Replacement for the Brew

[Zimme83]

The fact that there isnt much documented about the Brewsters operational history isnt a surprise given the fact that it wasnt US or RAF pilots hwo scored the kills. 99% of all flight documentaries are produced in US and UK and are almost only about events that involves these two countries. there is a lot of remarcable flight history that never becomes documentaries because they wherent accieved by US or UK pilots. How many have for ex heard about the "Biafra babies"?

[FLOOB]

The fact that there isnt much documented about the Brewsters operational history isnt a surprise given the fact that it wasnt US or RAF pilots hwo scored the kills. 99% of all flight documentaries are produced in US and UK and are almost only about events that involves these two countries. there is a lot of remarcable flight history that never becomes documentaries because they wherent accieved by US or UK pilots. How many have for ex heard about the "Biafra babies"?

Wait.. Jello Biafra?

[Butcher]

Finnish flight test data has been posted to these forums by Finns.  It matched what we have in AH.

I have tested it.  What coalcat is claiming is flat out wrong based on his misjudging enemy E states and actions.  It literally cannot do what he is claiming it does in AH.

Reminds me of the Marine air wing at midway, on the after action report stated zeros were doing 450 mph or faster, climbed without end, could stop on a dime and out turn everything. The only funny thing to come out of it was they all mentioned "zeros lite up on the first hits".

[Zimme83]

Wait.. Jello Biafra?

This is a Biafra Baby, their opponent was MiG-17.

[Wmaker]

SaaB MFI-17, they had Tunnans there too so they weren't against the MiG-17s alone.

[Randy1]

Keep in mind the AH models are only as good as the inputs of the plane's characteristics that can be found. 

If the brew is as good as it is in AH why did the Navy dump them so fast after loosing so many?  If the brew is based on the Finland model, what did the Fin's takeout to reduce the weight from the Navy version?

[Skuzzy]

Keep in mind the AH models are only as good as the inputs of the plane's characteristics that can be found.  

If the brew is as good as it is in AH why did the Navy dump them so fast after loosing so many?  If the brew is based on the Finland model, what did the Fin's takeout to reduce the weight from the Navy version?

44 of the F2A-1's (were they 1's? or 3's?) were delivered to Finland and given the designation B-239.  The Navy removed the tail hook, life raft, catapult harness, and the telescopic sight.  The engine was replaced with a 905HP Wright R-1820-G5 radial.  Finland got the empty weight down to around 3900 pounds (correct me if I am in error Wmaker), from the original empty weight of approximately 4700 pounds (I think that is correct).

NOTE:  The F2A-1 only had a 950HP Wright Cyclone R-1820-34 engine.  The F2A-2 had a 1200HP Wright Cyclone R-1820-40 engine.

[SmokinLoon]

44 of the F2A-1's (were they 1's? or 3's?) were delivered to Finland and given the designation B-239.  The Navy removed the tail hook, life raft, catapult harness, and the telescopic sight.  The engine was replaced with a 905HP Wright R-1820-G5 radial.  Finland got the empty weight down to around 3900 pounds (correct me if I am in error Wmaker), from the original empty weight of approximately 4700 pounds (I think that is correct).

NOTE:  The F2A-1 only had a 950HP Wright Cyclone R-1820-34 engine.  The F2A-2 had a 1200HP Wright Cyclone R-1820-40 engine.

and THAT is the model of Brewster most of us here in AH attach the lackluster label to.  It would be very nice to have the heavier and less powerful F2A's to show the differences in the flight models. Shaving 800-1000 lbs off the wing load and increasing the power output by 25% on a plane that size is going to make a huge difference in certain flight attributes.

If the frame is already in AH, wouldn't modeling the flight be minimal if all that is needed to be done is model the weight and engine???  It isn't like starting from scratch.  I don't know just what goes in to modeling the flight attributes, but if the chassis is already here then why not?  Especially on a model as controversial as this??? Having the F2A for EW scenarios would be a very good thing because obviously the B239 isn't representative of the pig the Dutch, British, and USN flew in the PTO.  

[jimson]

and THAT is the model of Brewster most of us here in AH attach the lackluster label to.  It would be very nice to have the heavier and less powerful F2A's to show the differences in the flight models. Shaving 800-1000 lbs off the wing load and increasing the power output by 25% on a plane that size is going to make a huge difference in certain flight attributes.

If the frame is already in AH, wouldn't modeling the flight be minimal if all that is needed to be done is model the weight and engine???  It isn't like starting from scratch.  I don't know just what goes in to modeling the flight attributes, but if the chassis is already here then why not?  Especially on a model as controversial as this??? Having the F2A for EW scenarios would be a very good thing because obviously the B239 isn't representative of the pig the Dutch, British, and USN flew in the PTO.  

Exactamundo!!!  +1000

If we can have umpteen billion 109's, why not another version of the Brewster?

Please HTC, give us the dog Buffalo in addition to the Finn Brewster. No more whining about it being overmodeled and we can then run a proper Midway scenario.

[Saxman]

Having the F2A for EW scenarios would be a very good thing because obviously the B239 isn't representative of the pig the British, and USN flew in the PTO.  

Fixed.

To reiterate: The 339s used by the Dutch were NOT pigs. See the quote I posted earlier in the thread, but it just took halving the fuel and ammo load to get it to turn with the Ki-43.

[Aspen]

My guess is that its pretty accurate.  When it first came out I was always finding them on my 6 after a merge where I expected them to be too separated to be an immediate threat and I was paying attention to other cons.  After that happened a few times I just adjusted my expectations...all happy now.

[Vudu15]

You guys have missed one key fact........my Brewster.....its powered my magic and can do all the the tings stated in this post. I can take off 100% fuel and make it to 20K in 1 min. I then arm my single AIM 9 and take out whole groups of bombers. I also have emergency RATOs just in case I need to get out of a fight in a hurry. Im sorry coalcat I should have told you sooner. 

[Zimme83]

SaaB MFI-17, they had Tunnans there too so they weren't against the MiG-17s alone.

This is a little off topic
Its a MFI-9, the little brother to the -17. And no, they did not have J-29:s. SwAF used Tunnan in Congo (Katanga) early -60, Biafra is a part of Nigeria and the war was btw 67-70.

But to go back to topic: Air war isnt won by the one with best number in the fact sheet. Aircrafts are part of a system of system and all has to work out well in order to win. 
In the case of the Brewster so must it be the dream for the AH top ace wannabe. Be a top scorer in an F4U or something like that is one thing. But the day someone become the No 1 ace flying the Brewster i think he have earned the best pilot title. that would be an accivemenet.

[Triton28]

I've been fooled by Brewsters when trying to judge their E more than any other plane.  I don't know if it's modeled wrong or it just hides it's E fantastically well, but it does have a habit of making tight turns and staying with you in a zoom.  

[Wmaker]

This is a little off topic
Its a MFI-9, the little brother to the -17. And no, they did not have J-29:s. SwAF used Tunnan in Congo (Katanga) early -60, Biafra is a part of Nigeria and the war was btw 67-70.

Sorry, I stand corrected.

I should always remember to post when sober...hard to do when one's a drunk.