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

[NZtyphoon]

Originally Posted by VO101_Tom

Yes, there are 100 oct. Spitfires, it's fact. Would be unfair if you can't fly with them. The debate is always with the numbers (iirc the wall of texts ) but I think this is irrelevant, when it should be decide to exist in the game or not.

The 109's field modifications made impossible to know, how many upgraded aircraft fight in the BOB. Much old version upgraded to E-7 during the battle. I think the principle should the same as the 100 octane fuel.

On a side note I have the book Luftwaffe Fighters and Fighter-Bombers Over Norway which includes a section on a Bf 109E-7 W.Nr. 3523 "Red 6" of 5./JG5 which was rescued from a Russian lake in 2003. (pages 61-63)

This was manufactured as an E-1 by Arado and was taken into Luftwaffe service on 27 September 1939; in August 1940 it was converted into an E-7. In mid 1941 it was overhauled and became an E-7/Trop, complete with the RLM 78/79 paint scheme before being shipped to Norway in early 1942 and serving in JG5. On 4 April the cooling system was damaged in combat with a Russian Hurricane IIC from 2 GIAP and Red 6 force landed on a frozen lake - from which it was rescued and still exists,

at Chino.

(The commentary by Brett Green is misleading.)

[VO101_Tom]

Originally Posted by NZtyphoon

On a side note I have the book Luftwaffe Fighters and Fighter-Bombers Over Norway which includes a section on a Bf 109E-7 W.Nr. 3523 "Red 6" of 5./JG5 which was rescued from a Russian lake in 2003. ...

Interesting video. Was an adventurous journey
Thanks for sharing.

[Kurfürst]

Originally Posted by Osprey

It is your opinion, not a fact, and you are in a minority of 1. Even Kurfurst doesn't support you.

Note that Kurfurst has made his counter move to powerful Spitfires by trying to get a late and rare 109 included into the BoB which pretty much demonstrates that his agenda is stat-padding all along. Good luck to him, I wouldn't deny anything to the Luftwaffe that was there all along, although as a mission maker for our server I wouldn't include it without regulation.....

http://www.il2bugtracker.com/issues/200

Yawn. I simply gathered the material I have posted here a year ago, the reason I put it up on bugtracker is because you have turned my attention to it. BTW, did you vote for 100 octane 109s and 110s yet? You know, for the sake of historical accuracy you say to be devoted to. I am sure if you want historical accuracy for the RAF, you would not danger your credibility by not supporting the same historical accuracy for the LW.

Stat padding? Last I flew online was some six years ago... Besides the normal 109s are just as good as 100 octane Spits. Its mainly about the 110s as those were the main types running on 100 octane, about half of them were running on it. The 109s had only one Gruppe initially - though thats about the same number as the not-so-common Spit IIs, which already have modelled. The Moscow map will probably have the E-7/N modelled anyways.

ps. I would be more delighted to see a flyable Wellington, which was the main British bomber and a nice counterpart for the 111, or a Hampden modelled.

[Glider]

Originally Posted by Kurfürst

ps. I would be more delighted to see a flyable Wellington, which was the main British bomber and a nice counterpart for the 111, or a Hampden modelled.

For once I agree with you 100%

[41Sqn_Banks]

Originally Posted by Crumpp

Winny,

The Operating Notes say that in the January 1941 edition. None of the earlier editions make any note of it at all under operating limitations. 100 Octane is a minor footnote of "may be used.....IF converted" in all previous editions of the Operating Notes.

It is a fact the RAF did not complete conversion to 100 Octane until around January 1941. That is evident in the Operating Notes.

Actually you mean January 1942, at a time where there was not a single operational squadron operating the Spitfire I.
The Pilot's Notes page from May 1940 simply doesn't specify which unit should use what fuel, so this doesn't tell us anything about how widespread the use was at that time.

[JtD]

Some people seem to enjoy going in circles, but from a logical point of view it is impossible to prove that "all operational units used 100 octane fuel during BoB".
An analogy - if someone claimed that there are orange ravens, it cannot be disproved by showing thousands of black ones. However, to support the claim, it would be necessary to show a couple of orange ones - that would close the case and therefore, it is the way an argumentation needs to follow here.
Back to the 100 octane fuel, this topic has provided plenty of information and documentation regarding the use in 1940. Papers, memos, storage lists, logbooks, manuals, pilot and ground crew instruction, pilot accounts - all there to prove beyond doubt that 100 octane fuel was used.
What I'm missing is prove of 87 octane fuel being used in operational units. So, can anyone come up with a definite proof that an operational squadron used 87 octane fuel lets say until the end of September 1940?
I think that that kind of info, for instance a squadron logbook dating the conversion to 100 octane fuel in October 1940, would be far more valuable than another 500 posts trying to convince each other of something people simply do not want to believe.

[Osprey]

Originally Posted by JtD

Some people seem to enjoy going in circles, but from a logical point of view it is impossible to prove that "all operational units used 100 octane fuel during BoB".
An analogy - if someone claimed that there are orange ravens, it cannot be disproved by showing thousands of black ones. However, to support the claim, it would be necessary to show a couple of orange ones - that would close the case and therefore, it is the way an argumentation needs to follow here.
Back to the 100 octane fuel, this topic has provided plenty of information and documentation regarding the use in 1940. Papers, memos, storage lists, logbooks, manuals, pilot and ground crew instruction, pilot accounts - all there to prove beyond doubt that 100 octane fuel was used.
What I'm missing is prove of 87 octane fuel being used in operational units. So, can anyone come up with a definite proof that an operational squadron used 87 octane fuel lets say until the end of September 1940?
I think that that kind of info, for instance a squadron logbook dating the conversion to 100 octane fuel in October 1940, would be far more valuable than another 500 posts trying to convince each other of something people simply do not want to believe.

Couldn't agree more and a normal person would understand that, but we have a 'special' person arguing the case against here who is better than all of us. I know this because he flies an aeroplane himself and polishes a 190 for a rich man.

According to his logic there can't have been more than a few thousand dinosaurs inhabiting the earth in total during that great span of a few hundred million years between the Jurassic and Cretaceous periods of our planet, on the basis that these are the only fossils that have been found. Furthermore, if you take into account modern livestock farming methods and regulations then their existence was even more implausible because every farmer knows that keeping a herd of Brontosauruses is not defined anywhere and they wouldn't fit in a modern cowshed for milking.