Aces High Bulletin Board

General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Motherland on June 02, 2009, 03:28:07 PM

Title: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Motherland on June 02, 2009, 03:28:07 PM
:D :D :D
(http://downloads.hitechcreations.com/screenshots/superfly/brewster/brewster1.jpg)
(http://downloads.hitechcreations.com/screenshots/superfly/brewster/brewster2.jpg)
(http://downloads.hitechcreations.com/screenshots/superfly/brewster/brewster3.jpg)
(http://downloads.hitechcreations.com/screenshots/superfly/brewster/brewster4.jpg)
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: soda72 on June 02, 2009, 03:28:26 PM
 :aok
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: TonyJoey on June 02, 2009, 03:30:17 PM
 :O
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: oakranger on June 02, 2009, 03:33:00 PM
I was hoping for a He-111, but this is a great addition too.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Harp00n on June 02, 2009, 03:34:50 PM
Looks Great!!  :rock




Too bad that it will be a rare sight between those P51 & Spit16-clouds
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: mipoikel on June 02, 2009, 03:35:21 PM
 :O

 :aok :rock
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Wmaker on June 02, 2009, 03:36:00 PM
This is a small step for AH Community but one giant leap for AH Finnish Community!
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Silent6 on June 02, 2009, 03:37:15 PM
Yes! More Planes = More FUN!!! Cant wait to try it!
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: RumbleB on June 02, 2009, 03:38:41 PM
flying coffin.
at least the finns cant run away in that.  :P
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: zoozoo on June 02, 2009, 03:39:01 PM
THANK YOU HTC  :aok :aok :aok
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Bark0 on June 02, 2009, 03:40:23 PM
Yup, Good Job. I Cant wait to see how It handles, and what Skins Greebo Will make.


 :salute
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: waystin2 on June 02, 2009, 03:43:25 PM
She's a beauty!!! :aok
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: 1701E on June 02, 2009, 03:44:11 PM
It's so small!  I like it! :D

Question, what year is the Brewster from?  Just curious if it will be in any area besides LW.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Silent6 on June 02, 2009, 03:44:36 PM
Just did a little reading on it and its only armed with one .50 and one .30 cowl  mounted MGs and it looks like a EW fighter.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: moot on June 02, 2009, 03:45:09 PM
Grats to the Finns.. What a long wait it'd been for them.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Wmaker on June 02, 2009, 03:45:47 PM
flying coffin.
at least the finns cant run away in that.  :P

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pw3e64sosEg (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pw3e64sosEg) :)
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: zoozoo on June 02, 2009, 03:46:25 PM
whats the armament on this thing
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: moot on June 02, 2009, 03:46:28 PM
It's so small!  I like it! :D

Question, what year is the Brewster from?  Just curious if it will be in any area besides LW.
First delivery was in '39.

Zoozoo... Wikipedia is all of 2 clicks away..
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: mipoikel on June 02, 2009, 03:48:35 PM
Just did a little reading on it and its only armed with one .50 and one .30 cowl  mounted MGs and it looks like a EW fighter.

Armament
1 × 0.30 in Browning AN machine gun and 1 × 0.50 in M2 Browning machine gun in the fuselage, with additional 2 × 0.50 in M2 wing-mounted machine guns for combat operations

In Finnish service: 4 × 0.50 in (12.7 mm) Browning M2 machine guns
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Wmaker on June 02, 2009, 03:48:43 PM
Question, what year is the Brewster from?

Model 239 first saw combat on June 25th 1941.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Motherland on June 02, 2009, 03:48:46 PM
It's so small!  I like it! :D

Question, what year is the Brewster from?  Just curious if it will be in any area besides LW.
The B-239's were first tested in Finland in 1940.
According to wikipedia it had 4 .50 cals in Finnish service, and that the 44 Finnish Brewsters destroyed 477 Soviet aircraft for 19 lost.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: MjTalon on June 02, 2009, 03:49:00 PM
Does anyone else see the new town or strat!!  :O :O :O :O :O
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Silent6 on June 02, 2009, 03:49:31 PM
one .30 and one .50 cowl mounted MG and two optional wing mounted MGs. Not sure if they were put on wing pylons or actually inside the wing.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Motherland on June 02, 2009, 03:52:36 PM
one .30 and one .50 cowl mounted MG and two optional wing mounted MGs. Not sure if they were put on wing pylons or actually inside the wing.
In the wing.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: 1701E on June 02, 2009, 03:54:55 PM
Well '39-'41 sounds early enough for me. :D
Shall be a fun one, who needs Late-war uber fast cannon dweeb planes anywho, I like my Early-Mid war planes. :P
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: stephen on June 02, 2009, 03:58:03 PM
Piece of junk, and the marines said so...
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Kazaa on June 02, 2009, 04:00:11 PM
Would have rather had the B-29. :D

Gratz Finns.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Larry on June 02, 2009, 04:00:22 PM
You know, with the new Typh and Buffalo not having and ammo counters I wonder if they are gonna remove them from the game? :noid
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Motherland on June 02, 2009, 04:00:29 PM
Piece of junk, and the marines said so...
US forces also said the P39 was a piece of junk and it was shipped over seas.
Ironically these aircraft became the mounts of some of the highest scoring aces in history :lol (on opposite sides of the war, too).
I can't wait to fly this thing :D
You know, with the new Typh and Buffalo not having and ammo counters I wonder if they are gonna remove them from the game? :noid
Looks like ammo counters above the control stick. It looks like the cockpit's pretty unfinished, none of the instruments have any needles.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: BlauK on June 02, 2009, 04:02:22 PM
 :aok :aok :salute


It's so small!  I like it! :D

It is actually quite large. There is just a huge guy flying it in those screenies :)
Bf109 is smaller.

Photo reference of pilot and Buffalo:
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6f/733px-Brewsterbuffalo.jpg)
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Baumer on June 02, 2009, 04:15:55 PM
Some more photo's

(http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/images/g270000/g271041.jpg)

(http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/images/g270000/g271049.jpg)

(http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/images/g10000/g12906.jpg)

(http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/images/k00001/k00830.jpg)

(http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/images/k00001/k00691.jpg)

(http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/images/k13000/k13386.jpg)
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Baumer on June 02, 2009, 04:18:59 PM
sorry double post
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Baumer on June 02, 2009, 04:19:33 PM
sorry double post
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: SkyRock on June 02, 2009, 04:26:35 PM
flying coffin.
at least the finns cant run away in that.  :P
:rofl
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: moot on June 02, 2009, 04:33:55 PM
The AH pilot does look too big.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: grizz441 on June 02, 2009, 04:36:26 PM
Thx for the development updates HTC.  It's appreciated.  Looks like a nice aircraft.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Saxman on June 02, 2009, 04:41:34 PM
So are we only getting the Model 239, or are we also going to get an F2A-3 for EW PTO scenarios?
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Beefcake on June 02, 2009, 04:45:15 PM
Someone call Camo! Anyone still have that old Duma comic "Loose Rivets" where they added the Buffalo?
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: smokey23 on June 02, 2009, 04:48:14 PM
another hanger queen with an armament like that i dont see many flyin it. the novelty will wear off fairly quick similar to the p-39
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: moot on June 02, 2009, 04:52:40 PM
Was it this one?
(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2430/3589783901_1602a52a72_o.jpg)
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Beefcake on June 02, 2009, 04:56:27 PM
Thats the one!  :D You are the man moot!
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: TwinBoom on June 02, 2009, 05:00:14 PM
another hanger queen with an armament like that i dont see many flyin it. the novelty will wear off fairly quick similar to the p-39

i love the 39 i see the all the time in mid war, brewster  will  not keep fast cannons slinging dweebs happy for long that is true but a hanger queen? i think not
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Wmaker on June 02, 2009, 05:05:32 PM
Another Loose Rivets...

(http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f147/Wmaker/200700buffalo.gif)

:)
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: choppit on June 02, 2009, 05:05:37 PM
Does anyone else see the new town or strat!!  :O :O :O :O :O


I think that's just the Tank town on NDisles........


BTW Brewster looks good
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: jdbecks on June 02, 2009, 05:11:09 PM
what will it fly like? what role did it serve?
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: MotleyCH on June 02, 2009, 05:12:38 PM
[rant]

I'm really surprised to see this added to the line up, previous voting results put this next to bottom of the list. Only 509 of them built, any other airplane would of been excluded for that reason.

What ever happened to ME-410, HE-111, Yak 3 or the A-26?

[/rant]
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Shifty on June 02, 2009, 05:19:26 PM
another hanger queen with an armament like that i dont see many flyin it. the novelty will wear off fairly quick similar to the p-39

There's more to AH than the LWA. As HTC fills out the missing aircraft you're going be disappointed at times. There's far more early war hanger queens as you call them missing than there are late war cannon armed uber rides. It's a great addition and long overdue.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Karnak on June 02, 2009, 05:23:28 PM
B-239 looks nice.  Good detail on it.

[rant]

I'm really surprised to see this added to the line up, previous voting results put this next to bottom of the list. Only 509 of them built, any other airplane would of been excluded for that reason.

What ever happened to ME-410, HE-111, Yak 3 or the A-26?

[/rant]
As I have told you guys many times, the vote was for the next aircraft only, not the next ten.  The P-39 lost to the B-25 by less than 1%, so they did add it next.  None of the other choices are set to any sort of add order based on that vote.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Rich46yo on June 02, 2009, 05:39:34 PM
i love the 39 i see the all the time in mid war, brewster  will  not keep fast cannons slinging dweebs happy for long that is true but a hanger queen? i think not

Last tour the P-39D had 29 kills vs 32 deaths in MidWar. The Q had 100 to 138. Those are basically TBM numbers, or SBD. Or wild cat.

The Hellcat, by comparison, has K/D numbers of about a total of 4300. I might see a P-39 in LW, where about 95% of the games action is, about once a week. If that much. Is there any reason to expect more from the Buffalo?

But I'll hold off on the coronation until the plane gets here and people fly it.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: BillyD on June 02, 2009, 05:41:00 PM
Pretty cool being of finnish blood meself. I would have preferred the Yak3 but looks fun :)

thanks HTC
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Bark0 on June 02, 2009, 05:48:45 PM
I say Give it a Blue n yellow Paint Scheme and call it a Peashooter

 :lol
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: RATTFINK on June 02, 2009, 05:51:21 PM
(http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u7/rattfink31/heavyanimao3la2po.gif)

(http://cache.hyves-static.net/images/smilies/default/smiley_viking.gif) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wZqpwVZqQFg  (http://cache.hyves-static.net/images/smilies/default/smiley_viking.gif)
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Karnak on June 02, 2009, 05:54:17 PM
Keep in mind also that there has been a number of loyal HTC customers from Finland and this is also a bone being tossed to them.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Ack-Ack on June 02, 2009, 05:59:21 PM
another hanger queen with an armament like that i dont see many flyin it. the novelty will wear off fairly quick similar to the p-39

Maybe for someone such as yourself that is only capable of flying fast late war planes but the Brewster fills a gap in the EW and even MW plane set.  It's a great addition to the game that won't be a hanger queen in the EW and MW arenas.

ack-ack
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Stampf on June 02, 2009, 06:02:31 PM
The Japanese loved it.  Everyone in picture captured, and in the service of the Empereror.  Compliments of the Dutch.

(http://www.j-aircraft.com/captured/capturedby/f2abuffalo/buffalo_capdutch.jpg)
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Clone155 on June 02, 2009, 06:03:44 PM
Im confused? I thought the Buffalo was american, why does it have nazi signs?
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Lord ReDhAwK on June 02, 2009, 06:04:27 PM
Congrat's Finns!   Shes a real beauty.  WTG HTC.

ReDhAwK
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Motherland on June 02, 2009, 06:07:32 PM
Im confused? I thought the Buffalo was american, why does it have nazi signs?
Contrary to (unfortunately) popular belief, the Swastika was not a Nazi symbol. It was around for thousands of years, being associated with good luck in cultures around the world before the Nazis defaced it and gave it a new connotation for Western Culture (I'm not sure if the same connotations are held in other cultures?). The blue swastika in the white circle was adopted as the roundel for the Finnish Air Force in 1918.
We have the version that was sold to the Finns, I would assume, because it's the one that saw the most significant service, being the mount of some of the highest scoring aces of all time.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Ack-Ack on June 02, 2009, 06:17:21 PM
Im confused? I thought the Buffalo was american, why does it have nazi signs?

Finnish Swastika: It was originally a Hindi symbol of luck used by the family of the Swedish Count Eric von Rosen who donated the first aircraft, a Thulin D Parasol (a license-built Morane-Saulnier L), to the Finnish (White) Army 6 Mar 1918 during the Finnish War of Independence (or Finnish Civil War).

It was adopted as the national marking of the Finnish Air Force in honour of him and later on also by the Army.  After the war, the swastika was abandoned as a symbol and instead a blue and white roundel was adopted.


ack-ack
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Shifty on June 02, 2009, 06:17:53 PM
Im confused? I thought the Buffalo was american, why does it have nazi signs?

The question that never goes away.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: MORAY37 on June 02, 2009, 06:26:45 PM
Well, the Finns will be happy.  Good for them.

Nothing like adding an aircraft that was completely outdated and outclassed when the war started.  At least it's a new ride.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Karnak on June 02, 2009, 06:32:05 PM
Contrary to (unfortunately) popular belief, the Swastika was not a Nazi symbol. It was around for thousands of years, being associated with good luck in cultures around before the Nazis defaced it and gave it a new connotation for Western Culture (I'm not sure if the same connotations are held in other cultures?). The blue swastika in the white circle was adopted as the roundel for the Finnish Air Force in 1918.
We have the version that was sold to the Finns, I would assume, because it's the one that saw the most significant service, being the mount of some of the highest scoring aces of all time.
It is still very popular as a good luck symbol in India.

Nothing like adding an aircraft that was completely outdated and outclassed when the war started.  At least it's a new ride.
There are not many aircraft left to be added that will not be whined about being "hangar queens" as most of the supermachines have already been put into the game.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: smokey23 on June 02, 2009, 06:33:57 PM
Maybe for someone such as yourself that is only capable of flying fast late war planes but the Brewster fills a gap in the EW and even MW plane set.  It's a great addition to the game that won't be a hanger queen in the EW and MW arenas.

ack-ack

well congrats to the early war flyers then, all 40 of you i dont do early war so all the better. Oh and by the way i dont like late war fast planes unless you call the A6m or Hurri C a fast plane. I just dont see many people upping it to often after the novelty wears off due to the meager armament. Thats just my opinion but we'll see what happens.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: TwinBoom on June 02, 2009, 06:38:51 PM
well congrats to the early war flyers then, all 40 of you i dont do early war so all the better. Oh and by the way i dont like late war fast planes unless you call the A6m or Hurri C a fast plane. I just dont see many people upping it to often after the novelty wears off due to the meager armament. Thats just my opinion but we'll see what happens.

same guns as the fm2 and b pony
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Motherland on June 02, 2009, 06:42:37 PM
4 .50 cals isn't exactly a meager armament... the P51B, Wildcats, and P38's (I know the P38 has a Hispano but from what I understand people continue to use the 4x .50's once that's dry) are fairly popular aircraft, I don't see why the Brewster won't see at least some use, with a similar crowd to the Wildcat. (the .50s are M2's, right, they weren't replaced in Finland?)
4x .50s is at very least a superior armament to that of the A6M2's, not far behind the A6M5b's IMO... especially in a turn fight.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: texastc316 on June 02, 2009, 06:44:02 PM
jeeze. Some of you are worse than kids. Its a good lookng plane, true it wont see alot of action in latewar but so what, its fills a void in scenarios, FSO, Snapshots, and it has been asked for for many many years. Not too many uber late war rides left, its about time we start filling in the early war stuff.
WTG superfly greebo and the rest of HTC.  :rock
now back to the show
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Rich46yo on June 02, 2009, 06:44:50 PM
well congrats to the early war flyers then, all 40 of you i dont do early war so all the better. Oh and by the way i dont like late war fast planes unless you call the A6m or Hurri C a fast plane. I just dont see many people upping it to often after the novelty wears off due to the meager armament. Thats just my opinion but we'll see what happens.

Smoke I think you should be reported for posting an original opinion and one that you really mean. How dare you!

Remember all the pages of the herd going gaa-gaa over the P-39? How many of them do you think still fly it?

And in order to have special events based on actual history you'd have to have the pre-war, and early war, Soviet aircraft the Finns actually flew against. What are you going to do? Match the Buffalos against LAs and Yak-9s?

Hey it would be great to re-create the Winter war in the air. But to do so you'd have to model a couple/three early war Soviet fighters 95% of your customer base would also only fly once. And there are far more planes we need more and would be used more.

But...your right. The Buffalo deserves a chance. Maybe I'm wrong and maybe it will find a niche.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Fencer51 on June 02, 2009, 06:49:19 PM
(http://www.51hangar.net/banners/MW.jpg)

Ahh one more piece in the planeset puzzle.. now all we need are the TBD and PBY.  :aok

Congrats Finns, its been a long time coming in several games.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Wmaker on June 02, 2009, 06:53:58 PM
And in order to have special events based on actual history you'd have to have the pre-war, and early war, Soviet aircraft the Finns actually flew against.

I-16 Rata alone in addition to the Brewster would make a great furball-setup for the AvA and special events. Both of these aircraft are highly maneuverable and I think they'd make a fun setup even for folks who aren't so famillar/interested in history of the Finnish Air Force.

BTW, Brewster arrived too late to see action in Winter War.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: MORAY37 on June 02, 2009, 06:58:10 PM
jeeze. Some of you are worse than kids. Its a good lookng plane, true it wont see alot of action in latewar but so what, its fills a void in scenarios, FSO, Snapshots, and it has been asked for for many many years. Not too many uber late war rides left, its about time we start filling in the early war stuff.
WTG superfly greebo and the rest of HTC.  :rock
now back to the show

Oh, and it's another american ride.  Surprise.... then snore.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: MORAY37 on June 02, 2009, 07:00:34 PM
It is still very popular as a good luck symbol in India.
There are not many aircraft left to be added that will not be whined about being "hangar queens" as most of the supermachines have already been put into the game.

Karnak, I'm not asking for supermachines.  There are plenty out there to model, but that just don't happen to be Made in America.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Saxman on June 02, 2009, 07:09:09 PM
Oh, and it's another american ride.  Surprise.... then snore.

Technically the Model 239 was Finnish. Yes it's an American design built in the States, but the Finns stripped most or all of the armor off, removed the naval equipment (arrestor hook, etc) increased the armament, (4x.50cal instead of 1.30 and 3x.50) and made a large number of other changes (basically stripped her BACK into the plane that Boyington said was actually very good until the Navy overloaded her). The 239 is completely distinct from the F2A-3 the USMC used at Midway, and the derivative export models the British and Dutch used in the early phases of the Pacific War.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Squire on June 02, 2009, 07:10:32 PM
"now all we need are the TBD and PBY"

Dont be silly, neither is jet powered. Or had No0Ks.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: B4Buster on June 02, 2009, 07:15:04 PM
WTG HTC
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Wmaker on June 02, 2009, 07:17:06 PM
Technically the Model 239 was Finnish. Yes it's an American design built in the States, but the Finns stripped most or all of the armor off, removed the naval equipment (arrestor hook, etc) increased the armament, (4x.50cal instead of 1.30 and 3x.50) and made a large number of other changes (basically stripped her BACK into the plane that Boyington said was actually very good until the Navy overloaded her). The 239 is completely distinct from the F2A-3 the USMC used at Midway, and the derivative export models the British and Dutch used in the early phases of the Pacific War.

Actually it shipped sans any Naval gear and without any armor and Finns added back and head armor to the 239s. It is, like you said, effectively a different plane compared to the F2A-3. The weight difference with 160gal fuel on both is around 1080lbs!
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: slyguy on June 02, 2009, 07:18:37 PM
Maybe for someone such as yourself that is only capable of flying fast late war planes but the Brewster fills a gap in the EW and even MW plane set.  It's a great addition to the game that won't be a hanger queen in the EW and MW arenas.

ack-ack

ack-ack, why do you have to assume that he's only "capable" of flying late war planes?  Maybe that's just what he likes.  You like what you like and he likes what he likes.  But of course what *you* like is the far better option.  Pretty arrogant.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Rino on June 02, 2009, 07:32:40 PM
Smoke I think you should be reported for posting an original opinion and one that you really mean. How dare you!

Remember all the pages of the herd going gaa-gaa over the P-39? How many of them do you think still fly it?

And in order to have special events based on actual history you'd have to have the pre-war, and early war, Soviet aircraft the Finns actually flew against. What are you going to do? Match the Buffalos against LAs and Yak-9s?

Hey it would be great to re-create the Winter war in the air. But to do so you'd have to model a couple/three early war Soviet fighters 95% of your customer base would also only fly once. And there are far more planes we need more and would be used more.

But...your right. The Buffalo deserves a chance. Maybe I'm wrong and maybe it will find a niche.

So an original opinion pretty much equals a whine then, gotcha.  Just out of curiousity, are you being forced to fly it, or does the
extra data on your hard drive slow it down THAT much?  :rolleyes:
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Karnak on June 02, 2009, 07:33:47 PM
So an original opinion pretty much equals a whine then, gotcha.  Just out of curiousity, are you being forced to fly it, or does the
extra data on your hard drive slow it down THAT much?  :rolleyes:
He wants the A-26 and is probable very disappointed right now.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: SoonerMP on June 02, 2009, 07:43:32 PM
Nothing wrong with wanting the A-26   :aok

I am interested to see how this bird will stand up though, in the MA's and Scenarios, snapshots etc...
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Hajo on June 02, 2009, 07:48:43 PM
Some people just don't get it do they.

If the aircraft isn't to their liking they have to belittle it. 

Morons think before opening your mouths.  Scenarios and FSOs' will employ the Buffalo.

If you don't like it in the MA don't fly it simple.

The Finns have been a stalwart of the AH Community since its' inception.

They, and Special Events will use the buffalo.

It imho is long overdue.

Hajo
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Bronk on June 02, 2009, 07:59:36 PM
People who take the time to learn this little bugger  are going to surprise the hell out of people.

Just like when you run into that FM-2 pilot who knows his chit.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: steely07 on June 02, 2009, 08:06:46 PM
Congrats Finns!!, and WTG HTC!!

Steely
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: VansCrew1 on June 02, 2009, 08:21:26 PM
Well i guess im going to stay around now just to fly it.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: beau32 on June 02, 2009, 08:40:18 PM
Nice, cant wait to try it out.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Slash27 on June 02, 2009, 09:53:22 PM
Oh, and it's another american ride.  Surprise.... then snore.

Are you holding your breath and stomping your feet? Maybe you should go kick the dog and beat up your pillow.


Ass.





Congrats Finns, long time coming :salute
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Megalodon on June 02, 2009, 10:05:36 PM
WTG! Fins  :aok  :cool: Bout Time! Can't wait to try it out!
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Guppy35 on June 02, 2009, 11:05:17 PM
I thought I heard a cheer from the direction of Finland :)

Nice work gents on the Buffalo.

Now about that Beaufighter! :)
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: 10thmd on June 02, 2009, 11:41:49 PM
I can't wait till the Finns start stomping the piss out off ppl in this thing. :devil
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: BnZs on June 02, 2009, 11:47:03 PM
Y'all will learn to love it.

If nothing else it will have people tearing their hair out just trying to *hit* the thing I expect.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: froger on June 03, 2009, 12:18:11 AM
flying coffin.
at least the finns cant run away in that.  :P

lol yup its gonna attract more attention than the B25 and the P39.
this thing have guns on the front or is it another B5n>>>>> :O
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Bruv119 on June 03, 2009, 12:23:07 AM
can't wait to bnz them in my uber spit !!!    :D


Good work  SuperFly  / Greebo   and TY.   :salute
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: froger on June 03, 2009, 12:24:09 AM
I say Give it a Blue n yellow Paint Scheme and call it a Peashooter

 :lol


 :aok
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: RTSigma on June 03, 2009, 12:33:52 AM
Yea! More unique planes! Now since its gear was crank-operated, will that be modeled?

PRESS G MULTIPLE TIMES TO LOWER GEAR
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: A8TOOL on June 03, 2009, 01:39:12 AM
(http://thesquad.forumotion.net/users/a9/77/24/39/smiles/85933.gif)(http://thesquad.forumotion.net/users/a9/77/24/39/smiles/162704.gif)
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Kotari on June 03, 2009, 03:18:24 AM
Wtg HTC  :salute

I named that ride "Pike", because it looks like a widely found fish in our lakes: short, fat and sharp teeth  :devil

Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Gianlupo on June 03, 2009, 03:32:03 AM
Wtg Finns!

Now, let's go on and build the Ilmavoimat.... let's add the Fiat G.50! :D


:noid
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: warhed on June 03, 2009, 03:43:06 AM
The AH pilot does look too big.

Lusche = Brewster Test Pilot?   :)
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Wmaker on June 03, 2009, 04:02:30 AM
Now since its gear was crank-operated, will that be modeled?

Brewster's gear isn't crank-operated, F4F/FM-2's is. :)
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Rich46yo on June 03, 2009, 04:06:29 AM
Technically the Model 239 was Finnish. Yes it's an American design built in the States, but the Finns stripped most or all of the armor off, removed the naval equipment (arrestor hook, etc) increased the armament, (4x.50cal instead of 1.30 and 3x.50) and made a large number of other changes (basically stripped her BACK into the plane that Boyington said was actually very good until the Navy overloaded her). The 239 is completely distinct from the F2A-3 the USMC used at Midway, and the derivative export models the British and Dutch used in the early phases of the Pacific War.

Were making things up now?http://www.warbirdforum.com/saga.htm

Quote
As required by the "Neutrality Act," Brewster modified the F2A by replacing its government-supplied engine, gun sight, and direction finder with export-approved equipment. It took out the life raft and arresting hook, and doubled the firepower by installing two half-inch machine guns in the wings. (Like most American fighters of the time, the F2A had two nose-mounted machine guns, synchronized to fire through the propeller arc.) Lastly, it painted out Felix, the bomb-carrying cartoon cat that was the mascot of VF-3. The company produced 44 of these "de-navalized" fighters under the designation B-239.


Quote
The B-239s went by boat to Norway, then by train to Sweden, where they were assembled by Norwegian air force mechanics under the supervision of Brewster engineers. The Americans didn't lack for smokes or news of the Brooklyn Dodgers: their buddies in Queens had stuffed the wing panels with cigarettes, magazines, and newspapers.

http://www.warbirdalley.com/buffalo.htm
Quote
A Finnish variant of the F2A, the VL (Valtion Lentokonetehdas) Humu was intended as a replacement for the Finnish Air Force's worn-out F2A-1 Buffalo fighters, which could not be replaced due to poor wartime availability of imported combat aircraft. The most significant changes from the original F2A-1 were a wooden wing (necessary due to material shortages) and a Russian M-63 engine purchased from Germany. The project soon fell behind schedule and the Humu proved to be inferior to the F2A-1 due to a higher aircraft weight, among other factors . Only one aircraft was delivered, and it never entered Finnish service.   [History by Jeff VanDerford with significant contributions by P. Kojo and Sampo Vuorinen.]

The Brewster is about as Finnish as baseball.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: moot on June 03, 2009, 04:14:19 AM
Lusche = Brewster Test Pilot?   :)
:lol  Probably!
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Wmaker on June 03, 2009, 04:15:36 AM
The Brewster is about as Finnish as baseball.

http://www.pesis.fi/pesapalloliitto/international_site/ (http://www.pesis.fi/pesapalloliitto/international_site/) :noid  :D
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: bravoa8 on June 03, 2009, 04:19:20 AM
The new update is going to be so cool :rock
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Rich46yo on June 03, 2009, 04:32:52 AM
Quote
Morons think before opening your mouths.  Scenarios and FSOs' will employ the Buffalo.

If you don't like it in the MA don't fly it simple.

Nobody had better have their own opinion. Or pine for the airplane "they wanted". I mean it, this is the last warning you'll get.
(http://i478.photobucket.com/albums/rr149/Rich46yo/borg1.jpg)
Dont say I didnt warn you.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Infidelz on June 03, 2009, 05:13:02 AM
Thank you HTC.

Inf>
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: TexMurphy on June 03, 2009, 06:34:19 AM
Im sitting here on the west coast of sweden and I thought I saw something pop over the horizon towards the east. Likewise there have been reports on the news of of earthquakes in finland.

Now I understand what it is... its the collective finish ejaculation of geekey joy that is sending out shockwaves over the entire continent...

Grats guys your worth it, just through the contribution to the community that you guys make is worth a reward like this... imho it should have come earlier....

Its also great to see the EW/MW gaps beeing filled as it will give us even better scenarios and snapshots.

Now Im hoping for additions to the Japanese, Italian and Russian planesets.

Tex
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: dev1ant on June 03, 2009, 11:18:31 AM
Are there really that many scenarios that the Buffalo can be used for that you couldn't sub in the F4F/Fm2?

Was kinda hoping for something a little more useful.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Saxman on June 03, 2009, 11:46:49 AM
Are there really that many scenarios that the Buffalo can be used for that you couldn't sub in the F4F/Fm2?

Was kinda hoping for something a little more useful.

Eastern Front, and very early PTO scenarios (RAF, RAAF and Dutch prior to American entry).
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Guppy35 on June 03, 2009, 11:50:55 AM
Are there really that many scenarios that the Buffalo can be used for that you couldn't sub in the F4F/Fm2?

Was kinda hoping for something a little more useful.

Useful in that latewar, latest and greatest sort of way so you won't have to work at the game much? 

Seems like filling out the EW plane sets is quite useful, as is getting the Finn's out of their 109s and into Buffalos.  More of us might have a chance against them this way :)
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: A8TOOL on June 03, 2009, 11:51:58 AM
Are there really that many scenarios that the Buffalo can be used for that you couldn't sub in the F4F/Fm2?

Was kinda hoping for something a little more useful.

Well it seems as tho the Buffalo will be flying Axis so you don't have to worry about it being in the American plane set even tho it's an American Design.

(http://downloads.hitechcreations.com/screenshots/superfly/brewster/brewster4s.jpg) (http://downloads.hitechcreations.com/screenshots/superfly/brewster/brewster3s.jpg)
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Motherland on June 03, 2009, 11:57:18 AM
Well it seems as tho the Buffalo will be flying Axis so you don't have to worry about it being in the American plane set even tho it's an American Design.

(http://downloads.hitechcreations.com/screenshots/superfly/brewster/brewster4s.jpg) (http://downloads.hitechcreations.com/screenshots/superfly/brewster/brewster3s.jpg)
The Buffalo was most famous for its service with the Finnish Air Force, so it only makes sense that that's the version that was modeled...
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Hajo on June 03, 2009, 12:18:46 PM
Axis??? The Buffalo?


Oh boy................it is apparent that a lot of History has been skipped over.

Look at the markings again.

those are Finlands markings.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: A8TOOL on June 03, 2009, 12:23:18 PM
Axis??? The Buffalo?


Oh boy................it is apparent that a lot of History has been skipped over.

Look at the markings again.

those are Finlands markings.

Looks like swastika's on the wings to me. So who would you fly it for?
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: 1701E on June 03, 2009, 12:26:57 PM
Looks like swastika's on the wings to me. So who would you fly it for?

Was answered a few pages ago, by Motherland.

Contrary to (unfortunately) popular belief, the Swastika was not a Nazi symbol. It was around for thousands of years, being associated with good luck in cultures around the world before the Nazis defaced it and gave it a new connotation for Western Culture (I'm not sure if the same connotations are held in other cultures?). The blue swastika in the white circle was adopted as the roundel for the Finnish Air Force in 1918.
We have the version that was sold to the Finns, I would assume, because it's the one that saw the most significant service, being the mount of some of the highest scoring aces of all time.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Furball on June 03, 2009, 12:32:15 PM
Just out of interest, will the B-239 differ greatly from the FM2?  I don't know a lot about the specifications of the Finnish version.  Nice looking plane, glad the Finnish guys have it finally.  :aok
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: BlauK on June 03, 2009, 12:37:45 PM
To answer A8TOOL:

Finland is often counted among Axis countries even though it did not officially belong to the Axis countries.
Possibly the correct term to use such situation is "Co-belligerence".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Co-belligerence


Brewsters also flew against Germans in 1944 ;)
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: A8TOOL on June 03, 2009, 12:41:18 PM
Contrary to (unfortunately) popular belief, the Swastika was not a Nazi symbol. It was around for thousands of years, being associated with good luck in cultures around the world before the Nazis defaced it and gave it a new connotation for Western Culture

Seems flying a plane with swastikas pasted all over it in WWll might be considered bad luck when surrounded by Allies. ........I'd shoot it.

The swastika didn't help Manson out much either.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: MrRiplEy[H] on June 03, 2009, 12:48:06 PM
Looks like swastika's on the wings to me. So who would you fly it for?

Lol what a tool!  :rofl
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Motherland on June 03, 2009, 12:57:01 PM
Seems flying a plane with swastikas pasted all over it in WWll might be considered bad luck when surrounded by Allies. ........I'd shoot it.

The swastika didn't help Manson out much either.
Well, I doubt the Finnish Air Force, let alone the hundreds of ancient cultures which used it from around the world, foresaw that an insane dictator from Germany would adopt the symbol and provoke the largest war in human history and commit massive genocide.

Alternatively we can assume they're all Nazis.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: MORAY37 on June 03, 2009, 01:18:11 PM
Axis??? The Buffalo?


Oh boy................it is apparent that a lot of History has been skipped over.

Look at the markings again.

those are Finlands markings.

Um... maybe it is you that should do the reading.

Finland was allied with Germany until 1944.  Hence the fact that there are 109's with Finnish livery in the game.  It wasn't until the Finns threw the Germans out in 1944 that they started fighting them.  Therefore, Finland fought on both the Axis and the Allied side in WW2.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Masherbrum on June 03, 2009, 01:19:41 PM
Looks like swastika's on the wings to me. So who would you fly it for?

 :rofl
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Motherland on June 03, 2009, 01:28:27 PM
Um... maybe it is you that should do the reading.

Finland was allied with Germany until 1944.  Hence the fact that there are 109's with Finnish livery in the game.  It wasn't until the Finns threw the Germans out in 1944 that they started fighting them.  Therefore, Finland fought on both the Axis and the Allied side in WW2.
I'm not an expert on the subject, however I don't think Finland was ever allied with Germany, merely co-belligerents, along with; Bulgaria, China, Croatia, Denmark, Hungary, Manchukuo, Romania, Slovakia and Spain.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: ACE on June 03, 2009, 01:33:08 PM
um is a brewster like a german p47?
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Masherbrum on June 03, 2009, 01:34:24 PM
Um... maybe it is you that should do the reading.

Finland was allied with Germany until 1944.  Hence the fact that there are 109's with Finnish livery in the game.  It wasn't until the Finns threw the Germans out in 1944 that they started fighting them.  Therefore, Finland fought on both the Axis and the Allied side in WW2.

It isn't this "cut and dry".   Before telling others "to do the reading", just make sure you know the intangibles.   Because your response tells myself and others, you don't.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Masherbrum on June 03, 2009, 01:36:06 PM
um is a brewster like a german p47?

 :huh   It was an American aircraft built by Brewster Aeronautical Corporation.

Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: ACE on June 03, 2009, 01:38:38 PM
lol thanks ... does it turn good  :pray
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Enker on June 03, 2009, 01:53:46 PM
Laugh out loud, thanks. Another question, does the Buffalo turn well? I hope so.
Turning well is relative, but if IL-2 is any indication, it will turn similar to a 109F with full flaps. In other words, it will be able to yank and bank to some extent, yes. But who cares about the turn rate. Turn rate is an excuse for not using ACM and handing the other pilot his bootay on a bullet-based platter.

Quote translated into English as best as I could.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: MrRiplEy[H] on June 03, 2009, 02:00:36 PM
Turning well is relative, but if IL-2 is any indication, it will turn similar to a 109F with full flaps. In other words, it will be able to yank and bank to some extent, yes. But who cares about the turn rate. Turn rate is an excuse for not using ACM and handing the other pilot his bootay on a bullet-based platter.

Quote translated into English as best as I could.

The finnish pilots quoted that the hurricane was a very stiff and unmanouverable plane compared to BW and it should be engaged in turnfight immediately.

That should give some idea about the manouverability.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Wmaker on June 03, 2009, 02:41:27 PM
I'll put this up here aswell...

(http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f147/Wmaker/Comparison.jpg)
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: AirFlyer on June 03, 2009, 03:28:03 PM
Looks like a fun little ride, I'll likely be picking it as a second ride beside my A6M.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Rich46yo on June 03, 2009, 03:35:10 PM
I'm not an expert on the subject, however I don't think Finland was ever allied with Germany, merely co-belligerents, along with; Bulgaria, China, Croatia, Denmark, Hungary, Manchukuo, Romania, Slovakia and Spain.


Sound like a "co-belligerent"?
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Wmaker on June 03, 2009, 03:42:34 PM
Rich46yo,

Take this to O'Club. It does not belong here.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Rich46yo on June 03, 2009, 03:53:49 PM
Rich46yo,

Take this to O'Club. It does not belong here.

Get a job with an AH paycheck and then tell me what to write. So far 1/2 of whats here doesnt belong here.

Tellya what..here. Feel better? Maybe "General Discussion" doesnt translate to well.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: BlauK on June 03, 2009, 03:55:43 PM
IMO Rich summarised the situation quite well.

[edit] uh.. did you take it away :(
There were just some minor details I would have liked to comment... but now I cannot remember what they were.[/edit]
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: BaDkaRmA158Th on June 03, 2009, 04:10:30 PM
With the brewster the Fm-2 may become a small perk ride for mid & late arenas considering we also have the f4f.


Either way im very stoked to get more early war fighters.


PLEASE HTC, stuff us full of early war birds! :salute
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Wmaker on June 03, 2009, 04:11:06 PM
Get a job with an AH paycheck and then tell me what to write.

I don't need AH paycheck to tell my opinion. Obviously I'm not a moderator here, nor am I backseat moderating IMO. But considering this thread is about a new aircraft for Aces High it would be pretty silly to get it locked with totally off topic material.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: A8TOOL on June 03, 2009, 04:11:21 PM
IMO Rich summarised the situation quite well.

[edit] uh.. did you take it away :(
There were just some minor details I would have liked to comment... but now I cannot remember what they were.[/edit]

Rich, please edit your post. I found it very informative and it DOES fit into this thread just fine.

What many in the thread are wondering you have answered. The History of the plane and the Finns participation in the war are all part of what has made this and the other Brewster thread very interesting.

My feelings on this would be... Don't let WMaker's OPINION of what he thinks belongs here rob us of the information that he somehow made you delete.

Please consider the re-posting of it.

 :salute

Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Wmaker on June 03, 2009, 04:13:26 PM
Description of this forum: Open forum for the general discussion of Aces High.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: A8TOOL on June 03, 2009, 04:14:03 PM
I don't need AH paycheck to tell my opinion. Obviously I'm not a moderator here, nor am I backseat moderating IMO. But considering this thread is about a new aircraft for Aces High it would be pretty silly to get it locked with totally off topic material.

Its the history of the plane and well worth a re-post but most of all should not be influenced by your opinion of where it belongs.

Quote
Description of this forum: Open forum for the general discussion of Aces High..

The Topic's name is called BREWSTER BUFFALO and is a general disscussion about a plane that will become the newest addition to the game of ACES HIGH that we know of so far.

You know where to leave your opinion and who will decide whether it should stay or not.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Wmaker on June 03, 2009, 04:18:36 PM
Its the history of the plane and well worth a re-post but most of all should not be influenced by your opinion of where it belongs.

Actually Rich's post was about Finland's role in WWII in general.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: BnZs on June 03, 2009, 04:19:42 PM
The Finns in those Brewsters were defending themselves from a mass-murdering dictator with more resources and a higher ultimate body count than Hitler had. And they did it almost by themselves.

They don't teach you much about the matter of Finland vs. USSR in school, not many t.v. programs about it either. I think it is perhaps it makes all too clear the way the West repeatedly made deals with the devil and wussed out in regards to communist aggression against small nations in the 20th century.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Wmaker on June 03, 2009, 04:21:41 PM
The Topic's name is called BREWSTER BUFFALO and is a general disscussion about a plane that will become the newest addition to the game of ACES HIGH that we know of so far.

You know where to leave your opinion and who will decide whether it should stay or not.

Your reading comprehension leaves lot to be desired.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: crazyivan on June 03, 2009, 04:23:59 PM
Um... maybe it is you that should do the reading.

Finland was allied with Germany until 1944.  Hence the fact that there are 109's with Finnish livery in the game.  It wasn't until the Finns threw the Germans out in 1944 that they started fighting them.  Therefore, Finland fought on both the Axis and the Allied side in WW2.
  :aok
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Oldman731 on June 03, 2009, 04:32:40 PM
The Finns in those Brewsters were defending themselves from a mass-murdering dictator with more resources and a higher ultimate body count than Hitler had. And they did it almost by themselves.

...er...not in 1941 they weren't...

- oldman
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: A8TOOL on June 03, 2009, 05:08:12 PM
Your reading comprehension leaves lot to be desired.

That I remember, we started with what other planes we really were hoping for to, since we're getting it what does it have, to what kind will we get , to why does it have Swastkas on it if it's an American plane, to the answer which meant reprinting some of it's history along with the Finns participation in the war. If your offended by it, try rewriting it's history.


Sorry if a missed a few but that's what I've been reading in short.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Wmaker on June 03, 2009, 05:18:54 PM
If your offended by it...

I'm not offended at all and I'm more than willing to discuss about my country's history in another thread.

No offence TOOL, but when you've checked the Internet and especially these threads for information regarding the Brewster and you end up with the conclusions below...

From what I gather the Brewster we're getting is an American made, stripped down low production Swedish version that somehow ended up under Nazi control.

...I really don't have very high hopes that you'd able to understand anything I would tell you regarding Finnish history.

Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: LLv34_Camouflage on June 03, 2009, 05:19:46 PM
Hmm... I'll have to start thinking of a new sig!

Great work SF, Greebo and Wmaker!  :salute

Camo
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: BnZs on June 03, 2009, 05:23:38 PM
...er...not in 1941 they weren't...

- oldman

Huh, what do you mean? In '41 the Finns were trying to get back land taken from them during the Winter War, sure, but that is justifiable.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: stephen on June 03, 2009, 05:26:45 PM
Whatever, still a worthless aircraft,... did somone blackmail HT into modeling this thing? :devil
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Rich46yo on June 03, 2009, 05:26:59 PM
Actually Rich's post was about Finland's role in WWII in general.

I answered a question, or responded to a statement made in the thread. If you feel like my next is overlong then just dont read it. Your not a Mod, and dont work for AH, so spare me the the proclamations.

Most Americans dont know about the history behind this front of the war. I start talking history and its hard for me to stop.

Finland did more then just protect themselves. They also fought a war of aggression with designs on expanding their land mass. And as the winds of war shifted they ended up dancing with both Dictators.

BTW the Brewster Buffalo was an American airplane purchased by Finland. It was no more "Finnish" then the 109 was.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Wmaker on June 03, 2009, 05:33:05 PM
I alreay stated that I'm not a mod and that I just expressed my opinion...I thought it would sink in the first time I said it. I know from experience that this thread would get totally sidetracked very quickly and that is why I expressed my opinion that general Finnish WWII history could be discussed in the O'Club.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Wmaker on June 03, 2009, 05:34:42 PM
BTW the Brewster Buffalo was an American airplane purchased by Finland. It was no more "Finnish" then the 109 was.

Have I somehow argued otherwise?

EDIT/However, Finland was the sole operator of the Model 239./EDIT
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Motherland on June 03, 2009, 05:34:49 PM
I answered a question, or responded to a statement made in the thread. If you feel like my next is overlong then just dont read it. Your not a Mod, and dont work for AH, so spare me the the proclamations.

Most Americans dont know about the history behind this front of the war. I start talking history and its hard for me to stop.

Finland did more then just protect themselves. They also fought a war of aggression with designs on expanding their land mass. And as the winds of war shifted they ended up dancing with both Dictators.

BTW the Brewster Buffalo was an American airplane purchased by Finland. It was no more "Finnish" then the 109 was.
Rich, if you don't want to repost what you originally did, could you PM me? I've always been interested by Finland's largely unknown and kind of confusing involvement in WWII.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: A8TOOL on June 03, 2009, 05:42:44 PM
I'm not offended at all and I'm more than willing to discuss about my country's history in another thread.

No offence TOOL, but when you've checked the Internet and especially these threads for information regarding the Brewster and you end up with the conclusions below...

...I really don't have very high hopes that you'd able to understand anything I would tell you regarding Finnish history.



I've learned a lot in this thread, the most being from Rich and I was sorry to see him erase his information because you thought it belonged somewhere else. If it was not for him I would have never known exactly why the Brewster we'll be using had Swastikas painted all over it.

Is it true there was only 44 made or is this the version that only one was  made?

Rich46yo's post
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,265934.msg3317328.html#msg3317328



Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Karnak on June 03, 2009, 05:44:07 PM
It doesn't have swastikas on it.  It has Von Rosen crosses.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Furball on June 03, 2009, 05:44:59 PM
Hmm... I'll have to start thinking of a new sig!

Karvapallo for president!
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: dev1ant on June 03, 2009, 05:45:51 PM
Useful in that latewar, latest and greatest sort of way so you won't have to work at the game much? 

I'd appreciate it if you wouldn't lump me in with 75% of the tools who populate the MA.

Thanks.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Enker on June 03, 2009, 05:49:16 PM
Whatever, still a worthless aircraft,... did somone blackmail HT into modeling this thing? :devil
It isn't worthless, it is simply from a different time period than the LW arena planes. Besides, think of all the FSOs we could enjoy with it.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: moot on June 03, 2009, 05:53:32 PM
You guys want to know the best thing about the Brewster, besides the naked spa celebrations it'll cause in Finland?  Using it to shoot down the whiners who call it useless.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: texastc316 on June 03, 2009, 05:56:19 PM
I can't wait for the first buffalo herd mission
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: moot on June 03, 2009, 06:00:45 PM
HTC should have a special Brewster day where anyone who's complained about it being FINALLY added... Gets a 20 perk/kill bounty on their pixel head if you make it flying a Brewster.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Wmaker on June 03, 2009, 06:02:37 PM
I've learned a lot in this thread, the most being from Rich and I was sorry to see him erase his information because you thought it belonged somewhere else. If it was not for him I would have never known exactly why the Brewster we'll be using had Swastikas painted all over it.

Is it true there was only 44 made or is this the version that only one was  made?

Rich46yo's post
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,265934.msg3317328.html#msg3317328

<Sigh>

TOOL, you are sitting infront of a computer with Internet access...

www.google.com (http://www.google.com)

Here's something to get you started:

http://www.sci.fi/~fta/BWtoFAF1.htm (http://www.sci.fi/~fta/BWtoFAF1.htm) Very nice article on how the Brewsters got delivered to the FiAF.

http://www.virtualpilots.fi/feature/articles/honorable_swastika/ (http://www.virtualpilots.fi/feature/articles/honorable_swastika/) Very thorough article on the use of the swastika-symbol in Finland.

http://www.virtualpilots.fi/hist/WW2History-CaptainWindsAirCombatTacticsLecture.html (http://www.virtualpilots.fi/hist/WW2History-CaptainWindsAirCombatTacticsLecture.html) A lecture prepared by Finnish ace Hans Wind which was given to new fighter pilots on their way to operational units. This is written from the PoV of a Brewster pilot.

http://www.sci.fi/~fta/fineka01.htm (http://www.sci.fi/~fta/fineka01.htm) Good reading...Gustaf Erik Magnusson - the father of Finnish fighter tactics

http://www.sci.fi/~fta/fintac-1.htm (http://www.sci.fi/~fta/fintac-1.htm) More very good reading...THE FINNISH FIGHTER TACTICS AND TRAINING BEFORE AND DURING THE WW II By Heikki Nikunen (Former FiAF Commander)


EDIT/Finland recieved *only* 44 Model 239s. But it's good to remember that they served a very long period of time and were flown a lot. So their service was very extensive. Brewster is a Brewster, Humu is a Humu. What does it say on the lower left corner of the screenshots on HTC homepage? Why would they model a plane of which one prototype was made and which saw no combat. Common sense goes a long way./EDIT





Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: A8TOOL on June 03, 2009, 06:05:49 PM
Thanks  :aok


Added:

Found a real photo of it btw.

This post has a lot of really strange looking planes. One of the He-111 and another of something that looks like it's straight out of Star Wars from Russia

Not sure why the 190's there.

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&ct=res&cd=3&url=http%3A%2F%2Fforums.civfanatics.com%2Fshowthread.php%3Ft%3D290189%26page%3D3&ei=v_0mSqS4E5mUMeDE6YUF&usg=AFQjCNGMvUixi1rhDzZWh3PEFwk6N01KEA&sig2=OzvvH6PwnsnQlxzqT57Rug
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Lusche on June 03, 2009, 06:25:25 PM
Some good links, WMaker.


But in
http://www.virtualpilots.fi/hist/WW2History-CaptainWindsAirCombatTacticsLecture.html (http://www.virtualpilots.fi/hist/WW2History-CaptainWindsAirCombatTacticsLecture.html) A lecture prepared by Finnish ace Hans Wind which was given to new fighter pilots on their way to operational units. This is written from the PoV of a Brewster pilot.

...I noticed the following statement:

Quote
The easiest one to shoot down of the enemy fighters is the Hurricane. It is totally helpless against us below 3,000 meters. It is slow and very clumsy and unmanoeuvrable. Whenever you meet a Hurricane, engage it in a turn-fight, where it is totally at our mercy.  

Somehow I have the feeling it won't be that easy against our AH Hurricane... :noid


Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Wmaker on June 03, 2009, 06:27:50 PM
Somehow I have the feeling it won't be that easy against our AH Hurricane... :noid

I have exactly the same feeling. Hispanos and internet lag among some other things will contribute to it greatly IMO.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Lusche on June 03, 2009, 06:30:35 PM
I have exactly the same feeling. Hispanos and internet lag among some other things will contribute to it greatly IMO.

I wasn't even thinking of the IIC. The I may be slower, but is far from being "clumsy and unmaneuverable"...
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Wmaker on June 03, 2009, 06:35:53 PM
I wasn't even thinking of the IIC. The I may be slower, but is far from being "clumsy and unmaneuverable"...

Yep, those are the "some other things" things I mentioned. :) Although I do think that below 5000ft in many vs. many engagement Brewster will easily have the upper hand against the Hurricane I because of its better guns, power loading and speed.

EDIT/Note that the Soviets flew Hurricane IIbs./EDIT
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: TheBug on June 03, 2009, 06:47:08 PM
If there ever was a group of guys worthy of getting "their" plane it has to be the Finns.  <S>

I'm happy for you guys and look forward to taking the Brewster for a spin myself.   :aok
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Rich46yo on June 03, 2009, 06:48:33 PM
Rich, if you don't want to repost what you originally did, could you PM me? I've always been interested by Finland's largely unknown and kind of confusing involvement in WWII.

Well more "yeas" then "Nays" so Ill post shortly, and from memory.

Finland was in a complicated position as Europe moved towards war. They despised Stalin and were rightfully fearful of the Soviet Union which always had hegemonic designs on the mineral rich, and strategic, Finland. The Soviets even supported the losing side in the Finnish civil war of 1918. So there was no love lost there. To Hitler and his cronies Finland was not only an important source of minerals but also, in their minds, a fellow Aryan people.

Remember Hitler made a deal with the Soviets when they both invaded Poland, "the non-aggression pact"? What most people dont know is that Hitler signed away on Finland and the Baltic states belonging to the Soviet sphere of interest. That was the price of Poland for the Germans. Latvia,Estonia,Lithuania, ceded themselves to Soviet control. The price demanded of the Finns was a big chunk of their territory. The Finns resisted. The Soviets attacked them. The winter war had started.

Into this morass came a small number of Brewster Buffalos. Now as far as I know they were stripped due to American export Laws and then reassembled with mostly Yank kit except for the sights. Back to the winter war. The Finns survived but had to give large chunks of its territory to the reds and had to resettle a whole lot of their citizens. It was at this time that they pursued close relations with Hitler. Britain and France had just been defeated so it wasn't like they could turn to anyone else. So again you see, "complicated".

But at the same time the Finns allowed Germany to secretly move troops thru their territory on their way to occupied Norway in 1940, sticking a knife in their Nordic neighbor in the back. They started drafting for German SS units even before Hitler attacked Russia. After the attack, even tho they declared neutrality, they allowed Luftwaffe units to use their bases which cause the Russians to go to war with Finland again. The Continuation War had started.

During which Finland was about as allied with Germany as you can get. Hitler visited Finland. Finnish boys wore SS uniforms. Britain and Canada actually declare war on Finland. Finland allows German units to use its land mass to stage attacks. America threatens a war declaration if the Finns cut off the Murmansk supply chain to the Soviets, "now western allies".The Germans armed and trained the Finnish Military. The Finns annexed Russian territory. They were firmly in the German camp until Stalingrad, after which as you can imagine, they started having 2nd thoughts. From then on up to about the end of '44 the Finns played both sides. Accepting arms from Hitler while secretly negotiating peace with Stalin. Even tho they had promised Hitler they wouldn't.

Eventually in The Lapland war the Finns turned and attacked the Germans forcing them out of their territory into Norway. This was after making a separate, secret deal with Stalin. The beginning of this war was phony however, both the Finns and Germans only pretended they were attacking, "another secret deal". At least until Stalin found out and the shooting began for real, each side even threatening to kill each others POWs. Anyway the Nazi/Finnish love affair was over. Yes, the Finns fought both for, and against, each side during this war.

So on the one hand there is a small country desperately trying to find a way to survive. On the other hand there was a opportunistic nation playing each side for its own benefit. In their defense their choices were few, tho they certainly were allies of Germany. One thing they were not were allies of the west. While they bravely protected their Jews they also allowed the German to use American and Brit POWs to build roads and track in northern Finland where many perished due to the cold and ill treatment.

Quote
Sorry if I was over-long. No doubt the Finns have a gentler memory of the war.
The Finns in those Brewsters were defending themselves from a mass-murdering dictator with more resources and a higher ultimate body count than Hitler had. And they did it almost by themselves.

They don't teach you much about the matter of Finland vs. USSR in school, not many t.v. programs about it either. I think it is perhaps it makes all too clear the way the West repeatedly made deals with the devil and wussed out in regards to communist aggression against small nations in the 20th century.
Now heres a real historian. :lol

There were only a small number of Brewsters delivered to Finland, like 40 or 50 right? No doubt the Finns flew them bravely, "having your country invaded will do that", but the condition of the Soviet air force on that front, at the time, was simply atrocious. 1/2 was in the gulag and the other half was afraid of going there. The Germans destroyed almost their entire air force in the opening days of Barbarossa.

Still, and all things considered, both the airplane and the Finnish Pilots shined when their country desperately needed them. Of that there is no question.

Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Cajunn on June 03, 2009, 07:23:13 PM
I wonder how many perks its going to cost, I think its going to get flown the he11 out of by all I'm reading here........ :rofl



Oh I'll start it

I think the Brewster should be perked because.........!
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Karnak on June 03, 2009, 07:38:33 PM
I wasn't even thinking of the IIC. The I may be slower, but is far from being "clumsy and unmaneuverable"...
I have, for many years now, considered the Hurricane to be substantially overmodeled.  There is a quote floating around out there than puts the time for a Hurri to do a full 360 degree roll at 4.5 seconds.  It does it in 3 seconds in AH.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: shreck on June 03, 2009, 07:54:46 PM
Well if the brewster is on the way, how about I-16? Would be a  nice match up I think!! :aok
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Rich46yo on June 03, 2009, 08:17:20 PM
Well if the brewster is on the way, how about I-16? Would be a  nice match up I think!! :aok

Wonderful I think. A special event modeled on that air war would be terrific. :aok
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Enker on June 03, 2009, 08:41:13 PM
Thanks  :aok


Added:

Found a real photo of it btw.

This post has a lot of really strange looking planes. One of the He-111 and another of something that looks like it's straight out of Star Wars from Russia

Not sure why the 190's there.

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&ct=res&cd=3&url=http%3A%2F%2Fforums.civfanatics.com%2Fshowthread.php%3Ft%3D290189%26page%3D3&ei=v_0mSqS4E5mUMeDE6YUF&usg=AFQjCNGMvUixi1rhDzZWh3PEFwk6N01KEA&sig2=OzvvH6PwnsnQlxzqT57Rug
I am doubting the credibility of that site, as they added the F-86 in the ugly list.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: DrDea on June 03, 2009, 08:52:22 PM
I am doubting the credibility of that site, as they added the F-86 in the ugly list.
Yea no crap.That AND the Dora. Looks like that site hasn't a clue. And the HE111 was on it too. :rolleyes:
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Widewing on June 03, 2009, 08:54:08 PM
Get ready for this....

(http://www.warbirdforum.com/herdbuffs.jpg)

Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Megalodon on June 03, 2009, 09:03:49 PM
There are many clips of the 229 in the "Suomen Ilmasota (Finnish Air War) 1939-45" 1-7 .. on you tube.

I would love to know what the anouncer is saying. Clip 3 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2dToF7s8wf8 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2dToF7s8wf8) at starting at about 2:45


and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HLW9vFJ6qa8&feature=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HLW9vFJ6qa8&feature=related)"Air War over Finland" 1-7 some <repeat footage>

Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Saxman on June 03, 2009, 10:02:48 PM
Well more "yeas" then "Nays" so Ill post shortly, and from memory.

Finland was in a complicated position as Europe moved towards war. They despised Stalin and were rightfully fearful of the Soviet Union which always had hegemonic designs on the mineral rich, and strategic, Finland. The Soviets even supported the losing side in the Finnish civil war of 1918. So there was no love lost there. To Hitler and his cronies Finland was not only an important source of minerals but also, in their minds, a fellow Aryan people.

Remember Hitler made a deal with the Soviets when they both invaded Poland, "the non-aggression pact"? What most people dont know is that Hitler signed away on Finland and the Baltic states belonging to the Soviet sphere of interest. That was the price of Poland for the Germans. Latvia,Estonia,Lithuania, ceded themselves to Soviet control. The price demanded of the Finns was a big chunk of their territory. The Finns resisted. The Soviets attacked them. The winter war had started.

Into this morass came a small number of Brewster Buffalos. Now as far as I know they were stripped due to American export Laws and then reassembled with mostly Yank kit except for the sights. Back to the winter war. The Finns survived but had to give large chunks of its territory to the reds and had to resettle a whole lot of their citizens. It was at this time that they pursued close relations with Hitler. Britain and France had just been defeated so it wasn't like they could turn to anyone else. So again you see, "complicated".

But at the same time the Finns allowed Germany to secretly move troops thru their territory on their way to occupied Norway in 1940, sticking a knife in their Nordic neighbor in the back. They started drafting for German SS units even before Hitler attacked Russia. After the attack, even tho they declared neutrality, they allowed Luftwaffe units to use their bases which cause the Russians to go to war with Finland again. The Continuation War had started.

During which Finland was about as allied with Germany as you can get. Hitler visited Finland. Finnish boys wore SS uniforms. Britain and Canada actually declare war on Finland. Finland allows German units to use its land mass to stage attacks. America threatens a war declaration if the Finns cut off the Murmansk supply chain to the Soviets, "now western allies".The Germans armed and trained the Finnish Military. The Finns annexed Russian territory. They were firmly in the German camp until Stalingrad, after which as you can imagine, they started having 2nd thoughts. From then on up to about the end of '44 the Finns played both sides. Accepting arms from Hitler while secretly negotiating peace with Stalin. Even tho they had promised Hitler they wouldn't.

Eventually in The Lapland war the Finns turned and attacked the Germans forcing them out of their territory into Norway. This was after making a separate, secret deal with Stalin. The beginning of this war was phony however, both the Finns and Germans only pretended they were attacking, "another secret deal". At least until Stalin found out and the shooting began for real, each side even threatening to kill each others POWs. Anyway the Nazi/Finnish love affair was over. Yes, the Finns fought both for, and against, each side during this war.

So on the one hand there is a small country desperately trying to find a way to survive. On the other hand there was a opportunistic nation playing each side for its own benefit. In their defense their choices were few, tho they certainly were allies of Germany. One thing they were not were allies of the west. While they bravely protected their Jews they also allowed the German to use American and Brit POWs to build roads and track in northern Finland where many perished due to the cold and ill treatment.
 Now heres a real historian. :lol

There were only a small number of Brewsters delivered to Finland, like 40 or 50 right? No doubt the Finns flew them bravely, "having your country invaded will do that", but the condition of the Soviet air force on that front, at the time, was simply atrocious. 1/2 was in the gulag and the other half was afraid of going there. The Germans destroyed almost their entire air force in the opening days of Barbarossa.

Still, and all things considered, both the airplane and the Finnish Pilots shined when their country desperately needed them. Of that there is no question.



IIRC, the declaration of war by the Western Allies on Finland was more just for show and to make Stalin happy than anything else, and as far as I know no Western Allies ever actually fired a shot on the Finns. So the situation wasn't just complicated on the Finns' side but the Western Allies' as well. The British, French, US, etc. wanted to support them in defending their independence, but to avoid war with the Soviets in the 30s and later during WWII itself to keep them pressing the Germans in the East, they gave in and ceded Finland. I THINK this is part of what actually drove the Finns into the alliance with Nazi Germany in the first place: They were abandoned by the West.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Guppy35 on June 03, 2009, 10:50:42 PM
I'd appreciate it if you wouldn't lump me in with 75% of the tools who populate the MA.

Thanks.


Note the question mark at the end of what I said.  You comment was it wasn't useful.  I was asking if that is what you meant.   Many of us see the addition of the Buffalo as quite useful.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: BlauK on June 04, 2009, 02:36:15 AM
Rich,
Nicely written. LIke I wrote previously, there were just a few details I wanted to comment. Also at some places the emphasis and selection of words would be different from my point of view... me being a Finn.

Into this morass [Winter War] came a small number of Brewster Buffalos.

The first Brewsters began to arrive in Finland just before the Winter War ended. They did not arrive to the combat units in time for any action.

Quote
But at the same time the Finns allowed Germany to secretly move troops thru their territory on their way to occupied Norway in 1940, sticking a knife in their Nordic neighbor in the back. They started drafting for German SS units even before Hitler attacked Russia. After the attack, even tho they declared neutrality, they allowed Luftwaffe units to use their bases which cause the Russians to go to war with Finland again. The Continuation War had started.
It was not a secret that Finns allowed German soldiers' "holiday transports" From Northern Norway to Germany and back through Finland. Norway was already fully occupied at that time, thus I see no knifing. Those transports were used quite a lot and thus Germany also secured their presense in Finland. When Barbarossa began, Germans formed a front in lapland, the Northern part of Finland.

Finnish SS-draft began in 1940, after the winter war and THAT was very secret. It was part of the desperate attempt to find some foreign support against Soviet Union. Finns has roots of military training in Germany during WW1 and it was wished for that these new men could follow the Jaeger tradition in Wehrmacht, but Hitler wanted all foreigners to go under SS.

Finnish SS-men were trained in Germany in 1941 and they fought at eastern front, but their training had not ended yet when Barbarossa began. Since Finland was again at war, some officers were called back home from SS battallion. Among those was a young finnish leutenant, Lauri Törni, later known as Larry Thorne (many of you may have seen the movie Green Berets, where John Wayne plays Thorne's part) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lauri_T%C3%B6rni

The Finnish SS-men fought in Ukraine and in Caucasus. They returned home in 1943. They would have wanted to continue fighting together at Finnish front, but were instead spread out to existing units. Finland and maybe also Estonia might be the only countries not ashamed of their SS-men.

Finland had declared neutrality all the time, not only after Barbarossa began. However it had also mobilized the army into its borders to defensive position, which was quite natural in that situation. Finland joined the attack against Soviets some weeks after Barbarossa began and Soviets had "techically started the war" against Finland a second time with its air strikes. Still there is no denying that Finland was planning to get back what was lost in Winter War.. and some more, if Germans were to be victorious. It was pretty much chosing between two evils when one cannot be left in peace.


Quote
The Finns annexed Russian territory. They were firmly in the German camp until Stalingrad, after which as you can imagine, they started having 2nd thoughts. From then on up to about the end of '44 the Finns played both sides. Accepting arms from Hitler while secretly negotiating peace with Stalin. Even tho they had promised Hitler they wouldn't.

Annexed... or occupied? Yes, they did not stop at old borders. Partly because of trying to find suitable defensive lines (e.g. istmuses between large lakes) and partly because of opportunism. Still they did not attack against Leningrad, since that was not in the plans agreed between Finns and Germans. Finns met the goals set together while Germans did not. Thus Germans were told that Finns will not advance any further until Germans have also met the goals. That was a useful excuse at that time.

You previously (in the deleted post) mentioned "a shameful Ryti-Ribbentrop agreement":  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ryti-Ribbentrop_Agreement
That agreement was made by Finnish president (cleverly) in his own name, instead of the government. It assured that Germans would still supply weapons and other help to Finns in a desperate situation under the Great Attack (Stalin's Fourth ;) ). This left a way out of the war at a right moment. Ryti was among those few that Finland had to prosecute as war crimilnals after the war to please Soviets. Nowadays his actions are considered very heroic and self-sacrificing... not shameful at all.


Quote
Eventually in The Lapland war the Finns turned and attacked the Germans forcing them out of their territory into Norway. This was after making a separate, secret deal with Stalin.

Again, no secret deal. When armstice with Soviets began, Germans were told that Finns will have to evict them.
Naturally Germans began to withdraw to Norway while Finns followed a day or so behind. At first here was no desire to fight the old brothers in arms who had helped to defend Finland against Soviets. Of cource there was bitterness among Germans and Finns were also forced to show some action to Soviets. Thus it became more real fighting.

Brewsters were used in Lapland against Germans, partly because the 109s has no range.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Gianlupo on June 04, 2009, 06:21:50 AM
Annexed... or occupied?

In fact, Rich had a poor choice of words. At the end of the war (WWII), Finland actually lost some of his territory (that is, the ones it had before the Winter War) to the Soviet Union.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Oldman731 on June 04, 2009, 07:57:33 AM
Finland and maybe also Estonia might be the only countries not ashamed of their SS-men.

Is this really true?  I mean...really?

- oldman
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Masherbrum on June 04, 2009, 08:16:55 AM
Is this really true?  I mean...really?

- oldman

Yes.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Whitey33 on June 04, 2009, 08:31:54 AM
Is this really true?  I mean...really?

- oldman

Yes.  Finns served in SS-Wiking, which was part of Waffen-SS, NOT part of Allgemeine-SS.
Wiking-division was elite fighting organisation. So why shame soldiers, whom fought hard and were part of elite?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finnish_Volunteer_Battalion_of_the_Waffen-SS

Quote from previous link:

"The battalion was praised by many Waffen-SS commanders, even Heinrich Himmler, for its combat performance. Himmler said "Where a Finnish SS-man stood, enemy was always defeated."[3] Moreover, the unit or its members were never accused of any war crimes."
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Wmaker on June 04, 2009, 09:28:46 AM
Is this really true?  I mean...really?

Good example of the fact that the "commonly accepted" history writing is basically nothing but the victors view on how things went down. :)
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Megalodon on June 04, 2009, 11:18:05 AM
I would assume that is one version that we will be getting?
Kinda like the 39 is available in different country variations?
They were quit a few Buffalo's in SE asia.

RAAF B-339c&d which was basicaly the same as the Finn 239 version. Brit sight, beef up pilot protection, Navy equipment removed but .. stronger motor.<which were termed export as well.. strange>

For the KiWi's http://www.warbirdforum.com/fisken.htm (http://www.warbirdforum.com/fisken.htm) NZ Brewster ace.

USNavy F2A-1, 2's 3's.
Pappy Boyington on the Brewster:
"It was a DOG!" "But the early models, before they weighed it all down with armorplate, radios and other ****, they were pretty sweet little ships. Not real fast, but the little ***** could turn and roll in a phonebooth. Oh yeah--sweet little ship; but some engineer went and ****** it up."

The Dutch had a few aswell


I always like it when we get new planes  :)
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Rich46yo on June 04, 2009, 11:38:36 AM
In fact, Rich had a poor choice of words. At the end of the war (WWII), Finland actually lost some of his territory (that is, the ones it had before the Winter War) to the Soviet Union.

Ah did I forget to mention the Soviets took their slice back? Im sorry.
Quote
The first Brewsters began to arrive in Finland just before the Winter War ended. They did not arrive to the combat units in time for any action.

Yes thats true. I didn't actually say they fought in the winter war did I? No I didn't. But I could have been more clear, "late at night and hurrying".

Quote
IIRC, the declaration of war by the Western Allies on Finland was more just for show and to make Stalin happy than anything else,
Well thts one way to look at it. I know America and every other nation on eath declares war "just for show" :huh Another way to look at it is "the British bombed Finland cause they actually felt they were at war with Finland.

Quote
I THINK this is part of what actually drove the Finns into the alliance with Nazi Germany in the first place: They were abandoned by the West.
Another way to look at that is that the British and French were either defeated or on the verge of being defeated and simply couldn't offer any help. But truly in order to Understand Finland in WW2 you have to look past "image" and "spin" and look at "actions". Unless your a revisionist that is.
Quote
It was not a secret that Finns allowed German soldiers' "holiday transports" From Northern Norway to Germany and back through Finland. Norway was already fully occupied at that time, thus I see no knifing.

Yeah but I wonder what the Norwegians saw. :D
Quote
Finnish SS-men were trained in Germany in 1941 and they fought at eastern front, but their training had not ended yet when Barbarossa began. Since Finland was again at war, some officers were called back home from SS battallion. Among those was a young finnish leutenant, Lauri Törni, later known as Larry Thorne (many of you may have seen the movie Green Berets, where John Wayne plays Thorne's part)

Which means what Blauk? Someone paid an American actor enough money to portray a Finn?
Quote
The Finnish SS-men fought in Ukraine and in Caucasus. They returned home in 1943. They would have wanted to continue fighting together at Finnish front, but were instead spread out to existing units. Finland and maybe also Estonia might be the only countries not ashamed of their SS-men.
No doubt. Many in Japan and Germany aren't "ashamed" of their WW-ll soldiers. They did however eventually swear a personal oath to Adolf Hitler, wear the runes of an organization that committed monstrous crimes, and fight for a Dictator who started a war that took 50,000,000 lives. At best their active participation freed up other SS units to commit war crimes. All with the support of their own Govt. in Helsinki.

But I do understand the official Finnish position. Many Japanese consider their country a victim cause we dropped nukes on them in a war we started because we cut off trade with them due to their inhuman treatment of the Chinese and Koreans. Its all about "spin" aint it Blauk?

F
Quote
inland had declared neutrality all the time, not only after Barbarossa began. However it had also mobilized the army into its borders to defensive position, which was quite natural in that situation. Finland joined the attack against Soviets some weeks after Barbarossa began and Soviets had "techically started the war" against Finland a second time with its air strikes. Still there is no denying that Finland was planning to get back what was lost in Winter War.. and some more, if Germans were to be victorious. It was pretty much chosing between two evils when one cannot be left in peace.

Really? You dont think the Finns couldn't just tell Hitler, as Spain and Sweden did, they just didn't want to participate? BTW the Soviets didn't "technically start" the war of continuation. They allowed German combat units to launch attacks on Russia from their soil. Think America would give Mexico a pass if they allowed Cuba to attack us from their side of the border?
Quote
That agreement was made by Finnish president (cleverly) in his own name, instead of the government.
More spin. More image. More posturing. More B.S.


Quote
Again, no secret deal. When armstice with Soviets began, Germans were told that Finns will have to evict them.
Naturally Germans began to withdraw to Norway while Finns followed a day or so behind. At first here was no desire to fight the old brothers in arms who had helped to defend Finland against Soviets. Of cource there was bitterness among Germans and Finns were also forced to show some action to Soviets. Thus it became more real fighting.

So you think it was a "wide open" deal? They colluded in secret to make Stalin think the Finns were actually kicking the Germans out. That sound "secret" to you? Eventually the Germans threatened to shoot a bunch of Finnish civilians, whilst the Finns threatened to retaliate by shooting German POWs. On their way out the Germans committed a scorched earth to Finnish territory. So much for loyalty.
Quote
They had negotiated in Rovaniemi and secretly agreed that the advance of the Finnish troops would be timed to match with the Germans’ withdrawal schedule. On September 19 the 6th Division was ordered to start moving.
http://www.rajajoki.com/lapland.htm
Quote
Yes.  Finns served in SS-Wiking, which was part of Waffen-SS, NOT part of Allgemeine-SS.
Wiking-division was elite fighting organisation. So why shame soldiers, whom fought hard and were part of elite?

Again, because they took a personal oath of loyalty to  monster who killed 50,000,000 people and fought on his behalf in a criminal organization. We in the west have a different view of the SS then the "Master Race" Nordics do. Even of their combat units.
Quote
Good example of the fact that the "commonly accepted" history writing is basically nothing but the victors view on how things went down.
Good example of a guy who cant refute, or even comment on, that "commonly accepted history writing". :)

I'm glad we got to air all this out however. Some of these so-called historical comments of the Finns being "quasi-allies" fighting the same evil as we was beginning to irk me. As was the misconception that the Buffalo was a "Finnish bone", no doubt believed by my friend from Lappeenranta who decided he was "Buffalo thread commander". If anything it can be considered a bone thrown to the British commonwealth, who operated far more Brewsters then the Finns did.

Lastly, and I say this again, it is also true the Finns flew it bravely and with great skill during the War of Continuation. We'll never know to what extent but I think we can safely say all members of the Finnish armed forces fought bravely during this period.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: MORAY37 on June 04, 2009, 11:40:42 AM
Well more "yeas" then "Nays" so Ill post shortly, and from memory.

Finland was in a complicated position as Europe moved towards war. They despised Stalin and were rightfully fearful of the Soviet Union which always had hegemonic designs on the mineral rich, and strategic, Finland. The Soviets even supported the losing side in the Finnish civil war of 1918. So there was no love lost there. To Hitler and his cronies Finland was not only an important source of minerals but also, in their minds, a fellow Aryan people.

Remember Hitler made a deal with the Soviets when they both invaded Poland, "the non-aggression pact"? What most people dont know is that Hitler signed away on Finland and the Baltic states belonging to the Soviet sphere of interest. That was the price of Poland for the Germans. Latvia,Estonia,Lithuania, ceded themselves to Soviet control. The price demanded of the Finns was a big chunk of their territory. The Finns resisted. The Soviets attacked them. The winter war had started.

Into this morass came a small number of Brewster Buffalos. Now as far as I know they were stripped due to American export Laws and then reassembled with mostly Yank kit except for the sights. Back to the winter war. The Finns survived but had to give large chunks of its territory to the reds and had to resettle a whole lot of their citizens. It was at this time that they pursued close relations with Hitler. Britain and France had just been defeated so it wasn't like they could turn to anyone else. So again you see, "complicated".

But at the same time the Finns allowed Germany to secretly move troops thru their territory on their way to occupied Norway in 1940, sticking a knife in their Nordic neighbor in the back. They started drafting for German SS units even before Hitler attacked Russia. After the attack, even tho they declared neutrality, they allowed Luftwaffe units to use their bases which cause the Russians to go to war with Finland again. The Continuation War had started.

During which Finland was about as allied with Germany as you can get. Hitler visited Finland. Finnish boys wore SS uniforms. Britain and Canada actually declare war on Finland. Finland allows German units to use its land mass to stage attacks. America threatens a war declaration if the Finns cut off the Murmansk supply chain to the Soviets, "now western allies".The Germans armed and trained the Finnish Military. The Finns annexed Russian territory. They were firmly in the German camp until Stalingrad, after which as you can imagine, they started having 2nd thoughts. From then on up to about the end of '44 the Finns played both sides. Accepting arms from Hitler while secretly negotiating peace with Stalin. Even tho they had promised Hitler they wouldn't.

Eventually in The Lapland war the Finns turned and attacked the Germans forcing them out of their territory into Norway. This was after making a separate, secret deal with Stalin. The beginning of this war was phony however, both the Finns and Germans only pretended they were attacking, "another secret deal". At least until Stalin found out and the shooting began for real, each side even threatening to kill each others POWs. Anyway the Nazi/Finnish love affair was over. Yes, the Finns fought both for, and against, each side during this war.

So on the one hand there is a small country desperately trying to find a way to survive. On the other hand there was a opportunistic nation playing each side for its own benefit. In their defense their choices were few, tho they certainly were allies of Germany. One thing they were not were allies of the west. While they bravely protected their Jews they also allowed the German to use American and Brit POWs to build roads and track in northern Finland where many perished due to the cold and ill treatment.
 Now heres a real historian. :lol

There were only a small number of Brewsters delivered to Finland, like 40 or 50 right? No doubt the Finns flew them bravely, "having your country invaded will do that", but the condition of the Soviet air force on that front, at the time, was simply atrocious. 1/2 was in the gulag and the other half was afraid of going there. The Germans destroyed almost their entire air force in the opening days of Barbarossa.

Still, and all things considered, both the airplane and the Finnish Pilots shined when their country desperately needed them. Of that there is no question.



Rich, it's nice to see someone gets it.  Please forward this to Masherbum.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: BlauK on June 04, 2009, 12:16:12 PM
Hmm.. I wonder why you had to try going personal. I thought we were discussing about history and not about people on this board :(

I said you wrote well and that I wanted to discuss details and nuances.

Which means what Blauk? Someone paid an American actor enough money to portray a Finn?
Just a curiosity... or something to point out that even the US army has a deceased hero with a "SS background". The movie is not about an ex-finnish soldier, but about an american one ;)

Quote
They did however eventually swear a personal oath to Adolf Hitler, wear the runes of an organization that committed monstrous crimes, and fight for a Dictator who started a war that took 50,000,000 lives. At best their active participation freed up other SS units to commit war crimes.
You can try to twist the SS issue as much as you want to. I could argue how A-bomb was a war crime and how evry US pilot helped in dopping it.... Like you said it is all about "spin" :p

Quote
Really? You dont think the Finns couldn't just tell Hitler, as Spain and Sweden did, they just didn't want to participate? BTW the Soviets didn't "technically start" the war of continuation. They allowed German combat units to launch attacks on Russia from their soil.
They could have, just like Poland did. Sweden and Spain were in quite different situation due to their location. Soviets were planning to attack Finland again already later in 1940, but Hitler's view had changed after the Winter War and he told Soviets he would not approve. That was partly because of the "holiday transports".

For Finns it was just a choice on whose side to fight against the other. The choice was obvious.

Quote
More spin. More image. More posturing. More B.S.
Obviously you have not read about Ryti-Ribbentrop agreement and the situation it was signed in. Where is the BS?

Quote
So you think it was a "wide open" deal? They colluded in secret to make Stalin think the Finns were actually kicking the Germans out.....
I meant that there was no secret deal between Finns and Stalin, like you claimed. Germans knew immediately that they would have to leave.


Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Wmaker on June 04, 2009, 12:26:03 PM
Good example of a guy who cant refute, or even comment on, that "commonly accepted history writing". :)

You truely are a piece of work. Just Wow.

I didn't want to get into this discussion on this thread. That is the reason I tried to get this into another thread. Because I didn't want this thread, discussing about new plane to be added in AH, to end up totally derailed. Like I've already said, I knew from personal experience that this thread would get out of hand quite quickly and it already has. You just weren't capable to understand that...and therefore uncapable to start another thread about it where all this could have been discussed and this thread could have continued to be about the aircraft in question, Brewster Model 239.

Trust me, I don't have any trouble to discuss Finnish history in the right forum and if need be make some comparisons that might prove just a tad unconfortable for you and just might drop you from your high horse.

Some of these so-called historical comments of the Finns being "quasi-allies" fighting the same evil as we was beginning to irk me. As was the misconception that the Buffalo was a "Finnish bone", no doubt believed by my friend from Lappeenranta who decided he was "Buffalo thread commander". If anything it can be considered a bone thrown to the British commonwealth, who operated far more Brewsters then the Finns did.

I can't recall any Finn saying that we were "quasi-allies".

Brewster Model 239 is American designed and built fighter aircraft and it's sole operator was Finnish Air Force. You can really twist that to any methaforical crap you wish.

fighting the same evil as we was

BHWAAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

"The same evil" ROFTLOL! :rofl

This is what I mean, you just digest any info you find without chewing on it at all. You can't see any shades of grey nor can you put yourself in other people's position and figure out reasons for the actions they took. There's really no use to try to have a discussion about anything with the likes of you.

Anyways,

I always get a chuckle when some clueless hypocrite amurrican such as yourself rides into a thread with his high white horse and starts laying down the moral and ethics on the actions of the evil, evil Finland in WWII. While your own country's population was thousands of miles away from the actual fighting, Finland actually had a real risk of ceasing to exist. Stalin's Fourth halted just couple tens of kilometres from where I live now. It is hilarious that the situation Finland was in doesn't really seem to register with you at all.

To anyone else,

I'm sorry I lost my cool and added some negative vibes on this forum. I usually try to avoid it. It's just that hypocrite individuals are sort of a pet peewe of mine.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: RAS on June 04, 2009, 12:33:51 PM
Anyway....looks like a good addition to the plane set.

From the pictures the view out the back might be pretty good ?  (Except for that huge rudder...hehe).

RASCAL
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Kotari on June 04, 2009, 12:34:47 PM
Rich,

I dont know what´s your agenda there, but those "facts" you state, are nice example of how much different viewpoint can be from safety of living in a super power, compared to the life of a really small country next to a superpower.

I really am not going to argue with you about those "facts" because alot of those are matters of interpretion (Or thickness of the USA glasses).

The bottom line is, there was a plan to cut Finland in half in one week and march in to Helsinki in a couple days enjoying people´s thanks for saving us from evil capitalists in a parade.
No one answered to our calls for help, the western super powers ignored because they didn´t want to piss of Stalin.

So taking on ANY source of materials to keep the fight going for our indepence was more than welcomed.
After a few years struggle, thousands of lives lost and countless amounts of resources, we still have a country, our culture and our language.
And we also lost HUGE slice of our country + paid tremendous amounts of money to Russia (Also as a note, we were the only country after WW2 to pay all the dues)

So, call me a revisionist, call me a Nazi if you will, i really don´t give a hoot... but do that to the heroes who saved us from getting overrun ticks me alot.

Politics dont belong here, nor speculations of war history...
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: RATTFINK on June 04, 2009, 12:46:24 PM
BlauK & Kotari win

Let's have a tart :)


(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6b/Runebergintorttu.jpg/800px-Runebergintorttu.jpg)
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Furball on June 04, 2009, 12:51:26 PM
Is this really true?  I mean...really?

- oldman

I recommend this book to anyone interested in WW2: http://www.amazon.com/Loyalty-My-Honor-Gordon-Williamson/dp/0760300127
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: BlauK on June 04, 2009, 01:02:16 PM
BlauK & Kotari win

Let's have a tart :)


(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6b/Runebergintorttu.jpg/800px-Runebergintorttu.jpg)

Durned.. that is a "Runebergin torttu"  :lol
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Runeberg%27s_tart

Named after this man:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johan_Ludvig_Runeberg

Where on earth did you dig that up? :) :)
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Rich46yo on June 04, 2009, 01:06:18 PM
Quote
Rich,

I dont know what´s your agenda there, but those "facts" you state, are nice example of how much different viewpoint can be from safety of living in a super power, compared to the life of a really small country next to a superpower.
America wasnt a super power in WW-ll. I have no "agenda" but nice try. BTW our Revolutionary War is a good study of what Americans do when occupied by a hostile super power.

Quote
I really am not going to argue with you about those "facts" because alot of those are matters of interpretion (Or thickness of the USA glasses).
I know you arent going to argue anything. Nor will you probably participate in any meaningful way. My guess is you will spin, pose, and maybe lay a little revision on us.

Quote
The bottom line is, there was a plan to cut Finland in half in one week and march in to Helsinki in a couple days enjoying people´s thanks for saving us from evil capitalists in a parade.
The bottom line is there were many countries who were actually cut in half, were actually occupied, and actually never submitted to Hitler nor actively participated in his campaign as Finland did.
Quote
No one answered to our calls for help, the western super powers ignored because they didn´t want to piss of Stalin.
The "western powers" were either defeated or on the verge of defeat. Finland was at peace when Barbarossa broke out. By allowing German troops to use their soil, by allowing her sons to wear Nazi uniforms, Finland participated in Hitlers war of aggression far more then any need to protect herslf. What part if this cant you understand? Finland was an active participant in Hitlers war of aggression. Both her Govt. and her sons were.

Quote
So taking on ANY source of materials to keep the fight going for our indepence was more than welcomed.
The thing is tho you didnt. Finland was an active participant in wars of agression. You allowed German combat troops to stage attacks from your soil. You allowed them to transit on the way to Norway where they conducted a brutal oppression. Finland allowed her sons to not only wear the SS runes but to take a personal oath of loyalty to Hitler. "Course later they had a change of heart". :)
Quote
After a few years struggle, thousands of lives lost and countless amounts of resources, we still have a country, our culture and our language.
At any cost right? No matter who they had to ally with or do business with? And always ready to take advantage of changing situations while trying to hide their actions behind false words and spin?
Quote
And we also lost HUGE slice of our country + paid tremendous amounts of money to Russia (Also as a note, we were the only country after WW2 to pay all the dues)
What "dues"?

Quote
So, call me a revisionist, call me a Nazi if you will, i really don´t give a hoot... but do that to the heroes who saved us from getting overrun ticks me alot.
Actually I didnt "call you" anything. Up till I saw your post I didnt even know you existed. Nice try for sympathy however. Especially since I never insulted any Finn to begin with.
Quote
Politics dont belong here, nor speculations of war history...

Im not talking politics. Nor am I "speculating". This is what actually happened in the war. I am however going to leave the thread now because, again as history has shown, its going to turn into something quite different then it started as. I suggest anyone wanting to know more to research and come to their own conclusions.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Rich46yo on June 04, 2009, 01:08:27 PM
See Rule #4
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Sakai on June 04, 2009, 01:09:58 PM
Is this really true?  I mean...really?

- oldman

Maybe this:

Estonians hated Russians.  Anyone helping Russians die was OK with them from what I garnered form the Estonians who lived at my place for two summers.  These two young women's eyes would flash if you asked about Russia at all, they are hot with hatred.  They heard something about Russian problems they would gloat.  I don't think they could have found any fault with anyone who did anything remotely connected to be anti-soviet.  
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Wmaker on June 04, 2009, 01:30:37 PM
See Rule #4

Care to elaborate? Why am I a fool?
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Lusche on June 04, 2009, 01:32:23 PM
This is a funny thread about... wait.. what was it about?
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Wmaker on June 04, 2009, 01:38:29 PM
This is a funny thread about... wait.. what was it about?

Ditto, like I've said again and again, I knew before hand this was going to happen. That's why I thought "Finland in WWII" should be discussed elsewhere.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: BlauK on June 04, 2009, 01:43:54 PM
Just a few more factual issues. I'll disregard the childish brawlings ;)


1)
Dues: "war indemnity", "war reparation"

During the heaviest years of payments, 1945-1949, about 15-16% of Finnish government expenses consisted of these war payments, "fines" to Soviet Union. Last train taking goods to Soviets crossed the border in September 1952. Counted in year 2003 value the total payments were about 4 Billion euros.

2)
When Barbarossa began, the attack against Soviet Union did not not originate from Finland. LW planes flew from Eastern Prussia and made a stop in Finland on their way back home. You may argue, that there is no difference. Yes, surely Finns knew about it and allowed it. I just wanted to correct the fact. Finns did not technically start the aggressions against Soviets.

3)
Like already stated several times, it was either side with Hitler, side with Stalin, or curl over and die. E.g. USA had no life threatening need to side with Stalin, but they did. I'd see that much more opportunistic than Finns taking all the help they could from Hitler.
For Finns there were only unpleasant options available. Standing behind righteous principles, "Chivalry and honour till death" is not from real life when one's existence and independence are in jeopardy.


I hope we get to fly teh Brewster soon :)
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Rich46yo on June 04, 2009, 01:58:23 PM
See Rule #4
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Oldman731 on June 04, 2009, 02:08:31 PM
I recommend this book to anyone interested in WW2: http://www.amazon.com/Loyalty-My-Honor-Gordon-Williamson/dp/0760300127

Thanks, Furball, but this is nothing new really.  Paul Carrell was writing similar stuff back in the 1950s.  I've never really figured out why people keep trying to put a nice-guy face on the Waffen SS when the well-documented facts are so blatantly to the contrary. 

Often I find that the first clue to a whitewash is something like "it isn't black and white, it's more nuanced shades of gray."  I was just wondering if the Finns really were proud of their SS troops or if that was a translation problem.  I guess I got my answer.

- oldman
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Furball on June 04, 2009, 02:38:47 PM
You're welcome.

Not all SS were war criminals though.  Majority of the Waffen SS were frontline combat troops.  There were regiments of the SS that took part in atrocities, but the majority were just very tough combat troops and were just like any other elite force during the war.  That is a nice book because it is all personal accounts of the war.  Whether you like the SS or not, it is still a good resource for learning about the war from another perspective.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: A8TOOL on June 04, 2009, 02:39:04 PM
This is a funny thread about... wait.. what was it about?

Well it took a few turns but it's supposed to be about the Brewster. I enjoyed finding out about Finland WWll history and it was very interesting to learn about how the American Brewster was sold to Finland and why the swastikas were on it.

Wmaker may have been right, but I did learn a lot.

Question for me now is, why did HTC allow a plane that only had a production of 44 planes enter our plane set when so many other late war models having higher production and service values were not allowed over the last 8 years. Seems there were many more American Brewsters produced and serving near that time period and it is more known to be an American plane. Is it because it's a better model and might be able to compete a little easier or ...? (http://thesquad.forumotion.net/users/a9/77/24/39/smiles/786161.gif)

Seems like Japan had about as many of them. I wonder what changes were made to the ones they captured and were using? (I'll have to look that up)

Also, where will it be placed in FSO? On the Axis side I would imagine... unless the FSO date coincided with the Finns  leaving Hitler already.

Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: BlauK on June 04, 2009, 02:46:28 PM
Would it not depend on what the particular FSO event portrays... At Eastern Front it is on Axis side, at PTO on Allied side, or mayby on both sides if Japanese are assumed to use captured Dutch planes. Similarly Hurricanes can be on both sides at Eastern Front or Ponies and Corsairs can fight against each other in South America ;)
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: A8TOOL on June 04, 2009, 02:49:30 PM
Would it not depend on what the particular FSO event portrays... At Eastern Front it is on Axis side, at PTO on Allied side, or mayby on both sides if Japanese are assumed to use captured Dutch planes. Similarly Hurricanes can be on both sides at Eastern Front or Ponies and Corsairs can fight against each other in South America ;)


WOW   :lol   That is just so screwed up.. hehehe   For the game it sounds fun tho. Brings a lot of why questions up..heheh

 :aok
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Motherland on June 04, 2009, 02:52:49 PM
Seems there were many more American Brewsters produced and serving near that time period and it is more known to be an American plane.
It's not more known as an American plane. The Buffalo's service in American hands is as a footnote of failure. On the other hand, many of the highest scoring aces of all time flew the Brewster in Finnish service.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Furball on June 04, 2009, 03:04:53 PM
The Brewster was despised by the RAF too.  I read a bit from the pilot of one a couple of days ago, the undercarriage lights didn't work and the wheels kept dropping down, the only way he could tell they were up was by looking at the daylight between the gaps in the panels on the wings.  It seemed there were numerous other Brewsters in the same flight who had the same trouble.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Wmaker on June 04, 2009, 03:53:32 PM
Hi TOOL,

Were the links I posted helpful?

Question for me now is, why did HTC allow a plane that only had a production of 44 planes enter our plane set when so many other late war models having higher production and service values were not allowed over the last 8 years. Seems there were many more American Brewsters produced and serving near that time period and it is more known to be an American plane. Is it because it's a better model and might be able to compete a little easier or ...? (http://thesquad.forumotion.net/users/a9/77/24/39/smiles/786161.gif)

For this question I'll quote Widewing thought's on it. I think he summed it up pretty well.

It was time.... This game has a dedicated population of Finns, many of whom have contributed greatly to what you get enjoy these days. Maps, skins, running Euro prime time events to name just a few things these gentlemen have done. These guys get together every year and their own Finn Aces High convention.

The Brewster was a very important fighter for Finland, and it is much loved in Finland, and not only by aviation and history enthusiasts. I've been involved with this game in one manner or another since January of 2001. Even before then, the Finns have been asking for the Brewster. Finally, they have it in the pipeline.

I for one, am thrilled to see this great bunch of guys get what they had hoped for these many years. When the update is released, I'm going to make a point to schedule flying during prime Euro time, so I can fly the Brewster and wing up with the Finns. The Buffalo will be great fun, and I will not hesitate to fly it in the late war MAs.

Wheather people view Finns as "a great bunch of guys" or not here probably varies from person to person. :) So as a Finn myself I'm not commenting on that. :) What is true that Euro special events were at times *almost* solely ran by Finnish CMs and Kanttori has done a tremendous work by doing many terrains for AH. The latest and greatest was the Karelia-map which Kanttori and Blauk did together. I really don't know how much these things affected to the inclusion of the Brewster. Only HTC knows that. :)

Here's Pyro's view on the inclusion of Brewster during the plane vote two years ago:

Brewster Buffalo – My sentimental choice to win.  For nearly 12 years, Finns have asked me for this.  Their passion for this plane is contagious.  I’ve wanted to give them one ever since I read Double Fighter Knight about 10 years ago.  That really gave me an appreciation of the FAF and the sturdiness of Finns in general.  Of course, now that I’ve said it’s my sentimental favorite, if it happens to win it will provoke more conspiracy theories than Patrick Ewing going to the Knicks in the first NBA draft lottery.

So, only guys at HTC know why the time was now. :) Would be great to hear their current view on its inclusion...but I think Pyro's quote above seems to sum it up. :)
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: MrRiplEy[H] on June 04, 2009, 03:58:24 PM
The Brewster was despised by the RAF too.  I read a bit from the pilot of one a couple of days ago, the undercarriage lights didn't work and the wheels kept dropping down, the only way he could tell they were up was by looking at the daylight between the gaps in the panels on the wings.  It seemed there were numerous other Brewsters in the same flight who had the same trouble.

The brewsters did have problems also in Finland but some smart engineering went into solving them. For example the replacement engines that were fit in had a very poor reliability history. This was fixed by reversing the first piston rings enabling a better lubrication in the engine and resulted in an excellently reliable construction.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Squire on June 04, 2009, 04:19:20 PM
There is really a lot of tilted misconceptions of the Brewster. For starters, im not about to claim it was some wonder fighter that was misunderstood, it certainly was average at best, and thats all it ever was, on its best day, for an early war fighter.

However...

The stuff about undercarriage lights ect, well, thats a stright maintenance issue, undoubtably as a result of the very poor conditions they were flown in Singapore. Both Ira Kepford (USN ace) and Joe Foss (USMC ace) stated they thought the F2A-3 version and the F4F were close enough in performance that the differences were small. They wanted both types replaced by newer and better fighters.

The whole business with the Brewster in US service came down to a single dogfight on June 4th 1942 at Midway. The 15 Buffalo and 7 Wildcats were launched late vs an IJN strike of 108 a/c. They were faced with 4-1 odds as well as this was the first combat of almost all the USMC pilots in the war. They fought as well as could be expected, and actually impressed the Japanese. It would have made no difference if all the fighters were F4Fs in that fight, none whatsovever.

The Brewster in Dutch and RAF/RAAF service in the East Indies is a circumstance where the air force is faced with the land ans sea forces being defeated and forced to withdraw, it was not the fault of the Brewster that they were in such poor circumstances. The presence of F4Fs or P-40s or Hurricanes would not have prevented that campaign from being the disaster it was. Nor would they have altered the Singapore campaign.

Its ironic that the P-40 at Pearl Harbor and the Phillipines is not blamed for the Allied defeats there, or the F4F blamed for the fall of Wake island, but somehow it seems many want to blame the poor Brewster for all the ills of the Allied forces in those early weeks and months of the Pacific war in other places. Its more to do with our human need for symbols. We dont like defeats, and anything associated with a deafeat gets all the harsh mythology that goes with it, and the opposite for the good times, where victories come, we over glamorize anything associated with winning, the P-51, the Spitfire, the Hellcat, ect. Its the same for ships, tanks, guns, and anything else we associate with a particular battle.

So take what they say about it with a grain of salt, and understand the context of the very difficult circumstances it fought in before beleiving all the over hyped smears and half truths. Was it a great fighter? no, but it wasn't as bad as many make it out to be through the crud colored glasses of Allied retreat in those early days of the war.

As for Finnish service, the Finns had the benefit of being able to operate it for almost three long years from airfields that were not over run, and were able to fight a long war of attirition over home territory against poorer Sovier pilots and tactics in many cases. I take nothing away from their accomplishments, they did a splendid job, but the circumstances were very different.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Masherbrum on June 04, 2009, 04:24:32 PM
Rich, it's nice to see someone gets it.  Please forward this to Masherbum.

Neither one of you know much about Finnish History.   Sadly, only two people in this thread "Don't get it" and they're named in the above quote.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: stephen on June 04, 2009, 04:24:47 PM
Never read a book that stated the early war woes of the american forces where the blame of the Brewster...., However i've read multiple accounts from pilots stating it was a piece of junk... (including one by Jimmy Thatch) surprisingly the f4f was well liked as far as I can recall, though out-classed.

Ill have to pour over a couple books.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: A8TOOL on June 04, 2009, 04:25:26 PM
Hi TOOL,

Were the links I posted helpful?

For this question I'll quote Widewing thought's on it. I think he summed it up pretty well.



Here's Pyro's view on the inclusion of Brewster during the plane vote two years ago:




Yes

Yes

And again Yes, I see exactly how this came to be.

Thanks very much for all your help Wmaker,

Salute Finns  :)
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Masherbrum on June 04, 2009, 04:25:52 PM
Ditto, like I've said again and again, I knew before hand this was going to happen. That's why I thought "Finland in WWII" should be discussed elsewhere.

Wmaker, you tried.    :salute
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Masherbrum on June 04, 2009, 04:26:38 PM
See Rule #4

Stick to the Thread Subject or revert to PM's or post in the O'Club. 
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: DrDea on June 04, 2009, 08:16:18 PM
See Rule #6
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: caldera on June 04, 2009, 08:31:54 PM
I like it. Looks like the Wildcat's fatter older brother. How many rounds per gun does it carry?
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Wmaker on June 04, 2009, 08:34:43 PM
How many rounds per gun does it carry?

For the 4x.50s: 200 rpg for the fuselage weapons and 400 rpg for the wing guns. With 3x.50s the .30 in place of the .50 has 600 rounds.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: E25280 on June 04, 2009, 08:54:46 PM
I'd just like to offer this up as a salute . . .

(http://www.smilespedia.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/01/27011.jpg)
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Masherbrum on June 04, 2009, 09:05:41 PM
Please lose the agenda and discuss the plane.I for one am tired of hearing the childish s*** on these threads.

Explain that to Moray and Rich, they missed the boat.   
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Hajo on June 04, 2009, 09:08:49 PM
I myself can't wait to fly it...and yes....in the MA also.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Masherbrum on June 04, 2009, 09:50:17 PM
I myself can't wait to fly it...and yes....in the MA also.

Exactly.   
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Demetrious on June 04, 2009, 10:31:45 PM
I am entirely mystified as to why the Brewster Buffalo is getting so much hate from people. Of all the early-war US fighters, the Buffalo is arguably the best. It's got good manuverability (in fact, it was praised for this by Pappy Boyington,) equally on-par with, say, the P-40 or the like, but has one thing that neither the P-40, F4F, or P-39 had- a  power/weight ratio and climb rate worth a hoot. Heck, I'd say it's fairly unique in that regard; an early-war American fighter that doesn't climb and accelerate like a lead brick? You don't say.

I wasn't paying attention to the forums when they introduced the P-39 (busy with school at that time, IIRC,) but I'd be equally as mystified if it received similarly harsh words. Considering that the P-40 has been favored by some good sticks who have shown what it can do, the P-39, which is arguably a hotter ship, should have been welcomed with at least some warmth. P-39 has similar manuverability and acceleration to the P-40, but is rather faster and has a cannon- why hate on that?

All in all, though, the addition of more varied and capable early-war fighters is going to make the Early and Mid-war arenas much more fun to fly in, because there will be more unique aircraft available in them. A relief of congestion in the Late War arena could be great fun- less furballs, more 1v1 or 2v2 opportunities. I look forward to it.

EDIT: And let's not forget that these aircraft have quirks of their own. The P-40 is, of all of them, a very stable and easy airplane to fly (even if it DOES have some quirky low-speed handling characteristics,) the P-39 is a right naughty girl at low airspeeds (read: HOPE YOU LIKE STALL HORNS), and the Buffalo... torque. Oh, dear god, torque. Until it's released in AH the only other sim I know of that's modeled the Buffalo is IL-2, and even though AH's flight model isn't quite as exacting as IL-2 in that regard, if it's any indication, managing torque in that bird is going to be, ah, interesting.

My point is, the early-war aircraft are now being expanded into a vertible "stable" of their own, rather then being the odd children out amongst a horde of late-war uberplanes. More planes to fly with more planes to fly them against, and all of this in machines that make you work for your kills because you don't have nearly as much spare energy to fling around.

Perhaps I'm an optimistic fool, but I'm excited. <3
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: hubsonfire on June 04, 2009, 10:33:36 PM
I'd just like to offer this up as a salute . . .

(http://www.smilespedia.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/01/27011.jpg)

 :lol I was wondering when that would show up. I have to wonder though, what will the Finns do with the time freed by no longer needing to campaign for the Buffalo? More risque hot tub photos? More mooning the camera at FinnCon? I shudder to think.

Glad it's made it into the game, even if there are truly horrific consequences.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Masherbrum on June 04, 2009, 10:36:31 PM
I am entirely mystified as to why the Brewster Buffalo is getting so much hate from people. Of all the early-war US fighters, the Buffalo is arguably the best. It's got good manuverability (in fact, it was praised for this by Pappy Boyington,) equally on-par with, say, the P-40 or the like, but has one thing that neither the P-40, F4F, or P-39 had- a  power/weight ratio and climb rate worth a hoot. Heck, I'd say it's fairly unique in that regard; an early-war American fighter that doesn't climb and accelerate like a lead brick? You don't say.

I wasn't paying attention to the forums when they introduced the P-39 (busy with school at that time, IIRC,) but I'd be equally as mystified if it received similarly harsh words. Considering that the P-40 has been favored by some good sticks who have shown what it can do, the P-39, which is arguably a hotter ship, should have been welcomed with at least some warmth. P-39 has similar manuverability and acceleration to the P-40, but is rather faster and has a cannon- why hate on that?

All in all, though, the addition of more varied and capable early-war fighters is going to make the Early and Mid-war arenas much more fun to fly in, because there will be more unique aircraft available in them. A relief of congestion in the Late War arena could be great fun- less furballs, more 1v1 or 2v2 opportunities. I look forward to it.

Jealousy and sour grapes of not "Getting what they'd rather have."
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Demetrious on June 04, 2009, 10:43:57 PM
Jealousy and sour grapes of notting "Getting what they'd rather have."

I suppose so. I bet that most of it is people complaining about "yet ANOTHER U.S. fighter," which is kind of funny, because much like the P-39 before it, the Buffalo is another plane that earned fame and fortune with a European air force because all of it's U.S. pilots were too busy trying to give the manufacturers AIDS via psychic rage.

Sometimes I am ashamed of my country when I read accounts of pilots who whined and squeaked about their P-39, Buffalo, or P-40 while the Russians and Finns were kicking enemy tail all over the sky with them.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: RATTFINK on June 04, 2009, 11:11:28 PM
Durned.. that is a "Runebergin torttu"  :lol
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Runeberg%27s_tart

Named after this man:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johan_Ludvig_Runeberg

Where on earth did you dig that up? :) :)


He's a fellow Johann... well he has one less "n" then I.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: DrDea on June 04, 2009, 11:44:44 PM
 Im just glad to see another plane. I fly mainly LW and dont give a fiddlers frack if ALL the planes from here on out are allied. Jebus guys,get over it. Its a new plane.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Masherbrum on June 04, 2009, 11:45:59 PM
Im just glad to see another plane. I fly mainly LW and dont give a fiddlers frack if ALL the planes from here on out are allied. Jebus guys,get over it. Its a new plane.

PM me your email address, I'll send you that Screenshot I was talking to Corrs about.    :devil
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Karnak on June 05, 2009, 01:38:34 AM
A8TOOL,

Keep in mind they also destroyed 477 Soviet aircraft for very few losses.  That kill total, and wartime service duration, certainly puts it past the C.205, Re.2005 and G.55 combined.  I'd be a bit surprised if the N1K2-J had half that number of kills.  Sure, it was only 44 aircraft, but they served a long time and fought many, many engagements.  The 44 Brewsters made a difference whereas I can't say things like the 957 Spitfire XIVs, 700ish Tempest Vs, 200 F4U-1Cs or (unknown#) F4U-4s really changed things significantly.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: trax1 on June 05, 2009, 03:08:49 AM
Great to see a new plane added, although I would have rather seen something like the He-111 or the Me-410 added to the game, especially the He-111, I think that's probably been the most requested plane to be added to the game.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Sakai on June 05, 2009, 06:44:56 AM
Great to see a new plane added, although I would have rather seen something like the He-111 or the Me-410 added to the game, especially the He-111, I think that's probably been the most requested plane to be added to the game.

He-111 is a must have as is the Do-217.  That gives the German Iron fans so much capability and use through the war. 

But it's hard to begrudge those Finns their ride. 
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Boozeman on June 05, 2009, 07:11:53 AM
the He-111 is inferior to the Ju-88 we already have. It's purely a scenario plane, BoB to be precise. The 217 otoh is a very capable bomber for any arena.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: MORAY37 on June 05, 2009, 11:20:14 AM
Explain that to Moray and Rich, they missed the boat.   

I'm quite okay with starting a new thread, where you, Mr. Exalted One, can explain where Rich was wrong.  I don't normally agree with the guy, and he has a harsh way of stating things, but he was mostly right.  The question diverged through the thread as to whether Finland was Axis or Allied.  You stated we were wrong to say Finland was both.

You've neither refuted any of his points, nor even discussed them once.  Simply said he was an idiot. 

 Please feel free to explain why, other than putting your fingers in your ears and screaming "No it's not...No it's not...no it's not!!!" over and over, which is all you seem apparently capable of, other than personal insults.

Finland WAS both, although it was never signed by treatise into either.  Its' behavior during the war was one of self preservation. 
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: MORAY37 on June 05, 2009, 11:27:24 AM
A8TOOL,

Keep in mind they also destroyed 477 Soviet aircraft for very few losses.  That kill total, and wartime service duration, certainly puts it past the C.205, Re.2005 and G.55 combined.  I'd be a bit surprised if the N1K2-J had half that number of kills.  Sure, it was only 44 aircraft, but they served a long time and fought many, many engagements.  The 44 Brewsters made a difference whereas I can't say things like the 957 Spitfire XIVs, 700ish Tempest Vs, 200 F4U-1Cs or (unknown#) F4U-4s really changed things significantly.

Keep in mind what planes it was fighting against.  Soviets in early war weren't even close, especially on this front.  Most of their monoplanes were busy ramping up to squadron service.

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/b0/Polikarpov_I-15.jpg)
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2a/Bundesarchiv_Bild_169-0112%2C_Russland%2C_erbeutetes_Flugzeug_Po-2.jpg)
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Masherbrum on June 05, 2009, 12:11:26 PM
I'm quite okay with starting a new thread, where you, Mr. Exalted One, can explain where Rich was wrong.  I don't normally agree with the guy, and he has a harsh way of stating things, but he was mostly right.  The question diverged through the thread as to whether Finland was Axis or Allied.  You stated we were wrong to say Finland was both.

You've neither refuted any of his points, nor even discussed them once.  Simply said he was an idiot. 

 Please feel free to explain why, other than putting your fingers in your ears and screaming "No it's not...No it's not...no it's not!!!" over and over, which is all you seem apparently capable of, other than personal insults.

Finland WAS both, although it was never signed by treatise into either.  Its' behavior during the war was one of self preservation. 


1.)  This thread was about the Brewster.   
2.)  You two chose to go off on tangents that were headed off to begin with by a Finn, who PREDICTED people like you would.
3.)  You still missed the boat.   You have no clue about Finland, so stop pretending to be "an expert" like Rich. 
4.)  The only ones "insulted" in this thread are the Finns who play this game and rightfully so deserve a plane that served them well and beat the hell out of two countries.   Considering it to be "an obsolete" craft.   

Again, this thread was about the PLANE, not about "intangibles" that were explained in a "grey light" by Rich and then taken by some, as gospel.   

Now, stop posting your childish rhetoric and move on if you cannot post about the PLANE, which again, is what this THREAD is about.   
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Furball on June 05, 2009, 12:22:38 PM
700ish Tempest Vs, 200 F4U-1Cs or (unknown#) F4U-4s really changed things significantly.


Sorry, O/T but i cannot resist a response to this seeing as my family is from London and were there during the war...  The Tempest killed 600+ V1 flying bombs (something like 1/4 of all destroyed) and saved a heck of a lot of lives in London, so had a major contribution to the defence of that city.  :aok :D
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: MORAY37 on June 05, 2009, 12:24:59 PM
1.)  This thread was about the Brewster.   
2.)  You two chose to go off on tangents that were headed off to begin with by a Finn, who PREDICTED people like you would.
3.)  You still missed the boat.   You have no clue about Finland, so stop pretending to be "an expert" like Rich. 
4.)  The only ones "insulted" in this thread are the Finns who play this game and rightfully so deserve a plane that served them well and beat the hell out of two countries.   Considering it to be "an obsolete" craft.   

Again, this thread was about the PLANE, not about "intangibles" that were explained in a "grey light" by Rich and then taken by some, as gospel.   

Now, stop posting your childish rhetoric and move on if you cannot post about the PLANE, which again, is what this THREAD is about.   

Ok.  Other than being used against a Russian air force predominated by EVEN more inferior aircraft( mostly biplanes or early 1930's era monoplanes) and flown by better Finnish pilots who knew the fate of their country rested on every man in uniform, and weren't relegated to inferior russian tactics...

The BREWSTER SUCKED.  

It will never even be as popular as the F4F in any arena, other than by the Finns.  I'm happy they got their ride, and I think this is a bone to them from HT, but the aircraft will be relegated to Special Events and the early war arenas (for the 20 people that go there)  and be used in large numbers only for the first three weeks after the update.

Quote
The F2A-1s diverted to Finland were given the company designation B-239. The naval equipment (tail hook, life raft, catapult harness) was removed, and the telescopic sight was replaced by a simple bead and sight arrangement. Armament consisted of one 0.30-in and one 0.50-in machine gun in the cowling, plus two 0.50-in machine guns in the wings. The engine was replaced by an export-approved 950 hp Wright R-1820-G5 radial. Maximum speed was 297 mph at 15,580 feet and service ceiling was 32,500 feet. Empty weight was 3900 pounds, and maximum weight was 5820 pounds.

The B-239s were transferred to Finland via Trollhattan, Sweden, where they were assembled by Norwegian Air Force mechanics. They were then ferried to Finland by both American and Finnish pilots. Only six examples had reached Finland by the time that the Russo-Finnish "Winter War" ended on March 3, 1940. During the uneasy peace that followed, Finnish personnel made a number of modifications to their Brewsters, including the installation of an armored headrest and seat back, plus a reflector gunsight in place of the original bead and ring.

A total of 44 B-239s reached Finland, and they were assigned the Finnish serial numbers BW-351 through BW-394. The B-239s were assigned to Lentolaivue 24 (LeLv 24), 32 being used on active duty and the rest held in reserve.

Finland went to war against Russia again on June 25, 1941, this time allied with Germany. During the first few months, the Brewsters were able to maintain air superiority over the northern front. The Finns found the Brewster to be very maneuverable at low level. B-239s encountered LaGG-3s, Yak-1s and Yak-7s, as well as Lend-Lease Hurricanes, P-40s and P-39s. The highest-scoring B-239 ace was Hans Wind, who got 39 of his 75 kills flying the B-239. The leading Finnish ace, Eino Juutilainen, scored 34 of his 94 kills while attached to LeLv 24 flying Brewsters.

As the war with Russia wore on, maintenance of the Finnish B-239s became an increasingly serious problem, since Finland was now allied with Germany and no longer had access to American spare parts. In an attempt to overcome these problems, at least six B-239s were fitted with captured Russian M-63 radials (these were license-built versions of the Wright Cyclone). The Finnish State Aircraft Factory also began the development of a homebuilt version of the B-239, this with a captured M-63 engine and plywood wings. This aircraft was known locally as the Humu. However, only one prototype was built.

Experiments were made with ski landing gear for operations from snow-covered fields. However, the landing gear could not be retracted when the skis were fitted, and this severely degraded performance. Consequently, skis were rarely used operationally.

In 1944, LeLv 24 traded in its surviving B-239s for Messerschmitt Bf 109G-2s. These B-239s were transferred to HLeLv 26. Kills continued to be scored, but by this time the Soviets had deployed large numbers of high-performance fighters and losses of B-239s began to mount. HLeLv 26 continued to operate its B-239s until the end, when an armistice was signed with the Soviets on September 4, 1944. Finland then switched sides and began to drive German forces out of Finnish territory. The Brewsters were flown against retreating German forces in Lapland, scoring several kills against Ju-87 Stukas.

After five years of combat and attrition, only eight Brewsters remained in the Finnish inventory. These surviving Finnish Brewsters were used in the training role until late 1948. During its combat career, the B-239 is credited with 496 kills, against 19 losses, for a victory ratio of 26 to 1. Finnish air force records credit 41 kills to a single B-239 before it was shot down. Is there any other fighter aircraft in history which has a record as good as this? After the war, the Humu prototype was restored and is on display in a museum in Finland. It is believed to be the sole surviving Buffalo in the world today.

Sources

   1. Enzo Angelucci and Peter Bowers, The American Fighter, Orion, 1985.

   2. Jim Maas, F2A Buffalo in Action, Squadron/Signal Publications, Inc., 1987.

   3. Jim Mass, Fall From Grace: The Brewster Aeronautical Corporation, 1932-42, J. Amer. Av. Hist. Soc, p.118, Summer 1985.

   4. William Green, Famous Fighters of the Second World War, Second Series, Doubleday, 1967.

   5. Gordon Swanborough and Peter M. Bowers, United States Navy Aircraft Since 1911, Naval Institute Press, 1990.

   6. Ray Wagner, American Combat Planes, Third Enlarged Edition, Doubleday, 1982.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Masherbrum on June 05, 2009, 12:32:41 PM
Ok.  Other than being used against a Russian air force predominated by EVEN more inferior aircraft( mostly biplanes or early 1930's era monoplanes) and flown by better Finnish pilots who knew the fate of their country rested on every man in uniform, and weren't relegated to inferior russian tactics...

The BREWSTER SUCKED.  

It will never even be as popular as the F4F in any arena, other than by the Finns.  I'm happy they got their ride, and I think this is a bone to them from HT, but the aircraft will be relegated to Special Events and the early war arenas (for the 20 people that go there)  and be used in large numbers only for the first three weeks after the update.


Let me know if you are in the Late War Arenas after we get this.   We'll test your theory, because I guarantee you, there are many more like me that would be MORE THAN HAPPY to shoot you down with ease.

But hey, thanks for showing the Community how selfish you are.    :rock
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: MORAY37 on June 05, 2009, 12:41:07 PM
Let me know if you are in the Late War Arenas after we get this.   We'll test your theory, because I guarantee you, there are many more like me that would be MORE THAN HAPPY to shoot you down with ease.

But hey, thanks for showing the Community how selfish you are.    :rock

Ok, so other than threatening to kill my cartoon plane, how have you refuted my point again?  That being the -239 flew against even more inferior aircraft, ie Biplanes and even more inferior monoplanes?   

Who's jumping off topic?  Threatening me in the MA? Laughable.  How old are you again?  You can't even stick to the one argument you had.... and try to disprove mine.  The Brewster Buffalo was over matched the day it rolled off the line.  It was withdrawn from US service in less than 6 months combat, and only one engagement in US hands. This being a US reeling from loss after loss, and scrambling to procure every combat aircraft it possibly could.  But, we shipped our remaining Buffalos to Finland...

 Yeah, it was spectacular...great add.

Selfish?  There's nothing in it for me sir.  I'll play the game regardless.  I'm happy for the Finns.  My opinion that there were other, more substantial aircraft to add, notwithstanding.

Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: -pjk-- on June 05, 2009, 01:20:15 PM
Hmm..
FAF Brewsters flew from 1941 to spring 1944 as frontline fighter in HLlev 24. From 1943 Russians had La-5`s, Spit 5`s(late-42), P40`s(-42), Airacobras, Yak 1`s, Lagg 3`s etc.
None of those were obsolete against 239. Some of those are very capable to fly in AH LW arenas :D

Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: vonKrimm on June 05, 2009, 01:22:54 PM
F3F-3!!!
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Masherbrum on June 05, 2009, 01:23:44 PM
Ok, so other than threatening to kill my cartoon plane, how have you refuted my point again?  That being the -239 flew against even more inferior aircraft, ie Biplanes and even more inferior monoplanes?   

Who's jumping off topic?  Threatening me in the MA? Laughable.  How old are you again?  You can't even stick to the one argument you had.... and try to disprove mine.  The Brewster Buffalo was over matched the day it rolled off the line.  It was withdrawn from US service in less than 6 months combat, and only one engagement in US hands. This being a US reeling from loss after loss, and scrambling to procure every combat aircraft it possibly could.  But, we shipped our remaining Buffalos to Finland...

 Yeah, it was spectacular...great add.

Selfish?  There's nothing in it for me sir.  I'll play the game regardless.  I'm happy for the Finns.  My opinion that there were other, more substantial aircraft to add, notwithstanding.

I stayed on topic.   I don't waste time with "threats" Moray.   I refuted your ludicrous statement and you still have to keep sniping.  
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Karnak on June 05, 2009, 01:34:44 PM
Keep in mind what planes it was fighting against.  Soviets in early war weren't even close, especially on this front.  Most of their monoplanes were busy ramping up to squadron service.

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/b0/Polikarpov_I-15.jpg)
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2a/Bundesarchiv_Bild_169-0112%2C_Russland%2C_erbeutetes_Flugzeug_Po-2.jpg)

If you look, you'll find that the vast majority of Soviet fighters in 1941 were monoplanes.  In fact, the Soviet Union moved to monoplanes with the I-16 far earlier than other nations did.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: MORAY37 on June 05, 2009, 01:54:31 PM
Let me know if you are in the Late War Arenas after we get this.   We'll test your theory, because I guarantee you, there are many more like me that would be MORE THAN HAPPY to shoot you down with ease.

But hey, thanks for showing the Community how selfish you are.    :rock


This isn't a threat?  This is your historical comparison of how the Brewster Buffalo fared in combat.... the two of us fighting in MA?  Your argument is ridiculous, and you know you are wrong.  But you are dogged in your determination at all costs, I'll give you that.

Buffalos in US hands were already phased out (1940-1941) in favor of the F4F, and only two marine squadrons retained it by the start of the war.  When it was mauled and hopelessly outclassed in its' one and only engagement, it was removed from US service and sent to the Finns to fly against the Russians

The Buffalo faced even more inferior aircraft flown by Russian pilots given horrendously mediocre training. The russians barely trained any ACM at all for their pilots in the early war days. The Finns were better trained, with a better aircraft on that particular front.  Once the Russians got half a clue, the -239 was withdrawn and replaced by German supplied 109G2's.

 

This is historical fact.  Should you come up with any facts, feel free to share. Historical fact does not include you and I fighting in the MA.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Sakai on June 05, 2009, 02:24:54 PM
the He-111 is inferior to the Ju-88 we already have. It's purely a scenario plane, BoB to be precise. The 217 otoh is a very capable bomber for any arena.

Yes, and that is why you have to model both, but I think due to its historical value and cool skins you'd see a few He-111s in the MA as well.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Karnak on June 05, 2009, 02:25:38 PM
I'd disagree about the aircraft, Moray.  The I-16-18 and I-16-24 are pretty competitive with the B-239.  The MiG-3 can't turn with one and has crap for guns, but it is far faster.  Utilized in a  skilled manner, the MiG-3's speed and I-153' turning capability should have been a hard combo for the B-239 to deal with.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Masherbrum on June 05, 2009, 02:39:10 PM

This isn't a threat?  This is your historical comparison of how the Brewster Buffalo fared in combat.... the two of us fighting in MA?  Your argument is ridiculous, and you know you are wrong.  But you are dogged in your determination at all costs, I'll give you that.

Buffalos in US hands were already phased out (1940-1941) in favor of the F4F, and only two marine squadrons retained it by the start of the war.  When it was mauled and hopelessly outclassed in its' one and only engagement, it was removed from US service and sent to the Finns to fly against the Russians

The Buffalo faced even more inferior aircraft flown by Russian pilots given horrendously mediocre training. The russians barely trained any ACM at all for their pilots in the early war days. The Finns were better trained, with a better aircraft on that particular front.  Once the Russians got half a clue, the -239 was withdrawn and replaced by German supplied 109G2's.

 

This is historical fact.  Should you come up with any facts, feel free to share. Historical fact does not include you and I fighting in the MA.

I've never compared the Buffalo to ANY fighter.   Are you blind?   You can blame the "lack of training", etc (This is almost as funny as watching people cheapen USN Aces, Hartmann, etc).   The ONLY things I discussed "historically", were properly informing HTC's customers of errors on Rich's and your behalf.   Nothing else, nothing less.   

I don't care about "inferiority".   You're pissed off and you two want to grief about it, spewing the same diatribe.   Did you two selfish people ever stop to think that another plane will join this later on in the year?   I wonder what sniping the two of you will come up with, then.   

You can cut and paste all you want from the internet, it doesn't change the fact that both of you tried writing prose on your own and failed miserably at it.   The Finns of this Community ALSO noticed it and corrected you as well. 
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: MORAY37 on June 05, 2009, 03:10:41 PM
I've never compared the Buffalo to ANY fighter.   Are you blind?   You can blame the "lack of training", etc (This is almost as funny as watching people cheapen USN Aces, Hartmann, etc).   The ONLY things I discussed "historically", were properly informing HTC's customers of errors on Rich's and your behalf.   Nothing else, nothing less.   

I don't care about "inferiority".   You're pissed off and you two want to grief about it, spewing the same diatribe.   Did you two selfish people ever stop to think that another plane will join this later on in the year?   I wonder what sniping the two of you will come up with, then.   

You can cut and paste all you want from the internet, it doesn't change the fact that both of you tried writing prose on your own and failed miserably at it.   The Finns of this Community ALSO noticed it and corrected you as well. 

So what part of accurate is wrong?  I'm talking historically right or wrong, not morally.  I understand a nation in jeopardy of ceasing to exist will side with whomever gives them the best chance to survive.  I'm not condemning the Finnish like Rich is, merely stating facts.  I disagree with his approach to the facts.

Since I am wrong on all counts, I expect your response to the following points, or your response is mute.  I dare you to prove me wrong.  Correct these errors for me, as they have been my points.

Did the Finns not side with Germany in 1939 thru 1944?
Did Britain not declare war on Finland?
Did the United States not seize Finnish shipping assets and freeze monetary ones?
Did Finland allow recruitment for German units within their borders?
Did they not allow Luftwaffe aircraft refueling rights, and rearm them, during attacks within Russia, specifically during Barbarossa and attacks on Murmansk? (complicity)?
Did they not allow Wermacht units "holiday passage" though the country, at pretty much all times?


Was the Brewster Buffalo withdrawn from US service in 1941 due to to deficiencies with the airframe and performance?
Was the Buffalo almost completely withdraw from Finnish service and replaced by 109G2's by late 1942?


Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Sakai on June 05, 2009, 03:56:28 PM
Did the United States not seize Finnish shipping assets?

Yes but ony for the herring, those tasty, tasty herrings.

Mmmmmmmmmmhhhhh  . . . herring.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Karnak on June 05, 2009, 04:03:18 PM
Was the Brewster Buffalo withdrawn from US service in 1941 due to to deficiencies with the airframe and performance?
Was the Buffalo almost completely withdraw from Finnish service and replaced by 109G2's by late 1942?
No, to both.

Go read now.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: -pjk-- on June 05, 2009, 04:06:40 PM
MORAY37
Read my post.
Í am not noob who does not know history of my country, or history of ww2, or history of FAF(later beeng(pilots  view) more insight you ever get from internet or books)
We have tryed to do our best to translate  most of official Finnish reports, testflyes on our pages.
Please go to virtualpilots.fi  and go figure
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Motherland on June 05, 2009, 04:16:58 PM
Was the Buffalo almost completely withdraw from Finnish service and replaced by 109G2's by late 1942?
The German Luftwaffe was still newly equipping units with the G-2 through mid-1942...
In fact, the contract for Finland to buy the first fighters wasn't signed until February 1st, 1943, and that was only for a squadron's worth of Messerschmitts.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: -pjk-- on June 05, 2009, 04:26:06 PM
Nice to be invisable :O
Time to go bed anyway..  Just wondering, how in the earth you  besserwiser`s (most younger than my son birth 1988) can have the only TRUTH.
If my bad english makes you to ignore my messages, be happy, you are not 1st to do. :salute
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Wmaker on June 05, 2009, 04:26:39 PM
I'm out of town and drunk. :)

I'm not gonna start defending my position  (or the position of the FiAF) as my objectiveness is compromised by alcohol. I'll just say that it would do a lot of good for Moray to actually do some research and not settle with the first sources he can find...as he's very wrong on many accounts....which, I can explain when I sober up and actually start caring about this conversation again. :) Brewster shot down many Soviet "inline engined fighters" including La-5s and Yaks well after FiAF had the first Messerschmittis...

You are free to apologize for your ignorance Moray. :)
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Wmaker on June 05, 2009, 04:31:19 PM
Well La-5 isn't an "inline engined fighter"!!  :rofl

Sorry about my slip up for everyone involved! My point still stands tho! :)

EDIT/ For the Finns....somehow it seems appropriate... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xSuB6O-SikU (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xSuB6O-SikU) :) /EDIT
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Ex-jazz on June 05, 2009, 04:36:28 PM

Holly Hulabalooo, Hitech!

We are getting The Brewster?

Mikä mekkala!  :lol
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Ack-Ack on June 05, 2009, 06:00:22 PM
If you look, you'll find that the vast majority of Soviet fighters in 1941 were monoplanes.  In fact, the Soviet Union moved to monoplanes with the I-16 far earlier than other nations did.

Also, the point also needs to be made is that the Soviet air force units in the north did not suffer the same fate as the other Soviet air force units in the south that were virtually destroyed by the Luftwaffe.  The Soviets were able to muster 700+ planes against the Finns.


ack-ack
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Lye-El on June 05, 2009, 06:14:26 PM

You are free to apologize for your ignorance Moray. :)


Now that's funny right there.......... :rofl :rofl
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Karnak on June 05, 2009, 06:27:01 PM
Also, the point also needs to be made is that the Soviet air force units in the north did not suffer the same fate as the other Soviet air force units in the south that were virtually destroyed by the Luftwaffe.  The Soviets were able to muster 700+ planes against the Finns.


ack-ack
It bothers me a bit how many people believe the same 1930s BS about the Soviet and Japanese air forces despite the wealth of easily available material out there.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: hubsonfire on June 05, 2009, 06:51:25 PM
Dug up a post for another thread, but since the whinging is growing more intense, might as well tack it up here. I had no idea what the Brewster was until I started reading the forums here. I know what he means now. From 03/2007

Quote
Brewster Buffalo – My sentimental choice to win.  For nearly 12 years, Finns have asked me for this.  Their passion for this plane is contagious.  I’ve wanted to give them one ever since I read Double Fighter Knight about 10 years ago.  That really gave me an appreciation of the FAF and the sturdiness of Finns in general.  Of course, now that I’ve said it’s my sentimental favorite, if it happens to win it will provoke more conspiracy theories than Patrick Ewing going to the Knicks in the first NBA draft lottery.

Not because it's awesome, or because it's going to change the MAs- but because, I guess you could say, it's a symbol of a people and war that most people don't know or care about in the least. It is a kind of contagious enthusiasm. Or maybe it's alcohol. Same thing really.  ;)

Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Masherbrum on June 05, 2009, 07:09:00 PM
Which is what I said from the beginning.   It's just that a couple people felt like whining "because they didn't want the Brewster for selfish reasons." 

<<S>> to our Finnish friends. 
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: TwinBoom on June 05, 2009, 07:30:14 PM
Which is what I said from the beginning.   It's just that a couple people felt like whining "because they didn't want the Brewster for selfish reasons." 

<<S>> to our Finnish friends. 

i cant believe some peeps are complaining about a new aircraft ...................
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: texastc316 on June 05, 2009, 07:35:32 PM
oh come on, sure you can
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Karnak on June 05, 2009, 07:36:23 PM
i cant believe some peeps are complaining about a new aircraft ...................
But it isn't the A-26 or He111 so they feel disappointed.  No consideration of all the guys who waited years for this one and who have contributed so much to the game.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Ack-Ack on June 05, 2009, 07:39:07 PM
Ok, so other than threatening to kill my cartoon plane, how have you refuted my point again?  That being the -239 flew against even more inferior aircraft, ie Biplanes and even more inferior monoplanes?   

It really shows that you are making comments about something without really knowing about the subject.  I know, this has been pointed out many times already in this thread but you insist on making the above comments regarding the quality of Soviet aircraft used in The Winter War.

This is what Robert L. Shaw (Mouse and the author of the fighter pilots Bible, Fighter Combat: Tactics and Maneuvering) that breaks down the air war during The Winter War.  Very interesting read and totally blows away your argument.  

Quote
The Winter War, although it lasted less than four months, illustrates some important points regarding air combat. One of the most important is that the numbers of aircraft on each side do not tell the whole story. In this conflict, the Soviets enjoyed an approximate 10-1 advantage in aircraft, but LOST aircraft in combat at roughly the same ratio. Still, they ultimately won the war. As we have seen in previous air wars, particularly in WW-I, quantity is typically much better correlated with the final outcome of a conflict than with aircraft exchange ratios. If the side with superior numbers is willing and able to make good on its losses, it can accomplish its goals in support of the overall effort and eventually achieve victory. The price, however, may be great.

In this conflict, the Soviets had the overwhelming advantage of numbers, and at least parity, if not a slight edge in quality with respect to fighter designs for most of the war. In addition, they had the advantage of holding both the strategic and tactical initiative in most cases. This usually allowed them to benefit from the element of surprise, concentration of numbers during a given engagement, and an initial altitude advantage. Another plus was the combat experience, at least at higher command levels, of the Russians in Spain and the Far East. This latter advantage was more than offset, however, by an inefficient command structure, low morale, and a general lack of experience among aircrews during much of the conflict.

The Finns, on the other hand, could also claim rough parity in fighter quality, a much higher overall level of aircrew training, high morale, and a more efficient and effective fighter employment doctrine. Also, as they typically were based much closer to the air action, the FAF could generate more combat sorties per aircraft than the Soviets, who were forced to waste much more time just transiting back and forth to the combat arena. This factor has a powerful force-multiplying effect on the "density" of aircraft that can be engaged in combat at any time with a given total number of aircraft. Operating mostly over friendly territory, the Finns were also less likely to lose downed aircrew; and those that survived returned to combat much wiser, with the effect of increasing the overall level of aircrew experience over time.

The general availability of radios to the FAF was another important factor. Finnish Fokkers were normally equipped with indigenous P-12-17/1 radios. Flight leaders usually had very low-power transmitters with a range of only about 3 mi for coordinating within their flights, while the wingmen generally had only receivers. A system of trained air observers had been established before the Winter War, using telephones to call the squadron headquarters, which were equipped with radios for notifying airborne fighters. The telephone system was not well developed, however, which often resulted in significant sighting delays. Even though the Finns did not have a very effective air-direction system during the Winter War, they were often able to receive engagement and sighting reports that were valuable in allowing them to concentrate their limited forces where they were most needed.

Although it is often dangerous to draw sweeping conclusions from limited air conflicts, the Winter War illustrates many critical principles that will be reinforced throughout the history of air combat.

The Winter War by Robert L. Shaw (http://www.sci.fi/~fta/winter-w.htm)

ack-ack
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Masherbrum on June 05, 2009, 07:43:45 PM
But it isn't the A-26 or He111 so they feel disappointed.  No consideration of all the guys who waited years for this one and who have contributed so much to the game.

Karnak, you and I don't always seem to see eye to eye (human nature), but I give the above a "damn right".   I'm happy for the LLv32, LLv34 and any other Finnish squadron we have.   
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: E25280 on June 05, 2009, 07:50:49 PM
It was withdrawn from US service in less than 6 months combat, and only one engagement in US hands. This being a US reeling from loss after loss, and scrambling to procure every combat aircraft it possibly could.  But, we shipped our remaining Buffalos to Finland...
For the sake of piling on . . .
http://www.warbirdforum.com/faf.htm
Quote
And so 44 Brewsters were bought in 16th of December 1939,  . . . First planes left New York harbour in 13th of January 1940, and the last planes arrived Sweden in 13th of March.

Kind of hard to have "shipped off our remaining Buffalos to Finland" when the Finns purchased them almost two full years before Pearl Harbor.  :rofl :rofl :rofl
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Masherbrum on June 05, 2009, 11:17:50 PM
 :uhoh
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Nurminen on June 06, 2009, 02:44:49 AM

EDIT/ For the Finns....somehow it seems appropriate... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xSuB6O-SikU (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xSuB6O-SikU) :) /EDIT


 :D   :salute
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Demetrious on June 06, 2009, 08:57:53 AM
Ok.  Other than being used against a Russian air force predominated by EVEN more inferior aircraft( mostly biplanes or early 1930's era monoplanes) and flown by better Finnish pilots who knew the fate of their country rested on every man in uniform, and weren't relegated to inferior russian tactics...

B*** best not be steppin to mah I-153. In the words of my generation, ahem.

But seriously, don't under-estimate the I-16 or the I-153. They were both lethal performers in the right hands, and they were both cannon-armed by the time of the Winter War. The I-16 and I-153 were both painfully slow, but good climbers and very nimble in a turn, and not bad at rolling. In 1941 they were reaching the end of their useful service life, but they weren't dead yet. A Brewster pilot who got lazy against an I-16 could find his arse in the wind quite quickly. If you don't believe me, try playing IL-2 against an I-153 dweeb sometime; they will redefine the barrel roll defense for you. Sure, its just a video game, but it illustrates the point nicely.

Also, let me remind you that the Japanese Army Air Force, armed with Ki-27 monoplanes that were far more manuverable then the Brewster, with better climb, got their tails handed to them by I-16s and I-153s at the battle of Khalkin Gol.

Quote
The BREWSTER SUCKED.  

It will never even be as popular as the F4F in any arena, other than by the Finns...

I am honestly curious as to why you think that way. Why, exactly, did the Brewster suck? As far as I can see you haven't elaborated percisely why the Brewster was markedly inferior as a fighter in it's era.  As for being less popular then the F4F, I find that hard to believe- it's got the same armament and similar manuverability, but has superior power loading and climb rate, two things that absolutely cripple the F4F. (The F4F is more durable, but there's something to be said for not getting shot in the first place.)
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: TwinBoom on June 06, 2009, 08:58:36 AM
But it isn't the A-26 or He111 so they feel disappointed.  No consideration of all the guys who waited years for this one and who have contributed so much to the game.

Those planes are in the works they gonna add every plane we voted on
bet A-26 and yak3 He-111 are next probably see screens of the A-26 next  

P.S. I got sounds ready to go for the brewster had them done for the past year now just knew HTC would give it to the finns :) WTG Finns PERKELE!!!!!!!!! we got the brewster :aok
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: MORAY37 on June 06, 2009, 12:52:56 PM
I'm out of town and drunk. :)

I'm not gonna start defending my position  (or the position of the FiAF) as my objectiveness is compromised by alcohol. I'll just say that it would do a lot of good for Moray to actually do some research and not settle with the first sources he can find...as he's very wrong on many accounts....which, I can explain when I sober up and actually start caring about this conversation again. :) Brewster shot down many Soviet "inline engined fighters" including La-5s and Yaks well after FiAF had the first Messerschmittis...

You are free to apologize for your ignorance Moray. :)

So other than a pile on, which is normal, I've yet to see one of my points refuted with anything but opinions.  Finnish War history or otherwise.
Please, all of you wishing to give me a history lesson, feel free to cite.  Especially you, Wmaker, since obviously Karaya can't refute the points I put out..  I'm waiting for anything viable from you, in regards to my points.  Correct what the history books say regarding Finnish History in the war. 

I restate, I'm not attacking the history of your country, and there is no ill will, unlike how some have put it to you.  If you would rather carry this conversation via PM's, than hijack this thread, that is fine.  I look forward to you correcting what I've learned is wrong, with hard cited historical facts.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: TwinBoom on June 06, 2009, 01:09:00 PM
So other than a pile on, blah blah blah blah take to pm

CANT WE ALL JUST GET ALONG!!!!!!
(http://img514.imageshack.us/img514/3319/bedfellows.jpg)
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Karnak on June 06, 2009, 01:16:40 PM
Those planes are in the works they gonna add every plane we voted on
bet A-26 and yak3 He-111 are next probably see screens of the A-26 next
You're delusional.  The vote meant nothing beyond the next aircraft added.  Only the fact that the votes for the B-25 and P-39 were so remarkably close and that the P-39 was a widely useful type to add got the P-39 added next.

All additions after that are entirely, 100%, unencumbered by that vote and are completely HTC's choice.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: TwinBoom on June 06, 2009, 01:20:38 PM
You're delusional.  The vote meant nothing beyond the next aircraft added.  Only the fact that the votes for the B-25 and P-39 were so remarkably close and that the P-39 was a widely useful type to add got the P-39 added next.

All additions after that are entirely, 100%, unencumbered by that vote and are completely HTC's choice.

again care to make a wager  :D
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Karnak on June 06, 2009, 01:35:40 PM
again care to make a wager  :D
Let me put it this way, it would be ridiculous for HTC to further overload the American planeset when other planesets are in such need of attention.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Masherbrum on June 06, 2009, 02:11:23 PM
So other than a pile on, which is normal, I've yet to see one of my points refuted with anything but opinions.  Finnish War history or otherwise.
Please, all of you wishing to give me a history lesson, feel free to cite.  Especially you, Wmaker, since obviously Karaya can't refute the points I put out..  I'm waiting for anything viable from you, in regards to my points.  Correct what the history books say regarding Finnish History in the war. 

I restate, I'm not attacking the history of your country, and there is no ill will, unlike how some have put it to you.  If you would rather carry this conversation via PM's, than hijack this thread, that is fine.  I look forward to you correcting what I've learned is wrong, with hard cited historical facts.

I've yet too "refute anything", because you haven't been right about anything.   Make sense yet or do you still have the bends?
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Ack-Ack on June 06, 2009, 02:17:06 PM
So other than a pile on, which is normal, I've yet to see one of my points refuted with anything but opinions.   



Actually, I pretty much destroyed your argument that the Soviet aircraft were highly inferior to the Finnish aircraft. 


ack-ack
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: BlauK on June 06, 2009, 02:19:30 PM
Moray,
There were already good links pointed out for you, but just a few most obvious ones to start with:

Quote
...it [Brewster] was removed from US service and sent to the Finns to fly against the Russians.

No, Brewsters arrived to Finland in spring of 1940. Later Brewster types served in USA even when they joined WW2.


Quote
Did the Finns not side with Germany in 1939 thru 1944?

No, only from 1941 to 1944. Germany sided with Soviet Union until 1941.


Quote
Was the Buffalo almost completely withdraw from Finnish service and replaced by 109G2's by late 1942?

No, Brewsters were used all the way to the end of wars in Finland. In mid to late 1944 the scored kills like Airacobras, Warhawks, La-5:s and Yak-9:s.

In spring 1943, Finland was allowed to buy 30 Bf109G-2:s from Germany, to equip one squadron with them. That squadron happened to be Lentolaivue 34 ;)
G-2 losses were replaced, but Finns got more 109s (G-6:s this time) only April 1944 onwards.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Steve on June 06, 2009, 02:21:17 PM
Cool stuff. Congrats to those who want to fly her. Any plane addition is a good one.     :aok
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Masherbrum on June 06, 2009, 02:25:41 PM
Cool stuff. Congrats to those who want to fly her. Any plane addition is a good one.     :aok

Which is how it should have been on Page 5.    :rock     Simple words ring true.   
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: TwinBoom on June 06, 2009, 03:46:06 PM
Let me put it this way, it would be ridiculous for HTC to further overload the American planeset when other planesets are in such need of attention.

but its their game :)
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: SLAMMER on June 06, 2009, 07:10:28 PM
Cool stuff. Congrats to those who want to fly her. Any plane addition is a good one.     :aok
well put steve. :aok
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Karnak on June 06, 2009, 08:47:45 PM
but its their game :)
Well, I saw no statement from Pyro saying that they are adding the A-26 next.  If you saw such, please post it.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: vonKrimm on June 07, 2009, 05:05:19 PM
I know we are sseing the Brewster in Finnish markings, so I expect the 239 model is just about air-worthy.  My question is will we have the 339 model for the NEI available to us?
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: E25280 on June 07, 2009, 08:04:55 PM
I know we are sseing the Brewster in Finnish markings, so I expect the 239 model is just about air-worthy.  My question is will we have the 339 model for the NEI available to us?
Hmm . . . well, as precedent, we did get both the P-39D and P-39Q.

So I think that warrants a definite maybe.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Greebo on June 08, 2009, 04:22:40 AM
There is no other Brewster coming out in this version to my knowledge.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Bossk on June 08, 2009, 05:52:29 AM
whats the mechanical difference between the Finnish Brewster and the NEI one? A Dutch skin wouldn't do the trick?
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Greebo on June 08, 2009, 06:01:08 AM
Mainly weight and power. The Finnish Brewsters were much lighter but less powerful than the US, British, Aussie and Dutch versions. I'd assume any Brewster that saw squadron service in WW2 would be allowed as a skin, but I could be wrong.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: texastc316 on June 08, 2009, 07:02:06 PM
I wonder what kinda of ENY we are looking at.
Title: Re: Brewster Buffalo
Post by: Eastwood on June 10, 2009, 02:23:43 AM
Good god, a trainer without guns whould be better. Looks kinda cute though, kinda like a Pug........ :rofl