Not “a couple”, but a week, yeah. Which is way less than the 5 years it took a single Battleship to be made.
I am also taking older tanks into account for the average, as this is a Ground vs Naval debate. Modern MBTs may take longer than WW2 tanks, yes- which were built even faster than the average I mentioned.
Just think about this; 50,000 Sherman tanks were made in the same span 4 Iowa-Class Battleships were made.
80,000+ T-34s were made as well.
Later, around 100,000 T-54/55s.
It is obvious that it takes an insignificant fraction of the time and resources to build a tank compared to a Battleship.
Therefore, it is not the same for a tank not to even make out of the design table as a Battleship ceasing construction after 6 months of tireless work.
H-41 was the last seriously designed ship; they had pretty complete blueprints for her, and her design phase was mostly complete. So I could see H41 being added later down the line. 42-44 are all design studies that were never seriously designed or considered. Alsace as a design, was never finished and was never finalized, so she’s out anyway. And A-150 is just an information black hole at the moment.
All that said, plans allegedly existed to 1:1 replace the 46cm guns on the Yamato with the twin 51cm guns. So there may be an avenue to get the 51cm gun in game a la Gneisenau.
THIS is what im most worried about, just what will gaijin actually make up for sevastopol’s 380mm shells if the kron’s 305mm already perform better than some 14-15 inch shells? and better yet:
while im not sure this is still the case, but years ago a datamine found that russian 12 inch guns had much better accuracy than other nations’ 12 inch guns, with it (as per the dataminer’s comment) being comparable to US 5 inch guns.
will the russian 380mm guns be more accurate than the competition? firing a shell that is conveniently stronger than the competition? i just cant really trust the snail with that
Doesn’t the Sevastopol’s mounts lack the power assisted loading due to weight concerns? That would mean that she would get a longer firerate compared to the others.
lets hope gaijin will adhere to that and not make up anything for the sevastopol gun handling.
i have this feeling they will either misconstrue or bend the stats in a way that will be most convenient for it like what they did with PK’s SAP shell (during when SAP was the meta)
I mean the Sevastopol lacked a lot of things… Not even a completed hull so who could say what loading mechanism could be used. 27s is the usual firing cycle.
You’re never going to get “confirmed” kills in middle eastern engagements. Even the lowest estimates of kills ~110 are still higher than the F-15’s kill count. And less than 5 were ever lost in AtA kills (None in American service and 2-3 in Iranian service). Several is not the correct term. “A Few” works better.
I meant besides Israel and Desert Storm. It’s easy to count kills when we’re allies with the people fighting. When it’s between Iran/Iraq though, we can’t tell.
*Minimum of 130 kills (Iran reports 160) plus 3 and 2-3 losses while having no AWACS support, no airframe support, and no NCTR. I know you love the F-15, but it was very coddled in terms of getting it’s kills. AWACS and Tankers were favoring Airforce jets and the Navy wasn’t allowed to deploy far into combat zones. I’m not saying the F-15 didn’t earn those kills. The F-15 having NCTR was the reason it could do so well in the strict ROE. It was technologically more advanced to the F-14A.
