Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Great list! I'm intrigued by your reference to the Airspeed Oxford in front line service - what did that consist of?
Just to toss a totally unknown bird out there how about the Fleet 16 how many pilots in the Commonwealth and US air forces were trained on this virtually unknown trainer over 400 were made and was responsible for much intial training in the BCATP .Please note me beating off the crowds
Brewster Buffalo: The Dutch liked her, her perfomance in Finish hands was amazing but her reputation was ruined by a bunch of green Marines who lost one(!) air battle they should not have entred in the first place. Talk about bad press.
The Buffalo conundrum is
I think that Blakesee and Gentile amongst others learnt on itExcellent suggestion PB. That's an aircradt I have never heard of, but it obviously did some great work. I like the way it looks like a cross between a Tiger Moth and a Harvard.
That's what I like about this forum, you ask a silly question, and you get some great well considered answers!
The Buffalo conundrum is Finnish use v everybody else, not USMC v everybody else. The overall record of Brit and Dutch Buffalo's was around 10 Japanese fighters and 10 other types downed for 53 Buffalo air combat losses, all to fighters (counting only specific combats where both sides' losses are given in "Bloody Shambles", but that's most combats which occurred*).
I don't see how that response backs up your original statement, which seemed to say the *results* of the single USMC combat spoiled the Buffalo's otherwise good reputation. But the actual results in both British and Dutch use v. the Japanese were basically similar to the Marine results at Midway: not good.I did not say that the Dutch were successful, just that they liked the plane. For success they would have needed a proper organisation on the ground; early warning, triple-A and so on. And the Marines should have escorted their bombers, not attacked the Japanese ones.
Although JoeB is spot on, I believe the Buffalo's performance over Midway will always give the aircraft negative press and it seems that battle is told first in many "picture books" about WW2 rather than the success of the Finns. Additionally I think you also have lingering bad press about Brewster itself because of some the issues they dad during WW2. Aviation enthusiast who read the contemporary "stuff" about WW2 will always first hear how the Buffalo was slaughtered over Midway - Thanks Osprey!
I don't see how that response backs up your original statement, which seemed to say the *results* of the single USMC combat spoiled the Buffalo's otherwise good reputation. But the actual results in both British and Dutch use v. the Japanese were basically similar to the Marine results at Midway: not good.
Who says the lack of success of British and Dutch Buffalo units was just because of factors like the ground organization or airfield AA, but not also pilots, or the airplane?
the Finnish Buffalos and the US F2F-3 also had rather different power loadings and wing loadings which might affect the actual performance of the planes in addition to the quality of the both pilots flying the planes and the quality of the pilots flying the opposing planes.
Lysander anyone?
multi role platform, abielt not a glamourous fighter nor heavy...
but to nip in and out of france for the resistance, artillery support, air sea rescue support,
ok i know they had horrific loses at the start of the BOB but how many aircraft , succeded in alternative roles as well as the pluck lysander?
The persistence of the "Committee to Resurrect the Reputation of the P40" is only exceeded by that of the "Committee to Resurrect the Reputation of the Buffalo".
it was a failure in the Pacific and the US was fortunate that the Wildcat was available because the USN was able to hold it's own against one of the best fighters in the world, the A6M, in 1942 with the Wildcat.