Maybe not. It was definitely more challenging than any other German weapon in the mid- to late 30s (but easier if we compare today with later US government projects such as building the atomic bomb or sending people to the moon
I am not saying other is more difficult than other, they are just different industries.
In some industries the knowledge is hard and slow
to accumulate by nature. Gun building is one of them. For example: building missiles is fast, so in crash program you set up production line, built them as fast as you can - and at test range fire them as fast to accumulate lessons. Products from production line are seriously faulty at initial stages and you know it. No problem as it is ment to work like this. You just ship them to after-production modification facility where the lessons of latest test shots are incorporated as mods to serial product. You do this till over an over again till you have acceptable product, and then put that mod XXXXXX to series production, and the last batches of modified 0-series production missiles are already put to silos and service while this is done. You can basically start serial production nearly same time as 0-series testing. Costly, relatively fast, and dirty process that works even with extremely complicated products.
Well, building gun barrels really don't lend that kind of development process. They are sloooooow to produce, and when product is f...d up it is, and there is nothing to do about it, but to build new one from scratch. You learn from prototypes/test models, but while the protos are tested meticulously your production line is idling as they can't start to do anything before previous tests are completed.
Manuferey wrote:And these Krupp workers would have had to work on other weapon programs anyway.
You hit the nail. That is exactly the point. Say working at late 30s so that Wehrmacht could had had 75mm AT guns at outskirts of Moscow in 1941 for example ?