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

[NZtyphoon]

Originally Posted by Kurfürst

Nobody else need to offer counter-evidence to your speculation, as you were not able to offer evidence to start with. The burden is proof is on you. You can't - I see you'd like to - escape from that fact I am afraid.

In other words what ever pitiful evidence Barbi thought he had, and has spent hours arguing over, even though he confessed to having only a very passing interest in the RAF

Originally Posted by Kurfürst

....Because I have only a very passing interest the RAF... Some times questions like this just solve themselves in time.

has been totally busted.

No Pips memo, which he has never seen in the first place;

Morgan and Shacklady busted; (pity I still like the book but some of their research lacks depth)

and his mere conjecture and wishful thinking over the words "certain" or "selected", written in memos that are 70 years old.

Not forgetting that Kf very recently did provide a document stating that the RAF actually considered it had adequate reserves of 100 octane fuel in November 1939.


All he can do is squeak "the burden of proof is on you" - and nobody but Kf has set that 'rule'. If that was really true everything Kf has posted, all of his bluster, all of his attempts to justify his position, has been, in the words of the bard "a tale. Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing" (MacBeth)

[Gabelschwanz Teufel]

If you are engaged in a battle for survival, do you not think you would utilize every possible advantage you have whether or not there are "adequate" reserves on hand or not?

[Glider]

Originally Posted by Kurfürst

And all the facts from the National Archives say

- that the RAF decided in March 1939 to equip 16 fighter + 2 bomber Squadrons with 100 octane

- that in May 1940 they acknowledged that the fuel was delivered to select fighter and bomber squadrons

- that in August 1940 they decided that other Commands may use 100 fuel as well (which does not mean they did, they were authorized to do so)

- 100 octane vs 87 octane issues figures for 1940 all show that 87 octane was the primary fuel issued during the Battle, and 100 octane issues did not increase or took prominence until the day battle was pretty much over

Everything else is merely your speculation and wishful thinking about 'all' and 'every' unit using 100 octane, supported by no evidence as many has already told you. You can only offer mere rhetoric and nothing more.

Nobody else need to offer counter-evidence to your speculation, as you were not able to offer evidence to start with. The burden is proof is on you. You can't - I see you'd like to - escape from that fact I am afraid.

If you believe that the RAF only used 16 squadrons of fighters with 100 Octane until Sept 1940, then you need to explain why we have over 30 squadrons mentioning it in combat reports. I think that counts as counter evidence

[Korn]

Sorry to intervene in the middle of your sword fighting, but if the 100 Octane fuel use was generalized, why is it even mentioned in the combat reports? I really doubt the use of your regular-every-day-normal fuel warrants mentioning.

Just asking. Was any air force during the WW2 in the habbit of specifying what fuel they flew with unless it was something, i don't know, unusual?

[Kurfürst]

Originally Posted by Glider

If you believe that the RAF only used 16 squadrons of fighters with 100 Octane until Sept 1940, then you need to explain why we have over 30 squadrons mentioning it in combat reports. I think that counts as counter evidence

I suggest you cease putting words into my mouth; nowhere I had suggested that the use of 100 octane was limited to 16 Squadrons, this may or may not have been revised, but given that there is an absolute lack of evidence that happening, any such thesis remains in the realm of wishful thinking. However the trail of evidence is clear, in 1939 the RAF clearly intended to issue the fuel to select Squadrons. In May 1940 the archive papers have noted that this policy of limited use was followed, as the papers still note that only select units/stations are supplied.

You have not produced anything that would suggest this policy was revised. Fuel issue/consumption records show that the 87 octane remained the main type issued and consumed.

So instead of dancing on the words and expecting others to disprove the unsupported thesis you are speculating about, how about producing a single paper saying that all Squadrons are/are to be supplied, hmm? So far your record with that is dismay failure.

Moreover, as you said you have combat reports from pilots from about 30 Squadrons (rotating between Stations that selected to be supplied with 100 octane as others have also correctly pointed out, so alone it gives very little idea of how many units were using the fuel at one time) so one just wonders on really what basis you are claiming that not 30 but 60+ Squadrons were all using 100 octane fuel, when you have only evidence for half of them. After years of rather barren research.

[NZtyphoon]

Originally Posted by lane

The first two screen captures are from Re-arming filmed around June 1940. 609 Squadron Spitfire I's are shown being re-fueled and re-armed. One of the aircraft still has a black & white underside paint scheme, whereas the others have all duck egg blue undersides. Note the 100 stenciled in black paint on the fuselage at the location of the fuel tanks. This is in contrast to the 100 stenciled in white paint at the fuel tanks location of the Spitfire I shown in the instructional film The Daily Inspection of a Spitfire. The location of the 100 octane fuel stencil also varies slightly from aircraft to aircraft.





From The Daily Inspection of a Spitfire June 1940.

According to Ted Hooton Spitfire Camouflage 1938-1940 Scale Aircraft Modelling Vol 5 No. 2, November 1982, the transition from Black/White under-surfaces to what was meant to be Sky (Type S) - there were some unit applied colours that were non standard - took place between 6 -17 June 1940 (p. 56).

R6692 - the Spitfire in the hanger, and the subject of the maintenance film, first flew June 3 was delivered to 6MU 5 June, then 609 Sqn. 7 June http://www.spitfires.ukf.net/p009.htm : in the film the aircraft code letter had yet to be applied, so the film was shot early-mid June, while it was still working into 609 Sqn. service. The 2nd photo of 609 Sqn Spitfires shows two of them still had black wheels, meaning they originally were painted black under the port wing, yet the undersurfaces of the wing were painted Sky, meaning the unit was in the middle of repainting its operational aircraft - again early - mid June 1940.

[lane]

Originally Posted by NZtyphoon

According to Ted Hooton Spitfire Camouflage 1938-1940 Scale Aircraft Modelling Vol 5 No. 2, November 1982, the transition from Black/White under-surfaces to what was meant to be Sky (Type S) - there were some unit applied colours that were non standard - took place between 6 -17 June 1940 (p. 56).

R6692 - the Spitfire in the hanger, and the subject of the maintenance film, first flew June 3 was delivered to 6MU 5 June, then 609 Sqn. 7 June http://www.spitfires.ukf.net/p009.htm : in the film the aircraft code letter had yet to be applied, so the film was shot early-mid June, while it was still working into 609 Sqn. service. The 2nd photo of 609 Sqn Spitfires shows two of them still had black wheels, meaning they originally were painted black under the port wing, yet the undersurfaces of the wing were painted Sky, meaning the unit was in the middle of repainting its operational aircraft - again early - mid June 1940.

Thanks for the info NZtyphoon.

Here's a 602 Squadron Spitfire at Drem. Note the black & white undersides and the 100 octane label stenciled in white. This photo was taken during a press day, probably late February or March 1940. See also the Flight article from 28 March 1940 which describes 602 Squadron's operations using 100 octane fuel, probably the same event. (Ironically, for those that like to "get in the weeds" with this stuff, the author of the flight article was none other than H. F. King ) 602 Squadron converted to 100 octane at Drem during February 1940.

[41Sqn_Banks]

As the Stations did have there own ORB, did anyone check them for entries concerning 100 octane fuel?

[Glider]

Originally Posted by 41Sqn_Banks

As the Stations did have there own ORB, did anyone check them for entries concerning 100 octane fuel?

I tried. The detail for each station varied, some did what you would expect as per the above, some only did entries for the station and ignored anything to do with the squadrons, and some were missing. Duxfords was missing two months of entries.

I also started to review the squadron records and what was interesting was that any squadron that formed after May 1940 had no mention of 100 octane at all and I checked these through to May 1941 by which time they certainly would have been using 100 octane. The inference I drew was that they didn't mention it as by then it was standard issue and therefore wouldn't be mentioned. This would support the view that the paper in May which referred to the stations concerned was talking about the Operational stations that had not been converted by April 1940.

I think its worth mentioning that Drem is in the North of Scotland. Not the first place I would issue 100 Octane too, if supply and distribution was to be limited.

[41Sqn_Banks]

It's interesting that so far ORB was found that mentions the switch to 100 octane fuel after May 1940. Of course some ORBs don't mention the switch at all. However if at least one squadron could be found it would clearly proof that it was not in use by all squadrons.

BTW: Anyone know what Merlin Modification 102 and 123 was? It was applied to the Spitfire of 41 Squadron in November 1939: http://www.oldrafrecords.com/records/424/4240052.gif

Also I remembered that there are two different Pilot's Notes for the Spitfire II are circulating, one that mentions the use of 100 octane only and another that mentions 100 octane (operational) and 87 octane (non-operational). Wouldn't it be logical that the first issue only contains 100 octane use as the new Spitfire II was only used operational at first, and only later when non-operational units used it the handling of 87 octane is mentioned.