Rating the Finns - Part II

A war weary Model 75A. The white rings indicate repaired bullet holes.

In a previous post I discussed my thoughts about the low aircrew quality ratings given to the Finns in the Battles Above 4 scenario book. This is not a post to disparage the author of that excellent scenario book in any way, but it is simply my thoughts on how I think the Finns should be rated in terms of Aircrew quality.

I have now gathered several titles on the Finns, in some cases titles in which the author(s) have sourced Soviet records to compare reported losses, and this research has convinced me that the Finns did have some of the highest kill ratios of any nation during World War II, usually flying outdated aircraft, and more often than not outnumbered in the various encounters with the Soviets.

What I first thought was an anomaly, that being the overwhelming kill ratio of Lentolaivue 24, flying Brewster F2As before receiving Messerschmitt Bf 109Gs later in the war, was not the exception, but instead the exceptional example of multiple successful Finnish squadrons. As outlined in another post, Lentolaivue 32, flying the Curtiss Model 75As for three years, also had an impressive kill ratio. But it does not stop there. With Morane-Saulnier 406s and Fiat G.50s other squadrons also inflicted far more casualties on the Soviets than was received in return. So we need to address the question - how were the Finns able to have such success?

"It's the man, not the machine" - and while I mostly agree with this premise, the tools of war can often provide an edge, but not so with the Finns. With aircraft of comparable performance in many cases, with armament on the lighter side, and with machines that were typically no more robust than the enemy, the Finns made up for a lack of quality equipment by the superior quality of their pilots. However, as mentioned in the previous post, the scenarios in Battles Above 4 do not give much distinction in aircrew quality between the Finns and the Soviets. While I usually like the aircrew ratings found in the Battle Above series, and the methodology that the author uses to determine ace and veteran aircrew quality, I believe that same methodology does not "work" during the Continuation War. How do we address this?

I have a few ideas around aircrew ratings for the Finns. The first takes an approach that any Finnish pilot that has five or more kills is an ace (+3). This is different than Battles Above, in which the author uses twenty kills or more before applying ace status. I would make a Finnish pilot with one to four kills a veteran (+2) aircrew, and any other pilot who has zero kills is rated as skilled (+1). Green (+0) aircrews should be extremely rare for the Finns. By taking this approach and applying against the scenarios in Battles Above 4, it will make most Finnish aircrew ratings improve, if one knows what pilots were involved in each scenario. As most of the scenarios only have a pilot or two named, this process would not ideally work, although any green aircrew would be bumped to skilled regardless, at least in my mind.

Another approach is to lower the aircrew ratings for each Soviets by one level, and utilizing the poor (-1) aircrew rating offered in the Korean War scenario book for green pilots, green for skilled, and so on. This potentially would balance the scenarios more towards the Finns, which makes sense to me, as in most of the scenarios they are outnumbered. This might be the easiest adjustment that can be made based on historical performance and the lack of information when it comes to knowing which Finnish pilots were present for each scenario.

A more extreme approach is to use both the aforementioned methods. Based on kill ratios, this actually might result in more historical outcomes but less than ideal balance for the Soviet players. However, in most of the scenarios the Soviet have the numerical advantage. Of course, being a dice game, results can always vary widely game to game so it would take several playthroughs of one scenario to see if any of the methods above provide a more historical outcome.

Here is a look at all three methods, using one scenario from Battles Above 4 in which the Finns are outnumbered. This scenario (65 to 0) had on the Finnish side the following known pilots and the number of confirmed kills each had obtained before this engagement - Aulis Bremer (6.33), Eino Koskinen (7.5), Kalevi Tervo (6.0), Pauli Salminen (3), and Yrjö Pallasvuo (5). 

Using my suggestions for Finnish aircrew quality above, giving ace status to these pilots with  five or more kills, really shows the imbalance, particularly if increasing the Finns and decreasing the Soviets. However, the historical event played out with the Finns claiming eleven kills (there were also present, but not in the scenario, Soviet bombers) to zero losses. The alternate version of this fight (Finland's Hawks, Stalin's Falcons) has the Finns at a greater numerical disadvantage with eighteen Soviet fighters and six Soviet bombers. I cannot imagine playing out this scenario and seeing the Finns so outnumbered and still managing to inflict such losses on the Soviets without making, at the very minimum, a dramatic increase in the Finnish aircrew quality.

It will be interesting to play through the scenarios with some measure of adjustments in place...but first I need to collect and paint planes!

Lentolaivue 32

Model 75A of Lentolaivue 32 in the later scheme of olive green and black over light blue

For those who have interest in the Continuation War, you probably know of the exploits of Lentolaivue 24 and their amazing successes while using the Brewster Model 239 against the numerically superior Soviets. However, the Finns fielded other squadrons that also delivered impressive kill ratios from mid-1941 until the Finns signed an armistice with the Soviets in mid-1944. One of those squadrons, flying another outmoded American fighter, was Lentolaivue 32. This squadron, which started the war flying Fokker XXIs, supported by a flight of Hawker Hurricanes, transitioned to the Curtiss Model 75A a few weeks into the war. The Sussu (Sweetheart), as the Model 75 was known in Finnish service, served in LLv 32 for three years and chalked up an impressive kill ratio over their Soviet counterparts. I have covered the Curtiss in Finnish service previously (found HERE) so I will not rehash those details. This post focuses on Lentolaivue 32 and its impressive string of victories, even when flying against advance Soviet fighters later in the war.

The squadron received its first victory on June 25, 1941 when Veikko Evinen, flying a Fokker XXI, shot down a pair of Tupolev SB-2. Evinen would obtain four victories in LLv 32, all in 1941. He would later transfer to LLv 34 and obtain ace status before being killed. LLv 32 would obtain 7.5 victories while flying the Fokker. LLv 32's first aces would be Paavo Berg and Kyösti Karhila, both obtaining their fifth kill on September 19, 1941, both victorious over MiG-3s.

A schwarm of Sussus

The following list shows the claims of the squadron, most of the claims verified against Russian archival sources. Note: FR = Fokker XXI, HC = Hurricane, CU = Curtiss, and MT - Messerschmitt.

Let's look at Lentolaivue 32 by the overall numbers. The squadron racked up 206 victories against nineteen losses for a ratio of nearly 11:1. Of the losses, six planes were lost due to anti-aircraft fire, three were lost due to Soviet airstrikes on Finnish airfields, while only ten were lost in combat, yielding a ratio of almost 21:1 when only counting combat losses. Ten LLv 32 pilots were killed, two wounded, and one was made a prisoner of war. Sixty-three of the squadron's pilots had at least a half kill and sixteen pilots made ace status. These numbers are even more impressive when taking into consideration that the squadron was rarely anywhere near full strength.

As seen on the following chart, the squadron was very successful against early war Soviet fighters, but also racked up numerous kills against the superior LaGG-3s and La-5s, again demonstrating the quality edge the Finnish pilots possessed as late as mid-1944.

I will discuss my final thoughts on rating the Finns in a future entry as a follow up to my previous post on Finnish aircrew quality.

The Curtiss Model 75 in Finnish Service

In a previous post I provided the Curtiss P-36/Model 75 in terms of Check Your 6! ratings. This post focuses on the Model 75’s service with the Finnish Air Force.

The Curtiss P-36, known variously as the Hawk, Mohawk, or Model 75, was used very little by its country of origin (the United States), seeing limited action at Pearl Harbor. However, several other nations used the Curtiss, in several different models, with varying degrees of success. France, in an effort to ramp up its military, purchased the Curtiss Model 75, variants A-1 through A-3, which resulted in the Curtiss making up nearly a third of the French fighter force by May 1940. Another country that used the Curtiss with great results was Finland, using captured versions obtained from Germany after France’s capitulation – the Finns utilized the Curtiss well into 1944, and donned the fighter with the name Sussu (Sweetheart). This post will delve a bit into the Curtiss while in Finnish service.

In Check Your 6! the Curtiss handles itself decently well for an early war aircraft. Using the A Maneuver Chart, the Model 75 also offers very good agility (+3) when not moving at maximum speed (4). Speed and firepower are where the Curtiss suffers when compared to aircraft introduced after 1941, but the ability to out turn most opponents along with upgrading the armament with two heavy machineguns (by the end of 1942) keeps the Curtiss relative even into 1944. Factoring in the overall exceptional Finnish aircrew quality, the Curtiss makes for a tough opponent. The A-4 version saw the introduction of the 1200 horsepower Wright Cyclone, but the Finns replaced the Cyclone with the lower powered Twin Wasp as it was deemed more reliable.

Nearly all of the Model 75s served in one squadron during the Continuation War, that being Lentolaivue 32, which completely converted to the Curtiss from the Gloster Gladiator shortly after the start of the war. The squadron typically consisted of three flights (of four to six aircraft each) and a command element. Of the fifty-eight pilots known to fly the Sussu at least sixteen of them became aces, Curtiss pilots claiming 190 kills, with the loss of just fifteen Model 75s, a ratio of nearly 13:1. Versions used by the squadron were the A-1 to A-4, as well as the previously Norwegian-owned A-6, a total of forty-four of all five types having been purchased from Germany. UPDATE (10/9/2025): According to the definitive account (Curtiss Design 75 Hawk P-36 and International Derivatives, written by Dan Hagedorn and Amaru Tincopa), the Finns utilized six Model 75A-1s, nine Model 75A-2s, nine Model 75 A-3s, seven Model 75A-4s, and thirteen Model 75A-6s. The Finns enjoyed flying the Sussu, calling it both robust and maneuverable. One might consider dropping the Agility penalty when moving at maximum speed and potentially increasing the Robustness to R2.

Books

We are blessed with several publications that cover the Finnish Air Force during the Second World War, many of them in English for us non-Finnish speakers. I will not list them all, but instead offer a few useful titles that I own:

Keskinen, Kalevi – Curtiss Hawk 75A – Stenman, 2004. A title that is mostly in Finnish but has English photo captions and an English translation section. Worth grabbing as it is focused mostly on the Model 75 (it does include some information on the P-40M that was captured and used by Lentolaivue 32).

Keskinen, Kalevi and Stenman, Kari – Finnish Aces of World War 2. Osprey Publishing, 1998. Typical Osprey offering that covers the aces that used various fighters in Finnish service.

Keskinen, Kalevi and Stenman, Kari - Finnish Air Force 1939-45. Squadron/Signal Publications, 1998. Numerous black and white pictures with some color profiles.

Persyn, Lionel, Stenman, Kari, and Thomas, Andrew – P-36 Hawk Aces of World War 2. Osprey Publishing, 2009. While there is a heavy focus on the Curtiss in French service, the Finnish use of the Model 75 is also covered in some detail.

Stenman, Kari – Finnish Aces: Their Planes and Units 1939-1945. MMPBooks, 2022. This pricey but large hardcover book (432 pages that weigh in at four pounds) is a deep dive into each Finnish ace, usually with a wartime photo of the pilot, black and white photos showing their various aircraft, and almost always a color profile of one of their aircraft. Included is a list of their victories, both confirmed and claimed but unconfirmed. This hefty book also provides detailed unit histories and several other appendices of information. Well worth the price if you are wanting a deep dive into Finnish fighter aces.

Aircraft Colors

Aircraft colors are often the subject of debate and confusion. However, the colors used on the Finnish Curtiss have been documented extremely well. I was able to find on the interwebs a document compiled by A. S. Marshall that provides Federal Standard 595b, RGB, and CMYK equivalents for not only the exterior but also for identification markings. The information for the Federal Standard colors came from Suomen ilmavoimien maalaukset ja merkinnät (Finnish Air Force camouflage and markings), written by Kari Keskinen, Kari Stenman, and Klaus Niska, published in 1996 by Apali Oy.

Early Model 75s in Finnish service were painted olive green on the upper surfaces and fuselage sides, with light blue under surfaces (RLM 65 should work as a good substitute). Later Finnish Model 75s were painted black and olive green on the upper surfaces, tail, and fuselage sides, with the under surfaces painted in light blue (some illustrations show light grey). As the black was faded in most cases, I suggest mixing light gray at a ratio four parts black to one part light gray. As with German-allied forces on the Eastern Front, the use of yellow on the cowling and under surface wingtips, along with a yellow fuselage band, were added to the Model 75s. Each flight had a distinctive color used for the aircraft number that appeared on the tail (yellow, white, or insignia blue with white outline). The aircraft number was the last digit of the plane’s serial number, a combination of a two-letter aircraft manufacturer code (CU for the Curtiss) and a three-digit number (example: CU-581 had a 1 on its tail). The serial number appeared in black on both sides of the fuselage. The hakaristi national insignia appeared in six positions (top and bottom of the wings and on the fuselage sides). Propeller hubs were usually painted black. There seems to have been no designated squadron insignia used for Lentolaivue 32.

AK Interactive makes a set of four acrylic paints for the Finnish Air Force. The colors included are black, olive green, light blue, and light grey. Arcus Hobby Colors also has a line of paints, available in enamel or acrylic, tailored for the Finns including a set for the Continuation War that has white, black, olive green, light blue, yellow, and grey. Lifecolor also makes a Finnish aircraft set, the acrylic colors being olive green, light grey, two shades of light blue, yellow, and black. 

Decals

Blue Sky Decals, Combat Miniatures, GHQ, Heroics & Ros, Hostile Aircraft, and I-94 Enterprises all make Finnish hakaristi in 1/285 or 1/300 scale. I am sure there are others, but these were the ones most prominent when searching online. Before someone makes a comment about the illustration of the hakaristi keep in mind that it was a symbol of luck prior to its modern day connotations.

Scenarios

In the Battles Above 4 scenario book (which features Eastern Front scenarios and available from I-94 Enterprises) there are three scenarios that include Model 75s (Claims For Everyone, Attack is the Best Defense, and 65 to 0). On the Check Your 6! discussion group there is also a scenario titled Finland’s Hawks, Stalin’s Falcon’s. The maximum number of Finnish Model 75s one would need to do all four scenarios is a very reasonable seven miniatures.

Where to Buy

There are a few companies making the Curtiss Model 75 in either 1/285th or 1/300th scale. As I use the former, I will list only those companies making 1/285th Model 75s that I have dealt with and highly recommend.

Flight Deck Decals – If I was choosing just one manufacturer, I would have to go with Flight Deck Decals. They offer the Curtiss in 1/300 but will do large custom orders in 1/285. These are printed planes, but the quality of the print and the material used is so good as to be amazing. You can find the Curtiss listed in two places – Other Nations WWII and USA WWII planes (both of these are found under the 3D Miniatures tab). In both cases look for Curtiss P-36-H75 Hawk. The price per plane at the time of this post was a trifling $2.10.

Raiden Miniatures – Code USA29 P-36 Mohawk can be found under the United States listing. At the time of this post, cost per plane was $3.00. My P-36s for Pearl Harbor are Raiden Miniatures. They are cleanly cast (being a newer addition to the Raiden line). Service from I-94 is exceptional, and they have online ordering.

Table Top Flights – A company with equally exceptional service, these are resin printed miniatures. Under the United States listing, look for Curtiss P-36/Hawk 75 (product code A-08-009-285) and be certain to click on the 1/285 box (they also make the Curtiss in 1/200 and 1/144). Cost is $3.50. The detail is excellent if subtle and the planes are cleanly printed. Easy to use online ordering makes working with Mike at TTF a breeze.

The Curtiss Hawk 75 for Check Your 6!

One of my favorite aircraft from the Second World War (and I do have several) is the Curtiss Hawk 75 (also known as the P-36). When in flight the sleek lines of this maneuverable yet rugged aircraft are apparent. Some confusion arises when trying to differentiate between the various armaments carried on each model, as well as how each model is designated. 

The P-36 was nearly obsolete by the time the Second World War started, but it was used by several nations early in the war, and by the Finns with great success well into 1944. Developed in 1934 in response to the U. S. Army's request for a low wing all metal-fighter with retractable wheels, the Hawk's main competitor was the Seversky P-35. The Seversky was eventually selected, even though it was slower and more costly to manufacture. However, Curtiss did receive a contract to build three prototypes. An improved Curtiss, using a Pratt & Whitney 900hp Twin Wasp engine, won the 1937 competition, resulting in an order for 210 P-36A models. While the P-35 was also put into production, only 196 models of the Seversky were built. By comparison, over one thousand Hawks were produced. Eventual users were Argentina, Britain, Brazil, China, Finland, India, the Netherlands, Norway, Peru, Portugal, Thailand, South Africa, and the United States.

The French received 316 Curtiss fighters where they were designated the Curtiss H75-C1. While the Curtiss made up 12.6% of the French single-seat fighter component, the H75 accounted nearly a third of the French kills during the 1940 campaign. The Vichy government would use the Curtiss in North Africa, where the H75 faced off against American Wildcats during Operation Torch.

The Finns, who nicknamed the Hawk "Sussu," received a wide variety of Hawk 75A models from captured French and Norwegian stocks. In 1942 they upgraded the armament to include one or two heavy machineguns, retaining the light machineguns in combination to provide a total of six weapons per plane. The Finns repeatedly mentioned the ruggedness of the Hawk, so a robustness rating of R1, while aligned with contemporary airframes, might be on the low side. The Sussu was used successfully during the Continuation War through mid-1944.

What follows is a chart listing the various models of the Hawk. I am thinking that the increased horsepower should result in better performance, so perhaps one might drop the (-) for agility on the models with the 1200 hp engine.

Rating the Finns

Brian DeWitt has created four very good scenario books for Check Your 6! In Battles Above 4 he has provided several scenarios that involve the Finnish Air Force, both for the Winter War and the Continuation War. As a gamer of the less mainstream, I plan on obtaining the planes to do many of these scenarios. As an historian, I also like to keep things as historically accurate as manageable, and with gaming at times complete historical accuracy can certainly be a hinderance. Many Check Your 6! scenarios are representations of much larger historical encounters, necessarily so because putting dozens and dozens of aircraft on the table bogs down the game. 

One area though that is bothering me somewhat are the Finnish pilot quality ratings. Remember, it is the man, not the machine (but really the machine has a large part to play). So how are the Finns able to rack up such amazing kill ratios flying aircraft like the Gladiator, Fokker DXXI, Buffalo, Hawk 75 (P-36), and other such second tier types that as the war progressed were inferior to their Russian opponents? Take for example Lentolaivue 24, perhaps the premier Finnish fighter unit. Claims were such that this unit might have had as high as a 25:1 kill to loss ratio. While Russian/Soviet sources have not been fully examined to compare actual reported losses, even if Lentolaivue 24 managed half that kill ratio, it is an amazing feat. So how is that replicated on the table top? Pilot quality.

But that is my dilemma - in looking at many of the Finnish scenarios in the book, they are often outnumbered, and even the difference in pilot skill between the two forces for any particular scenario does not seem to be great enough to recreate the historical record. To be honest, based on my readings (thus far just a couple of Osprey titles and perusing websites), I believe the Finnish ratings in Battles Above 4 to be too low, the Russians too comparable, or a combination of the two. I would even be, in some cases, tempted to give the Soviets a poor rating as found within the Korean War scenario book for Check Your 6! Jet Age (the dreaded -1 pilot). 

I have a few titles on their way, including what appears to be an amazing work, Finnish Aces: Their Planes and Units 1939-1945 by Kari Stenman and Karolina Holda. I plan to go through Lentolaivue 24 pilots as deeply as I can, accepting that this squadron's performance might have been the exception, but overall I believe that Finland's pilots were well trained, skillful, and far superior to most of their Soviet opponents. Mr. DeWitt mentions that he gives "green aircrew rating for aircrews that are not adequately trained or marginally trained new pilots that are in their first few engagements." I agree with that assessment, but not when it comes to Finland's pilot training and experience. More on this topic once I have a bit more source material.