Air Commodore F. R. Banks, I Kept No Diary , Airlife Publications, Shrewsburg, 1978, Appendix II Fuel, pp 234-236

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.o...ane/banks1.jpg

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.o...ane/banks2.jpg

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.o...ane/banks3.jpg

"With the coming of war, Banks entered the Royal Air Force Volunteer Reserve as a junior officer, being sent to work at the Aeroplane and Armament Experimental Establishment (A&AEE) at Boscombe Down, and with his previous work attracting the attention of Lord Beaverbrook, Banks was accredited as a 'troubleshooter' and given special powers. After a while, Banks was promoted to Air Commodore and was made successively, 'Director General of Engine Production', and 'Director of Engine Research and Development'.

Nothing to do with this. My question is: Acctualy the pilots in the sim just fly with maximun power settings all the time and are not worried with engine safe. Even now with CEM the pilots could fly this way, the just have to maintain radiator and oil fully open.

I mean the developers could program some weathering variable as function of how the pilot use their aircraft. The value of this variable could affect the aircraft in the next sorties and the risk of a malfunction will be higher. This has minor use in normal servers but in online wars with limited aircraft like adw or il2.org.ru this would make sense. The server program can as example numerate the disposable aircraft between 1 to n and at each sortie the weathering ll actualize for each one. The next pilot who picks that ac have higher chance to have problems etc. The commander of each squad can select some of this acs to go maintenance (then they become indisponible fot use for some time etc) reducing the weather variable. Do You understand what i am saying?

Actually in adw if you broke your ac you ll not have another until the high command send more to you. And this could last much time. My suggestion is that the developers include some feature where in an online war each pilot ll fly the same plane for many sorties and how they use the ac in the actual sortie ll influence the ac behaviour in the next. Just this... Obviously some have easier maintenance and are more rough for bad field conditions. One advantages of the 109 was the less maintenance time and cheaper to fix.

Totally tongue in cheek, but I know what you mean...the limit for +12 Boost was set at 5 minutes: on a Spitfire the throttle lever was gated with a thin wire which the pilot pushed forward through to gain maximum boost; the boost cut-out control was mounted on the side of the throttle assembly. (see attachment 1: attachment 2; power curve for Merlin III courtesy http://www.spitfireperformance.com) As the Pilot's notes show the pilot had to report the use of +12 and a note was added to the engine's log book.

I think its worth remembering that consumption in May-July averaged 10,000 tons a month. So imports between 1 June and 31 August must have been approx 140,000 tons (stocks plus consumption) and consumption was about 21.5% of imports.

By the same token on the 11th July pretty much the peak of the fightng the UK had a stockpile of just under 3 years.

Pips and Kurfurst may believe this is a shortage, if it is, I wish my bank balance had this kind of shortage.

Looking at the weekly issues of 100 Octane. There seemed to be a lull in FC operations in the week prior to the invasion of France, and then the fuel issued jumps to 3,600 tons, starting May 23, as BEF and home-based fighter units, and Blenheim units were intensifying operations. Because these amounts of 100 Octane fuel was being issued it can be safely assumed that there was no drastic need to go back to 87 Octane fuel, as the Pips memo alleges. Naturally 87 Octane issues increased as all of the RAF Commands intensified their operations.

ie: Bomber Command
Coastal Command
Army Co-Operation Command

That's very interesting. Thank you Glider for taking the time to sort through the numbers and put them in perspective.

We still disputing the words for "selected units" to convert by counting fuel stockpiles??

:grin:

Hi Glider:

I greatly appreciate the efforts you've made and the documents you have shared regarding the Battle of Britain and 100 octane fuel. As for the other business, it may be advisable to keep in mind the insight and wisdom found in camber's post 448. I believe you've adequately addressed the alleged shortage in your post 475 above.

:rolleyes: No Eugene. I know you have difficulties at times but the counting of stockpiles is to show that there was no shortage of 100 fuel despite what Australia, Pips and Barbi say.