I think no one believes your interpretation because your conclusions are wrong.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TomcatViP
I myself illustrated this meaning right her ein this thread by linking to a 1954 FLIGHT articles detailing the evolution of teh Merlin eng during the war with details of wich octane was used.  |
The article is in no way complete (for example Merlin V engine is not mentioned) and only mentions take-off power and not emergency power.
Quote:
|
More over I hve a thousand times explained and showed that there is no sense to believe that 100 octane will provide a tremendous augmentation of pow in an eng that was not specifically built for that fuel.
|
Every supercharged engine produces more boost below FTH than the engine can handle, that's why it is called FULL THROTTLE HEIGHT, it is the lowest altitude where the throttle can be fully open without damaging the engine. The engine can't handle that high boosts because of detonation. 100 octane fuel allows to run the engine with a higher boost without detonation. Higher boost means higher power.
This means every supercharged engine benefits from the use of 100 octane fuel as long a the engine control (e.g. Automatic Boost Control) allows the pilot to apply the higher boost. The Merlin engine has a Boost Control Cut-Out device to override the limit of the Boost Control, i.e. it allows the pilot to apply a higher boost than the regular +6 1/2.
Of course the higher power may cause a higher stress on other parts, however it is documented which modifications must be applied to a Merlin II/III to allow the use of higher boost.
The use and benefit of 100 octane in Merlin II/III is very well documented, it is also very well documented from which time on selected aircraft used it. What is so far not documented is when it was introduced for ALL operational aircraft.