Inaccurate performance data for BOB fighters in COD comparing to RL data

[ACE-OF-ACES]

Even worse than the flettner tab is the 1.98ata boost for the K-4. Next to nil, nada, zilch documentation compared to what has been put forward for 100 octane fuel. The fantasy speculation even carrying over to the G-10s :rolleyes:
Agreed

Which only highlights the hypocrisy in the 'proof required' by those (some) arguing against the addition of a 100 oct variant.

[JtD]

Actually we only have a handful of raffanatics doing the good old character assassination campaign, because they can't come up with anything better, mental or material, as they lack in both. ;)I asked you for what proof you have to support your claims, and you came up with nothing. Since then, you're only hanging around to throw out insults and red herrings, just look at the ten last posts you made here. Imo, no one is assassinating your character, your character committed suicide many, many pages ago. I guess some are desecrating the corpse, I wonder what made them this mad at you.

[Kurfürst]

I asked you for what proof you have to support your claims, and you came up with nothing.

I kindly ask you to stop lying and re-read the thread from the beginning.

[bongodriver]

Amazing really, in discussions about the battle of Britain the Luftwhiners claim the US won it for the Brits because they sent us 100 octane and in the same breath deny we ever used it.........confused?

[Glider]

Obviously no, it's what you are suggesting.

What I am suggesting is that the fact that some Squadrons were using it over France is irrelevant until we know how and if they were supplied with 100 octane fuel once their remnants returned to England.

I like the 'if' part of the reply. Kurfursts view is that the RAF did use 100 octane in France to defend France, but the RAF may not have used it to defend the UK.

A novel thought I admit.

[Glider]

Actually we only have a handful of raffanatics doing the good old character assassination campaign, because they can't come up with anything better, mental or material, as they lack in both. ;)

Well if you could come up with some supporting evidence for the theory that the the RAF used 87 octane in the BOB it would be welcome.

[GraveyardJimmy]

I like the 'if' part of the reply. Kurfursts view is that the RAF did use 100 octane in France to defend France, but the RAF may not have used it to defend the UK.

A novel thought I admit.

If that was the case surely there would be reports of performance during battle of France and how it compared once supply was restricted during battle of Britain? I haven't seen any comments on this marked change in aircraft performance and how the RAF was suddenly on a back foot.

[KG26_Alpha]

Ok

I locked this thread last week for the same reason its gone full circle once again with insults.

You can draw you own conclusions to suit your own opinions from the data provided in this thread already,
further discussion is pointless.

It will remain closed permanently.




.