New French and Italian fighters by Bismarck13!

MC200

I think I can manage that one as soon as I finish up the project I am on now. As far as I know, there isn't even a bad ER-2 Model available . . .

:gameon:
 
Morton said:
Your G50 are exellent Bismarck!! What we really need now is an equivalent Saetta!! For some reason no one has done a good one for CFS2 yet.

Morton :guinness:
Click to expand...

Great minds think alike Morton..........:d

This is the same thought I had when I saw the G.50 announcement!

I wonder why the C.200 has been so neglected so far, it performed better that the G.50 and it equipped more squadrons.

The Macchi C.200 airframe was so good that it took few changes to create the C.202 by adapting the license-built German DB601 engine to it.

I can't wait for Bismarck's promise to look into it! :jump:

Cheers!
KH :ernae:
 
bismarck13 said:
I think I can manage that one as soon as I finish up the project I am on now. As far as I know, there isn't even a bad ER-2 Model available . . .

:gameon:
Click to expand...

How about that! That's exactly what I was thinking these very days, while reading again a French publication about Soviet combat aircrafts of WWII! As far as multi-engine bombers are concerned, we have, for CFS2, the Pe-2, the Tu-2, the Pe-8, I even found an Il-4, but I've never seen any Ermolaev Er-2/Yermolayev Yer-2 (both spellings exist). And yet it's a VERY nice twin-engine bomber, with its F4U-Corsair-like (or Stuka-like) wings!
 
I can see you're making the first version of the Er-2, with the Klimov M-105 engines and the single-pilot cockpit, offset to port to improve the downward view. It looks great! :jump:
 
JapLance said:
The old Alessandro Casadio's MC.200 still looks great to me:

http://www.simviation.com/cfs2aircraft2.htm

Low poly number and Multi-LOD model. Only shortcoming is that parts don't break off, but I'm not Maxstuka anyway :wavey:

But I wouldn't reject a newer version, the more options the better.
Click to expand...

I think we must concentrate on lacking versions. Casadio's version still is good, but we need a Serie One with closed cockpit. The same with the G-50.
 
peperez said:
I think we must concentrate on lacking versions. Casadio's version still is good, but we need a Serie One with closed cockpit. The same with the G-50.
Click to expand...

100% agree on the G.50. The closed cockpit version by IS4G is really showing its age. The early MC.200 they did is fine to me.
 
I need a bombing mission...

...to test a plane. It's flying beautifully, but I need to test its agressivity.
 
peperez said:
Mon MB.151 avec des marques françaises c'est au Simviation!

Bons vols!

Pepe
Click to expand...

Ah ben carrément en français maintenant! :)
Merci Pepe!

And I had never heard about this funny Brazilian saying regarding the "three way of doing". :)

As for the throttle, I guess you meant the contrary: they pulled the throttle instead of pushing it.
 
Deckard said:
Ah ben carrément en français maintenant! :)
Merci Pepe!

And I had never heard about this funny Brazilian saying regarding the "three way of doing". :)

As for the throttle, I guess you meant the contrary: they pulled the throttle instead of pushing it.
Click to expand...

The French pilots bring the throttle back instead of moving it to front (up) position...
 
Deckard said:
How about that! That's exactly what I was thinking these very days, while reading again a French publication about Soviet combat aircrafts of WWII! As far as multi-engine bombers are concerned, we have, for CFS2, the Pe-2, the Tu-2, the Pe-8, I even found an Il-4, but I've never seen any Ermolaev Er-2/Yermolayev Yer-2 (both spellings exist). And yet it's a VERY nice twin-engine bomber, with its F4U-Corsair-like (or Stuka-like) wings!
Click to expand...
:applause:

Deckard, given the penetration of Japanese society by the Communists at all levels(the Richard Sorge' case is an example), I'd have to say there was a Soviet spy at Mitsubishi. The resemblance between the Il-4 and the G4M Betty are too close to think otherwise. I'm not going to gauge the performance of two real life planes from a flight sim, but there are similarities in performance. I fly the Il-4 and fly against it using it as a target, it's a nice plane.

Bones
 
tonybones2112 said:
:applause:

Deckard, given the penetration of Japanese society by the Communists at all levels(the Richard Sorge' case is an example), I'd have to say there was a Soviet spy at Mitsubishi. The resemblance between the Il-4 and the G4M Betty are too close to think otherwise. I'm not going to gauge the performance of two real life planes from a flight sim, but there are similarities in performance. I fly the Il-4 and fly against it using it as a target, it's a nice plane.

Bones
Click to expand...

The Il-4 was older... It was avaiable, in its DB-3 form, in 1938. They were very different planes in terms of load and range. The Soviet plane, also, was smaller and less armed than the G4M, that intended to be the Japanese answer to the American B-17. Mitsubishi insisted to put four engine in its plane but the Navy High Command determined it would use only two in a stupid decision.

Cheers

Pepe
 
tonybones2112 said:
:applause:

Deckard, given the penetration of Japanese society by the Communists at all levels(the Richard Sorge' case is an example), I'd have to say there was a Soviet spy at Mitsubishi. The resemblance between the Il-4 and the G4M Betty are too close to think otherwise. I'm not going to gauge the performance of two real life planes from a flight sim, but there are similarities in performance. I fly the Il-4 and fly against it using it as a target, it's a nice plane.

Bones
Click to expand...

Bones, the Il-4 and the G4M Betty look similar indeed. But the Il-4, originally named DB-3F, was a development, with new engines, of the DB-3, which clearly predates the G4M Betty. The original prototype of the DB-3, the TsKB-26, first flew in the summer of 1935, and the all-metal development, the TsKB-30, first flew in 1936, whereas the first prototype of the G4M Betty left the factory in September 1939 and first flew in October 1939. But maybe the Soviets, for the DB-3/Il-4, drew their inspiration from the predecessor of the G4M, the Mitsubishi G3M "Nell" bomber, the prototype of which had its first flight in July 1935, as the "Ka-15"? It was itself a development of the Ka-9, which first flew in April 1934.

Deckard
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top