Bug 174 on 12lbs boost. Review please.

[Crumpp]

Originally Posted by Seadog

Again, this is your thesis, but you have not presented any evidence to support your contention that RAF FC was using both 87 and 100 octane during the BofB (by British dates, from July 10 onward). The facts are that documents from March 1940 indicate that all new Merlin engined aircraft were equipped to utilize 100 octane, and given the wastage rates of existing aircraft, production rates of new aircraft and the conversion program for older aircraft, there simply wouldn't have been sufficient numbers, if any, of 87 octane only aircraft for RAF FC to have retained 87 octane as a front line fuel. The idea that RAF FC would retain 87 octane when all its fighters were equipped to handle 100 octane is simply preposterous, and completely unsupported by the facts, and a complete dearth of supporting evidence for 87 octane fuel use. The increase in 100 octane consumption was a reflection of the fact that the RAF won the BofB and RAF FC and BC were expanding rapidly.

Some more supporting data:

Prometheans in the Lab: Chemistry and the Making of the Modern World, McGrayne: "Britain's petroleum secretary Geoffrey Lloyd said later, "we wouldn't have won the Battle of Britain without 100 octane..." "p103.

Two Historians in Technology and War, Howard and Guilmartin:



Air Warfare: an International Encyclopaedia: A-L, Walter J. Boyne


others:

The Most Dangerous Enemy: An Illustrated History of the Battle of Britain
By Stephen Bungay p56, 59

and another:

Sydney Camm and the Hurricane, Fozard, Foreword by Sir Peter G. Masefield:



Masefield's bio:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/obit...Masefield.html

Why would Masefield say that "...without... "100 octane fuel" - there would have been no prospect of success"?

Nothing in any of those references says a thing about exclusive use or 100% of Fighter Command using 100 Octane. It says they used it and not the quantity or frequency.

In otherwords, YOU say "ALL OPERATIONAL UNITS - 100 Octane Fuel Only" in early 1940 but the RAF does not say that until January 1942.

[Seadog]

Originally Posted by Crumpp

Nothing in any of those references says a thing about exclusive use or 100% of Fighter Command using 100 Octane. It says they used it and not the quantity or frequency.

In otherwords, YOU say "ALL OPERATIONAL UNITS - 100 Octane Fuel Only" in early 1940 but the RAF does not say that until January 1942.

My thesis is this:

RAF FC used 100 octane exclusively during the BofB.

There is abundant evidence for 100 octane use, and that its' use was critical to victory. There are no references (and I mean NO, none, zilch, nada, etc etc...) to 87 octane use during the battle.

The available data supports my thesis. It does not support your thesis of mixed 87 and 100 octane use. In the absence of evidence your thesis fails, but the absence of evidence for 87 octane is what my theory predicts; my theory, therefore, fits the facts, while yours doesn't.

[Glider]

Originally Posted by Crumpp

the RAF does not say that until January 1942.

Is this your 1942 manual for the Mk I Spitfire or some other paper that I have missed?

[Crumpp]

There is abundant evidence for 100 octane use, and that its' use was critical to victory.

I hardly think 100 Octane was critical to victory.

The RAF won because they fought every day and they had a logistical system they allowed them to replace their losses.

That same logistical system, the Civilian Repair Organization combined with some very good pre-war planning in manufacture, allowed them to increase their numerical superiority during the battle.

So while the RAF took heavier losses in air to air combat compared to the Luftwaffe, they replaced those losses at a faster rate and were able to move from numerical parity in Single Engine fighters to numerical superiority during the battle.