Kevin J
Banned
You don't need Skua's because you can sling a bomb under a Fulmar.
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
You don't need Skua's because you can sling a bomb under a Fulmar.Not needlessly losing Courageous, Glorious, Ark Royal and arguably Hermes (sent to the Far East without credible CAG and sent to sea to escape Nagumo without any aircraft onboard or Ceylon air support) could have gone a long way to meeting the Axis globally.
In April 1942, Sommerville faced Nagumo with three carriers HMS Formidable, Indomitable and Hermes. Send Hermes (and the old Revenge class BBs) to the Med, but give Sommerville Ark Royal, Courageous, Glorious; and these five fast carriers, if equipped with at minimum 240 good aircraft will give Nagumo something to worry about.
Given the weakness of IJN carriers to dive bombers versus torpedo attack, let's hope Sommerville has some Skuas - a challenge as they were withdrawn without DB replacement in 1941.
True, true. And with five carriers that should bring at least five squadrons of Fulmars transiting undetected by radar towards Nagumo. Not dive bombers - were Fulmar crews trained as such? Perhaps some would have been former Skua crew.You don't need Skua's because you can sling a bomb under a Fulmar.
The Fulmar has a good turn of speed in a dive too, 415 mph, and a theoretical 435 mph. Far higher than an A6M2 at 390 mph. At low altitude, only a little bit slower than an A6M2 flat out, 265/272 mph as opposed to 273/296 mph. I'd be interested in everyone's thoughts whether a daylight unescorted attack could work.True, true. And with five carriers that should bring at least five squadrons of Fulmars transiting undetected by radar towards Nagumo. Not dive bombers - were Fulmar crews trained as such? Perhaps some would have been former Skua crew.
And the Fulmars' observer should reduce the odds of being bounced from behind, with his single .303 further giving the IJNAF pilots something to consider.The Fulmar has a good turn of speed in a dive too, 415 mph, and a theoretical 435 mph. Far higher than an A6M2 at 390 mph. At low altitude, only a little bit slower than an A6M2 flat out, 265/272 mph as opposed to 273/296 mph. I'd be interested in everyone's thoughts whether a daylight unescorted attack could work.
And the Fulmars' observer should reduce the odds of being bounced from behind, with his single .303 further giving the IJNAF pilots something to consider.
Damn, I missed the "occasionally" in the Wiki specs.The Fulmar didnt have a gun for the Observer. Some carried a Thompson gun and there are stories of the Observer throwing a bundle of toilet paper out the window to try and distract a pursuer.
I can't find any pics of Fulmars with bombs.
Ah, as shown below.The bomb was carried using the same lugs as the slipper DT.
Skua's were a bit passed it in 1942.
They were still basically equivalent to the Val or SBD-3.
Very basically.
The Vals used either 1000 or 1070hp engines and the SBD-3 used a 1000hp engine. SBD-3 also used a two speed supercharger, I don't know about the Early Val. 10% or more of extra power is nothing to sneeze at at. Both planes were evolving, the Skua might have been able to evolve, but was never given the chance. Flying the same plane (or attempting to) in 1942 as they were using in 1939 doesn't sound like a good idea even if you have them in depot or training unit's.
SPD-3s got armor and self-sealing tanks. Also had twin rear guns.
Midway demonstrates that getting any bomb hit on an IJN carrier should light it up like matchwood. Skuas with their single 500 lb. AP bomb, if they make it through the IJN fighter screen should score the fatal hits. But by 1942 it looks to be shallow dives by Fulmars for this job.Skua II had folding wings vs fixed wings on Val and SBD-3
SBD-3 was ~25% heavier than a Skua II
Basically, if the IJN and/or USN had used Skuas at Midway, the results would very likely have been the same.
I was thinking back to this thread. Given the need for the armoured carriers in home waters, were Glorious, Courageous Furious able to operate in the Indian and Pacific waters? I ask, as at Ceylon in 1942 the Revenge class with their original machinery were unable to condense sufficient water to keep their crews alive. And of course there's no air conditioning, but on that score you've got big hangar doors both fore and aft for ventilation. IIRC, these three carriers are rather short ranged.
Perhaps to Malaya and Burma beforehand. I've always thought the RAF fighter squadrons and their Buffaloes are remembered unfairly. Five squadrons of any fighter, even the latest Spitfire could not possibly defend a Malayan territory that excluding the Sarawak is larger than the entire UK (where over 80 Spitfire/Hurricane squadrons were active in Dec 1941).IIRC, they all served in the Pacific pre-war, and Glorious was serving in the IO when war started. IMHO, they would have been invaluable as aircraft ferries, if nothing else. In an single sortie Glorious could have doubled the number of Hurricanes on Ceylon, for example.