1C Home   |   Register   |   Today Posts   |   Members   |   UserCP   |   Calendar   |   Search   |   FAQ

Go Back   Official 1C Company forum > 1C Publishing > IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover

IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover Latest instalment in the acclaimed IL-2 Sturmovik series from award-winning developer 1C: Maddox Games.

Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-13-2011, 10:55 AM
JG53Frankyboy JG53Frankyboy is offline
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,159

anyway, the behaviour of its engine is, well........................... i guess we have to wait for the big "FM and CEM 'overhaul' patch" .
All radials have a questionable behaviour , espacially with its temperatures.

i personally would have made the Cr.42 flyable instead of the G.50. These had at least aircombat with the RAF. But that is like beating a dead horse
Reply With Quote
Old 05-13-2011, 05:49 PM
Rattlehead Rattlehead is offline
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 727

Originally Posted by Blackdog_kt View Post

Sorry for the long post
Not at all.
I enjoyed reading it.
Reply With Quote
Old 05-13-2011, 06:33 PM
jf1981 jf1981 is offline
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 334

I love the spit, I must say I need a bit of training on the onther ones.
Reply With Quote
Old 05-13-2011, 06:34 PM
Rickusty Rickusty is offline
Approved Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Rome, Total Wa... ehm, Italy
Posts: 115

Originally Posted by pupaxx View Post
the real G50 had a porked FM...I hope you enjoy some memories on 'Gigetto' so nicknamed by R.A. pilots:

The G50 was a fighter who tried to make their way through the ranks of biplanes whom were so adherent to the aerobatic tradition of Regia Aeronautica.
Was a plane with a strong tendency to spin even in level formation flight (as occurred to 2°Lt Mancini) because a wing design error.
The dangerousness of G50 was accentuated by a fuel tank behind the pilot and by an heavy armour, it not allowed the pilot to abandon the control stick for a single instant, the plane needed a continuous correction.
At that time Italian pilots were used to 'sit down' the plane at landing with the cloche pulled at the 'belly', G50 simply not allowed this without the risk of left wing drop.
Fiat had solved the drawback making the wing tip replaceable!
More skilled pilots used to push under the instrument dash the stick at the first touch with terrain.
How many well-executed 'tailslide' looked from ground were effectively attemped 'loopings'!!! And how many offset 'tonneaux' turned into violent spins with the nose towards the ground...

Tullio De Prato (chief-test pilot at Caproni-Reggiane Industries, rank of Major in R.A., 1 tour of duty Albania, 2 ToD North Africa, Reggiane 2005 test pilot) wrote in a letter: ''...talking about 'flight charateristics'
is a blasphemy, for sure these are optimistically obtained from 'naked' prototype...I sustained a close combat against an Hurricane (and i was regularly shot down) and I assure you the velocity gap was well above 10% in difference in my disadvantage.
With the weightened tail the plane impose an high-drag flight assett. Not to mention the armaments, the air intake (so low that sucked more sand than air), the constant feeling of walking on ice upset the more experienced pilot and made him regret the maneuvrable and quiet Cr42.
The engine...after 2 days in Lybia eated more oil than petrol and required endless takeoff before disconnecting, with anguish, the wheels off the ground...''

G50 in Battle of Britain
In September 1940, 20° Gruppo (Squadriglie 351/352/353), commanded by Maggiore Mario Bonzano, equipped with Fiat G.50 was part of the 56° Stormo formed to operate during the Battle of Britain as part of the Corpo Aereo Italiano based in Belgium, with 18° Gruppo (Fiat CR.42). Their use was hampered by their slow speed, open cockpits and short range. At the beginning of 1941, the C.A.I. came back in Italy, except for two G.50 Squadriglie that stayed in Belgium with Luftflotte 2, until April. While with the C.A.I. the Fiats flew 429 missions, 34 escorts and 26 scrambles but could not manage to engage enemy aircraft.
One aircraft was lost and seven more were damaged. While with Luftflotte 2, 20° Gruppo lost four additional fighters and two pilots were killed (Roncali (13 February 1941) and Meneghini (3 April), both of 352a Squadriglia), while two G.50s were damaged by German fighters and flak.
The experiences of the early series G.50s over Britain showed the inadequacies of the type. Its operations were almost useless in the campaign because they were too short-ranged and stationed too away from England. The G.50s had limited endurance, with missions rarely exceeding one hour.
The G.50bis with larger fuel tanks was already in production, but it was not sent to 20° Gruppo in time. Performance was also lacking; when 22 Fiat G.50s intercepted several Hawker Hurricanes on 5 November 1940, the RAF fighters easily escaped.
On 21 November, when a Bristol Blenheim attacked the Medgelem airfield two G.50s scrambled, but lost the bomber in the clouds. On 23 November, G.50s followed four Hurricanes, but were unable to close on them. Another fruitless intercept took place on 31 January, when G.50s lost a Blenheim that escaped into the clouds. The last sighting of enemy aircraft occurred on 8 April 1941, when, once again, the elusive targets were not intercepted.
The G.50s were early models with an open canopy, useful in Mediterranean climes, but the pilots suffered heavily in the bad weather of northern Europe. The aircraft was also under-equipped, with a mediocre radio set (powered by batteries, prone to freeze at altitude) and lacking any armour protection.
In Belgium, 20° Gruppo had the opportunity to see the Bf 109 in action with several G.50 pilots trained top fly the type with two Bf 109Es sent to the Gruppo in mid-January 1941.

Courage alone!
Yeah, the G.50 was a real waste of good metal and aluminium and , to be honest, caused the death of good pilots...

A typical example of all the good bribes and political connections that were keys in deciding to put that crap in production BEFORE evaluating its real potentials, and even after the Macchi C.200 "Saetta" was declared the winner of the "Project R" tender. (justly so)
Its inadequateness just adds up to the bravery and mastery of the Finnish pilots.

But the fact remains that the G.50 in the game has overall wrong characteristics compared to the real one.

I once posted a British pilot's account on when he flew both, a captured Macchi C.200 and a Fiat G.50 in North Africa, and while the first was considered by him "one of the best aircraft" he ever flew, he said the G.50 was a rather useless warbird.

found it

Click HERE


Last edited by Rickusty; 05-13-2011 at 06:56 PM.
Reply With Quote
Old 05-13-2011, 06:52 PM
Rattlehead Rattlehead is offline
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 727

Originally Posted by Rickusty View Post

found it

Click HERE

Thanks Rick, very interesting indeed.
Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-2011, 04:15 AM
drewpee drewpee is offline
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Western Australia
Posts: 427

bf109 for me. You have to work harder to down a spit. I tend to stall out in a climb when I was sure I had more E and my inability to take out the enemy with a quick burst leaves me open to wing man attacks. But when I manage to out maneuver a spit that's turning hard to get on your six using more vertical E officiant manovers and a cutting snap shot is totally satisfying.
Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-2011, 04:21 AM
Roger Wilco Roger Wilco is offline
Junior Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 16

the 109
Reply With Quote

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT. The time now is 03:16 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 1C Company. All rights reserved.