The Flying Battleship Killer

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 27 лис 2024

КОМЕНТАРІ • 269

  • @matthewjay660
    @matthewjay660 11 місяців тому +30

    "Those who touched the skies and tasted the salt of the seas." Wow! What an eloquent turn of phrase. 🗣️👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻

  • @geordiedog1749
    @geordiedog1749 11 місяців тому +16

    Any old iron any old iron
    Any any any old iron
    Talk about a treat
    Chasing ‘round the fleet
    Any old eyetie or hun you meet
    Ways 6 tonnes
    No rear gun
    Sod all to rely on
    You know what you can do
    With your Fulmar II
    Old iron old iron.
    (From a nailed on Fulmar fan)

  • @ericadams3428
    @ericadams3428 11 місяців тому +39

    The last Fulmar operated by the FAA was on HMS Campania by 813 squadron in 1945 where they had been using them as night fighters. Some versions of the MkII and the NF MkII had 4 x.50 cal Brownings instead of the .303's.

    • @geordiedog1749
      @geordiedog1749 9 місяців тому

      This is true. They dropped the fifties because of poor cold weather performance.

  • @anthonywilson2346
    @anthonywilson2346 11 місяців тому +89

    I had the dubious honour of helping to prepare the last remaining fulmar for flight in the early sixties at HMS Fulmar (RNAS Lossiemouth), until some clown (not me) put modern hydraulic fluid (OM15) into it. It later did fly after a total replumbing of its hydraulic system and I believe it now resides at HMS Heron (RNAS Yeovilton).😊

    • @Skinflaps_Meatslapper
      @Skinflaps_Meatslapper 11 місяців тому +5

      That's actually pretty awesome, it may not have appeared glamorous at the time but you not only got to see the end of its long career, you also had a hand in its final send off.

    • @Free-Bodge79
      @Free-Bodge79 10 місяців тому

      Good man.👊💛👍

    • @johnchambers573
      @johnchambers573 6 місяців тому

      😊​@@Skinflaps_Meatslapper

  • @charleslindsay3201
    @charleslindsay3201 11 місяців тому +78

    this video gives deserved credit to a basically unknown plane and it's pilots,well done.

  • @wings9925
    @wings9925 11 місяців тому +52

    Eric Brown: A total legend. Its unlikely anyone will ever fly more types and hold more varied and crucial military aviation roles as the great man. I'm proud to share his surname

    • @cedhome7945
      @cedhome7945 11 місяців тому +8

      Needs a block buster film of his life story if he was American that would have been made already

    • @mackenshaw8169
      @mackenshaw8169 11 місяців тому

      My Mother's side are Browns. A proud sept of the McClouds.

    • @TomFynn
      @TomFynn 11 місяців тому +2

      Everyone: This thing cannot be flown.
      Eric Brown: Hold my tea.

    • @chrisgoblin4857
      @chrisgoblin4857 11 місяців тому +1

      A wide and varied group us Browns haha. Eric was a proper legend and I share your sentiment 100%.

    • @trevormccarthy9019
      @trevormccarthy9019 10 місяців тому

      Maybe Hanna Reitsch would be a close second

  • @shaneintheuk2026
    @shaneintheuk2026 11 місяців тому +17

    It's nice to see a video that introduces new knowledge. An aircraft type I had heard of but knew nothing about.

  • @sundragon7703
    @sundragon7703 11 місяців тому +65

    Thanks for making this segment. As mentioned, carrier operations in the Med were often eclipsed by WW2 US carrier operations in the Pacific and the hunt for the Bismarck. So the segment is a welcomed contribution.

    • @salamander163
      @salamander163 11 місяців тому +1

      a catalina plane locate the Bismarck

    • @womble321
      @womble321 11 місяців тому

      British carriers could take bomb hits. US carriers were wrecked or sunk.

    • @womble321
      @womble321 11 місяців тому +4

      ​@@salamander163that was cover we allready knew where it was as they told us with radio messages. They had to make sure the Germans saw them so they didn't realise we could read their transmissions

    • @vanmust
      @vanmust 11 місяців тому

      Thank you.....lets not forget that during the 1st and the 2nd U boat "Happy Time" allied crews of both ships and aircrafts were frustrated and tried hard to show some positive results by either overclaiming or false reports..to be honest (I passed many times a couple of miles away) Alboran was a flat islet with a hut where fishermen used to store nets and later grew into a lighthouse... somehow resempled a submarine especially during twilight.....don't know it's present state though

  • @edjones7709
    @edjones7709 11 місяців тому +58

    A lot of the deck scenes were Fairey Firefly FR1s - armed with 4x20mm cannon in place of the Fulmar's 8x.303sMGs The Firefly replaced the Fulmar from 1943 onwards

    • @jeannotschumacher1024
      @jeannotschumacher1024 11 місяців тому +1

      How is it posdible that britain kept in service such a crap plane as the fulmar

    • @hammer1349
      @hammer1349 11 місяців тому +7

      ​@jeannotschumacher1024 simple necessity. A fleet or aircraft can't be replaced overnight nor can the pilots be retrained. Its similar to why the swordfish was kept in service long after it perhaps should have been.

    • @rawnukles
      @rawnukles 11 місяців тому +4

      thumbnail pic is also a Firefly I believe

    • @eaglescouttrooper7969
      @eaglescouttrooper7969 5 місяців тому +1

      ​@jeannotschumacher1024 we have to use the kit we've got, until we can upgrade . . ?

    • @andy530i
      @andy530i 4 місяці тому

      @@jeannotschumacher1024 The Fulmar & Swordfish played a major role in the sinking of the Bismark !

  • @larryjohnson7591
    @larryjohnson7591 11 місяців тому +12

    I had only heard a few things about the Fulmar. I had no idea it was as involved as you have pointed out. Thank YOu for filling in the blank spots.

  • @prizecowproductions
    @prizecowproductions 11 місяців тому +7

    Not a Aircraft man but I believe that one of the Naval Aircraft involved in the final demise of the Bismarck was the Swordfish which because of its slow airspeed aided its attack of the pre mentioned battleship.
    Aussie Jeff Moore

  • @tonysaint6749
    @tonysaint6749 10 місяців тому +3

    God bless you all from Adelaide Australia with love and appreciation 🙏❤️🕊️🇦🇺🦘😊

  • @iskandartaib
    @iskandartaib 11 місяців тому +21

    10:05 - I think that's a Firefly. Nore the four cannon. Also 10:15, 10:20, 10:26, 12:18, 13:15, 14:11, 14:14. The Firefly was the follow-on design, it had a RR Griffon engine, and the air intake under the nose was further forward, flush with the front of the cowl.

    • @paulkelk5142
      @paulkelk5142 11 місяців тому +3

      you are correct most of the footage of the Fairy Firefly their are quite a few surviviors mainly in the UK, Canada and Australia and i think there are single examples in India and Thialand too

    • @JosipRadnik1
      @JosipRadnik1 11 місяців тому +6

      There is about as much footage of Firefliies in this video as there is of Fulmars. To be fair though: there exists much more footage of Fireflies than of Fulmars to begin with but still....

    • @Easy-Eight
      @Easy-Eight 11 місяців тому +4

      Yep, most of the footage is of Fireflies. The Firefly was used over the Pacific in 1945. You'd be a deadman if you flew a Fulmar against the IJN.

    • @gregorydefrances5336
      @gregorydefrances5336 11 місяців тому +1

      Almost all of the footage here of "Fulmars" is of Fireflys

    • @PaulP999
      @PaulP999 11 місяців тому +3

      welcome to the useless editing of all the "dark" videos - Dark Skies, Dark Seas etc they all got a girl from the mailroom to throw some pix together - usually you get cold war for WW2 or the reverse. They don't care.

  • @gregorydefrances5336
    @gregorydefrances5336 11 місяців тому +11

    Almost all of this footage is of Fairey Fireflys, not Fulmars. For some odd reason I always liked the Firefly and was very excited because even the thumbnail is of a Firefly.

  • @chefrowlet
    @chefrowlet 11 місяців тому +10

    it's *wild* this is the first time i've really heard of this thing... i feel like between war thunder and my general obsession with wwii fighting vehicles i should've heard something before now, considering its service

  • @sapiotone
    @sapiotone 10 місяців тому +2

    Best video in the Dark series I've seen! Script is 💯% Well edited and mixed. Great work team Dark!!!

  • @emty9668
    @emty9668 10 місяців тому +2

    The Fulmar had a marginal role as a spotter aircraft during the chase with the Bismark. It didn't drop a bomb or torpedo. The damage was done by the Swordfish bi-planes that damaged the steering of Bismark

  • @redeye5450
    @redeye5450 10 місяців тому +3

    A most interesting article. Unfortunately, half of the film shown was not of the Fulmar, but of its successor the Firefly.

  • @froginasock8782
    @froginasock8782 11 місяців тому +7

    8:05
    "... powered by a single Rolls Royce Merlin, a beast in itself..."
    *shows footage or a jet engine tachometer and afterburner*

  • @richardsawyer5428
    @richardsawyer5428 11 місяців тому +6

    Plenty of Fireflies here but thanks for highlighting the Fulmar. Next up? The Firefly please.

  • @chrisbaker2903
    @chrisbaker2903 11 місяців тому +4

    Interesting that you mention it's involvment with the Bismark however, I kind of liked the part the Fairey Swordfish, commonly called The Stringbag, played in disabling the Bismark's rudder system that pretty much made it a sitting duck. Read the book, "To War In a Stringbag". Pretty freaking intersting. So darned slow that the Bismark's automated tracking systems could not track slow enough to keep it in the gun's sights.

  • @indigogolf3051
    @indigogolf3051 11 місяців тому +4

    Great narrative. Great research. Thanks for this. I've never even heard of the Fairy Fulmar. Don't know why, I've always loved aircraft. Maybe because Airfix never made a model of it!
    Thanks again.

  • @thetruthhurts7675
    @thetruthhurts7675 11 місяців тому +20

    Captain Eric "Winkle" Brown flew more types of aircraft as a test pilot than any other pilot in the world. His total was 482 including his basic training aircraft type. Just a bit of Rubbish History I know.

    • @raypurchase801
      @raypurchase801 11 місяців тому +3

      Both you and I are fountains of useless nerd-knowledge.

    • @antonysteel8061
      @antonysteel8061 11 місяців тому +2

      ‘winkle’ was a legend, RIP sir

    • @mikep4566
      @mikep4566 11 місяців тому

      And it's accepted that no one will ever surpass those 482 aircraft he flew@@antonysteel8061

    • @GordonDonaldson-v1c
      @GordonDonaldson-v1c 9 місяців тому +1

      @@antonysteel8061 Check out the Museum of Flight at East Fortune, if you get the chance. Possibly their most interesting exhibit (for me at any rate) is the actual captured Me163 he flew in. Brown was the only Allied pilot to fly the Me163 under rocket power. It took a brave man to do that!

  • @charlesharper2357
    @charlesharper2357 11 місяців тому +19

    Which battleships did this plane kill?
    Clickbait title...

    • @Fnorden
      @Fnorden 11 місяців тому +6

      I was thinking the same thing

    • @fawnlliebowitz1772
      @fawnlliebowitz1772 11 місяців тому +9

      Dark Skies don't know the difference between DD, patrol craft or a BB.

    • @philipliethen519
      @philipliethen519 11 місяців тому +3

      The entire “Dark” series has scrapped the barrel-bottom clean & now spins trivia or outrightly makes stuff up. [sigh] another channel unsubscribed. BUT the were good when they had substance.

    • @brettt8246
      @brettt8246 11 місяців тому

      A bit clickbaity, but the Fulmars did shadow the Bismarck while waiting for the Fairey Swordfish, (a totally outdated design) to drop Torpedoes, which slowed it up and allowed the British Battleships to catch up and sink it in the Bay of Biscay. So, you could say they helped. A bit.

    • @charlesharper2357
      @charlesharper2357 11 місяців тому

      @@brettt8246
      Ridiculous.

  • @GarysActionManChannel1970
    @GarysActionManChannel1970 Місяць тому

    One of the great what ifs? A Naval fighter version of the Boulton Paul Defiant minus its turret and equiped with wing cannons or machine guns. Boulton Paul experimented with a turretless version called the P94 with forwarded armament. It could have been reworked into a two-seater naval version as per RN specification. It's strength would have made it ideal for carrier operations

  • @Mike-sh3yt
    @Mike-sh3yt 11 місяців тому

    The best channel period for these type of historical presentations of beautiful war technology from all sides....

  • @pdwcave
    @pdwcave 11 місяців тому +2

    Sound research of Dark Skies is often spoilt by the inaccuracy of the video behind the dialogue. Many of the aircraft depicted in this episode are of the Fulmar's successor, the Firefly, which are easily identified by the 4 20mm canon and the raised pilots cockpit canopy.

  • @bumpedhishead636
    @bumpedhishead636 6 місяців тому

    It is amazing to think of the advancement in engines & aircraft from the Hawker & Fokker biplanes of 1926 to 10 years later and the Spitfire & Me 109 of 1936.

  • @JohnEdwards-r2l
    @JohnEdwards-r2l 11 місяців тому +7

    What aircraft will you show when you cover the Fairey Firefly.

  • @andrewcomerford9411
    @andrewcomerford9411 11 місяців тому +5

    AGAIN ? The thumbnail is a Firefly, not a Fulmar, and both were fighters.
    Neither could do much against a battleship.

  • @patrickradcliffe3837
    @patrickradcliffe3837 11 місяців тому +5

    I saw a Fulmar a the static display for the Reno Air Races last year impressive looking plane for sure.

    • @robertvanryn5746
      @robertvanryn5746 11 місяців тому +2

      That was actually a later fairey firefly- the fulmar’s successor. Bad video editing showed mostly firefly footage.

  • @andyman8630
    @andyman8630 11 місяців тому +9

    and when it's down to half the fuel capacity, it's known as a half fulmar

  • @michaelmcbride809
    @michaelmcbride809 11 місяців тому +2

    Good story - thanks for sharing it with us.

  • @neiloconnor9349
    @neiloconnor9349 11 місяців тому +1

    Thanks. Wasn't aware of the Fulmar's history.

  • @timothyirwin8974
    @timothyirwin8974 11 місяців тому +8

    Exactly how many battleships did the Fulmar sink/kill?

  • @TroysMilitaryHistory
    @TroysMilitaryHistory 11 місяців тому +13

    I like your channel but please don't use clickbait titles

    • @dirtfarmer7472
      @dirtfarmer7472 11 місяців тому +1

      Yes, that is truly irritating

  • @hawkertyphoon4537
    @hawkertyphoon4537 11 місяців тому +1

    Firefly.
    These are FIREFLIES!
    Stop grinding my gears.

  • @bryanmchugh1307
    @bryanmchugh1307 11 місяців тому

    Most excellent upload. The WW2 generation had nerves of STEEL.

  • @dieselrotor
    @dieselrotor 10 місяців тому

    I fancy Myself as a decent aviation buff and I had never heard of this aircraft nor it's history or role. Thanks.

  • @barbarybar
    @barbarybar 11 місяців тому +1

    A few shots of the much better Firefly there.

  • @AliceSmith-d6e
    @AliceSmith-d6e 5 місяців тому

    We really should have stuck with the Fairey Albacore in my opinion, it had two designs which were a monoplane and a biplane version, we went with the wrong version, had we gone with the monoplane and given it a more powerful powerplant I am absolutely certain that it would have been up to challenging the A6M Zero although the Zero having no armour it would most likely still be faster than the similarly shaped Albacore monoplane.
    And I say similarly shaped as since we don't really have access to the old designs we can only assume how it might have looked, and so I have taken the Albacore design and made modifications to it removing the upper and lower twin wings of the biplane version along with the static undercarriage and swapped them for the only wings and undercarriage that really makes sense which Fairey themselves would have had access to and that is the wings and undercarriage of the Fulmar.
    In doing so I noticed that the resemblance to the Mitsubishi A6M Zero is uncanny, especially if I colour it in using Japanese colours and markings, but the engine looks tiny on it which is why I believe that a bigger more powerful engine would have been a better option than the one the Albacore was given, I took liberties a little and upscaled the existing engine and made it look larger and more to scale with the rest of the plane and that is really when the Zero similarity pops out and sitting here now looking at the picture of it on my phone I am totally convinced that what I am looking at would have been a far more superior aeroplane than any British built model used by the Royal Navy's Fleet Air Arm during the first half of the war.

  • @andyf4292
    @andyf4292 11 місяців тому +7

    the armoured deck thing was due to them operating in range of german land based bombers. much trickier to hide in the Med rather than the Pacific

    • @aaronleverton4221
      @aaronleverton4221 11 місяців тому +4

      Turned out to be perfect for the Pacific, where kamikazes could sink a wooden-decked US fleet carrier, but bounced off steel-decked RN carriers.

  • @thetruthhurts7675
    @thetruthhurts7675 11 місяців тому +1

    There is a constant fight even today between the RN, and the RAF about just who should have what aircraft.

  • @kc_was_here737
    @kc_was_here737 11 місяців тому +6

    So, what made it a battleship killer? Did I miss that part?

  • @alanmoss3603
    @alanmoss3603 11 місяців тому +3

    I have a rather nice MPM 1/48 scale model of this aircraft!

  • @14rnr
    @14rnr 11 місяців тому

    Thank you for this.

  • @folksinger2100
    @folksinger2100 11 місяців тому +1

    Some of your film show the Fairy Firefly, these are the ones with 4 20mm cannon in the wing, 2 in each wing

  • @casinodelonge
    @casinodelonge 11 місяців тому

    Excellent video, one of your best in my view!

  • @ukaszkieferling8477
    @ukaszkieferling8477 10 місяців тому +1

    Too much footage of Fulmar's successor, the Fairey Firefly, can be misleading. Although based on a similar specification (FR) and described as a World War II aircraft, the Firefly was a different aircraft, mainly from the early Cold War period (in service from 1943 (F/FR Mk I) to 1958).

  • @JSFGuy
    @JSFGuy 11 місяців тому +4

    Just open this up.

  • @rjd560
    @rjd560 11 місяців тому +5

    Most of these Fulmars are Fireflys.

  • @ricopaige3083
    @ricopaige3083 11 місяців тому +2

    Most of what Im seeing looks like Fireflys. Fulmar did not have gun barrels protruding in front of the wings.

  • @Fricasso79
    @Fricasso79 7 місяців тому

    11:55 Various sources seem to suggest that only 3 Fulmars were ever lost to single seat fighters, so the assumption here that Fulmars lost against the Japanese were shot down by Zeroes may be incorrect, and they were probably shot down by Kates and Vals instead or were destroyed on the ground.

  • @michaelmorgan9289
    @michaelmorgan9289 11 місяців тому

    Thankyou. Interesting video.

  • @MacTrom1
    @MacTrom1 11 місяців тому +4

    So when did this plane EVER kill a battleship?

  • @losonsrenoster
    @losonsrenoster 11 місяців тому +1

    Britain never had a shortage of aircraft carriers, Britain IS an aircraft carrier, it would have been more so had they kept the channel islands. Out past the outer Hebrides their aircraft reached far into the north Atlantic

  • @johnkelly2098
    @johnkelly2098 11 місяців тому

    Incredibly large amount of shots of the Firefly for a Fulmar video.

  • @geordiedog1749
    @geordiedog1749 11 місяців тому +2

    What a confused video. But thanks for shout out to the Fulmar (even though you mainly show Fireflies - even in the thumbnail)

  • @BryanMau
    @BryanMau 9 місяців тому

    "The Flying Battleship Killer" the video clip leaves out which battleships she sank. I was previously familiar with this plane end It definitely made big contributions to the war but I was unaware that it killed battleships.

  • @christopherhill4438
    @christopherhill4438 10 місяців тому +1

    How many flying battleships did it kill?

  • @jokergame
    @jokergame 11 місяців тому +1

    Not sure where the ‘Battleship killer’ line comes from as it seems that never happened.

  • @roygardiner2229
    @roygardiner2229 11 місяців тому

    Thank you: that was all news to me.

  • @fredtedstedman
    @fredtedstedman 5 місяців тому

    thumbnail looks like Spitfire , with elliptical wing and those 4 big cannons ! my father served on Ark Royal WW2 .

  • @stevecastro1325
    @stevecastro1325 11 місяців тому

    Sometimes, just being good enough enough really is, good enough.

  • @joegatt2306
    @joegatt2306 10 місяців тому +1

    I could not find the names of the battleships the Fairey Fulmar sank in WW2, not even a cruiser or a single destroyer!

  • @carlostommybaggs5763
    @carlostommybaggs5763 11 місяців тому +2

    I take exception to the repeated negative comments on the Fairy Battle sir. Why just 30 Fairy battles could have easily won the battle of Omdurman by themselves, perhaps with as little as 15% losses.

  • @peregrinemccauley5010
    @peregrinemccauley5010 9 місяців тому

    Good doco'let.

  • @ClimateScepticSceptic-ub2rg
    @ClimateScepticSceptic-ub2rg 11 місяців тому +1

    'Battleship killer' turns out to have been click bait, it seems.

  • @jedironin380
    @jedironin380 11 місяців тому +1

    A fairly good video, I've never heard of the Fulmar before. However, it apparently never once killed a battleship, and they never said what armament it was fitted with??

    • @taffwob
      @taffwob 11 місяців тому

      It's armament was 4x0.303 machine guns in each wing, in a similar fashion to the Hurricane but with a larger ammunition load. Some were fitted with 2x0.5 machine guns in each wing.

  • @oscarvi3232
    @oscarvi3232 11 місяців тому +1

    So if this a video about the Fairey Fulmar, why was most of the footage of the Fairey Firefly?

  • @boeing-lt4el
    @boeing-lt4el 11 місяців тому

    Something about the narration audio was off on this vid. Was a bit "blurry" and hard to hear individual words.

  • @andyf4292
    @andyf4292 11 місяців тому

    matapan is a very interesting scrap

  • @davebowman6497
    @davebowman6497 11 місяців тому

    Talks about the prototype being powered by a RR Merlin. Shows clip of turbojet engine exhaust...

  • @Bob1942ful
    @Bob1942ful 11 місяців тому +1

    Ahh check facts. It was not 7,500 feet, but 7,500 meters. Kind of big difference in altitude.

  • @Ihaveguitars
    @Ihaveguitars 11 місяців тому

    A much steadier and more polished delivery. Well done and keep it up.

  • @flickingbollocks5542
    @flickingbollocks5542 11 місяців тому +4

    "Taste the salt🧂 of the 🌊 sea"...
    Lol 😂 he even repeats it as it is so good...
    Don't get me wrong, I love this guy 🤣👍

  • @dontbe8thnotes
    @dontbe8thnotes 11 місяців тому +1

    I swear half of this footage is the Firefly 2 seat fighter

  • @FrankJmClarke
    @FrankJmClarke 11 місяців тому +3

    How is the Bismark infamous? Infamous does not mean "Non-English speaking".

  • @RossHall-UK
    @RossHall-UK 11 місяців тому +1

    Anyone else note the "biplane fighters" were Stringbags?

  • @jnohunter4527
    @jnohunter4527 9 місяців тому

    Don't fool us! Many of your film clips feature the Fairey Firefly and not the Fulmar

  • @none3763
    @none3763 11 місяців тому +1

    "while your trembling pupil grips for the deck..."

  • @jonstivers
    @jonstivers 11 місяців тому

    In the swirling currents of the 1930s....Such an act!

  • @philipfoster7269
    @philipfoster7269 11 місяців тому

    RN FAA with it's wings clipped? You could argue the same today. Fair enough they have just stood up their first F35B squadron but I worry it is too little too late sometimes.
    Only one thing. Most of the time you are saying Fulmar and showing film of the later Firefly.

  • @adriansmith3139
    @adriansmith3139 11 місяців тому +1

    Why do you keep showing images of the later Firefly?

    • @GordonDonaldson-v1c
      @GordonDonaldson-v1c 9 місяців тому

      Just a guess, adriansmith3139, but maybe there isn't any footage of the Fulmar?

  • @F1lmtwit
    @F1lmtwit 11 місяців тому +1

    The Corsair was a late war plane? Didn't roll out in 42?

    • @meeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee2
      @meeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee2 11 місяців тому +1

      1942 that is about half time for WW2 so late war is a reasonable label.

    • @F1lmtwit
      @F1lmtwit 11 місяців тому +1

      @@meeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee2 THE US entered the war on December 7th, 1941... late war?

    • @meeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee2
      @meeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee2 11 місяців тому +1

      @@F1lmtwit The war in Western Europe started in 1939, the war in China even earlier, so 1942 is about half way through the war.

  • @wrm3016
    @wrm3016 11 місяців тому +1

    So how many battleships did this airplane kill? I counted zero. 🤔

  • @Skeppo1
    @Skeppo1 11 місяців тому +2

    What battleship did Fulmar kill?

    • @narabdela
      @narabdela 11 місяців тому

      Just the usual bollocks. The Fulmar never harmed any battleships. I'm beginning to think that a lot of this guff is AI generated.

  • @__WJK__
    @__WJK__ 11 місяців тому +5

    "The Flying Battleship Killer" ... so why was there no info on the Fulmar's special ability to "kill battleships" !??

    • @patgould2586
      @patgould2586 11 місяців тому +1

      Another reason why I'm a little tired of the latest Dark Skies videos. There was nothing special about the Fulmar, and from the words of an RN pilot from WW2, this airplane was USELESS.

  • @jeffreywilson3286
    @jeffreywilson3286 10 місяців тому

    The majority of the carrier video's, show the Fairey Firefly not the Fulmar. Although a decendant of the Fulmar, a very different aircraft. Cheers

  • @draconian6692
    @draconian6692 11 місяців тому

    I love the me-110

  • @madbaddad01
    @madbaddad01 11 місяців тому

    Can you tell me where the video at 11.17 is taken from please? I ask because the naval officer shown with the binoculars and tobacco pipe is the spitting image of my grandfather who was a British naval officer during WW2.

  • @stevehayward1854
    @stevehayward1854 11 місяців тому

    The Royal Navy saw itself as the Senior Service in the inter service rivalry and was superior to all other services, therefore they deserved the best

    • @tallthinkev
      @tallthinkev 11 місяців тому

      It's senior because it's the oldest

    • @stevehayward1854
      @stevehayward1854 11 місяців тому

      @@tallthinkev Exactly but it still thinks it is superior to all other services because of it's history

    • @geordiedog1749
      @geordiedog1749 11 місяців тому +2

      Quite right too

    • @stevehayward1854
      @stevehayward1854 11 місяців тому +1

      @@geordiedog1749 ☺👍

    • @garethmatthews7939
      @garethmatthews7939 11 місяців тому

      well who would rescue the army when the crabs are runing back to the uk just started reading a book on malta and it mensions a song the navy would sing and actually corned a raf office in cairo roll on the nelson rodney hood the f*****g airforce is no f*****g good

  • @davidcarr7436
    @davidcarr7436 11 місяців тому

    With those big maple leaves 🍁 on the fuselage, those Fulmars have to be from a Canadian unit.

  • @KevTheImpaler
    @KevTheImpaler 11 місяців тому

    I do not understand why it had to be so large. Even if they wanted a second crewman, I do not see why it had to be so big. I would not have liked to have been the navigator in one of those if attacked by a single seat fighter. There would be nothing you could do.

  • @bengazzi3186
    @bengazzi3186 11 місяців тому +2

    I keep trying and trying to watch @Dark Skies but turn off video most of the time
    because of wrong images and wrong "facts"
    @3:14 he says catapult stressing - The Royal Navy never had an aircraft carrier with catapults

    • @Oligodendrocyte139
      @Oligodendrocyte139 11 місяців тому

      HMS Courageous I think did.

    • @robbierobinson8819
      @robbierobinson8819 11 місяців тому +1

      It did make it possible;e for Fulmars to be launched from merchant ships to try to drive off or shoot down reconnaissance aircraft.

    • @bengazzi3186
      @bengazzi3186 11 місяців тому

      @@robbierobinson8819 carrier operations was the context of @DarkSkies video not destroyer or battleship operations which did not include arrestor recoveries

    • @bengazzi3186
      @bengazzi3186 11 місяців тому

      @@Oligodendrocyte139 carrier operations was the context of @DarkSkies video not destroyer or battleship operations which did not include arrestor recoveries

    • @Oligodendrocyte139
      @Oligodendrocyte139 11 місяців тому

      @@bengazzi3186 Courageous was converted from a battlecruiser to a carrier in between WW1 and 2. Check out the Wikipedia entry for HMS Courageous (50). It had catapults and arrestors etc. etc. At the start of the war it had two squadrons of Swordfish torpedo bombers.

  • @Easy-Eight
    @Easy-Eight 11 місяців тому

    Not bad but you have too many clips of Fairey Fireflies instead of Fulmars.

  • @androidemulator6952
    @androidemulator6952 11 місяців тому

    Fulmar looks like an early relative of the Firefly ???

  • @TheDarthSoldier
    @TheDarthSoldier 11 місяців тому

    I thought this was going to be about the swordfish

  • @dodoubleg2356
    @dodoubleg2356 10 місяців тому

    LHR should’ve borrowed a few of Fairey’s proving grounds runways, ha…Never heard of this aircraft ✈️ manufacturer ‘til now. 😉👍✌️

  • @Wingnutmodels
    @Wingnutmodels 10 місяців тому

    I'm sure the thumbnail is a firefly