Talk:Battle of the Java Sea

message: The text says that 4 loaded Japanese troop transports were sunk. But the table said "0 sunk". This reference http://www.dutcheastindies.webs.com/java_sea.html agrees that troop transports were sunk. So I changed 0 sunk to 4 loaded troop transports sunk. If the troop transports aren't significant enough to be on the table, then remove my change, but "0 sunk" is still misleading. Art LaPella 16:48, Sep 2, 2004 (UTC)
According to www.combinedfleet.com Japanese losses in the night battle of Sunda strait were friendly-fire casaulties, victims of some of 88 Long-Lances (type 93 oxygen torpedos) fired at USS CA Houston and HMAS CL Perth by the convoy protection (HIJMS CA Mikuma, HIJMS CA Mogami, HIJMS CL Natori, HIJMS DDs  Shikinami, Shirakumo, Murakumo, Shirayuki, Hatsuyuki and Asakaze (see TROM of HIJMS CA Mogami or HIJMS CA Mikuma)
Veljko Stevanovich 25. 11. 2005. 19:10 UTC+1
In relation to Japanese casualties, I would like to propose that they be amended, or at least include a section on Allied vs. Japanese reporting of casualties.  According to the Captain of the Exeter, as submitted to the Lords Commissioner of the Admirality, at least 1 Japanese "four funnel cruiser" was sunk and, as reported by surviving officers of the USS Houston and HMAS Perth, a Japanese destroyer sunk.  Details can be found at http://ahoy.tk-jk.net/macslog/BattleoftheJavaSeainwhich.html
RV 29.11.10  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.8.235.121 (talk) 05:38, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Casualties

message: :The entry on the USS Houston has more info on the Battle of the Sunda Strait than is given here. Shouldn't this entry have more detail? CFLeon 07:06, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, please feel free to jump-in and improve the article.  I've provided what I think is a fairly extensive list of references to the article to help whoever wants to get involved with it.  It's probably going to be awhile before I get to this article as I've got several others above this one on my "to do" list. Cla68 14:44, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Sunda Strait

message: I've deleted USS Pope from the list of ships involved; she was at Surabaya,according to my book, with engine trouble Xyl 54 15:49, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: USS Pope

message: I have altered what were incorrect captions to two of the photos, and made a clarification to a third. 
1) Re photo of high altitude bombers. 
This photo was taken from HMAS Hobart (as stated in the actual AWM source details http://cas.awm.gov.au/item/P02620.005), not HMAS Perth; and besides, Perth was not accompanying the ships on this day (i.e. 15th February); nor was HMAS Hobart involved in the Battle of the Java Sea (27th Feb), so she couldn't have taken this photo on that day. Nor for that matter were ships under aerial attack on 27th Feb (Battle of the Java Sea).
2) Re Exeter being bombed on 15th February. 
HMAS Perth was not in the force that day. The pic itself was taken from HMAS Hobart (and the ship in far right background - as can be seen in larger clearer photos of same - is a Dutch destroyer).
3) Re image of Hr Ms (HNLMS) Java with the caption - Bombs from Japanese aircraft falling near the Dutch light cruiser HNLMS Java during the battle - which would imply it was taken during the Battle of the Java Sea (27th Feb 1942).
This caption is also incorrect, as no ships were ‘bombed’ by aircraft during the Battle of the Java Sea (27th Feb. 1942). As a matter of fact, the AWM data for this image is also incorrect, as it was not taken during that battle (27th). This image was taken on either the 4th Feb bombing of the fleet, or more likely on 15th Feb (http://ww2db.com/image.php?image_id=4296 ) as the others above, but certainly not on 27th.
So a change to - Bombs from Japanese aircraft falling near the Dutch light cruiser HNLMS Java during a battle in the Java Sea - would seem more appropriate.
InterestedINhistory (talk) 05:38, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Photo Captions

message: This photo is NOT of a formation of planes from the IJN carrier Ryujo, but a formation of twin engined land based bombers, which were not capable of carrier launch/recovery. A better/sharper image of this photo clearly shows the twin engines. Have changed caption acordingly.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.240.195.129 (talk) 04:10, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: High altitude bombers taking AA fire photo caption 

message: This was a fiasco on part of Allied commanders - They sent ships without air cover into  fatal danger
Had Japanese torpedoes worked better even quicker destruction would have followed. 75.163.191.215 (talk) 18:30, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Poor Allied Command leadership 

message: I wonder on what basis the claim is made that the Battle of the Java Sea was the biggest surface engagement since the Battle of Jutland. The Battle of Cape Matapan of March 1941 involved more and heavier ships, while the losing side took comparable losses. (Paaskynen (talk) 17:29, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Biggest battle since Jutland?

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Battle of the Java Sea. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110726052724/http://www.dutcheastindies.webs.com/tarakan.html to http://www.dutcheastindies.webs.com/tarakan.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:33, 16 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Battle of the Java Sea. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150331201608/http://www.dutcheastindies.webs.com/BadungStrait.html to http://www.dutcheastindies.webs.com/BadungStrait.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:25, 11 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hey! Just wanted to compliment this page, since I know it's really hard to gather information about this topic. You did a great job! ;)
Stuart (talk) 14:14, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article 

message: The infobox says 3 Japanese destroyers were damaged, but the text provides the name of only one: Asagumo. Japanese Wikipedia says only 1 destroyer was damaged, and one transport was damaged by air raid, not naval attack. Until there is a better source, I'll change it to "1 Japanese destroyer damaged" for now. --Happyseeu (talk) 03:33, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  3 Japanese destroyers damaged? 

message: Should we change the textbox to say decisive Japanese victory? After this the ABDACOM navy was pretty much destroyed and contributed to Japan capturing the Dutch East Indies. ScotPolHist (talk) 15:17, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: No, per MOS:MIL/template documentation. Cinderella157 (talk) 23:44, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Decisive Japanese Victory