Bug 174 on 12lbs boost. Review please.

[Osprey]

Originally Posted by Osprey

Yes it was inevitable that "the worst person on the forum to answer his question" would do so and bend it against the RAF. His argument is of course about 'official clearance' in the manual, which is nonsense in RL combat and what actually happened. Indeed, a different throttle with a gate, 9lbs continuous hence the flight tests @ 9lbs (8., recommended 12lbs through the gate for takeoff power to 1000ft however this could still be used below the FTH (about 17k ft) anytime but for limited periods.

Predictably it took only about 3 more posts in the thread before........

Originally Posted by Kurfürst

This is a correct description IMHO for 1941. It is not a correct description for 1940.
............
It's only later, amended manuals (presumably from 1941) that are clearing +12 lbs for combat, too. <------ HA HA
............
Should 1C decide to introduce a post-BoB 1941 variant (doubtful), a +12 lbs version would be feasible, of course.[/b]

I love this.....

Originally Posted by Kurfürst

Note that none of these papers ('proof') specify any kind of boost rating. They merely say they used max. power. And max. power was +9.

max·i·mum (mks-mm)
n. pl. max·i·mums or max·i·ma (-m)
1.
a. The greatest possible quantity or degree.
b. The greatest quantity or degree reached or recorded; the upper limit of variation.
c. The time or period during which the highest point or degree is attained.
2. An upper limit permitted by law or other authority.

That would be 12 then.

Originally Posted by Kurfürst

Its no more than an awfully silly theory that when pilots made reference to emergency power, they meant using an emergency power far above the sanctioned limits for emergency power.

Yes I'm struggling to see why anybody would try to save their life if it meant breaking a sanction.

Originally Posted by Kurfürst

In contrast 41Sqn_Banks has the theory that a reference to emergency boost *MUST* refer to +12 lbs, even though +12 lbs is not listed anywhere, not referred to by any pilot, report or manual.

You aren't reading the reports then. They do frequently say this but others say 'pull the tit' or 'through the gate', which means to operate the ABC therefore use 12lbs, otherwise it would be 6.25 or 9. It's RAF slang from the time.

Originally Posted by Kurfürst

"I call it wishful thinking".......

......."My assumption"......blah, 109 never beaten, blah...."Its quite likely"......lie, make something biased up

"Its only logical"......

More opinion.

Originally Posted by Kurfürst

P.S. Curious, isn't it, that there's not a single hint or tests for +12 Spitfire IIs isn't it.

Maybe it's because the engine would blow up after a while?? Jeez.......

Originally Posted by Kurfürst

....come up with whatever fantasy we may like.

We hear you Kurfurst. You think that 12lbs is 'fantasy' lol This thread is going to be locked, I can see it already.