Brewster skins

[Dux]

That's too bad.  Brewsters were part of the US Navy at the time of Pearl Harbor, and saw action in the month or so afterwards flying patrols from Carriers and attacking Japanese submarines.

Any hypothetical Pearl Harbor FSO/Scenario would benefit from the US Navy skins.

Funny that they would allow a British P-39 (P-400) skin.  <Shrug>

Fencer, this is one of those instances where the terrain builders can build a replacement default skin into the terrain. 

[Vuokko]

Beautiful skins Greebo, thank you!

[Krusty]

HTC's guidelines in the sticky skins submission post at the top of the forum says nothing about an aircraft having to had seen combat. The relevant passage says: "We will only accept skins that were historically used in World War II".

There is precedent that the skins should have seen combat.

For example, neutral skins are not allowed. Training unit skins on continental USA aren't allowed. Unarmed recon skins are not allowed. Circus-painted formation bombers are not allowed (never went into combat, landed while the rest kept going).

There is a very real precedent for the skin in question having actually been used in combat.

[Greebo]

I believe the issue with unarmed reconnaissance skins is that they are being painted onto armed aircraft, not that they did not see combat. There were plenty of instances of these unarmed aircraft being intercepted or targetted by AA anyway. In my book getting shot at is combat even if you can't shoot back. The issue is more to do with putting skins on a plane that had a completely different use in RL to what it would be used for in the game.

This can also apply to formation ships, which would be used for bombing in the game and training squadron fighters which would be used for dogfighting. That hasn't stopped HTC allowing several training fighters in the game, although it is possible the orange N1Ks saw combat late in the war.

I asked Pyro about a neutral skin recently. He said he wouldn't normally allow one as it would use up a valuable slot. However he might if the skinner could make a very good case for it. So they are not banned as such, just not considered worth a slot in what is a WW2 game.

[Guppy35]

Just ordered a copy of:

Buffaloes over Singapore : RAF, RAAF, RNZAF and Dutch Brewster Fighters in Action over Malaya and the East Indies 1941-42
Cull, Brian; Sortehaug, Paul; Haselden, Mark

Looks like a worthy resource for potential Brewster info and skins

[lyric1]

Just ordered a copy of:

Buffaloes over Singapore : RAF, RAAF, RNZAF and Dutch Brewster Fighters in Action over Malaya and the East Indies 1941-42
Cull, Brian; Sortehaug, Paul; Haselden, Mark

Looks like a worthy resource for potential Brewster info and skins

Yep it's a good one as far as reading very few pictures most are on the net.

[AWwrgwy]

I believe the issue with unarmed reconnaissance skins is that they are being painted onto armed aircraft, not that they did not see combat. There were plenty of instances of these unarmed aircraft being intercepted or targetted by AA anyway. In my book getting shot at is combat even if you can't shoot back. The issue is more to do with putting skins on a plane that had a completely different use in RL to what it would be used for in the game.

This can also apply to formation ships, which would be used for bombing in the game and training squadron fighters which would be used for dogfighting. That hasn't stopped HTC allowing several training fighters in the game, although it is possible the orange N1Ks saw combat late in the war.

I asked Pyro about a neutral skin recently. He said he wouldn't normally allow one as it would use up a valuable slot. However he might if the skinner could make a very good case for it. So they are not banned as such, just not considered worth a slot in what is a WW2 game.

Exactly.  Formation ships didn't carry bombs.  They saw combat before they were formations ships but not as represented in their gaudy paint jobs as formation ships.  Unarmed reccon aircraft didn't carry guns.  And, possibly the training aircraft in question did see combat.  The enemy flying overhead and what not.

Neutral?  Saw combat probably before they were painted as such.  After, intercept and escort perhaps but "combat sorties" I don't know.  I suppose said "intercept and escort" could be stretched to be considered combat but it would be like considering modern day intercept of Soviet Bear recon flights as being combat.

This is the argument I was trying to make with your Ju88 recon skin.  Couldn't carry bombs so it shouldn't be on something that could carry bombs.

wrongway

[Greebo]

Actually I did some more research on the Ju 88D. The first versions were the D-0 and D-2, these had their cameras mounted in the bomb bay and only retained the inner pylons for drop tanks. They were never used for bombing.

However the version I skinned was a Ju 88D-1. This had its cameras mounted in the rear fuselage allowing the bomb bay to be used for bombs. It also retained its pylons and was able to carry the complete range of bombs the Ju 88A-4 could. D-1s and later versions were occasionally pressed into service as bombers.

[StokesAk]

They look sweet i know which one i will be taking up. 

[thrila]

One sortie, of 4 aircraft, which shot up a barge.  That was the RAF's only operational sortie. 

Do you mean specifically the 239 version or all brewster's in RAF service?  I know for certain the RAF brewsters saw a lot of action at malaya.

[AWwrgwy]

Do you mean specifically the 239 version or all brewster's in RAF service?  I know for certain the RAF brewsters saw a lot of action at malaya.

Clarification:

Funny that they would allow a British P-39 (P-400) skin.  <Shrug>

One sortie, of 4 aircraft, which shot up a barge.  That was the RAF's only operational sortie.  The Buffalo in US Navy service beats that hands down.  Their game, their call of course.

In order.

 


wrongway

[thrila]

doh....

[Greebo]

This is the aircraft of Captain William C Humbert of VMF-221 based at Midway in June 1942. This squadron scrambled 20 F2A-3s and five F4F-3s in two groups to defend Midway against an incoming carrier air strike of 107 aircraft, including 36 Zeroes. The USMC fighters were bounced by Zeroes as they attacked the Japanese bombers and lost 14 aircraft out of 25. The Japanese lost nine aircraft on the raid, although some of these were downed by AA fire over Midway. Captain Humbert survived the mission and claimed a Zero and a Kate destroyed.

[Banshee7]

I might have to reform my old AH squad that I COed.  The VMF-221 Fighting Falcons; home of the Marines' first ace . 

[TonyJoey]

This is the aircraft of Captain William C Humbert of VMF-221 based at Midway in June 1942. This squadron scrambled 20 F2A-3s and five F4F-3s in two groups to defend Midway against an incoming carrier air strike of 107 aircraft, including 36 Zeroes. The USMC fighters were bounced by Zeroes as they attacked the Japanese bombers and lost 14 aircraft out of 25. The Japanese lost nine aircraft on the raid, although some of these were downed by AA fire over Midway. Captain Humbert survived the mission and claimed a Zero and a Kate destroyed.

(Image removed from quote.)