Much like the P-39 Aircobra, the Brewster Buffalo excelled when used by competent pilots who were able to use the aircraft in a role and flight regime which favoured it’s strengths. This is true of a number of other WWII aircraft, like the Gloster Gladiator, which while seemingly obsolete, did a pretty outstanding job over Malta.

Brewster Buffalo

The main issue with the Buffalo was it was simply “too early” in a rapidly changing environment, being designed for a 1935 competition to replace the F3F biplane. Even as it was being issued, aircraft development was rapidly advancing, and the Buffalo simply became obsolescent almost overnight. Unfortunately, Brewster was a vary small company with very limited resources, and wasn’t able to upgrade their aircraft the same way other companies could, nor did it really have the resources available to design newer generations of aircraft.

Compare this to factories like Willow Run

The early lack of success was actually due to two factors, not only was the plane at least half a generation behind the current Imperial Japanese Army and Navy fighters of the period, but pilots also had not developed the proper tactics to deal with the very aerobatic Japanese fighters, attempting to engage in turning fights rather than “boom and zoom” energy fighting tactics. To be fair, virtually every nation involved in the Pacific theatre were making the same error in engaging in turning fights. The Buffalo was actually designed to be very aerobatic, and the wing loading on the initial versions was actually very similar to that of the A6M Zero.

The British and the Dutch attempted to overcome this with some fairly desperate expedients, such as halving the amount of fuel and ammunition carried. The Dutch and Finnish versions of the Buffalo were also different from the USN and Marine Buffalo’s – they had somewhat more powerful engines, the Dutch B-338C and D versions were lighter than the British, Australian and New Zealand ones, while the Finnish ones were “de navalized”, reducing their weight, which also increased their performance. Additionally, Finnish Buffalo’s were fitted with 4 machine guns rather than the usual 2.

Replica B-339 on display

Finnish Air Force Buffalo’s

The Dutch aircraft used by the ML-KNIL were capable of staying with the Ki-43 Oscar in a turning fight, which helped equalize the situation somewhat, although overall the Buffalo was still slower and less well armed. While I have no direct reference, it can be inferred the Finnish Airforce also exploited the superlative turning ability of the Buffalo (at least at first), and the extra firepower of the 4 machine guns as opposed to the more typical 2 gun setup used by other nations made any firing pass much more effective. It seems the quality of the Finnish Air Force pilots was also better, giving their pilots the ability to engage or refuse combat on their own terms.

So the general problem isn’t so much that the Buffalo was a bad aircraft, but it was one which had been overtaken by events by the outbreak of WWII, and one without much growth potential. Pilots could attempt to exploit it’s turning ability in a fight, although in general, Japanese aircraft were better at this sort of combat, while Soviet aircraft were closer in performance to Western aircraft, giving Finnish Buffalo’s an edge in a turning fight. Had Brewster been able to put more resources into the design, they “may” have been able to extend the life of the Buffalo somewhat, or perhaps have created a next generation aircraft, but this was not to be.