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

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?

quote:

The Fulmar weighs about 2600 lbs more than the Martlet. It also has 1300hp engine over the 1200hp of the Martlet.

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.

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

quote:

Inadvisable. Their mercy is quite spiky.

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.

quote:

ORIGINAL: oldman45

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

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?

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.

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.

quote:

ORIGINAL: oldman45

I throw myself on the mercy of the court

quote:

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

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.

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.

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. [: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? [&:]

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?"[&:]