Fiat G.55 I centauro

[alpini13]

its kinda  funny to hear guys ask what is the significance or how many kills did it account for...HELLO we have the p-47n and the TA 152 in here.....i think between the two they account for 5 kills...  TOTAL....oh and the production was less for each of those than the g-55... ++++1 for the g-55

[Debrody]

The g-55 was Italy's most widely used fighter in '44 summer, along with the c-205.
+1

[Stoney]

The g-55 was Italy's most widely used fighter in '44 summer, along with the c-205.
+1

Given they had only a handful of C-205's in the summer of '44, just how "widely" was the G-55 dispersed among Italy's air forces?

[Imowface]

Would rather have updated macchi's and an Re.2001 with a Cant Z.1007(or the seaplane version of this, the Cant Z.506B
 

[Debrody]

Given they had only a handful of C-205's in the summer of '44, just how "widely" was the G-55 dispersed among Italy's air forces?

lol in '44 summer the Italian Air Force had only 6 operational fighter squadrons.
The 1st Gruppo caccia had 3 squads, its 1st and 3rg squadriglia used g-55s, the 2nd used c205s. The 2nd Gruppo caccia had 3 squads too, if i am right, they were using g-55s, but they got 109 g-6s in july.
So in june the IAF had 5 squads of g-55 and 1 squad of c-205. No other fighters were used (for example, no re-2005, ca-314 etc).
The pilots liked the Macchi couse its superior low-alt performance, but the g-55 was better at high altitude.

[Stoney]

its kinda  funny to hear guys ask what is the significance or how many kills did it account for...HELLO we have the p-47n and the TA 152 in here.....i think between the two they account for 5 kills...  TOTAL....oh and the production was less for each of those than the g-55... ++++1 for the g-55

You may want to check you numbers for the P-47N...  And, even if you meant to say P-47M, it has a very well documented combat history.  For example, we can track the fate of each and every aircraft by serial number.  The G-55?  No one really knows what happened to them, what they did, which units they served with.  All we have is the expectation that its supposed to be a good performer or more specifically, that it has 3 20mm cannons, and therefore, should be included.

[Krusty]

I don't think that's really the case Stoney. I know I personally want the G.55 for several selfish reasons other than "an extra 20mm." I tend to find the 2x20mm are quite adequate. Then again I fly 109s light and 190s light as well.

My reasons include:

1) better range
2) larger wing (better alt performance, perhaps better turning/stalls)
3) possible Serie 0 loadout of 4x 12.7mm Breda Safat (2 top, 2 bottom) and a 20mm hub all in the nose.

It along with the C.205 were the only 2 frontline fighters still fighting at the end of the war. After the C.202s were retired and after the Italian surrender, the C.205 and the G.55 served under the Luftwaffe command structure and continued the fight.

If I recall from reading up on it way back, the G.55 and the C.205 had comparable numbers. One had a bit more than the other. On top of that, it seems a number of C.205s served on the Italian side after its surrender (what do they call that? Co-beligerent? -- they fought allied with new national markings), meaning the axis side probably had more G.55s than C.205s because the 205 pool was dilluted more.

[Debrody]

Krusty,
The italians got 109s after '44 late August, the c-205s and the g-55s werent used anymore.
The g-55 had an inverted gullwing (just like the b25 or the corsair), probably had better stability than the c205.
Stoney,
i see you really dont want the g-55 added. But i can tell you wich unit they served with.
I have fully detailed data from '44 May. In the 1st gruppo caccia, the 1st squadriglia (Asso do Bastoni) and the 2nd squadriglia (Arciere) were equipped with g-55s. The whole 2nd gruppo caccia had g-55s until the germans gave them messers. Then they gave their rides to the 1st gruppo caccia.

[Krusty]

The g-55 had an inverted gullwing (just like the b25 or the corsair), probably had better stability than the c205.

That's not quite right Debrody... It had a flat section of wing, which was nothing new. Then outboard of that it angled up. this was far from a gull wing design. It was a narrowing of the wing root, to better blend in the fuselage and the wing, I guess. it also had a cranked leading edge, which might add to the illusion of a gull wing, but this was not the case.

[Stoney]

i see you really dont want the g-55 added.

Its not that I don't want to see it added.  I think in an ideal world, every WWII era aircraft would be represented in-game.  What I am critical about is the idea that this aircraft is significant enough to add to a limited planeset.  It would, in my opinion, have marginally better performance than a C205--maybe.  Given the empty weight of the 205 and G55 being practically the same, I'd opine that the G55 would probably wind up having equal to worse performance, once all that extra armament is added.  In my opinion, people argue to have this plane added merely because they've heard its supposed to be some sort of uber 109 or something, with more guns.  In fact, by the time it was rolling off the factory, it was already approaching obsolescence compared to its contemporary peers.

Finally, if we accept that HTC has a limited amount of resources for developing new aircraft for the game, I'd argue that this aircraft, based on its significance during the war, would not even be in the top 20 aircraft remaining to add to the game.

[Krusty]

I tend to agree with you there stoney. You are also correct that it was a few mph slower than the C205 at FTH and max speed.

However, we all have our pet wants/needs. As busy as HTC is, it would make my day to have either the G.55 or the Me410 added to the front of the list. Much as I understand and appreciate the priorities they have, if they were to add these treats they would be well-used by one player named Krusty 

[gyrene81]

Finally, if we accept that HTC has a limited amount of resources for developing new aircraft for the game, I'd argue that this aircraft, based on its significance during the war, would not even be in the top 20 aircraft remaining to add to the game.

i'm sorry stoney, but based on that argument alone...the b239, ta152, me163, me262 and p47m should not exist in the plane set...the "approaching obsolesence" argument isn't very valid either as history shows, many "obsolete" aircraft were used in the war efforts of several countries, some with relative success and others, not so much.

the basic structure of the g55 is close enough to the c205 that with proper data, coding it couldn't be any more difficult than the b-29 was.

[Debrody]

I was almost sure thats a gullwing...
Btw, i can understand Stoney. But what we need then? The Meteor?
There are huge holes in the italian planeset, they need to be filled. True, the g-55 is pretty close to the c-205, but that also means its very easy to model. Also the c-205s 3d model looks old, could use a remodelling (along with several other rides).
So i think, that would be ideal, if we get the g-55 when we get the remodelled c205. Thats the most effective way to have the g-55.

[Stoney]

i'm sorry stoney, but based on that argument alone...the b239, ta152, me163, me262 and p47m should not exist in the plane set...the "approaching obsolesence" argument isn't very valid either as history shows, many "obsolete" aircraft were used in the war efforts of several countries, some with relative success and others, not so much.

the basic structure of the g55 is close enough to the c205 that with proper data, coding it couldn't be any more difficult than the b-29 was.

Probably nothing is more difficult than building the B-29.

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.

Also, could someone please point me to some sort of resource that actually shows the operational history of this aircraft.  Because, unlike...the b239, ta152, me163, me262 and p47m..., I can't find anything about how many kills it had.

Finally, the obsolescence comment wasn't about its real-world performance per se...  It was about the perception among some in the community that this aircraft is the hotrod of WWII Italian aircraft, and that its omission is denying them a competitive ride in the LW plane set or something.  If we said, "sure, we can add the G55, but its gonna be just a bit slower and less maneuverable than the C205", would people be clamoring for it so?

[Stoney]

I was almost sure thats a gullwing...

Look at the F6F wing construction--its very similar.  Basically, the designers placed the dihedral out beyond the landing gear attach points on the spar.

There are huge holes in the italian planeset, they need to be filled.

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?