Jump to content


Beta Testers
  • Content Сount

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

  • Clan


Community Reputation

603 Excellent


About HMS_Formidable

  • Rank
    Lieutenant Junior Grade
  • Insignia

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

1,386 profile views
  1. HMS_Formidable

    HMS Implacable Initial Impressions

    It's British, I guess. But yes ... Wargaming clearly has very little idea of naval aviation history. Sea Gladiator was only a thing for the first three months of the September 1939 war: it was a reserve training aircraft like the Hawk, activated as a stopgap when reserve / off cycle carriers were activated. Skua was decommissioned from combat after the first nine to 12 months. Fairy Fulmar emergency program fleet fighters (initiated before the war because the Skua was a dog) became the highest scoring FAA aircraft, entering service mid 1940 in conjunction with the invention of radar fighter direction. Out of service late 1942. Swordfish went into second-line action in mid 1941, though a few lingered because they were equipped with the first naval airborne radar sets. Replaced by Albacore as RN doctrine was for all-weather, night torpedo strike. Sea Hurricane was only in action in 1942 due to delays in supplies of Sea Martlets (Wildcats) due to the USN suddenly entering the war. 1943 was mostly Martlets with deck-park (non-folding) Seafires IIs, with Corsairs first appearing aboard HMS Illustrious in the second half. Barracuda was a bit of shambles as it suffered a series of fatal crashes due to delaminating wings, and its powerplant had been cancelled so it was using an understrength Merlin. So Albacores lingered longer than they should have, as Avenger supplies were erratic. 1944-45 was a combo of Seafire IIIs, Corsairs and a handful of Hellcats - with Fireflies entering service as strike reconnaissance fighters. Barracudas were still suffering powerplant issues, so Avengers were used in a glide-bombing role (the RN hated the USN lightweight air torpedo). 1946 saw the Sea Fury, and the Sea Hornet was a little later than that. Spearfish was dropped as it was quickly obvious torpedo aircraft could not survive new radar controlled AA postwar.
  2. HMS_Formidable

    Curious Carriers Carry No Magazine?

    Their whole hangar is a magazine And then, deeper in the ship, are the aviation fuel reserves and ammunition stores.
  3. HMS_Formidable

    Is the in-game Supermarine Seafire too slow??

    Everyone has their favourites. For me, it was the Seafire LFIII A [edited] on the deck , but a ballerina in the air...
  4. HMS_Formidable

    HMS Hood Review Post Buffs

    The upshot of all this is Hood is just not fun to play anymore. I've had her since she was originally released. A week or so ago I stripped out her captain, flags and modules ... and consigned her to the reserve fleet. She has become one big hulking target with few redeemable features, which is a shame as I used to like her previous rapid-reaction playstyle. She can still move quickly around the map, she just can't do much while on it! Perhaps they needed to nerf Hood to make the new Russian T7 battleships more appealing/effective?
  5. HMS_Formidable

    About the Furious WG.

    Which is pretty much the 'flavor' I had hoped for given their historical characteristics...
  6. HMS_Formidable

    Navy ships in HUGE HEAVY SEAS!

    or why the RN didn't use deck parks until they went to the Pacific ...
  7. HMS_Formidable

    The Cleveland's main guns are dual-purpose.

    Largely in part to their fighting for two years before Japan and the US had at it. The RN learnt the lessons being applied in late 1941 the hard way, even though its ships in 1939 had - at the time - the heaviest AAA defences in the world. So efficiency in this context isn't a like-versus-like comparison. UK developed, US refined and manufactured proximity fuses certainly saw a massive boost in AAA efficiency for all involved post 1944. It's why we pay so much attention to the Falklands War, the USS Stark - and the recent missiles fired at ships off Yemen - nowadays. To try and get the jump on the next round of harsh practical lessons over-ruling the theory of warfare.
  8. HMS_Formidable

    The Cleveland's main guns are dual-purpose.

    So are the guns on Leander and Exeter. I suspect they just weren't all that good at the job.
  9. HMS_Formidable

    Wow! No love at ALL for the Swordfish

    PS, I remember reading somewhere that it wasn't that German and Italian warship gunners couldn't track the Swordfish slow enough to shoot accurately. It was because the Swordfish could fly so low the guns could not depress far enough to target them. I guess some people could call that 'cheating'
  10. HMS_Formidable

    Wow! No love at ALL for the Swordfish

    Sure. And the F3F 'Flying Barrel' biplane was the main fleet fighter of the USN until mid-1941. It was a time of transition. But, despite the odds, the Swordfish did more damage per aircraft at Taranto than the ratio at Pearl Harbor. It proved equally effective for as long as its monoplane contemporary, the Devastator. But its flexibility then gave it another role: As it had extreme reliability, could carry anything (thus its nickname, Stringbag) and had all-weather, short-deck handling characteristics, it was kept active in a key battlefield, day and night, for the whole war - the Battle of the Atlantic. It created, in essence, the role that later became that of warship carried helicopters. It wasn't as perfect as many argue. Nor was it as useless as many argue. It was 'good enough'.
  11. HMS_Formidable

    Wow! No love at ALL for the Swordfish

    You'd never believe it was so useful it remained operational for the whole of World War II, would you? Because it could fly anywhere, at any time, in any weather, night or day, carrying any thing... It could also controlled stall, turn on a dime, fly with its wheels in the water ... and drop torpedoes, at night, against a fully alert naval base, in shallow water against a battleship row... But, like the Douglas Devastator, it was vulnerable to fighters without escort.
  12. HMS_Formidable

    If there was a CV Free Option would you take it?

    There is already an option: Age of Sail.
  13. I bet the Archangel Russian Premium has a faster turret traverse than Queen Elizabeth...
  14. HMS_Formidable


    I think there is enough difference between the RN BB and CL to make spending gold on captain respecs almost necessary. Everything from turret traverse, aa , different survivability traits ... what is useful on one is often redundant on the other. IMHO But I also agree ... IFHE was great on a Belfast. Not so much the line ships...
  15. HMS_Formidable


    But Premiums are allegedly training cruisers for the 'main line' ships... So Exeter would work for a CA main line. And there are no RN 'training cruisers' for the light cruiser at the moment HMS London rebuild https://forum.worldofwarships.com/topic/138046-british-heavy-cruiser-design-notes/ (not sure how to do the pretty module link) Anyway, there are several serious heavy cruiser studies. And as pointed out, there are also fairly serious differences between sub-classes. So an RN CA tree is more than viable. Frobisher York County Batch 1 County Batch 2 (Londons) County Rebuild Batch 2 / Premium London Rebuild Personally I agree, battlecruisers would fit well here and would mimic what we're seeing in the other trees. But they're a bit 'old' compared to the stuff in-game, even though Renown was a very successful AA/Carrier Escort rebuild. But there are plenty of design studies (see above) to choose from.