Brewster B-239 and the I-16

[mechanic]

Co-alt mossie vs i-16 or brewster is close to outright murder 

[Wmaker]

That said, after testing them for quite a bit I took my old Mossie up and good gods the engine power it has in comparison.

I don't quite see what this has to do with the article I posted, but I think we'll agree that AH would be extremely boring if everyone would only want one and same aircraft in the planeset so that no other type would ever be seen. That said Mosquito is one of the most beautiful aircraft ever built by a firm that is my all time favourite British aircraft manufacturer. More or less all De Havilland aircraft are very pleasing to the eye.

[Squire]

Too  much "bumper sticker" history on the Brewster, and not enough hard history. I have stated in other posts about the single fight at Midway and its effect on the memory of the Brewster, if we judged the P-40 on the USAAC (and general US) success in the Phillipines, it would be just as shunned, if not more so.

The Dutch Air Force B-339C/D did reasonably well, before being over run, it was not the F2A-3, or the RAFs "Buffalo Mk.I" B-339E, both of which were quite a bit heavier.

The best versions in the PACIFIC were the Dutch B-339C/D, and those "modified" ie stripped down RAF and RAAF B-339Es, and looking at the records they didnt do any worse than a lot of early P-40 and Hurricane units in so far as the air to air tally, roughly 1-1.  

I also would not say it saw "minimal" combat in the Pacific unless your talking about just the USA experience at Midway. Many of the campaigns it was involved in were several months duration, but sure, it did not see the years of service of other types.

Its never going to be remembered as a great fighter in the Pacific, for all the obvious reasons, it largely bore the brunt of the most disastrous campaigns (Malaya, East Indies), and the one sided, single sortie fight at Midway, and it was replaced by much sexier a/c with much more glory attached to them. It was never anything more than adequate on its very best day as a design, and was just as often a dissapointment, and the Allies wanted and needed types that were much more than that.

[Karnak]

I don't quite see what this has to do with the article I posted, but I think we'll agree that AH would be extremely boring if everyone would only want one and same aircraft in the planeset so that no other type would ever be seen. That said Mosquito is one of the most beautiful aircraft ever built by a firm that is my all time favourite British aircraft manufacturer. More or less all De Havilland aircraft are very pleasing to the eye.

That line didn't have anything to do with it, it was just an observation.  My first line was a response after I had read the article.

I was just noting how getting used to one thing can change the perception of something else that you had been used to.

[Wmaker]

I was just noting how getting used to one thing can change the perception of something else that you had been used to.

Oh, rgr. My reaction will probably be very similar when I hop back into 109G-14 at times, won't probably be for a while though.

[BnZs]

I'm looking forward to the Hurri, Spit, and Zeke drivers complaining about the Brewster.  The thing hasn't even been released and people are whining.

The I16 and, in particular, the Brewster will change the furball in AH, relax and enjoy it gents.

Does either do anything better than an a Zeke except dive?

[BnZs]

Widewing,

I have no issues with the Brewster's performance as a B-239.  I just don't think it is appropriate for settings other than Finland vs Russia (or minorly Finland vs Germany) as it is very close to the A6M2 in manueverablility, almost as fast, far more durable, has better guns and has excellent high speed handling for diving.

It will be interesting to see how it plays out though.

Karnak, after all our arguments about SpitXVIs and such, it is a little unbelievable to me that you think the Zekes will too over-matched by what is (from your own mouth) still a double-inferior fighter.

[Karnak]

Karnak, after all our arguments about SpitXVIs and such, it is a little unbelievable to me that you think the Zekes will too over-matched by what is (from your own mouth) still a double-inferior fighter.

How is it double inferior?  It handles speed very much better, its guns are very much better, it is approximately as fast, it turns marginally worse at low speeds and far better at high speeds and it is much more durable.  It turns well enough that I am skeptical that the A6M2 will be able to pull enough lead in a turn fight to hit with the Type 99 Model 1 cannons.

[Widewing]

Does either do anything better than an a Zeke except dive?

Assuming you mean the B-239, it does several things better than the Zero. It's faster below 5k, much better roll rate and far more durable. And as you said, it dives better, without control stiffening. Add to that flat shooting Brownings.

The Zero climbs better and is faster above 5k. It has a slight advantage in turn radius and rate. It has two 20mm cannons, making it more lethal for close-in snap shots.

They are close enough to make the pilot the deciding factor.


My regards,

Widewing

[Widewing]

Too  much "bumper sticker" history on the Brewster, and not enough hard history. I have stated in other posts about the single fight at Midway and its effect on the memory of the Brewster, if we judged the P-40 on the USAAC (and general US) success in the Phillipines, it would be just as shunned, if not more so.

This is precisely the argument that I have been making....

All things taken into account, the Brewsters did a commendable job under the absolute worst circumstances.



My regards,

Widewing

[Karnak]

This is precisely the argument that I have been making....

All things taken into account, the Brewsters did a commendable job under the absolute worst circumstances.



My regards,

Widewing

I, at least, have never been disputing that.  I just don't think the B-339, B-339E and B-439 models were as responsive in all ways as the Finnish B-239s.  I think they were significantly worse in at least two performance categories, namely turning and acceleration/climb.  I imagine they rolled just as nicely and handled speed just as nicely though.

[Pyro]

The Brewster and I-16 in the beta are currently more durable than intended.

[Baumer]

My only argument / question is about it's durability.

It's lighter than an A6M2 at most fuel loads and "appears" much more durable than the zero. I know that there may be other factors in the beta arena that might influence my perception of damage sustained, but they just seem very resilient.

One area in particular I'd like to make sure I have my facts straight, is about the self-sealing tanks. According to the books I have, the self-sealing tanks were removed from the B-239 at the Brewster factory prior to shipment. Did the FAF put them back on the plane in service, or were they flown with regular metal fuel tanks? I would expect them to burn somewhat like an A6M2 if they had regular metal tanks in the wings.

[Wmaker]

The Brewster and I-16 in the beta are currently more durable than intended.

Rgr, thanks pyro. It was starting to seem that way.

[mechanic]

My only argument / question is about it's durability.

It's lighter than an A6M2 at most fuel loads and "appears" much more durable than the zero. I know that there may be other factors in the beta arena that might influence my perception of damage sustained, but they just seem very resilient.

One area in particular I'd like to make sure I have my facts straight, is about the self-sealing tanks. According to the books I have, the self-sealing tanks were removed from the B-239 at the Brewster factory prior to shipment. Did the FAF put them back on the plane in service, or were they flown with regular metal fuel tanks? I would expect them to burn somewhat like an A6M2 if they had regular metal tanks in the wings.

Far as i can think, self-sealing tanks would not stop fire. The impact of the rounds into the fuel tank lights the fire. Self sealing tanks just slow down a fuel leak, ignition of contained fuel would be very similar at the time of impact. Possibly if anything, the SS tanks would put the fire out if it did not catch on the airframe. Just thinking, no info to back it up.