Replacement for the Brew

[Coalcat1]

 I have never understood why we have the Finnish brew in the first place. I know in reality there is no way it can climb like it does in game, turn like a KI43, roll like a 190, keep in control at 600+mph, do a 180 and hold all of its E, and take damage like a jug. Therefore my wish is that it is replaced with an accurately modeled, like most AC in game, F2A. But at this point, I wouldn't mind if the B239 was nerfed to the point of being able to accurately represent the F2A, because they are pretty much the same AC.

                                                                Coalcat1

       P.S there was no particular reson I'm posting this, just been seeing a lot of brews in the MA doing things that are very unrealistic allowed only by our F22 superbrew.

[Debrody]

Brewsterophobia?
They dont kill you unless you really wanna be killed. End of the story.

[Lusche]

I have never understood why we have the Finnish brew in the first place. I know in reality there is no way it can climb like it does in game, turn like a KI43, roll like a 190, keep in control at 600+mph, do a 180 and hold all of its E, and take damage like a jug.

Could you please either stop posting these nonsensical claims about the Brewster, or put up with some actual data showing that it is indeed overmodeled the way it is. Not at least to determine what "accurately modeled" really means. How about a film of you doing a 180 in a brewster and holding all your E?

[Saxman]

I know in reality there is no way...

Hear that, everyone? Coalcat knows. Who needs specific documentation indicating what's wrong with the flight model. Coalcat KNOWS.

I have never understood why we have the Finnish brew in the first place.

Probably because it was the only model that was actually significant to the war. The F2A-3 and British B-339s were underpowered and overweight, and were also overwhelmed by sheer numbers. The Dutch 339s were actually much closer in performance to the 239, but had little impact because they were overwhelmed by sheer numbers.

....turn like a KI43...

At least if you want to believe Wikipedia: "After the first few engagements, the Dutch halved the fuel and ammo load in the wing, which allowed their Buffaloes (and their Hurricanes) to stay with the Oscars in turns." Considering the B-239 was even lighter than the Dutch 339s...

[SmokinLoon]

Though I do think the Brewster we have in AH is not representative of what most of us think we have based on early war experience, I'll hesitate to say that the B239 in is that far out of line in terms of the flight model.  If AH could add in an early war variant, ya know the heavier and less powerful version, then maybe the more truer colors of what we read about will be shown in practice in AH.  But then again, which aircraft actually lives up to its label be it cursed or blessed in AH as it was in the real deal?  Few, if any.

It is difficult for many to accept what it can do in AH thanks to the press/testimony it gets from the experience it had early in WWII against the Japanese.  The Brewsters were handed their back sides by more experienced Japanese pilots, equal/superior aircraft, and better logistics and tactics.  As we all know, the Finn's used them splendidly against the Red Horde though most of us know it was due to superior Finnish tactics vs an over confident and lazy Soviet air force than it was to the prowess of the B239.   

[Skuzzy]

I have never understood why we have the Finnish brew in the first place. I know in reality there is no way it can climb like it does in game, turn like a KI43, roll like a 190, keep in control at 600+mph, do a 180 and hold all of its E, and take damage like a jug. Therefore my wish is that it is replaced with an accurately modeled, like most AC in game, F2A. But at this point, I wouldn't mind if the B239 was nerfed to the point of being able to accurately represent the F2A, because they are pretty much the same AC.

                                                               Coalcat1

       P.S there was no particular reson I'm posting this, just been seeing a lot of brews in the MA doing things that are very unrealistic allowed only by our F22 superbrew.

Feel free to produce documentation showing we have incorrectly modeled the Brewster.  

Here is a pretty decent thread which contains some of the differences between the F2A and the B239.

[LilMak]

I don't compare the Finnish Brew to the F2A. I compare it to what is in the MA and how it performs relative to those aircraft. I feel the plane should and does turn sharp enough to hit itself in the butt. Where I always find myself scratching my head is its apparent ability to make those turns with little to no loss in energy. It pulls off turns that make a Spit16 pilot jealous. The HP to Weight ratio doesn't bear out how quickly it seems to accelerate after making those hard turns. Since we are all (I hope) in the same virtual enviornment, this leads me to believe something is wrong with the drag model of the aircraft. I haven't done any wind tunnel testing but, looking at the plane, I wouldn't think it is what you would call a "slick" bird. I feel the plane accerates very similar to a spit which has a MUCH better HP/weight ratio when it should accelerate much like a FM2.

I did a little digging and found some HP numbers off the Internet (I know) so pleas correct if I got them wrong. Then I went to the hangar and loaded the planes with 25-30 minutes of fuel (MA 2.0 burn) and came up with the following "combat" weights to try to keep things even. Now I know this doesn't take all kinds of other factors into account (drag, wing loading, prop efficiency and so on) but it's a good indicator of what a plane should be able to do. There's no replacement for sheer power.

Brew-950hp.    5401lbs.      5.68lbs per HP
FM2-1350hp.   7286lbs       5.39lbs per HP
Spitfire 16-2200hp  8574lbs  3.89lbs per HP

Based on my MA experience while flying various Jugs for probably close to a decade, I find it as difficult to pull away from a manuvering Brew as I do a Spit16. While pulling away from a manuvering FM2 seems to be no problem.

What does this prove? Nothing really. But it hasn't helped me stop scratching my head or cursing to myself when a Brew does a 90-180 degree turn and stays latched to my 6 for ten plus seconds before I can start to pull away.
There's something "fishy" about the Brew and there is a large part of the community that thinks so.

[Karnak]

I don't compare the Finnish Brew to the F2A. I compare it to what is in the MA and how it performs relative to those aircraft. I feel the plane should and does turn sharp enough to hit itself in the butt. Where I always find myself scratching my head is its apparent ability to make those turns with little to no loss in energy. It pulls off turns that make a Spit16 pilot jealous. The HP to Weight ratio doesn't bear out how quickly it seems to accelerate after making those hard turns. Since we are all (I hope) in the same virtual enviornment, this leads me to believe something is wrong with the drag model of the aircraft. I haven't done any wind tunnel testing but, looking at the plane, I wouldn't think it is what you would call a "slick" bird. I feel the plane accerates very similar to a spit which has a MUCH better HP/weight ratio when it should accelerate much like a FM2.

I did a little digging and found some HP numbers off the Internet (I know) so pleas correct if I got them wrong. Then I went to the hangar and loaded the planes with 25-30 minutes of fuel (MA 2.0 burn) and came up with the following "combat" weights to try to keep things even. Now I know this doesn't take all kinds of other factors into account (drag, wing loading, prop efficiency and so on) but it's a good indicator of what a plane should be able to do. There's no replacement for sheer power.

Brew-950hp.    5401lbs.      5.68lbs per HP
FM2-1350hp.   7286lbs       5.39lbs per HP
Spitfire 16-2200hp  8574lbs  3.89lbs per HP

Based on my MA experience while flying various Jugs for probably close to a decade, I find it as difficult to pull away from a manuvering Brew as I do a Spit16. While pulling away from a manuvering FM2 seems to be no problem.

What does this prove? Nothing really. But it hasn't helped me stop scratching my head or cursing to myself when a Brew does a 90-180 degree turn and stays latched to my 6 for ten plus seconds before I can start to pull away.
There's something "fishy" about the Brew and there is a large part of the community that thinks so.

None of this conjecture is true.  In one of these whine threads I get fed up enough to run tests and allowed the whiner to pick the other plane.  I tested it against the Fw190D-9.  The B239 did literally nothing special.  It bled E like a stuck pig compared to the Fw190D-9, power on or power off.  It has no magical climb abilities, it is slow as crap.  It does have some strengths of course, but the whines about it are completely unhinged.  It is no more of a threat than the FM2 ot A6M3.

[FLOOB]

Guys im pretty sure this thread is a troll. I just wanted to say that i read something the other day saying that the most kills credited to one airframe durring WWII was 40 something and it was a b-239. Go finnish ground crews!

The f2a3 brewster would perform dramaticaly worse than the b239 in AH. My figures are rough but the f2a3 brewster weighed about 25% more than the b239, and it had about 100hp less than the b239. 25% weight difference on the same airframe type is HUGE when it comes to perfomance. Just look at the performance gap between the spitV and the seafire in AH. The spitV has the 14th smallest sustained turn radius in game. The Seafire? 37th. And im pretty sure the weight difference between those two spits is nowhere near 25%.

[FLOOB]

I just checked something. On the ingame e6b the b239 25% fuel weighs 4900 lbs, the f4f 25% fuel weighs 7300 lbs 

[LilMak]

It is no more of a threat than the FM2 ot A6M3.

I believe it is a much bigger threat than either and I'm sure I'm not in a minority. You have your opinion. I have mine.

[Skuzzy]

In the history of all the Brewster threads, no one has ever been able to produce any documentation suggesting the plane is not modeled correctly in Aces High.

[alpini13]

See Rule #4

[FLOOB]

Just did a quick test to see if the b239 really accellerates like a spit16. On the deck 25% fuel not using wep.
Spit16 150 to 225mph indicated = 16.3 seconds
B239 150 to 225mph indicated = 21.3 seconds
For obvious reasons the F22 was not included in the test.

Five second difference and that was only to 225mph.
And that's not opinion.

[FLOOB]

Here's what I was talking about. Found it on the wikipedia.

After evaluation of claims against actual Soviet losses, aircraft BW-364 was found to have been used to achieve 42½ kills in total by all pilots operating it, possibly making it the highest-scoring fighter airframe in the history of air warfare