Brewster Buffalo dive speed and handling

[uptown]

Wow! This is alot of reading. I've been conducting my own little 51 vs Brewski tests in the DA for a few weeks now. Here's my uneducated take on the plane.

It will lite you up if ya get too close to it. It turns like a bat, snappier then a zeke at higher speeds and takes a good half minute at least, for a 51D to get out of a good gun range (d800). It will stay with the 51 in a dive under 5K or so....which surprises me actually. It's also a tough little bird that needs a real solid hit to bring it down.

To be perfectly honest, I've never heard of the Brewster before it was added to the plane set and can not speak to if it's over or under modeled. The way I look at things is we have what we have, and I just try to learn how to deal with each aircraft on that basis. Pages upon pages of performance data is meaningless to me, as there are so many variables when 2 planes meet in a random dogfight, i.e. weight, speed, E state, altitude, skill level...so on and so forth.

The Brewski is a wonderful little plane just the way it is. It can be quite a challenge or it can be a easy kill. 

[Wmaker]

Wmaker- I have a "hunch" if you haven't factored in exhaust thrust yet, just a few lbs of it would bring that number to .03 .

Well I purposefully left it out considering the exhausts are basically pointing straight down. One thing to consider is that the tests were probably flown painted with the overall aluminum bronze, with no camouflage. The surface finish was most likely better than with the camouflage. Either way, my point was just show that the numbers are on the ballpark. Those Finnish tests were done using the continuous power setting (850hp) which is also mentioned in the Brewster's specification report. Finnish tests agree with the specification. If one extrapolates using those numbers, they arrive to the speed AHII Brewster makes on the deck.

[dtango]

  Wmaker - I was just being playful about your CD precision of 0,02957.  Close enough to .03 for me!

Tango
412th FS Braunco Mustangs

[Wmaker]

Wmaker - I was just being playful about your CD precision of 0,02957.  Close enough to .03 for me!

LOL!!! I'll post you the spread sheet, you'll probabaly start questioning my sanity!

Here's the extrapolation, AHII Brewster is as fast on the deck and couple mph faster after that:



Here's the performance spces from the Specification:

[RTHolmes]

any chance you could add the AH brew to that chart for comparison?

[Wmaker]

any chance you could add the AH brew to that chart for comparison?

I replaced it. The curve is before the official charts came available. I hadn't tested them at higher alts at the time. I might sometime update the graph to include the higher alts aswell.

[gyrene81]

That looks to be pretty much on par for the U.S. specs I've found.

[RTHolmes]

I replaced it. The curve is before the official charts came available. I hadn't tested them at higher alts at the time. I might sometime update the graph to include the higher alts aswell.

not sure I understand, I just meant add this curve (no testing):

[Wmaker]

not sure I understand, I just meant add this curve (no testing):

I know, I'll do it...later. That's what I had ready.

The purple curve is basically that one, but only till 8k.

[RTHolmes]

ok ty

[gyrene81]

Sorry fellas, I'm trying to figure out how hlbly figures the wing loading on the Brewster is considered high.

F2A-1 = 24.1 lbs/ft
A6M2 M 21 = 22.0 lbs/ft
FW190-A8 = 49.4 lbs/ft
FW190-D9 = 48.7 lbs/ft
Bf109-G6 = 40.9 lbs/ft
Spit Vb = 24.56 lbs/ft

Correct me if I'm wrong here gurus, but high wing load does not mean less maneuverability any more than low wing load means more maneuverability. Comparing maneuverability characteristics between 190s, 109s and Spit my understanding has been that high load wings offer better maneuverability at higher speeds vs lower load wings and vice-versa.

With a wing load of 24.1 lbs/ft there isn't any wonder that Brewster can turn like it does.

[dtango]

Lower wing-loading usually means better instantaneous turn performance.  For sustained turns however it gets a lot more complicated and all bets are off.

Tango
412th FS Braunco Mustangs

[2bighorn]

Lift coefficient vary quite a lot among airfoils, so wing loading isn't really a figure you should judge turn performance by.

[gyrene81]

Wait, my understanding is that a high wing load has a faster instantaneous turn performance and poor sustained turn capability, whereas a lower wing loading has slower instantaneous turn performance and better sustained turn capability. Angle of attack, airfoil dimensions, drag and thrust affect the coefficient of lift in that the higher the angle of attack, the more drag is produced which requires more thrust to maintain lift.



Brain freeze...          I'm so confused.

[2bighorn]

Wait, my understanding is that a high wing load has a faster instantaneous turn performance and poor sustained turn capability, whereas a lower wing loading has slower instantaneous turn performance and better sustained turn capability. Angle of attack, airfoil dimensions, drag and thrust affect the coefficient of lift in that the higher the angle of attack, the more drag is produced which requires more thrust to maintain lift.



Brain freeze...          I'm so confused.

As dtango said, wing with more lift (lift depends on surface area, shape of the foil, speed, air density etc) is better for turning. But the more lift is generated, the more lift induced drag you get, which can be good for instantaneous turn, but bad for sustained turning.

That's really extremely simplified answer, so take it with a caution...