Fiat G.55 I centauro

[Debrody]

I agree whole-heartedly, but its not the G55 that's causing the huge hole.  Its the CR42, G50 and C200.  Strangely, no one is campaigning for the most numerous and historically significant Italian fighters (after the C202).  I wonder why?

couse its an american game. Thats why we have as many p47s as russian rides. Anyway, the Fiat Cr-42 would be über-cool.

[Stoney]

couse its an american game. Thats why we have as many p47s as russian rides. Anyway, the Fiat Cr-42 would be über-cool.

Well perhaps, but of those that are arguing for the G55, many are European, but some are American.  Regardless, why would anyone that's interested in seeing the Italian plane set expanded not ask for the CR42, C200, or G50 before the G55?  After all, the highest scoring Italian ace got famous in a CR42.

[gyrene81]

So where exactly should the G55 be plugged in?  If you had to list the top 20 aircraft, not currently in-game, that should be added, and assign a priority to them, would the G55 make your list?  It wouldn't make mine.

my list wouldn't be based on "that would be kewl" to be honest...it would include the he-111, mig series, lagg-3, curtiss hawk, 109g6/as, 190a4, a6m3 and a few others...i understand the lack of good documentation hampers the introduction of some aircraft but...

[Debrody]

If that post is referring to me... now, should i ask for the re-2001,  the g-50, c-200, cr-42, s-79 etc etc, one after one? Who would support me? Who wanna fly an early war ride in the late war arena (except the fanatics)?
Dont let me wrong, they are cool rides, the re-2001 and the cr-42 are my favourites couse the hungarians used them a lot.

[Stoney]

If that post is referring to me...

my list wouldn't be based on "that would be kewl" to be honest...it would include the he-111, mig series, lagg-3, curtiss hawk, 109g6/as, 190a4, a6m3 and a few others...i understand the lack of good documentation hampers the introduction of some aircraft but...

No, not calling either of you out.  That was a rhetorical question.  The G55 gets asked for because people think it will be an Italian Spit 16/La-7/[insert FOTM LW hot rod].  It doesn't get asked for because people want to "round out" the Italian plane set.  If some of these people that argue for the G55 (and I mean specifically those like the OP of this thread) wanted to "round out" the Italian plane set, they'd want to include those more important, early war rides.  This is all about getting more hot rods into the game.  For scenarios and events, those early Italian rides would have a huge impact on Mediterranean setups. 

[Krusty]

Stoney, you put far too much credibility on the Cr.42. (not to side track, just a short comment)

I have campaigned numerous times for the C.200, the G.50, and other earlier models.

However the Cr.42 was obsolete before the war started. It was on its way out. By the time Italy really joined the fight its frontline fighters were all C.200 and G.50, with C.202s starting to take over.

The Cr.42 was a training plane during WW2. While it was numerically the most produced plane in Italy, most of these were before the war and exports. Those kept were used as trainers and third-rate ground attack to strafe troop positions with the 2x cowl MGs. They tried to use it as a night fighter but it was so obsolete it couldn't hunt down the bombers it was chasing.

I don't know if your story about the ace is wrong or if it's counting spanish civil war kills and other pre-war efforts. He certainly didn't make top killer in a cr.42 during WW2 against western allied planes.

As far as WW2 goes it's a nonentity, really.



Debrody: That's not a gull wing.

A Gull wing reverses its anhedral/dihedral, often to change the plane of the wing with the actual mounting point on the fuselage. Ju87s, F4us, B-25s (to a very small extent) have these.







Neither the F6F nor the G.55 have gull wings. Also the frames may externally look similar but it is not the same frame as the C205. it is different in shape and thickness, the curves are all different, the cockpit placement different... It has more room in the nose for many more guns. They had 2x 12.7mm guns on top of the nose and 2x underneath the nose. the only reason they removed these and put 2 of the guns in the wings was because they were hard to service that way. When they moved the guns to the wings they changed them to MG151/20s. It would be just as much effort to make as any other plane. You couldn't recycle the 3D shapes is what I mean.

[Debrody]

lol ok, i got it...

I  was almost sure thats a gullwing...

I have some original photos, and from those angles it almost looked like a gullwing.

[Krusty]

Stoney, I also have to disagree with your assessment of why folks ask for it. You seem to be under the impression folks only ask for it because they think it's uber.

The only folks that really know about it are the ones that care a bit about Italian aircraft in WW2. Most of the folks that ask for it seem to understand the situation and its real world peformance. We (I include myself) seem to want it out of interest/passion/love of the plane, rather than "I want to beat the other guys with a super plane!" or anything like that.

I think what you have described really does apply, just not to this plane. It applied to the P-47M (where it has such a large placebo effect and so much false hype preceeding it, by reputation alone). End result is 47M is a few mph faster than the 47N.

I don't think that's the case with G.55 requests. Look at it. It's as elegant as a spitfire or a Mitchell IMO. Doesn't it stir the imagination and inspire the lust for blood (the blood of pixellated aircraft)?*


*Paid for by the Krusty for G.55 committee.*

[MORAY37]

I love the look of the G.55.  I want it, and have asked for it for years.  And I'm American.

The fact the Luftwaffe was ready to cancel the 109 in favor of the G.55, simply adds to the intrigue.  The G.55 was probably the best Axis prop driven fighter design of the war.  The only thing that precluded the preceding action was the production time.  The G.55 took about 3X longer to manufacture than the Bf-109. 

[Krusty]

I love the look of the G.55.  I want it, and have asked for it for years.  And I'm American.

The fact the Luftwaffe was ready to cancel the 109 in favor of the G.55, simply adds to the intrigue.  The G.55 was probably the best Axis prop driven fighter design of the war.  The only thing that precluded the preceding action was the production time.  The G.55 took about 3X longer to manufacture than the Bf-109. 

That may have been a debatable statement in 1943... But the German designs far surpassed it later on. At the time it was a larger airframe that allowed more expansion moving forward. The fact that the guns were all internal helped, as well!

[Wmaker]

However the Cr.42 was obsolete before the war started. It was on its way out.

CR.42 was certainly obsolete already before the war started but unfortunately for Italian fighter pilots, it most certainly was "on its way out". Cr.42 was still in production when C.200 production ceased.

The Cr.42 was a training plane during WW2. While it was numerically the most produced plane in Italy, most of these were before the war and exports. Those kept were used as trainers and third-rate ground attack to strafe troop positions with the 2x cowl MGs. They tried to use it as a night fighter but it was so obsolete it couldn't hunt down the bombers it was chasing.

I don't know if your story about the ace is wrong or if it's counting spanish civil war kills and other pre-war efforts. He certainly didn't make top killer in a cr.42 during WW2 against western allied planes.

As far as WW2 goes it's a nonentity, really.

In the war CR.42 was first and foremost a fighter and far from nonentity. It saw significant action. It saw action in Battle of France, Battle of Britain, Malta, Africa and with the Hungarian Air Force.

Saying that it was a nonentity training plane during WWII is complete nonsense.

[Wmaker]

Suggested reading:

[MORAY37]

That may have been a debatable statement in 1943... But the German designs far surpassed it later on. At the time it was a larger airframe that allowed more expansion moving forward. The fact that the guns were all internal helped, as well!

Considering the Germans were going to put the DB 603 in the airframe for production.....the test aircraft for the line outperformed the 109K and G, as well as the 190A5.  Tank took the DB603 and redesigned the 190 into the 152 instead, when they realized they could make 3 109's for every 1 G.55. 

Also, the type was introduced in 1943.  At that time, it was the best axis prop.  Its performance wasn't matched until the 190D. 

[Krusty]

Considering the Germans were going to put the DB 603 in the airframe for production.....the test aircraft for the line outperformed the 109K and G, as well as the 190A5.  Tank took the DB603 and redesigned the 190 into the 152 instead, when they realized they could make 3 109's for every 1 G.55. 

Also, the type was introduced in 1943.  At that time, it was the best axis prop.  Its performance wasn't matched until the 190D. 

Again, debatable in 1943, not later. It was already matched by the C.205. You forget it was not a fast airframe. The 205 was faster than it already, and out before it as well.

The type was slow, it wasn't good at altitudes where allied fighters were escorting allied bombers.

While it was planned ahead to try the DB603, this would likely never have happened. They also "planned" the DB603 in a lot of things. That did not make the engine show up any sooner. Even the Me410 was planned to have the DB603, but never did, not even in 1944. The Italians showed a lack of infrastructure to produce their own engines quickly enough. Look how long it took to get the DB601 clone up and running!

It (the G.55) could manuver better than a 190. However it wasn't fast or high enough to take the fight where the 190 and 109 were going.

If this, if that, if then, maybe it could have been a contender. As-is it wasn't better than anything across-the-board. It had desirable characteristics, and that is why one guy on the German side wanted to build it. However that was not an official statement nor was it ever in the plans for Messerschmitt to work on them. It's all conjecture. Going off the actual performance of the actual production model (not a 1-off test plane) it was nice but not worth the time and effort for no real speed gain.

Where it WOULD have paid off was in the closing days of the war -- where they could have packed larger and larger engines in without changing the frame as much, where they could have packed more and more guns internally to kill bombers, etc. That again is all what-if, though.

As it stood, as a production model that saw combat, it was nothing great and nowhere uber. It is a sweet ride, though. I would like to see it.

[Wmaker]

They also "planned" the DB603 in a lot of things. That did not make the engine show up any sooner. Even the Me410 was planned to have the DB603, but never did, not even in 1944.

<sigh>

Me410 most certainly had DB603s.