![]() |
|
|
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
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.
__________________
Il-2Bugtracker: Feature #200: Missing 100 octane subtypes of Bf 109E and Bf 110C http://www.il2bugtracker.com/issues/200 Il-2Bugtracker: Bug #415: Spitfire Mk I, Ia, and Mk II: Stability and Control http://www.il2bugtracker.com/issues/415 Kurfürst - Your resource site on Bf 109 performance! http://kurfurst.org
|
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
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. |
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
|
Absence of evidence does not equal evidence of absence.
|
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
That seems crystal clear I am afraid. And, despite literally years spent desperately by some to find something to the contrary, there's an utter inability to produce a primary source even hinting universal use; Spitfire manuals from the summer of 1940 still continue to mention both 87 and 100 octane ratings, the fuel consumption figures of the RAF clearly show that 2/3s of the avgas consumption was 87 octane, research in Australia found a paper that clearly noted RAF FC had not managed to fully convert until November 1940; the utmost Spitfire authorites has noted the fears of 100 octane supply due to tanker losses and the U-boot threats. Most of us find it difficult to ignore all of that, unlike you. And just because you continue to use loud rhetorics in otherwise hollow and childish posts, its not gonna change. Quote:
Quote:
__________________
Il-2Bugtracker: Feature #200: Missing 100 octane subtypes of Bf 109E and Bf 110C http://www.il2bugtracker.com/issues/200 Il-2Bugtracker: Bug #415: Spitfire Mk I, Ia, and Mk II: Stability and Control http://www.il2bugtracker.com/issues/415 Kurfürst - Your resource site on Bf 109 performance! http://kurfurst.org
Last edited by Kurfürst; 01-10-2012 at 12:14 PM. |
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
So you admit you can't produce evidence for even a single combat sortie by a BofB RAF FC Hurricane and Spitfire using 87 octane.
|
|
#6
|
||||
|
||||
|
Same as you can't PROVE that there wasn't one.
__________________
Win 7/64 Ult.; Phenom II X6 1100T; ASUS Crosshair IV; 16 GB DDR3/1600 Corsair; ASUS EAH6950/2GB; Logitech G940 & the usual suspects ![]() |
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
Then why is there abundant evidence showing widespread use of 100 octane, and literally dozens of memoirs and histories showing the use of 100 octane, and many individual combat reports showing the use of 100 octane? Why are there no memoirs or squadron level or individual combat reports stating the use of 87 octane fuel? I can't prove something that didn't happen, and there is NO evidence showing 87 octane fuel use during Spitfire or Hurricane combat sorties during the BofB. There is evidence for widespread 100 octane fuel use during Spitfire or Hurricane BofB combat sorties , but no evidence of Spitfire or Hurricane combat sorties using 87 octane. Last edited by Seadog; 01-10-2012 at 05:45 PM. |
|
#8
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
There is evidence that selected squadrons where supported with 100 oct. There is NO evidence that ALL squadrons where supported with 100 oct. There is a grey zone, or maybe schroeders cat, which isn't, and can't be, defined. The compromise solution might be that the overwhelming majority did use 100 oct.
__________________
Win 7/64 Ult.; Phenom II X6 1100T; ASUS Crosshair IV; 16 GB DDR3/1600 Corsair; ASUS EAH6950/2GB; Logitech G940 & the usual suspects ![]() |
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
__________________
Il-2Bugtracker: Feature #200: Missing 100 octane subtypes of Bf 109E and Bf 110C http://www.il2bugtracker.com/issues/200 Il-2Bugtracker: Bug #415: Spitfire Mk I, Ia, and Mk II: Stability and Control http://www.il2bugtracker.com/issues/415 Kurfürst - Your resource site on Bf 109 performance! http://kurfurst.org
|
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Round and round we go.. So can you give me a definite number of 87 octane fighters used by the British between June and November 1940? To prove your theory. No, you can't. So you're in exactly the same situation as the people you're asking evidence from. Except that you're being hypocritical. your theory is exactly that, a theory. |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|