Carrier aircraft were assumed to be permanently inferior because folding, arresting, sea-survival, and strengthened structures added weight. More powerful engines narrowed that gap while land fighters grew heavier to gain range and other capabilities. In 1940 the U.S. Navy still fielded the F3F, while the early F4F lacked pilot armor and self-sealing fuel tanks that the Fulmar already carried. The A6M Zero offered far greater performance but less survivability and limited utility at night or in bad weather, making the Fulmar a credible contemporary naval fighter despite its modest speed.
Notable Point · 32:44-35:24
How the Fulmar compared with other naval fighters in 1940
Stronger engines narrowed the weight penalty of carrier construction, while contemporary U.S. and Japanese fighters carried important survivability or all-weather limitations.