Comparison between G2 and C.205

[gatt]

Well, I have to say that the AH G2 is a wonderful machine: 5'50" to get to 20K. Official data say 5'06". With the *same* engine, she was some 200Kg lighter than the C.205 (prolly due to the light armament). The C.205 now takes 6'30" to reach angel twenty.

The power loss after 15K of the C.205 is too big. Official tests done by Luftwaffe showed that the "Veltro" was able to stay with the G-4 up to 6,000mt.

I hope HTC will give back the 0.45 power to the Macchi. It was historically correct   Now she's a 1943 dog.

It will be interesting to see the comparison between the F4 and the incoming (?) C.202. They had almost the same performance ...... lets see.

[leonid]

gatt,
Believe me when I say that the 205 is no dog    Even if it now has only lo-mid alt power - like the la5.

------------------
leonid, aka grisha
129 IAP VVS RKKA

[v-twin]

Well, no doubt the 205 is a good machine below 15k, but it is also true (I agree with gatt) that the loss of power above 15k is indeed too big.
6'30" are really way to much for the 205 to climb to 6000m.
My sources report the 205 climbed to 6000m in 5'30"; this time seems reasonable, considering that the Mc202 with 400hp less climbed in 5'55" and that the LW found the Mc205 climbed with the 109G4.
Regards.


Veetwin
(I apologize for my bad english...)

[gatt]

Thx for the kind reply Leonid  
But face it, with her 4'35" to 15K the C.205 is the worst Daimler-Benz engined a/c, togheter with the 109F-4, sorry Janneh  

Its a long way to the final fine tuning but it is painful indeed.



[This message has been edited by gatt (edited 01-18-2000).]

[VISCONTI]

Gatt  
sorry but I think HTC will never fix the c205.
Is a lot of time that we scream but they do nothing!
maybe whit 60$ they will think to fix it.

regards.