Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Yeah i read in more than one place that its tail had a tendency to break off if it exceeded its maximum reasonable speed. But, in simple terms, a plane that can fly so fast that it can tear itself apart. whoo thats kinda awesome. The 605 was perfect for this airplane. I also read that the 2005 pilots were kind of aggressive with their tactics. i read that they would run head on at an allied bomber, firing all their guns. at the last moment theyd dive away.
The Reggiane 2005 was designed right from the get-go around the DB 605, even though it looks like the reggiane 2001. italian designers poured all their knowledge into this airplane, perfecting the wings, fuselage, tail, everything. and since the italian pilots were complaining about the poor armament issues, the 2005 designers, unlike what happened with the g.55(which originally had 1 20mm and 4 12.7mm), added the effects of very heavy weaponry into the fighter design. granted the bf 109 already had a cannon in the wings in the e model, but in the f model those were deleted in favor of a 1 cannon 2 machine guns layout. the 20mm cannon packs for the field kits solved this problem outwardly, but the increased drag and strain on the wings affected performance adversely, and the 3 cannon uparmoured 109s were generally seen as fodder for the p-51s if flown by non-expert pilots. the reggianes wing was designed with 20mm cannons already in the wings, or were designed well enough with provisions for them in mind. there was never a 5 cannon re.2005, i was just speculating on the firepower if the italians had done such a thing as to add 20mm cannon packs, like they did on some re.2001s. armament wise, the G/R 109s were slightly better than the re,2005s because although the cannons were the same exact thing, their MG 131s were better than the Breda SAFATs in the reggiane 2005. plus, there are accounts of re.2005s being able to easily maneuver with their best allied opponents, likely including the p-51s that might have been seen here and there in the 2005's zone of operations. the bottom line is, the re.2005 was designed like a high speed race car(with very good aerodynamics), but equally as a potent fighter with very heavy armament for its time and country of origin. im not overstating the re.2005 intentionally, im saying that it had much more potential than it was allowed during its limited career.
Mr Tomo PaukRe.2001 was featuring a backward-retracting UC, so there were no problems to add gun gondolas - not the case for Re.2005, since it featured the widely-spread UC (not narrow, like Bf-109) that was retracting outwards. That layout was ill suited for for added gondolas, but Re.2005 didn't really needed it.
Re.2005 was able to do 630 km/h (yes, I do not believe in 680 km/h figure) - the 3-cannon Bf-109G is about there, if not better.
There is no point to speak bad about the armament of the G.55 - it was 3 x 20mm for all WW2 examples that saw action in the war. Plus a couple of HMGs - as good as Re.2005.
As for outmaneuvering the P-51, many planes were able to do that, yet that was about the only thing they could do better once in the air.
As for Re.2005 being designed as a high speed race car, that does not singles it out away from any fighter.
Mr Tomo Pauk
630km/h was the speed of Fiat G55. How you explain Re 2005 have the same speed with the bigger and heavier Fiat on the same engine (1300hp)?
All accounts report the re2005 as the fastest of the series 5 fighters
Indeed, it was faster than G.55, but was it fastest? MC.205 has far less wing area (25% less?).
Anyway, it's all within 15 km/h, but far away from a 680 km/h figure from Wiki entry about Re.2005 - it took Germans to install a 1800 HP engine to propel their 109Gs to that speed.