FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
Many thanks!
fubar57
General
Thank you
MIflyer
Major
Great! Now I'll be able to fix the one I found in my swimming pool.
SaparotRob
Unter Gemeine Geschwader Murmeltier XIII
I really hope that plane will be restored.
special ed
1st Lieutenant
- 7,158
- May 13, 2018
I think that is the one Kermit got.
BW-372 is owned by the National Naval Aviation Museum (NNAM)
A news from June 2020: "The loan agreement with the Florida National Naval Aviation Museum (NNAM) has been extended and covers the years 2020-2022. The fighter has been in Finland since 2007 and the rental period was originally only 3.5 years."
It is on display at the Suomen Ilmavoimamuseo - Finnish Air Force Museum in Tikkakoski
A news from June 2020: "The loan agreement with the Florida National Naval Aviation Museum (NNAM) has been extended and covers the years 2020-2022. The fighter has been in Finland since 2007 and the rental period was originally only 3.5 years."
It is on display at the Suomen Ilmavoimamuseo - Finnish Air Force Museum in Tikkakoski
Attachments
MIflyer
Major
That Florida museum is the USN one at Pensacola. Note that the Brewsters used by Finland originally were USN F2A-1, not export models, and so represent the first monoplane fighters flown by the USN.
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
I believe the Finns got an F2A-1 variant (Brewster model B-239E, the F2A-1 was a model B-239) It didn't have armor, self sealing tanks, an arrest hook, carried 2 extra guns and had a more powerful engine.
SaparotRob
Unter Gemeine Geschwader Murmeltier XIII
And could turn inside a closet.
MIflyer
Major
According to the William Green book "War Planes of the Second World War Volume 4 Fighters": "....in December 1939 ... the remaining 43 F2A-1's still to be delivered to the US Navy were officially declared to be surplus to requirements as a means of making them available for delivery to Finland." "In fact 44 F2A-1 (alias B-239) fighters were shipped to Sweden where they were reassembled by SAAB's Trollhattan plant, tested and then flown to Finland. The F2A-1 contract was completed in Feb 1940 and all the Brewster fighters had reached Finland by the following April."
And "To replace these (the F2A-1 sent to Finland) an order for 43 F2A-2's was placed on behalf of the US Navy."
And old Marine pilot told me that he was on the West Coast, flying F3F-3 and they were enraged to hear that he East Coast Marines were being reequipped with a brand new airplane, the F2A. I think the Marines at Midway would have been a lot better off with F3F-3; it probably could have outclimbed the Zeros and should have been able to outturn them.
One US Navy pilot said he flew the F2A in training before going to F6F and it was a delightful airplane, the biggest problem he found was that the landing gear was too complex to operate easily.
In the past Finland has deliberately used both fighters from the USSR and those from Western countries; I guess that policy will change.
And "To replace these (the F2A-1 sent to Finland) an order for 43 F2A-2's was placed on behalf of the US Navy."
And old Marine pilot told me that he was on the West Coast, flying F3F-3 and they were enraged to hear that he East Coast Marines were being reequipped with a brand new airplane, the F2A. I think the Marines at Midway would have been a lot better off with F3F-3; it probably could have outclimbed the Zeros and should have been able to outturn them.
One US Navy pilot said he flew the F2A in training before going to F6F and it was a delightful airplane, the biggest problem he found was that the landing gear was too complex to operate easily.
In the past Finland has deliberately used both fighters from the USSR and those from Western countries; I guess that policy will change.
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
Will good overall information but I'm gonna tell you that Mr. Green is somewhat wrong! The airframes may have started out the same, but in reality the Finns got a different model Buffalo. I pointed out the differences between the two aircraft and this is well documented in many publications to include some from Finland. Again, the Finnish models were more similar to the Brewster model "339E" NOT "339s" and the differences clearly indicated. As a matter of fact at one time the US Navy try to lay claim to this aircraft and it was clearly pointed out that this was not an F2A-1. I'm not at home but later I'll try to post the article about this
Last edited:
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
The story of BW 372
www.warbirdforum.com
www.heraldtribune.com
I'll stand corrected - Finland did not get the 339E, the RAF did...
Brewster F2A-1 Wright R-1820-34 Cyclone engine (940 HP) and two guns above engine cowling, plus two optional guns in the wings) for the United States Navy, 11 built.
Brewster Model 339 Export version of the F2A-1 for Finland (with Wright R-1820-G5 Cyclone engine 950 HP, some sources say the G5 was 1000 HP. These engines were also used on DC-3s) and four guns, 44 built, tailhooks and life raft containers were removed. Initially these aircraft had no self sealing tanks or armor.
I think calling Finland's 339s "F2A-1" is a bit stretched as the 339 had different engines, armament and internal equipment
The Saga of BW-372: the Finnish Brewster finds a home
Finns want Florida museum to return rare plane
HELSINKI, Finland -- The only surviving example of the Brewster Buffalo -- considered by some to be the worst fighter plane of World War II -- is causing a stir among aviation enthusiasts in Finland,…
www.heraldtribune.com
I'll stand corrected - Finland did not get the 339E, the RAF did...
Brewster F2A-1 Wright R-1820-34 Cyclone engine (940 HP) and two guns above engine cowling, plus two optional guns in the wings) for the United States Navy, 11 built.
Brewster Model 339 Export version of the F2A-1 for Finland (with Wright R-1820-G5 Cyclone engine 950 HP, some sources say the G5 was 1000 HP. These engines were also used on DC-3s) and four guns, 44 built, tailhooks and life raft containers were removed. Initially these aircraft had no self sealing tanks or armor.
I think calling Finland's 339s "F2A-1" is a bit stretched as the 339 had different engines, armament and internal equipment
SaparotRob
Unter Gemeine Geschwader Murmeltier XIII
What a story. It is an illuminating story of dealing with Russian oligarchs.
buffnut453
Captain
The story of BW 372
The Saga of BW-372: the Finnish Brewster finds a home
Finns want Florida museum to return rare plane
HELSINKI, Finland -- The only surviving example of the Brewster Buffalo -- considered by some to be the worst fighter plane of World War II -- is causing a stir among aviation enthusiasts in Finland,…
I'll stand corrected - Finland did not get the 339E, the RAF did...
Brewster F2A-1 Wright R-1820-34 Cyclone engine (940 HP) and two guns above engine cowling, plus two optional guns in the wings) for the United States Navy, 11 built.
Brewster Model 339 Export version of the F2A-1 for Finland (with Wright R-1820-G5 Cyclone engine 950 HP, some sources say the G5 was 1000 HP. These engines were also used on DC-3s) and four guns, 44 built, tailhooks and life raft containers were removed. Initially these aircraft had no self sealing tanks or armor.
I think calling Finland's 339s "F2A-1" is a bit stretched as the 339 had different engines, armament and internal equipment
You buggers knew you'd drag me into this thread, didn't you!!!
Ok...the USN variants were the F2A-1, the F2A-2 and the F2A-3. Then there were the export variants. The Model 239 was broadly equivalent to the F2A-1 but without all the maritime gear (arrestor hook, floatation devices etc). The Model 339 was derived from the F2A-2 (there was no export variant of the F2A-3) but with a less powerful engine (1100hp as opposed to 1200 hp) and, again, no naval equipment. The Belgians received the Model 339B and the Brits received the 339E. Then we have the Dutch...and that's where things get even more complicated. They received three different models: the 339C, 339D and 339-23. The 339C was like the B339B and E with the less powerful engine. The 339D had the same 1200hp engine as the F2A-2. The 339-23 had the longer nose of the F2A-3 but, under the skin, was just another B339D. There were also detail changes between the variants based on national requirements (e.g. the Brits wanted more armour and protective coatings for the fuel tanks, and they also wanted a second landing light).
Got that? There will be a test later so make sure you understand it all!!
Last edited:
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
I'd give you 2 bacons if I could - I was waiting for you to jump in!!!! I kept typing "339" when I meant "239"You buggers knew you'd drag me into this thread, didn't you!!!
Ok...the USN variants were the F2A-1, the F2A-2 and the F2A-3. Then there were the export variants. The Model 239 was broadly equivalent to the F2A-1 but without all the maritime gear (arrestor hook, floatation devices etc). The Model 339 was derived from the F2A-2 (there was no export variant of the F2A-3) but with a less powerful engine (1100hp as opposed to 1200 hp) and, again, no naval equipment. The Belgians received the Model 339B and the Brits received the 339E. Then we have the Dutch...and that's where things get even more complicated. They received three different models: the 339C, 339D and 339-23. The 339C was like the B339B and E with the less powerful engine. The 339D had the same 1200hp engine as the F2A-2. The 339-23 had the longer nose of the F2A-3 but, under the skin, was just another B339D. There were also detail changes between the variants based on national requirements (e.g. the Brits wanted more armour and protective coatings for the fuel tanks, and they also wanted a second landing light).
Got that? There will be a test later so make sure you understand it all!!
buffnut453
Captain
Perhaps "bore in" is a better term than "jump in"...'cos I can bore for NATO!
One other tidbit...the F2A-1 and Model 239 had the least powerful engine of any variants, just 950hp IIRC.
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
From what I can see they did - I've been seeing references about the engine on the 239 (Wright R-1820-G5 Cyclone) for 950 HP, but also seen 1000 HP mentioned. I do know this engine was used on the DC-3Perhaps "bore in" is a better term than "jump in"...'cos I can bore for NATO!
One other tidbit...the F2A-1 and Model 239 had the least powerful engine of any variants, just 950hp IIRC.
