PDA

View Full Version : Those Italian warbirds



Freiwillige
11-30-2009, 03:26 AM
Have been reading up on and flying the Italian fighters allot lately. One thing I noticed is the Macchi series of fighters 200\202\205 all have a viscous high speed stall. Reading Italian comparisons they felt their Macchi's were superior to the comparable 109's. Yet in Sim it seems the 109's fly rings around the Macchi's.

Since I am no expert I am asking you what are your opinions on the Macchi's?

Freiwillige
11-30-2009, 03:26 AM
Have been reading up on and flying the Italian fighters allot lately. One thing I noticed is the Macchi series of fighters 200\202\205 all have a viscous high speed stall. Reading Italian comparisons they felt their Macchi's were superior to the comparable 109's. Yet in Sim it seems the 109's fly rings around the Macchi's.

Since I am no expert I am asking you what are your opinions on the Macchi's?

M_Gunz
11-30-2009, 03:38 AM
What is a "viscous high speed stall"? Something to do with the air of airfoil?

x6BL_Brando
11-30-2009, 06:58 AM
Viscous = sticky : Vicious = wicked, or violent

I think Freiwillige intended to convey the second word, a simple typo.

B

BillSwagger
11-30-2009, 06:59 AM
Macchis are decent and fun to fly but they lack the firepower to be of any use in game.

I know of no high speed stall, but it does do better than the 109 in the vertical. Its more noticeable against spitfires. I wouldn't use the plane as a turn fighter, although i've found it easy to hold position on Spitfires in tighter turn fights, but if the Spit had position i would not resort to tight turns, i would try to keep the fight faster.

I am unfamiliar with the historical performance of these planes, however i have looked into the Re-2000 which lead to the Re-2001. This plane bares a close resemblance to the Macchi so I wonder if they were not more maneuverable than how they are currently portrayed in the sim.

Now that i think about it, a few months ago i seem to recall a short discussion of the Macchi by a Spitfire pilot who had the chance to fly a captured 200. You might look to see if you can find that article again because it gave some pretty good information about its performance and turn ability. From what i remember the pilot mentioned it was a stable plane to fly, but to comment further i would need to refer to the article to be sure.



Bill

Kettenhunde
11-30-2009, 07:46 AM
Oops...edited because I misread it.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> Something to do with the air of airfoil? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes the airfoil influences the behavior of the aircraft in a stall. You can look at the polar and tell what the stall behavior will be on any airfoil.

The term "high speed stall" is really not a very technical one. I think in this case, you mean an accelerated stall as opposed to a shock induced separation.

Accelerated stalls in uncoordinated flight are vicious no matter what the airfoil.


All the best,

Crumpp

jamesblonde1979
11-30-2009, 08:14 AM
The 202 can be tricky to fly but I'd say it's performance is as good as a contemporary 109.

As for lack of fire-power, I find the armament adequate.

M_Gunz
11-30-2009, 09:14 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by x6BL_Brando:
Viscous = sticky : Vicious = wicked, or violent

I think Freiwillige intended to convey the second word, a simple typo.

B </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I wasn't sure so I asked.

mortoma
11-30-2009, 10:53 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BillSwagger:
Macchis are decent and fun to fly but they lack the firepower to be of any use in game. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>I have shot down hundreds of planes flying both the MC-200 and the 202. Marksmanship is an acquired skill that takes practice. About half of my kills in those two planes are PK's. I can shoot down IL2s every time by chewing up their ailerons. You also learn the weak points of enemy planes when you have weak guns! Flying those types makes you better because you learn a lot and learn how to shoot and hit the places where you want to hit. Fly a FW-190 and you need not care much about the "where" factor. Fly a Macchi and you have to care about the where.

BillSwagger
11-30-2009, 11:25 AM
How ever you'd like to word it, the Macchi guns are much too weak for any flying advantage it has to be of use.
You might be able to shoot down a plane with a well placed burst. I have lit engines a blaze with Macchi guns, so it is possible.
I've just found that in actual combat there might not always be time to lay that perfect shot, or your target isn't flying still enough. Usually I fire if i'm certain i can connect with a shot, being able to get the shot into the weakest part of the plane is secondary.
This probably isn't entirely true of the MC 205 series.

I know that ever since i flew a 200 against a spitfire for a few minutes with out success that the armament simply would not do. I had the spit beat in ever turn, and he was whirling around trying to shake me but that just aloud for me to pull deflection. I got shots up and down his fuselage, several times over, in the course of a few minutes. There was damage debri and flashes on his fuselage but nothing came of this. To put it in contrast, the Spit fires into the Macchi and the fight is over with half the amount of trigger time.

I also hold an opinion that the spitfire 20mm is too heavy. I can use the F4U-1c or Tempest Hispano and i might get better results using only a pair of Spitfire 20mm. I'm not sure if the belting is different, but it is something i noticed when flying those planes particularly when the shots are well placed at 250-300m. The Spit cannon just has more punch and seems to fold wings a bit better.

Anyway. thats not really on the topic of the macchi.


Bill

Insuber
11-30-2009, 11:28 AM
+1

Macchi's guns are a bit like the desert for a SAS training ... they really oblige you to administer wisely your scarce resources.

regards,
Insuber

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mortoma:
I have shot down hundreds of planes flying both the MC-200 and the 202. Marksmanship is an acquired skill that takes practice. About half of my kills in those two planes are PK's. I can shoot down IL2s every time by chewing up their ailerons. You also learn the weak points of enemy planes when you have weak guns! Flying those types makes you better because you learn a lot and learn how to shoot and hit the places where you want to hit. Fly a FW-190 and you need not care much about the "where" factor. Fly a Macchi and you have to care about the where. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Insuber
11-30-2009, 11:40 AM
By the way, when the Fiat G.55 will be flyable it will give a bad surprise to many Spit online flyers http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif In its 1944 version it has 1475 HP, a low wing load and 3 MG 151/20 + 2 Breda-SAFAT 12.7.

Regards,
Insuber

Romanator21
11-30-2009, 12:36 PM
The Macchis are, in my opinion, better than the 109, but they take more time to get used to first. They are less forgiving in stalls/spins.
Regarding firepower, I think the Italians only used 100 meter convergence, as a pose to more common 200 meter. Also considering that Breda shots are really slow (low energy) it's important to hit from very close. But all things considered, the MC.202 was a failure because of the light armament, and because it was 3 times as expensive/took 3 times as long as a 109 to produce.

Sillius_Sodus
11-30-2009, 03:18 PM
If you fly the 202 like the P-51, i.e. use lots of trim while turning, it handles well. When it does depart controlled flight you will often end up in a flat spin which can be tricky to exit. The guns seem very weak but I find that if you can stay on target for a few seconds, all of a sudden your target will suffer catastrophic damage. I've cut lots of wings and fuselages in half with the Bredas.

Frankthetank36
11-30-2009, 03:26 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BillSwagger:


I also hold an opinion that the spitfire 20mm is too heavy. I can use the F4U-1c or Tempest Hispano and i might get better results using only a pair of Spitfire 20mm. I'm not sure if the belting is different, but it is something i noticed when flying those planes particularly when the shots are well placed at 250-300m. The Spit cannon just has more punch and seems to fold wings a bit better.

Anyway. thats not really on the topic of the macchi.


Bill </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The problem with the Spitfire is that it doesn't have much cannon ammo and when you run out you're only left with a few .30 cal peashooters (the Zero has the same problem). It's great if you can make every shot count, but you can't shoot from far distances like you can with the 190's cannons just because you'll run out too soon.

Freiwillige
11-30-2009, 03:27 PM
According to IL2 compare the Bf-109F4 blows the MC-202 away in everything.
Speed, climb, turn radius, dive speed.

Erkki_M
11-30-2009, 03:33 PM
Actually the MC-205 is not too bad of a plane. It is in many ways a better fighter than the Bf109G6, but if I had to choose between the two, I'd pick the 109, though mainly because I've flown it a couple of thousands of hours more. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

205 has sufficient armament, is maneuverable, turns pretty well, comparably much better than the 109s at lower speeds, and is actually a bit faster than the G6. Its only real relative weakness is its horrible cockpit visibility, even worse than in 109G2 and G6early!

Ba5tard5word
11-30-2009, 03:42 PM
200 and 202 are fun to fly but as stated above, their armament is really lacking and they are slow, but the 200 is fine against Hurricanes and the 202 can hold its own against P-40's.

The 205 however is a really great plane in Il-2, I prefer it to 109's. Some 109's are faster but only the late models. Also I really prefer wing-mounted guns, for some reason I just seem to get more shots on target with them--the 205 has two cannons and a nice large ammo count for them so you can get several kills per mission. Its 12.7mm MG's basically just act as tracers to guide you on target with the cannons. Other than that it's pretty similar to a 109 except that it has that finicky speed stall...oh yeah and it has numbered ammo counters which is nice.

Yeah any of these will do a speed stall (where you're flying at any speed and pull too hard back on the stick and the plane will flip over to the right) but many planes will do this like Fw-190's and Spitfires and pretty much any US plane. The Bf-109 and La-5 don't do it, and maybe a few others but I can't think of any. You just have to get used to it, and once you do it's not a detraction to the plane.

Flying an MC-205 against Spitfire VIII's is a fun battle, they're a good match for one another. Unfortunately for the Italians the 205 came out basically when Italy was just about out of the war.

PanzerAce
11-30-2009, 04:13 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Insuber:
By the way, when the Fiat G.55 will be flyable it will give a bad surprise to many Spit online flyers http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif In its 1944 version it has 1475 HP, a low wing load and 3 MG 151/20 + 2 Breda-SAFAT 12.7.

Regards,
Insuber </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I've been flying the G.55 Late with the HSFX mod, and it really is quite a beast. It'll give almost anything in game a major headache, including Yaks. The current FM is, as expected, a bit wonky, including a snap stall at speeds that has to be seen to be believed. I'm looking forward to the next TD patch for a real FM and cockpit http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

VW-IceFire
11-30-2009, 05:51 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BillSwagger:
I also hold an opinion that the spitfire 20mm is too heavy. I can use the F4U-1c or Tempest Hispano and i might get better results using only a pair of Spitfire 20mm. I'm not sure if the belting is different, but it is something i noticed when flying those planes particularly when the shots are well placed at 250-300m. The Spit cannon just has more punch and seems to fold wings a bit better.

Anyway. thats not really on the topic of the macchi.


Bill </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
It's the same gun on all of the Hispano types. Belting is identical (I tested it a while ago). I think it is one of those effects where a gun seems more powerful possibly by it's placement or perhaps by other influencing factors. Another example is the P-40E versus the P-51D where the P-40 sometimes feels like it has more firepower than the P-51D despite the same number of guns.

Hurricane IIc's have always felt much more potent than a Spitfire's twin 20mm.

The Breda guns on the Macchi's are indeed horrible. I've emptied an entire loadout into the back of a P-47 once with no effect. The only Macchi worth flying for me is the MC.205 III with the MG151/20 guns in the wings. Now that is a fantastic fighter.

BillSwagger
11-30-2009, 06:44 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
It's the same gun on all of the Hispano types. Belting is identical (I tested it a while ago). I think it is one of those effects where a gun seems more powerful possibly by it's placement or perhaps by other influencing factors. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

True. i never really thought about the differences in P-40 vs P-51D, but they are with in reason just one is more stable than the other.
The spitfire is more stable than the F4U, but i'm just looking at the number of tracers that land on target since thats all you can really see anyway. In going head to head with a spitfire in an F4U-1c, and i unloaded into the spit and it flys away, only to return and take my wing off in much less trigger time. This scenario has played out more than a few times, which is really the only reason why i noticed. A spit is a smaller plane, harder to hit, but it should come apart easier. The contrast between these two planes armaments sticks out quite a bit, which leads me to think that the Spits 20mm x 2 is too strong.

I later got PK'd by an La-7 and his rail gun from 700m, so a lot of what i see online is also questionable anyway, and probably has more to do with the obvious than how the game was intended.



Bill

Gadje
12-01-2009, 03:56 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mortoma:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BillSwagger:
Macchis are decent and fun to fly but they lack the firepower to be of any use in game. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>I have shot down hundreds of planes flying both the MC-200 and the 202. Marksmanship is an acquired skill that takes practice. About half of my kills in those two planes are PK's. I can shoot down IL2s every time by chewing up their ailerons. You also learn the weak points of enemy planes when you have weak guns! Flying those types makes you better because you learn a lot and learn how to shoot and hit the places where you want to hit. Fly a FW-190 and you need not care much about the "where" factor. Fly a Macchi and you have to care about the where. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Your talking about AI here obviously. Bill about online. Huge difference. Any reasonable human pilot will not give you the chance to aim for ailerons LOL!
Apart from the weak firepower if you only fly in cockpit with pit on the Macchi's rear view is a real handicap. Obviously not if your using arrows or F2/F6 for your situation awareness. This makes it quite a different plane to fly. So you don't find it flown much with the BredaSAFAT guns if there is a 109 option in full real servers.

Erkki_M
12-01-2009, 04:38 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BillSwagger:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
It's the same gun on all of the Hispano types. Belting is identical (I tested it a while ago). I think it is one of those effects where a gun seems more powerful possibly by it's placement or perhaps by other influencing factors. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

True. i never really thought about the differences in P-40 vs P-51D, but they are with in reason just one is more stable than the other.
The spitfire is more stable than the F4U, but i'm just looking at the number of tracers that land on target since thats all you can really see anyway. In going head to head with a spitfire in an F4U-1c, and i unloaded into the spit and it flys away, only to return and take my wing off in much less trigger time. This scenario has played out more than a few times, which is really the only reason why i noticed. A spit is a smaller plane, harder to hit, but it should come apart easier. The contrast between these two planes armaments sticks out quite a bit, which leads me to think that the Spits 20mm x 2 is too strong.

I later got PK'd by an La-7 and his rail gun from 700m, so a lot of what i see online is also questionable anyway, and probably has more to do with the obvious than how the game was intended. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

There are various reasons. In P51 vs P40 for example, P40 is more stable, has better gunsight and more room around it to line up deflection shots, and different type of convergence setup(box instead of point).