Something to give you more perspective and context for the size of the Krupp K5 guns, they were very large guns...especially for guns on land...but there were many naval guns that were much larger used in WW2...even by the Germans. For instance, the guns on the Bismarck and Tirpitz battleships were 380mm (15in)...almost 100mm larger in diameter than the K5 gun at 283mm (11.1in)...and the Bismarck and Tirpitz each carrier 8 of the bigger guns. The US battleships of the North Carolina, South Dakota, and Iowa classes all carried 9 guns that were 406mm (16in) in diameter...and the Japanese Yamato class battleships carried 9 guns that were 460mm (18.1in) in diameter. When you look at shell weights, the stats become even more fantastic...the K5 fired a shell that weighed 255-265kg (562-584 pounds) while the German 380mm shell weighed 800kg (1800lb), the US 406mm could fire an armor piercing shell that weighed 1225kg (2700lb) and the Japanese 460mm gun lobbed shells that topped out at 1460kg (3218lb). One thing that is very notable about the Krupp K5 is how long the gun is...which is the biggest thing that gives it much longer range than even those larger naval guns. Here the stat is dramatically in favor of the K5, as its barrel is longer than 25m...83ft 9in to be exact. To compare, the Japanese 460mm barrel is much shorter at 69ft 4in (21.13m), with the US 406mm coming in just a bit shorter at 20.3m. Comparing the maximum firing ranges of the shorter barreled naval guns proves the fact that long barrels mean long range...the K5 reached out to 64km, while the US 406mm could reach only 47km, and the Japanese 460mm being able to reach out to a slightly shorter 42mk range.
@@Pjalphareacting Not exactly, it was more about Germany's focus being more land based, as opposed to other nations that focused their efforts in BIG guns on naval weapons. Ultimately, yes...the Allies overall had better big guns than the Germans, when you consider all factors...but the biggest advantage the Allies had was in fire control...the ability to shoot big guns accurately was definitely better for the Allies. As we see in this video, the Germans had an edge in making big LONG guns. There are other things that make land based large artillery so different than sea based, with the biggest different being mobility.
The idea that people would want to create weapons capable of killing and destroying other people is somehow "off" instead of wanting superiority over others is wrong is kind of "off". All animals, which humans are would rather have superiority and not use it than not having superiority.
![เป็นไปได้ไหม - WanMai [Performance Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Eh5hItD4Mr0/mqdefault.jpg)
Sometimes size matters.
Something to give you more perspective and context for the size of the Krupp K5 guns, they were very large guns...especially for guns on land...but there were many naval guns that were much larger used in WW2...even by the Germans. For instance, the guns on the Bismarck and Tirpitz battleships were 380mm (15in)...almost 100mm larger in diameter than the K5 gun at 283mm (11.1in)...and the Bismarck and Tirpitz each carrier 8 of the bigger guns. The US battleships of the North Carolina, South Dakota, and Iowa classes all carried 9 guns that were 406mm (16in) in diameter...and the Japanese Yamato class battleships carried 9 guns that were 460mm (18.1in) in diameter. When you look at shell weights, the stats become even more fantastic...the K5 fired a shell that weighed 255-265kg (562-584 pounds) while the German 380mm shell weighed 800kg (1800lb), the US 406mm could fire an armor piercing shell that weighed 1225kg (2700lb) and the Japanese 460mm gun lobbed shells that topped out at 1460kg (3218lb).
One thing that is very notable about the Krupp K5 is how long the gun is...which is the biggest thing that gives it much longer range than even those larger naval guns. Here the stat is dramatically in favor of the K5, as its barrel is longer than 25m...83ft 9in to be exact. To compare, the Japanese 460mm barrel is much shorter at 69ft 4in (21.13m), with the US 406mm coming in just a bit shorter at 20.3m. Comparing the maximum firing ranges of the shorter barreled naval guns proves the fact that long barrels mean long range...the K5 reached out to 64km, while the US 406mm could reach only 47km, and the Japanese 460mm being able to reach out to a slightly shorter 42mk range.
So we had more advance and capable armory than the Germans when you put it these stats though
@@Pjalphareacting Not exactly, it was more about Germany's focus being more land based, as opposed to other nations that focused their efforts in BIG guns on naval weapons. Ultimately, yes...the Allies overall had better big guns than the Germans, when you consider all factors...but the biggest advantage the Allies had was in fire control...the ability to shoot big guns accurately was definitely better for the Allies. As we see in this video, the Germans had an edge in making big LONG guns. There are other things that make land based large artillery so different than sea based, with the biggest different being mobility.
The idea that people would want to create weapons capable of killing and destroying other people is somehow "off" instead of wanting superiority over others is wrong is kind of "off". All animals, which humans are would rather have superiority and not use it than not having superiority.
Well to be fair, this is more related to war...
K5 was cute. grown ups used schwerer gustav/dora th-cam.com/users/shortsZk32ZIj17jk ^^