Bug 174 on 12lbs boost. Review please.

[Osprey]

Originally Posted by Kurfürst

That's a question you, and not Crumpp need to answer, Jeff.

Here's my answer. It was burned in Merlin engines on the front line providing the edge needed to knock down the Hun. Prove it wasn't.

[fruitbat]

Originally Posted by Kurfürst

That's a question you, and not Crumpp need to answer, Jeff.

And since you can't aswer it, you offer us only petty personal remarks and hollow arrogance.

No, That's a question you, and Crumpp need to answer, Kurfurst.

And since you can't aswer it, you offer us only petty personal remarks and hollow arrogance.

[Seadog]

Originally Posted by Kurfürst

That's a question you, and not Crumpp need to answer, Jeff.

And since you can't aswer it, you offer us only petty personal remarks and hollow arrogance.

LoL, I've pressed you to supply details of even a single 87 octane RAF FC sortie, during the BofB and you can't do it.

Your credibility has been destroyed.

Why not go away and come back when you find evidence for 87 octane use, or are when you ready to man up and admit that you are wrong.

100% 100 octane use = no evidence for 87 octane because it wasn't used.

[lane]

Originally Posted by NZtyphoon

Interestingly stocks of 100 Octane had already become greater than "Other Grades" by June - NOT October, as Crumpp has surmised:

That's a good one NZtyphoon and shows that 100 octane was the predominant aviation fuel in stock in the UK throughout the Battle of Britain.

[fruitbat]

Originally Posted by NZtyphoon

Consumption reports that say that 61,000 tons, 315 imp gallons per ton, 192,151,000 imp gallons of 100 Octane was consumed between June and end October 1940



So, where did 192,151,000 gallons of 100 Octane go if it was only consumed by a small number of RAF fighters and some Blenheims?

Interestingly stocks of 100 Octane had already become greater than "Other Grades" by June - NOT October, as Crumpp has surmised:

Great post, thanks for sharing.

100 octane fuel the main fuel stocked during the BoB, slam dunk.

[GraveyardJimmy]

Originally Posted by fruitbat

Great post, thanks for sharing.

100 octane fuel the main fuel stocked during the BoB, slam dunk.

And of course it would make little sense to stockpile fuel when in the most intense air fighting of the period for the RAF. They would need every chance they could get.

[robtek]

Originally Posted by NZtyphoon

Consumption reports that say that 61,000 tons, 315 imp gallons per ton, 192,151,000 imp gallons of 100 Octane was consumed between June and end October 1940



So, where did 192,151,000 gallons of 100 Octane go if it was only consumed by a small number of RAF fighters and some Blenheims?

Interestingly stocks of 100 Octane had already become greater than "Other Grades" by June - NOT October, as Crumpp has surmised:



Crumpp obviously believes that he knows better than all those "amateur" aviation historians who have written about 100 Octane so how about Crumpp takes some time out to write a best seller on 100 Octane, based on his professional expertise, and leave all of us confounded by his brilliance?

When i read 192151000 gallons for 150 days for about 700 fighters at about 75 gallons/h i calculate 24,2h flight time a day. Confusing!

[Al Schlageter]

Originally Posted by robtek

When i read 192151000 gallons for 150 days for about 700 fighters at about 75 gallons/h i calculate 24,2h flight time a day. Confusing!

150 days?

10 July – 31 October 1940 = 114 days

[NZtyphoon]

Originally Posted by robtek

When i read 192151000 gallons for 150 days for about 700 fighters at about 75 gallons/h i calculate 24,2h flight time a day. Confusing!

Exactly, please explain why so much fuel was expended, yet Crumpp et al maintain that only about 1/3rd of the RAF's frontline fighter strength was responsible, plus Blenheim squadrons? Say 250 fighters? How did 250 fighters chew through 192,151,000 gallons of fuel? - by flying about 72 hrs a day. Whats more confusing, the fact that 192,151,000 gallons of 100 octane fuel was consumed, or that only a small proportion of FC's frontline strength was responsible for using it?

No doubt Crumpp will come up with some old shop-worn argument that Consumption didn't mean consumption, but he has no evidence for that either, just speculation.