Brewster

[bravoa8]

Would this website help?

http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/ac-usn22/f-types/f2a.htm

The Brewster fighter's only U.S. combat use, on 4 June 1942 during the Battle of Midway, dramatically showed the inferiority of the F2A-3 when confronted by the Japanese Navy's "Zero" carrier fighters and well-trained aviators. In a brief battle against greatly superior numbers, Midway Island's Marine Fighting Squadron 221 (VMF-221) lost thirteen of twenty F2A-3s. Soon after, the "Buffalo" was removed from combat units and assigned to advanced training duty. In that role, it helped new U.S. fighter pilots enhance their skills before they joined operational squadrons. The aging F2A-2s and F2A-3s remained in the trainng mission into 1943, and a few were still in service in 1944-45.

[lyric1]

I want a silver one & a black one please.

Oh I forgot.. & one with 6 blue circles on it.

[Wmaker]

I want a silver one & a black one please.

Sorry lyric! I'll try to get on it!

[Wmaker]

F2A-3 is listed with 160gal fuel load instead of the 240gal full load.

[hlbly]

No need to try put words in my mouth. BAR mentioned on the constant whining and I just said like it is. There's no need to do anything based on whining, except have fun on the whiners' expense.

Oh so it accelerates to fast now I see.  

Well, have fun testing.











 did now you do some reading bud . In objective tests performed in game it out performed one plane equaled another ,barely beat a plane it should lost too by alot . There it is an easy to reproduce test . Where there is no wind difference in al or pilot abilty it is doing something it should not do . The only opponet it ever did well against was a Soviet Air Force . That like all branches of that nations forces performed so pitifully against Germany in 1941 . The Germans outperformed them over and over again with lower numbers ,inferior equipment , in the attack . AFTER the Sovs ,had the chance to begin to make changes based on lessons from the winter war . The Finns faced a sov armed forces that had beat the Japanese in China and was fully over confident about its abilitys ,while defending over home territory and all of the advantages that gives . Calling me names and not arguing on the merits of your position makes you the moron scooter not me . You have a plane that was death trap anywhere else against anyone else , that performed well against an enemy that had suffered an incredible purge that in particular hurt any technical part of its military . I know it is not the same exact plane , but it is not light years different either . Ithink there is alot more wrong then acceleration if it is so light how does it zoom so well , if it zooms so well how does it sustain climb so well ? No armor or self sealing tanks why is it so hard to shoot down ? I can't think of a test to answer these questions .Acceleration I could . Don't believe me it out accelerates the FW190 try it . How ever save the insults and argue from the merit of your position as you see it . It is all moot anyway . If this plane could do what it does here . No wildcat or hellcat would have ever been built .

[hlbly]

No need to try put words in my mouth. BAR mentioned on the constant whining and I just said like it is. There's no need to do anything based on whining, except have fun on the whiners' expense.

Oh so it accelerates to fast now I see.  

Well, have fun testing.

I did now you do some reading bud . In objective tests performed in game it out performed one plane equaled another ,barely beat a plane it should lost to by alot . This it is an easy to reproduce test .  The only opponent it ever did well against was a Soviet Air Force . That like all branches of that nations forces performed so pitifully against Germany in 1941 . The Germans outperformed them over and over again with lower numbers ,inferior equipment , in the attack . AFTER the Sovs ,had the chance to begin to make changes based on lessons from the winter war . The Finns faced a sov armed forces that had beat the Japanese in China and was fully over confident about its ability's ,while defending over home territory and all of the advantages that gives . Calling me names and not arguing on the merits of your position makes you the moron scooter not me . You have a plane that was death trap anywhere else against anyone else , that performed well against an enemy that had suffered an incredible purge that in particular hurt any technical part of its military . I know it is not the same exact plane , but it is not light years different either . I think there is alot more wrong then acceleration if it is so light how does it zoom so well , if it zooms so well how does it sustain climb so well ? No armor or self sealing tanks why is it so hard to shoot down ? I can't think of a test to answer these questions .Acceleration I could . Don't believe me it out accelerates the FW190 try it . How ever save the insults and argue from the merit of your position as you see it . It is all moot anyway . If this plane could do what it does here . No wildcat or hellcat would have ever been built . I added no words to your mouth skippy , you used the words moron and whine . Weaseling out by blaming someone else does little to bolster credibilty . Didn't hear bar say he didn't say it or he was just repeating someone else . I may not agree with him at times but we debate on our positions . We don't rely on the weak method of when your position is untenable resort to ridicule . We may agree to disagree , but we do it without any misplaced sense of superiority over each other . You never answer any questions why is that ?

[lyric1]

[hlbly]

(Image removed from quote.)

F2A-3 is listed with 160gal fuel load instead of the 240gal full load.

ROFL great chart so please explain why the 239 out turns the A6m5 in game . Unless I am mistaken a lower wing loading equals better manueverabilty . Yet the a6m5 it out turned by the 239 in game .

[Wmaker]

And just when I thought it wasn't gonna get any better.

Calling me names and not arguing on the merits of your position makes you the moron scooter not me .

I didn't call you names. I merely stated a fact. I maybe could have dropped it to you a bit more gently but it wouldn't really change the context in anyway.

There's no need for me to "argue on the merits of my position" when you haven't presented a single sound argument. If you think there's something wrong in the modelling of some plane in this sim we fly, starting to ramble on about how it did in the war itself isn't going to do you squat. Neither will this "combat testing" actually. Do some actual testing from where you can extract some numbers out of. Then start figuring out if the numbers you just extracted match to the real life counter part or not. There are plenty of variables that can affect to the performance of a plane in AH that are hard to test. Prop efficiency along speed range being one. But if all you can do is ramble on without any sort logic all I'm gonna do is laugh at you. I don't see any point to even try to have a logical discussion until you start presenting logical arguments.

[Wmaker]

Unless I am mistaken a lower wing loading equals better manueverabilty .

Well, you are mistaken.

[Ack-Ack]

the F2A-3 IS the 339 though.

The Brewster F2A-3 is the Brewster Model B-439.


ack-ack

[Wmaker]

I added no words to your mouth skippy , you used the words moron

Hmm..where did I use the word "moron"?

 

[gyrene81]

Hey Lyric, try this site out...some interesting reading.

http://www.warbirdforum.com/buff.htm



Wmaker, considering that you speak from the single point of view of someone who researched the achievements of ~15 pilots from your country who fought against inexperienced pilots...I'm not surprised you so readily used the word "ignorant". Did you happen to also research the Finnish pilots who were successful flying the M.S. 406 or the Fiat G.50?

I don't suppose you actually researched the Dutch or British squadrons stationed in the South Pacific that went against Japanese aircraft either.

[Wmaker]

Wmaker, considering that you speak from the single point of view of someone who researched the achievements of ~15 pilots from your country who fought against inexperienced pilots...I'm not surprised you so readily used the word "ignorant". Did you happen to also research the Finnish pilots who were successful flying the M.S. 406 or the Fiat G.50?

I don't suppose you actually researched the Dutch or British squadrons stationed in the South Pacific that went against Japanese aircraft either.

I don't quite see how any of this is relevant except that I try my best not talk complete nonsense in here...about any topic...because it doesn't do any good to the discussion and just adds noise for the occasional reader to wade through.

EDIT/Quite a few people here only seem to know one thing about the Brewster: The losses it recieved in one aerial combat during the Midway battle. They simply take that single tidbit without really thinking the event itself very much and start screaming Brewster must be over modelled. So yes, it's quite easy to use the word "ignorant" after that. And the word is spot on too. If there's zero desire to look into the issue any further and simply deny any info that's being offered that is exactly what they are./EDIT

[gyrene81]

I don't quite see how any of this is relevant except that I try my best not talk complete nonsense in here...about any topic...because it doesn't do any good to the discussion and just adds noise for the occasional reader to wade through.

Well, the fact is that the Finn B-239 with a lower horse power engine appears to have performed better than historical accounts show U.S. Navy, British and Dutch variants did. The majority of the Finns who received the B-239s had less flying general time than their U.S., British and Dutch counterparts and yet they managed to achieve phenomenal results, so pilot inexperience isn't entirely a solid argument one way or the other. The fact that so few F2A-1s were actually produced and documented in flight tests as well as the F2A-2 and F2A-3, makes it difficult to understand how or why the AH B-239 can out maneuver planes in AH that people tend to think should not be outmaneuvered by the Brew.

After trying to justify my own arguments against it's use in early war PTO setups, if we were talking about the F2A-2/B-339 or F2A-3/B-439 against the A6M2 I wouldn't have any arguments. Maybe it is just a matter of learning how to fly it.