SPIT MK I/II and over boost

[Al Schlageter]

Originally Posted by csThor

Apparently the "Deutschland über alles" types have their evil twins in the "Britannia rule the waves" types.

I have to agree with BlackDog - some people don't discuss, they try to run over their discussion partners like a steamroller in order to put their particular idea about history over everyone else. And people wonder why some of us prefer offline?

I know where you can get crying towels at a great discount.

[csThor]

Which is precisely what I was talking about. You want to be taken seriously? Then start acting like a responsible adult capable of serious discussion instead of slinging mud at everyone who's interested in discussion instead of "Because I say so" type statements.

[Seadog]

Originally Posted by csThor

Apparently the "Deutschland über alles" types have their evil twins in the "Britannia rule the waves" types.

I have to agree with BlackDog - some people don't discuss, they try to run over their discussion partners like a steamroller in order to put their particular idea about history over everyone else. And people wonder why some of us prefer offline?

I challenge anyone to produce any source stating that any BofB Hurricane or Spitfire flew even a single combat sortie with 87 octane fuel. This isn't about promoting one side or the other, but is all about historical accuracy.

Abundant evidence has been produced showing that there was more than enough 100 octane fuel available for all front line Fighter Command squadrons, but if 87 octane was used along with 100 octane, then there should be references to it in memoirs, pilot combat reports and historical accounts, and yet no such evidence has ever been produced.

It is time for those who claim that 87 octane was used by front-line RAF FC units during the BofB to produce positive evidence for their claims, or to retract those claims.

[Kurfürst]

Originally Posted by Seadog

I challenge anyone to produce any source stating that any BofB Hurricane or Spitfire flew even a single combat sortie with 87 octane fuel.

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. Not one paper. I'd say it's a sign. We had the same drama about 150 grade fuel years ago.

There's not one paper noting anything the like, and the people who were desperate to find some are extremely careful to only show snippets of the relevant papers. Some has even went as far manipulating the evidence. Time and time again they have been asked to share the fiels publicly, but they refuse, and keep posting the same papers that says selected units have been supplied, and nothing more.

Then it usually takes a bizarre turn, and since they can't prove what they want to be true, and getting frustrated, given the complete absence of supporting evidence, suddenly everyone else has to prove they are wrong.

It always reminds me of this classic scene.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_w5JqQLqqTc

[Al Schlageter]

Originally Posted by Seadog

I challenge anyone to produce any source stating that any BofB Hurricane or Spitfire flew even a single combat sortie with 87 octane fuel. This isn't about promoting one side or the other, but is all about historical accuracy.

Abundant evidence has been produced showing that there was more than enough 100 octane fuel available for all front line Fighter Command squadrons, but if 87 octane was used along with 100 octane, then there should be references to it in memoirs, pilot combat reports and historical accounts, and yet no such evidence has ever been produced.

It is time for those who claim that 87 octane was used by front-line RAF FC units during the BofB to produce positive evidence for their claims, or to retract those claims.

+100 !!!! Seadog

[Kurfürst]

Must be fun, registering several handles just to reply to yourself on a discussion board.

[Al Schlageter]

LOL BarbI. All you produced was your typed words (changed multiple times) for 1.98ata for the Bf109K-4. The rest of your proofs are just fanciful speculation. What has been shown for 100 fuel is more than enough proof that 11 Group and the bordering units in 10 and 12 Groups were using 100 fuel using your criteria of proof for 1.98ata.

Stop judging other people by your own actions.

[Kurfürst]

Relevance?

[Bounder!]

Originally Posted by klem

+1 on 100 octane supplies.

We aren't the only forum to have discussions on this and I found a very interesting post on another forum whch replaces the usual speculation with some documented facts. I'm not going to reproduce them here, you can read them at this forum post.....
http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/avi...tml#post542367
and another containing combat reports from as early as May 1940 with many, particularly the Hurricane Squadrons, before the Bob 'started' in July 1940.
http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/avi...tml#post542707

Like our own forum the Thread contains some vociferous posts against the idea and claims that the BoB was fought largely using 87 octane fuels although the main protagonist doesn't seem to offer contemporary data or reports. The posts in the links do contain such contemporary reports and some reflective reports written only a few years later indicating that Fighter Command was moved to 100 Octane fuel from March 1940, either through field mods or the delivery of new aircraft already converted. Its also unthinkable in the face of imminent attack that, with the 100 octane fuel reserves available, the whole of Fighter Command could not have been supported or would not have been converted. If there had been any division between 87 and 100 octane the aircraft requiring the highest performance would have taken preference and is perhaps why Bomber Command wasn't converted until 1941.


The Thread itself is begun by a poster who also refers to the work of Dr Gavin Bailey which supports the argument that 100 octane was readily available from Britain's own resources by the time of the BoB and not just dependent on US supplies (this is an argument sometimes used to suggest that the RAF couldn't have had the necessary supplies for the BoB). His book is mentioned here...
http://ehr.oxfordjournals.org/conten...1/394.abstract

Very interesting links Klem, wanted to say thanks for posting them

[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.