Author Topic: G.55 Centauro Lobbying Thread (Read 12920 times)

FrodeMk3 · « **Reply #150 on:** March 26, 2007, 06:11:34 PM »

Hey, noticed that since there are already a couple of good Italian Fighters(C.202-C.205) Why did'nt you guys ask for a good multipurpose attack/bomber like the S.M. 79?

http://www.aviation-history.com/savoia-marchetti/sm79.html

Krusty · « **Reply #151 on:** March 26, 2007, 06:13:31 PM »

The SM.79 has a role in scenarios, for sure... However, it wasn't really multipurpose (unless you count bomber/torp bomber?), and it carried about as much as the Ki67, only much slower than any other bomber in this game, and with less defensive capabilities.

Frankly, it would be slaughtered even in scenarios

That, and either the G.50 or the C.200 (either) would really round out the IT planeset nicely, though.

EDIT: Let me put it this way: Would you vote for the SM.79 if the P-39 was another option?

What if the P-39 gets done, but the B-25 is in the vote list?

What if the P-39 and the B-25 and the Brewster, and the 410, and the G.55, and the Pe2, and the Ki44 all get done, one after another, and the vote is down to He111 or SM.79?

Nobody's ever going to vote for the SM.79, frankly.

wasq · « **Reply #152 on:** March 26, 2007, 06:16:30 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Krusty
That, and either the G.50 or the C.200 (either) would really round out the IT planeset nicely, though.

I'm all for a G.50. After Brewster wins this one, of course.

Krusty · « **Reply #153 on:** March 26, 2007, 06:20:00 PM »

Naturally

Of the two, I'd like to have the Fiat, just because we already have 2 Macchis in the game, if we had 3 folks might accuse us of monopoly, or being unoriginal!

FrodeMk3 · « **Reply #154 on:** March 26, 2007, 06:28:14 PM »

Krusty, what you've pointed out is true...But, as it is, we're all seeing 6-7 contenders vying for 1 spot.

What we really need most, is something that fills the holes we have in our planesets( most notably EW/MW.) And not just for scenarios or the AvA arena...We have to consider the EW/MW arena's too. The S.M. 79 would give EW a much-needed filler, with it's dual bomber/ Torp capability. Plus, in EW especially, It's 270 mph. top speed would not be that slow.

The G.55 MIGHT squeeze into MW, but on the whole, it won't really contribute much to that arena, being yet another 380 mph. class fighter. We already have the P-51B, FW-190A5, Typh...you see where I'm going?

Krusty · « **Reply #155 on:** March 26, 2007, 06:36:44 PM »

Here's the problem with your idea:

The MA doesn't *have* any holes in the planeset. It has no planeset!

The MA is the MA. All planes are available on all sides. No early VVS fighters? Well, all the *other* early fighters are available.

You can only have holes in a planeset if you have structured planesets -- which naturally means thinking about scenarios (the only place where you will find planesets, really).

In the MA world it doesn't matter what we get. If you only think of the MAs, then you just have to vote what you think would be "most fun."

CPW · « **Reply #156 on:** March 26, 2007, 06:41:18 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Gianlupo
CPW, I'm checking the info you found on the first website, I'm not sure they're right... I have one of his books (and another one, too, but I can't remember where I put it... ), maybe he didn't check toroughly his sources...

Apart from this... welcome onboard! Feel free to use my avatar and signature!

Agree and Thx!!! Hope we can fly it.

And I wish the G.55 in AH can take external fuel tanks:t

Maybe a G.55/S,too:D

FrodeMk3 · « **Reply #157 on:** March 26, 2007, 06:47:10 PM »

In the MA is where most of the planes In-game see most of their flight time.
If you consider where the vote's being held...you'll see what I was alluding to. It's gonna come down to the 80-90% of the player base that don't go anywhere near the AvA or SEA. If it has a lower ENY value than the 109, It will get grounded earlier in the fast-filling LW arena's, so most won't fly it as often. But, Alot depends on the modeling...If it comes out as a 109 clone from Fiat, or if it's definetely superior. (This, we have to wait for the folks at HTC to decide.)

EDIT: This is in regards to the G.55...for scenarios and AvA, the S.M.79 would have been much more needed, along with the G.50 or S.M. 200.)

Krusty · « **Reply #158 on:** March 27, 2007, 01:24:41 AM »

CPW: Cool pics!

However, I don't think we'll ever get it. It's a special test craft, modified with 2 radiators instead of one (notice the torp goes between them?). It never went into production.

VWE · « **Reply #159 on:** March 27, 2007, 01:36:49 AM »

Its really amazing that almost exactly half of this thread is you and Gianlupo chattin back and forth...

Krusty · « **Reply #160 on:** March 27, 2007, 01:41:49 AM »

Maybe, maybe not. Aside from "that thing" (now handled), it has pretty much stayed on topic, revolving around the G.55 and the Italian air force in specific.

Folks reading it all the way through will discover a lot of information about not only this aircraft, but the general makeup and size of the entire IT air force in WW2.

It's not as if we've been saying "Hi, how's the wife? Kids doing okay? Lovely weather we have here, no?". It's had less participants than most O' Club threads, but it's been good for the dissemination of knowledge.

Gianlupo · « **Reply #161 on:** March 27, 2007, 02:10:24 AM »

VWE, what's your problem? You don't like the plane and/or thread, so why do you keep posting here? Go somewhere else, thanks, we don't need you.

Quote

Originally posted by FrodeMk3

This, we have to wait for the folks at HTC to decide.

Well, they should decide basing on performance!

So it should be a bit slower than a G6 (high altitude), have a better handling and a better maneuverability and be more stable (again, at high altitude).

Brenjen · « **Reply #162 on:** March 27, 2007, 12:00:55 PM »

I'm for the G.55 or the Yak, my problem is I'd rather see a Mig introduced before the Yak & since it's not on the list, my support will fall behind the G.55

Unfortunately I can't vote until I get back from my vacation so I'll miss at least the first round of voting.

Gianlupo · « **Reply #163 on:** March 27, 2007, 12:45:18 PM »

Thank you Brenjen.

I hope we can go past first round without trouble, but don't miss the other votes, we'll need your support, then!

humble · « **Reply #164 on:** March 27, 2007, 01:05:25 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Ball

The point I was trying to make is that from mid 1943 on the entire fighter development program focused on fighting bombers...not fighters. The 190 was a dog up high and needed extra armor as a buff killer. The 109 was only marginally capable at high alt and was limited by both the airframe itself and the need to fill multiple roles. The G.55 would have enabled the germans to address all there needs with one new airframe that could easily accomidate both the weaponry and engine upgrades thru 1945.

Additionally it had a signifiacnt advantage in both service ceiling and range which would have greatly increased the luftwaffes flexibility in countering the "loose escort" tactics employed by the americans. For the luftwaffe to actually recommend that the G.55 replace the 109 the g.55 had to be clearly dominant....

Personally I'd much rather see the P-39Q25....but the reality is the G.55 is probably both the most dominant mid war bird and a plane worthy of recognition. If we can only get one plane right now the g.55 provides a plane that will not only see tremendous use but is also one of the best designs of the war....