Author Topic: more F4Fs  (Read 1897 times)

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23047
Re: more F4Fs
« Reply #45 on: August 18, 2012, 11:08:28 AM »

Thank you Karnak.  I stand corrected and now accordingly ask that if rocket rails were only available in the hangar for the F4F-4 if the 6 gun package was selected, wouldn't a weight adjustment for the lighter fixed wing provide the desired performance levels?

Well, the goals of the posters here are different.  People asking for the F4F-3 want it as it would be a more competitive F4F and would do better against A6Ms.  I am disagreeing with that as I think it would be used inappropriately to mitigate the turning disadvantage of the F4F vs the A6M.
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline Shifty

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9377
      • 307th FS
Re: more F4Fs
« Reply #46 on: August 18, 2012, 11:27:07 AM »
I found facts

Yes you did, you found...


The Brewster F2A Buffalo was an American fighter aircraft which saw limited service early in World War II. It was one of the first U.S. World War II monoplanes with an arrestor hook and other modifications for aircraft carriers.
Top speed: 321 mph (517 km/h)
Length: 26' 4" (8.03 m)
First flight: December 2, 1937
Last flight: 1948
Introduced: April 1939
Manufacturer: Brewster Aeronautical Corporation

You failed to find information to back this statement up though.

the F2A Buffalo  did see some carrier service

You seem to jump off in a lot of threads half cocked and under informed.

JG-11"Black Hearts"...nur die Stolzen, nur die Starken

"Haji may have blown my legs off but I'm still a stud"~ SPC Thomas Vandeventer Delta1/5 1st CAV

Offline Tracerfi

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1936
Re: more F4Fs
« Reply #47 on: August 18, 2012, 11:33:51 AM »
It was one of the first U.S. World War II monoplanes with an arrestor hook and other modifications for aircraft carriers.


there
You cannot beat savages by becoming one.

He who must not be named

Offline surfinn

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 733
Re: more F4Fs
« Reply #48 on: August 18, 2012, 11:41:52 AM »
Well, the goals of the posters here are different.  People asking for the F4F-3 want it as it would be a more competitive F4F and would do better against A6Ms.  I am disagreeing with that as I think it would be used inappropriately to mitigate the turning disadvantage of the F4F vs the A6M.

I want it for its use in just about all the scenarios we do here as well as fso. I don't see it being a big advantage over the zero any more than the FM2 is now. Like the F4F and FM2 if you don't keep your speed up against a zero your dead meat to any experienced zero pilot. I also don't see it being used in the MA that often either.
Id also like to see it here if for no other reason than it was the first US produced ac to claim a air to air victory in 1940 as a martlet MK 1

Offline Shifty

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9377
      • 307th FS
Re: more F4Fs
« Reply #49 on: August 18, 2012, 11:43:45 AM »
there

So when did the F2A operate from CVs in WWII again?
When the B-239 ever operate from US Carriers period?
« Last Edit: August 18, 2012, 11:45:24 AM by Shifty »

JG-11"Black Hearts"...nur die Stolzen, nur die Starken

"Haji may have blown my legs off but I'm still a stud"~ SPC Thomas Vandeventer Delta1/5 1st CAV

Offline surfinn

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 733
Re: more F4Fs
« Reply #50 on: August 18, 2012, 11:45:31 AM »
Shifty if you will look at the article I posted in Post number 36 it has a lot of info on the F2a and its competitor the F4f-3

Offline Shifty

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9377
      • 307th FS
Re: more F4Fs
« Reply #51 on: August 18, 2012, 11:49:58 AM »
In 1940, deliveries began of 43 F2A-2 fighters, which had the 1200 horsepower Wright "Cyclone" engine in place of the F2A-1's 950 horsepower version, plus numerous other improvements. Eight F2A-1s were also rebuilt to F2A-2 standards. Initially serving with VF-3 and USS Lexington's VF-2, this model was a fast, nimble and well-armed fighting plane, though plagued (as were subsequent F2As) with an overly-delicate retractable landing gear and a maintenance-hungry powerplant.

The Navy ordered a final 108 Brewster fighters in January 1941. These F2A-3s featured a longer fuselage, increased fuel and ammunition capacity, additional armor and considerably greater weight. Range was better, but speed, maneuverability, climb rate and service ceiling were substantially degraded. By the beginning of the Pacific War, the F2A, by then also known by the popular name "Buffalo", was passing out of carrier squadron service in favor of the F4F-3. The "Buffalos" were transferred to the Marines, who assigned them to units defending Pacific island bases.

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

JG-11"Black Hearts"...nur die Stolzen, nur die Starken

"Haji may have blown my legs off but I'm still a stud"~ SPC Thomas Vandeventer Delta1/5 1st CAV

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23047
Re: more F4Fs
« Reply #52 on: August 18, 2012, 12:29:10 PM »
I want it for its use in just about all the scenarios we do here as well as fso. I don't see it being a big advantage over the zero any more than the FM2 is now. Like the F4F and FM2 if you don't keep your speed up against a zero your dead meat to any experienced zero pilot. I also don't see it being used in the MA that often either.
Id also like to see it here if for no other reason than it was the first US produced ac to claim a air to air victory in 1940 as a martlet MK 1
You're focusing on one versus one too much.  Sure, one on one the A6M2 demolishes any F4F, but in practice the F4F is so tough that the A6M2 has a very hard time dispatching it before another F4F saddles up on it and flames it.  The F4F-3, about which you say "I want it for its use in just about all the scenarios we do here as well as fso.", would narrow the performance difference between the F4F and A6M reducing the time it takes the F4F to saddle up on the A6M on your buddy.
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline surfinn

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 733
Re: more F4Fs
« Reply #53 on: August 18, 2012, 12:43:35 PM »
Well I've noticed how bad the f4fs in the wrong hands get pounded by zeros and KIs in the FSO anyway. I'm sure you wouldn't mind the challenge of having a lighter weight lighter armoured version of the f4f-4. Note the F4f-3 doses not have self sealing gas tanks and has lighter armour. I might also point out how the article mentioned this ac and it variants as being used in every major ambhibious assalt in the Euro theater. So I'm not thinking in terms of its use as solely in the pacific theater.

Oh to krusty I stand corrected sir I based original post on a article about all the variants of the martlet and jumped to a conclusion, I shouldn't have. I stand corrected.