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

[Al Schlageter]

Well I am glad to see you guys are finally coming around to seeing Eugene's 'song and dance' routine (get 'busted' on a subject and change the subject).

He will NEVER admit he is wrong.

As for him being a Green Beret (ie SF), they need pencil pushers as well.

[CWMV]

Well lane, you win.
I didn't think much of it, considering the partisan nature of the debate.
Your post though seems definitive.
Good job. Heres hoping its implemented.

[NZtyphoon]

Originally Posted by CWMV

Well lane, you win.
I didn't think much of it, considering the partisan nature of the debate.
Your post though seems definitive.
Good job. Heres hoping its implemented.

The "partisan nature of the debate" comes entirely from the fact that people such as lane and Glider have gone to considerable time, effort and expense to provide evidence that the RAF used 100 octane fuel for its frontline fighters throughout the Battle of Britain, while the naysayers, chiefly Kurfurst and Crumpp, have failed to provide any evidence whatsoever for their argument that the RAF used the fuel for a small, select portion.

In the meantime Crumpp in particular has driven the thread with lots of bluster and smokescreens while evading evidence and awkward direct questions asking him to provide documentation to prove his "case" - whatever the hell it is, because his story keeps changing - or disprove the case for 100 octane.