VOTE RE2005!INTO THE FUTURE AH'S PLANESET!

[batdog]

Works for me...why not?

xBAT

[straffo]

go !

[brady]

Yes

[Westy MOL]

Absolutely!!! This would be a very nice addition to AH.

-Westy

[buscaglia]

How does it compare to the G55?

SKurj ..... Similar performance pdog

 

Mmmm, the characteristics and performances of this two aircrafts were not so similar.

- Re2005 had the bestturning ability of any 1942-43 Italian fighter at all altitudes (mock fight test demonstrated that it was far superior to both g55 and c205 in turning, and it was even able to turn with c200 and re2001...wich were very light and maneuvrable earlier italian planes)

- G55 was a good turner as well, but more like the c205

- G55 climbed better (almost like c205)

- Re2005 dived better than any other italian fighters (up to 980 kph, but u couldnt use rudder a lot during dives)

- G55 had the same armament, 2x12.7mm and 3x20mm) but carried 100 more rounds in the nose cannon (250 instead of 150)

- Re2005 was slightly faster in level flight

- G55 had better handling over 20000 feets

- Re2005 had superior flight characteristics at lower altitudes (it was projected as a frontline airsuperiority fighterbomber, differently from the G55 wich was a point defence interceptor with good high altitude characteristics)
- Re2005 had superior flight characteristics at lower speeds: had a very good acceleration at lower speeds (wing profile was way more thin!), had a nice stall and stalled at a lower speeds, recovery from spins and autorotation was easier and quicker thanks to its big  rudder control surface.

But the G55 looks much better.
- Re2005 payload was also a fighterbomber, with a good payload too: Two wing hardpoints for 353 lb / 160 kg of bombs. It obtained several successes against road convoys and landing troops in Sicily.


- Re2005 had a longer range also, it carried three droptanks: a single central 240 liter tank and two 100 liter wing tanks.
 
- G55 had a shorter range it could carry 2 drop 100 liters DTsr

 

I think he is reffering to what busc said
"its more similar to another american allied aircraft i would say...wich is the supermarine Spitfire"
Spitfire is british not american.
Anyways the 2005 is much better than the spity. But busc im surprised, why a 2005, why not a SM79 the plane that your namesake flew during the war
 

Yeah, sorry, i know the spit is brit, that was typo..I am not sure if the Re2005 was better, but for sure on the same level (as combat results demonstrated).

About SM79...Sure that! I had started working on pubblishing a full set of data of the SM79bis as well...but i fear i will not complete this work soon, im goin abroad for  military service.
I leave this week and i ll be back in 10 months (hopefully).

[Serapis]

Which one had the structural problems and how many of the 2005 and G55 saw service? From an impact on the war standpoint wouldnt the MC 200 be a better addition (though not for the MA of course)? Easy to model too.

Charon

[ 10-15-2001: Message edited by: Charon ]

[buscaglia]

all the data can be found on the site, check re2005 in action for production, and structural problems. MC200...maybe in late future...its an early war bird, would be useless in MA...and what i am proposing is the only italian (-->1943) plane suitable for MA...the only "uber" for regia aeronautica fans  .

[Thrawn]

That plane is dead sexah!

[FabryKA6]

Alwys my Favorite !!
I love she


FabriKA6

1° Gruppo Caccia "ASSO DI BASTONI"
REGIA AERONAUTICA

[Blue Mako]

The more planes for my pony to kill the better!  Bring more axis cannon fodder to AH!

<GDR>
--------------------

Click on image to go to the 412th home page...

[pdog_109]

Re2005 as cannon fodder? - yeah right. Its the other way around, pee51 runstang will be cannon fodder to re2005.

[Blue Mako]

Originally posted by pdog_109:
Re2005 as cannon fodder? - yeah right. Its the other way around, pee51 runstang will be cannon fodder to re2005.

Hopefully we will see.  Seriously, I'm all for bringing more planes to AH.  The more variety the better.  

P.S. pdog_109, what's your game id?  Just wanna see your stats against the pony...

[pdog_109]

Sadly i don't pay to play. I play in the H2H games. I payed the price when it went down but as im piss poor i decided its not worth it. Now with 1.08 i can hardly fly over an airfield without my computer halting. But i know the p51 is a good plane, i respect it and use all my best to try and kill it. With a toejamty pilot, there meat on the table but well flown there hard. Since i mostly encounter nikis and spits in my 205, i rarely come across a 51. But i'd say my ratio is about 60/50.  60% killing p51s, 50% being killed. from 51s. If the pilot is good i can only hope for him to mess up or friendly's to arrive. Only advantage 205 has over 51 is turning but that is marginal. As you can see what busc wrote the 2005 can do much better. If you want we could go H2H in a private room. You seem like a good 51 driver.

[ 10-17-2001: Message edited by: pdog_109 ]

[Blue Mako]

Pdog, sorry to hear that you can't afford the MA, I know how that is...  I've only been able to afford it since the price halved.  I generally avoid H2H now as I can't get any good connections as I'm on a dial up from Australia but if I'm in H2H I'll look out for ya.  Not calling you out for a duel or anything but I like to correct peoples impressions of pony drivers.

I was curious as to how you faired against the pony after your "runstang" joke...  Too many pilots fly the pony and only run so I guess the nickname is deserved, up to a point.

As for my pony skills, I'm still learning it, there are a lot of guys better than me in it (RWY, Beemer, Midnight, Pugg666, Spatula to name a few).  I don't mind getting down and dirty with it (along with my squaddies) and that helps to change peoples opinion of pony drivers a little.  It is amazing how many people can be caught out by a pony pilot who does more than run!  So the more that think ponies can only hit and run the better!  (Btw I have been in a slump this tour but the last couple of days I've pulled out of it so don't put too much stock in my stats.   )

Anyway, I didn't mean to hijack the thread.  Back to the topic: "Bring the RE2005 to AH!!

 

[gatt]

Hi pdog,

the P-51, if properly flown, wont be cannon fodder for the Re2005. The 2005 is slow, judged with 1944 standards (about 10mph slower than a C205 at 23K, probably more under 20K). It took about 6'30" to get to 20K, a lot of time if compared to 1943-44 Spitfires LFIX and late 109G-6s. The kite is also heavy with her 3,575Kg t/o weight (about 175Kg more than a C205).

Yes, she had about 4sq.mt wing area more than a C205, but who cares about sustained turn performance?    

Anyway, reported performance data about italian fighters are generally unreliable. They mix prototypes with production, different armament ... a real mess.

The Re2005 was a beautiful kite. Any Series 5 fighters (C205, Re2005, G55) had great chances against 1943 allied (and axis) fighters but they were not uber at all from late 1943-early 1944 on. During early 1943 trials at Guidonia (Italy), the Series 5 fighters beated hands down the 109G-4 and did very well against the 190A-5. Anyway, they were the best the axis could send against high alt bombers.

P.S.: The Luftwaffe test pilots were really impressed about what the G.55 did at high alt with his 3x20mm (about 650 rounds) and 2x12,7mm. Their gondolas armed 109G were sitting ducks compared to the G.55. The G.55 airframe was the only one ready to mount the mighty DB603 engine. The DB603 engined G.55 (called G.56) was actually built and during the tests reached a max speed of 710kph+ at 23K (440mph+). Climb times were excellent. A nice perk plane indeed. IMHO, the G.55 would be more representative as a 1943 axis high alt interceptor. Moreover, production numbers *should* mean something. PYRO has the official G.55 flight manual. I just hope he is not doing Origami's with the manual pages    

[ 10-18-2001: Message edited by: gatt ]