Was the brewster ever carrier based???

[Baumer]

It would be interesting to select the tail-hook (and the extra weight, armor, self-sealing fuel tanks) in the hanger as an optional load out. Maybe that will be possible with the new ordinance model and then HTC wouldn't have to model another separate aircraft.

[MrRiplEy[H]]

It would be suicidal to select the tail-hook (and the extra weight, armor, self-sealing fuel tanks) in the hanger as an optional load out. Maybe that will be possible with the new ordinance model and then HTC wouldn't have to model another separate aircraft.

There, corrected that for ya!

The last thing BW with its 1000hp lawnmover engine needs is more weight.

[Demetrious]

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.

And sticking American pilots with a lead-footed beast that can't even perform a simple loop is fair to the Americans?

There's a reason the F2A-3 isn't in the game, and that's because it was 1. So useless that'd never leave the hangar, even in scenarios, and 2. Only used in one battle of the entire war, at Midway.

The F2A-2 was a good fighter, and very similar to the B-239 in capabilities (a little more engine power balanced by a a little more weight from the naval gear,) and in my opinion would benefit the game much more by enabling some "what-if" scenarios- in particular, what if the Wake Island relief force hadn't turned back? I think the F2A-2 would have acquitted itself well.

The F2A-2 is clearly not a priority for HiTech, but since it's sister ship the B-239 is already in the game, perhaps it'd be low-hanging fruit. In either case, I think the F2A-2 has more value in scenarios then the F2A-3 ever will.

[Saxman]

The problem with that is by the time the war started ALL squadrons equipped with F2As were flying the F2A-3. NO F2A-2s were deployed operationally during the war. Which means that it won't be added, no matter how much value it might have.

[Nemisis]

I know not everything is U.S. centric. But it would be pointless to create a new plane with same preformance (didn't know for sure, but your post DID suggest that the preformace is different so I will remember it) just with the addition of an arester hook and (possibly) rearanged cocpit.

[Motherland]

I know not everything is U.S. centric. But it would be pointless to create a new plane with same preformance (didn't know for sure, but your post DID suggest that the preformace is different so I will remember it) just with the addition of an arester hook and (possibly) rearanged cocpit.

Performance was drastically different. All of the gear that the Navy threw on the Brewster made it a dog of a fighter. The B-239 was very stripped down. I would like the F2A-3 just for the point of placating, at least some of, the whines about the B-239's performance in game, since everybody seems to think 'Brewster=F2A=Dog' instead of 'Brewster=B-239=long time mount of the highest scoring non-German ace of the war'.

[palef]

F2A was a better option than the B339E, the model upon which the Brewster's reputation foundered. They were sent RAAF and RNZAF squadrons with second-hand partly reconditioned DC-3 engines that would pop and spray oil all over the windscreen at random intervals. The RAF piled gear they thought vital onto an already underpowered airframe and threw them in piecemeal and disorganised fashion at an experienced enemy, despite knowing it's shortcomings and having already decided to replace them with Hurricane IIAs which somehow never made it to Singapore in the projected time frame.

That would be the aircraft to add.

[Karnak]

And sticking American pilots with a lead-footed beast that can't even perform a simple loop is fair to the Americans?

Yes, it is fair because it is historical.  It isn't fair for the Japanese players to be tossed at opposition flying fighters that should be out matched by their A6M2s, but aren't.

[Demetrious]

Yes, it is fair because it is historical.  It isn't fair for the Japanese players to be tossed at opposition flying fighters that should be out matched by their A6M2s, but aren't.

So one engagement near Midway is "historical?" Who cares? Even if the plane was implemented, if "history" is HTC's watchword, it could only be used in one scenario anyways.

Apparently it is:

The problem with that is by the time the war started ALL squadrons equipped with F2As were flying the F2A-3. NO F2A-2s were deployed operationally during the war. Which means that it won't be added, no matter how much value it might have.

-which means that HTC won't implement one and won't bother with the other.

I would like the F2A-3 just for the point of placating, at least some of, the whines about the B-239's performance in game, since everybody seems to think 'Brewster=F2A=Dog' instead of 'Brewster=B-239=long time mount of the highest scoring non-German ace of the war'.

People who can't take ten seconds to look up the history of the Brewster Buffalo on Wikipedia (and realize how good the early B-239 and F2A-2 was,) don't deserve any pandering at all.

[Nemisis]

So one engagement near Midway is "historical?" Who cares? Even if the plane was implemented, if "history" is HTC's watchword, it could only be used in one scenario anyways.

Apparently it is:

-which means that HTC won't implement one and won't bother with the other.

People who can't take ten seconds to look up the history of the Brewster Buffalo on Wikipedia (and realize how good the early B-239 and F2A-2 was) don't deserve any pandering at all.

First off, your name is kind of ironic. Just pointing that out.

Second, HTC focuses on historic realism of PLANES, not on the ARENAS. If you want realistic battles and engagments, fly in the scenarios and snapshots, and the like.

Third, wiki sucks, period. Learned that the hard way in school and here in the forums.

[Stiglr]

Demetrious wrote, some time ago:

And sticking American pilots with a lead-footed beast that can't even perform a simple loop is fair to the Americans?

Interesting quote there.... so "fairness" only applies to American pilots? Hmmmm....

I always laugh at how, in the early war of many sims, there's all this cry for "balance" and "fairness"... things that were in short supply in the real war.

Then, come late war, nobody's talking about shaving some speed off of Ponys or making P-47s softer or anything to offset their superiority over contemporary Axis aircraft.

That's one of the classic doublestandards of flight-simming....

=====================================================

And, to actually answer the question... the British and New Zealanders in Singapore and the DEI didn't find it 'fair' either. But those planes that were "good enough for Malaya" were all they had, for the most part.

[Nemisis]

What supriority are you talking about? I can name 2 axis aircraft VASTLY supperior to both of those, or any U.S. late war ride: the legendary 262 and 163.

Stigler, you need to remember, he wasn't talking about shaving some speed or turn rate off the jap planes, he was suggesting we let them use the more powerful versions of their aircraft (FM2 as opposed to the F4F for example)

[Motherland]

Stigler, you need to remember, he wasn't talking about shaving some speed or turn rate off the jap planes, he was suggesting we let them use the more powerful versions of their aircraft (FM2 as opposed to the F4F for example)

The B-239 was never operated by the USN and the F2A-2 was never operated in combat.

[Stiglr]

The Me162 and Me163 were a bit faster than all the others, and it helped them a lot in their interceptor role... but they couldn't turn very well... they were extremely vulnerable when not fast... and the technology was still a bit young.

Especially the 163, which was pretty much shot up at the bomberstream like a rocket, had a very short "maneuvering window" of time, and then had to try and land. Even fueling them was an invitation to disaster...

No, I bet the P-51 and P-47 drivers were not too anxious to trade places with the first jet jockeys...

But, getting back to the "fairness" argument, how come there's all this careful planning about "jet day"? Shouldn't the 262 or 263 simply be available at the part of the tour time where it would have figured in history? Or, is it just because there's no ALLIED jet to make things all "even Stephen", that's why they're all perked up and tightly controlled???

More holes poked in the tired, unimaginative Arena Paradigm
====================================================

I also realize what's being bandied about in this Brewster discussion. Point is, if a plane's going to be made available, don't you think all the representative versions... the ones that actually saw combat... should be in the set, giving people a choice of which to use?

As for the FM2, that's a viable one for late(r) war, like for the Jeep CVs... provided everyone doesn't stop using F4Fs in earlier war action. That would simply be a more subtle kind of 'ueberplaning'. Flying only the 'best' version of a type instead of soldiering on with the most representative version.

[Motherland]

I also realize what's being bandied about in this Brewster discussion. Point is, if a plane's going to be made available, don't you think all the representative versions... the ones that actually saw combat... should be in the set, giving people a choice of which to use?

I'm kind of curious to why HTC didn't include the F2A-3 in the first place. I feel like a bit of an bellybutton making this kind of comment about something i've never done but, 'how much work could it take'? The B-239 was essentially a stripped down F2A-3 wasn't it? Wouldn't it be even EASIER to find information (weights etc) on the American version of the aircraft? Adjust the weights, add the tail hook into the 3D model, get Greebo to make another fantastic skin, and voila? Somehow I imagine it wouldn't be quite that simple, but...