Sovetsky Soyuuz

Dev Server "Leviathans" General Discussion - Dev Server
62

From my understanding the hull wall partially completed and the gun was tested on a ground platform so what from this is unrealistic?

Currently, the Sovetsky Soyuz has a maximum armor thickness of 420mm of rolled cemented armor, even though the Soviets were unable to make cemented armor thicker than 230mm. So this isn’t the case of “the war ended before it could be complete” or “they had a material shortage”. Even if the war had continued and materials weren’t an issue, Soviet shipyards were literally unable to complete the ship as it is in game. I’m fine with them keeping the 420mm plates, but the armor type should be changed at the very least.

Also how is possible to build a shell, that is 110kg lighter than the Iowa’s, has nearly around the same pen as the Iowa’s yet has double (21kg more) the explosive mass?

The round is overperforming even compared to the official numbers. The official Soviet stats for that round was that it could pen a 406mm plate at 25 degrees from 13.6km away. On dev, it’s currently at 450mm at 30 degrees from 15km, so a considerable increase. I’m too lazy to do the actual math, but I’d assume it’s max pen should be more like 770 or so, compared to the 852 it is right now.

As for the explosive mass, they use A-IX-2 which has a crazy TNT equivalent, at least according to whatever source Gaijin uses, so while it only has 25kg of explosive, this translates to the current 39.58kg

Was Russia’s Navy really that advanced and ahead of it’s time?

Not at all. The Soviet navy was quite weak in WW2 compared to pretty much every other major power. In terms of large ships, they only had a total of 3 battleships and 7 cruisers, many of which were from WWI. You can get a pretty good sense of this already from the ships we have in WT. 5 out of the 8 BBs in the tech tree are either project ships that were never completed or were ships from other nations that ended up in Soviet service one way or another.

The armor is honestly what annoys me most about this whole thing. I don’t mind fake ships being added. In fact, I’d love to see some other iconic designs that never made it to completion like the German H-class and Japanese A-150s. But to not only make the fake ship based on all these “ideal” values but also be the best ship in the game is quite annoying. These paper ships should be worse if anything, than how we might estimate them to have performed IRL, since there are so many factors that could’ve influenced how they’d have performed if they were actually built.

21 Likes
63

In fact, the Soviet Union produced 395mm armor, but the performance of these armors was extremely poor. It was penetrated by WWI’s 14-inch armor-piercing shell at a speed of 105% during the test.

1 Like
64

It seems refer about SAP, which used in test and combat mostly. Original book I have it about doesn’t mention AP or SAP specially. Navweap distort it as AP penetration.

Precisely, I’m now in suspicious about that russian book itself as it is not specifically about Soyuz and its develpment, but is encyclopedia overall russian&soviet cannon from 19th and 20th century. Who will take wikipedia or Britannica encyclopedia as reliable source? I’ve already seen two times that even Gaijin has more official and reliable document than those book.

2 Likes
65

I’ve heard some rumors that 13.6KM, 25 degrees and 406mm are not test data but performance indicators. This indicator was not even reached in the actual test.

66

That’s definitely not true.

67

The prototype of M1915/28, the M1915 is said to have an index of 16.7KM, 25 degrees and 422mm, but there are rumors that this data has not been achieved either. The modified M1915/28 also failed to meet the reduced target. However, I also have doubts about this. The performance of the thick target plates used by the USSR is very poor. The 395mm armor could even be penetrated by the 14inch patt1911 at a 15-degree Angle of 508m/s. If these are true, it is most likely because the USSR is still using caps designed based on WWI. This leads to a rapid decline in the performance of the shell when the landing Angle is slightly larger.

68

Too bad gaijin will read this and do nothing about it. The naval base of the game isn’t important enough for gaijin to care it feels like.
I’m trying to get back into naval since I do love the ships, but man is the total lack of balance unfun, and it doesn’t really seem like this update will fix that. It seems like the same will occur: one huge meta defining super ship that racks up 30k damage and wipes the entire enemy team while every other ship on the friendly team can not even get damage points to grind. It’s fun to be that player I’m sure, but wow does it make for a miserable existence for 95% of the rest of the lobby.

2 Likes
69

image
image

What I have about their shape shows that their cap design is more of WW2 German design than WW1 design.

I cannot tell by the name because Imperial Russian-derived shells usually use same name if they design in same year, only can be distinguished by AP / SAP/ HE put infront of it (meaning we could have both AP model 1914 and SAP model 1914)

So I could not find enough source to change my first thought of navweap and encyclopedia confuses SAP as AP

2 Likes
70

Where is the source of your first picture? Considering the design era of 1915, it is unlikely to have such a modern cap design. It is more likely to use a small quilt cap similar to that of 1911.

If you have ever paid attention to Japanese armor-piercing shells, you will find that T/D=0.9 and an Angle of 25 degrees can be an insurmountable obstacle for some armor-piercing shells. Considering that the USSR armor-piercing projectile has a large cavity and a relatively backward design, it is very likely to disintegrate at 25 degrees.

71

It’ model 1914/1928. Actually, I don’t understand why you say 1915 when actual original designed model is model 1914.

72

What is the source where you read it?

73

In 1937, the USSR conducted tests on the simulated module of the PR23. One of the 14-inch armor-piercing rounds achieved a complete penetration at this speed.

1 Like
74

IMG_6089
IMG_6089853×1031 282 KB

IMG_6188

1 Like
75

can you give me link on this book?

76

https://tsushima.su/forums/viewtopic.php?pid=946096#p946096

77

Have anyone looked at this? It’s 176 pages book about Soyuz class. For some reason auto translate is buggy for me.

78

Same here unfortunately

79

Ok i read it. The main target of this tests was to get data for armor manufacturers, which was acquired. When you argue about could or can’t Soviet Union produce good armor during the war you forget that after 1941 most of production were evacuated to the middle of the USSR where production during the war only rose up every year, where new technologies in armor production were implemented and mastered. You can read about Soviet metallurgy during the war and be amazed how far it got. Even about those armor plates you were talking by the year 1940 only half of armor tested had defects cause there were no standardization at the moment and quality based on master who manufactured plate skill (evacuation happened after with standardization and improvements in production), and if test failed it led to rejection of whole batch, which from the point of quality assurance is way higher standards then Germany used during the war.

image
image1920×1080 264 KB

80

I have it yes

81

So? I don’t think it says anywhere that the Soviet Union was capable of making good armor.

1 Like