Blah blah blah.

Its a fact that plenty of spits and hurris were running around on 12lbs boost.

Just as its pretty apparent that the 109's are under modelled and nerfed too.

What most people want, myself included is the sim to be accurate on both sides, something its not at the moment for either.

A fact ? Really ? lol

And concerning the 109 learn your eng syllabus you'll see that you can do nearly all of what is in the book.

But I am not the kind of guys that think that cruising at max speed is absolutely essential in any serious sim ;).

Fruit bat,

The BoB was several months of improvements with the Merlins. Better engines and better fuel. To say that 1940s Spits used 12 boosts is good look at history.

CoDs Spits boosts are just wrong. I spend a lot of time in the Spit in ATAT online and the Spits are faster then the 109s at low Altitudes. Spits can outrun and dogfight the 109s but, they are very difficult to kill then.

Again, hopefully the patch will fix them.

Fruit back,

I'm too slow to right. I like your lost post.

I would like to see with the Spit 1/1a with 9 boost and 87 gas. Spit II with 100 octain and 12 boost. Even better, about 8 Spits for several for 1940 months.

I'm not saying that all spits used 100 octane, as this is obviously not the case, from the fuel totals used by the RAF for 100 octane and 87 octane during the battle, but with all the pilot accounts and squadron opps reports that relate to usage during BoB, to say that non of them were is also foolish. Its even more foolish to assume that 11 group did not have priority.

As to whether the spit mk11a goes to fast on 100 octane, thats not something that i know for sure, but it wouldn't surprise me, It all depends on which particular spit test you choose to use, and what particular configuration it was in equipment etc.... Which leads me to agree that at the moment Spits boost/speeds in combination are wrong at the moment to.

@Tomcat VIP, my German is non existent, so i can only go on the data that people have posted here that seems to show that the 109 is to slow down low, not to mention that non of the planes can reach there ceilings, but i guess thats OK to you.

as to your line,

"But I am not the kind of guys that think that cruising at max speed is absolutely essential in any serious sim"

wow, without your insight, i just don't think i could of managed to fly online for so many years.... Oh wait......

I would like to see a situation when the fuel can be selected between 87 octane and 100 octane for all models and also the different German fuels (B4 and C3 is it?) for 109's by the mission builder, and then limited server side, and performance adjusted from that, but hey ho.

But then i guess if we're dreaming add to that the fact that a spit at the end of the battle was heavier than at the start and therefore slower to, due to all the extras bolted on, bullet proof screen etc...

I've seen some pics of BoB with C3 109s but, I think it was rare.

(I was hurt for a long time and I am trying it post again. Sometimes my post dont make a lot of sense. :rolleyes: )

The 109E sitting in the crash scene in the hanger at Duxford was a C3 machine.

I'm sorry too hear that, over the years i've read many posts by you regarding the Fw190 which were essential reading lurking over at Cwos and at ubi, hope things are better,

~S~

I think we need to apply some common sense here. 100 octane was apparently used but there are serious doubts that it was used in each squadron and each Spit. It seems there is no data available that proofe that all Spits flew with 100 octane fuel.

If - what I personally believe to be likely - there had been Spits that flew with 100 octane fuel and others not it should be obvious that we never can achieve the same mix of variants in the simulation (online at least). So what should be done?

We should think about what is desirable for us as simmers as the whole community. I do not have the answer to that but would like to ask following questions:

- should we implement the 100 octane spit types as default even if it is quite probable that not all had this feature?

- Should we procede then also in the same manner with all the other planes in the game that is to go for the high performance variant of it even if we do not know in which number they've seen action?

- If we had the numbers which should be the threshold to decide that the default plane should be the better performing one?

(I presume that nobody here would really support the application of a certain logic in a one-sided manner that is only go for the highest performance variant for one particular side)

These questions are not rhetoric. I think we should ask ourselves this because I think it would be a fundamental decision that would be taken by the devs.