View Single Post
  #11  
Old 03-16-2012, 12:59 AM
Crumpp's Avatar
Crumpp Crumpp is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,552
Default

Quote:
NZTyphoon says:
If you believe that the RAF only used 16 squadrons of fighters with 100 Octane until Sept 1940, then you need to explain why we have over 30 squadrons mentioning it in combat reports.
You are invested in your point of view. There is no real reason to discuss anything.

FYI, a very good explanation was offered shortly after my last post.

Quote:
41Sqn_Banks says:
I absolutely agree with you that the case is in no way clear. However IIRC there is proof by combat reports and official squadron diaries (ORBs) that more than 16 squadrons used 100 octane before September 1940. Of course this doesn't mean that all squadrons used it. And this could also be caused by rotating the squadrons between the different groups.
__________________
Quote:
Re-arming filmed around June 1940.
The RAF certainly did not suddenly convert 16 squadrons in September without first conducting an operational trial of at least one or possibly several squadrons to ensure the fuel was viable in service. If an unforeseen issue suddenly reared its head, that would mean 1/3 of the FC would be out of the action.

Look up the O2 system on the F22 raptor........ALL of the USAF F22 were grounded.
It does happen and there is a reason the process to adopt new technology on aircraft is so laborious. The United States is just lucky it did not occur in the middle of a major conflict between first world nations.

What if the RAF adopted 100 grade en-mass and it caused the aircraft to be grounded, unavailable to defend the country in time of war???

Last edited by Crumpp; 03-16-2012 at 01:04 AM.