Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
You can look at thisHere is a file with figures from original Brewster documentation. The data on the 339-23 is sketchy, sorry about that Hopefully this file will help with the Brewster discussion. BTW, I'm unaware of 'two Brewster CEO's' being arrested. Perhaps the poster was thinking about Miranda and Zelcer, arms dealers who were jailed on charges relating to Curtiss Wright which dated well before they formed the Brewster Export Company (which was not legally part of Brewster Aeronautical Corporation).
My how times have changed. Not!
Ok. Now do it in 1:32 so I can get a better grasp.Just for the sake of comparison. A 1/72 scale Revell model of the F4F-4 next to a 1/72 scale Aoshima (MPC) model of the Buffalo (painted in USN colors). Note the Buffalos had a prop spinner.)
I wish there were 1/32 scale Brewster Buffalo kits out there! I did build the old Revell 1/32 WildOk. Now do it in 1:32 so I can get a better grasp.
Good question.Say, I was just thinking.
Did the British give the name"Buffalo" after the city by Niagara Falls in New York, or after the animal?
The Boston was named after the city of Boston to gain favor with then U.S. Ambassador to Great Britain Joseph Kennedy Sr. (who of course was from Boston) but the Mustang was named after the animal.
Hi,The verdict seems to be that if you were Norweigian flying against early Soviet pilots, it wasn't bad.
If you were a U.S. pilot flying a Buffalo, it was pretty much a dog that flew like a really nice sport plane, but wasn't any good for combat against decent adversaries in reasonable equipment.
You know, the guys the Norwegians that defected to Finland were flying against. My bad. Late night, not thinking. Thanks, Vicenzo. Duhhhh ...I'm not aware of norwegian pilot volounteer in the winter war, have you more info?
I can't verify (wasn't there, don't have photos of data plates. etc) but as note several times in this thread and others the Finns got a totally different engine than everybody else (except for the US FA2-1) got.Also I have never been able to verify what engine model the Finish Buffalo's had
The engine was Wright R-1820-G5 as mentioned in the message #38 and the attachment in message #41Also remember that the early Buffalo's where lighter than the ones used by the RAF, USMC, and the Dutch East Indies Pilots. They lacked a lot of the equipment later deemed necessary for a combat A/C. Also I have never been able to verify what engine model the Finish Buffalo's had. So they may have had slightly better (or at least ones with less operating hours) than the other air forces received.
And as previously stated with a well motivated Pilot, that has sufficient training, and hours in the type being flown, will have an advantage over a lesser trained, experienced, and motivated opponent. Even if the opponent has better equipment. Then throw in tactic's and logistics, and finally enough early warning of an attack. Its always hard to pin down exactly why one person or group succeeds with what is later considered to be a huge disadvantage in equipment or numbers, while other groups perform like we would expect them to do decades later.
Five FiAF B-239s got war-booty M-63s in 1942 but there were reliability problems and Finns began to reinstall 1820-G5s. The main reason for the problems was that Finns did not have the manual of M-63, they got one from Germany only in1943....I have no idea if the Finns got different engines from the Germans or used captured/salvaged Russian engines.