Terrible Plane From An Even Worse Company: Brewster SB2A Buccaneer

[@cdfe3388]

The worst plane ever was the Christmas Bullet. All other contenders are competing for second-worst.

[@josephglatz25]

Yep.

[@spudskie3907]

I’ve never heard of the Bullet so I had to look it up. Wow! I think I can make a better plane!

[@hertzair1186]

It was more of a murder weapon than an airplane

[@lancerevell5979]

Agreed. An utter abortion called an "airplane". 😮

[@downix]

You forgot the quotation marks around "Airplane"

[@Ndqar]

Brewster thought it could operate an urban factory. They tried to build Buffaloes in a 7 storey office building. Very cramped. No cranes. Lots of elevator trips.

[@massmike11]

Then they made it worse by trying to build F4U Corsairs. That were not deemed combate worthy.

[@fazole]

They had to assemble, dissemble, and reassamble each airframe as they moved them from floor to floor. The USN Buffalos had problems with gear retraction due to improper tolerances and the USN aviation mechanics attempted to fix the problem by shaving off some of the landing gear struts which caused the gear to collapse when landing on an aircraft carrier. So they adopted the Wildcat, which originally seen as just an update of the biplane F3F. The USMC got the Buffalos which were all shot down at Midway.

[@BrownSofaGamer]

@@fazoleThey also had to disassemble the planes again to transport them out of the factory to the airfield they were to be flown out from. Truly peak efficiency.

[@stephenbarker5162]

So even handed them a contract in the first place. Did no one in procurement ever check their production facilities.

[@christopherandersch1299]

The best thing Brewster did, was force Grumman to re-do their wildcat prototype.

[@lancaster5077]

Brewster did a lot of sub contract work. So not so bad in that respect ?

[@moblinmajorgeneral]

​@@lancaster5077The build quality of their Corsairs was so bad they had to be relegated for training, and the company was shuttered.

[@papadopp3870]

@@lancaster5077I got the impression that they had a hella quality control issues when acting as subcontractor. One would’ve been wise to choose Grumman or Vought planes not built by Brewster. But, yeah. The Finns loved the Buffalo… there’s that.

[@frank-y8n]

@@papadopp3870 That must have been due to trouble with their other aircraft. Climate?

[@limprooster3253]

​@@frank-y8nat lot of reasons. The buffalo was obsolete compared to Japanese planes but it wasn't outclassed by the Russian planes the fins were fighting. Finnish buffalos were land based, with the arrester hoom and other carrier equipment removed, and the weight savings helped address the buffalos biggest issue, weight and a lack of power.

[@merafirewing6591]

There are alot of other planes that take the worst ever made that are in a league of their own compared to Brewster. I just like the barrel shaped look of them and other aircraft.

[@MisterOcclusion]

Little wonder Brewster is a footnote in aviation history, and only really known for an aircraft that only the Finns could love.

[@CZ350tuner]

I read that the Curtis Helldiver was only accepted into service, despite failing all of the US Navy's specifications plus having structural integrity issues, because the Brewster Buccaneer was even worst.

[@Shrike58]

The second iteration of the Helldiver was up to snuff; the follow-on Curtiss carrier bombers didn't advance much beyond that.

[@brunozeigerts6379]

I remember the line from the Midway movie(the one starring Charlton Heston) When the base commander asks how many fighters they can put up, the reply is, 'About 10 F4F's and 15 Buffaloes.' "Antiques.' 'We'll let 'em know we're up there.' (except no Buffaloes were shown)

[@Shrike58]

I want to say that some SBNs wound up on USS "Hornet" (CV-8) in VS-8, but I've never found a picture.

[@colinmartin2921]

Impossible to pick the worse planes, because it depends on what sort of opposition they faced.

[@budwyzer77]

How does it compare to the Me 210 as a total disaster? The Buccaneer's failure didn't compromise the Navy's strike capability but it also didn't evolve into a useful plane.

[@jamesricker3997]

The Me 210 did manage to kill a lot of pilots, when the Luftwaffe couldn't afford to lose pilots

[@budwyzer77]

@@jamesricker3997 That's why I rank the 210 as a bigger failure even if it wasn't a complete dead end like the Buccaneer.

[@jameshall1300]

​@@budwyzer77 the 210 debacle also got pilots killed vicariously when they had to revert to the very outmatched ( at that point ) 110 while they worked out the kinks with the ,210

[@genreynolds6685]

I thought the Dauntless, hero of Midway was a Scout Bomber, too. SBD = Scout Bomber, Douglas.

[@fazole]

The USN divided the primary role of the SBD, between scout bombing and dedicated dive bombing. The dive bomber squadrons had more training in that skill.

[@paulbishop251]

Also, the aircraft assigned to the Scouting Squadrons would normally carry a 500 lb. bomb, while the Bombing Squadrons loaded out with a 1000 lb. one. The Scouting Squadrons would make up the difference in more fuel to extend their range.

[@strayling1]

Your best video yet. I both enjoyed and learned!

[@steveball2307]

Should have sent them to Finland, they liked Brewsters!

[@jfangm]

They liked Buffaloes, not Brewster products in general.

[@steveball2307]

@@jfangm Of course, my comment was tongue in cheek. That said, we often see in conflict, it's not what you've got but what you do with it that matters.

[@vinceely2906]

Finally found their place fighting for the Axis

[@jfangm]

@@vinceely2906 Finland wasn't an Axis power.

[@stephenbarker5162]

​@@steveball2307It helps when your enemy has even worse equipment and worse operational tactics and deployment.

[@richardferg6455]

The worst plane in WWII was the French Loire 210. A single seat floatplane fighter, went through trials, issued to units then grounded due to wing failures.

[@mikepette4422]

that sounds like a winner

[@F40PH-2CAT]

I think Italy's Breda BA.88 was worse. It was a bomber that could not get off the ground with a bomb load and ended up being used as a diversionary ground target on Italian airfields, them hoping the Allies would attack them instead of more useful planes.

[@tomaskoupil5994]

Avia S-199 deserves to be on the list as well. Post war design with early war performance, nasty flying characteristics and tendencies to kill it's pilots. Truly horrible plane.

[@timcargile1562]

At least it had a cool name.Its like having a cool logo.

[@fredkitmakerb9479]

At 19 minutes and 33 seconds, the derelict Buccaneer photo, is that at tullahoma, tennessee? I used to fly over it during my freightdog days.

[@RemusKingOfRome]

... needs a turret ... Oh WAIT ! Just goes to prove, manufacturing something complex like a WW2 plane , isn't easy. Everything needs to go right.

[@TorquilBletchleySmythe]

I'd pick the three nastiest turret fighters in the war, the Blackburn Roc, the Blackburn Skua, and the Boulton Paul Defiant. Conceptual and aesthetic disasters, they looked like they were meant to fail.

[@tomaskoupil5994]

Blackburn Roc is a serious contender in this category!🤔

[@stephengardiner9867]

The Roc and Skua were undeniably ugly, ungainly, underpowered and simply mystifyingly witless designs. The Defiant was not a bad looking aircraft but as a day fighter... "out of its league". Performance that allowed it to attack contemporary bombers BUT the wily Huns did not "play cricket" by the same rules and used fighter escorts as far as their range would allow. NO forward facing armament unless one trained the turret so that the barely adequate .303 cal. machine guns were firing dangerously close to the pilot. It could have made a rather deadly night fighter. In a way, the turret guns on a turret fighter were SO CLOSE to the later "Schrage Musik" installation on German night fighters. Ditch the turret for a couple of fixed weapons or lock the guns at a predetermined angle. Instead of flying (in daylight) along side of or worse, in front of your quarry, you approached from underneath...usually the least defended... at night. Those wings were more than big enough for a quartet of 20 mm canon or at least eight ,303's (some Hurricanes had 10!). The Defiant COULD have made more of a mark for itself. The Skua and Roc? Nah! I swear that the RAF, early in WWII, thought that there was something heroic in sending overweight, underpowered, underperforming, under-armed, aircraft into battle against clearly superior defending fighters.

[@falloutghoul1]

It's such a shame, because the bomber doesn't look that bad for a mid-late 1930's dive bomber.

[@pandaphil]

Agree. The nose might have been too long, but other than that it looks the part.

[@stephengardiner9867]

Now where have we heard a very similar tale of woes in the development of a WWII Navy dive-bomber? Was the thing all that worse than the Helldiver? It too was rejected by as terrible by Britain, Australia... and the U.S.A.A.C.! Vultee's parallel to these dive-bombers fared rather better. Brewster's mess was compounded by corruption whereas Curtis's seemed to be cluelessness. Perhaps this was fate's way of indicating that the dedicated dive-bomber's time had come and gone. The Buccaneer was actually not a bad looking lump but those nose mounted guns spoke volumes as to how far Brewster were "behind the curve" and they never seemed to develop an undercarriage that wasn't flimsy or complicated. A 1/48 scale kit would be great.

[@gdude3957]

I think that after the navy took over, many brass wienies were put in charge and made the crony situation worse,. My humble opinion, and i worked for Lockheed for 25 years. I saw and heard a lot. Can't talk or bad mouth, but suck ups do prevail sometimes in the industry. Sad but historically accurate.

[@richardw64]

Okay. I was willing to keep an open mind about the company and not accept your headline, until.... 22:07

[@TitanHulk220-s4m]

Oh yeh, it's not, they managed to ruin the F4U Corsair, it was the Final-Straw ! 😵‍💫🤦🏻‍♂️

[@aurosan750AU]

This is literally a streched "Buffallo"

[@briangibbs3774]

I would suggest that the ME 363 "Gigant" might be a close contender.

[@captainaxle438]

It's always because of not enough engine power. This holds true in all makes in all countries, even continued into the jet age development. Power and speed won the fight

[@Titus-as-the-Roman]

Apparently the Navy was well aware of Brewster's $hitty work when they took over & decided to remain open, at the time there were many companies that could assemble the aircraft but the actual designs went to a small Finite amount of aircraft design firms, they wanted to try & save as many design Engineers as possible & those that were responsible for their Prototype construction while the schools geared up to put them out.

[@MikeBracewell]

Great video, thank you. This thing looks, to my eyes, very much like the Curtiss Helldiver - another piece of junk. Mind you the Blackburn Skua is pretty high up there as the worst IMHO. Most Blackburn aircraft were crap, except - wait for it - the Buccaneer! What's in a name?

[@mebeasensei]

The Fleet Air Arm of the Royal Navy had to be right up there for having the worst set of aircraft for any of the major armed forces in WW2.

[@BobSmith-dk8nw]

@@mebeasensei That was mostly due to their time under the control of the RAF. Needless to say - the FAA Pilots loved American Lend Lease Aircraft. For all the bad things Brown had to say about American Aircraft - he flew and loved the Martlet. The FAA also played a very real role in getting the F4U Corsairs Carrier Qualified. Even with the Sea Fire - they loved it in the air but then wrecked it trying to land. Operational losses of Sea Fires were High. Of course - the P-51 fared even worse. It was so fragile that Carrier Qualifications were suspended due to fear that they were going to get someone killed. Excellent Land Based Aircraft did not have the same requirements as Carrier Aircraft which were so well satisfied by _"The Grumman Iron Works"_ . My First night aboard a Carrier - I was awakened by this loud *_KAAABLANNNNNGG!!!!!!!_* I wondered if an aircraft had crashed. Then I herd it again ... and again ... and again ... and I realized that was just the sound the planes made in landing. After that - I just slept right through it. .

[@ExcuseMePhoney]

I wonder if any aircraft collectors go out of their way to get Brewster planes, similarly to how people love the Edsel nowadays.

[@topaz2821]

I love the helldiver, genuinely one of my favorites of the war.

[@z3r0_35]

On the one hand, yes, the Ohka sucked...but it technically did what it was designed to do and it did it very well in the few cases where its mothership G4M could get into launch range. The main flaw with it was its reliance on a slow and vulnerable carrier aircraft. The same can't be said of the Buccaneer.

[@lancerevell5979]

A credible idea, very poorly executed. I guess Brewster hired the designers that nobody else wanted. 🙄

[@outlet6989]

Sounds like the way the VA hires their doctors.

[@DejaMoo-rf5th]

I was kinda expecting commentary, not just on the quality of the management, but the workforce themselves, as well- anyone searching for "House Committee on the Naval Matters, 1943", will find difficult-to-imagine hearing, involving Tom deLorenzo, at that stage union leader at Brewster... as Meatloaf sung "read on and weep"....

[@stephenmeier4658]

Brewster even tried to manufacture Corsairs but it did not work out for anyone.

[@Packless1]

...unfit for combat-operations, only used as traininers...!

[@Inkompetent]

They made Corsairs? Who'd have ever known, aside from that it's exactly what he mentions in the video! :O

[@stephenmeier4658]

​@@InkompetentYeah I do that a lot...commenting before I see the whole vid :{°

[@fredkitmakerb9479]

Another channel mention that after a while, all buccaneers rolled off the production line and went straight to the scrap yard. Did you find mention of that in your research?

[@None-zc5vg]

Consider the colossal waste of taxpayers money by which the debt accrued on the wartime borrowings for junk equipment like this took much of the remaining Century to pay off. The British were bankrupted by theirs.

[@kevanhubbard9673]

I'd never heard of this one although i knew about Brewster due to their ill fated Buffalo which is also in the running for the worst aircraft for WW2.

[@MFitz12]

I'm hard pressed to think of a better candidate for worst plane of the war - all factors considered.

[@brunozeigerts6379]

Worst warplane? Other than the Bullet(mentioned by another commentor, and I would agree) there's the Italian Ba 88 ground attack plane... that was so bad the Italians only parked them on runaways as decoys. Or the American Barling bomber... which had a range of 170 miles. Though it could double that... provided it didn't carry any bombs.

[@iffracem]

Fairey Barracuda, Bolton Paul Defiant.... "Hold our collective beers"

[@None-zc5vg]

The Barracuda and other Royal Navy 'planes suffered from having to be "jacks-of-all-trades" in order to get the most out of the limited space on the carriers from which they operated.

[@bruceday6799]

You'd think somebody would mention the TBD Devastator in this category...

[@GM-wl9mp]

Whenever I hear Brewster, I think of a beer company, not an aircraft company.

[@limprooster3253]

Which is ironic because the fins referred to the buffalo as a "flying beer keg"

[@rkkristalovich653]

What is the difference between the Buccaneer and the Buffalo?

[@marclaplante5679]

The Buffalo was a single seat fighter.

[@DavidBritton-nl1wv]

I'd actually be embarrassed to be caught sitting there in one of those tubs when the Japanese showed up in their Zeros and Nakajimas.

[@BAR209]

Even the plane looks like it has lost all hope and just wants to crash. 2:40-2:56

[@JohnnySmithWhite-wd4ey]

I vote for the Messerschmitt Me 210. Ordered straight off the drawing board. Put into production only to find it was completely unstable in flight.

[@evilpandakillabzonattkoccu4879]

Ki-105 Otori is my choice, just off the top of my head. It's hard to justify, because it was built very, very late in the war and, while 300 were ordered, only 9 were made.....though, that could also be seen is an indication of the desperate situation Japan was in and their need for this plane. Japan needed one plane to perform one task: A long range fuel tanker to move aviation fuel. So, in the final months of the war, the Japanese took their KU-7 gliders and retrofitted them with engines. Then the plane was given the task of transporting aviation fuel. This plane is amazing horrible because it (as I said previously) was meant to be a long range fuel transport aircraft.....but it ended up using 80% of the fuel it carried, just making the trip from Sumatra to Japan. 😂 You be the judge?

[@SteveMacSticky]

Oh you are Canadian, that's nice

[@Redgolf2]

Number 1 for me is the Blackburn Botha, cringe 😅

[@kidmohair8151]

I wonder if James Work managed to take the money and run. (to a country without an extradition treaty)

[@fembotheather3785]

The Curtiss SO3C Seamew was rather unsuccessful.

[@frankdillon6127]

clarification, I'm referring to the other plane, (Brewster F2A Buffalo).

[@kevindolin4315]

The Brewster logo is a corker. It makes it look like it was in the aviation business since 1810! Quite the accomplishment. Here's the USN's training film on the Buccaneer: kzbin.info/www/bejne/nILJf3WBg651gLM Here's a history of Brewster company, a how-to on how not to run a company kzbin.info/www/bejne/iaq8kKaJm6l9d68

[@Matt_The_Hugenot]

Two British competitors. The Blackburn Rock, the worse of the two aircraft produced to the flawed turret fighter concept, somehow they managed to build over 130 of them. The aircraft from which it was derived, the Skua, managed to be merely average. Probably the even worse was the Fairey Battle. In just three years 2200 were delivered and almost as soon as the last ones were handed over in 1940 the type was withdrawn from combat. Considering that it was powered by Rolls Royce Merlin engines that were desperately needed for Hurricanes and Spitfires consumption of precious resources should be added to its list of faults. The RAF had better aircraft that had entered service earlier and soldiered on longer.

[@pizzagogo6151]

Funny as I was watching this I kept thinking” why did the USN they persist with their rubbish designs & just not use their production facilities....”& then I got to the rest of the dismal story 🤣

[@Catsrule1132]

Please do a video on some of those high efficiency horten gliders

[@CZ350tuner]

The worst fighter, of WW2, was the Fiat G50. The total recorded kills tally is only 7 enemy aircraft, 6 of these were by the Finnish Airforce flown G50 fighters. More G50's were lost in combat than enemy aircraft shot down by them. It's 860 HP unsupercharged engine gave the G50 a top speed of only 265 MPH in level flight (exactly the same as the CR42 biplane that it was replacing). All the enemy fighters, that it faced, were at least 70 MPH faster and most Allied bombers could outrun the G50 without breaking into a sweat.

[@jmirsp4z]

between 30 November 1939 and 4 September 1944, the G.50s of HLeLv 26 shot down 99 enemy aircraft, including aircraft more modern than they, such as the British fighters sent to the USSR. In the same period, Finnish squadrons lost 41 aircraft of several types. But Fiat lost in combat were just three, with a ratio victory/loss of 33/1.

[@waynesworldofsci-tech]

Saw Buccaneer and thought Blackburn.

[@mebeasensei]

I love these long, single engine, pre-war scout jobs. My fav is the Aichi E13A. I think this Brewster is a handsome plane. And it reminds me of some Japanese late-war planes, as well as a smarter looking Helldiver.

[@vinceely2906]

Funny thing is the Blackburn Buccaneer was great but probably the only decent aeroplane Blackburn made.

[@Ryzard]

Anyone else hear "800 horsepower" for some planes and fantacize of bringing a corvette zo6 V8 back in time? Like 900hp naturally aspirsted and surprisingly fuel efficient? Just me? Okay..

[@pandaphil]

The Curtiss Seamew tops my list.

[@paulwoodman5131]

Sea Cow doesn't instill confidence 😅.

[@wirebrushofenlightenment1545]

Brewster seemed to like making big old chonks of planes.

[@haroldbrown1998]

I liked the Brewster Buffalo.

[@Dv087]

Looks a little like the Hell Diver.

[@kcstafford2784]

Would not actually being able to fly disqualify it as the worst plane ever???

[@alexander1485]

Ive seen the only one in existence, national naval aviation museum

[@jonathanklein383]

The buffalo was not a bad mid 30s plane. As it got heavier its performance got worse. The overheating engine was more wrights problem than brewster. Vs an i16 or a5m it was quite good. Then there was this thing. It looks like it could be capable. It ah... wasn't.

[@cuddlepaws4423]

Reminds me of the film 'Brewster's Millions'. In this case, the boss swindled $10 million. Plus, the company couldn't seem to make a cup of tea, let alone a plane. Just goes to show, just because it's American doesn't mean it's not S*it. But in this channel's comments section, there are plenty of Americans taking the piss out of other country's stuff. America can make rubbish, but when it's pointed out, you get all bitter and twisted.

[@JaguarKwikE]

Why did the Finns have such great results vs the US overloading for poor performance causing of the Brewster Buffalo

[@stephenbarker5162]

Probably because the Finns were fighting the Soviet Air Force which had poor aircraft and tactics.

[@frank-y8n]

@@stephenbarker5162 The Finns had a great variety of fighters none of which were designed for their climate. The others were probably even worse affected.

[@carlhicksjr8401]

And then there was the Vultee Vengeance....

[@frankdillon6127]

must remember early in the war we used what we had which makes sense. the Bruster was available old technology for sure. the young pilots were assured that the Bruster was as good as the Zero. when early on 90% of the Bruster's never returned, lead people to think this information was not correct.

[@paulrobinson3649]

I'm honestly surprised that we, the British, didn't ship them to the USSR with the Airocobra.

[@downix]

Hey! I like the Aircobra

[@budwyzer77]

The Airacobra wasn't a bad airplane. It just wasn't suited to US needs.

[@zzgonnazz6893]

Kingcobra better

[@outlet6989]

They are fighting words. Any car with a mid-engine can't be all bad.

[@fredkitmakerb9479]

In the hands of the russians, they used it as an air superiority fighter, and it performed very well. They actually preferred it to a lot of their own fighters.

[@Stay_at_home_Astronaut81]

Too bad, the Buccaneers were fine looking aircraft.

[@paulwoodman5131]

Pretty bad aerospace company that gets dissolved during a war after being run by the largest air force operator in the world. 😮

[@massmike11]

Seems the Fins disagreed.

[@martinryan2370]

Breda 88 or PZL karas

[@giorgiotoso1039]

Yes the breada "Lince" Ba.88 is a valid contender and so is is the less well known, but abysmal Savoia-Marchetti SM.85. Useless, and also ugly!

[@richardhart9204]

... so, it was like the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, before Tony Dungy.

[@stephenmeier4658]

This

[@mikepette4422]

Poor sad Brewster

[@williamroberts1819]

An important part of aviation history aaaaaaand sad face emoji.😢😢😢😢😢

[@MichaelJDargan]

HE 177. Not even close.

[@patrickcardon1643]

"Black sheep" ... I see what you did there 😄

[@towgod7985]

Truly, easily, the worst airplane of WWII!

[@Packless1]

...the other 'Buccaneer' ~20years later was MUCH better...! 😉

[@old_guard2431]

Should have sent them to the Finns.

[@picklerick8785]

Buccaneer? More like Succaneer! I am not surprised the Navy tried to foist them on the Marines, because if there's one thing the Navy was good at in 1942, it was screwing the Marine Corps. They abandoned the Marines on Wake, ensured the Marines on Midway had Buffaloes and Vindicators, and boned the Marines on Guadalcanal repeatedly. I'm legit surprised they let Marines fly Corsairs, because they didn't suck.

[@Idahoguy10157]

The navy lost more lives defending Guadalcanal than the First Marine Division lost there. The navy, marines, coast guard, and the army all paid blood. For that matter include the Royal Australian Navy and Australian coast watchers. Plus the natives who assisted the allies. The butcher bill was high on all parts.

[@milferdjones2573]

Lucky the Japanese fleet unlike other parts was often timid. At Midday the Japanese could still take the Island only one US Carrier left which at best might take out a BB or two before out of weapons a fuel for the planes. As mentioned Midway land craft poor and Japanese still had two light carriers one day away.

[@Idahoguy10157]

@@milferdjones2573 ….the point of taking Midway was to go after the American carriers. Taking it to occupy it would have been pointless. Plus as far east as Midway was the US could have starved out a Japanese garrison. Resupplying it would have been sporadic

[@tomandtinadixon]

Too many brewskis at Brewster.

[@SatchPersaud-sm1gc]

I would have thought it would have been russian

[@johnnyzippo7109]

@johnnyzippo7109 0 seconds ago I must say , considering what a Second Global War meant to everyone involved , to call Brewster a terrible company . To call them terrible , without first explaining the contractual environment of the epoch , at best click bait , at worst , hostoric and intellectual ignorance . No one at the time knew , yet , who , what would be a world beater. Fortunately for YOU , ALL of the Brewester employees have gone to Glory , on their behalf , kiss our a---!

[@pibbles-a-plenty1105]

Donald Trump is inspired to greatness by companies like Brewster. LOL!

[@lancerevell5979]

Brewster would have been loved and well funded by a Biden misadministration. Of course, he'd have shipped a bunch to Ukraine, loaded with American Greenbacks.

[@lancerevell5979]

A Biden Misadministration would have well funded Brewster, and shipped a bunch of them to Ukraine loaded with American Greenbacks.

[@ninelima1412]

Brewster appears to be just like any Elon Musk company .