Say NO to the G.55

[FrodeMk3]

Humble, You're right that RLM developement priorities switched to Stopping the bomber stream. But, It was into Jet or Rocket powered aircraft that this developement went into. Once the Me-262 demonstrated it's performance, The RLM was sold. Whereas the G.55 was the best performing High-alt plane for the Regia Aeronautica , The Germans had planes like the 109K-4 and Ta-152 for High alt use. If you put a G.55 against a Ta-152, the 152 is almost 100mph. faster.

I'd like to take a moment and apologize for getting out of line in my previous two posts. It's easy to get too heated in a thread like this, IMHO.

[tedrbr]

What is really, really sad here.

The G.55 has pretty good numbers in the forums.  But the majority of players in the game placing their votes online probably have NO idea what it is.  

G.55 is my second favorite plane on that list, but I am predicting it gets cut in the first round, unless there has been a lot of online and in-squadron lobbying for it the past couple of days.

But even there, probably online lobbying won't help for first round..... vote pop up is first thing they see, most probably placed a vote on name recognition, without really looking at what the planes were.  

If G.55 get's the axe in first round, you can probably figure the final rounds will include the B-25, the He-111 and P-39.

[Gianlupo]

Originally posted by Bodhi
Gianlupo,

I agree, it might actually fly in the MA.  That is not the reason I am against it.  I'd just like to see more of the major players available before we push into models that at their best were rare.

All fairness to you, I would definitely love to see more Itlaian Aircraft, just not the G.55 first.  

Anyhoo, my opinion is getting a bit strong so I will let this rest.  Good luck to you in the voting Gianlupo.

Thank you, Bodhi, I wish good luck to you, too.

Back on the topic, gentlemen, my point is that history, in Aces High, for the way the gameplay is now, has a tiny influence.

I can understand what Bodhi, Ball and many others say, and I respect their point of view: yes, we have many gaps in the planeset and they'd have to be filled.

But, alas, that'd be if scenarios were the bulk of the game. Unfortunately they're not.

That's why I think even a plane with little history, but good performance can be added to the current planeset. The G.55 could hold its own in MAs, that's why I'm so strongly lobbying for it. If the main part of gameplay were scenarios, I'd not do it, because we have many other planes that need to be added before the Centauro.

So, please, Humble, Frode, Krusty and all the others... it's useless to argue about historical facts. If you want or don't want this plane, you should argue about it from a technical point of view, like Jawz's doing. Because, in the end, I think this is the thing that will influence the vote most (who knows, maybe I'm wrong and all the MA kids will just vote for the plane they heard something of somewhere... we have too many kids! )

Jawz

It had the good high altitude handling and performance because of low wing loading and a lot of wing area. This tends to reduce maximum speed at low alt and to reduce the roll rate.

Quite true. There are many other planes that have a lot of wing area, like the Spit Of course Spits have a lesser wing loading, but a Centauro could turn slightly worse than them, I guess (mind you, I'm not an expert) Anyway, as I stated before, it could hold its own, even at low altitudes.

What hurt the German people was the bombers.

Indeed, the G.55 main mission was to shoot down bombers, don't forget it!

And finally....

But since the germans tried morters, rockets, 50mm cannon and all kinds of other outlandish things its pretty clear they never did really solve the issue. And since the various pods & gizmo's seriously comprimised the 109 and other planes combat capability the germans suffered attrition in both pilots and planes as a result. It's not a big reach to say that a plane designed for hi alt with plenty of cowl room for a bigger engine (and 3 x 20mm in nose) wouldnt have faired better....resulting in higher US bomber losses and lower attrition to the luftwaffe.

PHEW!!! Luckily they did! Or I'd be wearing a Camicia Nera!

[Gianlupo]

Originally posted by tedrbr
What is really, really sad here.

The G.55 has pretty good numbers in the forums.  But the majority of players in the game placing their votes online probably have NO idea what it is.  

G.55 is my second favorite plane on that list, but I am predicting it gets cut in the first round, unless there has been a lot of online and in-squadron lobbying for it the past couple of days.

But even there, probably online lobbying won't help for first round..... vote pop up is first thing they see, most probably placed a vote on name recognition, without really looking at what the planes were.  

If G.55 get's the axe in first round, you can probably figure the final rounds will include the B-25, the He-111 and P-39.

Tedrbr, we all know what plane will win, more or less since Pyro posted his list... I just had to try!

Anyway, don't think everything's already written... who knows...

[humble]

Originally posted by FrodeMk3
Humble, You're right that RLM developement priorities switched to Stopping the bomber stream. But, It was into Jet or Rocket powered aircraft that this developement went into. Once the Me-262 demonstrated it's performance, The RLM was sold. Whereas the G.55 was the best performing High-alt plane for the Regia Aeronautica , The Germans had planes like the 109K-4 and Ta-152 for High alt use. If you put a G.55 against a Ta-152, the 152 is almost 100mph. faster.

I'd like to take a moment and apologize for getting out of line in my previous two posts. It's easy to get too heated in a thread like this, IMHO.

No apology required, its a debate and all well intentioned. I'm simply trying to sperate historical significance (almost none) with the potential impact the plane might have had. If we view AH as a "historical reenactment" club then then the g.55 has little value. If we view it as a "big time players" reenactment then it doesnt belong either. However if we simply ask what were the best planes available (sticking to those that saw combat) at any point during the war and the g.55 is not only one of (if not the best) "midwar" ride...but a plane that will compete well in the LWA IMO...

What I find intriquing is that the Italians went and specifically designed a plane to deal with the B-17s that maintained a reasonable overall flight envelope for fighter on fighter combat, had good range and "room to grow"...and it was just sitting there in 2/43 ready to go....yet the germans ignored it and never put an equal (let alone better) buff hunter in service (jets excluded of course).....

This is the only plane that could have moved me off the P-39. I think its simply a more worthy plane from a "sim" standpoint....not a historical one.

[Sweet2th]

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.

Problem solved : Give US all the planes.........

[Goth]

Sorry, I have to ally with the anti- G.55 crowd. I voted for a japanese addition.

[Stoney74]

Originally posted by FrodeMk3
The George was used to try to stem the tide. But, like almost all of the Japanese planeset, It was snowed under by much greater numbers.

And, maybe better tactics and pilots?  Maybe?

[FrodeMk3]

Thank you, Humble. As to the G.55 in the LW, we would have to see how well it did at 10k and below, most fights in the MA's are in that envelope. What's been discovered, is that planes that were phenomenal at 20-30k have alotta problems close to the deck.(Think of the performance change in the Jug and the Pony D, for example.)

You're right, Stoney. But I quoted numbers right off the bat Because after their losses at Midway, the Japanese could'nt replace their aircrews with the same quality as before...Whereas the U.S. started cranking out increasingly better pilots, and quite a lot more of them, as the war war on.
Alot of Japanese aces fought until the end, but New pilots were lower on the list of priorities, it seems, until the need for Kamikaze's arose.

[humble]

Thats the part I dont have a good answer for. It's got a max wieght of just over 8100 lbs (500 lbs lighter then 205) and surface area of just over 227SF so wing loading is around 35/SF or so...this is actually significantly better then the C205 and on par with the 202 and Ki-61.

It's got better power loading then the 205 (and the Ki-61 & 202) so from what I gather its got better overall performance then both at lower alts...

I'd "expect" that it would out turn and out accelerate all of the above based on the raw numbers....but if and when we get it I'll be curious how it actually does....

[Gianlupo]

Well, of course it's not a definitive statement about the low altitude performance of a Centauro, but think about this:

the G.55 has a wing area of 21.11 sq.m, with a MTOW of 3,720 kg, that means a wing loading of 176.2 kg/sq.m and a power-to-weight ratio of 0.29 Kw/kg;

the Spit XIV has a wing area of about 22.48 sq.m, with a MTOW of about 3,858 kg, wing loading is 171,61 and a power-to-weight ratio of 0.71 Kw/kg (Griffon 65 engine - data are from http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org-)

So, I guess it would behave much different from a Spit XIV, even though the shape of the wing, of course, willl have influence on stall characteristic, and something more, I'm not an expert (unfortutately )

Btw, Humble, Frode, don't you think you should continue a discussion about performance of the G.55 in a thread supporting it, not in a thread against it?

[FrodeMk3]

Gian, It's a moot point now. Check Pyro's new thread.

[Gianlupo]

Oh, well.... we tried.

Thanks to anyone who supported it.