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

[Glider]

Where has Kurfurst gone anyway

[Al Schlageter]

Originally Posted by Crumpp

If it is correct, then there is absolutely no chance a single operational squadron flew with the fuel during the Battle of Britain. England simply did not have enough 100 Octane fuel on hand to come close to that reserve requirement.

They were doing the technical development of the Spitfire. The 16 squadrons is a very important part of that technical development and inline with the subject they were research. One can look at the 87 Octane consumption on the documents in this thread and easily tell that it was not until after September that 100 Octane became the predominate fuel used by the RAF.

So tell me Eugene why is there so many fighter squadrons using 12lb boost which can only be done when using 100 fuel?

This is just what I have even before the BoB started:

By Month

No. 32 Squadron pre BoB H
No. 92 (East India) Squadron pre BoB S
No. 111 Squadron pre BoB H
No. 151 Squadron Feb 1940 H
No. 602 (City of Glasgow) Squadron pre BoB S
No. 609 (West Riding) Squadron pre BoB S

No. 1 (Cawnpore) Squadron May 1940 H
No. 3 Squadron May 1940 H
No. 17 Squadron May 1940 H
No. 19 Squadron May 1940 S
No. 54 Squadron May 1940 S
No. 74 Squadron May 1940 S
No. 56 (Punjab) Squadron May 1940 H
No. 73 Squadron May 1940 H
No. 79 (Madras Presidency) Squadron May 1940 H
No. 85 Squadron May 1940 H
No. 87 (United Provinces) Squadron May 1940 H
No. 229 Squadron May 1940 H

No. 43 (China-British) Squadron June 1940 H
No. 41 Squadron June 1940 S
No. 610 (County of Chester) Squadron June 1940 S
No. 611 (West Lancashire) Squadron June 1940 S

Well quite naturally 87 fuel was predominate as the other RAF Commands (Bomber, Coastal, Training etc) used 87 fuel.

[winny]

Originally Posted by Crumpp

If it is correct, then there is absolutely no chance a single operational squadron flew with the fuel during the Battle of Britain.

luckily it's not correct. Just let me understand your argument here.

You're disregarding contemporary combat reports, pilot's memoirs, Morgan and shacklady and more, in favour of a document that was written when nobody in Europe expected the war to start in 1939. Nobody, not even hitler.



Britain was in the process of rearmament. Everything changed in September '39.
They were expecting to have to fight in '41 or '42. As soon as Poland was invaded all the plans changed.

The history of trimpell oil refinery says that according to their records there were over 300 converted spitfires and hurricanes by the end of July. They supplied the fuel, at the time. Surely their account is more reliable.

EDIT: Corrected spelling of Trimpell

[lane]

Originally Posted by winny

The history of trimpnell oil refinery says that according to their records there were over 300 converted spitfires and hurricanes by the end of July. They supplied the fuel, at the time. Surely their account is more reliable.

Close but not quite Winny:

"Bulk supply contracts for higher octane fuel were placed by the Air Ministry and it was put into widespread use in the RAF in March 1940 when Spitfires' Rolls Royce Merlin engines were converted to use the 100 octane fuel.

By May 1940, reconnaissance Spitfires had begun flying combat missions using the 100 octane fuel. By 31 July 1940, there were 384 Spitfires serving in 19 squadrons using the 100 octane fuel."

Heysham Heritage Association, The Trimpell Oil Refinery



Heysham’s position is not unique, rather it’s very much in keeping with the conventional view:





Alec Harvey-Bailey, The Merlin in Perspective, (Rolls-Royce Heritage Trust, Derby, 1983)


Alfred Price, The Spitfire Story, (Arms and Armour Press Ltd., London, 1986)


David Ross, The Greatest Squadron of Them All, The Definitive History of 603 Squadron, RAauxAF, (Grub Street, London, 2003)


W.G. Dudek and D. R. Winans, AIAA Paper No. 69-779, Milestones in Aviation Fuels, (Esso Research and Engineering Company, New York 1969.)


A. R. Ogston, History of Aircraft Lubricants, (Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc. Warrendale, PA USA), p. 12.

[winny]

Originally Posted by lane

Close but not quite Winny:

Sorry it was from memory. I underestimated

And I'd forgotten about the fact that they were converting 87 into 100 - which means that the import figures do not take into account existing 87 that was converted in the UK.

Nice.

[Glider]

This might help. This is the RAF Order of Battle as reported to FC at 09.00 on the 13th July giving squadrons, bases and the operational status, I only hope you can read them. These are the original reports posted to FC as held in the NA

The no of Spitfire Squadrons is an almost exact match for my OOB plus the Hurricane Squadrons not mentioned in the prior posting

[Kurfürst]

Originally Posted by Glider

Where has Kurfurst gone anyway

I guess where everybody else who has lost interest in the thread, which is pretty much about three RAF fanatics who doesn't even fly in the sim desperately trying to sell a pet theory that nobody bought.

NZTyphoon has run out of his limited stores of unconvincing ruckus, and he can't seem to be able to decide between copy-pasting his old posts or pathetic personal attacks on other members. You and him should really decide whether I'm 'trolling' the thread or I am absent from it. It is impossible in the same time you know.

Or look at 'lane' (Mike William's umpteenth login handle). He posts the very same papers for about the 20th time every two pages or so, in the belief that spamming the thread with irrelevance has convincing power. Without managing to convince anyone, and especially not the developers. I guess another sore outburst in the next path news thread at the development team is in order..

Even better, look at your own performance. You can't admit you can't prove anything apart from what we have already known and you cannot admit that you don't know anything about the number of Squadrons, Stations supplied, when this happened. Others do not find it so difficult and we all understand that the evidence is lacking, but at a later time, it may well clear up. Instead, we see fanciful explanations why your own supplied documents have been mistyped or being irrevelant pre-war planning, or the latest that they were 'destroyed in the bombing of London'. You only manage to come up with these childish call-outs, like 'where is Kurfurst'? You know, he's patiently awaiting for you to find something you could not find in all these years. But let me direct a question to you - did having the last word work out so well in the kindergarten that you grow so fond of such approach?

I won't even mention 'Al Schlageter' who is the undisputed champion of having the most handles and at the same time, the most frequently permabanned member of this forum, and the only one who went as far as opening a thread just to call Oleg Maddox an idiot for including the 1,98 ata Bf 109K-4 in Il-2.

So tell me, why should anyone be interested in this sad quartet...? The whole thread is loud with your agony and frustration, and pretty much everyone lost interest in watching any more it. Sure, its amusing for a while, then people move on. You came here with an agenda and an axe to grind, but only managed to convince anyone with grey matter between the ears that the honest answer is 'we do not know', and also that it's a waste of time to listen to you, since you are either repeating the same like a broken record, or frothing in the mouth.

Well, congratulations - I find that I don't even need to enter a debate with you, as you are perfectly capable of behaving in a manner that nobody in their right mind would take seriously what you say anyway.

[winny]

Originally Posted by Kurfürst

I guess where everybody else who has lost interest in the thread, which is pretty much about three RAF fanatics who doesn't even fly in the sim desperately trying to sell a pet theory that nobody bought.

I notice you've gone from arguing the facts to character assasination.. Pathetic.

And you're talking rubbish, why would an RAF fanatic (as you put it) argue that the RAF had 100?

If they didn't have 100 octane then what they achieved in 1940 is even greater than I thought it was.

Truth is what happened happened, if they did it on 87 octane (they didn't, but I'll humour you) then they are even better than I thought they were.

And you nailed it - I'm not making this argument for a video game - It's about what happened, not what you say happened because you can't handle being killed by Spitfires in a computer game.

Seeing as 'everyone else has lost interest' why are you even posting?

To accuse us of being fanatics when you run and maintain a 109 site is frankly beyond hypocritical. Your opinion is so biased as to be of no value what so ever.

[fruitbat]

Good job K.

They've supplied evidence, and you've personally attacked them.......

How about something of a rebuttal, based on actual evidence, rather than slander.

If you can.

[NZtyphoon]

Originally Posted by Crumpp

I agree the 800,000 ton strategic reserve requirement be built up before any squadrons convert probably comes from a pre-war estimate.

If it is correct, then there is absolutely no chance a single operational squadron flew with the fuel during the Battle of Britain. England simply did not have enough 100 Octane fuel on hand to come close to that reserve requirement.

Again, that is just speculation on my part. Morgan and Shacklady just listed the two facts we know but they were not writing a book on the history of the Oil Committee and strategic reserves.

1. An 800,000 ton Strategic Reserve was required to be on hand before a single aircraft flew operationally.

If your argument that the RAF needed to build up a reserve of 800,000 tons of 100 octane before releasing it for use is correct then the RAF never released 100 octane, because their reserves never reached 800,000 tons right throughout the war. The 800,000 ton figure was a conservative pre-war estimate of what reserves should be built up in the event that America refused to supply 100 octane

It would be interesting to find the pre-war estimates for the reserves of other grades of aviation fuel and see how they match up with war-time reserves - has anyone got the pre-war estimates for other grades?