SPIT MK I/II and over boost

[Seadog]

Originally Posted by Kurfürst

Yaaaawn.

After years of trying to dig up everything in the archieve and still not a single paper saying that 100 octane replaced existing 87 octane in all Squadrons/Stations has been found.

I am not asking for evidence that 100 octane replaced 87 octane in all front line fighter squadrons, instead, all I am asking is for evidence that even a single combat sortie was ever made by RAF FC Spitfires or Hurricanes using 87 octane during the BofB.

Abundant evidence exists for hundred octane fuel use by RAF FC, during operational sorties, but none has ever been produced showing 87 octane use by a single front line BofB RAF FC Spitfire or Hurricane sortie.

Kurfurst, it is time for you to put up or shut up.

[CaptainDoggles]

Absence of evidence does not equal evidence of absence.

[Kurfürst]

Originally Posted by Seadog

I am not asking for evidence that 100 octane replaced 87 octane in all front line fighter squadrons, instead, all I am asking is for evidence that even a single combat sortie was ever made by RAF FC Spitfires or Hurricanes using 87 octane during the BofB.

Well its rather simple, I would have believed even with a blindfold one would easily get it. The standard fuel in the RAF was 87 octane, and from around March 1940 we have a British document saying that 100 octane fuel replaced it in select fighter stations. No, it doesn't say all, it specifically says: "the fighter stations concerned".

That seems crystal clear I am afraid.

And, despite literally years spent desperately by some to find something to the contrary, there's an utter inability to produce a primary source even hinting universal use; Spitfire manuals from the summer of 1940 still continue to mention both 87 and 100 octane ratings, the fuel consumption figures of the RAF clearly show that 2/3s of the avgas consumption was 87 octane, research in Australia found a paper that clearly noted RAF FC had not managed to fully convert until November 1940; the utmost Spitfire authorites has noted the fears of 100 octane supply due to tanker losses and the U-boot threats.

Most of us find it difficult to ignore all of that, unlike you. And just because you continue to use loud rhetorics in otherwise hollow and childish posts, its not gonna change.

Abundant evidence exists for hundred octane fuel use by RAF FC, during operational sorties, but none has ever been produced showing 87 octane use by a single front line BofB RAF FC Spitfire or Hurricane sortie.

Which part of 87 octane being the standard fuel in the RAF FC prior the spring of 1940 and that afterwards select fighter stations were receiving 100 octane fuel were you unable to decode?

Kurfurst, it is time for you to put up or shut up.

I don't take orders from you I am afraid.

[Seadog]

Originally Posted by Kurfürst

Well its rather simple...

So you admit you can't produce evidence for even a single combat sortie by a BofB RAF FC Hurricane and Spitfire using 87 octane.

[robtek]

Originally Posted by Seadog

So you admit you can't produce evidence for even a single combat sortie by a BofB RAF FC Hurricane and Spitfire using 87 octane.

Same as you can't PROVE that there wasn't one.

[Seadog]

Originally Posted by robtek

Same as you can't PROVE that there wasn't one.

Then why is there abundant evidence showing widespread use of 100 octane, and literally dozens of memoirs and histories showing the use of 100 octane, and many individual combat reports showing the use of 100 octane? Why are there no memoirs or squadron level or individual combat reports stating the use of 87 octane fuel?

I can't prove something that didn't happen, and there is NO evidence showing 87 octane fuel use during Spitfire or Hurricane combat sorties during the BofB.

There is evidence for widespread 100 octane fuel use during Spitfire or Hurricane BofB combat sorties , but no evidence of Spitfire or Hurricane combat sorties using 87 octane.

[robtek]

Originally Posted by Seadog

Then why is there abundant evidence showing widespread use of 100 octane, and literally dozens of memoirs and histories showing the use of 100 octane, and many individual combat reports showing the use of 100 octane? Why are there no memoirs or squadron level or individual combat reports stating the use of 87 octane fuel?

I can't prove something that didn't happen, and there is NO evidence showing 87 octane fuel use during Spitfire or Hurricane combat sorties during the BofB.

There is evidence for widespread 100 octane fuel use during Spitfire or Hurricane BofB combat sorties , but no evidence of Spitfire or Hurricane combat sorties using 87 octane.

There is no black and white!

There is evidence that selected squadrons where supported with 100 oct.

There is NO evidence that ALL squadrons where supported with 100 oct.

There is a grey zone, or maybe schroeders cat, which isn't, and can't be, defined.

The compromise solution might be that the overwhelming majority did use 100 oct.

[Kurfürst]

Originally Posted by robtek

There is no black and white!

There is evidence that selected squadrons where supported with 100 oct.

There is NO evidence that ALL squadrons where supported with 100 oct.

There is a grey zone, or maybe schroeders cat, which isn't, and can't be, defined.

The compromise solution might be that the overwhelming majority did use 100 oct.

Agreed.

[fruitbat]

Originally Posted by robtek

There is no black and white!

There is evidence that selected squadrons where supported with 100 oct.

There is NO evidence that ALL squadrons where supported with 100 oct.

There is a grey zone, or maybe schroeders cat, which isn't, and can't be, defined.

The compromise solution might be that the overwhelming majority did use 100 oct.

I think people will be more than happy with this, because then the mission builders can decide, and people can vote with there feet.

So we need a hurri and a spit mk 1 with 100 octane fuel as well, as the 87 octane versions we already have.

Everybody happy?

[Seadog]

Originally Posted by robtek

There is no black and white!

There is evidence that selected squadrons where supported with 100 oct.

There is NO evidence that ALL squadrons where supported with 100 oct.

There is a grey zone, or maybe schroeders cat, which isn't, and can't be, defined.

The compromise solution might be that the overwhelming majority did use 100 oct.

There is a black and white dicotomy:

White: There is evidence for numerous combat sorties by BofB Hurricanes and Spitfires using 100 octane fuel.

Black: There is NO evidence for even a single combat sortie by a BofB Hurricane or Spitfire using 87 octane fuel.

There is NO grey zone, because if there was, there would be evidence for combat sorties with 87 octane fuel along with 100 octane fuel.

Theory: 100 octane was used exclusively by front-line RAF FC Hurricanes and Spitfires during the BofB.

Theory predicts that combat reports would be uncovered showing 100 octane use. These reports exist and have been brought to light; the theory correctly predicts the evidence.

Theory: 87 and 100 octane was used by front-line RAF FC Hurricanes and Spitfires during the BofB.

Theory predicts that combat reports would be uncovered showing 87 octane use. These reports do not exist, and none have ever been published.
The theory fails the evidence test.