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

[Crumpp]

What was the storage life for the fuel,

Don't confuse the sweetened stock with the blended fuel you put in your tank. Blending does not occur until the gas is leaving the storage facility and heading for the pump to be sold or put into a vehicle to be used. Once it is blended, it is considered consumed.

All the 100LL stock is made one time per year. It is not blended though until it is sold to an airport. The Reid Vapor Pressure tolerances of aviation fuel are much more stringent than automotive fuel.

The Energy Information Administration says the switch between the two fuels happens twice a year, once in the fall (winter blend) and again in the spring (summer blend). Summer-blend gasoline is typically more expensive to produce than the winter blend, and it won’t affect vehicle performance or the durability of the engine and fuel system, according to the EPA.

http://ask.cars.com/2009/02/whats-th...y-cars-pe.html

You can get away with blending automotive fuel twice per year for the most part.

Airplane fuel does not work that way. My old Socata used to have vapor lock issues because I did not fly for months when I was away on business. The plane would sit with full tanks in the hanger. By the time I got to fly it, the conditions had changed from when it blended to maintain Reid VP and I would end up hitting the auxiliary fuel pump all the time to keep my fuel pressure up so the engine would not quit. Once that gas was out of my tanks, I did not have to use the aux pump except for start, takeoff, and landing.

[NZtyphoon]

Originally Posted by Crumpp

Next point is "consumed" does not mean it was put in an airplane and used up. Aircraft fuel has a specific shelf life to it. Once mixed it is distributed and considered consumed. For example, 100LL stock is refined only ONCE per year in the United States. The stock is then distributed to the holding yards. When it is dispensed to the airports, the final mix of that stock occurs and it becomes 100LL fuel. Just because the airport buys 15,000 gallons does not mean it will be sold and go into airplanes by the time the shelf life is over. That is why airport managers keep data on fuel sales!

That does not mean they mixed up a huge batches of 100 grade to be "disposed of" either. In many cases fuel can be converted back to stock and then again to a lower grade. It is still 100 grade that is consumed whether it comes back to the holding yard or not!

This is why the same reasoning that was used to "prove" the 100/150 grade extent of use was so flawed. First the strategic stocks must be maintained and once the fuel is mixed, it is "consumed". Nothing to do with it being blown out the exhaust pipe of an airplane.

Originally Posted by Crumpp

Airplane fuel does not work that way. My old Socata used to have vapor lock issues because I did not fly for months when I was away on business. The plane would sit with full tanks in the hanger. By the time I got to fly it, the conditions had changed from when it blended to maintain Reid VP and I would end up hitting the auxiliary fuel pump all the time to keep my fuel pressure up so the engine would not quit. Once that gas was out of my tanks, I did not have to use the aux pump except for start, takeoff, and landing.

And what exactly do intensive wartime operations of military aircraft have to do with what US civil aviation does with fuel blended and used for peacetime civilian operations? Socata's sitting in hangers for months? So What? For instance, the standard practice of the RAF was to fill the tanks of their fighters asap after landing to avoid vapour locks, condensation etc - there was no time for fuel to deteriorate through sitting around in a hanger for months waiting for something to happen. By Crumpp's reasoning the RAF mixed up small batches of 100 octane fuel then let it sit around, or tested it to see if it would work, instead of using as much as possible at a time when the country was facing full scale air assault!

Confusing peacetime civilian practice with military practice during wartime, and saying that the same constraints apply to the use of aviation fuel is just nonsense. It is just another red herring by someone who doesn't want to admit that he has no arguments left against FC using 100 octane fuel for all of its front line operations by Hurricanes, Spitfires and Defiants throughout the Battle of Britain.

[ACE-OF-ACES]

Originally Posted by NZtyphoon

It is just another red herring by someone who doesn't want to admit that he has no arguments left against FC using 100 octane fuel for all of its front line operations by Hurricanes, Spitfires and Defiants throughout the Battle of Britain.

Agreed 100%

Now.. as I said a dozen or so pages ago..

Why are you guys wasting your time arguing with this less than a handful bunch of biased nay-sayers?

I think you guys should start a group PM here to pull all this data togther into a nice little package and submit it to someone that actully maters here in the real world.. i.e. Luither.

Luither has shown in the past to be someone with an open mind, that is to say if you provide him the data he will make the change if the change can be made.

PS if you need a place to post your result I can offer up my website as a place to post your 'summary' of all this data

www.flightsimtesting.com

[Al Schlageter]

I am still waiting for the 40 plus Hurricane and Spitfire squadrons that only used 87 fuel during the whole BoB from the Dynamic Duo.

Eugene still hasn't produced the OoB he said he would post.

[ACE-OF-ACES]

Well don't hold your breath!

But seriosly.. You guys really need to stop wasting your time with these guys.. Put them on ignore and lets work togther to put togther a package for Luiter.

[fruitbat]

Originally Posted by ACE-OF-ACES

Well don't hold your breath!

But seriosly.. You guys really need to stop wasting your time with these guys.. Put them on ignore and lets work togther to put togther a package for Luiter.

nah, its fun watching them squirm.

[Osprey]

Originally Posted by ACE-OF-ACES

Well don't hold your breath!

But seriosly.. You guys really need to stop wasting your time with these guys.. Put them on ignore and lets work togther to put togther a package for Luiter.

Yes this.

AoA, I second you to be organiser

[NZtyphoon]

Originally Posted by ACE-OF-ACES

Well don't hold your breath!

But seriosly.. You guys really need to stop wasting your time with these guys.. Put them on ignore and lets work togther to put togther a package for Luiter.

I agree - this thread has long run its course; if Barbi and Crumpp and co want to believe in their horse pucky let 'em - I nominate and second Ace to be organiser.

[Al Schlageter]

A little graphic I put together using info from this thread, the official RAF website and the Spit Perf website. It is from July 1 to Sept 30 1940.

[ACE-OF-ACES]

Originally Posted by NZtyphoon

I nominate and second Ace to be organiser.

Well.. if no one else wants to do it I can hurd the cats!

Ill start a group PM this weekend.. We can discuss our goals and work from there. S!