Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Pretty bad for a CV based fighter aircraft. After attacking an enemy torpedo bomber at 300 feet you are out of the fight. You are also dead meat for any enemy aircraft with a bit of an altitude advantage.
Pretty bad for a CV based fighter aircraft.
But then again, it's not a CV fighter, it's a CV Recon that can be used as a fighter in a secondary role.
I know the distinction might be lost, but it would be more proper to compare the Fulmar's performance to the Dauntless (or more accurately the BT-1) as both were used as fleet defence fighters, but had another primary role.
In 1942 the US carriers would have:
1.) Wildcat - fighter
2.) Dauntless - DB (recon)
3.) Devastator or Avenger - TB
In 1940 the British carriers had:
1.) Sea Gladiator - fighter (replaced with SeaHurri in 1941)
2.) Fulmar - Recon (replaced the Sea Skua - DB/Recon from 1939)
3.) Swordfish - TB
The Fulmar was ordered in 1938 under O.8/38, not F.8/38 for example.
"F" signifies fighter, while the letter "O" (Observation) signifies naval reconnaissance aircraft.
The British didn't think that the Fulmar would need good performance or agility as a fighter, but they did require a second crewmember as spotter, navigator wireless operator.
Obviously if performance as a fighter was considered as the primary function they wouldn't have the second crewmember there.
According to Eric Brown the British Admiralty issued specification 0.8/38 calling for a two seat naval fighter which resulted in the Fulmar. His description of a combat between a Fulmar against a Me110C indicates a three to one advantage for the ME110.
You believe that your numbers indicate that the Wildcat was a rather puny performer. Brown apparently believes differently.
With regard to this comment, I was always led to believe the Fulmar was designed as a multi-role aircraft.
With regard to its capabilities, I think it was optimised to shoot down unprotected bombers. it was never intended to operate so close inshore as to need to take on high performance fighters.
By combining two roles into one, the british were able to maximise the number of fighter airframes onboard a carrier with limited aircraft capacity. By being available as combat ready from June 1940, it was able to fulfil a niche that the the martlet could not until the following April (in any measurable degree).
The Wildcat was credited with 1408 kills in the Pacific, 26 kills in the Med and 2 kills in the ETO. I don't have the number of kills the Fullmar was credited with. Do you?
The Wildcat was what the USN had when war broke out and it had to suffice until better planes came along. It held the line at Coral Sea, Midway and Guadalcanal and did good service with the RN. In a way, the Wildcat, P40 and Hurricane kind of had similar roles. They were the best the US and British had in numbers enough to make a difference in the early going and without them it would have been more of a struggle.