Warbird Information Exchange

the brewster f2a buffalo was labeled as a flop by the u.s. navy / usmc early in the war, fact known, as well as as the export version of the aircraft b -339-e belgium, holland, raf in the far east, but was a real whoop assed fighter with finland when they were sided with the axis, notably against the ussr who had much superior aircraft. i find the disparity of victories between the allied & axis quite confusing. the japanese decimated the various buffulo types in in the far east pacific, with britain, the dutch, usa at midway island etc. but the finnish air force made very good results with the type b - 239 against the ussr w/ germany with excellent results. why the difference in victories? 1/2 a world away?? did the buffalo operate better in colder conditions in europe as compared to the tropical atmosphere?? finnish aces abound in the type up to 1944. raf aces notable in the far east, u.s. aces none w/ 2 kills at most. the poor buffalo has taken it's share of knocks, but i think finland's success with the type should be noted in consideration of the advantage of the ussr's technological edge..

_________________
tom d. friedman - hey!!! those fokkers were messerschmitts!! * without ammunition, the usaf would be just another flying club!!! * better to have piece of mind than piece of tail!!

There are several factors when considering the success of the Finns with the F2A compared to the Brits, Dutch and USMC. First the Finns were using very early -1 models stripped of Navy equipment. Lighter and more responsive than the later models. They did eventually add self sealing material to the fuel tanks and armor plate, making thier aircraft the eqivalent of the F2A-2 only lighter. They also replaced the single .30 caliber gun with another .50 caliber gun giving them 4 .50 cal guns. The Finns had superb tactics. It is little known but two Finnish pilots pioneered the four plane flight formation with two plane elements long before the Germans developed the same formation as a result of thier efforts in Spain. The Finns also used slashing diving attacks and eschewed dog fighting. The Finns were superb gunners. Putting 70 rounds out of 100 into a towed or ground target was the minumum score in training, scores in the 80s and 90s were common. Pilots were expected to aim at particular parts of aircraft such as engines, fuel tanks or cockpits. The Brewster proved easy to fly with good performance, tough and easy to maintain with superb radios. The Finnish 24 squadron flying the Brewsters was the premier fighting unit of the FAF and already had a number of aces and many experienced pilots from the Winter War. Finnish fighter command extensively studied the RAF tactis in the Battle of Britain and adapted them as needed. They preferred meeting the enemy in the air where the odds of killing the pilot as well as the aircraft were greater, rather than risk scarce assets in airfield strafing for example.

The opposition: In reality the Brewsters faced aircraft that were roughly equivalent in age and design i.e. Polikarpov I-15, 153 and 16, the Hurricane, the P-40 and early Migs and Yaks plus Tupolev bombers. These aircraft were flown by second and third line Soviet pilots with poor training and worse tactics and leadership. Later the Brewsters were hard pressed against aircraft like the P-39 and especially the LaG 5 and Yak 3/9 and Il-1 flown by the survivors who had learned to fight. The Finns considered the Hurricane particularly "stiff and clumsy" and they operated a squadron of them.

In the Pacific the Dutch and USMC were flying an aircraft (F2A-3) that was full ton heavier but with not much increase in horsepower. The Dutch and Marines did not have much if any experience in air combat and had not developed modern tactics and did not know much if anything about thier opponents. The superiority of the Zero is well known. Japanese tactics were not that sophisticated but they were supremely aggressive. I am not sure about the RAF model whether they were equivalent of the -2 or -3 but the pilots were not that experienced compared to their European based counterparts and thier leadership was overcome pretty quickly by the speed of the Japanese advance.

_________________
"I can't understand it, I cut it twice and it's still too short!" Robert F. Dupre' 1923-2010 Go With God.

looks as you've done your homework!! many thanks for the great info!!

_________________
tom d. friedman - hey!!! those fokkers were messerschmitts!! * without ammunition, the usaf would be just another flying club!!! * better to have piece of mind than piece of tail!!

The Finns and the Brewster are two of my favorites. The only serious weak point in the Brewster was the landing gear which was too delicate for carrier landings. Brewster's weak point was totally inadequate leadership at the corporate level. I read somewhere that it was one of the only companies to go bankrupt before the end of the war.

_________________
"I can't understand it, I cut it twice and it's still too short!" Robert F. Dupre' 1923-2010 Go With God.

In Singapore and around, it was the RAF, RAAF RNZAF and Dutch NEI using Buffalos, not just the RAF. Despite a few experienced pilots from Europe, most were green. Some of the RAAF pilots were only recently trained on multi-engine types, not fighters.

Critically, more effort had been put in by the unit leadership in social standards than actual fighter training. The expectation was that the Japanese (not being of European origin) would be very second rate fighters, and this complacency was, as we know, costly throughout the Pacific.

Additionally, the aircraft were flawed with missing equipment, inadequate and incomplete gunnery set ups and so forth. These shortcomings were not addressed quickly enough, partly though 'peacetime expectations' partly pressure on resources in Europe.

One RAAF Squadron had experienced RAAF airmen as the squadron leader rejected in favour of an RAF pilot who claimed (with his Buffalo's kill markings) to have shot down more enemy aircraft in the Battle of Britain than his records - or tellingly - contemporary claims allow. Even given benefit of the doubt, his other behaviour in the period was pretty poor.

HTH.

PS - John, thanks for the Finns pioneering the 'finger four' formation story. I understood it (and I'm no expert) to have come out of Condor Legion experience in Spain in the late 30s - say 37, and the Finns were fighting from 1939 onward. The following ref gives it as a peacetime developed tactic by the Finns - which is remarkable as very few effective wartime fighter tactics were peacetime developments, peacetime being heavy on bull and theory and having no real data.

http://www.sci.fi/~fta/FAFhist.htm

_________________
James K

"Switch on the underwater landing lights"
Emilio Largo, Thunderball.

www.VintageAeroWriter.com

didn't some company in the last few years make a full scale reproduction of the buffalo in u.s. navy markings?? can't remember if it was static or a flyer or where it went upon completion.

_________________
tom d. friedman - hey!!! those fokkers were messerschmitts!! * without ammunition, the usaf would be just another flying club!!! * better to have piece of mind than piece of tail!!

Good point Tom. The Dutch made two static full scale models (not aircraft structure, but shape lookalikes), one for the MLM Museum Holland, the other, IIRC went to N York. There's also the sole original one, ex-Finnish, now at Pensacola(?) and a Finnish development type in Finland.

_________________
James K

"Switch on the underwater landing lights"
Emilio Largo, Thunderball.

www.VintageAeroWriter.com

I've seen the NY one, it is in the excellent Cradle of Aviation Museum. It is a Buffalo in general shape only, and is very obviously a mock-up. Still, if that's all you've got........

What's the long-term plan for the survivor? Is it planned to bring it back to Pensacola? Conservation or restoration? Bolt a 3350 on the front and race it around the sticks at Reno?

Geoff Fiskin RNZAF did quite well on the Buffalo. The RAAF was credited with some 20 enemy a/c shot down by them as well in malaya...

RAF/RAAF/RNZAF B-339s were considerably heavier than the F2A-2 due to added equipment
including fuel and oil tank protection and an increase in rounds per gun for the wing guns. The Wright 1820 engine on most of them were a commercial aviation version with a lower horsepower rating.

Duane

Regarding survivors: The original F2A recovered in Russia and transferred to the Navy at Pensacola has been tranferred to Finland on a ten year loan. It is assembled and displayed as recovered.

I heard somewhere that the Dutch had bought some wreckage of East Indies Air Force examples that had crashed in Australia.

The Cradle of Aviation Musuem built one mock up for themselves and at least one for the Dutch.

Earl Rhineheart of Illinois? claimed to have one in the 1960s and 1970s and was keeping it hidden from the Navy. Supposedly this example was lost in a barn fire.

I think there is a claim of a known wreck in a swamp in the eastern US somewhere.

The Finnish built copy uses a Soviet engine (as did some original examples when the R1820s wore out) and wooden wings with no provision for armament in the wings. Performance was not the equivalent of the original and so not worth pursuing, especially after the Finns began getting Bf 109s.

_________________
"I can't understand it, I cut it twice and it's still too short!" Robert F. Dupre' 1923-2010 Go With God.

I believe Jerry Yagen's Military Aviation Museum has/had a rear fuselage of a Finnish Buffalo, but I'm not sure if they have/had anything more than that.

As far as the one in the eastern US, I remember reading about a group that was convinced there was a wreck in Chesapeake Bay. Not sure if they ever found it or if anything ever came of that.

_________________
Matt

Brewster Buffalo: Pearl of the Sky
Thought I would weigh in on the interesting topic about the Brewster Buffalo and its use by the Finns during WWII. In 1992 I exchanged letters with several Finnish fighter pilots when researching the FAF experience in aerial engagements with Soviet-flown American Lend-Lease aircraft, specifically the P-39 Airacobra. One of the more interesting replies I received came from Hans Wind, who was credited with 75 destroyed Russian aircraft and was assigned to Fighter Squadron 24. Wind said he began combat flying in 1941 with only 172 hours total flying time on the Brewster Buffalo B-239 (F2A1) and from April 1944 onward piloted the ME-109 G-2 & G-6 versions. While flying the Brewster Buffalo Wind was credited with destroying 32 Russian aircraft, mostly fighters and notable among those victories was 3 Hurricanes and 2 Spitfires—that must have been a shock to the Russian pilots to be out-dueled by the lowly Brewster! Wind also downed 3 P-39 Airacobras but these victories were while flying the bf-109 G.
Hans Wind described the affection Finnish pilots had for the Brewster Buffalo, “Without this aircraft the Finnish air defense and fighter interception would not have been possible to repulse the enemy effectively… with these 44 BWs the Finnish Air Force caused during 1941-1944 the destruction of 477 Soviet fighting planes for the loss of 19 of our own. This is why the Finnish fighter pilots cherished the Brewster B-239, calling it “Taivaan Helmi” (Pearl of the Sky).
Hans Wind on the quality of the Soviet pilots and combat tactics: “The Russian tactics in the air, from the beginning in June 1941… was a very stiff one. Thus individual flight skills of Russian well-disciplined fighter pilots were not revealed clearly at this first stage; nevertheless their air skills developed continuously in air battles, according to our findings. By 1942-1943 the Red Army fighters were very dangerous opponents when considering their fighter planes, their air tactics as well as the individual piloting skills… Their personal skills were comparable with the aces of any other nation, and there were plenty of them [aces] in the S.U.”
Another Finnish fighter pilot that flew the Brewster Buffalo was Arvo Koskelainen, who like Hans Wind flew with Squadron 24. Koskelainen describes joining combat, “I had to make my first war flight at a very early stage and with a scant 170 hours flying time. As far as I know the Russians, too, had ordered some very inexperienced pilot trainees to war flights; one pilot of Tsaika that was taken prisoner told that he had only 120 hours flying time.”
Koskelainen continues, “In the spring of 1942 I was transferred to Squadron 24, where I became a Brewster pilot. I remember very well my first air combat with Russian Lavotsk 5, the Lavotsk attacked from straight towards me, but he shot too hastily and missed. Perhaps I shot to hastily myself, too, but suddenly the Lovotsk nosed down toward the base in Kronstadt. The Finnish radio station at the coast… reported the plane forced landed in the sea, where the Russian guard boat rescued the pilot.”
“The Brewster was an easy and comfortable plane to fly,” continues Koskelainen. “There was a radio transmitter and receiver on the plane, which enabled the pilots to have contact with each other as well as ground-stations and squadron base station.”
Carl Bruun was another Finnish air force Brewster pilot I exchanged letters with in 1992 and he writes, “In the summer of 1944 I was flying Brewster and I had a direct combat with [P-39] Airacobras; my squadron was No. 26 and we had our base at Heinjoki on the Carelian Istmus—we had 18 Brewsters. On 10-6-1944 I was leading a reconnoitering patrol of 4 Brewsters. I start [took off] at 9:55 hrs and set course south to Terijoki by the seaside north of Leningrad (St Petersburg). We were flying on top of the clouds, about 2000 meters when 3 Airacobras dived on us from about 3000 meters at a steep angle. I warned my colleagues and watched the one [P-39] pointing at me. In the dive the Airacobra turned his back on me to attack me from behind. He didn’t see me after that so I put my plane also into a steep dive. When his faster Airacobra shot past the nose of my Brewster I opened fire with my four 12.7 mm colts. It must have been a shocking surprise for him! I don’t know if I got some hits on his plane but he took up a maximum G-turn with condensation stripes streaming from his wingtips. His idea was correct if I would have been flying a faster airplane… after a while they had other mistakes too [in this combat] and it ended with all 3 Airacobras diving for the clouds with a Brewster after each with guns blazing.”
Brunn concludes, “The Brewster was best in the beginning of the Continuation War, later, when the Russians got new planes it was difficult to shoot then down, but it was safe to sit in a Brewster for me.”
It is an odd fact of WWII military aviation that the Brewster Buffalo, somewhat maligned as an American fighter went on to tally an impressive combat record in the hands of Finnish AF pilots (Eino Juutilainen credited with 34 victories on type). True also of the P-39 Airacobra in Soviet hands, it too has been discounted as inferior to Lightnings, Thunderbolts and Mustangs but of all American manufactured fighter-types of WWII the P-39 shot down the most enemy airplanes (Soviet ace G.A. Rechkalov downed 48 of his 58 kills in a P-39).

Yup, the Soviet engines captured by the Germans and sold to the Finns were license built versions of the Wright 1820 improved by the Soviets. The Finn's gained another 100hp with the Shvetsov M-63...which was the improved version of the 1820 known after 1941 as the ASh-62(M-62).

I've heard a story that the original Wright 1820-G5's of the B-239's had heavy oil consumption problems similar to the problem the Commonwealth Brewsters had. The Finn mechanics simply flipped the oil control ring 180 degrees(suggesting they were installed with the bevels facing incorrrectly) and the problem was solved. Dunno if it's true...a nod to the fact they operated in vastly different temps and conditions is noted.

EDIT

_________________
He bowls overhand...He is the most interesting man in the world.
"In Peace Japan Breeds War", Eckstein, Harper and Bros., 3rd ed. 1943(1927, 1928,1942)
"Leave it to ol' Slim. I got ideas...and they're all vile, baby." South Dakota Slim
"Ahh..."The Deuce", 28,000 pounds of motherly love." quote from some Mojave Grunt
DBF

Hi John, thanks, I got it the wrong way around it was the New Yorkers who built two, one for the Dutch MLM Museum - but I can confirm I've only ever heard of two.


The saga of who recovered and 'owned' that aircraft does fill a book, and it did, I understood, end up in Finnish hands, loaned to the NMUSNA - but you may be correct it was obtained by the US Navy. Can you confirm?


The ones that made it to Australia were assigned to the RAAF, then to the USAAF eventually. I've a vague memory of minor parts surviving, like the Republic P-43 Lancer 'bits' in Aus.

And during the war, there were a couple of RAF ones on Crete, but these were pretty definitely lost on the German invasion.

Meanwhile another chance to post these images (buy your Buffalos now while stocks last!)





From this thread:
viewtopic.php?p=298236
- with some interesting points, not least Spanner's at the end. He's right, of course!

Regards,

_________________
James K

"Switch on the underwater landing lights"
Emilio Largo, Thunderball.

www.VintageAeroWriter.com