Best Italian Fighter of WWII

[Acheron]

So, while browsing wikipedia, I come across this right at the start on the article of the Fiat G.55 Centauro:

The Fiat G.55 was arguably the best type produced in Italy during World War II,[2]​ (a subjective claim also frequently made for the Macchi C.205 Veltro as well as for the Reggiane Re.2005 Sagittario)

Hoho, I thought, definitely a case for this forum! So, what was the best one in your opinion?

Also, later in the article:

designers shifted their attention on the new, larger and more powerful Fiat RA.1050, a license-built copy of the Daimler-Benz DB 605. Aircraft powered by this new engine became the "Serie 5", and all had alphanumeric designations ending in the number "5" (Macchi C.205, Reggiane Re.2005, Fiat G.55).

So, would it be accurate to say, that the Italians had trouble making a powerful engine, but were quite good with air-frames or what made these planes so impressive?

 

[GregP]

Definitely one of those three ... I lean toward the pretty one. Which is all three.

The Fiat was probably the easiest to produce and the Reggiane was probably the most complex to produce. They all performed remarkably alike, with a slight advantage going to more than one of them at some point in the envelope.

Military pilots don't usually GET a choice but, if I COULD choose, I'd probably choose the Macchi .. though I would not be disappointed by any of the three .... at least, if the Reggiane had the tail structural weakness fixed, that is.

 

[msxyz]

I lean towards the Reggiane Re.2005 although it came in such low numbers that it had no impact on the war effort.

A British expert pilot and instructor said once about it that it combined the best aspects of Spitfire and Messerschmidt in a single plane (I remember posting a link of his book a few months ago in these very forums in a similar thread)

If we don't consider the Re.2005, I think the best may be the G.55. The C.205 was a C.202 adapted to host the larger DB605 engine and it shared the same vice and virtues of its predecessor.

The G.55 was every bit as good as the other '5' series fighters, and it also had some growth potential (it was originally designed to mount a FIAT inverted V16 engine that never wen past prototyping stage): a DB603 powered version was in the works and it would have been a formidable opponent. Post war, FIAT adapted the Merlin engine to the G.55 frame to create the G.59

 

[Vincenzo]

i stay with the Macchi C.202, the "serie 5" came too late

 

[Just Schmidt]

i stay with the Macchi C.202, the "serie 5" came too late

I agree. In as far as serving in anything approaching useful numbers is a parameter, there really isn't any contest.

 

[GrauGeist]

The G.55 was the best out of the three.

So much so, the Luftwaffe even considered producing a version for themselves.

 

[Acheron]

Military pilots don't usually GET a choice but, if I COULD choose, I'd probably choose the Macchi .. though I would not be disappointed by any of the three .... at least, if the Reggiane had the tail structural weakness fixed, that is.

Interesting, considering what M msxyz wrote

The C.205 was a C.202 adapted to host the larger DB605 engine and it shared the same vice and virtues of its predecessor.

Skimming over wikipedia, these vices seemed bad. Assuming the fixed the radios and upgraded the armament, I understand M msxyz that the 205 retained the issue of suddenly entering into a spin.

I agree. In as far as serving in anything approaching useful numbers is a parameter, there really isn't any contest.

And if we leave that out? Would make the thread more fun If you want, you can factor in ease/cheapness of production in comparison, though if you don't want, be my guest.

 

[Graeme]

Citation [2] = Aircraft of World War II by Jefferey L. Ethell. Collin/Jane's - 1995.

The World's smallest book on the Subject?

 

[GregP]

Wiki is the worst source in the world except for no source.

The MC.205 or C.205, depending on who is writing it, was indeed a 202 with an Italian DB 605 in it. It was a winner in every sense of the word, and every Allied pilot who flew one universally loved it. Of course, you could say the same for the Fiat G.55. It was ALSO a winner. Ditto the Re.2005.

They built about 274 G.55s during the war and 75 post-war.
They built about 1,200 MC.202s and about 262 MC.205s during the war.
They built about 48 Re.2005s during the war.

If I wanted a force of Serie 5 Italian fighters, I'd have to stick with Macchi, but the G.55 was a very good airplane. The Re.2005 was the last gasp of the basic design lines of the Seversky line, and the tail was about the same as a Seversky P-35, A Republic P-43 / P-47, and Reggiane's own Re.2000. Pretty, but not many built. The Germans built more Junkers Ju.88 prototypes than the entire run of Re.2005s!

 

[Graeme]

Wiki is the worst source in the world except for no source.

Absolutely!
I'm just glad that the Little Ethell made it onto Wikipedia.
Although, interestingly, he never mentions the word "best". I see "excellent" and "loved".
Love is good.

Inside - in itsy-bitsy type...

He does mention the G.56 version however.
Which lead me to "best" - seen in The Fiat Fighters by Piedro Vergnano...

 

[GregP]

One man's opinion anyway.

They look to me like they're in pretty much of a dead heat, with all having great handling, good stall, decent speed for the time, and well-balanced controls.

Yes, there may be some things to dislike (not from memory .. I'd have to look them up), but not many overall when compared with their erstwhile contemporaries. All three were likely better than the Bf 109, but there certainly weren't 29,000+ wartime Seri 5 fighters flitting about making mischief.

 

[msxyz]

Interesting, considering what M msxyz wrote

Skimming over wikipedia, these vices seemed bad. Assuming the fixed the radios and upgraded the armament, I understand M msxyz that the 205 retained the issue of suddenly entering into a spin.

Yes, both had a tendency to enter a spin after hard turns. From what I've read, however, the plane gave ample warning ('shaking' is the word often used by those who drove it) so the pilots knew in advance when they had to go easy on the stick.

If we go in a 'what if' scenario, then I'd like to include the Re.2002. The engine was not on par with the series '5' (1200HP) but it was a very good all round fighter bomber and it was the chosen design for a multirole carrier based aircraft. Too bad it was outdated when it entered service in 1942. Two years earlier? It would have been competitive especially in a 'clean' configuration. It had 3 hardpoints and could mount a combination of fuel tanks, bombs, rockets or even lightweight torpedoes. Like many other Italian planes, it was hindered by the lack of a powerful engine, in this case a radial. Its engine was a 14 cylinder Piaggio (Rhone 14 derived, all Italian radial designs are evolutions of foreign engines) with a higher compression possible thanks to using German spec fuel (91 octane in Italian designation) instead of the typical Italian one (80/87).

The designer of Reggiane fighters, Ing. Longhi, worked in the States from 1926 to 1936 at Curtiss and other companies; he befriended US industrialist Seversky and he also worked with with famous designer Alexander Kvarteli. There is a persistent rumour that Longhi did license many designs from Seversky when it came back to Italy in 1938, a rumour that Republic aviation officials always denied, despite the historic fact that Seversky was ousted from the company he founded when it was caught red handed selling sensible technology to Japan right before ww2.

 

[msxyz]

Sorry double post.

 

[Graeme]

Two more with "best".

 

[Acheron]

Wiki is the worst source in the world except for no source.

Here I have to disagree. Yes, wikipedia is at times inaccurate or outright false, but I would maintain that for every well-researched book out there, you will find at least one other that is actually worse than wiki, rating an aircraft based on their nationality or manufacturer seems rather common (fanboys and haters).

 

[Greyman]

For what it's worth Eric Brown rated the Macchi 205 one of the top 20 greatest aircraft he ever flew.

Unfortunately it appears he was never able to get his hands on the G.55 or Reggiane 2005.

 

[Vincenzo]

Actually there were two M.C.205, the first a 202 with the new engine, called C.205V, and a redesigned one called C.205N

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Wikipedia is a double edge sword. What I like to do is see the references given for a given paragraph or statement, usually shown at the bottom of the page. With that you can verify the source of the information. When I don't see a reference, that's when I become suspicious.

For me I think it's the 202/ 205 series with the G55 a close (very close) second.

 

[GregP]

Here is drawing I did of the G.55.

It's a good one, to be sure. Also drew the others, but the G.55 seems like a good one to show.

 

[Clayton Magnet]

Two more with "best".

View attachment 653159
View attachment 653160

They're 2 aircraft just crying out for a bubble type canopy.