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

[winny]

I'd just like to add a little example of how procedures differed during the war when compared to peacetime/modern times.

Spitfires suffered from a couple of problems that would today result in the grounding of the fleet. Namely the "Skew Gear problem" in Merlins where the skew gear would fail randomly and catastrophically, (this happened to Alex Henshaw a number of times) and the Piston seizures on Packard Merlins - caused by the fact that the piston heads were not machined, to save time, and were left to wear to shape, or in some cases seize as the push rods got bent. Neither of these problems would be acceptable today. They simply could not afford to halt production to find the source of the skew gear problem, so they continued making the engines as was, up until the point that they fixed it. This almost certainly cost lives and certainly cost aircraft.

[bongodriver]

Yeah it seems pretty evident this Crumpp chap is not familiar with the concept of 'can do', its more like 'could do subject to subclause B paragraph 8 having gone through all the correct channels to get a facilitation to arrange several meetings, the minutes of which will be copied in triplicate and sent for further approval'.

[ATAG_Snapper]

Originally Posted by bongodriver

Yeah it seems pretty evident this Crumpp chap is not familiar with the concept of 'can do', its more like 'could do subject to subclause B paragraph 8 having gone through all the correct channels to get a facilitation to arrange several meetings, the minutes of which will be copied in triplicate and sent for further approval'.

In place of email distribution: "Alright chaps, shut your cake holes and gather 'round....."

The paperwork would follow later.

[Osprey]

In short, we'd have lost the war if Crump had been in charge.

Imagine D-Day on Omaha beach, Crump leading the first wave in Dog Green sector with a clipboard in his hand pointing out all the hazards to the commanders before ordering a full retreat because of failures in Health and Safety policy.

[Seadog]

Originally Posted by Osprey

In short, we'd have lost the war if Crump had been in charge.

.

Yes, I suspect that's his agenda...

[winny]

Originally Posted by Osprey

In short, we'd have lost the war if Crump had been in charge.

Imagine D-Day on Omaha beach, Crump leading the first wave in Dog Green sector with a clipboard in his hand pointing out all the hazards to the commanders before ordering a full retreat because of failures in Health and Safety policy.

"Oi.. You.. Where do you think you're going with that bayonet? You could have someone's eye out with that!"

[winny]

Which inevitably leads to..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o5gqI...e_gdata_player

[Crumpp]

Unlike your car, dvd player, or your standard military manual.....

Pilot Operating Notes are part of the airworthiness of the aircraft and a legal document. They carry the weight of law by convention.

The is the master document for all flight information, and pilot's may not deviate from the POH unless specific approval has been granted by the relevant aviation authority for such deviation.

Don't confuse the articles discussion of the GAMA changes in 1975 that put all convention signers on the same format. Manufacturers of light civil aircraft tried to save a few dollars during one of the darkest periods in General Aviation by cutting corners on the POH's. The result was the GAMA changes which standardized POH for all convention signers and everyone adopted the same format.

The POH is approved by the aviation authority during type certification, and issued to an aircraft when it is manufactured as part of the initial airworthiness certificate.

http://ezinearticles.com/?Pilots-Ope...101&id=6521261

It has been that way since 1919!!

As for for the "engine parts" conforming during operation, that is normal for all engines. In fact it is called the "break in"!!

No engineer looked at a part on the assembly line that would destroy the engine and said "keep churning em out boys!! We can win the war with our airplanes that won't fly".

That is really stupid. He looked at it and said, "Yes it is bent but it is still within tolerenances and won't effect anything, keep working"

Happens all the time in aviation and does not violate any convention.

[NZtyphoon]

What Crumpp is conveniently ignoring is that Rolls-Royce were already
A) Testing a Merlin at 18 lbs boost and generating 1,536 hp on a special blend of gasoline, benzol, methanol tetraethyl lead in August 1937. (Price Spitfire Story 2010 p. 107) But then Price, like most aviation historians, is an ignorant -non engineering- dweeb who knows nothing about aircraft.

B) testing Merlins IIs on 100 Octane in 1938.

Whatever Crumpp might think Rolls-Royce had been working on modifying Merlins to run on 100 Octane and high boost well before 1940, and with their engineering capabilities would have known what sort of modifications would be needed to get the Merlin II & III series running reliably at higher ratings - the modified cylinder heads would have been developed and ready to use as soon as the go ahead was given in November 1939 to allow Merlins to run at +12 lbs.

If Crumpp had been in charge at R-R at the time nothing would have been done because Crumpp would want every single tiny detail thrashed out at length, and he would know better than everyone else that at least 30 months would be needed for intensive operational testing and development before production engines could be cleared to use 100 octane fuel.