HOME > BUFFALO > FLIGHT TESTS I

Flight testing the Brewster Buffalo I

First impressions

Take-off - The take-off is very smooth and straightfoward, with no tendency to bounce or bucket. After opening the throttle the throttle the tail remains down for about 30 yards, but holding the stick right forward brings the tail up very smoothly. The elevator control is not too sensitive as on the Spitfire or too sloppy as on the Hurricane. As the speed increases the aeroplane has a slight tendency to swing, which, however, is very easy to control. . . . The aeroplane flies off without assistance after a take-off run which is short than that of either the Spitfire or Hurricane; when airborne it increases speed quite rapidly and has a good initial rate of climb.

Landing - The approach glide at 90-95 m.p.h. is steep, making the landing easy and giving an excellent view of the aerodrome. Because of the slight sinking impression the pilot tends to flatten out slightly higher than usual, but the aeroplane settles down after a small float with no bounce, bucket, or swing. The brakes can be used after touching down, they operate smoothly and effectively and the ground run is not very long.

Taxying - On the ground the aeroplane is very maneuverable--it can easily be turned in its own space with the aid of a little braking, which is most effective and quite smooth, the tail wheel is not steerable. The view is good except directly ahead where it is obscured by the high position of the nose.

Ailerons - Tests in the speed range from the approach glide to 400 m.p.h. showed the ailerons to be exceptionally effective; they are crisp and powerful, and the stick forces are not too light at low speeds nor too heavy at the greater speeds. The pilots considered them to be a very definite improvement on the Hurricane and Spitfire fabric covered ailerons.

General - There is no tendency for any control to oscillate snatch or take charge at any speed. The pilots considered that with this aeroplane a definite advance had been made in fighter controls.

What Eagle squadron thought

It is strongly recommended that this type should on no account be considered as a fighter without considerable modification.

The wings are not bolted to a centre section but appear to have a common main rear spar located through the fuselage. Changing wings in the event of accidents will therefore be uneconomical and slow.

The elevator is actuated by a push-pull tube. While this is a positive method of operation it is feared than an explosive shell or even a bullet . . . may shatter or collapse it. Experience has proved how much punishment the twin cable can stand without breaking down.

The electric system instead of having dual cables is of the one wire earth return [negative ground] type, which means that a chafed lead may cause fire and will in any case blow the fuse in the given circuit.

The fire power of two .5 Colt and two .303 Browning guns is inadequate.

No reflector sight.

The side panels of the windscreen are at such an angle that it is difficult to see through them.

The armour plated seat is not thick enough or high enough to protect the head. It should stretch from one side of the cockpit to the other. It is submitted that the side panels on the fuselage adjacent to the seat be armour plated in view of the number of arm wounds which have been received in other single seat fighters.

The [primer] is not positive like our Ki-gas and it has a habit of sticking in the off position. It incorporates a rubber gland which perishes and has to be removed.

The undercarriage actuating lever is so small and sharp that it is both difficult as well as painful to operate. . . . The same applies to the flap operating lever. [He didn't like the seat adjustment lever either.]

The top straps of the Sutton harness should be fed through the back of the seat instead of over it. In its present position the pilot is only securely held when right way up. In the inverted position the straps give enough to allow him to hit his head on the hood.

The control column with firing button on top . . . does not give such good firing maneuverability when fighting as the spade grip, with the firing button in the front.

The R/T controls are on the right hand side, necessitating changing hands to operate [the radio], and is so placed that the pilot's elbow hits the seat every time he changes from send to receive.

The oxygen is regulated automatically instead of manually, where the pilot can turn it on a bit more for fighting.

The clock itself is of no value without a trip indicator which this one has not got.

The rudder has only one instead of two control cables. It should have three hinges.

The inertia starter is not so good for quick take-offs as the battery starter.

There is no automatic mixture control with the supercharger in high gear. There is no exhaust gas analyser by which to judge the mixture control.

There is not automatic boost control. This means that in a battle climb the throttle has to be adjusted continuously in order to avoid exceeding maximum possible boost.

The fuel tanks appear to be of the integral type built into the spar. A bullet hole in the tank will therefore mean changing the wings.

The flaps are not large enough and only work for 60 [degrees} of travel, with the result that the glide is somewhat flat and the aircraft trundles a long way on landing.

When landing or taxying the tail wheel wobbles on its caster and rips the rubber of the tyre.

As a trainer the aircraft is delightful. It behaves with the ease of a [Gloster] Gladiator and is just as simple to aerobat. So far we have found no vices.

(These reports are continued on Flight Testing the Buffalo II. Also see Eric Brown's opinion on the Buffalo)