Author Topic: New C202 and C205 Models. NICE!  (Read 9173 times)

Offline bustr

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 12436
Re: New C202 and C205 Models. NICE!
« Reply #60 on: March 01, 2013, 07:34:25 PM »
Betcha we ain't gettin the Type-B in our C.202.

Type-B Early, Middle, and Late were all used in the C.202. Middle and Late were also used in the C.205. The gunsight modeled by HTC is the Type-C Late. There was a Type-C Early and Late.

Type-C Early looks like a PBP1 and the Type-C Late looks like a ReviC12 and a PBP1 had a love child. Neither Type-C Early or Late was used in the C.202.

Just like our spit1 never flew in combat with a MkIIs square glass gunsight but, the same MKII round glass as in the remodeled Hurii1. I just keep telling myself that the spit1 would have been upgraded to a square glass if it had stayed in front line combat long enough other than as a low level PR plane or weapons and electronics test bed. I've got my rubie fuzzy slippers on clicking the heels together going if HTC models it, it's true, it's true , it's true Oh lauwsy, Oh lauwsy............

Type-B Middle

You can see the etched graticle which was one of several backups if the light bulb failed. You used the elevation knob to raise the reflector plate up high enough to center the etched graticle.



Good view of the etched backup graticle if you look close, bottom of the reflector glass.




The fighter in this picture is a C.202 with a Type-B Middle.  You can sorta see the etched backup graticle.



bustr - POTW 1st Wing


This is like the old joke that voters are harsher to their beer brewer if he has an outage, than their politicians after raising their taxes. Death and taxes are certain but, fun and sex is only now.

Offline bustr

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 12436
Re: New C202 and C205 Models. NICE!
« Reply #61 on: March 01, 2013, 08:40:47 PM »
I knew I had these somewhere.

C.202 Cockpit and a Type-B Middle.



Some Details...Gotta love that 100Mil reticle detail.



Here is page for a 1:1 exact replica of the Type-B Middle at Hyperscale. The best pictures are on page2 of the previews. I think there is enough here now for Waffel and company to put a Type-B in the C.202.

http://www.hyperscale.com/2010/reviews/kits/tailboompreviewbg_1.htm

bustr - POTW 1st Wing


This is like the old joke that voters are harsher to their beer brewer if he has an outage, than their politicians after raising their taxes. Death and taxes are certain but, fun and sex is only now.

Offline Wmaker

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5743
      • Lentolaivue 34 website
Re: New C202 and C205 Models. NICE!
« Reply #62 on: March 02, 2013, 02:46:36 AM »
Forgot to mention that I'm really digging the new Italian style gauges!  :aok
Wmaker
Lentolaivue 34

Thank you for the Brewster HTC!

Offline icepac

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6977
Re: New C202 and C205 Models. NICE!
« Reply #63 on: March 02, 2013, 07:14:03 AM »
I will look suave as I strafe down ord bunkers with my C202.

Offline EagleDNY

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1514
Re: New C202 and C205 Models. NICE!
« Reply #64 on: March 02, 2013, 11:21:54 AM »
Nice job.  I used to fly the C.205 a lot, and will again when the update is released. 
Got my first Me-262 kill in one - they dive like the devil!

Offline Krusty

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 26745
Re: New C202 and C205 Models. NICE!
« Reply #65 on: March 03, 2013, 01:01:12 AM »
Comments on 3 things: Gunsights, drop tanks, and machine guns. In that order...

Gunsights:

While not standard, the Type C was used as early as May 1942 on the Series V when a production batch of 50 were built at SAI-Ambrosini with that gunsight installed. It showed up in later Series marks as well, but wasn't "standard" so much as it was what one factory installed. The Type C only become "standard" on the last production runs of the C.202.

Drop Tanks:

The C.202 was primarily a fighter but it could carry bombs and drop tanks from a very early date. They simply weren't used much. Once the tide of war had turned to the point they were all withdrawing to defend Italy itself from invaders, many of the 202s flew ground attack missions, bombing and strafing troops on the ground. Now, granted, these bombs were more anti-personnel than anything else. They were very low-power bombs. For AH's purposes they would be useless. At this time they still didn't use drop tanks, either. However, after the C.205 came into being (still with the exact same drop tank and bomb capacity) the armistace took place. I'm speeding the timeline up to get past the armistace. Italy was divided; about half the 205s and pilots went North to fly with Germany, and half stayed South to be hastily recognized by the Allies as co-belligerent forces.

Unfortunately, this meant that brother could be fighting brother (so to speak) and so the co-belligerent forces were tasked to attack the German army positions in the Balkans to keep them from having to fight their own kinsmen in the North.

To this end, a general order was made to use drop tanks due to the long range nature of flying to the Balkans and back. These C.205s didn't rack up many kills, though they flew an astounding amount of sorties and wreaked havoc on german positions and equipment, especially during the German withdrawal. They raised a lot of hell. I ran across this and some other interesting info the last time I dug into C.2 droptanks, from the last time it was discussed. I can't, however, find the references cited or the webpages that had this info NOW, now that I could use it.

You'll most likely find Co-Belligerent markings on photos of C.205s with DTs on them. Here's one:



But the hectic time of the invasion of Italy means there are only so many photos of these planes. Co-Belligerent photos are pretty rare overall. The DT was important enough to warrant a historical place on the airframe in that museum in Italy. They put one under one of the wings. They must have felt it was important. Because of these points above I'd love to see the 2x 100 Liter droptanks as an option for our new C.205s.

The Breda-SAFAT 12.7mm machine gunes:

The Breda SAFAT 12.7mm machine gun was heavily adapted from the Browning .50cal machine gune. It also suffered from the same problem the Browning had: When synchronized through a propeller, the rate of fire dropped significantly compared to that of an unsynchronized gun. While the Breda might do 700+ rpm normally, when fired through the prop this dropped to about 500-550 rpm. Some references put it as low as 400 rpm, which is quite believable since this is the RPM the Ho103 had and it used the same Italian ammo as the Breda and was also built off the Browning design. In-game now our C2 12.7mm fires at ~630 rpm, which is too fast. It needs to come down a bit. The same goes for all synchronized .50cal guns, as well. They seem to fire too fast as well.

Overall there is an average where you can estimate a gun will lose X percent of its rate of fire by synchronizing it, but there are a handful that defy this general statement and lose a lot more. Ho-103s, Breda-SAFAT 12.7mm, and Browning .50cal (the first 2 basically building from the Browning .50cal) all lose more rounds per minute than the average gun. A LOT more.

So now that we're getting the new Macchis, can we get the proper nose guns for them? Now would be the time to do it!

Offline Krusty

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 26745
Re: New C202 and C205 Models. NICE!
« Reply #66 on: March 03, 2013, 01:11:38 AM »
Per Tony Williams on another discussion of Ho103 and Browning .50cal synchronization:

Quote
This is from my next book:

"A practical example of the effect of synchronisation is graphically provided by comparative tests held by the USN in 1926/7 of the .30" M1921 and .50" M1921, both on a test stand and in synchronised mountings. These also shed some light on the differences between claimed and actual rates of fire, and between different installations of the same gun. The .30" had a claimed RoF of 1,200 rpm, but proved capable of between 800 and 900 rpm on the test stand. When synchronised, the RoF went down to an average of 730 rpm (a fall of about 15%), with a range of between 667 and 818 rpm for different installations and propeller speeds. The .50" had a claimed RoF of 600 rpm, and did rather well to achieve between 500 and 700 rpm, depending on the recoil buffer adjustment (although a contemporary British report put this at 400-650 rpm, the difference possibly caused by belt drag when installed), but this fell to an average of 438 rpm when synchronised, varying between 383 and 487 rpm. As the synchronised guns were adjusted for maximum RoF, this represented a reduction of around 37%. There is no inherent reason why a larger calibre weapon would suffer a bigger reduction in RoF, so the synchronisation conditions must have been better suited to the .30" gun's natural RoF."

This situation still existed in 1940, as the British tested a US plane (I forget which - a Curtiss I think) with synchronised .50s and grumbled about the 400-450 rpm RoF.

So our SBD, P-40C, Brewster, P-39s, C2s, Ki-84, should all drop to between 400 and 500 rpm firing rates for their nose mounted 12.7mm or .50cal guns.

Offline USRanger

  • AvA Staff Member
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10325
      • BoP Home
Re: New C202 and C205 Models. NICE!
« Reply #67 on: March 03, 2013, 02:20:54 AM »
I really do hope they take another look at the view out of the cockpit.  In all these years, I've never posted a "realism" whine, but I gotta say, this one looks pretty off.  The front two support beams need spread out & lose some weight.  Since it's my favorite fighter, I just felt the need to say something this time. :angel:



Axis vs Allies Staff Member
☩ JG11 Sonderstaffel ☩
Flying 'Black[Death] 10' ☩JG11☩

Only the Proud, Only the Strong Ne Desit Virtus

Offline Nathan60

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4573
Re: New C202 and C205 Models. NICE!
« Reply #68 on: March 03, 2013, 02:23:42 AM »
Well one thing is clear, Hitech likes em thick
HamHawk
Wing III-- Pigs on The Wing
FSO--JG54
CHUGGA-CHUGGA, CHOO-CHOO
Pigs go wing deep

Offline LCADolby

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7313
Re: New C202 and C205 Models. NICE!
« Reply #69 on: March 03, 2013, 06:26:12 AM »
I really do hope they take another look at the view out of the cockpit.  In all these years, I've never posted a "realism" whine, but I gotta say, this one looks pretty off.  The front two support beams need spread out & lose some weight.  Since it's my favorite fighter, I just felt the need to say something this time. :angel:

(Image removed from quote.)



The screenshot is of a C205, the photo is a C202. That doesn't match up.
JG5 "Eismeer"
YouTube+Twitch - 20Dolby10


"BE a man and shoot me in the back" - pez

Offline RngFndr

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 579
Re: New C202 and C205 Models. NICE!
« Reply #70 on: March 03, 2013, 06:35:18 AM »
WOW, 205 my favorite fighter.. Oh man, now I need to relearn the instruments..
Italiano, a Metrica.. Gonna be missing those generic gauge faces for awhile..

Looks SWEET, it was needed..

Offline Wmaker

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5743
      • Lentolaivue 34 website
Re: New C202 and C205 Models. NICE!
« Reply #71 on: March 03, 2013, 06:39:44 AM »
The screenshot is of a C205, the photo is a C202. That doesn't match up.

That particular C.202 doesn't have the armored glass. I guess I should have left that one out. The rest of the pics posted have the armored glass in place. That's really the only difference between C.202 and C.205 that matters in this issue.
Wmaker
Lentolaivue 34

Thank you for the Brewster HTC!

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23047
Re: New C202 and C205 Models. NICE!
« Reply #72 on: March 03, 2013, 08:17:24 AM »
I really do hope they take another look at the view out of the cockpit.  In all these years, I've never posted a "realism" whine, but I gotta say, this one looks pretty off.  The front two support beams need spread out & lose some weight.  Since it's my favorite fighter, I just felt the need to say something this time. :angel:

(Image removed from quote.)


Not really on my favorites list, but I do agree that the cockpit framing looks too thick compared to the photos.
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline icepac

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6977
Re: New C202 and C205 Models. NICE!
« Reply #73 on: March 03, 2013, 08:35:23 AM »
Bringing the rate of fire of the P51s guns real life levels will be met with much gnashing of teeth.

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23047
Re: New C202 and C205 Models. NICE!
« Reply #74 on: March 03, 2013, 08:40:06 AM »
Bringing the rate of fire of the P51s guns real life levels will be met with much gnashing of teeth.
What is the correct rate of fire and what is it now?  As I understand it, the .50 BMG should do 10-12 rounds per second.

And why would that only affect the P-51 and not other .50 BMG armed units?
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-