BlueBeta

Breda Ba.88 Lince

vp_915dc1e2dab4a599a009605007195123.jpg

 

 

Gba88.jpg

 

 

This was a twin engine ground assault plane armed with 3×12.7mm in the nose and 1 7.7mm as defensive

 

It could carry up to 1000kg of bombs and reach the speed of 490km/h

It will be Rank 1 in War Thunder.

 

10 May 2017

https://warthunder.com/en/news/4696-development-ba-88-lince-a-wild-spirit-en

 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, _Condottiero_ said:

Why only "three 50 kg, three 100 kg, or two 250 kg bombs"?

Because in overload (with 500kg) it wouldn't take off

 

"Only 250kg" for a rank1 is very fine...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The devblog video shows the plane rolling rather quickly actually. I expected it to be much more sluggish honestly.

medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I'm suspecting the stock payload to be the 3 x 50 kg payload, I have a feeling that this is going to be a fairly sluggish grind at first by rank 1 standards, particularly since, while its performance isn't terrible for such a low tier, it would only be barely adequate for use in the fighter role except as a last resort (meaning that early on, you're limited to strafing soft targets and perhaps light pillboxes if you're persistent enough to blow through all of your ammo for only a couple of ground kills), especially if the Breda-SAFAT MG (and by extension the Japanese Ho-103, which used the same ammunition) STILL doesn't get proper HE shells when the patch drops (no, Gaijin, Immediate-Action Incendiary is NOT  the same as High-Explosive - the former just makes a bright flash to assist in aiming, the latter actually does some ****ing damage).

 

On the other hand I suppose it's a good thing that War Thunder doesn't model reliability issues, as I suspect that with the Italians being added, we'll see at least a handful of maps based on the North African Theater as well, as the real plane was largely pulled from front line service because the engines couldn't handle sand (now, cooling issues on such maps, on the other hand...).

Edited by Z3r0_
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A pathetic addition not worth the effort that was put into it.

 

The main contribution of this aircraft to the War was to act as a decoy on airfields so that proper aircraft wouldn't be hit - it was unflyable by most pilots, some were incapable to turning when airborne, apparently some couldn't take off even with both engines running!!

 

Wt is supposed to be at least somewhat realistic - really dropped the ball on this one :(

 

 

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Z3r0_ said:

On the other hand I suppose it's a good thing that War Thunder doesn't model reliability issues, as I suspect that with the Italians being added, we'll see at least a handful of maps based on the North African Theater as well, as the real plane was largely pulled from front line service because the engines couldn't handle sand (now, cooling issues on such maps, on the other hand...).

 

It's not even a matter of just reliability with this aircraft - the top speed when loaded was only half that promised, some couldn't take off, some couldn't turn when airborne - this thing should have the same flight model as the BV 238.... but nerfed a bit, and the same top speed as the Po-2!!:facepalm:

  • Confused 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Josephs_Piano said:

A pathetic addition not worth the effort that was put into it.

 

The main contribution of this aircraft to the War was to act as a decoy on airfields so that proper aircraft wouldn't be hit - it was unflyable by most pilots, some were incapable to turning when airborne, apparently some couldn't take off even with both engines running!!

 

Wt is supposed to be at least somewhat realistic - really dropped the ball on this one :(

 

 

 

It was a great failure BUT there is some soul into it . It made his war actions , it made his world records , it was very advanced at the time . Yes in Africa it was a total failure but this aircraft have some history , even if not an happy one . Im not against projects , failed aircrafts that had the efforts of a nation/men/pilots behind ( japanese G5N or XP-55 or HE-100 ) im more upset when i see 2-3 Fw190 with the japanese .

  • Upvote 4
medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah the record breaking aircraft was a different beat entirely - but also unarmed so not much use - and it is certainly a good looking machine.....

 

And like you the presence of captured a/c in the game is a great annoyance - especially the number of Japanese B-17's appearing in AB ground forces....  but that's another issue :)

  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As mediocre as the Ba88 was, WT does have other planes that in the war performed almost as horribly. TBD Devastators got completely butchered at Midway, the F2A-3 was so horribly overweight it couldn't perform loops (or so I read somewhere, can't remember where sorry!), the Me 163 did more damage to its pilots than to B17 squadrons, the Ta 154 production was cancelled because the production models performed much worse than the prototypes....

 

Part of the fun of the game is to have a few odd ball planes and wonder what would have happened to those machines in better conditions. If the Ba 88's engines had consistently performed up to specifications and the plane wasn't as overloaded with military equipment (afaik the ones that couldn't take off were supposed to carry a 1000 kg payload, which is not included in the game), things could have gone differently, who knows. After all, on paper the plane's specs (assuming the engines perform properly) are very comparable to a 110.

Edited by TLTeo
  • Upvote 4
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Josephs_Piano said:

 

It's not even a matter of just reliability with this aircraft - the top speed when loaded was only half that promised, some couldn't take off, some couldn't turn when airborne - this thing should have the same flight model as the BV 238.... but nerfed a bit, and the same top speed as the Po-2!!:facepalm:

 

The assumption here is that WT's version of the aircraft is what a Ba.88 would've been capable of under ideal conditions, as it seems that a lot of the trouble with the aircraft had less to do with design flaws and more to do with dismal quality control and quality assurance during production of various components, the engines in particular.  This is hardly surprising, as issues with manufacturing quality and logistics were the bane of the Italian war effort (not just in World War II, but also in World War I), and makes the fact that they still managed to hold their own for a little while even more impressive.

Edited by Z3r0_
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, TLTeo said:

As mediocre as the Ba88 was, WT does have other planes that in the war performed almost as horribly. TBD Devastators got completely butchered at Midway, the F2A-3 was so horribly overweight it couldn't perform loops (or so I read somewhere, can't remember where sorry!), the Me 163 did more damage to its pilots than to B17 squadrons, the Ta 154 production was cancelled because the production models performed much worse than the prototypes....

 

i disagree - the TBD was massacred because it was obsolete - not because it was a crap design.  the 163 was a truly advanced design, and cancelling production of the 154 was the right thing to do - should have been done for the Ba 88 - although the reason was mainly to do with lack of proper glue rather than performance - it wasn't AS GOOD as the prototype, but it was still serviceable!

 

The buffalo got overloaded - but still actually performed very well for the Finns, and actually wasn't as bad as the myths make out against the Japanese - again given that it was obsolescent - given better tactics it would have been "ok" - but no allied fighters of the time cold engage in dogfights with Japanese fighters - as hurricane and spitfire pilots found out soon after!

 

All these aircraft did actually perform OK against their designs.....  the Ba.88 did not...  

 

The fact that the 88 appeared "on paper" to be similar to the 110 is irrelevant - it wasn't - it could barely take off, and performed nothing at all like the 110.

4 minutes ago, Z3r0_ said:

 

The assumption here is that WT's version of the aircraft is what a Ba.88 would've been capable under ideal conditions (as it seems that a lot of the trouble with the aircraft had less to do with design flaws and more to do with dismal quality control and quality assurance during production of various components, the engines in particular).

 

But they were NOT capable under "ideal" conditions - that's the point - it was SUCH a bad design that even carrying small loads, giving up the rear machine gun, etc - it was still rubbish.

Edited by Josephs_Piano
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Josephs_Piano said:

 

i disagree - the TBD was massacred because it was obsolete - not because it was a crap design.  the 163 was a truly advanced design, and cancelling production of the 154 was the right thing to do - should have been done for the Ba 88 - although the reason was mainly to do with lack of proper glue rather than performance - it wasn't AS GOOD as the prototype, but it was still serviceable!

 

The buffalo got overloaded - but still actually performed very well for the Finns, and actually wasn't as bad as the myths make out against the Japanese - again given that it was obsolescent - given better tactics it would have been "ok" - but no allied fighters of the time cold engage in dogfights with Japanese fighters - as hurricane and spitfire pilots found out soon after!

 

All these aircraft did actually perform OK against their designs.....  the Ba.88 did not...  

 

The fact that the 88 appeared "on paper" to be similar to the 110 is irrelevant - it wasn't - it could barely take off, and performed nothing at all like the 110.

 

But they were NOT capable under "ideal" conditions - that's the point - it was SUCH a bad design that even carrying small loads, giving up the rear machine gun, etc - it was still rubbish.

 

My comment was supposed to say "what they were capable OF", which, admittedly, wasn't much even when the plane WAS working properly.  Still, if nothing else I suppose its one saving grace is that it'll probably be the very first aircraft of its type that one unlocks on the tree, and that combined with such poor performance might give it a BR as low as 1.3.

Edited by Z3r0_
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No , The Ba.88 was excellent design , the many world records prove it . Like many other italian aircraft it suffered the same mistakes . A too dense , of wood heritage, structure ...Basically the Ba.88 were 2 fuselages , one inside the other . Thats not just for design style ( for example that is the same problem of Macchi fighters) but also to meet high structure requirement by the high commands and all the hundreds modifications that paired with underpowered engines ( the main problem behind every italian plane before the arrival of german ones )  made of the Ba.88 a vicious machine . Adding weight to an aircraft is not an easy task , the simple addition of a steel plate behind the seat of the pilot on hungarians RE 2000 totally unbalanced the plane . WT is full of failed planes and still they have alot of history behind them . For me the Ba.88 deserve to fly and thats why we inserted it . There is something of beautifully romantic to give a failed plane a second chance !

  • Upvote 2
medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The record breaking Ba88 was not the same as the production aircraft - that version of it has no more resemblance to the aircraft in the game than the Bf109V13 has to the 109E's that fought in the Battle of britain!

 

WT doesn't "give it another chance" - it fabricates its abilities - it was a failed plane and remains a failed plane - if WT makes it usable and competitive then it is just another fantasy element that makes WT one step less realistic - the fact that WT includes a lot of fantasy rubbish doesn't justify including more fantasy rubbish

Edited by Josephs_Piano
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not the most exciting prospect Im afraid.

 

Breda's Ba.88 is widely regarded as one of the biggest if not the very biggest aeronautical failure of the second world war.

 

A good, streamlined basic design (that set records before getting loaded with equipment) but ruined by obsolete construction design practices and absurd italian air ministry strength specifications for ground-attack aircraft making the end result far too heavy and thus underpowered (especially with the small and obsolescent Italian engines). Also totally futile given that the plane had a lot of timber components which would've been likely to catch alight no matter how much sheer resistance was achieved.

I'm sure I remember reading somewhere that test pilots were afraid to put the thing in a dive for fear they may not pull out, and in an aircraft originally intended to be capable of dive-bombing!

 

It was soon deemed unsuitable for combat operations by all of the Regio Aeronautica units that were unlucky enough to be issued them. The main contributions of most deployed examples was acting as a permanently parked plane to decoy allied intelligence.

 

Maybe it may have been useful had it been able to mount more powerful engines (like the BMW 801) or/and had Breda been allowed to refine the design and remove much of the superfluous structure. But the Italian's weren't in any position to invest time and resources into any such thing. I think Breda (on their own initiative) did make a few examples of an improved, better-powered version with a more advanced wing or something but not much interest was shown by the italian air ministry nor the Regio Aeronautica.

Edited by Been_Benuane
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Josephs_Piano said:

The record breaking Ba88 was not the same as the production aircraft - that version of it has no more resemblance to the aircraft in the game than the Bf109V13 has to the 109E's that fought in the Battle of britain!

 

WT doesn't "give it another chance" - it fabricates its abilities - it was a failed plane and remains a failed plane - if WT makes it usable and competitive then it is just another fantasy element that makes WT one step less realistic - the fact that WT includes a lot of fantasy rubbish doesn't justify including more fantasy rubbish

I'll agree with you once the update comes out and the model for this aircraft is anything except sluggish.

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Josephs_Piano said:

The record breaking Ba88 was not the same as the production aircraft - that version of it has no more resemblance to the aircraft in the game than the Bf109V13 has to the 109E's that fought in the Battle of britain!

 

WT doesn't "give it another chance" - it fabricates its abilities - it was a failed plane and remains a failed plane - if WT makes it usable and competitive then it is just another fantasy element that makes WT one step less realistic - the fact that WT includes a lot of fantasy rubbish doesn't justify including more fantasy rubbish

 

There are so many warplanes that are derived from civil or record aircrafts. You can take for example the SM.79 or the Blenheim ...Its an aircraft evolution , that is some cases is succesful and some other cases its not . And the differences from the first SM79 and the production ones are even greater (exterior) than the ones on  the Ba.88 .

And there is nothing really "rubbish" in historic aviation . Are studies , resources , months of people works if not years . And his big failure make it even more interesting . Also we have to remove arcade because is a fantasy clash with no respect for nationality ?

medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WT doesn't model reliability issues and presents the planes in the most workable condition so the performance while ideal is not unrealistic. From what I've read the majority of issues were due to the extreme unreliability of the Piaggio P.XI RC40 which failed to generate their supposed output due to extreme overheating among other things(which was worsened by the sand filters in Africa which means that their performance there was even worse than the normal models and thus not indicative of general performance).

 

IIRC while they certainly wouldn't be agile they would be workable with performing engines so the performance isn't made up.

medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Josephs_Piano said:

The record breaking Ba88 was not the same as the production aircraft - that version of it has no more resemblance to the aircraft in the game than the Bf109V13 has to the 109E's that fought in the Battle of britain!

 

WT doesn't "give it another chance" - it fabricates its abilities - it was a failed plane and remains a failed plane - if WT makes it usable and competitive then it is just another fantasy element that makes WT one step less realistic - the fact that WT includes a lot of fantasy rubbish doesn't justify including more fantasy rubbish

War thunder will give another chance to this plane just because the FM is based on technical data that are so different from "on battlefield" data.

So, some of its problems like overheating with sand filters won't be in game. This as for many planes and tanks already ingame who hasn't the "real world" issues and problems of reliability.

 

War thunder will give it another chance to be good as it was expected to be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This plane is really good looking.

 

It will be like an Italian air tech tree T-34-100 except to a lesser extent in some ways (not as severely unrealistic, but at the same time, it will be given a much fairer chance in War Thunder than in real life).

medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, RememberRoute23 said:

This plane is really good looking.

 

It will be like an Italian air tech tree T-34-100 except to a lesser extent in some ways (not as severely unrealistic, but at the same time, it will be given a much fairer chance in War Thunder than in real life).

That's an odd comparison.  What's unrealistic about the T-34-100 anyways?

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Josephs_Piano said:

 

It's not even a matter of just reliability with this aircraft - the top speed when loaded was only half that promised, some couldn't take off, some couldn't turn when airborne - this thing should have the same flight model as the BV 238.... but nerfed a bit, and the same top speed as the Po-2!!:facepalm:

Yeah no that's a reliability issue.

Considering its payload, it's literally physically impossible for a performing up-to-spec Ba.88 to halve its top speed from ~300mph to ~150mph, simply by changing the payload from empty to a war-ready weight.

 

In fact, the only references to ~150mph I can find are with sand filters, which implies that the filters screwed up the power of an already unreliable engine and is primarily responsible for its poor reputation and combat performance.  Gaijin is not likely to give us the version with those sand filters.

 

This is supported by the Re.2000's own mechanical reliability issues, which shares the Ba.88's engine.  Its engine is described as an unreliable, mechanical nightmare.  Expect neither of these aircraft to have these in-game.

22 hours ago, Josephs_Piano said:

A pathetic addition not worth the effort that was put into it.

 

The main contribution of this aircraft to the War was to act as a decoy on airfields so that proper aircraft wouldn't be hit - it was unflyable by most pilots, some were incapable to turning when airborne, apparently some couldn't take off even with both engines running!!

 

Wt is supposed to be at least somewhat realistic - really dropped the ball on this one :(

Real life consists both failures and successes.

Neglecting the operational failures (of which over 100 were built, mind you) just because they were not successful and you don't like them?  Doesn't get much more unrealistic than that.

  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Retry said:

...(of which over 100 were built, mind you)...

As I understand it: They were built for political reasons (after the test pilots recommended not accepting the Ba.88 for service)

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.