Author Topic: G.55 Centauro Lobbying Thread  (Read 11130 times)

Offline Gianlupo

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5154
G.55 Centauro Lobbying Thread
« Reply #45 on: March 23, 2007, 10:07:41 AM »
Ah, cc, didn't see that thread.. I'll give it a read... and then I'll hit Krusty on his knuckles! :D

Yak 3 is not that beautiful.... :D the G.55 is better! ;)
Live to fly, fly to live!

Offline Krusty

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 26745
G.55 Centauro Lobbying Thread
« Reply #46 on: March 23, 2007, 12:32:21 PM »
What "pissing" contest... ?

You simply didn't like that I brought up some points against modeling the first French fighter (not that we need one) as the D.520.

As for Italian fighters: After they realized in 1940 that they needed modern fighters they began work on the C202. Macchi popped a DB engine onto a C.200 airframe, and miraculously it was a wonderful aircraft. Over 1500 C202s were made, almost as much as all G.50s and C.200s combined. It was the main front-line aircraft of the war, for the Italians after 1942 or so.

Guess what? We already have it modeled! And we also have the 205 modeled, less capable than the G.55 but still a decent aircraft for 1943.

So not only do we have the most common and representative aircraft for the Italians already modeled in-game, we also have another airframe that's slightly more representative than the G.55.

G.55 is just icing on the cake. We already have a foundation of sorts, and the C202 is used in scenarios and events regularly. This doesn't even compare to your D.520 thread.


So, let's have the icing on that cake! Bring on the G.55!

Offline Karash

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 126
G.55 Centauro Lobbying Thread
« Reply #47 on: March 23, 2007, 12:37:31 PM »
I have to say that adding a japanese plane like the Ki-44 or Ki-43 would be my preference...but I dont think it really has a shot at happening.

I think we should put a ban on any more US or German planes for a year or so.

We have way to many birds from the US and GER.  Adding another true Italian bird would be great...and from the stats looks very impressive, and would have a lot of seat time I think in the MA.  The only thing I think I would hate about that plane is the canopy!!!

Offline Gianlupo

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5154
G.55 Centauro Lobbying Thread
« Reply #48 on: March 23, 2007, 12:46:27 PM »
:lol yep, it miss a bubble canopy.... but no one is perfect, isn't it? ;)

Thanks for your support, spread the voice and make the italian lobby (mafia? :D) grow, we have to counter a horde of Finns!
Live to fly, fly to live!

Offline Solar10

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 819
G.55 Centauro Lobbying Thread
« Reply #49 on: March 23, 2007, 12:54:45 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Gianlupo
... and 250+ were built

 


This says it all.  No.
~Hells Angels~
Solar10

Offline Hawco

  • Parolee
  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 650
G.55 Centauro Lobbying Thread
« Reply #50 on: March 23, 2007, 01:01:47 PM »
I want a G.55 !!

Offline Krusty

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 26745
G.55 Centauro Lobbying Thread
« Reply #51 on: March 23, 2007, 01:36:50 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Solar10
This says it all.  No.


Does it, now?

Cr.32, 1200 built, most of those in the 30s, the later versions (with 4 guns) that saw service in WW2 numbered only 500.

Cr.42, 1700 built, many exported, but on the whole a very ineffective fighter (where its performance in Belgium was notably lacking aginst the RAF in 1940). It was obsolete before the war started and they knew this. It was relegated to ground attack and other light duties in N. Africa until retired.

G.50, 450 of the main type (G.50bis) were produced. It was the comptemporary of the C.200, and until the C.202 came into service it was one of the 2 main front line aircraft.

C.200, 1100 built, saw more combat than any other Italian type. The main frontline fighter until the C202 came around

C.202, 1500 built. That's right, one of the best front-line aircraft in the Italian Air Force, it fought in all theaters the Italians did, and only 1500 were built. More even than its predecessors, save for the obsolete pre-war Cr.42.

C.205, about 200 built. Production was still slow as the Italians surrendered.

G.55, between 150 and 200 delivered, more built but bombed at the factory. Production was still slow as the Italians surrendered.

So you say 200 "is nothing"??? 200 isn't "worth" being included in this game? Well, gee, that's 1/5th (20%) as much as the C.200, which saw more combat than any other IT type in the war. That's over 13% of the total C202 numbers. Still a significant number. If you add the G.55s and the C.205s together you get a major contribution to the front lines. 400+ aircraft, in an airforce consisting of only 2500 or so.

That's a VERY major chunk of the whole.

Offline Gianlupo

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5154
G.55 Centauro Lobbying Thread
« Reply #52 on: March 23, 2007, 01:38:04 PM »
Nice! :)

No.... wait... I'm not sure I want an ambiguous looking guy to support my lobby...... that avatard is disturbing!!!!!! :O :D

Solar, again, look what I answered to Karnak about the production numbers... we have planes with far less than that figure in the game... numbers aren't relative in absolute, but relatively to the country.

EDIT: Krusty, you have to lose that nasty habit of posting while I'm doing it!!! :D
Live to fly, fly to live!

Offline Krusty

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 26745
G.55 Centauro Lobbying Thread
« Reply #53 on: March 23, 2007, 01:45:22 PM »
Heh, you have to stop that nasty habit of posting right after me? :t

Just hit refresh, type as fast as you can, and post, lol! Best way to avoid posting while I do :aok

Offline straffo

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10029
G.55 Centauro Lobbying Thread
« Reply #54 on: March 23, 2007, 02:36:42 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Krusty
What "pissing" contest... ?

You simply didn't like that I brought up some points against modeling the first French fighter (not that we need one) as the D.520.


And yet you start again.
I'll be always astonished by your blindness and your egotism.


I want this plane as a tribute to the 100 000 soldier who have fallen in the "little event" that happened in 39/40  can you at least respect that  ?

I guess no, you've proved repeatedly in the past you cant change your opinion.

Offline Geary420

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 833
G.55 Centauro Lobbying Thread
« Reply #55 on: March 23, 2007, 02:37:11 PM »
We need a G.55 avatar to compete with the Brewster camp.

Offline Gianlupo

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5154
G.55 Centauro Lobbying Thread
« Reply #56 on: March 23, 2007, 03:32:11 PM »
Nice idea geary, I'll try to make something! :)
Live to fly, fly to live!

Offline Krusty

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 26745
G.55 Centauro Lobbying Thread
« Reply #57 on: March 23, 2007, 04:02:05 PM »
How about this?

« Last Edit: March 23, 2007, 04:10:52 PM by Krusty »

Offline Gianlupo

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5154
G.55 Centauro Lobbying Thread
« Reply #58 on: March 23, 2007, 04:15:32 PM »
Not bad, Krusty... but what about a better draw? I know it's not easy to find one, I'm looking for it.. :P

Anyway, until then....

<--------- :)
Live to fly, fly to live!

Offline Krusty

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 26745
G.55 Centauro Lobbying Thread
« Reply #59 on: March 23, 2007, 04:41:50 PM »
You don't like that image?

I got it from a larger one (750 wide) but it didn't have the wingtips to start with, so it feels a little "cramped".

How about this one, then?