Fulqrum Publishing Home   |   Register   |   Today Posts   |   Members   |   UserCP   |   Calendar   |   Search   |   FAQ

Go Back   Official Fulqrum Publishing forum > Fulqrum Publishing > IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover > Technical threads > FM/DM threads

FM/DM threads Everything about FM/DM in CoD

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 03-26-2012, 04:29 AM
Crumpp's Avatar
Crumpp Crumpp is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,552
Default

http://forums.ubi.com/showthread.php...=1#post3217673

http://forums.ubi.com/showthread.php...=1#post3358320

Quote:
Senior Intelligence Officer of 126 (RCAF) Spitfire Wing, 2 TAF, noted in his daily operational summary on 20 April 1945 after the crashes of two Spitfires; "The incidents followed a number of engine problems that were attributed to the introduction of 150-grade fuel in early February. Pilots mistrusted it, and were no doubt relieved when the AF brass decided to revert to 130-grade. The vast majority of pilots, I'm sure, were beginning to wonder if the additional seven pounds of boost they got from 150-grade fuel were worth the price being paid."[11]
-Berger, Monty and Street, Brian Jeffrey.Invasion Without Tears. Toronto, Canada: Random House, 1994 (1st ed) ISBN 0-394-22277-6

Last edited by Crumpp; 03-26-2012 at 04:32 AM. Reason: added second link
  #2  
Old 03-26-2012, 04:49 AM
NZtyphoon NZtyphoon is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: NZ
Posts: 543
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crumpp View Post
http://forums.ubi.com/showthread.php...=1#post3217673

http://forums.ubi.com/showthread.php...=1#post3358320



-Berger, Monty and Street, Brian Jeffrey.Invasion Without Tears. Toronto, Canada: Random House, 1994 (1st ed) ISBN 0-394-22277-6
And that's all? That's all Crumpp can put forward to somehow "prove" that the RAF didn't use 100 Octane fuel in 1940? What have either of these two replies got to do with fuel stockpiles or any of the other nonsense Crumpp has been spouting?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crumpp View Post
NZTyphoon, Once again.....

In the pursuit of gamers proving 100/150 grade was the standard fuel of the RAF, documents were produced that showed hundreds of thousand of tons of the fuel being moved around various stations and brought into the RAF logistical system in anticipation of the fuel being adopted.

The operational use turned out to be extremely limited and for a very short period of time before it was withdrawn from service.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kurfürst View Post
As noted, the whole story ever increasingly reminds old participants of the 150 grade-fiasco of lane and co. The agenda of 'all the RAF fighter Command was using 150 grade' was pressed with the same fortitude, documents were manipulated and doctored for support the same, until documentary evidence become clear and it turned out that 'all +25 lbs Mark IXs using 150 grade' were in fact but two Sqns on operational trials, the '+25 lbs Mk XIVs' lane was pushing for never existed due to technical troubles, those '+25 RAF Mustang IIIs of the RAF in 1944' were again just two Sqns who have seen the enemy about twice, once over France and once over the North Sea, were and proposed use of 150 grade in the 2nd TAF's IX units was recalled after a month of operation in 1945 - a fact that lane still omits from his website articles.

The 100 octane story/agenda is the same, with the same old origins, methods and smokescreen - though I am sure its can be presented as better case than what turned out to be the truth about 150 grade (giggles).
Reading the whole thread presented by Crumpp shows nothing like the story Barbi tells; in fact far from proving Mike Williams aka lane wrong, or showing any evidence of "manipulated or doctored documents" Crumpp congratulated Mike on his research - which is about all Crumpp got right. Just another example of how Barbi is prepared to stretch and manipulate the truth in an effort to discredit other members of this forum.

Sorry, if Crumpp thinks the thread he has presented as "evidence" proves his case, that the RAF built up reserves of 100 octane without using it, he is dreaming. All it proves is that that Barbi and co have lost the debate and have nothing practical to say.

Last edited by NZtyphoon; 03-26-2012 at 09:23 AM.
  #3  
Old 03-26-2012, 05:03 AM
Glider Glider is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 441
Default

CRUMPP/NZ
I admit to not giving a damn about 150 octane, this thread is about 100 Octane in the BOB.

Crumpp, can I ask you to confirm that your belief is that Bomber Command used 87 Octane during the BOB period until 100 octane was released for general use in all front line commands in August.
  #4  
Old 03-26-2012, 03:35 PM
ACE-OF-ACES's Avatar
ACE-OF-ACES ACE-OF-ACES is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: NM
Posts: 2,248
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NZtyphoon View Post
What have either of these two replies got to do with fuel stockpiles or any of the other nonsense Crumpp has been spouting?
nothing but a..

__________________
Theres a reason for instrumenting a plane for test..
That being a pilots's 'perception' of what is going on can be very different from what is 'actually' going on.
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:44 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 Fulqrum Publishing. All rights reserved.