If the gun pictured is the one that I suspect it to be, it was very effective ... it was a primary reason for the Germans being able to capture Festung Sevastopol.Zerodefect said:The Germans sure loved ineffective technology.
If the gun pictured is the one that I suspect it to be, it was very effective ... it was a primary reason for the Germans being able to capture Festung Sevastopol.
No doubt (DUH!), but efficiency, or the lack thereof, was not at question.NdF said:Possibly effective at demolition of fortifications but very inefficient.
And what good did THAT do them?If the gun pictured is the one that I suspect it to be, it was very effective ... it was a primary reason for the Germans being able to capture Festung Sevastopol.
No doubt (DUH!), but efficiency, or the lack thereof, was not at question.
GBExpat said:If the gun pictured is the one that I suspect it to be, it was very effective ... it was a primary reason for the Germans being able to capture Festung Sevastopol.
And another aspect that was not at question.Vern Humphrey said:And what good did THAT do them?
And another aspect that was not at question.
NdF said:Not being a question considered is a big part of why the Germans lost the war. blah, blah, blah .... <snip>
Zerodefect posted a pic of a huge Krupp long-calibre cannon as an example of "ineffective technology".
I pointed out that the cannon enabled the Germans to reduce the defenses and capture Sevastopol and, so, it turned out to be rather effective for that purpose.
You jumped in with commentary about Efficiency ...
So, have fun commenting, again, on Efficiency ... perhaps someone will join you to discuss that subject.