Replacement for the Brew

[Karnak]

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.

Yeah, but the stats support me.  Your opinion may be your opinion, but it is also factually wrong.

Tour 172, LWA:
A6M3: Kills: 535 Deaths: 834 K/D: 0.64
B239: Kills: 988 Deaths: 1471 K/D: 0.67
FM2: Kills: 1479 Deaths: 1509    K/D: 0.98

[Skuzzy]

LilMak, one only need to look at the comparison performance charts to see it is not possible for the Brewster to accelerate like a Spit 16.  Those charts are generated from the flight model engine of the game and are absolutely representative for those models in the game.  No opinions needed.

http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/scores/planeperf.php?gtype=0&pw=2&p1=101&p2=86&submitButtonName=Generate+Chart

[BnZs]

Not saying that Lilmak is right. Far from it. BUT...this is comparison of top speed, NOT acceleration of any kind, thus it doesn't have much bearing. One could use the same kind of chart to claim that the Spitfire XVI has no acceleration advantage over the P-51D, when in fact it out accelerates the heck out of the Mustang on the low end.

LilMak, one only need to look at the comparison performance charts to see it is not possible for the Brewster to accelerate like a Spit 16.  Those charts are generated from the flight model engine of the game and are absolutely representative for those models in the game.  No opinions needed.

http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/scores/planeperf.php?gtype=0&pw=2&p1=101&p2=86&submitButtonName=Generate+Chart

[Lusche]

Not saying that Lilmak is right. Far from it. BUT...this is comparison of top speed, NOT acceleration of any kind, thus it doesn't have much bearing.

You have to click on "climb rate". Climb rate is a result of excess power, as is level acceleration... 

[lunatic1]

          keep in control at 600+mph                              the only way i've ever gotten a brewster to get even close 600mph was to dive straight down,don't remember what the speed was when the wings ripped off.

[Randy1]

I am with LilMak on this one.  There must be an error in the drag.  I don't think the error is definable by anyone testing it in the game.  It could be the error comes in at speed since drag is proportional to the square of the velocity.

I don't think any of us have the parasitic drag coefficient in our back pocket and i don't think HTC does either for these early war planes.

These things did not have self-sealing gas tanks either.

[FLOOB]

I am with LilMak on this one.  There must be an error in the drag.  I don't think the error is definable by anyone testing it in the game.  It could be the error comes in at speed since drag is proportional to the square of the velocity.

I don't think any of us have the parasitic drag coefficient in our back pocket and i don't think HTC does either for these early war planes.

These things did not have self-sealing gas tanks either.

Well thats pretty vague so Im going to assume that you agree with him when he says that the b239 accelerates like a spit. I find it difficult to understand why you agree with that when the test results I posted in this thread show that the b239 accelerates much worse than a spit16.

[Lusche]

 I don't think the error is definable by anyone testing it in the game.  It could be the error comes in at speed since drag is proportional to the square of the velocity.

That would be quite testable. Just conduct high speed deceleration and e-retention tests.

[Randy1]

That would be quite testable. Just conduct high speed deceleration and e-retention tests.

And compare them against what?

[R 105]

 Just a question to others who may know more about Finland's roll in the air war in WWII. Why was Finland replacing the Brewster with the G model 109s as fast as they could. Was it a manufacturing problem in producing enough Brewsters or was it because the 109Gs was superior planes? 

[LilMak]

Yeah, but the stats support me.  Your opinion may be your opinion, but it is also factually wrong.

Tour 172, LWA:
A6M3: Kills: 535 Deaths: 834 K/D: 0.64
B239: Kills: 988 Deaths: 1471 K/D: 0.67
FM2: Kills: 1479 Deaths: 1509    K/D: 0.98

Those numbers are about as comprehensive as using my thrust to weight calculations for the entire flight model.

[Skuzzy]

Two things.

1)  No one has ever presented any data to show the modeling is incorrect.  Quite the opposite, actually.
2)  I see a lot of wild claims, but have not seen any films to bolster said claims.

No point in anyone getting all worked up about this.  It is all in the numbers.  Just show some valid data.

[Randy1]

Two things.

1)  No one has ever presented any data to show the modeling is incorrect.  Quite the opposite, actually.
2)  I see a lot of wild claims, but have not seen any films to bolster said claims.

No point in anyone getting all worked up about this.  It is all in the numbers.  Just show some valid data.

And the Wiki says:

Fighting against the Brewster B-239

. . .  If he is on your 6, all you have to do is fly away from him.

[FLOOB]

Just a question to others who may know more about Finland's roll in the air war in WWII. Why was Finland replacing the Brewster with the G model 109s as fast as they could. Was it a manufacturing problem in producing enough Brewsters or was it because the 109Gs was superior planes? 

Yes the 109g is a superior fighter. The brewsters were only replaced when they wore out. They started the war with only 44 of them, by the end of the war there were only half a dozen of them still servicable, but the were in service until the end of the war. I don't think Finland manufactured any fighter airplanes, I think they were all imported. So they couldn't have replaced their brewsters with brewsters if they wanted to.

[FLS]

 I don't think the error is definable by anyone testing it in the game.

So how did you notice it?