![]() |
|
|
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
It makes no sense Klem. No a single notch of it. It's an illusion for late grown child tht prbably started somehow reading two line in an history books. I love the Mayas civilization but I am not convincing myself Steve Job and the NASA were their creation Guess why the 21st century RAF can't introduce a new fighter without so much pain ? IMHO : You'd better help the devs to fix the Spit FM toward some realism at least. I am sure that they would then be happy (and with some financial interest too) to give you your boosted Merlin on Spitfire Last edited by TomcatViP; 01-10-2012 at 09:06 AM. |
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
Klem- i've just gone through that forum thread you posted the link to http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/avi...2-a-20108.html
I'd say that nails it- credit must go to MikeWilliams and Glider for their research efforts- the weight of evidence clearly affirms the fact that 100 octane fuel was widely used by RAF fighter command since early summer 1940. As for the tone on that forum- it's a marked contrast to the personal insults that get thrown around here. |
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
+1 couldn't agree more. Hats off to the guys researching and posting links to their sources. Last edited by Bounder!; 01-10-2012 at 09:36 AM. |
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
+100
|
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
|
It used to be like here, until they banned Kurfurst for the same as what he tries to do here. (I am not joking)
|
|
#6
|
||||
|
||||
|
See my above post.
__________________
![]() Personally speaking, the P-40 could contend on an equal footing with all the types of Messerschmitts, almost to the end of 1943. ~Nikolay Gerasimovitch Golodnikov |
|
#7
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
You do the ground crews and engineering personnel a great dis-service when you suggest they couldn't manage it 'in the middle of a ragging war'. Perhaps you are judging them by more casual peacetime standards. If you can't make even a notch of sense from the reports you have been shown I can only assume you are suffering from the same wishful thinking that dogged Hermann Goering. Like some other anti-100 posters you choose not to believe the evidence of the time that is presented. I can't change that and I'm not going to bother trying any more. btw, if your 'late grown child' was a reference to me you couldn't be more wrong.
__________________
klem 56 Squadron RAF "Firebirds" http://firebirds.2ndtaf.org.uk/ ASUS Sabertooth X58 /i7 950 @ 4GHz / 6Gb DDR3 1600 CAS8 / EVGA GTX570 GPU 1.28Gb superclocked / Crucial 128Gb SSD SATA III 6Gb/s, 355Mb-215Mb Read-Write / 850W PSU Windows 7 64 bit Home Premium / Samsung 22" 226BW @ 1680 x 1050 / TrackIR4 with TrackIR5 software / Saitek X52 Pro & Rudders |
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
|
Pls Klem edit your post. Hugely discomforting to read.
"The late grown child" was nothing as an insult. Moreover I didn't say that there wasn't 100 oct. I say that there is no link that the FC was converted and it does not make any sense in an air defense campaign. Let's take the biofuel swap of modern aircraft engine. It makes sense to test and add the use as a strategical resource for short high intensity conflict. That's why all major airforce today want to show others they have that possibility. Does it means that the USAF will convert its fleet of F15/16/22 to BioFuel ? Yeah as much as they want starving soldier on the battlefront... You've got to get an eye on the purpose of an application. From time to time of course, there is no thinkable application for a reasonable mind. Last edited by TomcatViP; 01-10-2012 at 12:36 PM. |
|
#9
|
||||
|
||||
|
lol.
|
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
|
Originally Posted by TomcatViP
Moreover I didn't say that there wasn't 100 oct. I say that there is no link that the FC was converted and it does not make any sense in an air defense campaign.
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|