WesWorld

Hoo, I saw your post in the encyclopedia on the river monitors (I presume this is what they are) and was comparing it to the river monitors I built for Romania, and a couple of concerns came up.

1) The armament seems pretty heavy for this size of vessel, I'd like to see a picture to show that many weapons can fit on that size of vessel. I based the Romanian monitors on the Austro-Hungarian ones and they only have 2 150mm compared to 6 105mm that the General Zartenar class have. The Romanian Monitors are 2 meters longer yet have only 2 (larger I admit) mounts.

2) Is it a deliberate not to have the main belt cover the magazines and engineering spaces completely for this vessel? If so, I am curious to know the rationale behind it.

I too have a question, pertaining to the Type 42 Tenders.

The Springsharp for the TD42-1 and TD42-2 has the main armement, eight 75mm automatic rapid-fire guns, in deck mounts with hoists on center lines, evenly spread, all raised mounts - superfiring.

Trying to envision that, it would seem to indicate that the mounts are in all on the same deck level, one pair forward, one pair aft, in tandem. Indeed all the armament is on raised mounts.

Could you please elaborate on how they would appear?

The armament of the RGB42A Class is excessive, yes. I expect the ship to be cramped. But I also expect this not to be a problem. Standard river patrols last only a few days and while in harbor the crews will be in baracks.

Here is a conceptional sketch I put together. The design is a lengthened RGB37A vessel, with a 3m section added and superstructure shifted a bid to make room for a second mount forward.



I think it does not look less realistic than other designs in WesWorld.

The armor suit of the RGB42A Class is meant to provide armored boxes for magazins and engines, plus some splinter protection at vital spots. More armor would have made the design too heavy. I am aware of the danger of unprotected buoyancy.

Regarding the TD42 Class - I have to check as its been a while since I put that one together. Either I had a clever idea or it is an error in my SS file.... Most likely the latter and you should assume a standard 4x2 pattern.