Author Topic: The C-205...Under-rated?  (Read 2794 times)

Offline stroker71

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 939
Re: The C-205...Under-rated?
« Reply #15 on: January 01, 2009, 01:02:37 AM »
what ever the jap fighter that looks like it what ever it is

Anger on you 666th post...wierd!

I run the wings tanks out to 1/4 first then go back to aux.  Takes the weight from the wings and gives it better roll.
Back to DuHasst
Here since tour 84
Quote by Uptown "It's one thing to play the game...quite another to live there."

Offline Boozeman

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 482
Re: The C-205...Under-rated?
« Reply #16 on: January 01, 2009, 07:48:41 AM »
The 205 is a pig.

Now the 202.  There is an airplane.

- oldman

Oh, you can make a 205 handle much like 202 and still retain it's advantage in speed, climb and firepower.
Now that is an even nicer airplane.


 

Offline 1pLUs44

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3332
Re: The C-205...Under-rated?
« Reply #17 on: January 01, 2009, 07:51:21 AM »
I fly it like its a P-38 that turns a bit better. It climbs very well, holds a dive fairly well, turns good enough, and the guns on it are great.

I think maybe I'll start spending more time in one. Comments? Tips? From the dedicated 205 lovers??

Needs gas
No one knows what the future may bring.

Offline B4Buster

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4816
Re: The C-205...Under-rated?
« Reply #18 on: January 01, 2009, 11:50:50 AM »
If it turns better than a 38, the 38 is doing something wrong.

+1 No decent 38 stick would lose to a C.205 IMO
"I was a door gunner on the space shuttle Columbia" - Scott12B

Offline Banshee7

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6644
Re: The C-205...Under-rated?
« Reply #19 on: January 01, 2009, 05:09:36 PM »
Tours 86 - 296

Offline Bosco123

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3604
Re: The C-205...Under-rated?
« Reply #20 on: January 01, 2009, 06:21:40 PM »
Of course Bubi, love that plane ;)
Skifurd AKA "Bosco"
Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) Operator
United States Marine
"Stay ahead of the game, Stay ahead of the plane."

Offline gatt

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2441
Re: The C-205...Under-rated?
« Reply #21 on: January 02, 2009, 04:21:10 AM »
The C.205 has similar performance to the Bf.109G-6, although it doesn't turn or climb quite as well ....

No decent 205 stick would lose to a G-6.
As far as the P-38 is concerned, a decent 205 stick would never ever enter a turnfight with that bat.
« Last Edit: January 02, 2009, 04:34:54 AM by gatt »
"And one of the finest aircraft I ever flew was the Macchi C.205. Oh, beautiful. And here you had the perfect combination of italian styling and german engineering .... it really was a delight to fly ... and we did tests on it and were most impressed." - Captain Eric Brown

Offline Lusche

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23931
      • Last.FM Profile
Re: The C-205...Under-rated?
« Reply #22 on: January 02, 2009, 06:08:20 AM »
No decent 205 stick would lose to a G-6.

I have a simple question:

Why?

Assuming same skill level ("decent") in pilots, a fighter is supposed to have a very distinct performance advantage in any way over the other to give that kind of guarantee.
I'm currently not aware of such an decisive advantage the C205 has over the G6.
« Last Edit: January 02, 2009, 06:12:54 AM by Lusche »
Steam: DrKalv
E:D Snailman

In November 2025, Lusche will return for a 20th anniversary tour. Get your tickets now!

Offline gatt

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2441
Re: The C-205...Under-rated?
« Reply #23 on: January 02, 2009, 07:05:50 AM »
I have a simple question:

Why?

Assuming same skill level ("decent") in pilots, a fighter is supposed to have a very distinct performance advantage in any way over the other to give that kind of guarantee.
I'm currently not aware of such an decisive advantage the C205 has over the G6.


Well, obviously I speak for myself. I have always tried to use the 205 as it should, IMO, be used: fast, at medium altitude, using hit & climb techniques. In those condition the F-4 ---> G-6 family has almost always been an easy prey in 1vs1 fights down to the ground.
I had more acceleration, more speed (especially between 10 and 15K), more firepower, more rollrate, generally more maneuverability fighting in a dive than the G family. Everytime I saw a 109G driver nosing down after the merge I knew it was mine. Even the G-14 was often easy to kill. Only well flown K-4 were impossible to catch or difficult to kill. Many 109 pilots think to have always the climb advantage, they usually underestimate enemy's E, thats how you usually get them if you are fast.
 
I think your probably right if you imagine same skill pilots, CO-E, CO-ALT ... but it is only theory. In the main arena I killed almost all 109's I found.
 
And maybe I was lucky, perhaps the best 109 pilots flew Knights like me ;)
« Last Edit: January 02, 2009, 07:25:34 AM by gatt »
"And one of the finest aircraft I ever flew was the Macchi C.205. Oh, beautiful. And here you had the perfect combination of italian styling and german engineering .... it really was a delight to fly ... and we did tests on it and were most impressed." - Captain Eric Brown

Offline Krusty

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 26745
Re: The C-205...Under-rated?
« Reply #24 on: January 02, 2009, 12:42:38 PM »
Somebody said they think the C205 would climb like a G2 with gondies.

Not quite. The C205 with internal wing guns climbs almost identically to the G2 without gondies. The speed and climb charts are almost identical, with just a slight difference in the low-alt power peak because it's not a real DB engine (it's an Italian-made version of one, different power, different settings, etc).

However, it has never been the best turning aircraft. When you have speed to bleed it handles very nicely, but against a 109G2/G6 it has a significantly worse turning radius.

Then again, that's only flat turns at best turn speed. Generally I try to avoid those in a C205. I find it works best to fly it like a 109 and shoot it like a 190.

Offline gatt

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2441
Re: The C-205...Under-rated?
« Reply #25 on: January 02, 2009, 04:31:19 PM »
Heya Krusty,

differences in power curves are one of AH's two standards, like the difference in WEP time for example.
German and italian official documentation, that is engine manuals, show no difference.
Power curves and engine settings were exactly the same.
"And one of the finest aircraft I ever flew was the Macchi C.205. Oh, beautiful. And here you had the perfect combination of italian styling and german engineering .... it really was a delight to fly ... and we did tests on it and were most impressed." - Captain Eric Brown

Offline jerkins

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 407
Re: The C-205...Under-rated?
« Reply #26 on: January 03, 2009, 01:45:12 AM »
The 205 is a blast to fly.  The Italians thought it was far superior to the 109 IIRC.
Jerkins
Strike Bandits
B~Smooth Xtreme Racing

Offline Nilsen

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18108
Re: The C-205...Under-rated?
« Reply #27 on: January 03, 2009, 03:12:19 AM »
perhaps the best 109 pilots flew Knights like me ;)

You nailed it right there  :D

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Re: The C-205...Under-rated?
« Reply #28 on: January 03, 2009, 08:39:59 AM »
One thing where the Macchi beats the 109 is high speed handling.
It feels to me as very pleasant with E, and being as rare as it is in the MA, many pilots do not know how to fight it.
I'd love to se a graphics update, it's a beauty.
It was very interesting to carry out the flight trials at Rechlin with the Spitfire and the Hurricane. Both types are very simple to fly compared to our aircraft, and childishly easy to take-off and land. (Werner Mölders)

Offline iwomba

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 51
Re: The C-205...Under-rated?
« Reply #29 on: January 03, 2009, 09:40:45 PM »
Gee don't make posts like this :)

Let everyone think it is a very ordinary plane.

We don't want too many to know just how good it can be.
WOMBA
9GIAP
Sydney, Australia Branch