|
|
|
|
#1
06-20-2011, 06:08 PM
|
|||
|
|||
I wonder, is there a single statement anywhere about Luftwaffe pilots complaining about the lack of 100 octane engines or fuel, during the Battle..? Or the Italians..?
__________________
Il-2Bugtracker: Feature #200: Missing 100 octane subtypes of Bf 109E and Bf 110C http://www.il2bugtracker.com/issues/200 Il-2Bugtracker: Bug #415: Spitfire Mk I, Ia, and Mk II: Stability and Control http://www.il2bugtracker.com/issues/415 Kurfürst - Your resource site on Bf 109 performance! http://kurfurst.org 
|
|
#2
06-20-2011, 06:29 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
|
#3
06-20-2011, 07:13 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
__________________
 | AFBs of CloD 2[/URL] |www.pumaszallas.hu i7 7700K 4.8GHz, 32GB Ram 3GHz, MSI GTX 1070 8GB, 27' 1920x1080, W10/64, TrackIR 4Pro, G940 Cliffs of Dover Bugtracker site: share and vote issues here
|
|
#4
06-20-2011, 07:17 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Here is a quote directly from the book as made by Galland (you obviously haven't read it). "The theme of fighter protection was chewed over again and again. Goering clearly represented the point of view of the bombers and demanded close and rigid protection. The bomber, he said, was more important than record bag figures. I tried to point out that the Me109 was superior in the attack and not so suitable for purely defensive purposes as the Spitfire, which, although a little slower, was much more manoeuvrable. He rejected my objection. We received many more harsh words. Finally, as his time ran short, he grew more amiable and asked what were the requirements for our squadrons. Moelders asked for a series of Me109's with more powerful engines. The request was granted. 'And you ?' Goering turned to me. I did not hesitate long. 'I should like an outfit of Spitfires for my group.' After blurting this out, I had rather a shock, for it was not really meant that way. Of course, fundamentally I preferred our Me109 to the Spitfire, but I was unbelievably vexed at the lack of understanding and the stubbornness with which the command gave us orders we could not execute - or only incompletely - as a result of many shortcomings for which we were not to blame. Such brazen-faced impudence made even Goering speechless. He stamped off, growling as he went." So Galland even in his own book states he preferred the 109 over the Spitfire and that his quote was made purely to get at Goering. How can you expect to be taken seriously when you twist words and meanings to suit your own agenda? Last edited by ICDP; 06-20-2011 at 07:24 PM.
|
|
#5
06-20-2011, 07:25 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
__________________
| AFBs of CloD 2[/URL] |www.pumaszallas.hui7 7700K 4.8GHz, 32GB Ram 3GHz, MSI GTX 1070 8GB, 27' 1920x1080, W10/64, TrackIR 4Pro, G940 Cliffs of Dover Bugtracker site: share and vote issues here
|
|
#6
06-20-2011, 07:45 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
|
|
#8
06-20-2011, 08:35 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Galland asked for spitfires facetiously, because he was receiving orders from above that the escort fighters were to stay close to the bombers, a role to which the spitfire was better suited than the 109. He was trying to make a point that his fighters were not being used to their strengths, not that he felt the spitfire was superior. Similarly Moelders did not ask for "100 octane 109s" since the Germans didn't classify their fuel that way (and in some cases measured the octane number differently). He asked for 109s with more powerful engines. Last edited by CaptainDoggles; 06-20-2011 at 08:38 PM.
|
|
#9
06-20-2011, 11:03 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
) RAFFC pilots also wanted better performance, and they got a complete transition to 100 octane fuel, a transition which was completed prior to the start of the battle.
|
 |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
