Author Topic: Brewster B-239 and the I-16  (Read 8275 times)

Offline mechanic

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 11327
Re: Brewster B-239 and the I-16
« Reply #45 on: June 28, 2009, 12:00:12 AM »
I do that in the 38G on the deck all the time.  Managed it nicely in the Brewster too.  Way too low and slow, plowed into the water, both wings and tail came off.  Then Bat came in and rammed me and he broke up the same way and we were both sitting there in the water having a good laugh at that tough little bird :)


 Heh, we ended 20 yrds apart looking both quite similar to a cuban cigar. Not sure if either of even fired a shot that fight but it lasted long enough before the water cherry picked us.
 
 The brewster is a dominant force in the beta arena. I-16 more of a novel toy, very fun. Both of them stand no chance vs a furballing B26 I did discover. Any well aimed attack with the 26's nose guns is enough to damage either plane considerably. In defence the B26 can just nose down a fraction and pull away from them. Any attempt to chase the 26 results in laser tail gun volleys at a target that cannot close with you. Landed two kills in the b26 before the new patch stutters stopped me playing. One I-16 and one Brewster.
And I don't know much, but I do know this. With a golden heart comes a rebel fist.

Offline BnZs

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4207
Re: Brewster B-239 and the I-16
« Reply #46 on: June 28, 2009, 12:11:14 AM »



Indeed, the P-47N would have a bigger problem with 109E, or C.202. Why? Miserable climb rate without WEP.


My regards,

Widewing

So Republic needed to go back to the drawing board? :huh  ;)

Truly the silly penny have been dropped in the stupid machine. Methinks the flight-model likes the light-wingloaded crates a mite too much. Anyway, good as excuse as any for please give us the P-47M! plea. :rock
"Crikey, sir. I'm looking forward to today. Up diddly up, down diddly down, whoops, poop, twiddly dee - decent scrap with the fiendish Red Baron - bit of a jolly old crash landing behind enemy lines - capture, torture, escape, and then back home in time for tea and medals."

Offline TonyJoey

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1953
Re: Brewster B-239 and the I-16
« Reply #47 on: June 28, 2009, 01:11:26 AM »

 Heh, we ended 20 yrds apart looking both quite similar to a cuban cigar. Not sure if either of even fired a shot that fight but it lasted long enough before the water cherry picked us.
 
 The brewster is a dominant force in the beta arena. I-16 more of a novel toy, very fun. Both of them stand no chance vs a furballing B26 I did discover. Any well aimed attack with the 26's nose guns is enough to damage either plane considerably. In defence the B26 can just nose down a fraction and pull away from them. Any attempt to chase the 26 results in laser tail gun volleys at a target that cannot close with you. Landed two kills in the b26 before the new patch stutters stopped me playing. One I-16 and one Brewster.

 :lol

Offline Krusty

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 26745
Re: Brewster B-239 and the I-16
« Reply #48 on: June 28, 2009, 02:06:33 AM »
I took a P-47N with 50% fuel, 8 guns with the smaller ammo load (267 rds per gun) and a B-239 with 25% fuel.

So, Krusty probably didn't use much WEP while trying to out-climb the Brewster. Likewise, he didn't push the dive fast enough to either force the Brewster to pull off power or damage the aircraft.

Indeed, the P-47N would have a bigger problem with 109E, or C.202. Why? Miserable climb rate without WEP.


I had taken the 6 gun option, and fuel state by the time I got to the fight was less than 50%. I was using WEP in the climbs, spiral climbing, level climbing, attempting wingovers with flaps, anything I did the brewster just had its nose glued to me and peppered me as I tried to get a gun lock on it.

With this loadout and weight, my performance was notably better than a D-40.

The wing loading on the FM2 is compared to the official F2A weights, not this super-lightened semi-frankenstein (?) we have in-game.

Offline lyric1

  • Skinner Team
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10686
Re: Brewster B-239 and the I-16
« Reply #49 on: June 28, 2009, 02:21:31 AM »
Another passage from the book I have about the planes in Singapore.


Offline Boozeman

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 482
Re: Brewster B-239 and the I-16
« Reply #50 on: June 28, 2009, 06:11:38 AM »
Krusty, why didn't you use the + 85 mph the P47N can do to gain an advantage on the Brewster?
If you are looking for vices on the Brewster, it's in the speed where you find them. 

Offline Wmaker

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5743
      • Lentolaivue 34 website
Re: Brewster B-239 and the I-16
« Reply #51 on: June 28, 2009, 06:50:51 AM »
The 1944 FM-2 has better wing loading, HP loading, stability, than the 1939 Brewster, and yet somehow HTC models the BREW as superior.

Bollocks. There is info regarding the wingloading posted to this very thread and you still choose to repeat these kind of inaccuracies. What source says FM-2 has a better wingloading than Model 239?? Please name your source. I bet you can't, because you have none. You are once again making things up as you go.

Weight/Wing areas presented on this table match Game's and AHT's data:
« Last Edit: June 28, 2009, 06:52:46 AM by Wmaker »
Wmaker
Lentolaivue 34

Thank you for the Brewster HTC!

Offline Widewing

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8801
Re: Brewster B-239 and the I-16
« Reply #52 on: June 28, 2009, 10:11:55 AM »
I had taken the 6 gun option, and fuel state by the time I got to the fight was less than 50%. I was using WEP in the climbs, spiral climbing, level climbing, attempting wingovers with flaps, anything I did the brewster just had its nose glued to me and peppered me as I tried to get a gun lock on it.

With this loadout and weight, my performance was notably better than a D-40.

The wing loading on the FM2 is compared to the official F2A weights, not this super-lightened semi-frankenstein (?) we have in-game.

Krusty, a friend of mine (Erik Shilling) was an AVG pilot. At Chennault's request, he flew a mock engagement with an RAF B-339 at Rangoon in November of 1941. They took off together and climbed out side by side. Leveling off, the Brewster turned right and the Tomahawk turned left. After a few minutes, they reversed and merged directly over the runway. The instant their wingtips passed, the fight was on.

Shilling entered the merge at well over 400 mph, the B-339 considerably slower. Shilling pulled into a 3g, 45 degree chandelle, zooming up high and around on the Brewster. Typical of his experience flying Spitfires, the RAF pilot hauled the Brewster around in a punishing turn, nearly level. At that instant the fight was, in a realistic sense, over. Shilling was high above with lots of potential energy, while the Buffalo had scrubbed off much of its speed. The RAF pilot realized that he had been had as he saw the shark-mouth Tomahawk diving straight at him. He attempted to evade in every manner he could think of. This included cutting power and dropping flaps. Nothing worked, as Shilling would simply go vertical, roll and come right back in (textbook high yo-yo). He had the Brewster pinned down and there was nothing its pilot could do about it. Finally, Chennault called an end to duel and both landed.

My conversations with Erik revealed that he knew that the Brewster could out-turn his Tomahawk. He also knew that it climbed better. Shilling's big advantage was speed. His Curtiss was faster than the B-339. He also knew that the RAF blokes would rely on their training and concentrate on a turning fight (which cost them dearly against the Japanese). He exploited his advantage and dominated the more agile fighter.

One may ask, why was Shilling asked to fly the duel when there were pilots available who would become great aces? Chennault selected Shilling because "he was my best pilot. Shilling could out-fly anyone in the organization. That is why I picked him to build and pilot our photo ship (a modified Tomahawk). I knew Shilling could fly deep into Japanese air space, take the photos and get back." 

The point Krusty, is that you have to avoid the strengths of the enemy and exploit the strengths of your aircraft. Your P-47N should have easily dominated the Brewster if you avoided trying to maneuver with it. Don't fight the way the other guy fights best. If you found yourself low and got bounced by the Brewster, there's little you can do except evade and build E. I've executed a perfect diving bounce on a 262 while flying an SBD in the DA. That doesn't mean the SBD is a "Frankenstein". It means that the 262 driver was not paying attention, and his decision to burn off his E was a bad one.

If you wish, we can go into the TA. I'll take a P-47N, you can fly the Brewster. We'll do a standard merge. I'll demonstrate my point.

The B-239 is not a super plane. It is highly maneuverable, with superior ailerons and light control forces. It's rate of climb is good for its genre, but inferior to almost all types encountered in the LWAs. Its great weakness is its lack of speed. Max speed at its best altitude is no more than 305 mph. Many of the late war fighters can do well over 400 mph at that height. Even the A-20G is faster on the deck; about 40 mph faster.


My regards,

Widewing
« Last Edit: June 28, 2009, 10:13:44 AM by Widewing »
My regards,

Widewing

YGBSM. Retired Member of Aces High Trainer Corps, Past President of the DFC, retired from flying as Tredlite.

Offline mechanic

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 11327
Re: Brewster B-239 and the I-16
« Reply #53 on: June 28, 2009, 10:22:29 AM »
Thanks for that widewing, enjoyed reading it alot. You are priveledged to have such friends. Your point also, clearly proven that an empty B26 can evade and/or destroy both the I16 and brewster, unless starting from considerable disadvantage or prone to suicidal tactics.
And I don't know much, but I do know this. With a golden heart comes a rebel fist.

Offline Widewing

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8801
Re: Brewster B-239 and the I-16
« Reply #54 on: June 28, 2009, 10:40:55 AM »
Thanks for that widewing, enjoyed reading it alot. You are priveledged to have such friends. Your point also, clearly proven that an empty B26 can evade and/or destroy both the I16 and brewster, unless starting from considerable disadvantage or prone to suicidal tactics.

There's few things more entertaining than taking a big old bomber into a furball and chewing up the mob with it. When exiting the mob, slow fighters like the Brewster and I-16 can't overtake the B-26, so they line up like ducks behind it.... Too bad that there's no film viewer for the Beta. I'd love to see that film.


My regards,

Widewing
My regards,

Widewing

YGBSM. Retired Member of Aces High Trainer Corps, Past President of the DFC, retired from flying as Tredlite.

Offline Wmaker

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5743
      • Lentolaivue 34 website
Re: Brewster B-239 and the I-16
« Reply #55 on: June 28, 2009, 11:38:07 AM »
One thing that has frustrated me to no end is the very very poor signal to noise ratio regarding the Brewster fighter aircraft during the history of this BBS. There are guys
like Widewing and Squire that actually have objectively looked at the specs of the said aircraft and compared it to the rest of the planeset and then, have actually sacrificed a few moments to think (again, objectively) how it would/should compare to the said planeset.

Many others have basically read that F2A-3 was overweight and that many of them were lost in a single engagement against the IJN. They then just parrot the only thing they have read/heard every time the word "Brewster" comes up without ever really involving any thought process what so ever into the equation.

Correcting these individuals would almost be a full time job. Therefore I've mostly just given up and let the clueless be...well, clueless.
Wmaker
Lentolaivue 34

Thank you for the Brewster HTC!

Offline mechanic

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 11327
Re: Brewster B-239 and the I-16
« Reply #56 on: June 28, 2009, 01:13:03 PM »
Brewster, I would have gone to war in one happily.
And I don't know much, but I do know this. With a golden heart comes a rebel fist.

Offline Krusty

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 26745
Re: Brewster B-239 and the I-16
« Reply #57 on: June 28, 2009, 01:22:52 PM »
In regards to the P-47N fight I had, I did level out to build up speed, but the second I tried to use that speed (loop, yo-yo, high turn, whatever) the brewster was instantly there, and could hang on its nose indefinitely (never losing aim at me) while I did whatever manuver I was attempting. While the range was often 600-800 yards, I was avoiding death, but even using the speed, the only thing I could do was "disengage" -- could never use the speed because the BREW could simply float at all alts at any angle.


EDIT: That is what I did. I disengaged, and left the fight area. BREW couldn't follow, broke off and turned around.

Offline Krusty

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 26745
Re: Brewster B-239 and the I-16
« Reply #58 on: June 28, 2009, 01:35:24 PM »
WMaker: Mathematics.

Brewster had 208.9 square feet of wing area.

Wildcat had 260 square feet of wing area
(F4F-4 in this example, FM-2 has same wing)

Brewster (F2A-3) weighs (fully fueled) 7159 lbs max, and your weight listed is barely over the "empty" weight of 4732lbs (2146kg).

Wildcat weighs (max) 7952 lbs, but I don't know if that counts external tanks or not. Using F4F-4 numbers here. I know FM-2 a little heavier, but don't have the numbers in front of me. Even assuming this is all internal weight, that gives us:

7159 divided by 209 equals 34 lbs per square foot for the Buffalo
7952 divided by 260 equals 30 lbs per square foot for the F4F-4

The HP loading is much better on the FM-2 because of the improved power and the WEP settings. (1350hp as compared to BREW 1000 hp in-game, and 1150 I think for the F2A3 model)

The FM-2 has a much larger wing, more horsepower, and in general this should equate to better handling in a tight turning situation. More area, more lift, more power to keep the plane in the air.
« Last Edit: June 28, 2009, 01:37:19 PM by Krusty »

Offline E25280

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3475
      • http://125thspartanforums.com
Re: Brewster B-239 and the I-16
« Reply #59 on: June 28, 2009, 01:44:06 PM »
WMaker: Mathematics.

Brewster had 208.9 square feet of wing area.

Wildcat had 260 square feet of wing area
(F4F-4 in this example, FM-2 has same wing)

Brewster (F2A-3) weighs (fully fueled) 7159 lbs max, and your weight listed is barely over the "empty" weight of 4732lbs (2146kg).

Wildcat weighs (max) 7952 lbs, but I don't know if that counts external tanks or not. Using F4F-4 numbers here. I know FM-2 a little heavier, but don't have the numbers in front of me. Even assuming this is all internal weight, that gives us:

7159 divided by 209 equals 34 lbs per square foot for the Buffalo
7952 divided by 260 equals 30 lbs per square foot for the F4F-4

The HP loading is much better on the FM-2 because of the improved power and the WEP settings. (1350hp as compared to BREW 1000 hp in-game, and 1150 I think for the F2A3 model)

The FM-2 has a much larger wing, more horsepower, and in general this should equate to better handling in a tight turning situation. More area, more lift, more power to keep the plane in the air.
Umm . . .

You realize our Brewster is NOT the F2A-3?  Therefore your math is entirely irrelevant.
Brauno in a past life, followed by LTARget
SWtarget in current incarnation
Captain and Communications Officer~125th Spartans

"Proudly drawing fire so that my brothers may pass unharmed."