Bug 174 on 12lbs boost. Review please.

[robtek]

Originally Posted by Osprey

.....One photo of a destroyed 109 is enough for him and it unquestionable from then on - Germany must have had it in abundance and were using it from day 1.

What a fanboy.......

With such ridiculing, wrong statements you don't improve your image!!

He has never said or written what you have posted.

That 109 is proof that c3 fuel was used in frontline squadrons, as the number of mounted DB601N engines on Bf109 and Bf110 is evidence for it.

Though only a lesser part of all fighters used it.

I say it again, it is proofed that many british fighters used 100 octane, there is only evidence that ALL did use it.

There possibly will never be a PROOF that 100% of all fighters of the FC used 100 octane during the BoB, so this discussion is becoming more and more futile.

For CoD the implementation of duplicate models with slightly different FM shouldn't be that hard, i assume, so that the mission builders and server operators can create their version of the BoB / BoF / CB.

[GraveyardJimmy]

Originally Posted by robtek

There possibly will never be a PROOF that 100% of all fighters of the FC used 100 octane during the BoB, so this discussion is becoming more and more futile.

But only because no matter how often evidence is produced there will always be someone who says "ah! But you don't have a document showing that the out of commission aircraft that was being scrapped for parts wasn't leaking 87 octane rather than 100!"

[bongodriver]

When evidence becomes practically overwhealming it is as good as proof, the real futility is the resistance being put up against 100 octane fuel, this thread is 'not' about the LW use of 100 octane it is about the fact that right now the fuel modelled for the RAF is incorrect and more to the point the performance even for that fuel is incorrect, it really does seem there is only scope for single fuel types in game therefore the most prevalent ones should be modelled, in the case of the LW that is 'not' 100 octane and in th case of the RAF it is 100 octane.

[robtek]

But the evidence isn't overwhelming, there is lots of evidence for single flights, but where is i.e. the collection of reports from a single AC from ALL active fighter squadrons on a given day during the BoB, documenting the use of 100 octane on that day, that would be overwhelming evidence.

The evidenc is so far only indicating that there is a strong possibility that ALL used it.

[Osprey]

Originally Posted by robtek

But the evidence isn't overwhelming, there is lots of evidence for single flights, but where is i.e. the collection of reports from a single AC from ALL active fighter squadrons on a given day during the BoB, documenting the use of 100 octane on that day, that would be overwhelming evidence.

The evidenc is so far only indicating that there is a strong possibility that ALL used it.

No, it's overwhelming.

[Al Schlageter]

Originally Posted by Osprey

No, it's overwhelming.

It will be interesting when 1C gets around to modeling late war a/c with robtek's logic with regards to the 1.98ata Bf109K-4.

[Osprey]

Don't be silly Al. The raids devastating the Ploieşti refineries in late 44 didn't affect fuel supplies at all. Any tactician knows that a successful fuel blockade can only be achieved through sinking about 5% of inbound fuel tankers