Bug 174 on 12lbs boost. Review please.

[robtek]

Originally Posted by Seadog

........By May 1940, reconnaissance Spitfires had begun flying combat missions using the 100 octane fuel. By 31 July 1940, there were 384 Spitfires serving in 19 squadrons using the 100 octane fuel.
http://www.heyshamheritage.org.uk/html/trimpell.html.........

That says that the Spitfire conversion was done at 31st july,

The start of the BoB was at the 10th of July (Channel Battles) with the preparations for Seeloewe by decimating the fighter force.

British historians see a different beginning date in august with the beginning of large day bombing raids.

[Seadog]

Originally Posted by robtek

That says that the Spitfire conversion was done at 31st july,

The start of the BoB was at the 10th of July (Channel Battles) with the preparations for Seeloewe by decimating the fighter force.

British historians see a different beginning date in august with the beginning of large day bombing raids.

No, it says on July 31st there were 384 Spitfires in 19 squadrons (every Spitfire squadron in RAF FC) flying with 100 octane fuel. These aircraft were converted to 100 octane well before that date, unless you somehow believe that they were all converted on the same day! The article quoted states:

Bulk supply contracts for higher octane fuel were placed by the Air Ministry and it was put into widespread use in the RAF in March 1940 when Spitfires' Rolls Royce Merlin engines were converted to use the 100 octane fuel.

[Robo.]

Originally Posted by robtek

That says that the Spitfire conversion was done at 31st july,

The start of the BoB was at the 10th of July (Channel Battles) with the preparations for Seeloewe by decimating the fighter force.

British historians see a different beginning date in august with the beginning of large day bombing raids.

Despite the different perception of what was BofB, the RAF was ready in March 1940.

robtek did you manage to find any claim of 87 Octane fuel used in a combat sortie of a RAF fighter aircraft after June 1940?

[Osprey]

Game set and match. Well done Seadog.

Robtek, swallow your pride and take it on the chin. Unless you can prove these articles false any persistence in your argument is just going to make you look foolish.

[6S.Manu]

Great! Good job Seadog!

Now we have to wait for the developers...

[robtek]

It isn't my fight and i have nothing to loose here, but having only the 100oct. versions represented is a loss for all.

[bongodriver]

Originally Posted by robtek

It isn't my fight and i have nothing to loose here, but having only the 100oct. versions represented is a loss for all.

But who is asking specifically for the removal of 87 octane? this is all about the acceptance that 100 octane was the main fuel used as evidence shows.

[Robo.]

Originally Posted by robtek

It isn't my fight and i have nothing to loose here, but having only the 100oct. versions represented is a loss for all.

We should have both, I agree. It looks like we'll only have one though. And with that being the case, it should be 100 octane.

Or do you believe that there were any 87 octane fighters flying combat sorties in summer of 1940?

[GraveyardJimmy]

I think what it boils down to, as other have said is this:

The game needs 87 and 100 octane version to allow for pre-BoB scenarios and mission makers discretion.

However, if the devs are only going to implement a single variant of the aircraft with only one performance and boost model the decision has to be made as to whether it is 87 or 100 octane. This is not the optimum solution but failing to have both variants we need to have the one that was used for the most of BoB. In this case the evidence suggests that it is 100 octane that made up most of the fighter fuel.

Therefore if possible, everyone would want both variants modelled. If it is only possible to have one, then there has to be 100 octane represented.

[Osprey]

Originally Posted by robtek

It isn't my fight and i have nothing to loose here, but having only the 100oct. versions represented is a loss for all.

You've been arguing against 100 octane use across FC in 11 group during the BoB, please don't pretend that you were arguing for multiple fuels in game now this evidence has refuted that claim. Now that you know the truth please go to bug 174 and add your support Thanks.