Replacement for the Brew

[Ack-Ack]

Brews are like mushrooms.  They grow in thick furbals where P-38s don't last long.

Still doesn't the change the fact of my reply. 

ack-ack

[muzik]

I've listed the documents that had the biggest amount of technical info regarding the plane and those docs were produced by Brewster Corp.

I haven't seen your documents so try not to make any assumptions as SOME people do.

Are you saying that the Brewster Corp produced flight test data on the B239? Before the Finns modified the a/c? Or after?

Finnish Air Force ran performance tests (speed and climb) which confirmed that figures given by Brewster Corp.

What figures? Correct me if I'm wrong, but the B239 was the result of modifications by the Finns and Brewster did not put out a version of this prior to the Finns purchase (or ever from my understanding.) So are you saying figures for the Buffalo matched the 239? Or they were extrapolated?

Also, flight testing was done for Finnish delegation in the United States (three seperate airframes) to confirm the performance of the aircraft before the purchase.

Three separate airframes? That doesn't sound like B239, and I'm guessing you would say so if one of them were a 239.

So here is a conclusion, everything you just said sounds like the data on the Brew is extrapolated from variants of the Buffalo and no extensive testing of a 239 was done. Which I have no problem with. I'm not sure if an accurate reproduction could be created that way, but then I haven't seen your data.

Mind posting the link to the posts?

It is pretty silly conclusion that anecdotal info could somehow be turned into a flight model...

I didn't state ANY conclusion. I especially didn't say that anecdotal info alone could be used. I related info that suggested a possibility.

I could care less if they used "anecdotal" info in their flight model as long as it is heavily balanced by some data. If enough pilots contradict data and say that an aircraft did poopdifrikkenloop in combat, then I say put it in there.

[Ack-Ack]

I haven't seen your documents so try not to make any assumptions as SOME people do.

Wmaker has been kind enough over the years to have posted all the data he's collected on the B-239.  Just take some time to do a search of the forums and you'll find what he's posted.

Are you saying that the Brewster Corp produced flight test data on the B239? Before the Finns modified the a/c? Or after?

Brewster didn't sell the B-239 to the Finns without flight testing it first.  Robert Winston conducted flight tests on the B-239 at the Brewster factory in Long Island, NY prior to the B-239s being shipped to the Finns.  Brewster also had the flight data from the F2A-1.

What figures? Correct me if I'm wrong, but the B239 was the result of modifications by the Finns and Brewster did not put out a version of this prior to the Finns purchase (or ever from my understanding.) So are you saying figures for the Buffalo matched the 239? Or they were extrapolated?

The B-239 is the export version of the F2A-1 Buffalo.  The USN at the time was replacing the F2A-1 Buffalo with the F2A-2, so the US agreed to sell Finland all of the USN's F2A-1s under the export name B-239.  It also had all the naval equipment removed, as well as the self-sealing fuel tanks and cockpit armor but the Finns added the armor back.

Three separate airframes? That doesn't sound like B239, and I'm guessing you would say so if one of them were a 239.

The Buffalo was produced in 3 regular production models and 5 export models.  

Regular Production Models
F2A-1
F2A-2
F2A-3

Export Models
B-239 (F2A-1)
B-339 (F2A-2)
B-339C (F2A-2)
B-339D (F2A-2)
B-339E (F2A-2)

So here is a conclusion, everything you just said sounds like the data on the Brew is extrapolated from variants of the Buffalo and no extensive testing of a 239 was done. Which I have no problem with. I'm not sure if an accurate reproduction could be created that way, but then I haven't seen your data.

Your conclusion is based on incorrect data and derived without doing any research into the Brewster Buffalo.

ack-ack

[muzik]

Your conclusion is based on incorrect data and derived without doing any research into the Brewster Buffalo.

My conclusion was based on HIS comments. And thanks for repeating what I already admitted to.

Brewster didn't sell the B-239 to the Finns without flight testing it first.  Robert Winston conducted flight tests on the B-239 at the Brewster factory in Long Island, NY prior to the B-239s being shipped to the Finns.  Brewster also had the flight data from the F2A-1.

That's interesting, the "legend" I always heard suggested that the Finns bought Buffalos and molded them into a competitive fighting machine, but it was actually a product of Brewster in almost every respect except maybe an engine upgrade.

Just take some time to do a search of the forums and you'll find what he's posted.

You see the thing is, I don't really care all that much.  I believe like some others believe, it doesn't feel right, it doesn't seem to abide by certain physics. And I trust my suspicions are confirmed when many others have the same suspicions.

And last but not least, I think it's perfect just the way it is. Don't ever change it.

[muzik]

We (HTC) NEVER use anecdotal information to model anything.  NEVER.  This type of rumor is absolutely baseless and without any merit.

This is the type of posting which gets people banned from our board.  It wastes our time and muddles any chance of having a decent discussion.  It is useless, baseless, derogatory speculation.

A.  I NEVER said you did!!!!!!!!! The word is "suggests." It's not an accusation nor was it a condemnation in any way, shape or form!!!!!!!! It's ridiculous that you're offended by something that you SHOULD be giving slight consideration to, however minor.

B. I NEVER said "I heard"... or indicated in any way it was a rumor. Are you turning it into one?

C. Of the three adjectives you chose, one of them was right.... speculation. And it was nothing but respectful. It was not derogatory nor was it intended to be. Baseless and useless are yet to be seen.

You want to ban me, or threaten to ban me for a post like that because why????

You feel embarrassed or insulted for something trivial?

That's at least the second time you've threatened to ban me for making completely benign comments. So go ahead, perma-ban me from ah while your at it.

In the future you'd be wise to not mistake someones participation on these boards as an indication that they can't live without your product or contributing to your salary.

[Ack-Ack]

That's interesting, the "legend" I always heard suggested that the Finns bought Buffalos and molded them into a competitive fighting machine, but it was actually a product of Brewster in almost every respect except maybe an engine upgrade.

When the Finnish embassy in Washington D.C. received the green light from the Finnish government to purchase fighters from the US, the only Finnish stipulation that the plane be promptly available and compatible with 87 octane fuel.  The Finns didn't choose a specific plane to order, the US presented the Buffalo as the plane meeting the requirements the Finns had stipulated and on what was available to sell to the Finns at the time.

You see the thing is, I don't really care all that much.  I believe like some others believe, it doesn't feel right, it doesn't seem to abide by certain physics. And I trust my suspicions are confirmed when many others have the same suspicions.

If you didn't care, why did you post in the first place questioning what Wmaker said?  If you had done any research, even a few minutes worth, you'd see that you are incorrect in your beliefs in the performance of the B-239 in real life and in game.  It was already proven one of the claims of the Brewster's "incorrect modeling" was just a myth and the B-239, in-game, couldn't do what the OP claimed it could do.

ack-ack

[Tinkles]

A.  I NEVER said you did!!!!!!!!! The word is "suggests." It's not an accusation nor was it a condemnation in any way, shape or form!!!!!!!! It's ridiculous that you're offended by something that you SHOULD be giving slight consideration to, however minor.

B. I NEVER said "I heard"... or indicated in any way it was a rumor. Are you turning it into one?

C. Of the three adjectives you chose, one of them was right.... speculation. And it was nothing but respectful. It was not derogatory nor was it intended to be. Baseless and useless are yet to be seen.

You want to ban me, or threaten to ban me for a post like that because why????

You feel embarrassed or insulted for something trivial?

That's at least the second time you've threatened to ban me for making completely benign comments. So go ahead, perma-ban me from ah while your at it.

In the future you'd be wise to not mistake someones participation on these boards as an indication that they can't live without your product or contributing to your salary.

So much irony.

[Skuzzy]

A.  I NEVER said you did!!!!!!!!! The word is "suggests." It's not an accusation nor was it a condemnation in any way, shape or form!!!!!!!! It's ridiculous that you're offended by something that you SHOULD be giving slight consideration to, however minor.

Who said I was offended?  I was stating as strongly as possible we NEVER model based on anecdotal remarks.

B. I NEVER said "I heard"... or indicated in any way it was a rumor. Are you turning it into one?

Drawing a conclusion from, what you consider facts, starts rumors, whether you like it or not.  That is exactly how rumors grow.

C. Of the three adjectives you chose, one of them was right.... speculation. And it was nothing but respectful. It was not derogatory nor was it intended to be. Baseless and useless are yet to be seen.

Your conclusion was based on incorrect information, making it both baseless and useless.

You want to ban me, or threaten to ban me for a post like that because why????

I did not say I want to ban you.  I did not threaten you.  I do not threaten.  I do not have to.  I simply stated a fact.


The bulk of people who think there is something wrong with the Brewster think it is an F2A-1, and not a B-239.  They are very different planes.  Until that is acknowledged and accepted, it is very difficult to have a discussion about the plane.

[muzik]

Who said I was offended?  I was stating as strongly as possible we NEVER model based on anecdotal remarks...

...I did not say I want to ban you.  I did not threaten you.  I do not threaten.  I do not have to.  I simply stated a fact.

When you drew your howitzer, you pretty much let the cat out of the bag.

Drawing a conclusion from, what you consider facts, starts rumors, whether you like it or not.  That is exactly how rumors grow.

Especially when you wig out after treating the data like it belongs to an F-22 instead of a forgettable, 75 year old, barelymissedbeingabi-plane .

Your conclusion was based on incorrect information, making it both baseless and useless.

Yea, moderate those things out of the boards why don't ya.

The bulk of people who think there is something wrong with the Brewster think it is an F2A-1.

I don't!

[Karnak]

The bulk of people who think there is something wrong with the Brewster think it is an F2A-1, and not a B-239.  They are very different planes.  Until that is acknowledged and accepted, it is very difficult to have a discussion about the plane.

I'd guess F2A-3 actually as that is what was used by the Marines at Midway and thus the most familiar to Americans.

[Saxman]

I'd guess F2A-3 actually as that is what was used by the Marines at Midway and thus the most familiar to Americans.

Yeah, it was the F2A-3 that was used at Midway. The B-339E was arguably even WORSE (IIRC, the British added even more weight). Boyington himself actually loved the F2A-1 and -2.

[Changeup]

Yeah, it was the F2A-3 that was used at Midway. The B-339E was arguably even WORSE (IIRC, the British added even more weight). Boyington himself actually loved the F2A-1 and -2.

That's because he knew the Corsair was almost done and wanted people to love something else, lol.

[Karnak]

Ok, an encounter I had with the Brewster came to me.  I was in a Mossie VI flying in towards tank town when I saw a Brewster attacking a lower fighter up ahead.  I continued to climb and was above him when I arrived, friendly was deceased.  While I knew he had been BnZing I thought I had good E on him so I hit WEP (didn't have as much alt as I'd have liked on him) and dove, he saw me and dodged, which is what I expected.  I am a fan of aggressive BnZ so I took it vertical with the intent of either roping him if he tried to follow me up or of just coming back down on him to hammer out more of his E.  Well, he came up after me but he wasn't stalling out, he cut my corner and closed to about 600 yards, not enough to get me, but too close for me to come down on him and I was starting to stall out.  Bah, misjudged his E.

I knew my Mossie out climbed him by about 500fpm so I converted to a wide spiral climb, but as slow as I was from the zoom I couldn't get my climb advantage out of the old girl (Mossies don't like low speeds) and I couldn't level out to gain speed without offering him a rather large target that he had now closed to within 400 yards of.  He blew some E to try for a guns solution and lost ground for it, but I could tell my spiral was not going to pull this out.  At this point we were probably at about 8,000ft, so I decided to disengage.  I dropped my port wing and put my nose down, below and ahead of me I saw a formation of enemy B-24s at perhaps 4,000ft, interestingly from the third country.  As I dove I looked back to see what the Brewster was doing and he was, as expected, gamely diving after me.  He'd held with me through the zoom climb and the spiral climb, so he could hold with me in a dive, right?  Well, my sleek airframe and 3250hp had other ideas.  It wasn't even a contest as I opened distance rapidly, almost as though he were standing still.  Looking ahead I altered my dive to an intercept on the B-24s and blew two of them away as I leveled off through their formation.  Looking back the Brewster was far, far behind and dropping away.  He turned and dove for ack or home shortly after that.

[BnZs]

This little anecdote is a good segue into a thought I was having on the matter. While any actual flight testing whatsoever will reveal there is nothing the Brew does that many other planes cannot do, the extent to which lightly wing-loaded but underpowered planes can hang on the prop and menace more powerful planes zooming in the vertical AFTER pulling G in evasive maneuvers has always been an eyebrow-raising aspect of this game. The SpitV or any Zero can do this much better than the Brew of course, but I guess people don't think of them as dogs like they do the Brew.

Ok, an encounter I had with the Brewster came to me.  I was in a Mossie VI flying in towards tank town when I saw a Brewster attacking a lower fighter up ahead.  I continued to climb and was above him when I arrived, friendly was deceased.  While I knew he had been BnZing I thought I had good E on him so I hit WEP (didn't have as much alt as I'd have liked on him) and dove, he saw me and dodged, which is what I expected.  I am a fan of aggressive BnZ so I took it vertical with the intent of either roping him if he tried to follow me up or of just coming back down on him to hammer out more of his E.  Well, he came up after me but he wasn't stalling out, he cut my corner and closed to about 600 yards, not enough to get me, but too close for me to come down on him and I was starting to stall out.  Bah, misjudged his E.

I knew my Mossie out climbed him by about 500fpm so I converted to a wide spiral climb, but as slow as I was from the zoom I couldn't get my climb advantage out of the old girl (Mossies don't like low speeds) and I couldn't level out to gain speed without offering him a rather large target that he had now closed to within 400 yards of.  He blew some E to try for a guns solution and lost ground for it, but I could tell my spiral was not going to pull this out.  At this point we were probably at about 8,000ft, so I decided to disengage.  I dropped my port wing and put my nose down, below and ahead of me I saw a formation of enemy B-24s at perhaps 4,000ft, interestingly from the third country.  As I dove I looked back to see what the Brewster was doing and he was, as expected, gamely diving after me.  He'd held with me through the zoom climb and the spiral climb, so he could hold with me in a dive, right?  Well, my sleek airframe and 3250hp had other ideas.  It wasn't even a contest as I opened distance rapidly, almost as though he were standing still.  Looking ahead I altered my dive to an intercept on the B-24s and blew two of them away as I leveled off through their formation.  Looking back the Brewster was far, far behind and dropping away.  He turned and dove for ack or home shortly after that.

[TheCrazyOrange]

This little anecdote is a good segue into a thought I was having on the matter. While any actual flight testing whatsoever will reveal there is nothing the Brew does that many other planes cannot do, the extent to which lightly wing-loaded but underpowered planes can hang on the prop and menace more powerful planes zooming in the vertical AFTER pulling G in evasive maneuvers has always been an eyebrow-raising aspect of this game. The SpitV or any Zero can do this much better than the Brew of course, but I guess people don't think of them as dogs like they do the Brew

I beat Redbull's K4 using the Ki-43. You just have to be smart about timing, and hoard E like your life depends on it.