That would be an impressive rebuild even by today's standard!
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
That would be an impressive rebuild even by today's standard!Here's an example of the problems trying to tie down the fate of every single aircraft. This Spitfire MkXII shown in the 2 images below looks to be a complete write-off and yet it was repaired and put back into service with its original serial number. There is no easy way to categorize a "loss" like this. (Source: "Spitfire: a Complete Fighting History" by Alfred Price)
View attachment 752024
Cat C?Here's an example of the problems trying to tie down the fate of every single aircraft. This Spitfire MkXII shown in the 2 images below looks to be a complete write-off and yet it was repaired and put back into service with its original serial number. There is no easy way to categorize a "loss" like this. (Source: "Spitfire: a Complete Fighting History" by Alfred Price)
View attachment 752024
Winter War: you needed an eye witness that saw the aircraft go down or the claim was null and void. At least this was the case in the Air Force. Unofficially the FAF claimed to have destroye
Cat C?
I'd not trust this salvage rebuild if I were the pilot. Hopefully they just moved the serial # to another airframe in order to hide the crash from higher ups.That would be an impressive rebuild even by today's standard!
I'd not trust this salvage rebuild if I were the pilot. Hopefully they just moved the serial # to another airframe in order to hide the crash from higher ups.
But was it repaired? I don't have Alfred Price's book but does he give the full serial?Here's an example of the problems trying to tie down the fate of every single aircraft. This Spitfire MkXII shown in the 2 images below looks to be a complete write-off and yet it was repaired and put back into service with its original serial number. There is no easy way to categorize a "loss" like this. (Source: "Spitfire: a Complete Fighting History" by Alfred Price)
View attachment 752024
But was it repaired? I don't have Alfred Price's book but does he give the full serial?
The only MK.XII that I can trace coded DL-V is MB839 for which the history is given as:-
"AST" is a reference to Air Service Training which was part of the Civilian Repair Organisation, with sites at Exeter & Hamble. So the aircraft arrived there on 9 March 1944 but was noted "CE" on 24 Sept 1944. "CE" is a reference to it being declared "Category E" which is a write off. That fits more with the photos.
Do you know anything of the Buffalos that escaped to Australia and were pressed into service by the USAAF?It's impossible to know how many Buffalos were serviceable on a given day, or even to know the identities of all the airframes that escaped from Singapore to the Netherlands East Indies.
Have you checked out the ADF Serials Buffalo page.Do you know anything of the Buffalos that escaped to Australia and were pressed into service by the USAAF?View attachment 752165View attachment 752166View attachment 752167
Do you know anything of the Buffalos that escaped to Australia and were pressed into service by the USAAF?View attachment 752165View attachment 752166View attachment 752167
I completely agree with everything you said in the above quoted post, although I think it really comes down to an airplane designed to fight in the prior war, and this war was fought differently. Same goes for the Zero.The engine problems with the Buffalo are well known, with pilots in Malaya/Singapore reporting the performance of some engines as "pathetic." However, not all the blame should be apportioned to Brewster. Wright simply didn't have the production capacity to meet the demand, hence the use of refurbished engines. We all think of America as the arsenal of democracy. However, it was far from being that in late 1940 when the RAF's Buffalos were under construction. A fair amount of production capacity in the US defence industry came directly from orders in the UK that were paid for with cash (this predates Lend Lease by a considerable margin). It was Wright's responsibility to ensure their engines were fit for purpose. It was Brewster's responsibility to check the engines as installed were meeting specifications. It was the British Purchasing Commission's responsibility to ensure aircraft leaving the factory were acceptable. It seems there were failures across the board.
The RAF never received any Buffalo that had a 1200hp engine. All RAF Buffalos were supposed to have 1100hp engines but, as noted above, many engines failed to deliver even close to the specified power levels. The Dutch did get some 1200hp machines and their performance was notably better than the 1100hp airframes. The Finns received modified F2A-1s that had 950hp engines...so, actually, the lowest power of any Buffalo variant, and yet they did rather well with them.
I have read that the Finns modified the piston rings, which reduced engine wear.I completely agree with everything you said in the above quoted post, although I think it really comes down to an airplane designed to fight in the prior war, and this war was fought differently. Same goes for the Zero.
However, my question with engine failures does have to do with the Fin's you mentioned.
I don't recall ever hearing/reading of any failures with the F2A-1's that were sent to Finland, and yet, they got an "for export" engine, much like the rest of the Buffalo's that went to overseas allies.
Granted, those other allies got a different version of the Cyclone than the Fin's did.
Did they just get lucky, or did they have just as many engine failure issues and I've just never run across any of that information?
I also thought it was interesting how the Fin's tried to use the Russian version of the Cyclone engine, culled from the I-16 fighters they shot down, but found those engines were made just crudely enough that all the parts from a specific engine would only work in that engine.
Apparently, QC gave the Russian machinists a WIDE berth when it came to tolerances.
"21 Curtiss CW-22B" -- What happened to those?Finland, 17 exports from US in January 1940, 27 in February
Belgium, 1 export from US in April 1940, to Bordeaux, evaluated by Luftwaffe, found in Germany in 1945, 6 export in May 1940, on Bearn, off loaded at Martinique, rotted away in open storage.
NEI, exports from US 11, 13, 9, 30, 7, 1 March to August 1941 (72 accepted, 71 exported), further exports 11 in January 1942, 1 in March and 1 in April 1942.
Australian Archives, A7059 1/1377 (readable online)
Page 31, General Kenny reports rerouted Dutch ships delivered a total of 2 Lockheed 12, 21 Brewster SB1A, 21 Curtiss 22-B, 18 Curtiss P-40, 3 Vought Sikorski seaplanes. (Actually 18 Kingfisher serials 24/V7 to 24)
page 28. Dutch serials on the 17 Buffalo in RAAF service, first group, D-3/171, 175, 177, 184, 185, 186
Second group, Fin marking B3/132, 181, 176, 176, 179, 168, 167, 174, 183, mapping to Fuselage marking, 301, 302, 305, 307, 308, 309, 310, 311, 312. Fin marking 303, 306, no fuselage mapping.
Page 30, 36
A51-1, D3-171 on 5 June 1942 by 1 AD, to USAAF 21 Sep 43
A51-2, D3-175 on 4 June 1941 by 1 AD, written off by PRU 5 Aug 42
A51-3, D3-177 on 13 June 1942 by 1 AD, to USAAF 7 June 1943
A53-4, D4-184 on ? by 1 AD, written off by PRU 16 Jun 42
A53-5, D5-185 on 6 June 1942 by 1 AD, written off by PRU 19 Oct 42
A53-6, D6-186 on 6 June 1942 by 1 AD, written off by PRU 29 Oct 42
A53-7, 301-B3-132 on 18 August 1942 by 25 Squadron, to USAAF 13 Nov 43
A53-8, 302-181 on 18 August 1942 by 25 Squadron, to USAAF 20 Oct 43
A53-9, 305-176 on 18 August 1942 by 25 Squadron, to USAAF 14 Jan 44
A53-10, 307-176 on 18 August 1942 by 25 Squadron, to USAAF 9 Jul 43
A53-11, 308-179 on 18 August 1942 by 25 Squadron, to USAAF 25 Jun 43
A53-12, 309-168 on 18 August 1942 by 25 Squadron, to USAAF 25 Jun 43
A53-13, 310-167 on 18 August 1942 by 25 Squadron, to USAAF 8 Jul 43
A53-14, 311-174 on 18 August 1942 by 25 Squadron, to USAAF 7 Jul 43
A53-15, 312-183 on 18 August 1942 by 25 Squadron, to USAAF 15 Jul 43
A53-16, B3/303 on 23 October 1942 1942 by CGS, to USAAF 5 Nov 43
A53-17, B3/306 on 23 October 1942 1942 by CGS, to USAAF 21 Sep 43
A51-1 to 6, received new, ex USAAF Erection Depot Victoria.
A51-7 to 15, received from USAAF 18 August 1942, only 1 serviceable as received, all 9 unserviceable until 15 January 1943.
A17-16 and 17, taken over by RAAF after being abandoned by USAAF at Williamtown.
Britain 21 exports from US in June, 11 in July and 1 in August 1940, Britain imports, 21, 11, 1 July to September 1940. AS, AX and BB serials, ex Belgian.
Britain 169 exports from US December 1940 to June 1941, far east imports 169 January to August 1941. 1 final export in October 1941, arrived far east January 1942. W serials.
When it comes to recording exports aircraft that moved as parts of a unit are omitted, Britain exported 9 Brewster in October 1940 and another 6 in November, for the RN, to the Middle East (Egypt)
RAF Serial Registers, Brewster Buffalo, 71 Sqn mentions, AS414, 416, 421, 423. 71 sqn had Buffalo September to November 1940.
AS410, AMAS? 12 Jul 40, AAEE "D" 9 Feb 41
AS411, 37 MU, 4 MU CRE 9 Sep 40, Instructional 2852M?
AS412, AMAS? 10 Jul 40, 39 MU 8 Aug 40 then 4MU CRE "B" same day, Cat E 10 Apr 42
AS413, 37 MU 24 Jul 40, 4 MU CRE 21 Aug 40, Admiralty 20 Oct or Dec 40
AS414, 37 MU 19 Jul 40, 4 MU CRE 21 Aug 40, 71 Sqn 26 Oct 40, SAS CRU 10 Nov 40, instructional 2855M
AS415, 37 MU 19 Jul 40, 4 MU CRE 21 Aug 40
AS416, 37 MU 19 Jul 40, 4 MU CRE 21 Aug 40, 71 Sqn 24 Oct 40, 37 MU 20 Nov 40, to FAA 21 Nov? 40
AS417, 18 MU 18 Oct 40, 37 MU 30 Jul 40, 4 MU CRE 21 Aug 40, 37 MU 1 Sep 40, (Unreadable) 4 Sep 40, SAS CRE (Mods) 1 Dec 40, Instructional A37
AS418, 37 MU 10? Jul 40, (Unreadable) CRE 20 Aug 40
AS419, 37 MU 11 Jul 40, 4 MU CRE 21 Aug 40, SOC 2 Jul 43
AS420, 37 MU 10 Jul 40, 4 MU CRE 21 Aug 40
AS421, 8? MU 18 Jul 40, 37 MU 20 Jul 40, 4 MU CRE 21 Aug 40, 71 Sqn 26 Oct 40, 37 MU 16 Nov 40, to FAA 21 Nov 40
AS422, 5 MU 18 Jul 40, Hatstone? RNAS 24 Jul 40, (Sundry Units), CAT E 22 Apr 42.
AS423, 5 MU 14? Jul 40, 71 Sqn 20 Oct 40, to FAA 21 Nov 40
AS424, 5 MU 16 Jul 40, 37 MU 2 Sep 40, 4 MU CRE 9 Sep 40, 37 MU 13 Sep 40, To FAA 21 Nov 40
AS425, 5 MU 19 Jul 40, AAEE 31 Jul 40, 37 MU 11 Aug 40, 4 MU CRE "B" 21 Aug 40, SOC 1 Jul 43
AS426, 5 MU 19 Jul 40, 4 MU CRE 23 Aug 40, To FAA 21 Nov 40, Instructional A39
AS427, 5 MU 23 Jul 40, SAS CRE 12 Nov 40, to FAA 21 Nov 40, Instructional A38
AS428, 5 MU 23 Jul 40, 4 MU CRE 25 Aug 40, To FAA 21 Nov 40, SOC 2 Jun 43
AS429, 5 MU, 4 MU CRE "B" 2 Sep 40, Instructional 2857M
AS430, 5 MU 19 Jul 20, 2 MAE? 10 Aug 40, Instructional 2859M
AX810 to AX820 All to Admiralty 31 October 1940. BB450 To Admiralty 31 January 1941
As of end February 1943, no operational Buffalo left in RAF, 2 instructional, 59 lost overseas, 109 unaccounted for on evacuation, out of 170 arrivals.
Yeah? Tell me more.
Yes, all of the surviving F2A-3's from VMF-221 went to training duties at NAS Miami, as did those stationed at Palmyra.Did any of the F2A's that survived Midway get sent to Miami or another base for use as trainers, as most of the USN F2A's lived out their lives?
I always thought what brought the F4F to the forefront was its landing gear was better suited for carrier use (as some have said, they didn't call Grumman "The Iron Works" for nothing), so the Navy decided to move forward with F4F development.Note that the F2A won the competition over the F4F, and both represented a similar level of technology.
But what saved the F4F from obscurity was the interception of the Italian liner Rex in 1938 by B-17's and the introduction of the turbrsupercharged Y1B-17. The USN suddenly realized that its worst fears, generated by Billy Mitchell, were coming true. At first they secured a prohibition of such long range over-water operation of USAAC aircraft, but they needed a high altitude fighter capable of at least theoretically intercepting a B-17 if they wished to win the Battle of Washington DC.