That thread points to an interesting web-site; but still, it's a website.
I can tell you that Conway's agrees that the batch II's had a little more bunkerage (30t, being 10%) but the increase to 2750 looks generous- Conways gives ranges of 3200nm for batch I, and 3300nm for the batch II at cruising speed 15knts.
On the other hand, Conway's does not put mine rails on the batch II's - they had sweeping gear attachment points. The mine load on the batch I's is 24 mines.
Also Conway's list both batches as having zero DC as built, but, does credit the batch II's with an improved AAA suite of 1 x 75mm AA, and 2 x 40mm in two twin mountings.
Jane's mentioned that the intended armament of these ships included "bomb throwers", which I take it is a period description of depth charge projectors. So you could add a couple of K-gun projectors with limited re-loads, on the basis they were probably installed at some point between 1930 and 41.
Edit: So I agree that "Technically both Admiralen batches were designed with four DCTs (2 right, 2 left)".
Interestingly the batch I's as built, had a seaplane stowage point above the aft torpedo tubes. As did the later Tjerk Hiddes class* built in the late 1930s. No catapault, though.
[*The Tjerk Hiddes launched in 1939 was scuttled in 1940. The one in AE is the ex RN "N" class, formerly the Nonpareil. The Van Galen in AE is the ex RN DD Noble. The Admiralen batch II DD of that name was sunk in May 1940.]
So agree with some of Cardas' points.
< Message edited by Ian R -- 2/12/2020 3:08:57 AM >
"You may find that having is not so nearly pleasing a thing as wanting. It is not logical, but it is often true."
- Cdr Spock