Author Topic: Say NO to the G.55 (Read 3023 times)

humble · « **Reply #30 on:** March 28, 2007, 05:12:48 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Bodhi
Even with 250 aircraft, it is a waste of time. (and if you care to look at the numbers cited they add up to aabout 250 aircraft)

As for calling me ignorant, I have a much better tendency to back up my statements with facts than your assumptions. So tread lightly.

What makes the G.55 both relevent and interesting is the fact that the luftwaffe actually recommended and endorsed switching the 109 production lines to the G.55 in 2/1943. So the plane is more important then its raw numbers might suggest. It also happens to be a plane that would see significant use in the MA....I'd guess it will move handily into the top 5...

Ball · « **Reply #31 on:** March 28, 2007, 05:15:36 PM »

The Luftwaffe made many horrendous decisions on aircraft production during the war.

Heck, didnt they agree to produce thousands of He-162's before even test flying it?

Sorry but your argument for bringing a plane to AH cannot really rely on the LW recommending to produce it over the 109 - therefore it is important, interesting and should be added.

Bodhi · « **Reply #32 on:** March 28, 2007, 05:19:25 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by humble
What makes the G.55 both relevent and interesting is the fact that the luftwaffe actually recommended and endorsed switching the 109 production lines to the G.55 in 2/1943. So the plane is more important then its raw numbers might suggest. It also happens to be a plane that would see significant use in the MA....I'd guess it will move handily into the top 5...

What I find amazing is that the aircraft saw 148 produced and delivered. If was such an uber plane, it would have been adopted by the German's no matter what. It wasn't.

DieAz · « **Reply #33 on:** March 28, 2007, 05:38:47 PM »

perhaps it is up to the vote simply because only 2 Italian planes are represented.

the other countries planes up to vote are better represented.

as for the Finnish planes, did they even build any of their own? or bought from other countries? I'm not sure of this. only reason I ask.

well anyway G.55 got my vote for the reason of only 2 planes availible from Italy.

JB73 · « **Reply #34 on:** March 28, 2007, 05:47:56 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Ball
Anti-Germanic/Anti-Axis comments for the entire life of his BBS "career"

I think perhaps he just doesn't understand the possibility that an "underdog" may have come up with some good stuff that was comparable to, even superior to allied planes. It doesn't matter it didn't reach the production levels of the unhindered Americas, it just "sucks" becaue it wasn't invented by the allies.

Bodhi · « **Reply #35 on:** March 28, 2007, 05:50:28 PM »

It was insignificant.

Ball · « **Reply #36 on:** March 28, 2007, 06:08:09 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by JB73
I think perhaps he just doesn't understand the possibility that an "underdog" may have come up with some good stuff that was comparable to, even superior to allied planes. It doesn't matter it didn't reach the production levels of the unhindered Americas, it just "sucks" becaue it wasn't invented by the allies.

Have you not been reading what i have been posting? Dont accuse me of the anti axis BS for my "career".

I just do not agree with the G.55 being added as i feel there are far more significant types to be added - i was pointing out that the CR.42 would be a far more significant Italian aircraft to add.

Krusty · « **Reply #37 on:** March 28, 2007, 06:31:33 PM »

CR.42 was as significant as the 1939 Tutor was to the RAF.

tedrbr · « **Reply #38 on:** March 28, 2007, 06:44:50 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Masherbrum
The IAR series (80&81) had more of an impact than the G.55.

Anything had more impact than the G.55 It was a VERY late war fighter. Produced in very limited numbers.

But, according to reports, it flew better than most German planes. Think of it as a top shelf Bf 109.

It also adds another Italian plane to the plane set.

3x20 mm MG 151/20 cannons, one engine-mounted (250 rounds) and two wing-mounted (200 rounds each), 2x12.7 mm Breda-SAFAT machine guns in the engine cowling (300 rounds each), Provision for two 160 kg (353 lb) bombs on underwing racks. Makes for a nice bomber interceptor, with possibly a ground attack role as far as the game is concerned.

The Fiat G.55 was my second choice. Went A-26 Invader, buff drivers need a second perk ride in this game.

Krusty · « **Reply #39 on:** March 28, 2007, 06:49:04 PM »

So, second half of 1943 is "VERY late"?

It's not quite like the 109K, it doesn't have the raw horsepower. It does, however, have larger wings for better turning and more stability, which comes in handy up at 25k.

Treize69 · « **Reply #40 on:** March 28, 2007, 06:54:02 PM »

Second half of 1943 is "very late" when its country of origin was out of the war on August 9th of that year...

Krusty · « **Reply #41 on:** March 28, 2007, 06:54:57 PM »

Treize, IT fighters (including the G.55) fought into late 1944, and after that point they fought on with late-model 109s (we used to have a couple of ANR skins, and somebody made a new one recently).

Gianlupo · « **Reply #42 on:** March 28, 2007, 06:55:30 PM »

Hmmm... well, Bodhi, let me see...

Quote

Originally posted by Bodhi
Vote for what you want to see.

I said no on the Brewster and the G.55. I think they add very little to the game aspect, and more importantly, the long term goal of CT.

I have yet to decide what I would rather see, as there are many aircraft represented that could add a lot to an already deficient set.

I could argue for the He-111, as it is needed for the historical side of several different scenarios played in here.

I could argue for any of the Japanese fighters, as they are extremely deficient, and besides filling out many possible scenarios in the PTO several are would be players in the MA.

I could argue for the P-39 as it also would fill scenarios across the board owing to it's uses as a lend lease aircraft as well. It might even see use in the MA.

I could argue for the Yak 3 as it will fill many Eastern Front scenairos as well as be an MA fighter.

I could argue for the Russian Bombers as they are woefully under represented and again fill scenario as well as limited MA usefulness.

I could argue for the B-25 as it was so widespread and used by British, Russians, Australians, and US. It's usefulness in scenarios and CT would be more than enough. It's variants might also see use in the MA in one way or another.

I could argue for the A-26 as again it was widely used and would see scenario usage and CT would warrant it, plus it would be used in the MA for sure.

The Me410 could be used especially in CT and scenarios. I am unsure about it's place in the MA though.

All in all, I really do not know what I will vote for. I am still at work, (and am working on a Corsair right now) and no blue planes are being suggested for vote, so thats a quandry. In the end though, I will probably lean towards the He-111 or another allied bomber, Russian or US, just not sure. Will see tonight.

So, we should add to AH something that adds to the game aspect and, in the long term to CT....

Well, it all depends on what you think is "the game aspect".... reading through your above words, it seems that we need plane that could be used widely in scenarios and can see some use in the MA... well, IMO, MAs are still the most important part of the game. There you find most of the players, 24/7, there you'll find most of the fights (like them or not).

So, I'd say that we have to add to the game a plane that can add something to the MAs, in first place, to CT, then and, in the end, in AvA or SEA. Like it or not, I'm afraid this is the order in which you have to list them.
Then, you have not to look at production numbers, but at flying characteristics of the planes: IMO, G.55, Yak3, Ki44, maybe P39 and Me410 are the planes that could add to "the game aspect".

Regarding my choice, it has good flying characteristics, good armament and would be a fearsome opponent in MA (not only in MW, even in LW)... and in CT perspective, if the first tour will be the 8th AF against Germany, isn't it likely that the second one will be the 15th AF against Germany and Italy? Then the Centauro would be really useful...

Bottom word: I think that historical reasons should (and will) have less impact on the voting, while the characteristic of the plane should (and will) be the true criterion by which the winner should (will) be elected.

Just my 2 cents, of course.

One last thing, regarding German interest for the G.55: check the first link in my signature, you'll find why it didn't went in production in Germany.

Treize69 · « **Reply #43 on:** March 28, 2007, 06:58:32 PM »

"Those Italian pilots from the Regia Aeronautia who went North to fly for the Luftwaffe were called the Aeronautica Nazionale Republicana (ANR). While trying to maintain a separate identity from the Luftwaffe, they quickly adopted the German ways of doing things. The ANR was made up primarily of three fighter groups with three squadrons each (approximately 200 pilots). The ANR's primary mission was to repel attacks of medium and heavy bombers of the 12th and 15th Air Forces. Since many industrial targets in Northern Italian cities were being attacked regularly after September 1943 by bombers of the USAAF and the RAF, the bulk of the activities of the ANR were mainly defensive in nature. Gradually the Germans began to equip the ANR with Messerschmitt Bf-109s to replace the inferior Italian-manufactured planes. In August of 1944, the Germans, disappointed over the performance of the ANR, attempted to officially disband the organization and take over their equipment and personnel. Some ANR pilots staged an armed rebellion and set fire to their planes rather than surrender them to the Luftwaffe. Faced with this unexpected reaction, the Germans backed off, reassessed their position, rescinded the order, and sent a new Luftwaffe commander to Italy. The Germans and the Italians didn't get along particularly well before the attempted "coup" and the relationship did not improve afterwards. The Italians never shared the Germans' strong feelings about their cause and their intensity for organizing and managing. On the other hand, the Germans viewed the Italians as not particularly motivated pilots, with marginal skills and inferior equipment, and, from whom minimal results could be expected. Predictably, the ANR was plagued by chronic fuel and spare parts shortages with the bombing of aircraft factories and railways in Northern Italy. The ANR ceased to function at all in early 1945. "

And exactly what massive proportion of the aircraft for those 200 well equipped and highly motivated supermen were G.55s?

Gianlupo · « **Reply #44 on:** March 28, 2007, 07:00:11 PM »

Tedrbr, Treize, you can't see that the G.55 is a LATE war plane.... Gabrielli started working on it in 1941, it made his first flight on April 30, 1942.

And, Treize, sorry, Italy didn't end its partecipation to WWII with the Armistice... we went on, split in two, on both sides, and with a civil war going on...

EDIT: Treize, where did you take that quotation from? It would be a good habit to always quote your sources... it seems to me like a lot of nonsense... and really offensive....