How not to choose a fighter. The saga of the “5th series”: The crisis in the supply of fighter aircraft in Italy during the Second World War. Part 1

Home » Books on aviation history » How not to choose a fighter. The saga of the “5th series”: The crisis in the supply of fighter aircraft in Italy during the Second World War. Part 1

Aviation history booksControversial history of the recent past

byakin 04/17/2017 484

1

to Favoritesin Favoritesfrom Favorites 2

I would like to express my deep gratitude to my dear colleague redstar72 for his help in editing this article.

Editor's Note: Italian aviation historian Gregory Alegi offers a fresh look at how World War II political infighting and bitter industrial rivalries prevented the Italian Air Force from fielding world-class fighters, despite the availability of superior German Daimler engines. -Benz DB 605.

In 1943, three types of Italian fighters made their combat debut, equipped with 1475-horsepower 12-cylinder V-shaped inverted liquid-cooled Daimler-Benz DB 605 engines. The Macchi MC.205V, FIAT G.55 and Reggiane Re.2005 fighters were powerful and elegant aircraft, the relative merits of which are still debated to this day. What is less well known, however, is that this new generation of state-of-the-art fighter aircraft was three years late due to a tortuous decision-making process that pitted industrial and political interests against each other in a fierce battle. And as a result of these internal disputes, the winner was a foreigner - the Messerschmitt Bf 109 fighter.

Between April and July 1943, the Royal Italian Air Force (Regia Aeronautica) in fairly rapid succession adopted and put into service the FIAT G.55 Centauro, Macchi MC.205V Veltro and Reggiane Re.2005 Sagittario fighters. The high performance characteristics of these three types of fighters were supposed to significantly increase the combat capabilities of the Italian Air Force, which continued to be based on the machines with which Italy entered the war three years ago - SIAI-Marchetti S.79 torpedo bombers, S.75 and S transport aircraft .82 and Macchi MC.200, FIAT G.50 and CR.42 fighters.

Even now, more than 70 years later, these three fighters capture the imagination of aviation enthusiasts and pilots. Discussions about their handling, design and performance often lead to heated debates, often based on local bias or preference for a particular company and almost always looking at only individual points. To get a more complete understanding of the “5th series” fighters [1] , it is necessary to consider the entire process of their birth and the accompanying circumstances as a whole.

Prototyping industry?

The enthusiasm for Italian fighters equipped with DB 605 engines is understandable. During the war, only a few countries were able to launch mass production of completely new aircraft designs, while Italy lays claim to the dubious prize for taking the longest time to develop aircraft. In addition, none of the new generation Italian aircraft were ever used at the front on any significant scale. An exception can be considered the MC.202, created by Macchi chief designer Mario Castoldi by deeply modifying the MC.200 for the German liquid-cooled DB 601 engine. Otherwise, the evolution was minimal, and production aircraft differed little from their prototypes. For example, during the production of the latest S.79 series, Alfa Romeo engines were optimized for low altitudes, and the bombardier nacelle was removed as unnecessary [2] . The limited production of the Italian version of the DB 601 engine led to the retention of the obsolete MC.200 in production. There was no shortage of competitions and prototypes of all kinds, and many believe that the Regia Aeronautica got into trouble during the war years precisely because there were too many of them.

Amid the enthusiasm for the trio of 5-series fighters, what often goes unnoticed is the fact that all of them were produced in small quantities before the Armistice concluded in September 1943 and hardly had time to take part in battles. The total production of these aircraft during wartime, including the period after the Armistice, did not exceed 392 aircraft - 259 MC.205, 101 G.55 and only 32 Re.2005 - which is very far from the planned ambitious production plans and sharply contrasts with the scale of production , for example, the Messerschmitt Bf 109 [3] , about 320 copies of which were delivered from Germany to the Italian Air Force. These figures move the conversation from a discussion of theoretical performance characteristics to the actual situation in the Italian economy, as well as in the military and political spheres, which tends to be overlooked in narratives based more on the study of individual company documents than on historical analysis. Some of the common reasons for the fighter fiasco lay in the structure of the national aviation industry and the delay in understanding by the Ministry of Aviation (Ministero dell'Aeronautica) of the scale of the war in which Italy had entered.

To understand how these factors were implemented in practice, it makes sense to look at the fighter deliveries made during the war, and also to look at what the Regia Aeronautica command planned to do and what actually happened instead. The tortuous history of the creation of the G.55 can serve as a clear example of the “Byzantine order”, poor administration and behind-the-scenes intrigues in the corridors of power, thanks to which Italian fighter aviation found itself in a deplorable state. Similar stories can be written about bombers [4] , training aircraft and machines for other purposes. The command pinned a lot of hopes on chimeras, which were never realized.

Description of the design of the Reggiane Re.2001 “Ariete” aircraft

The Reggiane Re.2001 aircraft was a single-seat all-metal cantilever monoplane with retractable landing gear.

The fuselage is a semi-monocoque oval cross-section of all-metal construction. An anti-cutter pylon with an armor plate was attached to the top of the fourth and fifth frames. The cockpit canopy consisted of a front visor and a cover that hinged to the right and was equipped with sliding windows.

The three-spar wing of an all-metal structure of an elliptical shape consisted of a center section and two consoles equipped with ailerons covered with fabric (the left one had a trimmer adjustable on the ground). The flap is sectional, located on the center section and consoles. The cantilever tail unit of an all-metal structure of a classical design was sheathed with canvas. The rudders were equipped with trimmers controlled in flight.

Retractable tricycle landing gear with tail wheel. The main landing gear, equipped with shock absorbers and brake wheels, was rotated 90° during retraction and then folded into the wing during flight.

The propeller-driven installation used a twelve-cylinder V-shaped, with inverted cylinder blocks, liquid-cooled Alfa Romeo RA.1000 engine with a drive centrifugal supercharger with a power of 1175 hp. With. with a three-blade metal adjustable-pitch propeller.

The fighter's armament consisted of two synchronized 12.7-mm Breda-SAFAT machine guns, located in the forward fuselage in front of the cockpit, and two wing-mounted 7.69-mm machine guns of the same company.

To maintain communication with aircraft in the air and the home airfield, the Allocchino Bacchini B.30 transceiver radio station was used.

Extermination crisis

In 1935, Italian fighter aviation consisted of the equivalent of 11 groups (gruppi), each of which had three squadrons (squadriglie) of 12 aircraft each. Of these 11 groups, six were armed with FIAT CR.30 and CR.32 biplanes designed by Doctor of Engineering [5] Celestino Rosatelli, equipped with 12-cylinder V-shaped FIAT A.30 engines with a power of 600 hp. Three groups were equipped with earlier biplanes of the same designer - CR.20/20bis with 410 hp FIAT A.20 V-engines. One group flew on Ansaldo AC.3 parasol monoplanes, which were licensed Dewoitine D.9s (powered by a 420-horsepower Bristol Jupiter radial engine), and another group flew on Macchi M.41 flying boats with FIAT A engines. 20.

Although the CR.32 performed well in the Spanish Civil War that began the following year, the Air Force headquarters (Stato Maggiore Aeronautica - SMA) knew that the country's fighters were on the verge of obsolescence. Like other air forces, the SMA believed that the first line should include twin-engine multi-seat long-range heavy fighters (Caccia Combattimento - a specification issued in 1938 for such an aircraft led to the creation of the unsuccessful Breda Ba.88 ) and cheaper single-seat interceptor fighters with high rate of climb and limited range.

Italy's first attempt to modernize its fighter force came in 1935, when a competition was announced to build a modern fighter-interceptor. However, this competition ended in nothing, as it soon became clear that

“None of the proposed projects met all the requirements.”

This was the first sign that Rosatelli's line of biplanes would soon come to an end. This was a worrying trend since ten years before this competition, the ministry had selected FIAT as its main fighter aircraft supplier. In January 1936, the specification for the new competition was released, commonly referred to as the "1938 competition" because comparative flight tests were conducted that year.

The FIAT concern immediately proposed an all-metal monoplane G.50, designed by Doctor of Engineering Giuseppe Gabrielli and equipped with an 840-horsepower FIAT A.74 RC.38 radial engine. In December 1936, even before the first flight of the G.50 (it took place on February 26 of the following 1937), Assistant Minister of Aviation and Chief of the Air Force General Staff, Colonel General of Aviation Giuseppe Valle (Generale di squadra aerea [Gen.sa] Giuseppe Valle) chose it to equip one regiment (Stormo), issuing an order for the supply of 81 fighters of this type.

Another contender, the Macchi MC.200, made its first flight later than the G.50 - in December 1937, but during comparative flight tests in Guidonia it surpassed its competitor in speed and maneuverability. This was a surprising result, especially in light of the fact that between June 1935 and September 1937, FIAT received 61.16% of all fighter orders by value, while Macchi received nothing. But now the superiority of the MC.200 has forced the ministry to order Macchi fighters [6].

Although both the MC.200 Saetta and G.50 Freccia were quite modern machines for those years, the impression was somewhat spoiled by the third type of fighter, which was put into service along with them. It was a FIAT CR.42 biplane, powered by the same Fiat A.74 engine as the G.50 and MC.200. The first flight of Celestino Rosatelli's machine took place in May 1938. The FIAT management somehow managed to convince the Regia Aeronautica command to accept it into service as a transitional type between the old CR.32 and the new monoplanes. To be fair, it should be noted that at that time biplane fighters were still actively used (and even new ones were created) in other countries of the world [7] ; however, the “transitional” CR.42 survived in serial production right up to September 1943, and instead of the originally planned 200 vehicles, 1492 were built (of which 182 were exported)!

On January 5, 1938, a third competition was announced to create a modern fighter-interceptor, which again ended with mediocre results. Of the seven submitted projects, only Reggiane Re.2000 reached the series, the prototype of which was built at the company’s own expense at its own risk. Moreover, this fighter was mainly manufactured for export [8] , only 15 aircraft of this type served in the Regia Aeronautica. Its competitors, the Macchi MC.201 and FIAT G.52, developed from the MC.200 and G.50 respectively, suffered from problems with the 1000 hp FIAT A.76 RC.38 radial engine, which was never flown.

In March 1940, the Regia Aeronautica command requested Macchi to adapt the MC.201 airframe to accommodate the installation of a 1,175-horsepower inverted V-engine DB 601A, licensed production of which, under the designation RA.1000 RC.41I, later began in Naples at the Alfa Romeo plant. This is how the famous MC.202 Folgore appeared, of which 1,128 copies were ultimately produced [9] . At the same time, the Regia Aeronautica command learned that the FIAT concern had not started work on the G.52; instead, from mid-1939 efforts were concentrated on a completely new project, the G.55, which was to be powered by the equally new FIAT A.38 16-cylinder V-engine developing 1,200 hp. and rotating coaxial counter-rotating screws. FIAT AS.8 engine , created for the record-breaking CMASA CS.15 aircraft. Also in March 1940, the Regia Aeronautica command ordered three experimental and 12 production A.38 engines, intended for installation on prototypes of the single-engine G.55 fighter and the Macchi MC.301 twin-engine heavy fighter. Meanwhile, Reggiane began work adapting the Re.2000 to fit the DB 601, leading to the Re.2001, which made its first flight in June 1940.

One could say that the stage was already set for the tragedy that occurred over the next five years. When on November 10, 1939, Colonel-General of Aviation Francesco Pricolo (Gen. sa Francesco Pricolo) replaced General Valle as Chief of the Air Force General Staff, he immediately began to assess the situation he inherited in terms of available combat personnel and promising programs. One of his first actions was to review all available aircraft types, followed by an order to retire hundreds of obsolete aircraft.

Structure of the Italian Air Force

Until the surrender on 8 September 1943, the Regia Aeronautica (Royal Air Force) was considered one of the three branches of the Italian Army.

The Regia Aeronautica was subordinate to the Ministry of Aviation, headed by Benito Mussolini. In fact, the Italian Air Force was commanded by the Chief of the General Aviation Staff, to whom the Air Force Command (Superaero) was also subordinate. From October 3, 1939 to November 15, 1941, the position of Chief of the General Staff was held by Divisional General Francisco Pricolo, from November 15, 1941 to July 1943 by Divisional General Fougier, and from July 1943 by General Sandalli ).

There were four operational ground aviation units located on Italian territory:

1 Squadra Aerea (1st Air Fleet) was located in northern Italy, headquarters in Milan;

2 Squadra Aerea was located in Sicily and the island of Pantelleria, with headquarters in Palermo;

3 Squadra Aerea was located in central Italy, with headquarters in Rome;

4 Zona Territoriale was located in southern Italy, with headquarters in Bari.

Five air fleets were stationed outside the borders of the metropolis during World War II:

Aeronautica della Libia headquarters in Tripoli (the fleet consisted of eastern and western sectors);

Aeronautica delPAIbania headquarters in Tirana;

Aeronautica della Sardegna headquarters in Cagliari;

Aeronautica dell'Egeo headquarters on the island of Rhodes;

Air fleet of Italian East Africa (Central Ethiopia and Eritrea).

Each of the air fleets consisted of divisions (Divisione) or brigades (Brigate), as well as individual divisions (Gruppo Autonomo). The largest of the air fleets consisted of three divisions: two bomber and one fighter. The fighter division consisted of three regiments (Stormo). The regiment consisted of two fighter divisions of the ground forces (Gruppo di Cacchia Terrestre). The division consisted of two to four squadrons (Squadriglia). In turn, the squadron consisted of three flights (Sezione), with three aircraft per flight. During the war, the number of squadrons was increased from 9 to 12 aircraft.

The Air Force of the National Socialist Republic (Aeronautica Nazionale Reppublicana - ANR) adopted the same structure as the Luftwaffe, so the number of squadrons increased to 15-20 aircraft, and the division consisted of three combat squadrons and one headquarters squadron. Accordingly, the strength of the division increased from 36 to 60-65 aircraft.

The Allied Italian Air Force had three wings: fighter, bomber and seaplane wings. The existing regiments were not disbanded, but each regiment began to consist of three divisions.

There were numerous deviations from the above rules caused by the military situation at the fronts.
Military ranks of the Italian Air Force

The birth of the “5th series”

On August 10, 1940, the MC.202 prototype made its first flight. The FIAT concern, meanwhile, unsuccessfully tried to resolve the problems of the A.38 engine, the first launch of which took place on a test bench in June of the same year. Since the beginning of development, the engine has been completely transformed: its configuration from the usual V-shaped became inverted, the supercharger was moved from the rear to the bottom, and instead of coaxial propellers, a conventional three-bladed one appeared. The design of the G.55 fighter underwent no less significant changes. The 22 m² wing with one tubular spar provided in the original design was replaced by a conventional two-spar wing with an area of ​​21 m². The latter was initially designed to be one-piece, but in the final version it consisted of two consoles connected to each other along the axis of the aircraft.

In March 1941 - in the third year of development - FIAT suggested that the G.55 prototype could be ready by early 1942, with mass production very optimistically planned to begin at the end of that year. On March 31, 1941, at a meeting of three-star generals, Pricolo declared that the Regia Aeronautica

“cannot in any way rely on mass production [G.55], since the project is still very far from implementation.”

At the next meeting on June 25, 1941, Colonel General Prikolo reported that, according to representatives of the FIAT concern, the A.38 engine must be “significantly modified” before it becomes suitable for any practical use. Prikolo also inquired about the possibility of equipping the Re.2001 and MC.202 (but not the G.50, which is typical) with 1475-horsepower DB 605 engines, which the FIAT concern was supposed to begin producing in the spring of 1942 under the designation RA.1050. The head of the General Directorate of Production and Supply of the Ministry of Aviation (Direzione Generale delle Construzione e degli Approvvigionamenti del Ministero dell'Aeronautica - DGCA) Lieutenant General Alfredo Bruno (Tenente Generale Alfredo Bruno) replied that despite the increase in weight by 100 kg, it should not be a problem creation of both an "adapted" Re.2001 and an MC.202 with an "enlarged wing". This can be considered the first mention of the future Re.2005 and MC.205N Orione respectively.

In the summer of 1941, work was underway at Macchi on the MC.202bis project; it was a Folgore with the minimum number of changes required to accommodate the DB 605. At the end of October, company management informed the Air Ministry of the expected performance of the new variant. Reggiane undertook similar work and construction of a wooden mock-up of the new Re.2005 began in October 1941 and a preliminary report was issued on 25 November.

At a meeting on October 13, Air Force generals were forced to admit that the situation was beginning to get out of control. On the one hand, it seemed desirable to concentrate a limited number of licensed DB 605 engines on one fighter - the G.55 or MC.205N, and as compensation to the Reggiane company, issue an order for the Re.2002 fighter-bomber - a version of the Re.2000 with 1175 -strong Piaggio P.XIX engine; on the other hand, the desire to minimize the time required to master the production of new machines was no less justified. In addition, some meeting participants wanted to optimize the workload of the FIAT concern, improve the flight performance of aircraft and increase industrial production by ordering airframes and engines from one company. This position was firmly held by the Deputy Chief of the Air Force Main Staff, Air Force Colonel General Giuseppe Santoro (Gen. sa Giuseppe Santoro). Since the production of the DB 605 had already been entrusted to the FIAT concern, the choice of the G.55 was implicitly implied. This position of Santoro was reflected in the semi-official history of the Italian Air Force during the Second World War, published by him in 1957.

Uncertainty about what needed to be done prompted the meeting participants to propose a compromise proposed by Lieutenant General Alfredo Bruno: to build two copies of the experimental MC.202bis,

“to facilitate the preparation of the final version of MC.205 and speed up its creation.”

As for the FIAT concern, then

"taking into account the need to use FIAT production lines for the production of fighter aircraft"

it was decided that he could produce the G.55 with DB 605 engines, subject to positive results from prototype testing; otherwise he would have had to release the MC.205.

On November 15, 1941, Mussolini dismissed General Pricolo. This was largely due to the latter's poor relations with the chief of the general (joint) staff, Army General Ugo Cavallero (Capo di Stato Maggiore Generale Generale d'Armata [Gen] Ugo Cavallero). In his hard-hitting memoirs, Pricolo claimed that he left the Regia Aeronautica with the MC.205 flying. This was an exaggeration, but there is no doubt that on his initiative the stalemate with the G.55 moved forward.

On November 24, 1941, Pricolo's successor, Colonel General of Aviation Rino Corso Fougier (Gen. sa Rino Corso Fougier), a World War I ace and popular fighter wing commander, called a meeting to review the decisions made in October. At this meeting, the former MC.202bis was named "MC.205V" for the first time; Colonel General of Aviation Mario Bernasconi (Gen. sa Mario Bernasconi) described him as

“an aircraft that will be derived directly from the MC.202 by replacing the DB 601 engine with a DB 605 and without any changes to the airframe design. This aircraft can be expected to reach higher speeds than the MC.202 currently has. Macchi has already started design work and the MC.202 design will allow the development of the MC.205 (DB 605) prototype to be developed much faster.”

Italian style, German power – the MC.205V Veltro fighter, based on the proven Macchi MC.202 Folgore airframe, was the easiest and fastest way to put into mass production a fighter with a Daimler-Benz DB 605 engine. The Veltro differed from the Folgore by two characteristic cylindrical oil coolers under the engine hood. Starting from the 101st production aircraft, the MC.205V was equipped with wing cannons, clearly visible in the photo

The creator of Macchi seaplanes for participation in the Schneider Cup races and the MC.200 - MC.205 fighter series, Doctor of Engineering Mario Castoldi, against the backdrop of the MC.202 prototype in Lonate Pozzolo. The design of the MC.202 and MC.205V had a large number of identical components, which should have ensured a simple and quick transition to the production of the MC.205V, using existing tooling

Designed by Giuseppe Gabrielli, the all-metal single-seat FIAT G.50 monoplane fighter was only slightly better than the CR.42 biplane fighter built by the same concern and equipped with the same engine. The Celestino Rosatelli-designed biplane was so popular with pilots for its excellent maneuverability that production volumes of the FIAT CR.42 doubled that of the G.50

Doctor of Engineering Giuseppe Gabrielli

Timeline for the development of Italian fighters. 1935: competition of projects for the creation of a fighter-interceptor (cancelled because the proposed projects did not meet the requirements) 1936: second competition of projects for the creation of a fighter-interceptor 1938: third competition of projects for the creation of a fighter-interceptor

Equipped with a DB 601 engine, the Macchi MC.202 Folgore fighter is considered the best large-scale Italian fighter of the Second World War. This aircraft was distinguished by good speed and maneuverability

Chief of Staff of the Air Force in 1939-41, Colonel General of Aviation Francesco Pricolo inspects the cockpit of the experimental Campini-Caproni CC2 aircraft equipped with a motor-compressor engine

Combat aircraft. "Macchi" by Mario Castoldi: as they were

Historically, we have historically accepted Italian military vehicles almost as if they were talking about the dead: either nothing at all, or nothing at all. That is, they seemed to exist, but it was as if they were not there. Something was flying there that was not good for anything in the first place.

In fact, the truth was, as always, not where the triumph of ideology was. If we talk about fighters, the Italians had them, moreover, they were very modern and interesting machines, which is what I, in fact, am going to show you.

The Italians had their own “trick”, which cannot but be mentioned before starting. The vast majority of countries implemented the idea of ​​literally a couple of brands, so as not to strain their industry. These are the Spitfire and Hurricane for the British, the Messerschmitt and Focke-Wulf for the Germans, and Yakovlev and Lavochkin for us.

Some will say: Polikarpov. Yes, but the production of Polikarpov fighters was actually stopped before the start of the war. And the aforementioned MiG merged there in 1942. So if you take the cut this way, then everything is fine.

So, the Italians were more careless in this regard and took everything, even potatoes. That is, in fact, they turned their Air Force into a very funny collection of aircraft from a bunch of manufacturers. Capronni-Vizzola, Reggiane, AUT, IMAM, Fiat... The French had something similar, which was absolutely not beneficial in terms of maintenance, repairs and logistics.

Therefore, speaking about what Italian designers have achieved in terms of creating fighter aircraft, I decided to start with the Macchi brand. For several reasons at once, but that’s not the point. The point is that in this material there will be three aircraft at once. Simply because, on the one hand, you can discuss every screw, or you can approach it from the side from which the rather short life of the Italian Air Force does not particularly deserve any curtsy.

MC.200 Saetta ("Arrow")

Mario Castoldi.
Artist of the world of airplanes. He created airplanes in much the same way as his fellow countryman Raffaello Santi (who is simply Raphael) painted pictures: easily and quickly.

“Saetta” turned out exactly like that: from a project for a two-seat interceptor. What are the problems of removing one crew member, increasing the flight range and strengthening the weapons (one heavy machine gun - well, clearly not enough even for 1935)? Yes, none. And now the M.S.200 is already flying. It’s 1937, and Castoldi faces the tempting prospect of government contracts!

Of course, we had to fight. The Ministry of Defense of that time did not really like the plane, primarily because of its appearance. A bloated barrel, and even with a hump. It looked so-so.

But Castoldi defended the plane, and expert pilots from the Ministry of Defense and the Italian Air Force helped him in this. It was they who saw the golden grain in this peculiar aircraft.

This hump in the cockpit area provided simply excellent visibility. Aerodynamics were average because the engine was air cooled. But they could quite normally cover themselves in battle. In general, aerodynamics was a very strong point for Italian designers, and Castoldi also did everything he could in terms of ensuring that the shapes were as close to ideal as possible.

But the highlight of the MC200 was not its high speed. The Saetta's strengths were its rate of climb, vertical maneuver, and strength. The design really was not afraid of hard landings and an inexperienced pilot could “attach” the M.S.200 from the heart, without any problems for the aircraft.

The plane dived exclusively. During testing, the aircraft reached a speed of 805 km/h at its peak, without any flutter.

In 1939, the M.S.200 was successfully adopted.

Combat use.

The MC200 did not make it to the war with France. France ended somewhat faster than the Italians supplied the required number of aircraft to the troops. Plus there were delays, including due to accidents. In 1940, Denmark ordered 12 vehicles, but it was not possible to fight there either, since Denmark also ended.

The first combat use of the “Strela” (as the name is translated from Italian) occurred at the end of 1940, when the battles for Malta took place. The M.S.200 was accompanied by German bombers and, naturally, engaged in battles with British air defense fighters of the island. These were mainly Hurricanes, to which the Strela was inferior in speed. Well, the Italian “Strela” was such that even the monster that was the “Hurricane” surpassed it in speed.

However, Italian pilots quite normally realized their superiority in maneuverability, turning radius and rate of climb. As a result, the Hurricanes suffered losses, the Saetta turned out to be a very difficult opponent, plus 2 12.7 mm machine guns versus 6 7.7 mm machine guns for the British - it seems to me that this was somewhat more effective.

North Africa.

It was worse there, because the Americans with P-40s were added to the Hurricanes. It was more difficult with the Tomahawks; the plane was a little worse in maneuver, but was much superior in speed and power of weapons. 6 12.7 mm machine guns are very serious.

However, in Africa, in desert conditions, the MC200 performed very positively. Durable, with a short take-off run, plus even production vehicles were distinguished by their extraordinary ease of piloting. A huge plus is visibility, which was clearly lacking in British and American fighters. So weak weapons are perhaps the only disadvantage of this vehicle.

The Strela also became a fighter-bomber. Hanging bombs on fighters of that time was commonplace, but with the M.S.200 it worked out quite well. Low speed and excellent visibility have become good components of success. By success I mean the sinking of the 13th group of the British destroyer Zulu by the Arrows. It is clear that stopping a ship already damaged by German aircraft with bombs is not exactly an achievement, but still. We have what we have.

“Arrows” also fought in our skies.

Already in August 1941, M.S.200 took part in combat operations as part of the Italian Expeditionary Force in Russia (CSIR). During 18 months of combat operations, the aircraft performed 1,983 escort sorties, 2,557 “on-call” sorties, 511 sorties to cover friendly troops, and 1,310 attack sorties. In total, 88 Soviet aircraft were destroyed with the loss of 15 Italian fighters.

We will not judge the numbers and their veracity, since if the Germans turned out to be complete liars, then one can doubt such successes of the Italians. Although, if you work on U-2 and transport aircraft, you can get even more. Of course, there is no information about who the Italians shot down.

Well, when Italy ended as a member of the Axis in 1943, the Air Force ended accordingly. Most of the Strelas became training aircraft, and some of them met the 50s in this capacity.

Overall, the plane turned out to be quite good. Better than many in Europe, and, perhaps, in the world.

Advantages: maneuverability, visibility, design.

Disadvantages: speed, weapons.

MC.202 Folgore ("Lightning")

This plane was born at the same time as all its classmates: at the peak of the Spanish successes of the Messerschmitt and the liquid-cooled engine.

Italy was no exception, and many designers rushed to come up with new aircraft. Castoldi was no exception.

The trouble was that it did not have a decent engine. And competitors from other companies too. And then Castoldi, through Mussolini himself, turned to the Germans for help, since the allies and followers of the Duce’s teachings did not refuse the request.

So in 1940, the coveted liquid-cooled in-line Daimler-Benz DB 601 was available, around which Castoldi built the M.C.202.

There was a prototype, and it was a very interesting prototype: the racing M.S.72, which in 1934 set a world speed record of 710 km/h. Using developments on the M.S.72 and a German engine, Castoldi created the M.S.202.

You and I have already realized that an imported engine for an aircraft is not the best thing, especially in a changing situation (hello MS-21). Therefore, simultaneously with testing prototypes with German engines, work began on the licensed assembly of DB.601 under the designation RA1000 RC41.

In principle, one could be happy for the Italians, since the MC202 was truly a world-class aircraft and was not much inferior to analogues from other countries, and even surpassed many. M.S.202 was really the best Italian fighter that fought against the Allies on all fronts.

The only drawback of the Italian vehicle was the same problem of heavy weapons. The Italians were never able to create something more or less decent with a caliber of 20 mm and above. Therefore, all that could be counted on were 12.7 mm heavy machine guns.

A nuance: Italian cars were distinguished by the completeness of their aerodynamic forms and the heritage of racing cars was evident. Hence the rather thin wing profiles and the impossibility of installing the same heavy machine guns in the wings. Therefore, the maximum configuration of the M.S.202 is two synchronized 12.7 mm machine guns and two wing-mounted 7.7 mm machine guns. Which in 1942 really wasn’t enough.

In 1941-43, about 1,500 MC202s were produced, both on its own and on.

"Lightning" at war.

When it came to getting into the crucible of air battles, the Lightning wasn't doing very well. Some experts argue that if the MS 202 had arrived in northern Africa earlier, the airborne Axis forces could have been more successful in resisting the Allies and the situation in Africa would have been different.

I don’t know how useful M.S.202s with untrained and half-ready crews would be in Africa, I honestly don’t know. It is very difficult to judge here, and history does not have a subjunctive mood.

The facts say that the Lightning, which first collided in 1942 in the air of Malta with the Sea Hurricane and Seafire from the aircraft carriers Eagle and Wasp, felt more than comfortable in battle.

M.S.202 also fought on the Eastern Front, as part of the aforementioned CSIR corps. But since aircraft in the air force of the corps were an infrequent phenomenon, it is simply not possible to talk about any successes or failures solely due to the fact that the Lightnings were present in single quantities.

In general, the main sore point of the aircraft was not even the weapons, but the engine. The production of M.S.202 was problematic in terms of quantity solely due to the engines, the production of which the Italians were unable to raise above 40-50 units per month. Of course, given the constant need to replace those that have expired and were damaged in battle, this is minuscule. And the fact that Italian factories were able to produce 1,500 aircraft can be called a labor achievement.

The Germans could not afford to supply engines to the Italians during the war. In the end, this is what happened: a very good and promising combat vehicle was produced per teaspoon per hour.

If we talk about the assessment of M.S.202 from an expert point of view, then it turns out to be somewhat ambiguous.

If we take the assessments of the allies, the plane was worthless. And if you read the memoirs of Italian pilots, it was a plane that was both appreciated and loved by those who flew it.

MC.205V Veltro ("Greyhound")

An aircraft that could well claim not only the title of the best Italian fighter, but also compete for one of the highest places in the overall standings. It was not for nothing that it was called the “Italian Mustang”; it was a truly outstanding car.

It all started in 1942, when the Luftwaffe put into service a very outstanding aircraft: the Bf-109G with a DB-605 engine producing 1,475 hp. The “trick” of the engine was that in size it was actually identical to its predecessor DB-601, which the Italians did not fail to take advantage of.

Quite expectedly, I decided to introduce a new engine into my old M.S.202 aircraft. The plan worked out quite well, and so the M.S.202 bis was born, which in fact differed from its predecessor only in the design of the oil cooler (in the form of two cylinders on the sides of the forward part of the fuselage), the retractable tail landing gear and the shape of the propeller spinner.

Quite expectedly, the aircraft passed all stages of testing and received the designation MC.205V and the name “Veltro” (“Greyhound”).

Serial production of the MC.205V was launched at the enterprises of Macchi (I and III series of the aircraft) and Fiat (II series). True, the Fiat plant in Turin did not produce a single aircraft, but the Italians are almost not to blame for this. Although, depending on how you look at it. If new fighters had entered service earlier, perhaps the plant would have remained intact. And so it was completely bombed by the Allies in December 1942 and not a single aircraft was ever launched on it.

All they could do was produce 262 units. Agree that this is a meager amount, which was not able to cover the needs of the Italian Air Force for these aircraft.

Meanwhile, M.S.205 could become a very remarkable machine. It was technologically simple, it was based on the design of M.S.202. The wing with two 7.7 mm machine guns was borrowed completely.

By 1943, it became clear that 2 x 12.7 mm and 2 x 7.7 mm were completely useless against American bombers, and on aircraft of the third technological series, wing machine guns were replaced by MG-151 cannons. But imports are still a weak link, no matter how you look at them.

Licensed release of the DB-605 engine under the designation RA 1050R.C. 58 "Tifone" was carried out on .

The first Greyhounds entered service at the beginning of 1943, and by the time of the Italian capitulation in September 1943, the Regia Aeroinautica had 66 M.S.205 fighters.

Subsequently, their production continued, but under German control. It so happened that Macchi’s main production facilities were located in the northern part of Italy.

Pilots who mastered and flew the MC.205V spoke highly of the capabilities of this fighter. They believed that with the same training of pilots at low and medium altitudes, the Borzoi was no worse than the Mustang. Yes, above 6000 meters the Mustang began to have an advantage in speed and maneuver, since the wing, borrowed from the M.S.202 Folgore, was clearly too small for such an aircraft.

In this table you can compare the performance characteristics of Italian aircraft and their opponents.

How can you summarize everything that has been said? Well, only this way: alas for the Italians, but history does not have a subjunctive mood. Castoldi's planes were indeed quite outstanding machines, if not for the nuances that did not allow them to confidently gain well-deserved fame. The fighters were strong and maneuverable, they did not need long and smooth runways, they were unpretentious. But the frankly weak armament of two machine guns is simply absurd for 1942 and beyond.

If the Italians had mastered the production of guns and engines... But this did not happen, and therefore, no matter how wonderful the Macchi planes were, they could do absolutely nothing to ensure victory for their country.

Italian Army Aviation[edit]

Main article: Italian Army

Current inventory [edit]

Italian Army A-129D during a training exercise in 2022

An NH-90 of the Italian Army during a training exercise in 2022

Agusta A109 - Elicottero yes collegamento, osservazione avanzata e Posto C2 airmobile Agusta-Bell AB 205 A-1 - Elicottero Leggero multiruolo Agusta-Bell AB 206 C-1 - Elicottero yes addestramento Agusta-Bell AB 212 - Elicottero yes TRASPORTO tattico e pattugliamento Agusta -Bell AB 412 — Elicottero da trasporto Leonardo AW169 — Elicottero leggero multiruolo

Carabinieri[edit]

Main article: Carabinieri

Agusta Bell 412