foam from two foaming generators;
- water that was under steam pressure in the boiler room;
- water from the fire extinguishing system of fuel tanks;
- carbon dioxide from the generating unit in the boiler room.

A few words about weapons.

The main caliber guns were the Bofors German-made caliber 150 mm. The same ones as at Cologne and some German destroyers are quite modern and quick-firing.

They were arranged according to the retirement scheme, six guns in three two-gun towers and one on a pin machine, closed with a shield. Two towers installed aft.


Such a scheme was preferred when firing on the retreat, which was not surprising given the difference between the Dutch and Japanese fleets.


The ballistic data of the De Ruyter guns was about the same as that of the Java artillery, the firing range was 21 km, the weight of the armor-piercing projectile was 46,7 kg, and the fragmentation fragment was 46,0 kg.

However, the De Ruyter could give the exact same salvo as the Java, which had 10 such guns, but only 7 out of 10 barrels could participate in the airborne salvo.

But a special analysis requires anti-aircraft weapons. It was truly unique. Due to cost savings, the Dutch decided not to equip the cruiser with universal guns at all. Therefore, instead of the usual all-rounders with a caliber of 76-127 mm, ten 40-mm Bofors anti-aircraft guns of the Mk III model in twin units were installed on De Ruyter.

The machine guns were quite quick, the passport rate was declared as 120 rounds per minute, the real one could be even higher, up to 150 rounds per minute, if there was a well-trained crew reloading clips of 4 rounds manually.

"Zeiss" rangefinders, coupled with their own computing devices, and even stabilized in three planes, had a remote guidance system from anti-aircraft fire control posts.

That case when the Dutch were able. So much so that the British immediately began to copy their anti-aircraft fire control system. The control system was beautiful, but that’s all that could be spoiled, the Dutch military didn’t just ruin, but they ruined it.

The magnificent capabilities of this revolutionary system were practically reduced to zero by its extremely unfortunate location. It is very difficult to say what the creators of the ship thought, but anti-aircraft guns were concentrated in one place: on the aft superstructure.

As a result, the cruiser was very vulnerable to aircraft from forward course angles, and for the same reason there was a serious threat of disabling the entire air defense of the ship as a result of the only successful hit in the aft superstructure.

True, there was still light anti-aircraft weapons. Four coaxial installations of 12,7 mm Soloturn machine guns. Two were mounted on the navigation bridge, and two above the bow rangefinder post. This could, of course, create some interference with attacking aircraft from the bow, but nothing more.

Well, four 7,7-mm machine guns in deck installations generally should not be taken into account as anti-aircraft weapons. As well as two seemingly anti-aircraft, but training guns with a caliber of 37 mm.

But the torpedo tubes on the cruiser was not at all. In the Dutch naval doctrine, the launch of torpedoes was the prerogative of exclusively submarines and destroyers.


The cruiser’s crew consisted of 35 officers and 438 non-commissioned officers and sailors. It is worth noting that all the living quarters of the ship, which was supposed to serve in the tropics, were spacious, well-ventilated and even equipped with ventilation systems.

In general, the cruiser was unusually widely provided with various electrical household equipment: electric laundries, sinks, floor polishers, in general, everything that could facilitate the crew's service.

In general, De Ruyter could well serve as a model in terms of thoughtfulness of small details, modern systems and innovative approaches. It is a pity that all the innovations did not help him at all in a real battle, where the cruiser ran into opponents not quite equal to him.

But let's go in order.


When the Netherlands suddenly ended on May 15, 1940, capitulating to Germany, the Dutch fleet in the colonies joined the Allies. Dutch ships were mainly involved in the protection of communications and wiring convoys.

After the German invasion of the Netherlands and the surrender of the Dutch army, the troops and navy in the colonies remained on the side of the allies. The East India Squadron was involved in the protection of communications and escorting convoys in the Java Sea and the Indian Ocean.

On December 7, 1941, Japan and the United States entered the war. And on February 4, 1942, the first collision of Dutch ships with the enemy occurred. The Allied Squadron, whose flagship was the De Ruyter, which consisted of the Dutch cruiser Tromp and the American cruisers Houston and Marblehead with the American destroyers Baker, Bulmer, Edwards, Stuart and the Dutch Drinks Hine "and" Van Gent "was attacked by Japanese aircraft.

Japanese pilots so finished the "Marblehead" that he had to be sent for repair in the United States. But this, as it turned out, was not the worst deal.

British-Australian and American ships approached the US-Dutch squadron. The Allies gathered all their forces to counter the Japanese attack on Indonesia. During February, the Allied squadron tried to oppose the Japanese. Safely losing Singapore, Palembang, the Allies prepared to lose Sumatra and Java.

Before the last battle on February 26, the compound commanded by Carl Doorman, the Dutchman, included:
5 cruisers - Dutch De Ruyter (flagship) and Java, American Houston, English Exeter and Australian Perth;
9 destroyers - Dutch Witte de Witt and Cortenar, English Jupiter, Electra, Encounter, American Edwards, Alden, Ford and Paul Jones.

Doorman led his ships to a base in Surabao when he received news of a large Japanese convoy literally 60 miles away. The admiral led the squadron to intercept the convoy and requested air cover, which he was not provided with. True, Japanese aviation did not bother the Allies much.

But this was done by a detachment of Japanese ships consisting of three groups of ships.

The first: the cruiser "Dzintsu", the destroyers "Yukikaze", "Tokitsukazze", "Amatsukaze," Hatsukaze. Second: the heavy cruisers Nati and Haguro, the destroyers Usio, Sazanami, Yamakaze and Kawakaze. Third: the Naka cruiser, the destroyers Asagumo, Minegumo, Murasame, Samidare, Harusame and Judati.

In principle, the Japanese had an advantage, but not fatal. It is worth noting that Doorman had an order to attack the convoy only at night, which devil he climbed to the superior enemy forces during the day, it is difficult to say today.

De Ruyter was the first to receive a direct hit from a shell from the Haguro. Further, the battle in the Java Sea took place under the complete control of the Japanese, who damaged the Exeter and sank the destroyers Kortenar and Elektra.

Further, Doorman continued to stupidly lose ships, the flagship “De Ruyter” got along with the rest, the radio station was disabled, and all the commands were given out by a searchlight. One can only imagine how such management was operational and intelligible.

At night, the remains of Doorman's squadron came upon the heavy cruisers Nachi and Haguro. In the battle that began, the Haguro gunners planted a 203-mm shell in the stern of De Ruyter, and when the cruiser, which had lost its course, began to turn away, they also hit it with a torpedo.

At the same time received a torpedo and "Java". Both cruisers sank, reducing the size of the Dutch fleet by two-thirds. The last ingenious order of Doorman was the order not to pick up the crews of Java and De Ruyter so as not to endanger other ships.

The surviving Houston and Perth safely washed off. Exeter was finished off the next day.

In total, De Ruyter got hit by two 203 mm shells and one 610 mm torpedo from the Japanese heavy cruiser Haguro. He stayed afloat for about 3 hours and sank, taking with him nearly 80% of the crew, along with Mount Admiral Doorman.


In principle, the course of the battle in the Java Sea confirmed the initial intentions and alignment of the allies. The Dutch rushed into battle and almost all died, the Anglo-Saxons sought to bring the ships to the rear, so at the first opportunity they took both Exeter and Perth with Houston.

Indeed, why would the British, Australians and Americans die for some Dutch colonies there?

In general, the death of De Ruyter is surprising. Well, really, what is one torpedo and two shells, albeit a 203 mm? Totally frivolous, in my opinion.

The cruiser, which was equipped with a very good system of struggle for survivability, and drowned from far from fatal injuries. Yes, the Long Lance is a very powerful weapon, almost half a ton of explosives, but the cruiser is not a destroyer. This is a large ship, even light in class.

If you familiarize yourself with the course of the battle in the Java Sea, you begin to think about the fact that both De Ruyter and Java were lost due to the complete unwillingness of the crews to fight for their ships.

In fact, a very good ship was lost out of the blue, in a completely meaningless battle. Without inflicting any damage to the enemy, because 4 Japanese vehicles sunk by the allied squadron at the cost of the death of 3 cruisers and 5 destroyers - well, obviously not to call the result successful.

And if you evaluate, then the "De Ruyter" was a very interesting and beautiful ship. Advanced in terms of weapons and equipment. Another question was what he had to do with the 150 mm guns against the Nachi and Haguro.

But as a project, you must admit that the light cruiser De Ruyter was a fairly high result of Dutch shipbuilding.

Anti-aircraft guns could be placed differently - and could be called an example for everyone.
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

52 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Graz 6 January 2020 05: 42 New
    • 8
    • 1
    +7
    in my opinion, several squadrons of strike aircraft would be more sensible in defending the colonies than this fleet, it’s another matter that the planes quickly became obsolete at that time, but the British even managed to use their own torpedo bombers quite well

    the author, but what about the Dutch submarine fleet?
    1. 27091965 6 January 2020 20: 16 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      Quote: Graz
      but what about the Dutch submarine fleet, how did it differ at least?


      Destruction of the German submarine U-95, there were still victories, not many, but there were. Mostly they fall on 1940-1941.
    2. Doctor Evil 7 January 2020 01: 01 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Quote: Graz


      the author, but what about the Dutch submarine fleet?

      December 24, 1941 the submarine K-XVI sank the Japanese destroyer Sagiri.
  2. Thrifty 6 January 2020 05: 57 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Well, the Dutch obviously did not want to learn from mistakes, anti-aircraft guns were heaped up in one place for sure to get the maximum density of anti-aircraft fire! The truth is that the sector of real shelling of the target was probably low, and the presence of dead zones was a headache for sure. They just didn’t check it with life on a cruiser, otherwise the aircraft would have drowned it earlier if they wanted to!
  3. Kote Pan Kokhanka 6 January 2020 06: 02 New
    • 2
    • 1
    +1
    . Engines: 2 Parsons, 6 boilers "Yarrow", 66 000 liters. with.

    More correct - the first car!
    1. Potter 6 January 2020 10: 35 New
      • 4
      • 0
      +4
      Still, TZA is a turbo gear unit. I do not know examples of steam engine installations with an aggregate capacity of 33000 hp. The most powerful warships were in the English BKR type Minotaur, 2 for 13500 hp, German BKR Blucher, 3 for 12800 hp Steam engines of transatlantic liners, including the notorious Titanic, were slightly more powerful. After the construction of the Dreadnought, large ships were equipped with steam turbines, and from the end of the PMW, turbo-gear units with a high-speed turbine and a gear reduction gear. The specific power of TZA is 4-5 times higher than that of PM, PM at 66000 hp. would eat the entire displacement of such a cruiser.
    2. Undecim 6 January 2020 11: 43 New
      • 4
      • 0
      +4
      That's right - a steam turbine.
      The main power plant of the cruiser De Ruyter consisted of six boilers of the Yarrow type, two Parsons steam turbines with a total capacity of 66 hp. and the possibility of short-term afterburner up to 000 hp, as well as two steam turbines of the Curtis economic course of 76 hp. each one.
  4. andrewkor 6 January 2020 06: 12 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Instead of asking for a defective switchboard installation on a superstructure, he directly asks to insert the Bofors battery!
    The beautiful ship "beautifully" perished!
  5. mark1 6 January 2020 06: 17 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    It looks like the PTZ Dutch saved as much as they did on everything else, but you could have gotten a more balanced ship by reducing fuel reserves (7-8 thousand miles would have been enough in excess)
    1. Alexandra 6 January 2020 21: 34 New
      • 4
      • 0
      +4
      Well, what PTZ on a light cruiser? Moreover, it provides protection against the consequences of the explosion of a 610 mm torpedo Type 93 carrying a charge of 490 kg of trinitroanisole.

      The cruiser "Java", which had a slightly larger displacement, from the explosion of another of the same torpedo, the feed broke off, and it sank in 15-20 minutes. “There is no reception against scrap” (C)
      1. mark1 7 January 2020 06: 44 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Quote: AlexanderA
        Well, what PTZ on a light cruiser?

        The light cruiser always had a PTZ (PKZ) on a par with the NKZ, the whole question is only in the degree of its development. by reducing the fuel reserves by 30 percent, one could try to strengthen them, in other matters as well as air defense.
        There is no method against scrap, but the degree of development of structural protection elements determines the combat stability of the ship and is one of the signs of the difference between a cruiser and a destroyer.
        1. Alexandra 7 January 2020 13: 16 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          Well, tell us about the typical depth of the light cruiser’s onboard PTZ and the typical explosive charge mass, from which this typical PTZ was supposed to protect. In the meantime, I will give an example:

          "The Italian constructive underwater protection of the Pugliez system was developed by Italian specialists from 1921 to 1931 ... The constructive underwater protection of the Pugliez system consisted of two concentric cylinders that went in the underwater part of the ship for about 2/3 of the length of the hull. An inner cylinder with a diameter of 3 m was made of 7 mm high-resistance steel, kept constantly empty and was designed to absorb the energy of the explosion.The outer cylinder with a diameter of 5,48 m formed a double side skin with a width of 10 to 15 mm and a torpedo bulkhead with a thickness of 28 to 40 mm. The space between the cylinders (protective chamber) was divided into 16 sections, filled with fuel and fresh water, which, as they were consumed, were replaced with outboard water. , one 8–9 mm thick, and the other 7 mm thick. The width of the protection on the midship frame was 7,57 m from each side. The design resistance to the underwater explosion was 350 kg of TNT, but in practice this value was not achieved due to insufficient P ochnosti riveted connections (including the area of ​​the outer cylindrical mounting bulkheads to the keel structures). "
  6. Rurikovich 6 January 2020 07: 17 New
    • 9
    • 0
    +9
    Cruiser like a cruiser request Characteristics, in principle, correspond to its 6000 tons. In the Aglitsky fleet, there were the same 4 types of “Arethusa”. And in general, the catch phrase that people still howl is confirmed everywhere and everywhere smile The Dutch created an excellent ship for their displacement, but profuka it. Although in fairness it should be noted that at that time, anyone could merge with Japanese combat vehicles - they were created to destroy their own kind.
    The pasta also created beautiful cruisers, fast, like birds. But even those were not lucky - they fought with the British. If there were paddlers in the opponents, then one could still dream of glory, and so one had to sink from the shells of the English destroyers and the same light cruisers. Well, battleships fell at Matapan.
    So the Dutch could only drown request
    And yes, a decent ship, he could still compete with his own kind. But alas ....
  7. Sergey M. Karasev 6 January 2020 08: 47 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    It is worth noting that all the living quarters of the ship, which was supposed to serve in the tropics, were spacious, well-ventilated and even equipped with ventilation systems.

    Did warships without ventilation of cockpits and cabins still be built in the 30s?
    Mb mean air conditioners?
  8. Dooplet11 6 January 2020 09: 10 New
    • 15
    • 0
    +15
    A few words about weapons.

    The main caliber guns were the Bofors German-made caliber 150 mm. The same ones as at Cologne and some German destroyers are quite modern and quick-firing.
    .
    But a special analysis requires anti-aircraft weapons. It was truly unique. Due to cost savings, the Dutch decided not to equip the cruiser with universal guns at all. Therefore, instead of the usual all-rounders with a caliber of 76-127 mm, ten 40-mm Bofors anti-aircraft guns of the Mk III model in twin units were installed on De Ruyter.

    Eh, Roman, Roman! Well, what are you so inattentively cropping?
    Let's compare your fantasies with other sources?
    Here is what Arsenal-Collection 2016 No. 03 (45) says (https://www.litmir.me/br/?b=588937&p=27):
    Initially, the cruiser was planned to arm with six 150-mm guns in three towers and four 105-mm Bofors anti-aircraft guns in two two-gun installations. With further design, the seventh main gun was added. At the same time, 105-mm anti-aircraft guns disappeared from the project, and their place was taken by 40-mm Bofors anti-aircraft guns in five double-barreled installations. A feature of the project was the lack of torpedo tubes, and De Ruyter did not have the ability to put mines. The main caliber. 150 mm guns GK (actual caliber - 149,91 mm, barrel length 50 calibres) were designed by the German concern Krupp. The Dutch acquired a license for their production, the first guns received a cruiser of the Java type. In the 1920s guns of this type were also equipped with large gunboats of the Dutch fleet. The guns were mounted in deck installations manufactured by the Swedish concern Bofors. The guns of the Dutch sailors earned a high reputation, therefore, when the issue of arming the new cruiser was decided, other options were not considered. Unlike earlier ones, The De Ruyter guns were designed and built by the Dutch firm Wilton Fienord. Two-gun installations received the designation “MK. 9 ", single-armed -" MK. 10".

    A single installation could, if necessary, fire firing projectiles. The weight of the rotating part of towers I and II was 71 kg, tower III weighed 200 kg less, that is 600 kg. Deck installation guns number 70 weighed 600 kg. The turning angles of tower I, and the installation of guns No. 3 — 25 gr. on Board. Stern tower III had a turning angle of 000 g. on Board.

    Despite the large elevation angle, the GK guns were not intended for firing at air targets, since they had insufficient guidance speed in the horizontal plane of the GK towers. In addition, there were no corresponding fire control devices. The only type of fire at air targets could only be barrage.
    .
    Small caliber anti-aircraft artillery. Dutch naval experts knew their adversary and monitored all the changes taking place in the fleet of the Island Empire. The rapid development in Japan of naval aviation, including carrier-based, did not pass by their attention. Therefore, the new cruiser was supposed to have powerful anti-aircraft weapons, for which we had to turn to the Swedish company Bofors. This company developed an anti-aircraft machine with technical assistance from the German company Krupp. The first valid specimen was presented for testing in late summer 1930. Then two years of painfully bringing the system to mind followed. Official tests were carried out on March 21, 1932. On board the De Ruiter, ten 40-mm machine guns were placed in five two-gun Bofors MK. 3 "


    1. The GK was not the Bofors at all, but the Krupp, the Bofors guns with the Krupp 150mm guns were on Dutch gunboats. And on the "De Ruyter" were Krupp guns in installations from the "Wilton Fienord".
    2. The 40-mm Bofors anti-aircraft guns were installed not at all out of economy, but because of the development of naval aviation by the alleged enemy and the desire to provide good air defense.

    Mr. Skomorokhov gave birth to another "imperishable humor." Article 100500 cons.
  9. Dooplet11 6 January 2020 10: 17 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    And then Roman just forgot to remove what he copied:
    When the Netherlands suddenly ended on May 15, 1940, capitulating to Germany, the Dutch fleet in the colonies joined the Allies. Dutch ships were mainly involved in the protection of communications and wiring convoys.

    After the German invasion of the Netherlands and the surrender of the Dutch army, the troops and navy in the colonies remained on the side of the allies. The East India Squadron was involved in the protection of communications and escorting convoys in the Java Sea and the Indian Ocean.

    And where so in a hurry?
  10. zombee 6 January 2020 11: 39 New
    • 5
    • 1
    +4
    Quote: Rurikovich
    Well, battleships fell at Matapan.

    Matapan had a heavy cruiser cruiser (Zara, Paula, Fiume)
    1. Rurikovich 6 January 2020 16: 08 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      Quote: zombee
      Matapan had a heavy cruiser cruiser (Zara, Paula, Fiume)

      “Vittorio Veneto” received his torpedo from whom? From God or from the English. But I generally meant that the Italian cruisers had fallen as a victim to the English battleships wink for it was a post about Italian cruisers ... yes
      Remember, did not take into account the fact that people have forgotten how to think logically smile
      1. zombee 7 January 2020 14: 24 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        from the plane))) Not from the destroyer or the cruiser. And if there wasn’t a formidable, figs the Angles would have caught them
  11. Vladimir_2U 6 January 2020 11: 44 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    Excuse me, how so? stabilized in three planes What is it that the Dutch managed to create an automatic target tracking system in the 30s?
  12. zombee 6 January 2020 11: 57 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    Quote: Vladimir_2U
    Excuse me, how so? stabilized in three planes What is it that the Dutch managed to create an automatic target tracking system in the 30s?

    Quote: Vladimir_2U
    Excuse me, how so? stabilized in three planes. Well, the Dutch managed to create a target tracking machine in the 30s

    Well, in principle, yes, they managed, Hazemayer
  13. voyaka uh 6 January 2020 12: 24 New
    • 25
    • 2
    +23
    "The surviving Houston and Perth safely washed off" ///
    ---
    Petty lies, however. negative
    They were ordered to fight another squad of Japanese ships: three cruisers and several destroyers. In this battle, Houston and Perth died.
    The whole article is in such a playful, obscene style.
    I can imagine what a storm would have begun if the author had written about Tsushima in the same style: "how the Japanese finished these ..."
    Write about naval battles with respect to the dead sailors and pilots of any country.
    1. Undecim 6 January 2020 14: 19 New
      • 17
      • 0
      +17
      I agree with you, Alex.
      The author did not even bother to ask in detail the circumstances of the death of the cruisers De Ruyter and Java and the phrase "If you familiarize yourself with the course of the battle in the Java Sea, you begin to think about the fact that both De Ruyter and Java were lost due to the complete unwillingness of the crews to fight for their ships." immediately spat upon the memory of 526 sailors of the Java cruiser and 367 sailors of the cruiser De Ruyter, who died along with their ships.
      The torpedo hit the Java cruiser, which caused the detonation of the artillery cellars of the aft towers and the cruiser’s food was torn off, fire extinguishing equipment and dewatering pumps were de-energized. The ship sank within fifteen minutes, not even having time to lower the boats and life rafts.
      On the cruiser De Ruyter there was no detonation of ammunition, but a strong fire started. The auxiliary power plant failed, just like in Java, the fire and drainage equipment did not work. However, the crew fought for survivability for three hours while the ship went under water.
    2. unknown 7 January 2020 10: 00 New
      • 2
      • 1
      +1
      In fact, in this battle, yes washed away.
      They died subsequently when they received orders to leave the theater of operations.
      Along the way, we decided to recoup on Japanese transports, but fell into a trap.
      They died in a night battle in which the Japanese used their advantage in artillery and torpedo weapons.
      By the way, the Houston entered the battle in the Java Sea without an existing stern tower, with six main-caliber guns.
    3. dmmyak40 7 January 2020 12: 49 New
      • 5
      • 0
      +5
      Alexei, I support your words regarding the presentation style 100%! The latest articles of the novel were written in a style strange for this kind of publication: for a quarter - Russian semi-literary, for the second - "semi-Albanian", for the third quarter - ala Lurkmoar ", for the fourth - banter.
      And inevitably, the articles begin to cause rejection and severe irritation.
      I think, nevertheless, a rating of articles is needed, otherwise the number of copy-paste and frankly illiterate Russian language in the articles will grow.
    4. DRM
      DRM 9 January 2020 20: 50 New
      • 0
      • 1
      -1
      Quote: voyaka uh
      "The surviving Houston and Perth safely washed off" ///
      ---
      Petty lies, however. negative
      They were ordered to fight another squad of Japanese ships: three cruisers and several destroyers. In this battle, Houston and Perth died.
      The whole article is in such a playful, obscene style.
      I can imagine what a storm would have begun if the author had written about Tsushima in the same style: "how the Japanese finished these ..."
      Write about naval battles with respect to the dead sailors and pilots of any country.

      I wanted to write about the same, but I saw your comment. In general, the style of the article resembles Pikul with his SPICULATIONS.
  14. Corrie sanders 6 January 2020 16: 06 New
    • 5
    • 7
    -2
    good article overall, thanks to the author
    but a couple of remarks:
    1. The Dutch, yes, were eager to fight the Japanese, hoping that the heirs of the glories of de Ruyter and van Tromp would show the yellow under-macaques how to fight at sea. But, firstly, they did not conduct normal aerial reconnaissance of the area to clarify the possible forces for covering the convoy, and secondly, they did not take into account that the combat training of under-macaques and their level of technical equipment is a couple of goals higher than their arrogant and contemptuous faces. As a result, when meeting with the Japanese, Doorman did not see colonial service advice notes but heavy cruisers, possibly the best in the world. Even during the battle, a flurry of shells fell on the ABDA squadron, to which they could not counter anything meaningful, and they began to turn away - well, almost like in Tsushima. Further, Doorman could not even imagine that Japanese torpedoes could get it at a 20 km distance - a torpedo from Haguro came from that distance. The torpedo was noticed at the last moment, the ship did not conduct any anti-torpedo maneuvers, but walked on the retreat.
    2. All private combatants write about the absolute fire suppression of the Japanese, the crews of the ABDA squadron were oppressed and amazed by the onslaught of the Japanese, one to one, as in the memoirs of the Tsushima participants, there was one desire - to quickly flee, hide. Seeing that the entire ABDA squadron was fleeing, the crews of the Dutch LKR clearly lost all desire to fight for survivability, since there was no place to wait for help.

    Conclusions: the battle discharge was predetermined by carelessness and arrogance at the planning stage, Doorman, to whom the Angles and Yankees had the stupidity to entrust the command of the squadron, had no experience in commanding the formations, and military experience in general. Perhaps under the captain Exeter or Houston’s pennant braid, the losses would have been smaller and would have fled faster. And actually the battle itself - noobs on light cruisers against heavy cruisers of the first line - even had no chance of a draw, even theoretically, there are no complaints about the Dutch crews
    1. Dooplet11 6 January 2020 16: 38 New
      • 6
      • 0
      +6
      good article overall, thanks to the author
      in general, a mixture of facts and conjectures, it remains to remove blunders from the "article" and find out to which author of which source thank you to say.
    2. Octopus 6 January 2020 17: 37 New
      • 4
      • 4
      0
      Quote: Corrie Sanders
      Conclusions: the drain of the battle was predetermined by carelessness and arrogance at the planning stage

      The discharge of this, and many other subsequent battles was predetermined by the carelessness and arrogance of the strategic leadership (military and political) of the ABDA.
      1. Neither the Dutch, nor the British, nor the Americans were ready to meet with the enemy, not inferior in number and sharply superior in quality, both material part and training, and above all the quality of command and level of military thought. Until the end of the 43rd year, the Japanese aircraft carrier division (AUS) was a death star, similar to the Wehrmacht tank group. There was simply nothing to oppose her. In addition to luck, of course.
      2. ABDA was categorically not ready for joint action. Logistics, command, submission - nothing is ready. Much louder, this all came back to the Allies a little later, the episode from Kratchli near Savo
      1. Corrie sanders 7 January 2020 02: 09 New
        • 2
        • 3
        -1
        yeah, about Savoy - after this “resounding victory of the American fleet” (4 TKr USA sunk and 1000> KIA
        against 0 sunken ships and 60 dead at IJN), the Americans were shocked by the fact that the Japanese cruisers with big handicap shot their cruisers, and these were the best US cruisers of the first line, with personnel and well-trained crews, who had fought for almost a good year. After the events at Guadalcanal in the United States, they were seriously puzzled by the question of how to get ahead of the Japanese in terms of the rate of fire, and after numerous experiments with manual loading, they came to the conclusion that it was impossible to exceed the testimonies of the Japanese by the traditional method - this was the rate limit for manual loading, the Japanese reached in 1941. And in the end, they decided to build a cruiser only with automatic loaders, respectively TKr type "Des Moines" and LKR type "Worcester". So it is in 1943 for a second. So now you need to understand what kind of an unexpected man Doorman got at the very beginning of 1942, where this shock came from, his sudden shyness and stampede, how quickly the HMS Exeter, which had recently defied the heavily armored pickpocket with 11 '' avtillery, quickly faded. The Houston pen-and-cardboard paperboard also retreated very quickly, leaving the Dutch cruisers' light cruisers, with their electric stoves, air conditioning and tropical luxury, to tear to pieces. That the Dutch were there, the British themselves “broke” even after the “Prince of Wales” and “Ripals,” they had Japanese fear until the very end of BB2. They joke on the Italians, but really don’t like to remember how their heels sparkled in the Java Sea and Ceylon, how they hid their battleships on the secret islands from the Japanese, how they draped Dorsetshire and Cornwall, how Argus threw a Vampire with a micro destroyer
        1. Octopus 7 January 2020 04: 25 New
          • 4
          • 3
          +1
          You have some kind of narcotic altistory.
          Quote: Corrie Sanders
          against 0 sunken ships and 60 dead at IJN), the Americans were shocked that the Japanese cruisers with big handicap shot their cruisers,

          Of course, the Americans didn’t have any data on who shot whom. They began to investigate the whole story six months later, they found one switchman and enough. Naturally, there were no questions either to the naval ministers or to the fleet commanders who ensured such combat readiness. There were no particular questions about how it happened that King, appointed December 30, 41, was the 8th (eighth) commander of the fleet under Roosevelt. This is not a record, appointed the day after King Commander of the Pacific Fleet (CINCPACFLT) Nimitz was the 12th (twelfth) commander of the Pacific Fleet under Roosevelt. It would be strange to expect any other results from the fleet, besides building up an underwater group.
          Quote: Corrie Sanders
          And in the end, they decided to build cruisers only with automatic loaders, respectively, TKr type "Des Moines" and LKR type "Worcester"

          Of course, there was nothing of the kind. Immediately in the 42nd they made no decisions. The following year, the 43rd, another ten Baltas were ordered, the rate of fire of 14 new SRTs is quite enough.
          Quote: Corrie Sanders
          So it is in 1943 for a second.

          In the 43rd there was neither DeMoyne nor Worcester. Both are in the 45th. Systems with mechanical loading are still pre-war projects of the Americans, but they fixed all the projects for new weapons to a single one (why and why - see above). So I had to mobilize to make ships with an old set of weapons, sometimes very mediocre.
          Quote: Corrie Sanders
          where this shock, sudden shyness and stampede came from, how quickly the HMS Exeter, which had recently challenged the heavily armored pickpocket with 11 '' avtillery, quickly faded.

          From there, that time he was three in one, but this time about equal forces (pennants, individually the Japanese are much stronger), + 2 KR, including Exeter, quickly got lacquits.
          Quote: Corrie Sanders
          the British themselves “broke” even after the “Prince of Wales” and “Ripals”, they had a Japanese fear until the very end of BB2.

          The attention of the British was concentrated on Europe. Yes, in Asia they were not ready, they made a lot of unforced errors, both in connection with the lack of mutual understanding with the Americans, and by themselves. No one denies this, as far as I know. Prince and Ripals, of course, are a fakap, but by the beginning of December, against the background of a total facespal, their presence had already solved little. The British did not shoot their General Palov (A.Persival), after all, the liberals, but they were completely exhausted, appointed the life president of the Association of Far Eastern Prisoners of War.

          As in the case of Pavlov, Percival was more likely a scapegoat than the culprit of the Singapore disaster. Although his contribution cannot be underestimated.
        2. unknown 7 January 2020 10: 11 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Exeter commanded another. The main caliber towers lacked personnel.
    3. unknown 7 January 2020 10: 08 New
      • 3
      • 1
      +2
      The main force of the Japanese in this battle were two heavy cruisers with a total airborne salvo of twenty 12 "guns. The Allies had two heavy cruisers with a total airborne salvo of twelve 12" guns. Plus three light cruisers, in total having twenty-two 6 "guns on board.
      I immediately recall the battle of the Komodor Islands, in which one heavy and one light obsolete American cruiser fought with two Japanese heavy cruisers.
      1. Octopus 7 January 2020 15: 44 New
        • 0
        • 2
        -2
        Quote: ignoto
        12 "guns.

        Reduce, please.
        Quote: ignoto
        Allies have two heavy cruisers

        And far from the Baltic states.
  15. sergo1914 6 January 2020 20: 36 New
    • 0
    • 3
    -3
    Talk about the effectiveness of cruisers without mentioning the Aurora? Author, have you not sobered up yet?
  16. cat Rusich 6 January 2020 23: 17 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    In my opinion, De Ruyter is a raider against merchant ships. High speed, guns in the stern - flew up, turned around, a few salvos on the "freight" and "the most complete to hell" ... To sink one transport "from the raid" and remain "alive" for "De Ruyter" is already a "result".
    1. Corrie sanders 7 January 2020 00: 04 New
      • 4
      • 1
      +3
      it was planned for a military confrontation with tertiary "fleets" of third countries, such as Siam or China, the largest ships of which were destroyers and avisos. An independent conflict was excluded with Japan, since the guarantors of the Gaul. East India were (and acted) the United States and England, which were the main consumers of East Indian oil. By the way, they planned it right, since Siam did dare to attack the Vichy colonies in October 1940. So, the French light cruiser Lamotte-Piquet (such as Duguet-Truen) and 2 advice notes of the Bougainville type (both are in WoWS during French branch) in the battle of Koh Chang in January 1941 they dispersed the Thai “fleet”, sinking 2 torpedo boats and a completely modern battleship built in Japan “Dhonburi” (1936 “Kawasaki”, with 2x2 8 '' guns of the Civil Code by the way).
      1. cat Rusich 7 January 2020 00: 22 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Make friends with a bear (usa) (sign a contract), and keep your ax in your bosom (build your fleet). When Japan attacked the Dutch East Indies, the use of De Ruyter had to be reconsidered, given the reality of “not getting on the rampage” —shipping “from the corner in the back” on “peaceful Japanese transports” and avoiding a direct collision with the Japanese combat fleet.
      2. unknown 7 January 2020 10: 14 New
        • 3
        • 0
        +3
        The Dutch planned to build battlecruisers to counter the Japanese.
    2. Octopus 7 January 2020 00: 58 New
      • 2
      • 2
      0
      Quote: cat Rusich
      raider against merchant ships. High speed, guns in the stern - flew,

      No. To quickly sink a trader, a torpedo would not hurt. They were on all Germans. De Ruyter is more like a regular KRL squadron, but the Dutch do not have a squadron. Really looks like a rather ill-conceived ship.
      1. cat Rusich 7 January 2020 01: 14 New
        • 1
        • 1
        0
        “There are sorrows in life, we don’t have bread - we eat cookies ...” The Dutch have “garbage cards” (“De Ruyter”) “bluff” (engage in open battle) against the Japanese who have “straight” or “flash” on their hands "no need, it’s better to try to sink at least Japanese fishermen. In general, it is realistic to evaluate the capabilities of De Ruyter and use it so that De Ruyter would be useful, rather than drown in the first battle.
        1. Octopus 7 January 2020 01: 45 New
          • 3
          • 2
          +1
          Everyone had their problems there. Resources, if wisely approached, were available, but the Americans were not going to fight for Singapore anyway, and Indonesia could not be held without Singapore. So the Allies had much more troubled plans for the Pacific Ocean than for Europe.
          Another question is that nothing really depended on the Dutch here. The only thing they could do was go to 100% partisans, submarines and torpedo boats.
          1. unknown 7 January 2020 10: 16 New
            • 0
            • 2
            -2
            There is a version. that in that war the USA and the USSR fought against Great Britain and Germany.
            The United States sought to destroy the British Empire, which was consistently done, in many ways, by Japanese hands.
            1. voyaka uh 7 January 2020 11: 00 New
              • 4
              • 0
              +4
              Absolutely crazy version. The Americans invested a huge part of their military-industrial complex in Len-Liz for Great Britain as well as in Lend-Lease for the USSR.
              Dozens of Essins from their fleet were handed over to the British for free.
              The Americans themselves had the same problems in the Far East against the Japanese in 41-42 as the British. Both allies suffered two years of defeat from the Japanese.
              1. Octopus 7 January 2020 16: 07 New
                • 3
                • 2
                +1
                Quote: voyaka uh
                The Americans themselves had the same problems in the Far East against the Japanese in 41-42 as the British. Both allies suffered two years of defeat from the Japanese.

                Yeah. Part of the problems was related to the fact that the pre-war plan of the fleet was to give the Japanese complete freedom of hands for six months to a year, and then, after two years, launch an offensive from Hawaii. Actually, they did just that.
                Quote: voyaka uh
                Absolutely crazy version. The Americans invested a huge part of their military-industrial complex in Len-Liz for Great Britain as well as in Lend-Lease for the USSR.

                )))
                No.
                US military spending averages $ 15bn / month. All LL - three months of the war. Soviet LL - less than one month of war. So Stettinius in Congress later answered the question "Did we help our enemies with a fig?"
                Quote: voyaka uh
                Absolutely crazy version.

                So it was, oddly enough. For the States, this war was, above all, a campaign against the system of colonies. The British Empire, including the Atlantic Charter, put an end to the British Empire.
                Quote: ignoto
                USA and USSR fought against Great Britain

                Unfortunately, that was the case. The states perceived the USSR as a bit strange, but still a republic, like Mexico (Trotsky sits in Mexico, I remind you). The idea that Stalin was building a new empire, and one that the British never dreamed of in nightmares, was not categorically accepted by the American foreign policy leadership, including Roosevelt. Therefore, by the way, the Atlantic Charter did not apply to Eastern Europe at all.
                1. voyaka uh 7 January 2020 18: 24 New
                  • 4
                  • 3
                  +1
                  Purely Russian conspiracy thesis ...
                  But this is not the most crazy theory, so nothing. On ru.net still not that walks. laughing
                  1. Octopus 7 January 2020 18: 29 New
                    • 1
                    • 2
                    -1
                    Quote: voyaka uh
                    Purely Russian conspiracy thesis ...

                    Seriously?

                    What exactly do you deny? Atlantic Charter? The collapse of the colony system? That all the pro-English in the 39th year of Eastern Europe was under Soviet occupation? From Stettin in the Baltic to Trieste in the Adriatic?
                2. Engineer 7 January 2020 20: 54 New
                  • 2
                  • 0
                  +2
                  I have a feeling that you are cramped and bored as part of a commentator. Can you give out a couple of articles? To begin with the shooting, a devastating and instructive story about the head-headed Yankees who do not know how to arm and leave only due to the general technical base. Approvals from the patriotic public are attached. And then a full-fledged salvo to defeat, Roosevelt was a traitor to the interests of the American people because he did not give hand to the advancing Soviets. The best carpenter for 300+ comments guaranteed. I'm really serious. It will be more interesting than Samsonov’s fantasies, Roman essays and unrequited love for Oleg Kaptsov’s battleships.
                  1. Octopus 7 January 2020 21: 51 New
                    • 1
                    • 2
                    -1
                    )))
                    The idea is rich. So I write in parts in the comments)))
                3. Octopus 7 January 2020 21: 47 New
                  • 0
                  • 2
                  -2
                  Quote: Octopus
                  average $ 15bn / month

                  Error. 10 + / month at the end of the war. 341 common.
              2. hohol95 7 January 2020 20: 52 New
                • 1
                • 0
                +1
                Dozens of Essins from their fleet were handed over to the British for free.

                You have a bad knowledge ...
                Destroyers for Bases Agreement - an agreement on the transfer of 50 US destroyers to the British Navy. The contract was concluded on September 2, 1940 between the United States and Great Britain. The American destroyers of the times of the First World War, which were under conservation, were transferred to the British side in exchange for a long-term lease (for 99 years) of a number of English colonial lands.
                On September 2, 1940, at the height of the air battle for Britain, US Secretary of State Cordell Hull announced his consent to transfer warships to the British Navy. In exchange for the ships, the American side wanted to get air and / or sea bases in the following places for free 99-year rent:
                Newfoundland (today's part of the Canadian province of Newfoundland and Labrador).
                Eastern bahamas
                South coast of jamaica
                West coast of Saint Lucia,
                Trinidad West Coast (including the Gulf of Paria)
                Antigua
                the coast of British Guyana (today the state of Guyana) up to a 50-mile distance to Georgetown.
                The agreement also granted the American side rights to the Great Sound harbor (Bermuda) and Castle Harbor (English) Russian. Bermuda island The south and east coast of Newfoundland.

                And what is the "FREE" destroyers?
                Perhaps you are also not aware of the transfer by the British to the USSR Navy of 8 destroyers from the 50 and 9th received for spare parts donation? On the SF and the 9th destroyer put into operation, as a combat unit!
                “Daring”, “Active”, “Valiant”, “Worthy”, “Hot”, “Burning”, “Cruel” and “Tenacious” left Scapa Flow in the USSR on August 16, 1944. The agreement provided for the transfer of eight ships, but due to its great age and deterioration, the ninth was transferred as the “donor of spare parts,” which was sent to the Soviet Union on September 10, 1944. They also decided to use it in military operations and it went into operation under the name “ Friendly ".
  17. zombee 7 January 2020 14: 29 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Quote: voyaka uh
    Handed over to the British for free

    Navy base is free ???