Author Topic: a couple new fighters  (Read 743 times)

Offline Tank-Ace

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5298
a couple new fighters
« on: August 09, 2011, 01:14:41 PM »
I would like to wish for the following:

Re-2005
max speed: 421mph @ 23k
rate of climb: 3900'/min

2 12.7mm mgs
1 Mg152/20 hub cannon
2 Mg151/20 wing cannons

And the IAR-80C
Maximum speed at 5000 m 485 km/h
Maximum speed at 5000 m 485 km/h

2 Mg151/20
4 7.92mm FN machine guns.
You started this thread and it was obviously about your want and desire in spite of your use of 'we' and Google.

"Once more unto the breach"

Offline B-17

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2672
Re: a couple new fighters
« Reply #1 on: August 09, 2011, 09:08:57 PM »
Why'd you put the max speed twice for the IAR?

Offline Pigslilspaz

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3378
Re: a couple new fighters
« Reply #2 on: August 09, 2011, 09:10:22 PM »
Probably read the same line twice and typed that instead of rate of climb.

Quote from: Superfly
The rules are simple: Don't be a dick.
Quote from: hitech
It was skuzzy's <----- fault.
Quote from: Pyro
We just witnessed a miracle and I want you to @#$%^& acknowledge it!

Offline B-17

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2672
Re: a couple new fighters
« Reply #3 on: August 09, 2011, 09:10:56 PM »
Ah, true. Are they both Italian, TankAce?

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23047
Re: a couple new fighters
« Reply #4 on: August 09, 2011, 09:28:46 PM »
Ah, true. Are they both Italian, TankAce?

The IAR-80C is, IIRC, Romanian.


-1 to the RE2005, =1 to the IAR-80C.

Italian aircraft we need are things like the SM.79-ii, C.R.42, G.50 and C.200.  You know, the things they actually fought their war with.  We don't need things like the G.55 and Re2005, things they wish they had fought the war with.
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline Tank-Ace

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5298
Re: a couple new fighters
« Reply #5 on: August 09, 2011, 10:47:05 PM »
+1 to the bombers, but -1 to the G.50 and C.200. The C.205 didn't see much more service with the Reggia Aeronatica than the G.55 and Re.2005 did.

And yes, I did read the same line twice. The IAR.80C was capable of something around 3000'/min. I don't wanna do the conversion from time to 5000 meters, so you'll have to do it yourself if you're that desperate for an exact number  :).


And beyond just the uses they would have in special events or even the Late War arena, these would both give us entirerly new aircraft, with very different handling characterisitcs from anything we have, and thats something we haven't seen in a while.
You started this thread and it was obviously about your want and desire in spite of your use of 'we' and Google.

"Once more unto the breach"

Offline Raphael

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2010
Re: a couple new fighters
« Reply #6 on: August 09, 2011, 10:48:02 PM »
IAR FTW! +1000000000000!
Remember 08/08/2012
 Youtube videos - http://www.youtube.com/user/raphael103/featured
Game ID => Raphael
XO of Jg5

Offline Raphael

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2010
Re: a couple new fighters
« Reply #7 on: August 09, 2011, 10:48:59 PM »
yes! it is romanian Industria Aeronautica Romania = IAR
Remember 08/08/2012
 Youtube videos - http://www.youtube.com/user/raphael103/featured
Game ID => Raphael
XO of Jg5

Offline Pigslilspaz

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3378
Re: a couple new fighters
« Reply #8 on: August 09, 2011, 11:30:09 PM »
IAR-80, the bastard child of the F4U and the Spit  :neener:

Quote from: Superfly
The rules are simple: Don't be a dick.
Quote from: hitech
It was skuzzy's <----- fault.
Quote from: Pyro
We just witnessed a miracle and I want you to @#$%^& acknowledge it!

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23047
Re: a couple new fighters
« Reply #9 on: August 09, 2011, 11:34:22 PM »
And beyond just the uses they would have in special events or even the Late War arena, these would both give us entirerly new aircraft, with very different handling characterisitcs from anything we have, and thats something we haven't seen in a while.
Then why not ask for fighters that actually fought?  J2M3/J2M5, Ki-44-II or Yak-3?  Why ask for fantasy Italian aircraft?
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline B-17

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2672
Re: a couple new fighters
« Reply #10 on: August 10, 2011, 12:36:47 AM »
+1 to the bombers, but -1 to the G.50 and C.200. The C.205 didn't see much more service with the Reggia Aeronatica than the G.55 and Re.2005 did.

And yes, I did read the same line twice. The IAR.80C was capable of something around 3000'/min. I don't wanna do the conversion from time to 5000 meters, so you'll have to do it yourself if you're that desperate for an exact number  :).


And beyond just the uses they would have in special events or even the Late War arena, these would both give us entirerly new aircraft, with very different handling characterisitcs from anything we have, and thats something we haven't seen in a while.

3000'/m = about 1 km/minute.

Offline Tank-Ace

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5298
Re: a couple new fighters
« Reply #11 on: August 10, 2011, 01:57:12 AM »
They did fight. The Re-2005 has  confirmed kills. It served at squadron strength. It meets every criterion for addition to the game.


I think the real problem here is that I didn't ask for something thats either British, or useless and redundant  :neener:.
« Last Edit: August 10, 2011, 02:00:34 AM by Tank-Ace »
You started this thread and it was obviously about your want and desire in spite of your use of 'we' and Google.

"Once more unto the breach"

Offline Debrody

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4487
Re: a couple new fighters
« Reply #12 on: August 10, 2011, 02:19:09 AM »
here is that I didn't ask for something thats either British, or useless and redundant  :neener:.
Be cool, dude. Yup maybe thats true too, but if i can remember correctly, about 25 re-2005s were produced. Much less than ta-152s...
The standardised fighter was the C-205 and the G-55 til '44 september when the italians got 109G6s. Mario Bellagambi (italian ace pilot) said that "the Macchi performs well against fighters, the G-55s inpotent."
In the early war, the G-50 performed poory, being only a bit faster than the Cr-42. The C-200 was a better aircraft.
I would vote for the Cr-42, C-200, Re-2000 and the S-79. Both would be hangar queens in the MA but excellent additions to the scenarios.

The IAR-80 wasnt an early-war aircraft... just saying. With its top speed i would wonder if it could catch an il-2...

About the Re-2000: it was exported to Hungary, til '42, it was our standard fighter, with its license-produced version called MAVAG Héja (Hawk)
Re.2000:

MAVAG Héja:
AoM
City of ice

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23047
Re: a couple new fighters
« Reply #13 on: August 10, 2011, 02:26:21 AM »
They did fight. The Re-2005 has  confirmed kills. It served at squadron strength. It meets every criterion for addition to the game.


I think the real problem here is that I didn't ask for something thats either British, or useless and redundant  :neener:.
Exactly what British aircraft have you seen be advocate for lately?

Do you think the Ju188, J2M3/J2M5, Ki-44-II or Yak-3 are British, useless or redundant?

You're asking for aircraft that had miniscule numbers when there are vastly more significant aircraft the Italians had.  The rare C.205 is already modeled, asking for the G.55 or Re2005 is like asking for the Halifax in addition to the Lancaster.
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline B-17

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2672
Re: a couple new fighters
« Reply #14 on: August 10, 2011, 02:29:40 AM »
Your forgot to mention the He-111 and the Do-217 :D