Inaccurate performance data for BOB fighters in COD comparing to RL data

[lane]

Originally Posted by pstyle

Here's my take on this "units concerned" business, working from most recent to oldest:

By May 18th, these "units concerned" has been stocked with the necessary 100 octane

Prior to May 18th. There are two separate lines of discussion.
One relates to Bomber command and the stocking/ holding of two fuel types a Blenheim statinos, mainly stations Wyton, Watton, Waattsiham and West Raynham.

Fighter command, on the other hand was also subject to the same "proposal" that "certain units" should "begin to use 100 octane". There was some discussion about whether or not the existing spitfires and hurricanes could actually convert to the 100 fuel without substantial modifications. However, this concern was proved unfounded. They could use the 100 fuel.

So who are these "certain units"?
Well, as Talisman identifies in his post above, these "certain units" are the "squadrons armed with fighters and Blenheims" as specified by Assistant Chief of the Air Staff - who sits ABOVE both fighter and bomber command, which is why, form the overall RAF perspective this refers to "certain units", and not ALL units.

I think it's entirely fair to suggest, that from the perspective of fighter command, this referred to ALL fighter units.

I am in agreement with Talisman that by May 18th, all of these "units concerned" were using 100 Octane. And that their Spitfires and Hurricanes could use the fuel WITHOUT considerable modification, as per the statement of Mr Tweedie, at the May 1940 meeting.

There is a sting in the tail though, while the Spits/Hurris could use the 100, they would not get the performance benefit until the modifications had occurred to each individual aircraft.

Good post pstyle. Just a thought...I'm not sure about your last statement regarding not getting the performance benefit until the modifications had occurred to each individual aircraft whilst using 100 octane. It may in fact be the case that using 100 octane without the modifications may actually have allowed for greater power than the 1310 hp provided by +12 lbs., though likely resulting in increased strain on the engine.

R.D.E.6 memo dated 14/11/39 states "The modifications to the boost control cut out to limit the maximum boost to 12 lbs. sq.in. are simple and in hand (otherwise full throttle would give about 17 lbs. sq.in.)"

See also comments of Sgt. R. C. Wilkinson, 3 Squadron, 14 May 1940