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

[Crumpp]

I have no idea where your first post in this thread is, and i wasn't talking about you specifically.

Ok, we are good.

so i do disagree with you

No issue at all.

squadrons were converted in the main before July

Take the ones that specifically say "100 Octane fuel in use" like this one:



Just like this one, it will specifically state if they are using the fuel.

Throw out the ones that just note conversion like this one:



And you will have a more accurate idea of the timeline and extent.

It won't be dead on but at least you won't have conversion mixed in with use.

There is some very good knowledge in your community. It is hampered by the "us vs them", win-lose mentality, emotional investment, and immaturity of some the members.

[NZtyphoon]

Originally Posted by Crumpp

Take the ones that specifically say "100 Octane fuel in use" like this one:



Just like this one, it will specifically state if they are using the fuel.

Throw out the ones that just note conversion like this one:

Note what the 611 Sqn ORB says:

21/3: Fuel: The new aircraft are one by one being converted...for the use of 100 Octane fuel, instead of D.T.D 230.

By arbitrarily "throwing" the 611 Sqn ORB out because it says "conversion" instead of "using the fuel" the fact that it notes that 100 octane fuel was being used instead of 87 octane is completely missed, plus it says 9 aircraft converted. So dump that "rule".

Here are two other ORBs from February 1940, from before before the issue of AP1590B/J.2-W, March 20 1940. That's four squadrons, plus four airbases North Weald, Digby, Hornchurch (11 Group) and Drem 13 Group confirmed to be converted or in the process of being converted to use the fuel in Feb-March 1940 alone. All indicate that 100 Octane fuel was the only type of fuel being used by converted aircraft.

Before you say "only four squadrons" these are ORBs of the time which have been found so far, that does not mean that these were the only squadrons in the RAF to convert.

Those from February also show that the conversion of Merlins was well underway before A.P1590B/J.2-W was issued, confirming what the document says.

[Glider]

Originally Posted by Crumpp

Why would you do that Glider? I don't think anyone is saying that.

I think that some people have stated that non operational flights were done on 100 octane and non operational flights on 87 octane. Postings have been made saying that in one month a squadrons did X operational flights and Y non operational flights.

We agree that this wouldn't have happened which is good

What would be worth it to do is change the fuel type when the units rotated out for rest and refit. They are not doing any operational flying under that status and unless they had an additional mission to gather data on the fuels use, there is no reason to continue to use 100 Octane. I am sure maintenance trend data over as many hours of flight time was required before the entire force converted but you don't need it from every squadron.

The difference between us is that when they moved for rest normally to a Group in the North they normally remained as Operational squadrons. Look at the OOB and compare then number of Operational and Non operational squadrons. A handfull are non operational. As I said Operational used 100 octane and non operational 87 Octane.

Crumpps steps to conversion.....

If I wanted to convert and it was not possible to convert the entire force, the first thing I would do is get as much 100 Octane gas to the airfields as I could before anyone converted. Then my conversion pool has a supply of gas.

The next thing I would do is convert as many squadrons as possible to be able to use 100 Octane. That timeline is going to be based on how fast the parts required can enter the system and reach the point of use. I would convert as many aircraft as possible without violating the required logistical ratio so my airplanes can continue to fly and I am not without airplanes due to maintenance awaiting parts. Now I have pool of capable aircraft.

As much as possible all of my operational squadrons using 100 Octane would be down in 11 Group in the thick of the action.

If logistics said I only had enough fuel for 16 squadrons by September then you can bet when a squadron rotated out for rest and refit, they would go back to 87 Octane and their replacement would come from that pool of converted units.

As logistics increased my usable fuel supply, I would add operational squadrons to other areas until the entire force was converted.

Your steps are basically the same as the RAF, The fuel had been issued by May 1940, the changes to the aircraft were very small, took about a day and the task was completed in May. The March paper listing the changes showed that the major conversion task was already included in new engines or in normal routine maintanence, all that was left was drilling a couple of holes so that side of the Logistics was covered, all that was left was delivering the fuel of which there was no shortage.

Now you seem to have dropped the pretence that 1940 was about operational testing which is good, now can you supply the 16 squadrons evidence?

[NZtyphoon]

Now, to France 7 May 1940: the RAF stored 660,056 gallons, 2111 tons of 100 octane versus 561,076 gallons, 1,778 tons, of 87 Octane in France: this was before the balloon went up, 4 Hurricane squadrons listed plus 9 Blenheim, all operating with 100 Octane:





and was requesting extra fuel for Blenheims, 188 gallons each for the outer tanks, plus 280 gallons of 87 Octane for the inner tanks.



And here the projected requirement for 100 Octane was far greater than that for 87: 1,579,740 gallons, 5,007 tons V 950,000 gallons or 3,011 tons.



If the RAF was only interested in building up stocks of 100 octane fuel before releasing it for use why would 100 octane fuel be sent to France to support the squadrons of the BEF? I presume your assumption is that the 4 Hurricane squadrons and 9 Blenheim squadrons were to be used for "operational trials?"

On 7 May more 100 Octane was stocked in France than 87 Octane, and projected requirements for 100 Octane were also far greater - this for a fuel you say was only used in "operational trials".

The requirement to supply 9 Blenheim squadrons - note on the second to last page the stipulation "ALL reinforcing Blenheim units require aviation fuel, per aircraft as follows: (i) 100 octane. 188 gallons (ii) D.T.D 230. 280 gallons - with 100 octane contradicts the pre-war paper which stipulates that only 16 fighter squadrons and a couple of Blenheim squadrons were to use 100 octane fuel before September 1940.

[Osprey]

Originally Posted by Crumpp

It is a fact the RAF did not complete conversion to 100 Octane until around January 1941. That is evident in the Operating Notes.

It is your opinion, not a fact, and you are in a minority of 1. Even Kurfurst doesn't support you.

Note that Kurfurst has made his counter move to powerful Spitfires by trying to get a late and rare 109 included into the BoB which pretty much demonstrates that his agenda is stat-padding all along. Good luck to him, I wouldn't deny anything to the Luftwaffe that was there all along, although as a mission maker for our server I wouldn't include it without regulation.....

http://www.il2bugtracker.com/issues/200

[41Sqn_Banks]

Originally Posted by Crumpp

Winny,

The Operating Notes say that in the January 1941 edition. None of the earlier editions make any note of it at all under operating limitations. 100 Octane is a minor footnote of "may be used.....IF converted" in all previous editions of the Operating Notes.

It is a fact the RAF did not complete conversion to 100 Octane until around January 1941. That is evident in the Operating Notes.

Actually you mean January 1942, at a time where there was not a single operational squadron operating the Spitfire I.
The Pilot's Notes page from May 1940 simply doesn't specify which unit should use what fuel, so this doesn't tell us anything about how widespread the use was at that time.

[JtD]

Some people seem to enjoy going in circles, but from a logical point of view it is impossible to prove that "all operational units used 100 octane fuel during BoB".
An analogy - if someone claimed that there are orange ravens, it cannot be disproved by showing thousands of black ones. However, to support the claim, it would be necessary to show a couple of orange ones - that would close the case and therefore, it is the way an argumentation needs to follow here.
Back to the 100 octane fuel, this topic has provided plenty of information and documentation regarding the use in 1940. Papers, memos, storage lists, logbooks, manuals, pilot and ground crew instruction, pilot accounts - all there to prove beyond doubt that 100 octane fuel was used.
What I'm missing is prove of 87 octane fuel being used in operational units. So, can anyone come up with a definite proof that an operational squadron used 87 octane fuel lets say until the end of September 1940?
I think that that kind of info, for instance a squadron logbook dating the conversion to 100 octane fuel in October 1940, would be far more valuable than another 500 posts trying to convince each other of something people simply do not want to believe.

[Osprey]

Originally Posted by NZtyphoon

If the RAF was only interested in building up stocks of 100 octane fuel before releasing it for use why would 100 octane fuel be sent to France to support the squadrons of the BEF? I presume your assumption is that the 4 Hurricane squadrons and 9 Blenheim squadrons were to be used for "operational trials?"

Don't be ridiculous NZ, obviously one of the safest places you could store and build up your stock of precious fuel is on the front line facing the enemy when you in full retreat. Don't use it mind, there are only lives at stake - it's more important to build it up first.

[Osprey]

Originally Posted by JtD

Some people seem to enjoy going in circles, but from a logical point of view it is impossible to prove that "all operational units used 100 octane fuel during BoB".
An analogy - if someone claimed that there are orange ravens, it cannot be disproved by showing thousands of black ones. However, to support the claim, it would be necessary to show a couple of orange ones - that would close the case and therefore, it is the way an argumentation needs to follow here.
Back to the 100 octane fuel, this topic has provided plenty of information and documentation regarding the use in 1940. Papers, memos, storage lists, logbooks, manuals, pilot and ground crew instruction, pilot accounts - all there to prove beyond doubt that 100 octane fuel was used.
What I'm missing is prove of 87 octane fuel being used in operational units. So, can anyone come up with a definite proof that an operational squadron used 87 octane fuel lets say until the end of September 1940?
I think that that kind of info, for instance a squadron logbook dating the conversion to 100 octane fuel in October 1940, would be far more valuable than another 500 posts trying to convince each other of something people simply do not want to believe.

Couldn't agree more and a normal person would understand that, but we have a 'special' person arguing the case against here who is better than all of us. I know this because he flies an aeroplane himself and polishes a 190 for a rich man.

According to his logic there can't have been more than a few thousand dinosaurs inhabiting the earth in total during that great span of a few hundred million years between the Jurassic and Cretaceous periods of our planet, on the basis that these are the only fossils that have been found. Furthermore, if you take into account modern livestock farming methods and regulations then their existence was even more implausible because every farmer knows that keeping a herd of Brontosauruses is not defined anywhere and they wouldn't fit in a modern cowshed for milking.

[winny]

Originally Posted by Crumpp

Winny,

It is a fact Dowding rotated and rested his squadrons.

It is not speculation or assumption, the squadrons were rotated and rested. It was very contraversial and that argument is covered in some detail in the official RAF History. I personally believe it was an essential part of the RAF victory.

Keep in mind that tactically, the RAF SE fighters took a pasting from the Luftwaffe SE fighters with the exception of July 1940. Very good pre-war planning, good leadership, most significantly brave men and women all allowed the RAF to increase its strength during the battle to ultimately prevail.

For the Luftwaffe, it is an example of tactical success ending in a defeat in the campaign.

I'm sorry but.. I said I know he rotated squadrons I have 42 books on the subject of the BoB. I know a lot about the subject.

It seems that you are failing to understand the difference between rotated and withdrawn.

The reason I brought it up was because..

You said "If logistics said I only had enough fuel for 16 squadrons by September then you can bet when a squadron rotated out for rest and refit, they would go back to 87 Octane and their replacement would come from that pool of converted units.
"

There was no pool of converted units - all of the RAF's FC squadrons were active.

I'm saying that to suggest that they forced pilots back onto 87 octane when they moved to a different group does not stack up.
100 octanes only real advantage was in rate of climb. All groups were operational and all groups were involved in combat.

The RAF at the beginning had around 2,200 aircraft IN TOTAL FC, BC ,CC and transport. FC had around 6-700 aircraft. This is where the focus for 100 octane was placed.


EDIT: And you also said "I highly doubt the Air Ministry had 100 Octane fuels in any substantial quantity in 1938"
So I post the original documents which show they did have large stocks and you come back that 'logistical has nothing to do with operational" or words to that effect.