Was the brewster ever carrier based???

[Nemisis]

I ask because I see what looks to be a USN skin for the brewster. Or was it possibly used by the USN, but never carrier based?

[Baumer]

According to the USN Aircraft Location Reports, VF-2 had 16 F2A-3's aboard the Lexington on February 2nd 1942. However the Brewster (B-239) we have in the game is rather different the F2A-3.

Some time after the 10th and before the 17th of February VF-2 left the Lexington and was replaced with VF-3 (F4F-3) while at sea.   

[Krusty]

I believe it's a marine skin, since they were land-based. The "version" of the brewster we have in-game is not cv-capable, and no naval skins will be allowed for it.

[Nemisis]

Ok, just wondering. Thanks guys.

[FiLtH]

  I think its worth having the proper Brewster and the Devastator if ONLY for the Midway scenario. I know Id fly the TBD...it may have been slow, but it looked cool trying to get there.

[Saxman]

Actually, it's not that no Naval skins will be allowed. It's that there's only one US squadron's markings that will be allowed PERIOD, because only one saw combat with the Brewster. Both our "Blue" skins for the Brewster are for the same squadron (VMF-221, I believe). One was their colors at the time of Midway, the other--with the red/white rudder flash--was from when they were loaded on Saratoga for Kimmell's aborted Wake relief force, which was rerouted to Midway after Nimitz called off the operation en route (so technically, they WERE deployed to the combat zone in those colors).

[Krusty]

I believe Greebo's own comments mentioned these are allowed because they are Marine units, and that carrier-based skins won't be allowed due to the lack of arrestor gear and so forth.

EDIT:

BTW Pyro has written back regarding what is an acceptable skin for the Brewster. USN skins are not allowed although VMF-221 skins are OK. RAF, Dutch and RAAF skins are fine as well.

[5PointOh]

Saxman and Krusty are correct...



The markings like these and red/white stripes on the rudder were used till May 15 1942, prior to Midway.

[Digr1]

I ask because I see what looks to be a USN skin for the brewster. Or was it possibly used by the USN, but never carrier based?

[phatzo]

maybe this skin would be cool

[Saxman]

I believe Greebo's own comments mentioned these are allowed because they are Marine units, and that carrier-based skins won't be allowed due to the lack of arrestor gear and so forth.

EDIT:

In that case OTHER USMC birds would be valid as well. However I believe the official statement was that the only American skins allowed were VMF-221.

And by your argument, any skins known to have been used by FG-1As (which IS usually recorded so it would be possible to tell) shouldn't be allowed for the F4U-1A, since most FG-1As were built without the arrestor gear and folding wings.

[Nemisis]

Anyone else think it would be worthwhile to get the brewster changed to an F2A-3 version? Just a discussion topic, not a wish or anything.

[Saxman]

Not really. Even for scenarios, the F2A-3 wouldn't have much use (really, the only scenario it would figure into is Midway). Additionally, B-339 used by the Dutch and B-339E used by the British and Commonwealth are two different animals as well.

I'd say despite the performance differences, the 239 we already have is more than adequate to fill the various roles the Brewster is needed for.

[crazyivan]

(Image removed from quote.)

hey hey hey! Let me get out first. Perk the brewster.

[Karnak]

Anyone else think it would be worthwhile to get the brewster changed to an F2A-3 version? Just a discussion topic, not a wish or anything.

Hell no.  By far the most significant service the Brewster saw was as the B-239 in Finnish service.

Not everything is US centric.

I would like to see the F2A-3 version added though, to properly separate the two. The B-239 isn't really fair to the Japanese in scenarios.