Talk:Breda Ba.88 Lince

Why eliminate every argument about 'the fairness' of the aircraft? Where is NPOV? I have italian vices, OK, la Cappella Sistina etc. but what's wrong to watch about the 'fairness'? I have in this specific case my source of Daniele Lembo, repeat 3 times about the 'fair shape' of the plane BA.88. It's if nothing else, said by someone. More, in my Encyclopedia delle armi da guerra (originally known as War machines, british high-quality encyclopedia) The Breda is called 'fair and tough at the same time'. So i have TWO sources stated that it's a 'fair machine'. So what's the problem?--Stefanomencarelli 22:30, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Clean lines would probably be a better use of words!!Petebutt (talk) 12:02, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Why did the Bf 110 perform better than the Ba 88?
From the current version:

"It is notable that the Ba.88 was also a contemporary of the Messerschmitt Bf 110, with no great differences in horsepower, weight, power to weight ratio or wingload. But the difference in success was immensely in the Bf 110's favour."

"[The Ba 88's] structure was too heavy, wing loading too high, and the engines were quite unreliable with insufficient power."

If it was too heavy, with insufficient power, and too high a wing loading, why was the Bf 110 OK despite having a similar weight, engine power, and wingload? It would seem that the same comments should be made of the Bf 110.

Bendel boy (talk) 15:14, 6 May 2018 (UTC)