Best Pacific Fighter II

snafud1 · Jun 18, 2009

I knew the Dutch did ok with them but the Brits got mauled to where I question the kill ratio. At best I think it would be considered 1:1. And you count count the Finns because they were not PTO. If you did count the Finns look at what they were up against at first. I-15's and I-16's for the most part.

vikingBerserker · Jun 18, 2009

The Brits or more specifically the Commonwealth did well against the Japanese Army's Nates and Oscars and 3 Commonwealth pilots became aces flying them during the Malayan campaign.

On Dec 21st, 1941 the 67th Sqd shot down 6 aircraft and another 3 probables with no loss.
Dec 25th they shot down another 8 but losing 5.
Jan 23rd, shot down 1 fighter no loss
Jan 24th, shot down a flight of 4 bombers, no loss
At the end of the campaign most of the Buffalo losses were actually from being bombed on the ground.

It really was not until the US went against the IJN's Zero that things went badly for the Buffalo.

snafud1 · Jun 18, 2009

OK, I see now. And I knew alot of a/c were bombed not shot down.

Marcel · Jun 19, 2009

snafud1 said:
Where did you get your info. This is the first time I heard that since all that was ever told about Buffalo sqdrns being wiped out. I don't think their kill ratio would be that good. UNLESS , you're counting the Finnish pilots that used the Buffalo.

Of course I count the FAF with this as they were flying the Buffalo. It shows that in capable hands the Buffalo was better than can be concluded from the results in the PTO (I know some-one will claim now that the VVS were the worst AF in the world ) .
The Dutch pilots did not do so well. 72 a/c was way to few for the big area in NEI. They also didn't have early warning etc. The pilots were mostly inexperienced, just like their British collogues on the Buffalo. The same counts for the marines at Midway. Bad tactics, late warnings (means you won't have an altitude advantage) and inexperience meant that the Japanese would walk right over them. The B339's in the NEI did achieve a ratio of somewhere near 2:1.. The British had more problems with their buffalo as they had weaker engines (Dutch D version had 1200 hp compared to 1100 in the British E versions) and were much heavier with equipment. The Dutch considered the B339D as a decent aircraft and even preferred them over their 12 Hurricane MKIIB aircraft.

My claim is still that the bad reputation of the Buffalo is caused by propaganda and politics:
1. the allies could not admit that their pilots were inferior to the Japanese, so blame equipment (Buffalo as sheepgoat)
2. The US wanted to get rid of the very bad Brewster factory with their slow output and bad management.

With the last point you can say that it was fortunate that the USN choose the Wildcat. But I think just comparing the technically, there was not much to choose between the 2. The first point was just propaganda.

Having said this, I will never claim that the Buffalo was the best a/c in the PTO. It was just as bad, or as good, as all other allied types at the start of the PTO.

renrich · Jun 19, 2009

Compare the Buffalo and Wildcat at Midway with comparable pilots. No doubt the manufacturer was a problem. A dud airplane built by a dud manufacurer. Brewster could not get Corsairs built either. Marcel, if you can get your hands on "The First Team" John Lundstrom, please do. It is probably the best book about USN fighter pilots in 41-42 in the PTO. I believe if you read it you will gain a different perspective.

syscom3 · Jun 19, 2009

Marcel, while the Buffalo was struggling, the F4F and P40 were holding their own.

The F4F and P40 both flew combat missions well into 1944. The Buffalo was never used again after the Midway debacle.

Most Buffalo kills were against bombers. They simply couldnt hold up against fighters. Maybe the Finns had success with them, but no one else did.

Vassili Zaitzev · Jun 19, 2009

If the marines at Midway had F2A-2's instead of -3's, would that have made a difference?

syscom3 · Jun 19, 2009

Vassili Zaitzev said:
If the marines at Midway had F2A-2's instead of -3's, would that have made a difference?

Maybe add a minute to their lives.

They were all dead meat the moment they took off.

syscom3 · Jun 19, 2009

I created a poll for the fighters that existed in 1942, which gives some good info on the various types flying in that year.

http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/aviation/best-fighter-pacific-cbi-theaters-1942-a-17960-10.html

Vincenzo · Jun 19, 2009

syscom3 said:
Marcel, while the Buffalo was struggling, the F4F and P40 were holding their own.

The F4F and P40 both flew combat missions well into 1944. The Buffalo was never used again after the Midway debacle.

Most Buffalo kills were against bombers. They simply couldnt hold up against fighters. Maybe the Finns had success with them, but no one else did.

for US forces yes, but finnish used it also in late '44

syscom3 · Jun 19, 2009

Vincenzo said:
for US forces yes, but finnish used it also in late '44

Out of necessity, not because they wanted too.

Vincenzo · Jun 19, 2009

same can be told for f4f and p-40 in US air forces

Marcel · Jun 19, 2009

renrich said:
Compare the Buffalo and Wildcat at Midway with comparable pilots. No doubt the manufacturer was a problem. A dud airplane built by a dud manufacurer. Brewster could not get Corsairs built either. Marcel, if you can get your hands on "The First Team" John Lundstrom, please do. It is probably the best book about USN fighter pilots in 41-42 in the PTO. I believe if you read it you will gain a different perspective.

I fully agree on the manufacturer. About the Buffalo I don't fully agree, as I still think the Buffalo didn't do very well because of the pilots at the Midway squadron and the massive opposition they encoutered. The Wildcats flying there from Midway didn't do very well, either.
I myself own a few volumes about the Dutch Buffalo's and still believe the Buffalo could have done at least as good as the Wildcat when properly flown. I also read a comment from a USN pilot (don't remember his name) saying he preferred the F2A-2 over the F4F any time (although not the F2A-3).

But I will try to get the book you suggest before arguing any further, thanks for the suggested read Sys!

Marcel · Jun 19, 2009

syscom3 said:
Maybe add a minute to their lives.

They were all dead meat the moment they took off.

But that was more because of there tactical situation than because of the a/c as I believe.

syscom3 · Jun 19, 2009

Vincenzo said:
same can be told for f4f and p-40 in US air forces

Incorrect.

Both proved themselves to be good aircraft in 1942 and 1943 untill replaced by newer types.

Vincenzo · Jun 19, 2009

syscom3 said:
Incorrect.

Both proved themselves to be good aircraft in 1942 and 1943 untill replaced by newer types.

we were not talking of '44?, howewhere both outdated for late '43

syscom3 · Jun 19, 2009

Vincenzo said:
we were not talking of '44?, howewhere both outdated for late '43

The point is the Buffalo was useless in 1942. The P40 and F4F were not.

The Buffalo was removed from service in 1942 because it was a death trap.

The P40 and F4F were good enough to fly well into 1944 and still go on combat missions.

Doughboy · Jun 19, 2009

syscom3 said:
The point is the Buffalo was useless in 1942. The P40 and F4F were not.

The Buffalo was removed from service in 1942 because it was a death trap.

The P40 and F4F were good enough to fly well into 1944 and still go on combat missions.

I totally agree with you...

Vincenzo · Jun 19, 2009

syscom3 said:
The point is the Buffalo was useless in 1942. The P40 and F4F were not.

The Buffalo was removed from service in 1942 because it was a death trap.

The P40 and F4F were good enough to fly well into 1944 and still go on combat missions.

Buffalo was not useless in '42 they shoot down enemy planes until october '44, and obv. was not a death trap.

They flying combat mission well into in '44 for same reason that finnish buffalo not just replacement, the CVE have trouble with larger fighter, P-40 was replaced whit P-47 or 51 when this available

Doughboy · Jun 19, 2009

This seems to imply that the Buffalo was a death trap....

"The Brewster F2A (company Model 139) was an American fighter aircraft which saw limited service during World War II. In 1939, the F2A became the first monoplane fighter aircraft used by the US Navy. In December 1941, it suffered severe losses with both British Commonwealth and Dutch air forces in South East Asia while facing the Japanese Navy's A6M Zero and the Japanese Army's Nakajima Ki-43 "Oscar". It also saw action with United States Marine Corps (USMC) squadrons at the Battle of Midway. Frustrated with the Buffalo's poor maneuverability and speed compared to the Zero, the F2A was derided by USMC pilots as a "flying coffin"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brewster_Buffalo

Best Pacific Fighter II

Which is the best Pacific Fighter?

F4U Corsair

F6F Hellcat

P-38 Lightning

P-40 Warhawk

Supermarine Seafire

Ki-43 Hayabusa

Ki-61 Hien

Ki-84 Hayate

Ki-100

N1K2

Other

Senior Airman

Lieutenant General

Senior Airman

rotartsinimdA

Chief Master Sergeant

Pacific Historian

Master Sergeant

Pacific Historian

Pacific Historian

Senior Master Sergeant

Pacific Historian

Senior Master Sergeant

rotartsinimdA

rotartsinimdA

Pacific Historian

Senior Master Sergeant

Pacific Historian

Staff Sergeant

Senior Master Sergeant

Staff Sergeant

Users who are viewing this thread

Similar threads