Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
Posted: 8/20/2004 6:27:51 PM EST
The article said this is the only know surviving Buffalo from WWII. Hope they can make it airworthy again.

www.warbirdforum.com/found.htm


Now for a couple of questions for the panel. If there is only one airworthy example of any aircraft should it be flown for the public. Do you take a chance on destroying the "last" of anything?

Will we in the future see restored military jets like we have WWII aircraft. Is the cost too high
to make it practical for civilians or will the .gov just not let the parts and aircraft get to the public?

Personally I love seeing the old birds in the air but it saddens me to see the last of anything destroyed.
Link Posted: 8/20/2004 6:32:20 PM EST
You don't have to wait for the future to see restored military jets there are plenty flying now.

My opinion, if only one example exists it should be flyable, but now flown. If two exist then they should fly if possible.
Link Posted: 8/20/2004 6:35:21 PM EST
That thing cost a lot of Marines their lives in WWII.
Link Posted: 8/20/2004 6:35:56 PM EST
http://www.livestocktrenz.com/Bailey.The.Buffalo/Bailey.htm


My Favorite Buffalo!


Take a look at the pics InHouse1 and Inhouse2

stupid Canadians......
Link Posted: 8/20/2004 6:38:15 PM EST
Link Posted: 8/20/2004 6:39:12 PM EST
Its a plane right? Why not fly it?
Not flying it because it "might" be crashed is stupid. Its like taking away your guns because you "might" kill someone.
Link Posted: 8/20/2004 6:40:04 PM EST
BTW, that plane now belongs to the Navy museum in Pensacola... they traded 3 P-3's for it.
Link Posted: 8/20/2004 8:36:27 PM EST
Despite the Buffalos shortcomings, the Finns were absolutly DEADLY with it in WW2. They had an amazing kill ratio vs. the russians.
Link Posted: 8/20/2004 10:47:32 PM EST
That Brewster will not be made flyable.
It will be a cosmetic restoration.

Link Posted: 8/20/2004 11:21:40 PM EST

Originally Posted By KA3B:
That Brewster will not be made flyable.
It will be a cosmetic restoration.




+1


I just don't see how that can be salvaged.

- BUCC_Guy
Link Posted: 8/20/2004 11:52:10 PM EST
It could be restored to flyable condition.
That's not what the National Museum of Naval Aviation is all about.
There are plenty of aircraft that were flown to the NAM that have been left outside to rot.



Originally Posted By BUCC_Guy:
+1
I just don't see how that can be salvaged.
- BUCC_Guy

Link Posted: 8/20/2004 11:57:51 PM EST
VL HUMU



Humu (="reckless") is a mid-wing single-seat fighter. Its fuselage is metal construction and comes from an American Brewster Buffalo B-239 (It has been lenghtened 19cm). The wooden wing is of Finnish design. The power plant is a Russian M-63 engine, purchased from Germany.

The basis of the Humu was the Brewster, of which Finnish pilots had a high opinion. After the strenght of Brewster fleet had reduced from original 44, design work of an indigenous version was launched. In October 1942 the Finnish Air Force ordered 90 aircraft, but a year later serial production was found to have fallen behind the schedule so much that the order was reduced to cover 60 aircraft. A wooden wing was tested on Brewster BW-392 from autumn of 1942 onwards. The aircraft was destroyed on 5th June 1943 when it flicked to the ground immediately after takeoff, killing pilot, an experinced Brewster flyer who was taking the aircraft to a squadron for in-service trials. In June 1944 serial production of Humu was cancelled, and only the prototype was completed. It first flew in August 8th 1944 with Captain Esko Halme at the controls. It logged total of 19h 50min on test flights before it was stored on March 28th 1945.

Humu fell short of expectation that had been bestowed on it. The wooden wing was too flexible and also 250kg heavier than an original wing. Neither did the M-63 engine develop the nominal 1000hp power output, and therefore performance remained much lower than had been calculated. In short, 1944 Humu was already totally obsolete as a fighter. Its development work served as a good example of emergency solutions to which the Finnish Air Force had to resort during the war years due to shortage of materials.



Originally Posted By CFII:
Despite the Buffalos shortcomings, the Finns were absolutly DEADLY with it in WW2. They had an amazing kill ratio vs. the russians.

Link Posted: 8/21/2004 4:14:01 AM EST

Originally Posted By CFII:
Despite the Buffalos shortcomings, the Finns were absolutly DEADLY with it in WW2. They had an amazing kill ratio vs. the russians.



26:1

Link Posted: 8/21/2004 6:35:07 AM EST
Link Posted: 8/21/2004 6:39:37 AM EST
The Finns did kick some serious Russian ass, didn't they. In the end, they were simply run over by a massively superior force. Even that bastard Stalin held the Finns in high regard. As far as I know, only the Finns were successful in maintaining their freedom; all of Uncle Joe's other targets lost theirs.

BTW, are we sure that's a buffalo.....might it be a bison?
Link Posted: 8/21/2004 7:02:21 AM EST
Link Posted: 8/21/2004 7:19:05 AM EST
Link Posted: 8/21/2004 7:19:41 AM EST
speaking of restored aircraft, anyone see that documantary with the B-29 they restore in the artic only to have the damn thing catch fire.
Link Posted: 8/21/2004 7:20:05 AM EST

Originally Posted By SGB:
Arguably the worst fighter of WW2





In fact, out of all American fighters used during WW2 the Brewster Buffalo has the best kill/loss ratio. Too bad the Finns were the only ones to figure out how to use it.



Vulcan94
Link Posted: 8/21/2004 9:36:36 AM EST
Here is Hans "Hasse" Wind pictured with his Brewster, one of the most succesful pilots during the war. He achieved 75 victories during the course of the war



Link Posted: 8/21/2004 10:13:44 AM EST

Originally Posted By twonami:
speaking of restored aircraft, anyone see that documantary with the B-29 they restore in the artic only to have the damn thing catch fire.



Yes, I did, years ago...

THAT SUCKED! Those guys replaced all the engines, and just about everything else of complexity on that plane; then I think it was a heater that got knocked over on takeoff... Really sad if you ask me.
Link Posted: 8/21/2004 2:46:17 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/21/2004 2:50:06 PM EST by JDemond]
KeeBird. It was the tank supplying fuel to the A.P.U. generator, that caught fire.
www.ramonacafe.com/keebird.htm
www.b29keebird.net/

I wish they would have left it alone!!
Link Posted: 8/21/2004 4:41:43 PM EST
The Finns were in a shitty spot. Hadda be on the Nazi side to fend off the Russki's.
Explain that to me.
Link Posted: 8/21/2004 5:23:56 PM EST
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 9:10:08 AM EST

Originally Posted By obershutze916:

Originally Posted By captainpooby:
The Finns were in a shitty spot. Hadda be on the Nazi side to fend off the Russki's.
Explain that to me.



The Fins really could have carred less about the Nazis. The Finns called it "the Continuance war."

To them, it was about reagining what they had lost in the winter war.

Yes, they fought side by side with the Germans (more Austrians and Bavarians than Germans). It was a marrage of convenience more than anything. They did not have what they needed to wage a major war, and the Germans wanted someone to help them.

The Fins were really not punnished by the western allies after the war for what they did as it was pretty justified. Besides, being a co-beligerant with the Germans kept them from trying somthing silly like invading.



There pretty much were no alternatives. Weapons were greatly needed and that country supplied them.

As a note, after the Continuation war, Finns fought against the Germans in Lappland on orders of the Allied Control Commision.

And if i recall correctly, Finland was the only country to pay its war debs in full, regardless of how justified they were.

Link Posted: 8/22/2004 9:54:52 AM EST
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 10:04:43 AM EST

Originally Posted By obershutze916:
The Soviets, as much as I hate to say it, also payed their western debts in full as well. Except for one ship full of gold bars that sunk, they did pay.



Uh...whereabouts exactly did that ship sink at, anyway?

Link Posted: 8/22/2004 12:43:37 PM EST
Top Top