[Glider]

Originally Posted by Crumpp

Glider,

Documentation like that is useful but one can hardly make the conclusion all operational units were using the fuel. You are making a leap of logic that just is not there. If someone presented Combat reports from November 1945, would you make the conclusion the entire Luftwaffe was using the FW-190D9? Of course not, the report would have to be placed in context in order to be understood.

But it is documentation, documentation that shows it was in use. You as have been pointed out have no documentation. NOthing that says that 87 octane was in use in front line units.

All the combat report tells you is that on that day and time, that single airplane was using the fuel.

Which gives us over 34 squadrons using the fuel as we have reports for that. However we have none that show 87 octane in use.

Once more, period magazine articles the fuel was "in use" is not all operational units and niether is logistical documentation.

For example:



Making the conclusion Hurricanes were using 100 Octane in the Battle of France based off some logistical projections for future war is amatuerish and clumsey. It is a paper tiger. That document is a calculation of projected needs written on 7 May 1940. The British Expeditionary Force was on the Beaches of Dunkirk 18 days later.

Again you forget that we have the logistical background for the use of 100 octane in France, the combat reports that show it in use in France, plus as a final kicker, the evidence from at least one crashed German fighter that the Germans were using captured RAF 100 octane fuel stocks. Finally you need to read the papers before you quote them. The &th May gives a present establishment of 100 Octane i.e. it was already in place in serious quantaties

Now if that is amaturish then I plead guilty.
Now how does that compare to a theory based on a 1942 Pilots Notes of an aircraft that wasn't in the front line in 1942 from which you decide that the aircraft wasn't using 100 Octane two years before. Does that strike you as detailed research, double checking and of course you do have documentation to support it don't you?.

How much of those calculation and projections for future war do you really think became ground reality in 18 days?

Clearly more than you think.

Finally can I remind you that you still havn't said how many RAF fighter squadrons you believe were using 100 Octane in the BOB or how many Blenhiem squadrons were using it.
You also believed that the period of 1940 was operational testing, with unfortunately nothing to support. This trend of having wild theories and no support is my definition of an Amaturish.

PS After your claim of 20 years in special forces I have serious doubts as to your experience iro aviation.