Page 1 of 5

Fairy Fulmar

Posted: Thu Jul 14, 2011 8:03 pm
by oldman45
Is it possible for a Fulmar to take off and land on the Hermes?

RE: Fairy Fulmar

Posted: Thu Jul 14, 2011 8:14 pm
by Schanilec
Would say so only if carrier trained.

RE: Fairy Fulmar

Posted: Thu Jul 14, 2011 10:02 pm
by crsutton
Anything that say "carrier capable" or "carrier trained" can operate from a carrier. Otherwise they cannot...

RE: Fairy Fulmar

Posted: Thu Jul 14, 2011 10:22 pm
by oldman45
I know the Fulmars are carrier capable, the question is can the Hermes handle a plane like that. I don't like putting planes on a carrier that can't handle them in real life.

RE: Fairy Fulmar

Posted: Thu Jul 14, 2011 11:41 pm
by jb1144
This site http://www.fleetairarmarchive.net/Ships/Hermes.html list the Hermes as capable of operating the Martlet (F4F), but dosn't say if they were ever embarked.

RE: Fairy Fulmar

Posted: Fri Jul 15, 2011 3:02 am
by oldman45
The Fulmar weighs about 2600 lbs more than the Martlet. It also has 1300hp engine over the 1200hp of the Martlet.

Just found a passage that stated fulmars operated off of 5 escort carriers before the arrival of the sea hurricanes and martlets. I guess they could fly off the Hermes in a pinch.

RE: Fairy Fulmar

Posted: Fri Jul 15, 2011 4:08 am
by Canoerebel
I have been requested to post a copy of the following Indictment herewith:


In the Kangaroo Court for the State of Denial

The Forumates of Said State

vs.

Oldman

Indictment

Count One: That on the 14th day of July, 2014, Oldman did, with lunacy aforethought, in a Forum post titled "Fairy Fulmar," which is a class A misdemeanor and high crime in and of itself, seriously propose to utilize the Fulmar as an offensive weapon in a War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition match. Said proposal against the decorum and high standards of serious players and contrary to the laws established by the Supreme AE being, to wit: Commandment One: Thou shalt not attempt to utilize the Fulmar or Wapiti in any offensive role in an Admiral Edition's match lest thou causest thy opponent to bang his head on the keyboard while simultaneously becoming dislodged from his seat of choice while laughing."

Presented to the Forum this 15th day of July, 2011.

Canoerebel
Provisional, Irregular and Temporary
District Attorney for the State of Denial
Denial Bar Number 614110
Justice Building
Denial City, State of Denial
1-800-Myrna Loy
www.sendkeylimepie.yum

RE: Fairy Fulmar

Posted: Fri Jul 15, 2011 5:00 am
by JeffroK
Double the fine, should be "Fairey Fulmar"

The judge doesnt suggest an option, would putting F2F's on board have helped?

Quick, someone put up the stats for a Skua!

RE: Fairy Fulmar

Posted: Fri Jul 15, 2011 9:00 am
by Blackhorse
ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

I have been requested to post a copy of the following Indictment herewith:


In the Kangaroo Court for the State of Denial

The Forumates of Said State

vs.

Oldman

Indictment

Count One: That on the 14th day of July, 2014, Oldman did, with lunacy aforethought, in a Forum post titled "Fairy Fulmar," which is a class A misdemeanor and high crime in and of itself, seriously propose to utilize the Fulmar as an offensive weapon in a War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition match. Said proposal against the decorum and high standards of serious players and contrary to the laws established by the Supreme AE being, to wit: Commandment One: Thou shalt not attempt to utilize the Fulmar or Wapiti in any offensive role in an Admiral Edition's match lest thou causest thy opponent to bang his head on the keyboard while simultaneously becoming dislodged from his seat of choice while laughing."

Presented to the Forum this 15th day of July, 2011.

Canoerebel
Provisional, Irregular and Temporary
District Attorney for the State of Denial
Denial Bar Number 614110
Justice Building
Denial City, State of Denial
1-800-Myrna Loy
www.sendkeylimepie.yum

[:D]

Denial is in Egypt, right?

RE: Fairy Fulmar

Posted: Fri Jul 15, 2011 10:30 am
by Terminus
Either way, I wouldn't count on the Hermes being able to take the Fulmar.

RE: Fairy Fulmar

Posted: Fri Jul 15, 2011 11:18 am
by Shark7
It's probably going to be more a question of 'will it fit on the elevator?' or 'will it fit in the hangar?' as opposed to weight.

Hermes was very much like Hosho. The UK's first purpose built carrier, its hangar space could only accomodate 20 aircraft at time of commissioning. Refits in 1934 added an additional elevator, but reduced hangar space to only 15 aircraft.

The Fulmar was a fairly large aircraft, though with wings folded it was significantly smaller, however it was a full 5' longer and 2' taller than the Fairey Swordfish that Hermes did carry...that could make a difference depending on hangar and elevator dimensions.

RE: Fairy Fulmar

Posted: Fri Jul 15, 2011 11:18 am
by ilovestrategy
I had never even heard of this plane, had to Google it to see what it looked like. What was it's role?

RE: Fairy Fulmar

Posted: Fri Jul 15, 2011 11:19 am
by 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.

RE: Fairy Fulmar

Posted: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:00 pm
by JohnDillworth
The Fulmar weighs about 2600 lbs more than the Martlet. It also has 1300hp engine over the 1200hp of the Martlet.

So, 2,600 pounds more and only an additional 100 Hp? Must have been like flying an anvil.

RE: Fairy Fulmar

Posted: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:23 pm
by Terminus
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.

Like the Skua (yeah, I said it) which was intended as a fighter-divebomber...

RE: Fairy Fulmar

Posted: Fri Jul 15, 2011 1:57 pm
by oldman45
ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

I have been requested to post a copy of the following Indictment herewith:


In the Kangaroo Court for the State of Denial

The Forumates of Said State

vs.

Oldman

Indictment

Count One: That on the 14th day of July, 2014, Oldman did, with lunacy aforethought, in a Forum post titled "Fairy Fulmar," which is a class A misdemeanor and high crime in and of itself, seriously propose to utilize the Fulmar as an offensive weapon in a War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition match. Said proposal against the decorum and high standards of serious players and contrary to the laws established by the Supreme AE being, to wit: Commandment One: Thou shalt not attempt to utilize the Fulmar or Wapiti in any offensive role in an Admiral Edition's match lest thou causest thy opponent to bang his head on the keyboard while simultaneously becoming dislodged from his seat of choice while laughing."

Presented to the Forum this 15th day of July, 2011.

Canoerebel
Provisional, Irregular and Temporary
District Attorney for the State of Denial
Denial Bar Number 614110
Justice Building
Denial City, State of Denial
1-800-Myrna Loy
www.sendkeylimepie.yum

I throw myself on the mercy of the court

RE: Fairy Fulmar

Posted: Fri Jul 15, 2011 2:33 pm
by Terminus
Inadvisable. Their mercy is quite spiky.

RE: Fairy Fulmar

Posted: Fri Jul 15, 2011 2:47 pm
by JohnDillworth
Inadvisable. Their mercy is quite spiky.
Do they still give the death penalty to whoever tries to start a best battleship thread?

RE: Fairy Fulmar

Posted: Fri Jul 15, 2011 2:56 pm
by 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.

RE: Fairy Fulmar

Posted: Fri Jul 15, 2011 2:58 pm
by 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.