Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Most under rated Allied aircraft.

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Most under rated Allied aircraft. Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Most under rated Allied aircraft. - 6/2/2011 7:38:45 PM   
crsutton


Posts: 9590
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline 		My vote is the coronado transport. 16,000 lb. payload and the ability to transport to any dot base that is on water. You only get about 50 of these gems, so use them wisely.



_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg
Post #: 1
RE: Most under rated Allied aircraft. - 6/2/2011 7:57:42 PM   
spence

 

Posts: 5400
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: Vancouver, Washington
Status: offline 		Just cause it is a picture of a PB2Y-5 in action.




BTW this is indicative of level bombing the Navy Way (right from the get go though this picture was taken in 1945).

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by spence -- 6/2/2011 8:01:10 PM >

(in reply to crsutton)
Post #: 2
RE: Most under rated Allied aircraft. - 6/2/2011 9:08:39 PM   
crsutton


Posts: 9590
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline 		Actually, the patrol bomber is only fair due to its high service rating. Catalina is a much better plane and much more useful. I am referring to the transport version of which the Allies only get a handful.



_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to spence)
Post #: 3
RE: Most under rated Allied aircraft. - 6/2/2011 9:10:03 PM   
terje439


Posts: 6813
Joined: 3/28/2004
Status: offline 		Maybe not underrated, but gee I want alot more of;

Mitchell Pr.II
20/25 range for an Allied early war scout :o



Terje

_____________________________

"Hun skal torpederes!" - Birger Eriksen

("She is to be torpedoed!")

(in reply to spence)
Post #: 4
RE: Most under rated Allied aircraft. - 6/2/2011 10:15:42 PM   
JohnDillworth


Posts: 3100
Joined: 3/19/2009
Status: offline 		P40E gets a lot of crap for not being a Zero. It's perfectly adequate for the time and situation. Never great, but it's what the Allies had it I'm happy for every one. I also like the F4F-7 Wildcat. Massive range for a single engine recon plane. By the time you get them you probably have a small base in the Salomons that will allow it just to reach and recon Truk. Can these fellas be based on a Carrier?

_____________________________

Today I come bearing an olive branch in one hand, and the freedom fighter's gun in the other. Do not let the olive branch fall from my hand. I repeat, do not let the olive branch fall from my hand. - Yasser Arafat Speech to UN General Assembly

(in reply to terje439)
Post #: 5
RE: Most under rated Allied aircraft. - 6/2/2011 10:26:50 PM   
jeffk3510


Posts: 4132
Joined: 12/3/2007
From: Kansas
Status: offline 		So long as it is "carrier capable" and "carrier trained".  Correct me if I am wrong someone..

_____________________________

Life is tough. The sooner you realize that, the easier it will be.

Currently chasing three kids around the Midwest.

(in reply to JohnDillworth)
Post #: 6
RE: Most under rated Allied aircraft. - 6/2/2011 10:55:07 PM   
WLockard


Posts: 183
Joined: 11/13/2005
Status: offline 		P39D, in the game it is better than the P40-E

(in reply to jeffk3510)
Post #: 7
RE: Most under rated Allied aircraft. - 6/2/2011 11:19:58 PM   
Shark7


Posts: 7937
Joined: 7/24/2007
From: The Big Nowhere
Status: offline 		The Brewster Buffalo B.339 gets a bad rap due to the experiences the British had with them, but when flown by well trained pilots against aircraft they were not so horridly mismatched against, they did very well (talking the ones flown by the Finnish Air Force against the Russians). Let's face it, the British forces in Malaya in 1941 were stripped down in an effort to defend the homeland, they had some disadvantages.

_____________________________

Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'

(in reply to WLockard)
Post #: 8
RE: Most under rated Allied aircraft. - 6/2/2011 11:34:50 PM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5821
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline 		Aye, the B339 is definitely under-rated. I'd also put in the I-15 and I-16. I've had multiple Dutch aces in the B339 and also multiple Chinese aces in the I-15s and I-16s. The Chinese avoided Zeroes but the B339s all had some Zero kills. It is all about how you use them.

_____________________________

John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.

(in reply to Shark7)
Post #: 9
RE: Most under rated Allied aircraft. - 6/3/2011 3:03:23 PM   
crsutton


Posts: 9590
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: jeffk3510

So long as it is "carrier capable" and "carrier trained".  Correct me if I am wrong someone..


It is not "carrier capable" in the game which is an oversight as it was able to fly from carriers. However, I do not think it could get off a carrier when fully loaded with fuel so the range was not as great.


But a valuable plane early in the game when the Allies have virtually no decent recon aircraft.


_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to jeffk3510)
Post #: 10
RE: Most under rated Allied aircraft. - 6/3/2011 3:21:48 PM   
crsutton


Posts: 9590
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Shark7

The Brewster Buffalo B.339 gets a bad rap due to the experiences the British had with them, but when flown by well trained pilots against aircraft they were not so horridly mismatched against, they did very well (talking the ones flown by the Finnish Air Force against the Russians). Let's face it, the British forces in Malaya in 1941 were stripped down in an effort to defend the homeland, they had some disadvantages.


Not necessarily an undeserved bad rap. It was not a great plane. The Finns has a lighter version but basically their great advantage came with a core of veteran pilots fighting against Soviet pilots that were woefully unprepared and under trained flying obsolete pre-war fighters. (sort of a death cocktail ) Even the Finns admitted that once they came up against better Soviet fighters, (Yaks, P40s and Migs) the playing field got very level. It was not the plane in this case but the pilots.

Anywhere else and the Brewster got hammered by better planes.

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to Shark7)
Post #: 11
RE: Most under rated Allied aircraft. - 6/3/2011 3:52:14 PM   
LeeChard

 

Posts: 1099
Joined: 9/12/2007
From: Michigan
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Nemo121

Aye, the B339 is definitely under-rated. I'd also put in the I-15 and I-16. I've had multiple Dutch aces in the B339 and also multiple Chinese aces in the I-15s and I-16s. The Chinese avoided Zeroes but the B339s all had some Zero kills. It is all about how you use them.

I agree, if you take the time to train the chinese pilots to a reasonable standard you can do some damage with the I-15 and I-16. The problem is getting enough planes. I tend to disband squadrons to fill out my active ones.

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 12
RE: Most under rated Allied aircraft. - 6/5/2011 6:59:23 PM   
Dobey455

 

Posts: 445
Joined: 12/28/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton


quote:

ORIGINAL: Shark7

The Brewster Buffalo B.339 gets a bad rap due to the experiences the British had with them, but when flown by well trained pilots against aircraft they were not so horridly mismatched against, they did very well (talking the ones flown by the Finnish Air Force against the Russians). Let's face it, the British forces in Malaya in 1941 were stripped down in an effort to defend the homeland, they had some disadvantages.


Not necessarily an undeserved bad rap. It was not a great plane. The Finns has a lighter version but basically their great advantage came with a core of veteran pilots fighting against Soviet pilots that were woefully unprepared and under trained flying obsolete pre-war fighters. (sort of a death cocktail ) Even the Finns admitted that once they came up against better Soviet fighters, (Yaks, P40s and Migs) the playing field got very level. It was not the plane in this case but the pilots.

Anywhere else and the Brewster got hammered by better planes.


It can't just be put down to good pilots.
The Brewster in Finnish service achieved a much, much higher kill \ loss ratio than either the Bf-109 or the Fw-190 in German service did against the same opponents, and I haven't seen any evidence that he Finns were substantially better pilots than the Germans.
(for the record Finnsish Brewsters scored 32:1 kill loss.)

(in reply to crsutton)
Post #: 13
RE: Most under rated Allied aircraft. - 6/5/2011 10:03:30 PM   
crsutton


Posts: 9590
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline 		I admit that I pulled this directly from Wiki, but sometimes the people writing for Wiki know their stuff.

Yeah, I would have to say it was the pilots in this case. And the fact that the Buffalo was at least a marginally better fighter than the I15 and I16 fighters that it was facing during this period. The kill ratio that you cite is for a period early in the war. It does not apply to the whole war. The Red Air force got fairly proficient at killing both German and Finnish pilots as the war progressed. And an average pilot in a Yak 3 would probably eat up a good pilot in a Buffalo

Attacking Soviet Air Force pilots using formulaic defensive tactics, many Finnish pilots racked up enormous scores on the Finnish front. The default tactic was the four-plane "parvi" (swarm) with a pair flying low (but visible, not too close to the terrain) as the bait and a pair flying high to dive on the eventual interceptors. In the long run, the Soviet Air Force on the Finnish front never developed an efficient approach to counter this tactic. According to some reports, this tactic also inspired the German Luftwaffe's kette.[citation needed] Most of the pilots of Lentolaivue 24 were Winter War combat veterans. This squadron achieved total of 459 Soviet aircraft kills with B-239s, while losing 15 Buffalos in combat.[6]

While the remarkable Finnish accomplishments in the Buffalo are undeniable, aviation historian Dan Ford points out that Stalin's purges and recent expansion of the Soviet Air Force resulted in many new inexperienced pilots while simultaneously discouraging combat initiative. The result was pilots who failed to scan the airspace behind them, and also Soviet air formations that held their positions in defensive circles while the diving Finnish pilots picked them off one-by-one. The Soviet fighter aircraft used in the early years on the Finnish front also included some obsolescent models such as the Polikarpov I-15 and I-153. After the end of hostilities, Karhunen, the captain and commander of the 3rd flight of LeLv 24, recalled:

"The Brewster model 239 was good against the older Russian fighters, Polikarpov I-153 Chaika (Gull) and I-16. Hence the period 1941–42 was the best time for us. In 1943 it was already significantly more difficult when the Russians began to use their newer fighters against us... Later, with the Yaks, Hurricanes, Tomahawks, LaGG-3 and MiGs, it became a fight to the death."[42]


Ack, I think I am hijacking my own thread...

< Message edited by crsutton -- 6/5/2011 10:06:46 PM >

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to Dobey455)
Post #: 14
RE: Most under rated Allied aircraft. - 6/6/2011 3:34:33 AM   
oldman45


Posts: 2320
Joined: 5/1/2005
From: Jacksonville Fl
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: spence

Just cause it is a picture of a PB2Y-5 in action.




BTW this is indicative of level bombing the Navy Way (right from the get go though this picture was taken in 1945).



Perhaps its just my eyes but if you look off the bow of the ship, I think I see the plane that dropped the bomb or torp flying rather low. Anybody else see it

_____________________________


(in reply to spence)
Post #: 15
RE: Most under rated Allied aircraft. - 6/6/2011 4:00:08 AM   
Shark7


Posts: 7937
Joined: 7/24/2007
From: The Big Nowhere
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: oldman45


quote:

ORIGINAL: spence

Just cause it is a picture of a PB2Y-5 in action.




BTW this is indicative of level bombing the Navy Way (right from the get go though this picture was taken in 1945).



Perhaps its just my eyes but if you look off the bow of the ship, I think I see the plane that dropped the bomb or torp flying rather low. Anybody else see it


Probably a torpedo, PBYs were capable of using torpedoes


_____________________________

Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'

(in reply to oldman45)
Post #: 16
RE: Most under rated Allied aircraft. - 6/6/2011 6:26:32 AM   
Fallschirmjager


Posts: 6793
Joined: 3/18/2002
From: Chattanooga, Tennessee
Status: offline 		The Bolo. It makes a good ASW plane all the way into 1942 and even into 1943 if you are short of upgrades.

In the late war I think the Twin Mustang. If the Allies allowed for player defined research I would pour resources into this plane. I have seen kill ratios of 25:1 when playing Downfall.

(in reply to Shark7)
Post #: 17
RE: Most under rated Allied aircraft. - 6/6/2011 7:35:31 AM   
Erkki


Posts: 1461
Joined: 2/17/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton

I admit that I pulled this directly from Wiki, but sometimes the people writing for Wiki know their stuff.

Yeah, I would have to say it was the pilots in this case. And the fact that the Buffalo was at least a marginally better fighter than the I15 and I16 fighters that it was facing during this period. The kill ratio that you cite is for a period early in the war. It does not apply to the whole war. The Red Air force got fairly proficient at killing both German and Finnish pilots as the war progressed. And an average pilot in a Yak 3 would probably eat up a good pilot in a Buffalo

Attacking Soviet Air Force pilots using formulaic defensive tactics, many Finnish pilots racked up enormous scores on the Finnish front. The default tactic was the four-plane "parvi" (swarm) with a pair flying low (but visible, not too close to the terrain) as the bait and a pair flying high to dive on the eventual interceptors. In the long run, the Soviet Air Force on the Finnish front never developed an efficient approach to counter this tactic. According to some reports, this tactic also inspired the German Luftwaffe's kette.[citation needed] Most of the pilots of Lentolaivue 24 were Winter War combat veterans. This squadron achieved total of 459 Soviet aircraft kills with B-239s, while losing 15 Buffalos in combat.[6]

While the remarkable Finnish accomplishments in the Buffalo are undeniable, aviation historian Dan Ford points out that Stalin's purges and recent expansion of the Soviet Air Force resulted in many new inexperienced pilots while simultaneously discouraging combat initiative. The result was pilots who failed to scan the airspace behind them, and also Soviet air formations that held their positions in defensive circles while the diving Finnish pilots picked them off one-by-one. The Soviet fighter aircraft used in the early years on the Finnish front also included some obsolescent models such as the Polikarpov I-15 and I-153. After the end of hostilities, Karhunen, the captain and commander of the 3rd flight of LeLv 24, recalled:

"The Brewster model 239 was good against the older Russian fighters, Polikarpov I-153 Chaika (Gull) and I-16. Hence the period 1941–42 was the best time for us. In 1943 it was already significantly more difficult when the Russians began to use their newer fighters against us... Later, with the Yaks, Hurricanes, Tomahawks, LaGG-3 and MiGs, it became a fight to the death."[42]


Ack, I think I am hijacking my own thread...


Both pilots and hardware. The Leningrad front was a kind of a secondary front to the Soviets, and they would not send their best hardware there until March 1943(the same month LeLv34 was founded and received its first Bf 109s) in the form of 3rd Guards regiment that had 1 of its 3 squadrons equipped with Lavochin La-5, and later another regiment in Leningrad air defense. And while Magnusson's LeLv24 had mostly well trained veteran pilots, same could not be said about the Soviets. Even later in the war with clearly better aircraft(La-5, P-39N and Yak-9; Yak-3 was only used against Germans and in relatively small numbers) they lacked the individual pilots' skill, tactics and organisation to fully exploit them. Even the La-5s of the 3rd Guards managed to shoot just a single 109 of the LeLv34, in a bad weather radar and GCI guided ambush...

In late Spring of 1944 the Soviets had over 1,000 aircraft between the front and Leningrad vs. 6 Finnish 109s in at Suulajärvi - and the B-239 had been pulled from frontline use as LeLv24's last wings had received Bf 109s. On the other hand, P-36s that were as numerous as Buffaloes, served in the fighter role until the end of the war, and they didnt do much worse, really.

_____________________________


(in reply to crsutton)
Post #: 18
RE: Most under rated Allied aircraft. - 6/6/2011 4:02:32 PM   
crsutton


Posts: 9590
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline 		Thanks for the info.

Back to the original subject, I also favor the liberator long range transport. Once again, you only get a pitiful supply (3 per month) but it is a great plane for deep para drops.

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to Erkki)
Post #: 19
RE: Most under rated Allied aircraft. - 6/7/2011 3:04:42 PM   
Sardaukar


Posts: 9847
Joined: 11/28/2001
From: Finland/Israel
Status: offline 		Some good info about Finnish fighter tactics and pilots in WW II:

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

The most important element in the fighter combat was surprise, and that was the goal which always had to be tried to reach for. A big and tight formation could very seldom achieve the surprise because it was easily seen from far away and the pilots couldn`t keep good lookout while working to maintain their positions in the formation. On the other hand, a section with the two fighters about 100 - 150 yards away from each other, or the division with 300 - 400 yards between the two sections, were found to be very effective in the search exercises. This kind of formation tactics was adopted by the FAF during 1934 and 1935 and it became the standard method in the Finnish fighter units since then. Every pilot was free to keep a good lookout to every direction and also all the time to check the six of the other pilots. In addition to that this kind of small and loose formation was seen much later because all of its aircraft were not always at the same time in the view of the opponent. The search phase was heavily emphasized in the training and the ability in that was an important factor in the evaluation of the fighter pilot`s skill.

It was also found in training that one of the most important skills of the fighter pilot was the shooting accuracy; the ability to judge the right deflection during maneuvering, to estimate the right shooting distance and to concentrate the fire on the point target, for example on some vulnerable part of the target airplane. The shooting training became an essential, and in times dominating, part of the fighter training. The Käkisalmi air gunnery camp on the coast of Lake Ladoga was a big contributor to the shooting accuracy of the Finnish fighter pilots.

The good self confidence which was acquired from the air gunnery camps and air combat training was the basis for the Finnish fighter pilots` success in the Winter War.

The Finnish fighter tactics differed before the Winter War from almost all other nations` fighter tactics. Only the Germans had during the last phase of the Spanish War began to use the similar tactical principles as the Finns.

When the FAF in the spring of 1943 got the Messerschmitt 109 G fighters, the performance balance was once again stabilized, but the Soviet numerical superiority was increasing steadily. The most air operations concentrated on the Gulf of Finland where the Brewsters still were able to fight successfully by using several divisions stacked high one above another. The pilots took advantage of the potential energy and their good flying skill and shooting accuracy.

There are three basic things which made the Finnish fighter force successful:
  • The philosophy of loose and broad section and finger four formations which the FAF adopted already in 1935.
  • The emphasis on individual accuracy in air-to-air gunnery which was trained for systematically. The Finnish fighter pilots didn`t just shoot at the target airplane, they shot at certain parts of the target airplane.
  • The principle to attack regardless of numbers which always gives the advantage of initiative.




_____________________________

"To meaningless French Idealism, Liberty, Fraternity and Equality...we answer with German Realism, Infantry, Cavalry and Artillery" -Prince von Bülov, 1870-


(in reply to crsutton)
Post #: 20
RE: Most under rated Allied aircraft. - 6/7/2011 3:11:45 PM   
Sardaukar


Posts: 9847
Joined: 11/28/2001
From: Finland/Israel
Status: offline 		And:

In the air combats the following characteristics were found (17):
  • The most combats were fighter combats and the Finnish formations always took the initiative. In all cases the flight of about ten fighters was strong enough to fight successfully even against the big enemy formations until additional fighters were sent to the battle.
  • The Brewsters used against the Soviet I-153 and I-16 aircraft the energy tactics in which they hit from above and pulled again up to a new attack position. The enemies tried with their agile fighters to get into a nose to nose shooting positions but lost often the systematic defence capability.
  • The winner was usually not determined by the performance of the fighter but by the skill of the pilot. The Soviet pilots seemed often to be good flyers but bad shooters and also not capable to fight alone. They still often used their old tight formations of three aircraft. It seemed that they had at least partially abandoned their old training system but were not yet ready for the new one, and in any case had not given training for that.
  • The attacks on the escorted bomber formations had been successful. The first attackers hit the escort fighters and shot them down or forced them to break, and then the other fighters could concentrate on the bombers.
  • The slow Fokkers tried to avoid fighter combats concentrating on the enemy seaplanes and reconnaissance aircraft. The attacks were usually done from the rear sector and the enemies tried to escape at the low level to eliminate the shooting position from behind and below.
  • The Fiats also used the energy tactics in the fighter combats.
  • The Curtisses lacked speed but they were agile and used as an evasive maneuver a steep and tight climb turn which often caused the enemy to stall.



_____________________________

"To meaningless French Idealism, Liberty, Fraternity and Equality...we answer with German Realism, Infantry, Cavalry and Artillery" -Prince von Bülov, 1870-


(in reply to Sardaukar)
Post #: 21
RE: Most under rated Allied aircraft. - 6/7/2011 3:21:52 PM   
Sardaukar


Posts: 9847
Joined: 11/28/2001
From: Finland/Israel
Status: offline 		And Summer 1944 experiences with Me-109Gs:

The intercept sorties were flown with as many fighters as was available at any certain moment, usually 8 - 20 fighters. The basic idea was that the top section or division attacked on the Soviet escort fighters while the lower division or flight attacked on the bombers. However, often, due to the great numbers of the Soviet escort fighters, all of the Finnish fighters had to commit themselves to the fighter combats. Anyhow, the Finnish principle was always to attack even as a section regardless of the numbers of the enemy. The limited fighter force was not able to repulse the bomb raids, but it caused continuous losses which were eating the enemy pilot cadre. The attacks scattered the Soviet formations and spread the combat over a larger area where the enemy could not get the direct benefit from the big numbers. The duels were solved by the combat skill and shooting accuracy of the individual pilots and the Finns proved to be the winners almost always. There were several occasions in which the Soviet formation turned back after seeing the Finnish fighters in the interception position (22).


When the Soviet offensive was stopped in the middle of July 1944 the enemy activity also in the air operations began to go down. The Soviet fighters started to avoid air combats while the Finnish fighter force was continuously becoming stronger due to the small losses and the deliveries of the additional MT fighters (22).


So it was quite clear that superior tactics, aggressiveness, better flying skills and shooting accuracy were really the deciding factors if planes were about same generation.


< Message edited by Sardaukar -- 6/7/2011 3:28:08 PM >

_____________________________

"To meaningless French Idealism, Liberty, Fraternity and Equality...we answer with German Realism, Infantry, Cavalry and Artillery" -Prince von Bülov, 1870-


(in reply to Sardaukar)
Post #: 22
RE: Most under rated Allied aircraft. - 6/7/2011 11:59:58 PM   
spence

 

Posts: 5400
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: Vancouver, Washington
Status: offline
quote:

quote:

ORIGINAL: spence

Just cause it is a picture of a PB2Y-5 in action.




BTW this is indicative of level bombing the Navy Way (right from the get go though this picture was taken in 1945).




Perhaps its just my eyes but if you look off the bow of the ship, I think I see the plane that dropped the bomb or torp flying rather low. Anybody else see it



Yes the small black thing is positively the PB2Y that attacked just off the bow of the ship. It was bombing, not launching a torpedo. IIRC The plane was shot down on a subsequent attack and the aircraft that took this picture landed in the water and picked up the crew while under fire from the ship which was fairly nearby but dead in the water and sinking. The AAR is in the squadron history for VP-13 (or maybe VPB-13) at VPNavy.com

(in reply to crsutton)
Post #: 23
RE: Most under rated Allied aircraft. - 6/8/2011 12:48:15 AM   
Shark7


Posts: 7937
Joined: 7/24/2007
From: The Big Nowhere
Status: offline 		@ Sardaukar: From what you have posted, it seems that the B.339 is under-rated based not on its own performance, but due to other factors such as tactics, training (the units in Malaya were not the cream of the crop, those pilots were defending the British Isles), and initiative are what made the difference.

In the opening days of the Pacific War, the Japanese had the edge in tactics, training, and initiative...hence they outperformed the B.339. Plus the Zero and Oscar were just a better aircraft, 1 generation newer.

A good question to ask is how did the B.339 fair against a more equal opponent over Singapore...namely the Nate?

_____________________________

Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'

(in reply to spence)
Post #: 24
RE: Most under rated Allied aircraft. - 6/8/2011 4:57:38 PM   
Sardaukar


Posts: 9847
Joined: 11/28/2001
From: Finland/Israel
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Shark7

@ Sardaukar: From what you have posted, it seems that the B.339 is under-rated based not on its own performance, but due to other factors such as tactics, training (the units in Malaya were not the cream of the crop, those pilots were defending the British Isles), and initiative are what made the difference.

In the opening days of the Pacific War, the Japanese had the edge in tactics, training, and initiative...hence they outperformed the B.339. Plus the Zero and Oscar were just a better aircraft, 1 generation newer.

A good question to ask is how did the B.339 fair against a more equal opponent over Singapore...namely the Nate?


Also have to remember that FAF Brewster was lighter version than those used in Malaya, for example. RAF Brewsters were quite in disadvantage when it came to energy fighting. I think B339 might have done decently well against Nate, but most RAF pilots there were definitely not as well trained as FAF pilots were.

_____________________________

"To meaningless French Idealism, Liberty, Fraternity and Equality...we answer with German Realism, Infantry, Cavalry and Artillery" -Prince von Bülov, 1870-


(in reply to Shark7)
Post #: 25
RE: Most under rated Allied aircraft. - 6/8/2011 6:57:02 PM   
crsutton


Posts: 9590
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline 		One variable frequently left out when comparing fighters is acceleration, which is a key factor once a fight gets low or becomes a turning fight. I am pretty sure the brewsters did not have great acceleration, but have to admit don't know how they would compare acceleration wise to the zero or oscar.

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to Sardaukar)
Post #: 26
RE: Most under rated Allied aircraft. - 6/8/2011 8:36:43 PM   
FatR

 

Posts: 2522
Joined: 10/23/2009
From: St.Petersburg, Russia
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar
Some good info about Finnish fighter tactics and pilots in WW II:

It's all nice and stuff, but keep in mind, that in every area of importance Finnish aviation was practically a non-factor, leaving everything actually worth doing (primarily operations against Murmansk and Leningrad, but also the vast majority of air action over Baltic) to Germans. Also, I'm not sure if any good research on air war over the Finnish front actually exists (I'm mostly interested in air war as related to naval warfare, hence the statement above...), and if therefore anyone actually can say with any authority how successful Finnish Buffalos were.

(in reply to Sardaukar)
Post #: 27
RE: Most under rated Allied aircraft. - 6/9/2011 12:32:15 AM   
Mistmatz

 

Posts: 1399
Joined: 10/16/2005
Status: offline 		Maybe not the most underrated, and maybe more so in stock. But the Wirraway is doing a good job as ASW patrol for me.

_____________________________

If you gained knowledge through the forum, why not putting it into the AE wiki?

http://witp-ae.wikia.com/wiki/War_in_the_Pacific:_Admiral%27s_Edition_Wiki


(in reply to FatR)
Post #: 28
RE: Most under rated Allied aircraft. - 6/9/2011 1:01:28 AM   
Fallschirmjager


Posts: 6793
Joined: 3/18/2002
From: Chattanooga, Tennessee
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mistmatz

Maybe not the most underrated, and maybe more so in stock. But the Wirraway is doing a good job as ASW patrol for me.



I have been using these too. They have decent range and Australia has a lot of them so you might as well use them. They do need lots of training though.

(in reply to Mistmatz)
Post #: 29
RE: Most under rated Allied aircraft. - 6/9/2011 7:25:48 AM   
Sardaukar


Posts: 9847
Joined: 11/28/2001
From: Finland/Israel
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: FatR

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar
Some good info about Finnish fighter tactics and pilots in WW II:

It's all nice and stuff, but keep in mind, that in every area of importance Finnish aviation was practically a non-factor, leaving everything actually worth doing (primarily operations against Murmansk and Leningrad, but also the vast majority of air action over Baltic) to Germans. Also, I'm not sure if any good research on air war over the Finnish front actually exists (I'm mostly interested in air war as related to naval warfare, hence the statement above...), and if therefore anyone actually can say with any authority how successful Finnish Buffalos were.


There were quite a few historical studies, like the quoted article, written by ex-CO of the Finnish Air Force. So I think he does have some insight and access to primary sources.

Quite a lot of stuff here from those who actually flew those battles: http://www.virtualpilots.fi/hist/

Some interesting stuff about tactics in: http://www.virtualpilots.fi/hist/WW2History-paivahavittajataktiikka.html (in Finnish, original notes from 1946-47 included in PDF). Writer was in fighter training right after war with fighter aces like Puhakka, Wind and Luukkanen as instructors and lecturers. Those notes are from those lectures and training. Maybe Google translator etc. helps with that.

This would be main interest and most relevant to Brewster:

http://www.virtualpilots.fi/hist/WW2History-CaptainWindsAirCombatTacticsLecture.html (Cpt. Wind's Lectures on Fighter Tactics, Captain Hans Henrik "Hasse" Wind 30.7.1919-24.7.1995 75 aerial victories, double recipient of the Mannerheim Cross (the highest military award in Finland)

Original document by Hans Wind, Finnish Air Force, 1943.

The birth of this lecture series as told by Brewster/Me 109 ace Väinö Pokela:

"It all started in 24 Fighter Squadron during '42 or '43 if I remember correctly. Someone suggested that one of the squadron pilots go to Kauhava (Air Force Academy) to lecture on tactics, 'how to wage war with Brewsters'. That was because the Americans also started waging war and they had no clue how to go about it. There in the Pacific when they started fighting it was completely pitiful. They had three engagements where Brewsters were used. And in the last one they had 17 Brewsters in one aerial engagement, and if I remember correctly, 13 were shot down. After that all the Brewsters were sent to Florida for their Air Force cadets.

And all of this was the result of them attacking Zeros. They didn't consider at all that the Zero had no armour, was made of wood and was much lighter. But it had an engine of the same size. And they (Americans) started turn-fighting them (Zeros). So, the Brewsters were shot down. They just should have used rocking-chair (vertical) tactics, attack and pull out.

The Finns had already learned that in the Winter War when they attacked the I-15s and I-16s with their Fokkers. You did not turn-fight them. And this lecture, the paper about air combat tactics written by Hasse, started right from this idea."


http://www.virtualpilots.fi/hist/WW2History-AirWarofContinuationWar.html




< Message edited by Sardaukar -- 6/9/2011 7:51:56 AM >

_____________________________

"To meaningless French Idealism, Liberty, Fraternity and Equality...we answer with German Realism, Infantry, Cavalry and Artillery" -Prince von Bülov, 1870-


(in reply to FatR)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Most under rated Allied aircraft. Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

4.297