Brewster B-239 and the I-16

[moot]

This all stems from the misguided view that the Brewster could not possibly be as capable as it is. This in turn is due to 60 years of brainwashing. 20 F2A-3s were chewed up at Midway, out numbered 2 to 1, attacked by better fighters with an altitude advantage. Not one of the Marines involved had ever flown a air combat sortie before that.

Yikes

[Die Hard]

Great.  Lets lose the Ta152 and any number of other birds because there weren't many of them. 

Why would you deny the skinners and the scenario folks the chance to use a Brewster.  That makes no sense at all.  There is now this nicely done model of the Brewster.  Why not use it?

Yeah, the Ta 152 is being used a lot in scenarios is it? My point exactly.

Oh I'm sure the Brewster will be used in many scenarios... With blue Von Rosen crosses on them facing Ratas and whatever Soviet bombers we might get in the future.


Here's the hard facts: The Pacific Brewsters in service with the European colonial forces were so troubled with technical issues that they simply cannot be included in the game in a realistic manner. No matter how accurate the performance, since HTC does not model mechanical failures and guns jamming the Brewster will never be portrayed realistically in any scenario and will always have an unhistorical advantage. In U.S. service it was involved in one action, ONE. This does not justify the time and resources needed to research and model a separate version.

[Saxman]

Yeah, the Ta 152 is being used a lot in scenarios is it? My point exactly.

Oh I'm sure the Brewster will be used in many scenarios... With blue Von Rosen crosses on them facing Ratas and whatever Soviet bombers we might get in the future.


Here's the hard facts: The Pacific Brewsters in service with the European colonial forces were so troubled with technical issues that they simply cannot be included in the game in a realistic manner. No matter how accurate the performance, since HTC does not model mechanical failures and guns jamming the Brewster will never be portrayed realistically in any scenario and will always have an unhistorical advantage.

By that argument we shouldn't have the Ki-84 and N1K2, which were plagued by shoddy workmanship and poor materials. Landing gear in both aircraft were notorious for snapping, and both experienced frequent problems with their engines.

[lyric1]

Probably should have started a new thread for this issue in regards to the B-239 it is a minor flaw that probably is not worth going in to however I thought I would point it out. When the empty shell casings fall out of the B-239 from the fuselage guns they drop out of the wheel wells at two locations instead of the one slot under the left wing.

   

[Die Hard]

By that argument we shouldn't have the Ki-84 and N1K2, which were plagued by shoddy workmanship and poor materials. Landing gear in both aircraft were notorious for snapping, and both experienced frequent problems with their engines.

Indeed, for scenarios they are equally misrepresented. However, like the Ta they have MA appeal; the only Brewster (if any) that will see use in the MA is the one with the Von Rosen crosses.

[Widewing]

Yikes

Although none of the Marine pilots involved in the Midway fight had fired a shot in anger previously, the senior officers had enough experience flying that most survived. Only two casualties were regular Marines. Most of the squadron's pilots were reservists, 10 of whom went MIA after being shot down. Their squadron, VMF-221, had formed in San Diego in July of 1941. After Pearl Harbor, the squadron size was increased by adding reservists and the unit was transferred to Ewa in Hawaii where they prepared to deploy to Midway. Saratoga delivered the squadron to the atoll on Christmas day, 1941. Gradually, the unit was being re-equipped with F4F-3s. The transition was slow due to the bulk of Wildcats being assigned to carrier squadrons. Replacements for those lost during the Coral Sea battle meant that six additional Wildcats slated for VMF-221 were transferred to carrier squadrons. Instead of having 13 F4Fs at Midway, they only had 7. Of those, only 6 were committed, with one undergoing an engine change at the time. One F4F and one F2A-3 were forced to abort and return to base with mechanical trouble.

On March 10, 1942, four of VMF-221's F2A-3s discovered a Mavis flying boat while on routine patrol. Capt. James Neefuss shot it down. Neefuss was not involved in the Midway battle, and it appears that he was transferred from the squadron prior to June.

One of VMF-221's Wildcat pilots shot down a Zero and damaged two others. He survived the fight and would go on to be the Marine's first ace. His name? Capt. Marion E. Carl. Like every member of VMF-221 who flew into combat that day, Carl was awarded the Navy Cross. At Guadalcanal, he would earn a second Navy Cross and finish the war with 18.5 kills. In addition to the two Navy Crosses, he was also awarded 3 DFCs and 13 Air Medals. Midway was Carl's first combat.

It is interesting that the original claims for the Marine Corps show VMF-211 totaled 19 kills. Post war examination shows that 10 were certainly downed, but it is hard to determine the true tally because several these Japanese went down on Midway and were claimed by AA gunners as well. Some of these may have been shot down by the Marine pilots, but it is impossible to determine with any certainty. Japanese records report that 9 Zeros failed to return. Surviving Marine pilots claimed 3 Zeros destroyed and 3 more damaged. No one knows if or how many Japanese aircraft were shot down by Marines who did not survive the fight. One investigator believes that 6 additional D3a and B5N types were probably shot down by the missing Marine pilots. Another historian attributes 3 to them.

As I stated previously, when you consider the difficulty and complexity of the tactical circumstances as well as the inexperience of the Marine pilots, they did better than one would think possible.


My regards,

Widewing

[Die Hard]

Impressive.

[Guppy35]

Yeah, the Ta 152 is being used a lot in scenarios is it? My point exactly.

Oh I'm sure the Brewster will be used in many scenarios... With blue Von Rosen crosses on them facing Ratas and whatever Soviet bombers we might get in the future.


Here's the hard facts: The Pacific Brewsters in service with the European colonial forces were so troubled with technical issues that they simply cannot be included in the game in a realistic manner. No matter how accurate the performance, since HTC does not model mechanical failures and guns jamming the Brewster will never be portrayed realistically in any scenario and will always have an unhistorical advantage. In U.S. service it was involved in one action, ONE. This does not justify the time and resources needed to research and model a separate version.

Die Hard seems an appropriate handle.  So next time Rangoon is run, or a Midway scenario, you'd not allow the presently modeled Brewster to be used?

Based on your latest argument, the 262, 163, P51, P38 and any number of other birds that had teething troubles in combat should not be used as well because without their flaws they have an unhistorical advantage.  Well there goes the scenario world, right out the window.

Again, that's just silly.

I gotta admit, I never saw the 'fear the Brewster' threads coming.

[moot]

It's a good plane.  The players like it.  It's not mismodeled. It has a stable mate right out of the box. What's the problem?

[hubsonfire]

The recurring complaint seems to be that it doesn't perform like a different model. 
Oh, and that the other models weren't also added. Anything else?

[humble]

I think this largely falls into the category of preconceptions. The Brewster (in any flavor) saw minimal combat in the PAC. The combat it did see was against overwhelming odds and short lived. These historical events shape our perception of the plane and its relative capabilities.

The British used the Buffalo in the defense of Crete in 1941 and 4 pilots scored 5 or more kills in that series of actions. The leading ace Geoff Fiskin went on to become the leading commonwealth ace in the PAC. The Dutch flew the 339 with reasonable success in defense of Java. Before the ground campaign was lost the Dutch had claimed 55 Japanese planes for the loss of 30 339's (in combat). In one of the largest actions the Dutch intercepted a force of 30+ bombers escorted by 20+ zekes, claiming 11 kills while suffering the loss of 4 339's.

We can look further to another similar plane the Hawk 75 to see the reality that these lesser known early war fighters were very formidable when well handled. While there are clearly potential performance variations the fundamental reality is as WW posted above. Relative pilot quality was the determining factor in the conflicts that shaped historical perception of the Buffalo.... 

[Die Hard]

Die Hard seems an appropriate handle.  So next time Rangoon is run, or a Midway scenario, you'd not allow the presently modeled Brewster to be used?

Sure they can. Who am I to deny them anything? I'm saying HTC shouldn't bother making the B339, B439, F2A-2/3. It would be useless for anything but scenarios, and just as historically inaccurate as the B239 when limited by the Aces High framework. If it was my decision no further work should be done on this aircraft past the Finnish model.

[Wmaker]

Pilot's report on flying the I-16 by the late Mark Hanna. He was one of the most famous warbird display pilots in the world.

http://www.alpinefighter.co.nz/pages/i_16pr.html

[Karnak]

Pilot's report on flying the I-16 by the late Mark Hanna. He was one of the most famous warbird display pilots in the world.

http://www.alpinefighter.co.nz/pages/i_16pr.html

I will say I like both the I-16 and Brewster quite a bit.  They are fun, early war birds.

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.

[moot]

You really appreciate the full spectrum of warbirds' progress, just seeing a spit8 or P40 thunder around your I-16/Brewster