Fairy Fulmar

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Fairy Fulmar

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Fairy Fulmar

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Fairy Fulmar - 7/14/2011 11:03:37 PM

oldman45

Posts: 2320
Joined: 5/1/2005
From: Jacksonville Fl
Status: offline

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

_____________________________

Post #: 1

RE: Fairy Fulmar - 7/14/2011 11:14:52 PM

Schanilec

Posts: 4040
Joined: 6/12/2010
From: Grand Forks, ND
Status: offline

Would say so only if carrier trained.

_____________________________

This is one Czech that doesn't bounce.

(in reply to oldman45)

Post #: 2

RE: Fairy Fulmar - 7/15/2011 1:02:23 AM

crsutton

Posts: 9590
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline

Anything that say "carrier capable" or "carrier trained" can operate from a carrier. Otherwise they cannot...

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to Schanilec)

Post #: 3

RE: Fairy Fulmar - 7/15/2011 1:22:07 AM

oldman45

Posts: 2320
Joined: 5/1/2005
From: Jacksonville Fl
Status: offline

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.

_____________________________

(in reply to crsutton)

Post #: 4

RE: Fairy Fulmar - 7/15/2011 2:41:14 AM

jb1144

Posts: 14
Joined: 12/4/2007
Status: offline

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.

(in reply to oldman45)

Post #: 5

RE: Fairy Fulmar - 7/15/2011 6:02:08 AM

oldman45

Posts: 2320
Joined: 5/1/2005
From: Jacksonville Fl
Status: offline

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.

_____________________________

(in reply to jb1144)

Post #: 6

RE: Fairy Fulmar - 7/15/2011 7:08:24 AM

Canoerebel

Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline

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

(in reply to oldman45)

Post #: 7

RE: Fairy Fulmar - 7/15/2011 8:00:36 AM

JeffroK

Posts: 6391
Joined: 1/26/2005
Status: offline

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!

_____________________________

Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 8

RE: Fairy Fulmar - 7/15/2011 12:00:29 PM

Blackhorse

Posts: 1983
Joined: 8/20/2000
From: Eastern US
Status: offline

quote:

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

Denial is in Egypt, right?

_____________________________

WitP-AE -- US LCU & AI Stuff

Oddball: Why don't you knock it off with them negative waves? Why don't you dig how beautiful it is out here? Why don't you say something righteous and hopeful for a change?
Moriarty: Crap!

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 9

RE: Fairy Fulmar - 7/15/2011 1:30:35 PM

Terminus

Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline

Either way, I wouldn't count on the Hermes being able to take the Fulmar.

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Blackhorse)

Post #: 10

RE: Fairy Fulmar - 7/15/2011 2:18:00 PM

Shark7

Posts: 7937
Joined: 7/24/2007
From: The Big Nowhere
Status: offline

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.

_____________________________

Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'

(in reply to Terminus)

Post #: 11

RE: Fairy Fulmar - 7/15/2011 2:18:25 PM

ilovestrategy

Posts: 3611
Joined: 6/11/2005
From: San Diego
Status: offline

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

_____________________________

After 16 years, Civ II still has me in it's clutches LOL!!!
Now CIV IV has me in it's evil clutches!

(in reply to Terminus)

Post #: 12

RE: Fairy Fulmar - 7/15/2011 2:19:22 PM

Shark7

Posts: 7937
Joined: 7/24/2007
From: The Big Nowhere
Status: offline

quote:

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.

_____________________________

Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'

(in reply to ilovestrategy)

Post #: 13

RE: Fairy Fulmar - 7/15/2011 3:00:29 PM

JohnDillworth

Posts: 3100
Joined: 3/19/2009
Status: offline

quote:

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.

_____________________________

Today I come bearing an olive branch in one hand, and the freedom fighter's gun in the other. Do not let the olive branch fall from my hand. I repeat, do not let the olive branch fall from my hand. - Yasser Arafat Speech to UN General Assembly

(in reply to Shark7)

Post #: 14

RE: Fairy Fulmar - 7/15/2011 3:23:30 PM

Terminus

Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shark7

quote:

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...

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Shark7)

Post #: 15

RE: Fairy Fulmar - 7/15/2011 4:57:11 PM

oldman45

Posts: 2320
Joined: 5/1/2005
From: Jacksonville Fl
Status: offline

quote:

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

_____________________________

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 16

RE: Fairy Fulmar - 7/15/2011 5:33:45 PM

Terminus

Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline

Inadvisable. Their mercy is quite spiky.

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to oldman45)

Post #: 17

RE: Fairy Fulmar - 7/15/2011 5:47:19 PM

JohnDillworth

Posts: 3100
Joined: 3/19/2009
Status: offline

quote:

Inadvisable. Their mercy is quite spiky.

Do they still give the death penalty to whoever tries to start a best battleship thread?

_____________________________

(in reply to Terminus)

Post #: 18

RE: Fairy Fulmar - 7/15/2011 5:56:21 PM

Nikademus

Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shark7

quote:

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.

< Message edited by Nikademus -- 7/15/2011 5:57:10 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to Shark7)

Post #: 19

RE: Fairy Fulmar - 7/15/2011 5:58:37 PM

Nikademus

Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline

quote:

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.

_____________________________

(in reply to oldman45)

Post #: 20

RE: Fairy Fulmar - 7/15/2011 5:59:55 PM

herwin

Posts: 6059
Joined: 5/28/2004
From: Sunderland, UK
Status: offline

quote:

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/dive bomber. Two-person fighter so that one member of the crew can navigate (over-water) while the other pilots.

_____________________________

Harry Erwin
"For a number to make sense in the game, someone has to calibrate it and program code. There are too many significant numbers that behave non-linearly to expect that. It's just a game. Enjoy it." herwin@btinternet.com

(in reply to ilovestrategy)

Post #: 21

RE: Fairy Fulmar - 7/15/2011 6:03:21 PM

herwin

Posts: 6059
Joined: 5/28/2004
From: Sunderland, UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shark7

quote:

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.

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

_____________________________

(in reply to Nikademus)

Post #: 22

RE: Fairy Fulmar - 7/15/2011 6:14:59 PM

Terminus

Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shark7

quote:

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.

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

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Nikademus)

Post #: 23

RE: Fairy Fulmar - 7/15/2011 6:35:17 PM

Canoerebel

Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline

quote:

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.

(in reply to oldman45)

Post #: 24

RE: Fairy Fulmar - 7/15/2011 6:37:21 PM

Nikademus

Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline

quote:

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.

< Message edited by Nikademus -- 7/15/2011 6:38:30 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to herwin)

Post #: 25

RE: Fairy Fulmar - 7/15/2011 7:42:13 PM

AW1Steve

Posts: 14507
Joined: 3/10/2007
From: Mordor Illlinois
Status: offline

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?"

And the Firefly and SeaSkua were further examples of this way of thinking (but the Skua wasn't a bad dive bomber), as was the ME-110, and the use of the SBD at Coral Sea as "Auxialry fighters"

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).

_____________________________

(in reply to Nikademus)

Post #: 26

RE: Fairy Fulmar - 7/15/2011 7:45:22 PM

AW1Steve

Posts: 14507
Joined: 3/10/2007
From: Mordor Illlinois
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

quote:

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.

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.

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?

_____________________________

(in reply to Nikademus)

Post #: 27

RE: Fairy Fulmar - 7/15/2011 7:52:16 PM

AW1Steve

Posts: 14507
Joined: 3/10/2007
From: Mordor Illlinois
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

quote:

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.

That would be the real limiting factor. FAA pilots were often willing to bend the rules IF it would help give them a fighting chance. Their use of the Coursair proved that. The USN had totally rejected the Corsair for fullsized carrier use, the FAA used them on escort carriers

, by using a wild , weird and semi blind landing approach. After that , the USN took a second look at the Corsair (and the shortage of F-6F Hellcat's didn't hurt either).

BTW , there was a squadron of Fulmars ashore at Ceylon (along with Hermes's Swordfish) when she was sunk. They couldn't get to her in time to cover her.

_____________________________

(in reply to Nikademus)

Post #: 28

RE: Fairy Fulmar - 7/15/2011 7:58:01 PM

Nikademus

Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline

quote:

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.

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?

Certainly nothing in life is guranteed. having a dedicated navigator won't give you 100% anymore than an IFF/homing beacon will, but it helps. Just saying that the there were some genuine pluses to the two pilot idea....the British wern't tripping on LSD after all. :)

The Fleet Defender....the F-14 was one....unless Tom Cruze was piloting....in which case the plane was reduced to 0.5 pilots. :)

_____________________________

(in reply to AW1Steve)

Post #: 29

RE: Fairy Fulmar - 7/15/2011 8:23:27 PM

Wirraway_Ace

Posts: 1400
Joined: 10/8/2007
From: Austin / Brisbane
Status: offline

quote:

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?"

Development time, development cost. The British war effort was a model of economy which tended to result in inferior but adequate equipment. 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.

Also, this develop method was not always a failure. The Beaufighter was a very successful modification of the marginal Beaufort bomber afer all.

p.s. I get a kick out of Max Hastings inability to hide his distaste in Retribution for the massive material available to the US versus British forces. It appears to lack elegance to him....

(in reply to AW1Steve)

Post #: 30