Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: ilovestrategy

I had never even heard of this plane, had to Google it to see what it looked like. What was it's role?

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

ORIGINAL: Shark7

ORIGINAL: ilovestrategy

I had never even heard of this plane, had to Google it to see what it looked like. What was it's role?

Fighter-Bomber, Recon...

It was a jack of all trades, master of none.

Not exactly. It was an ideal naval fighter in the early days of the war when deployed out far from enemy shores because of several factors it had going for it.

1) Two seat fighter.....allowing a dedicated navigator. This allowed the plane to more safely navigate over large stretches of water and coordinate more closely with the FDO's located aboard the home carrier.

2) large fuel reserve allowed the plane to patrol for long hours or escort 1E planes in ferry or strike missions

3) It had twice the ammo capacity of the Hurricane allowing green FAA pilots a better chance to down enemy intruders.

The Fulmar did sterling service for the UK in the Med, particularily when it came to intercepting enemy patrol planes and bombers. However it's positive attributes negated from it's ability to face down 1E fighters. Keep in mind that back in the early days of the war, it was generally felt that one could not create a naval fighter that was fully competetive with a dedicated land based 1E fighter. The A6M more than any other carrier fighter of the time dispelled that notion. UK Fleet air doctrine however had pretty much accepted the fact that (their) carrier groups would be at a disadvantage if operating near concentrated land based airpower which was a big part of the reason why they opted for armored flight decks.

Fulmars shot down a good number of bogies but a short stint at Malta and worse, a very brief stint in the I/O vs. A6M's revealed it's shortcomings in spectacular fashion. Interestingly....the UK never gave up completely on the two seat fighter requirement......IIRC it's immediate latewar/post war fighter design was also a two seater.

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

ORIGINAL: Shark7

ORIGINAL: ilovestrategy

I had never even heard of this plane, had to Google it to see what it looked like. What was it's role?

Fighter-Bomber, Recon...

It was a jack of all trades, master of none.

Not exactly. It was an ideal naval fighter in the early days of the war when deployed out far from enemy shores because of several factors it had going for it.

1) Two seat fighter.....allowing a dedicated navigator. This allowed the plane to more safely navigate over large stretches of water and coordinate more closely with the FDO's located aboard the home carrier.

2) large fuel reserve allowed the plane to patrol for long hours or escort 1E planes in ferry or strike missions

3) It had twice the ammo capacity of the Hurricane allowing green FAA pilots a better chance to down enemy intruders.

The Fulmar did sterling service for the UK in the Med, particularily when it came to intercepting enemy patrol planes and bombers. However it's positive attributes negated from it's ability to face down 1E fighters. Keep in mind that back in the early days of the war, it was generally felt that one could not create a naval fighter that was fully competetive with a dedicated land based 1E fighter. The A6M more than any other carrier fighter of the time dispelled that notion. UK Fleet air doctrine however had pretty much accepted the fact that (their) carrier groups would be at a disadvantage if operating near concentrated land based airpower which was a big part of the reason why they opted for armored flight decks.

Fulmars shot down a good number of bogies but a short stint at Malta and worse, a very brief stint in the I/O vs. A6M's revealed it's shortcomings in spectacular fashion. Interestingly....the UK never gave up completely on the two seat fighter requirement......IIRC it's immediate latewar/post war fighter design was also a two seater.

ORIGINAL: oldman45

I throw myself on the mercy of the court

ORIGINAL: herwin
BTW, any idea how many A6M pilots got lost on their long flights and had to splash?

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

ORIGINAL: herwin
BTW, any idea how many A6M pilots got lost on their long flights and had to splash?

A good number of planes returning from Guadalcanal disapeared into the ether on the long flight back. Conversely, a small # disapeared during the carrier battles. Exact numbers will never be known. Probably the most famous incident involved F4Fs of the Hornet which was unable to navigate back to the home carrier before the entire escort splashed.

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

ORIGINAL: oldman45

Is it possible for a Fulmar to take off and land on the Hermes?

don't believe, and if one could...the airgroup would be so small as to be useles.....probably not more than a flight. However I doubt the plane even with folding wings could fit down the carrier's elevator.

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve

Yeah but there you had rookie flyers of a rookie ship.

Just because you've got a navigator doesn't mean you'll find your way back. Flight 19 had FIVE rookie navigators. [:D]

Seriously , the single most effective way to find your way home to a ships was the TACAN system. But who wants to broadcast a homing beacon during war time? [&:]

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve

My understanding is that the Fulmar was a variant of the proto type that resulted in the "Battle" light bomber. What were they thinking? "Ok, it's a lousy bomber (it got massacred in the French campaign) so let's try it as a fighter?"[&:]

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve

The therory is they could handle bombers. (It might work if your enemy doesn't escort his bombers--in other words if your enemy is either desperate or stupid).

ORIGINAL: Wirraway_Ace

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve

My understanding is that the Fulmar was a variant of the proto type that resulted in the "Battle" light bomber. What were they thinking? "Ok, it's a lousy bomber (it got massacred in the French campaign) so let's try it as a fighter?"[&:]

The Empire was broke before the war and had a real challenge on its hands as it accumulated wartime debt. My memory is the last of the debt was paid off in the 70s.

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Wirraway_Ace

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve

My understanding is that the Fulmar was a variant of the proto type that resulted in the "Battle" light bomber. What were they thinking? "Ok, it's a lousy bomber (it got massacred in the French campaign) so let's try it as a fighter?"[&:]

The Empire was broke before the war and had a real challenge on its hands as it accumulated wartime debt. My memory is the last of the debt was paid off in the 70s.

Warspite1

I think it was only about four/five years ago that we paid off the final installment, not the 70's.

ORIGINAL: Wirraway_Ace

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Wirraway_Ace




The Empire was broke before the war and had a real challenge on its hands as it accumulated wartime debt. My memory is the last of the debt was paid off in the 70s.

Warspite1

I think it was only about four/five years ago that we paid off the final installment, not the 70's.

You are indeed correct. Last installments made to the US and Canada in 2006. Almost 60 years...

ORIGINAL: Terminus

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

ORIGINAL: Shark7




Fighter-Bomber, Recon...

It was a jack of all trades, master of none.

Not exactly. It was an ideal naval fighter in the early days of the war when deployed out far from enemy shores because of several factors it had going for it.

1) Two seat fighter.....allowing a dedicated navigator. This allowed the plane to more safely navigate over large stretches of water and coordinate more closely with the FDO's located aboard the home carrier.

2) large fuel reserve allowed the plane to patrol for long hours or escort 1E planes in ferry or strike missions

3) It had twice the ammo capacity of the Hurricane allowing green FAA pilots a better chance to down enemy intruders.

The Fulmar did sterling service for the UK in the Med, particularily when it came to intercepting enemy patrol planes and bombers. However it's positive attributes negated from it's ability to face down 1E fighters. Keep in mind that back in the early days of the war, it was generally felt that one could not create a naval fighter that was fully competetive with a dedicated land based 1E fighter. The A6M more than any other carrier fighter of the time dispelled that notion. UK Fleet air doctrine however had pretty much accepted the fact that (their) carrier groups would be at a disadvantage if operating near concentrated land based airpower which was a big part of the reason why they opted for armored flight decks.

Fulmars shot down a good number of bogies but a short stint at Malta and worse, a very brief stint in the I/O vs. A6M's revealed it's shortcomings in spectacular fashion. Interestingly....the UK never gave up completely on the two seat fighter requirement......IIRC it's immediate latewar/post war fighter design was also a two seater.

Yup. The Fairey Firefly; this was almost a carbon copy of the Fulmar.

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

ORIGINAL: oldman45

I throw myself on the mercy of the court

That's good enough for me, as I'm feeling characteristically charitable today. As Temporary Self-Appointed District Attorney, I hereby nol prosse the indictment. You may proceed about your business, Oldman.

But be ye warned, forumites...the Kangaroo Court is ever vigilent.

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Wirraway_Ace

ORIGINAL: warspite1


Warspite1

I think it was only about four/five years ago that we paid off the final installment, not the 70's.

You are indeed correct. Last installments made to the US and Canada in 2006. Almost 60 years...

Warspite1

The price of freedom eh? [:(]

ORIGINAL: Wirraway_Ace

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Wirraway_Ace



You are indeed correct. Last installments made to the US and Canada in 2006. Almost 60 years...

Warspite1

The price of freedom eh? [:(]

Probably. The more interesting question to me is should Britain have borrowed more to provide better equipment to reduce wartime losses while further burdening its surviving citizens with debt? I have come to the opinion that the wartime leadership achieved a reasonable balance given the constraints of a chronically weak economy. Very tough decisions that are little comfort to those who lost family members in undersized cruisers or bombers with almost no ability for the crew to escape once hit.