The Brewster

[Wmaker]

Speaking of which, here it is again being used at Midway:

http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,329323.msg4315782.html#msg4315782

I don't like the use of substitutions in general either but when you accuse others of bias and then conviniently forget the fact that A6M5b is also "too good" for Midway setup it kind of reveals your own bias/agenda.

[Karnak]

I don't like the use of substitutions in general either but when you accuse others of bias and then conviniently forget the fact that A6M5b is also "too good" for Midway setup it kind of reveals your own bias/agenda.

No, the A6M5b shouldn't be there at all, nor the A6M3  Or the P-39 or P-40.  Not sure why they enabled those.

[Wmaker]

No, the A6M5b shouldn't be there at all, nor the A6M3  Or the P-39 or P-40.  Not sure why they enabled those.

Yep, but since they are, I don't see a point in raising issue over Brewster alone.

[BaDkaRmA158Th]

I agree more version's should be represented. It would give everyone a much better understanding of this A/C.

Think about it this way too, another early war carrier fighter. 

Also consider the skill many pilots have in this game, i can imagine 450-500mph planes diving on zeeke's and betty's booming then zooming away.
 



How history treats some a/c is unfair, i know for a fact some people in this game have the ability and skill to make almost any airframe dance in ways no one could imagine. Its the pilot, not the brick.

[Babalonian]

I hate to admit this, but the best way to settle this issue... if it indeed requires the hatchet... is to just add the dog that's the F2A-3, the hanger queen it will  ultimatley end up being and all...  but, at least it will most likely be a carrier enabled Brewster, so it has a chance of shedding the dust once in a while in the MAs.

[icepac]

I'm curious what was removed that lost the plane almost 20% of it's weight as well as how the engine made more horsepower on finnish 87 octane than it did with US high octane goodness.

[Butcher]

I'm curious what was removed that lost the plane almost 20% of it's weight as well as how the engine made more horsepower on finnish 87 octane than it did with US high octane goodness.

This is what I don't understand, in the ETO the P-38 had a horrible problem flying with british 87 octane, one of the reasons the Japanese fighters in the Pacific never had any speed was due to this low octane as well.
Planes like the Ki-84 were tested after the war and reached well over 400 mph.

[Ack-Ack]

Good unbiased info on the Brewster with the various countries.

Annals of the Brewster Buffalo


ack-ack

[Stoney]

This is what I don't understand, in the ETO the P-38 had a horrible problem flying with british 87 octane, one of the reasons the Japanese fighters in the Pacific never had any speed was due to this low octane as well.
Planes like the Ki-84 were tested after the war and reached well over 400 mph.

It wasn't just the octane of the fuel that plagued the P-38.  Hell, the pilots were freezing their butts off in the cockpit for one.  But I digress.  The Brewster shouldn't suffer much of a penalty running low octane fuel, since the engine was designed to use it.

[Wmaker]

I'm curious what was removed that lost the plane almost 20% of it's weight

This has already been explained to you earlier in your own thread here by dtango and I've mentioned in several threads about the Brewster aswell: http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,316744.15.html .

It's not that the finns reduced the weight, it's the US added a bunch of weight instead.  According to Dean's AHT, empty weight of the B239 was only 3744 lbs.  By contrast the F2A-3 empty weight was 4765 lbs.  Where did all that come from?  +280 lbs on the airframe, +547 lbs for a new version of the Wright Cyclone 1820 engine, +215 lbs for fixed equipment.  The wing weight went up 172 lbs with no change in area.  That's just empty weight.  

Add the additional fuel and ammo etc etc. and voila you get 5276 lbs vs. 6906 lbs.  Looking at the math, that's actually 23% lighter than the F2A-3.

F2A-3 came after B239, not the other way around.

as well as how the engine made more horsepower on finnish 87 octane than it did with US high octane goodness.

As Stoney said, the engine was specified to use it and could develop that 1000hp using 87 octane fuel. Even 80 octane fuel was accepted provided that you used lower power setting. Also, the German fuel that Finns used had a differed in the way the octane value was measured. One can't directly compare American values to German figures.

Spec chart for the R-1820G-5: http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgMakeModel.nsf/0/9d8387f8163ad7d98525670e0065ae06/$FILE/ATTZCGXO/TC154.pdf

[Reaper90]

As Stoney said, the engine was specified to use it and could develop that 1000hp using 87 octane fuel. Even 80 octane fuel was accepted provided that you used lower power setting. Also, the German fuel that Finns used had a differed in the way the octane value was measured. One can't directly compare American values to German figures.

Spec chart for the R-1820G-5: http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgMakeModel.nsf/0/9d8387f8163ad7d98525670e0065ae06/$FILE/ATTZCGXO/TC154.pdf

It's also worth noting that the American F2A's operated in the hot, humid south Pacific.... the Finn's B239's enjoyed cold dense air, which anyone who likes horsepower will tell you cold dense air is always better than hot, humid air.

[icepac]

This has already been explained to you earlier in your own thread here by dtango and I've mentioned in several threads about the Brewster aswell: http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,316744.15.html .

F2A-3 came after B239, not the other way around.


As Stoney said, the engine was specified to use it and could develop that 1000hp using 87 octane fuel. Even 80 octane fuel was accepted provided that you used lower power setting. Also, the German fuel that Finns used had a differed in the way the octane value was measured. One can't directly compare American values to German figures.

Spec chart for the R-1820G-5: http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgMakeModel.nsf/0/9d8387f8163ad7d98525670e0065ae06/$FILE/ATTZCGXO/TC154.pdf

Is there any weight information on the guns they fitted?

[MAINER]

I would'nt mind having the F2A-3. I Dont think it saw much service though. It may be good for scenarios.

[Wmaker]

Is there any weight information on the guns they fitted?

Yes there is, I'm sure that the weights for the Browning .50cal and .30 cal machine guns are rather easy to find: www.google.com

[icepac]

Are the weights of the 30s vs the 50s accounted for in the weight differences between finnish and the US version?