G55 and Re.2005

[Borgoo]

just a wish

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiat_G.55

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reggiane_Re.2005

 

[potsNpans]

+1 so they can help escort SM.79's.

[Borgoo]

three 20 mm MG 151/20s and two 12.7 mm (.5 in) Breda-SAFAT machine guns are better for buffs hunting   

[alpini13]

yes,yes ,yes,YES!!!!!

[EagleDNY]

Still +1 to this, and to an update of the C.2s

[skorpion]

+1

[Butcher]

just a wish

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiat_G.55

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reggiane_Re.2005

 

Re.2005 won't be added, wasn't combat strength - G.55 has a good chance i'd vote on it

[alpini13]

wow,that IS an interesting comment...the re-2005 was not combat strength...you are correct sir!......but neither was the TA-152....and we have that in the game.......the ta-152 never made it to squad strength(jg301 had ta-152,fw190d,and fw 190A8/9 at same time),was made in roughly the same numbers as the re-2005...but the re-2005 saw more combat with more kills to its credit and a longer service history.......so why not again?

[Debrody]

Theese rides look very simmilar. Would be nice to get a g-55 when the C20x series gets its (needed) update.

[Tank-Ace]

Re.2005 won't be added, wasn't combat strength - G.55 has a good chance i'd vote on it

Depends on your defenition. Total numbers in service are over the requirment, but there wasn't a  squadron that flew the Reggiane as its exclusive aircraft.

Just like it depends on your defenition of a "squadron" of tanks, whether the M26 Pershing qualifies or not.

[Butcher]

wow,that IS an interesting comment...the re-2005 was not combat strength...you are correct sir!......but neither was the TA-152....and we have that in the game.......the ta-152 never made it to squad strength(jg301 had ta-152,fw190d,and fw 190A8/9 at same time),was made in roughly the same numbers as the re-2005...but the re-2005 saw more combat with more kills to its credit and a longer service history.......so why not again?

HTC has been opposed to adding planes that didn't fill squadron strength or seen combat - its been this for years, I believe the there is a few threads detailing the reasons why in the past.

We could easily get the Re.2001 or Re.2002 - both were combat strength. Why the Ta-152 was added I have no clue, but this same argument has been made with the Meteor, Pershing tank, Ki-43-III and numerous others which have not be added.

[Debrody]

In the other hand we have the 4-hog, the c-hog, the m-jug, spit16...  neither seen much combat in the ww2. True, still a lot more than the 2005.
Guess what?  Fiat cr.42 ftw  : )

[waystin2]

The RE.2005 was flown in squadron strength and did see combat.  +1

[ebfd11]

+1 on this little bird, we need more AC from various countries.

[Ack-Ack]

HTC has been opposed to adding planes that didn't fill squadron strength or seen combat - its been this for years, I believe the there is a few threads detailing the reasons why in the past.

We could easily get the Re.2001 or Re.2002 - both were combat strength. Why the Ta-152 was added I have no clue, but this same argument has been made with the Meteor, Pershing tank, Ki-43-III and numerous others which have not be added.

Don't know why the argument has applied to the Ki-43 III, it's been shown to have been produced in large numbers and served in squadron strength for multiple sentais. 

There was a thread a few months back about the Re.2005 and I think only pre-production aircraft were built and no more than 8 Re.2005s saw operational combat service with 22º Gruppo.

This is a site on the commander of 22º Gruppo, which was the group assigned the Re.2005 and mentions the number of Re.2005s in operational service.  Interesting to note that the Italians used captured Dewoitine D.520s, even scoring a confirmed kill against a B-24.

Biplane fighter aces Italy - Generale S.A. Vittorio Minguzzi



ack-ack