SaparotRob
Unter Gemeine Geschwader Murmeltier XIII
That's only if the basement floods.
Groundhog Thread Part Deux - P-39 Fantasy and Fetish - The Never Ending Story (Mods take no responsibility for head against wall injuries sustained)
- Thread starter greybeard
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Glider
Captain
Does anyone doubt it?
Snautzer01
Honourably banned
- 42,565
- Mar 26, 2007
That would be a mistake.
Thumpalumpacus
Major
Brotha, I don't have the info to say anything contrary, but I won't lie, I'm skeptical of that.
Truth be told, it'd be cool if you twisted this thread into a discussion about the Buff, because everything here feels a little tired. So what've you got? Where am I selling you and
SaparotRob
short?Anything's better than this groundhogging, and I'll take the blame for going off-topic.
Last edited:
Thumpalumpacus
Major
I welcome any correction you or others might have; and it would make this thread even more productive.
It may well be the most successful US fighter flown by other nations than the USA, but there were a lot of them. Then there is the thorny issue of "success", the Mustang MkI, IA and Mk II would still have been a complete success if it never shot an enemy plane down.
buffnut453
Captain
Brotha, I don't have the info to say anything contrary, but I won't lie, I'm skeptical of that.
Truth be told, it'd be cool if you twisted this thread into a discussion about the Buff, because everything here feels a little tired. So what've you got? Where am I selling you and
Anything's better than this groundhogging, and I'll take the blame for going off-topic.
The Finns alone managed a 32:1 kill/loss tally, claiming 459 shot down for only 15 air combat losses (Source: Finnish Air Force - Wikipedia). Yes, I know it's Wiki but the numbers tally pretty well with the Keskinen and Stenman 2-volume work on the Brewster in Finnish service (they claim 33:1), which is the most comprehensive history of the type in Finland. I trust the authors' research.
The Commonwealth squadrons in Malaya and Singapore claimed 67 kills (with a further 34 claimed as Probables) for 28 air combat losses (Source: "Buffaloes Over Singapore", Cull et al). Somewhere I have numbers for 67 Sqn that was in Burma but I can't locate the details right now.
So...yes, I think the 26:1 kill:loss ratio is pretty solid for the poor old Buffalo.
Last edited:
GregP
Major
Hi FlyboyJ. I have a Soviet Ace list, but it doesn't say what aircraft the pilot was flying. It DOES list the unit, but I don't have a list of what units flew what aircraft. More importantly, I don't have a timeline of each victory claim, so even if I DID have a list of which unit flew which aircraft at what time, it could not be matched up by the victory list.
In fact, the world Ace list I have is attached. Enjoy. The file isn't exactly finished since there are 2 or 3 countries absent, but working on things like this over time is slow. So, anyone who can add some data ... please DO SO! Oh, and, please reattach it in here or in a new thread.
Thumpalumpacus
Major
What do you think made those numbers work? I'm ignorant, so forgive my dumb questions; I'm used to hearing about them being shot down in droves at Midway. What were we Americans missing that the Finns, or even RAF, got somewhat right?
This is an honest question, please don't take it otherwise.
buffnut453
Captain
Not entirely sure I understand the question. Are you asking why did the Finns do so supremely well, and the Commonwealth didn't do too terribly?
Thumpalumpacus
Major
... or why Americans did so poorly? Or why I might think that?
GregP
Major
The Finns used copious quantities of pixie dust 
combined with Soviet aircrews that had little or outdated training and were not encouraged to do individual thinking. Many Soviet pilots, at first, were competent to fly the airplanes, but had never engaged is dissimilar air combat training of any sort, and were mostly low-time fliers. Many were also flying VERY outdated equipment until the production facilities were moved eastward and the Yak-3s and La-5s started coming off the lines.
Realistic training and FLIGHT TIME so the pilots were very familiar with their airplanes were a BIG factors. Maybe the Allies should have contracted with the Finns to fight the Germans!
combined with Soviet aircrews that had little or outdated training and were not encouraged to do individual thinking. Many Soviet pilots, at first, were competent to fly the airplanes, but had never engaged is dissimilar air combat training of any sort, and were mostly low-time fliers. Many were also flying VERY outdated equipment until the production facilities were moved eastward and the Yak-3s and La-5s started coming off the lines.Realistic training and FLIGHT TIME so the pilots were very familiar with their airplanes were a BIG factors. Maybe the Allies should have contracted with the Finns to fight the Germans!
Its a case of what against what. Look at the figures the LW achieved in the early days of Barbarossa. Prior to WW2 starting the Soviet Union had more aircraft than the rest of the world combined.
buffnut453
Captain
For the Finns, agree that training was key. They were very experienced and knew how to wring the most out of every aircraft that they operated. Interestingly, the Finnish Air Force had similar numbers of Brewsters and P-36s but the former returned better combat stats (the P-36 still wasn't shabby...just not quite as good as the Brewster).
At Midway, VMF-221 lost 15 aircraft of 21 engaged. I think there are a number of reasons, including poor tactics (VMF-221 was still using Division tactics rather than the more tactically flexible pair and Thach Weave tactics that were emerging in the USN). The Squadron engaged in 5 Divisions, of differing sizes and at least one comprising a mix of F2A-3s and F4Fs, and the Divisions didn't all engage at once, but arrived in a rather piecemeal fashion. They were attacking a formation of 108 Japanese aircraft, including 36 A6Ms.
Also, around half of VMF-221 had only recently arrived at Midway. Not all of the new arrivals were green pilots just out of training but such a substantial change will affect unit cohesion in combat (the reason for such a large influx of new pilots was that VMF-221 was split in half to form a second squadron as the USMC desperately sought to expand its front-line strength).
According to most accounts, the Japanese lost 11 aircraft in the Midway attack, with a further 14 heavily damaged and 29 slightly damaged. Traditional thinking is that most of the Japanese losses were due to AAA fire from Midway Island. However, it's entirely possible that some of the VMF-221 pilots who were killed managed to inflict some damage/losses on the Japanese formation.
I'm afraid a lot of received wisdom about the Buffalo is derived from books that were released in the 1970s and simply trotted out the rather lazy assessment that they were shot down in droves. Martin Caiden in his Ragged, Rugged Warriors even quotes an Australian pilot who stated that his squadron was entirely wiped out...which never happened. Such epithets don't stack up when compared against contemporary operational records (I have done that research, including communicating with almost every surviving Buffalo pilot in the 1990s...including Bill Brooks, the last survivor from Midway, who was rather fond of the Buffalo).
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
Hi Greg - great stuff, many thanks! I remember you talking about this over the years, pretty awesome! I might be able to extract some data from this, I think I remember reading somewhere that VVS P-39s claimed over 2,200 Luftwaffe aircraft. Hoping to verify this number and find out how many VVS P-39s were claimed by the Luftwaffe.
Maybe this is one area our "Expert" can accurately address.
GregP
Major
Hi FlyboyJ, I still have very LARGE files I could post, but some exceed the file size limit (or they did at the time, some years past).
I have an Excel file with data on over 1000 airplanes, 99% of which are WWII airplanes. But, it's 105 Mb in size, so it didn't use to be able to be posted. Maybe it can be now. Let me know.
Cheers.
Maybe we need a sticky thread for files we want to share with the forum? So everyone could find them?
I have an Excel file with data on over 1000 airplanes, 99% of which are WWII airplanes. But, it's 105 Mb in size, so it didn't use to be able to be posted. Maybe it can be now. Let me know.
Cheers.
Maybe we need a sticky thread for files we want to share with the forum? So everyone could find them?
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
Let me digest what you have - I know there's been some things updated on the site but don't know if a file that size could be downloaded. Many thanks for the offer!
Marcel or https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/members/wurger.1418/ may know the answer to this
GregP
Major
No problem. The entire population of WWII aviation enthusiasts isn't all THAT large, and is shrinking daily as we die off.
Why not share the information while there is still interest?
Again, maybe we need a sticky thread for sharing files. Alternately, I could PM YOU the file or files and YOU could upload it?
Why not share the information while there is still interest?
Again, maybe we need a sticky thread for sharing files. Alternately, I could PM YOU the file or files and YOU could upload it?
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
Updated my response - let me ask the other guys who are a little bit more savvy than I
GregP
Major
Thanks!
