109 e3b against spitfire II

[Seadog]

Originally Posted by CaptainDoggles

He asked for 109s with more powerful engines.

Luftwaffe fighter pilots, like all fighter pilots, wanted aircraft with better performance. This is abundantly clear from the above quotes and they pressed their claims with Goering himself! One way to get better performance was through the introduction of the 100 octane rated DB601N engine and it is clear that Luftwaffe fighter pilots were pressing for its introduction...( I can't wait for the torrent of claims that Luftwaffe pilots "didn't want any stinking 100 octane rated engines...") RAFFC pilots also wanted better performance, and they got a complete transition to 100 octane fuel, a transition which was completed prior to the start of the battle.

[Danelov]

Salomonic hipotetic solution: Luftwaffe must buy some A6M2 Zero(Or buy the licence)and everybody is happy.

[CaptainDoggles]

Originally Posted by Seadog

Luftwaffe fighter pilots, like all fighter pilots, wanted aircraft with better performance. This is abundantly clear from the above quotes and they pressed their claims with Goering himself! One way to get better performance was through the introduction of the 100 octane rated DB601N engine and it is clear that Luftwaffe fighter pilots were pressing for its introduction...( I can't wait for the torrent of claims that Luftwaffe pilots "didn't want any stinking 100 octane rated engines...") RAFFC pilots also wanted better performance, and they got a complete transition to 100 octane fuel, a transition which was completed prior to the start of the battle.

His exact words were "Moelders asked for a series of Me109's with more powerful engines."

You can't just make stuff up and attribute it to a historical figure. You don't really know what octane the pilots wished they had, did you?

The Germans generally didn't concern themselves with RO Numbers; their fuel was graded alphanumerically. C-3 fuel was what the Allies would have called 130 Octane fuel (150 after 1942 IIRC).

[Seadog]

Originally Posted by CaptainDoggles

His exact words were "Moelders asked for a series of Me109's with more powerful engines."

You can't just make stuff up and attribute it to a historical figure. You don't really know what octane the pilots wished they had, did you?

The Germans generally didn't concern themselves with RO Numbers; their fuel was graded alphanumerically. C-3 fuel was what the Allies would have called 130 Octane fuel (150 after 1942 IIRC).

Fighter pilot don't give a damn about octane ratings except to get more power. One way to get more power (at least on the Merlin) is to run the engine on a higher octane fuel and increase the boost pressure. RAFFC did this to every Merlin powered fighter in its operational inventory, and thus no pilots are recorded as wanting 100 octane fuel, "like my pal has in the squadron done the road".

Luftwaffe pilots also pressed for "more powerful engines" and again high octane fuel made this a much easier proposition. Asking for more power is exactly the same as asking for higher octane fuel. ( I didn't have to wait long for the "we don't need no stinking 100 octane fuel" claims from the Lufters... )

[CaptainDoggles]

Originally Posted by Seadog

Fighter pilot don't give a damn about octane ratings

Couldn't agree more.

( I didn't have to wait long for the "we don't need no stinking 100 octane fuel" claims from the Lufters... )

Please quote where I said that.

[VO101_Tom]

Originally Posted by Seadog

Fighter pilot don't give a damn about octane ratings except to get more power. One way to get more power (at least on the Merlin) is to run the engine on a higher octane fuel and increase the boost pressure....

Its not true. Moelders asked for a series of Me109's with more powerful engines. DB 601 A-1, DB 601 Aa, DB 601 N, later DB 601 E (for F), DB 605 engine family (for G-K). All were stronger than the previous type, without it that they would use the 100 octane C3 fuel instead of the 87 octane B4 ones. Of course, if they use C3 fuel, MW30, MW50, or GM1 system, the strength of the engine is growing rather yet. But purely visible, that it is possible to make stronger engine, using the same fuel (B4):

[Kurfürst]

Originally Posted by Seadog

RAFFC pilots also wanted better performance, and they got a complete transition to 100 octane fuel, a transition which was completed prior to the start of the battle.

Source please. Oh wait, we have your word for it, and everything it worth for.

Originally Posted by Seadog

Yet there isn't a single statement anywhere about RAFFC pilots complaining about the lack of 100 octane engines or fuel, during the Battle.

Originally Posted by Seadog

Fighter pilot don't give a damn about octane ratings except to get more power.

No comment

[Seadog]

Originally Posted by Kurfürst

Source please. Oh wait, we have your word for it, and everything it worth for.





No comment

We have a source:



and you have not presented a single shred of evidence to contradict it.

Originally Posted by Kurfürst

Quote:
Originally Posted by Seadog
Yet there isn't a single statement anywhere about RAFFC pilots complaining about the lack of 100 octane engines or fuel, during the Battle.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seadog
Fighter pilot don't give a damn about octane ratings except to get more power.

No comment

Of course you have no comment. The whole point of 100 octane fuel was give engines more power through higher boost pressure, and no RAFFC pilot flying a Merlin engined fighter during the BofB is on record of complaining that he can't use overboost, and so was deprived of 30% more power than his buddy in another squadron.

[CaptainDoggles]

no RAFFC pilot flying a Merlin engined fighter during the BofB is on record of complaining that he can't use overboost, and so was deprived of 30% more power than his buddy in another squadron.

As I said earlier, absence of evidence does not imply evidence of absence.

Your source, if I remember from way back in the thread, is a 3rd-party book. I asked if they had references since this is not a primary source and you ducked the question.

[Seadog]

Originally Posted by CaptainDoggles

As I said earlier, absence of evidence does not imply evidence of absence.

Your source, if I remember from way back in the thread, is a 3rd-party book. I asked if they had references since this is not a primary source and you ducked the question.

I didn't duck it. We have a source that states that RAFFC went completely to 100 octane, and there is no source that states that this is incorrect, and there is a large body of evidence that supports the view that RAFFC used 100% 100 octane fuel operationally during the BofB. If you don't accept the above source, than present some evidence that from July 10 to October 30 1940, that even a single RAFFC Merlin powered squadron was using 87 octane during combat operations.

There was about 46 RAFFC Merlins engined fighter squadrons available on July 08 1940. Surely you can find evidence that one of them was using 87 octane operationally during the battle. Just one...