Spit IIa is now so much more inferior to the 109

[Crumpp]

Where does RAF authorities allow to ignore/violate engine limitations?

In the General Pilots Notes it states the pilot can balance risk and exceed the published limitations. That was the clause used to advance the idea in the 100 Octane thread that the RAF pilots routinely violated the Notes on a Merlin Engine in the Operating Notes.

My agenda is to follow primary sources, this makes life pretty easy.

Mine too. That is why I bring the point up you cannot look at a combat report as proof of 100 Octane use with specific references to +12lbs or 100 Octane.

The RAF didn't want to provide the pilot with an engine self destruct switch

Obviously the RAF was comfortable enough to test it at 12,500 feet on 9-6-39 Merlin III serial number 7491 mounted on Spitfire N3171 up +10.55lbs using 87 Octane fuel.