Author Topic: Fiat G.55 "Centaruo" (Read 1262 times)

Krusty · « **Reply #15 on:** February 19, 2008, 09:21:16 AM »

No. It was "better" but still not "good/great"

The P-40N was a last-ditch effort to make the P-40s competitive in a late war atmosphere. However, they were still only just barely catching up to planes that had been in combat for a year already. Not enough performance, and too late.

Don't get me wrong, they built a lot and they flew 'em, but they couldn't compete with the P-38s, P-47s, and P-51s already in service.

BlauK · « **Reply #16 on:** February 19, 2008, 01:55:45 PM »

P-36 (Curtiss Hawk) would be much sexier than P-40

Selino631 · « **Reply #17 on:** February 19, 2008, 03:44:01 PM »

can we get back to the topic please...

angelsandair · « **Reply #18 on:** February 19, 2008, 04:36:54 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Krusty
No. It was "better" but still not "good/great"

The P-40N was a last-ditch effort to make the P-40s competitive in a late war atmosphere. However, they were still only just barely catching up to planes that had been in combat for a year already. Not enough performance, and too late.

Don't get me wrong, they built a lot and they flew 'em, but they couldn't compete with the P-38s, P-47s, and P-51s already in service.

I thought the P-60 Warhawk was made to be the last ditch effort to save the P-40. It actually was a great plane, it just arrived at the very end of the war as i recall.

Bosco123 · « **Reply #19 on:** February 19, 2008, 05:18:05 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by angelsandair
I thought the P-60 Warhawk was made to be the last ditch effort to save the P-40. It actually was a great plane, it just arrived at the very end of the war as i recall.

Other end of the war, The P-36 was the last Biplane fighter of WW2 then replacing it was the P-shooter.

Masherbrum · « **Reply #20 on:** February 19, 2008, 06:07:00 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Selino631
can we get back to the topic please...

Exactly!! The I.A.R. 81c

Ack-Ack · « **Reply #21 on:** February 19, 2008, 06:09:08 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by angelsandair
Wasn't the P-40N actually a good fighter?? I think I had seen stuff on the Military channel about it.

That's what you get for watching TV to educate yourself instead of actually doing some research.

The P-40N was not a night fighter, just like the P-47N isn't a night fighter. Just because the designation letter is N, doesn't mean the plane is a night fighter.

ack-ack

Motherland · « **Reply #22 on:** February 19, 2008, 06:59:31 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Ack-Ack
That's what you get for watching TV to educate yourself instead of actually doing some research.

The P-40N was not a night fighter, just like the P-47N isn't a night fighter. Just because the designation letter is N, doesn't mean the plane is a night fighter.

ack-ack

He never really insinuated that he thought it was a night fighter.

Selino631 · « **Reply #23 on:** February 19, 2008, 07:51:41 PM »

This thread is about the G.55 not the P-47

Selino631 · « **Reply #24 on:** February 20, 2008, 12:07:08 PM »

bump..

Bosco123 · « **Reply #25 on:** February 20, 2008, 05:04:35 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by captkaos
Boy I cannot believe I am typing this:

"Search Feature" is a wonderful thing.

Check who posted them...ME!!

Selino631 · « **Reply #26 on:** February 22, 2008, 11:47:57 AM »

bump...

Matador · « **Reply #27 on:** February 22, 2008, 07:38:32 PM »

I posted something similar to this a while ago but did not only include G.55
it was a great plane, especcialy with the optional torpedo. If HTC d wont make the G.55 for us then just make it so that the C.205 could carry its true drop tanks and bombs. either way its an improvement to the itallian plane set.

Matador