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

[TheGrunch]

No problem Kurfürst, just a matter of a few minutes and a good look at the RAF website vs. the combat reports on Mike Williams' site (is there not another source for these RAF combat reports anywhere else on the internet?). I'm not convinced myself that the supply was universal, but my personal impression is that at the very least 11 Group was converted almost universally before the battle "began".

Could I ask whether anyone is aware whether it's true (and I'm not sure where I heard this suggested) that the sector airfields and their satellites were supplied from the same depots? This would clear up a lot of the confusion, since we could then assume that many of the permanent fighter airfields were supplied as well.

Thanks VERY much for that link, fruitbat, I'll go through as many squadron ORBs from there as I can get to examine the 100 octane situation, when the squadron received CSUs, and indeed whether they were De Havilland or Rotol units, because if I remember correctly Kurfürst has posted in the past evidence that the De Havilland units were not as well-regarded by the RAF, and the widespread conversion to Rotol units afterwards seems to support this.

It's a pity the German record situation is not as complete or available.

[Moggy]

You have to remember that the only RAF aircraft (as far as I'm aware) which would be using 100 octane fuel are the Spitfire, Hurricane and Defiant. I'm pretty sure (given stock levels during the battle) that the fuel was used universally amongst the groups. As we all know, squadrons changed groups as and when needed so the need for the fuel would of still been there, although I'd imagine an aircraft using 100 octane fuel would still be able to use 87 octane if needed...without the performance boost of course.

*EDIT*
Apologies if this has already been posted but Swallow has found an interesting piece of information in the Spitfire I pilot notes, Section 2; Handling and flying notes for the pilot, supplied with the Collector's Edition;

Fuel: - Operational units: 100 octane only. Other units: 87 octane

[Kurfürst]

Originally Posted by Moggy

You have to remember that the only RAF aircraft (as far as I'm aware) which would be using 100 octane fuel are the Spitfire, Hurricane and Defiant.

Some (two?) Bristol Blenheim Squadrons also seem to have used it.

[Moggy]

Bloody heck, well that does surprise me! Just checked in the Blenheim IV pilot notes and you're spot on the Blenheim can use 100 octane fuel. Wll they say you do learn something new everyday.

[csThor]

It's most likely II./JG 26 which received the DB 601N-powered aircraft but I am still hesitant to see this type as more than a "candy bar" for the most successful pilots (still too much of a guess rather than knowledge). "White 4" (of Uffz. Perez) was the personal aircraft of Hptm. Karl Ebbinghausen (the commander of II./JG 26, hence the killmarks on said aircraft) before it was passed on to 4./JG 26. Having either the Bf 109 E-4/N or the Bf 109 F-0 tested by Stab/JG 51 in October 1940 would be interesting if the campaign engine allowed for such "rewards for outstanding performance".

[TheGrunch]

Originally Posted by csThor

It's most likely II./JG 26 which received the DB 601N-powered aircraft but I am still hesitant to see this type as more than a "candy bar" for the most successful pilots (still too much of a guess rather than knowledge). "White 4" (of Uffz. Perez) was the personal aircraft of Hptm. Karl Ebbinghausen (the commander of II./JG 26, hence the killmarks on said aircraft) before it was passed on to 4./JG 26. Having either the Bf 109 E-4/N or the Bf 109 F-0 tested by Stab/JG 51 in October 1940 would be interesting if the campaign engine allowed for such "rewards for outstanding performance".

Maybe someone had better get coding one. I wouldn't bet on a Maddox Games campaign engine any time soon.

Originally Posted by Moggy

The Lord giveth, the Lord taketh away. I've just checked the date on the top of Section 2 and it's January 1942.

I thought it might be, I knew there were two variants going about, sorry about that Moggy.

[Moggy]

No worries, the closest I've got to 100 octane fuel being mentioned in pilot's notes are from June/July 1940 and the Spitfire IIa and I can't see any ammendment dates on that all. My Hurricane Mk.I notes pre dates 100 octane fuel and only mentions 87 octane as a result.

[csThor]

Originally Posted by TheGrunch

Maybe someone had better get coding one. I wouldn't bet on a Maddox Games campaign engine any time soon.

Well, I couldn't code if my life depended on it. But unfortunately I have to agree with you WRT a dynamic campaign from 1C:MG.

[Kurfürst]

Originally Posted by csThor

It's most likely II./JG 26 which received the DB 601N-powered aircraft but I am still hesitant to see this type as more than a "candy bar" for the most successful pilots (still too much of a guess rather than knowledge).

Agreed. For the most part of the big daylight battles, the 109s with 601N weren't that numerous to justify the coding required. A 110C-x/N on the other hand is a must IMHO, with roughly half the ZGs were flying, and giving the 110 flying some favour. And it's probably II/JG 26 as you say, though I'd wager that it wasn't handed out to the most successfull pilots of seperate JGs initially. The 19 July memo specifically mentions a Gruppe, plus otherwise logistics and maintaince would be nightmarish, with a mix of 601A and 601N powered Emils...

If I had to choose the line-up, I'd do this:

Bf 109E-1 of 1939, as E-3, but with four MG 17s
[b]Bf 109E-3 (what we have now) of 1939, manual prop pitch, probably no armor(?), 601A. This is pretty much as the 109E started the war in September. A good stand in for May 1940 France battles as well.

Bf 109E-4, 1940. Auto prop pitch, pilot/fuel tank armor in the fuselage. Optionally head/windscreen armor (the latter seems to have been randomly appearing on planes), MG FF/Ms (Mine shells ). Standard DB 601A. 'Boxy' canopy instead of the rounded one. This would represent the detail improvements made in the meantime of September 1939 - May-August 1940, just like the CSP/armor thing on BoB Spitties/Hurris. Plus most E-3 were converted to E-4 by August anyway (the designation was changed because of the MG - FF/M cannon, slightly modified to fire high capacity HE shells).

Bf 109E-7/N. As E-4, but with 601N, and the E-7 can also carry drop tank. Not only it could represent E-7s that started to arrive in August 1940 and become the major production model, it could step-in as the early few E-3/N or E-4/N 'candy bars', as well as older E-1/E-3/E-4 retrofitted with droptanks, and could be well used for later adds ons and scenarios, such as Afrika or Barbarossa, by which time the remaining Emils were typically E-7/Ns beside 109Fs.. I'd skip the basic E-7 entirely, it only differes from the E-4 in the droptank option, and the slightly more powerful (ca +50 HP..) DB 601Aa... needless waste of development time IMHO.

[TheGrunch]

I'd agree with that line-up wholeheartedly.

Going through ORBs now, and honestly sometimes it is hard to say. Often you can read about a squadron receiving a certain number of 'improved Hurricane aircraft from 5MU' and really there is little more information than that.

EDIT: Any comment on the phrase Me. Jaguars? Referring to aircraft dive-bombing? Maybe 110s?