Quote:
Originally Posted by Crumpp
I agree with your interpretation on the Spitfire Mk II Notes.
It is a fact the Spitfire Mk II was using 100 Octane in June 1940 because the Notes On the Merlin engine specify that as the only option. The emotional investment in this issue so high that many participants confuse In use with all operational units.
The Operating Notes are a followed and the proceduresYou cannot say "all operational" Spitfire Mk I's or Hurricanes were using 100 Octane in June of 1940.
The USAAF did the same thing when they converted to 100 Octane (100/130 grade). They published instructions to use 91 Octane for training and OCONUS and 100 Octane for operations. The Pilots Operating Handbooks reflect the fuel changeover after that Technical Order was published.
You don't see the Notes on the Merlin Engine being updated until January 1942.
|
The only one who has the "emotional investment" on being right in this thread is Crumpp, who has been ignoring
anything which is inconvenient to his case, including placing me on his ignore list. Look at how much his arguments have changed and look at how inconsistent everything he says has become.
The timeline of the Merlin's adaptation for using 100 Octane fuel:
1937 Merlin II developed 1,536 hp at +18 lbs on special blend of fuel;
1938 Figures for Merlin II and III using 100 Octane fuel presented at Paris airshow, albeit no mention of +12 lbs boost; clearly whatever redesign of the cylinder heads was needed Rolls-Royce would have had the job well in hand.
1939 Merlin II & III tested and approved for +12 Lbs boost; September 1940; Blenheim IVs of BC cleared to use 100 Octane fuel in outer wing tanks. November decision that reserves of 100 octane fuel adequate to allow all Merlins to be modified to use the fuel.
1940 February - first squadrons converted to use 100 octane; March A.P1590B/J.2-W specifically states conversions well underway; May - 100 Octane used by Hurricanes and Blenheims based in France during combat ops....etc etc etc.
Again, Crumpp is arguing for the sake of argument because he's always right, no matter what.