Why does the Breda 88 get shit on so much

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

pops-paolo said:
is thee anyway they could have re-designed it/remodeled the wieght?
Click to expand...

Yes by removing the .30 cals, IFF, and nose armor. It would also require us turning this thread into another P-39 thrashing session that will ultimately end up closed…

Cheers,
Biff

PS: My above answer is really an attempt at humor elsewhere on this forum…
 
Last edited:
A heavy airplane can use either a big wing to fly or big engines (or both).

The Breda 88 had neither. Plus the aerodynamics of a bad steam locomotive.




Wiki can be good and bad. It compared the Breda88 with the Bf 110. The 110 once it gat past the Jumo 210 engine had 10-15% more power than the Breda 88 in 1940 (got even better later) and had a larger wing for the same weight. The engines on the Breda 88 were barn doors.


They were almost identical in diameter to the R-2800s used in many American planes but had 1/2 the power at sea level and only about 60-65% of the power at 4000 meters.
The British Blenheim had lower powered engines but a much bigger wing.

It does look cool at first glance though
 
Gentlemen:
I read every single mind-numbing post & I believe what's being overlooked is Pops Paolo is Italian, has openly admitted his lack of aerodynamics, but feels a tug a of patriotism towards his country. He sees what appears to be a muscular aircraft that; just by going strictly on appearance is fast & a good military aircraft. Yet he reads the reports that reveals the harsh reality of the aircraft performance & these reports conflicts what the photos shows to be a sleek & beautiful design. I believe he's trying to rectify what he sees is a beautiful aircraft with the less-than complimentary assessments of its function. Meaning? If it looks good......

As a licensed private pilot with multi-engine rating, A&P mechanic, ( retired ) certified inspector for P&W PT-6 & JT-8 turboprop & jet engines, & blah, blah.. I can relate to all of the analysis of the pros & cons of the Breda 88. And yet through Pop's eyes, I too, see what appears to be an Italian aircraft variant of the famous Italian sports cars ( pick one).

As an active modeler (see my current super detailed Guillow's Mustang build) I too see a rare but beautiful subject to be modeled. I have even attempted considering to modeling this aircraft.

Performance? It yeah it's sucks. For appearance? I see a beefy looking sleek twin engined aircraft that says "Italian" with pride.

Cheers to you Pops. Hoping when you get a chance to visit Italy this year, you may visit some of the air museums & enjoy many aircraft of Italian design that stood with pride, starting with the Savoia M-65 racer & culminating in the world record setting MC-72 to the Atlantic crossing in formation of Balbo's M-55 & many more.

Cheers,
 
While I agree that the Lynx looked good to a certain extent, the bulbous semi-bomb bay extension ruins the lines for me.
Why not instead, look to the Savoia-Marchetti SM.91 for a sleek looking machine and one that could have had real potential in another lifetime?
 
Skyediamonds said:
starting with the Savoia M-65 racer & culminating in the world record-setting MC-72 to the Atlantic crossing information of Balbo's M-55 & many more.
Click to expand...

Getting your S's and M's mixed up there, skyediamonds, inhaling that jet fuel when servicing those PT6s and JT8s...

Savoia S.65, or Macchi M.67...

M.67

MC.72...

MC.72

And Balbo's S.55s.

S.55 model

I'd love to see one of these in person. There's a complete one in a museum in Brazil, but it's been closed to the public for a few years now since before COVID.

Lots more. Images from my 2019 visit to the Italian Air Force Museum on the shore of Lake Bracchiano.

Museo Storica Dell'Aeronautico Militare | Flickr
 
Three reasons it failed:
  • Lack of HP
  • A high wing loading aircraft design, in an air force that craved low wing loading fighters & low landing speeds - RAF, US, Luftwaffe all went through that transition, the Italians did not
  • The fuselage AND wing had the skin of a monocoque, but a full tubular fuselage as well.
Lets face it every air force had a twin engine attack plane that was a dog, Italy was unlucky enough to have their's when it counted the most
Curtiss A-18
Breguet 690, 693
Blenheim
Hs-129
 
DerAdlerIstGelandet said:
Thats the problem with youth today. They don't want to think for themselves. They want everything given to them.

If you want to actually learn something, then by all means. Otherwise don't waste our time.
Click to expand...
both engines had the same power, same weight, the bf110 was slightly faster, the bf110 was slightly bigger
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

Why did the U.S. navy reject the F6U Pirate?
Replies
10
Views
678
eagledad
E
S
Why did the Me 109 roll and turn so bad at speed?
5 6 7
Replies
134
Views
10K
GregP
SMGs in ww2 with much smaller cartridges?
2 3
Replies
53
Views
2K
Admiral Beez
A
H
Why was the Barracuda so much slower than the Avenger?
3 4 5
Replies
92
Views
9K
EwenS
E
WW2 Fantasy Aircraft
2 3
Replies
44
Views
1K
tomo pauk
Menu
Log in
Register