![]() |
Quote:
|
Which is precisely what I was talking about. You want to be taken seriously? Then start acting like a responsible adult capable of serious discussion instead of slinging mud at everyone who's interested in discussion instead of "Because I say so" type statements.
|
Quote:
I challenge anyone to produce any source stating that any BofB Hurricane or Spitfire flew even a single combat sortie with 87 octane fuel. This isn't about promoting one side or the other, but is all about historical accuracy. Abundant evidence has been produced showing that there was more than enough 100 octane fuel available for all front line Fighter Command squadrons, but if 87 octane was used along with 100 octane, then there should be references to it in memoirs, pilot combat reports and historical accounts, and yet no such evidence has ever been produced. It is time for those who claim that 87 octane was used by front-line RAF FC units during the BofB to produce positive evidence for their claims, or to retract those claims. |
Quote:
After years of trying to dig up everything in the archieve and still not a single paper saying that 100 octane replaced existing 87 octane in all Squadrons/Stations has been found. Not one paper. I'd say it's a sign. We had the same drama about 150 grade fuel years ago. There's not one paper noting anything the like, and the people who were desperate to find some are extremely careful to only show snippets of the relevant papers. Some has even went as far manipulating the evidence. Time and time again they have been asked to share the fiels publicly, but they refuse, and keep posting the same papers that says selected units have been supplied, and nothing more. Then it usually takes a bizarre turn, and since they can't prove what they want to be true, and getting frustrated, given the complete absence of supporting evidence, suddenly everyone else has to prove they are wrong. It always reminds me of this classic scene. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_w5JqQLqqTc |
Quote:
|
Must be fun, registering several handles just to reply to yourself on a discussion board. :D
|
LOL BarbI. All you produced was your typed words (changed multiple times) for 1.98ata for the Bf109K-4. The rest of your proofs are just fanciful speculation. What has been shown for 100 fuel is more than enough proof that 11 Group and the bordering units in 10 and 12 Groups were using 100 fuel using your criteria of proof for 1.98ata.
Stop judging other people by your own actions. |
Relevance?
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Abundant evidence exists for hundred octane fuel use by RAF FC, during operational sorties, but none has ever been produced showing 87 octane use by a single front line BofB RAF FC Spitfire or Hurricane sortie. Kurfurst, it is time for you to put up or shut up. |
All times are GMT. The time now is 11:53 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 Fulqrum Publishing. All rights reserved.