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

[Glider]

Crumpp
I think I can truly say that I have never seen such rubbish posted from someone who pretends and likes to believe that they know about aircraft.

The first document supports the contention that operational units had 100 octrane and non operational units had 87 octane. Something that has been said from the start.

The Alterations and Precautions Paper
This has three main sections:-
a) Modified Boost Control
The modifications as outlined in the paper are very straightforward and can easily be undertaken. Basically you drill two holes and reassemble the cut out valve, to pretend this is a major task shows a massive disrespect to the ground crew and support teams.
b) Modified Cylinder Top Joint
This change is already incorporated in new engines and is already being addressed in normal mainantence, so nothing to be done there
c) You need 100 Octane fuel

Which is what we have been saying from the start.

Your Pilots Notes dated June 1940
I do not believe for a moment that these are from June 1940. Reason is simple, it doesn't mention any fuel type. In June 1940 we know for certain from combat reports and station/squadrons records that 100 Octane was in use in a number of squadrons. If the type of fuel isn't mentioned then it can only be because only one type of fuel exists and that puts the pilots notes in 1938/9. Crumpp has been asked many times to supply other parts of the Pilots Notes to help us tie this issue down. His refusal to do so I believe speaks volumes.

Consumption Chart
The figures up to May are combined 87/100 octane figures which is why they are in the centre, a junior school student could work that one out.

These figures are for the RAF not Fighter command and I draw your attention to the figure for August 1940 36,000 tons of fuel were used by the RAF. In September 37,000 tons almost the same but the proportion of 100 Octane had gone up, In October 35,000 tons again a figure in the same ball park and 100 octane proportion again went up.

The question is, What changed between August and October? The reply is again very simple All operational Commands were Authorised to use 100 Octane in August. As the units in Bomber Command and Coastal Command switched over, so the proportion of 100 Octane increased.

Its also worth noting that in April 1941 when we all (I think) agree that 100 Octane was in use in Operational Commands the split between 87 Octane and 100 Octane was still 50/50. Training, Transport, BOAC, manufacturers and other non operational flights, use a lot of fuel.

[Kurfürst]

Originally Posted by Glider

The question is, What changed between August and October? The reply is again very simple All operational Commands were Authorised to use 100 Octane in August. As the units in Bomber Command and Coastal Command switched over, so the proportion of 100 Octane increased.

Funny but the the August 1940 document you posted does not say this at all, that the authorization only effects Bomber Command and Coastal Command.

It says all operational aircraft. That includes Fighter Command, too. This whole 'other commands' is entirely your brainchild David, the paper simply does not use such term as 'other'.

I guess is rather plain and simple, in May 1940 select fighter units of Fighter Command which were 'concered' by the decision switched over to 100 octane, and in early August all operational aircraft of Fighter (etc.) Command(s) were authorized to follow their example.

I guess the newborn optimism was fueled (getit?) by the fact that compared to the rather low stocks of reserves in the spring of 1940, the avgas stocks significantly increased by the summer as a result of shipments from the Middle East.

The fuel issue papers show that the process did not actually start until late September, by which time the great day fighter battles were over.

[Glider]

Originally Posted by Kurfürst

Funny but the the August 1940 document you posted does not say this at all, that the authorization only effects Bomber Command and Coastal Command.

It says all operational aircraft. That includes Fighter Command, too. This whole 'other commands' is entirely your brainchild David, the paper simply does not use such term as 'other'.

I guess is rather plain and simple, in May 1940 select fighter units of Fighter Command which were 'concered' by the decision switched over to 100 octane, and in early August all operational aircraft of Fighter (etc.) Command(s) were authorized to follow their example.

I guess the newborn optimism was fueled (getit?) by the fact that compared to the rather low stocks of reserves in the spring of 1940, the avgas stocks significantly increased by the summer as a result of shipments from the Middle East.

The fuel issue papers show that the process did not actually start until late September, by which time the great day fighter battles were over.

As so often your reply leaves more questions. If as is believed by Crumpp that 16 squadrons used 10,000 tons of 100 octane, then when 60 squadrons used 100 Octane the figure should be what, 30-40,000 tons of 100 Octane, PLUS Bomber and Coastal Command. But the figure never went to anything like that figure. So explain that and support it and you have a case.

PS I never said Bomber and COastal Command I used the correct quote.

[Crumpp]

Originally Posted by Glider

Crumpp
I think I can truly say that I have never seen such rubbish posted from someone who pretends and likes to believe that they know about aircraft.

The first document supports the contention that operational units had 100 octrane and non operational units had 87 octane. Something that has been said from the start.

The Alterations and Precautions Paper
This has three main sections:-
a) Modified Boost Control
The modifications as outlined in the paper are very straightforward and can easily be undertaken. Basically you drill two holes and reassemble the cut out valve, to pretend this is a major task shows a massive disrespect to the ground crew and support teams.
b) Modified Cylinder Top Joint
This change is already incorporated in new engines and is already being addressed in normal mainantence, so nothing to be done there
c) You need 100 Octane fuel

Which is what we have been saying from the start.

Your Pilots Notes dated June 1940
I do not believe for a moment that these are from June 1940. Reason is simple, it doesn't mention any fuel type. In June 1940 we know for certain from combat reports and station/squadrons records that 100 Octane was in use in a number of squadrons. If the type of fuel isn't mentioned then it can only be because only one type of fuel exists and that puts the pilots notes in 1938/9. Crumpp has been asked many times to supply other parts of the Pilots Notes to help us tie this issue down. His refusal to do so I believe speaks volumes.

Consumption Chart
The figures up to May are combined 87/100 octane figures which is why they are in the centre, a junior school student could work that one out.

These figures are for the RAF not Fighter command and I draw your attention to the figure for August 1940 36,000 tons of fuel were used by the RAF. In September 37,000 tons almost the same but the proportion of 100 Octane had gone up, In October 35,000 tons again a figure in the same ball park and 100 octane proportion again went up.

The question is, What changed between August and October? The reply is again very simple All operational Commands were Authorised to use 100 Octane in August. As the units in Bomber Command and Coastal Command switched over, so the proportion of 100 Octane increased.

Its also worth noting that in April 1941 when we all (I think) agree that 100 Octane was in use in Operational Commands the split between 87 Octane and 100 Octane was still 50/50. Training, Transport, BOAC, manufacturers and other non operational flights, use a lot of fuel.

All operational Commands were Authorised to use 100 Octane in August.

Please just post the Spitfire Pilot Operating Notes from August. They will match the January 1942 and specify ALL OPERATIONAL UNITS if you claim is true. I highly doubt you can post them. Yes, changing fuel type is a big deal in aircraft. You can bet they published a new edition to the Pilot Operating Notes.

Post that August 1940 Operating Notes and it is Argument over, end of discussion.

[Crumpp]

The figures up to May are combined 87/100 octane figures which is why they are in the centre, a junior school student could work that one out.

Just like the 1938 figure is combined. Really? I highly doubt it.

If 100 Octane was on the airfields in significant amounts, it would reflect on that document.

It does not and you can read the Operating Notes to see that 87 Octane is the most common fuel in June 1940.

[NZtyphoon]

Originally Posted by Crumpp

Just like the 1938 figure is combined. Really? I highly doubt it.

If 100 Octane was on the airfields in significant amounts, it would reflect on that document.

It does not and you can read the Operating Notes to see that 87 Octane is the most common fuel in June 1940.

What 1938 figure? You can doubt all you like, provide some evidence that this meant there was no 100 Octane fuel available.

It is quite clear that in May 1940 Hurricanes of the BEF in France were using 100 Octane fuel. Starting 7 May 1940 we have 660,056 gallons, 2111 tons of 100 octane in France: this was before the balloon went up:
















Note too that there is another grade of fuel mentioned in the second to last document D.T.D.224 (77 Octane) which was used in light aircraft "Trinidad Leaseholds Limited" the documents on fuel consumption say "Other Grades" meaning 87 Octane fuel wasn't the only other type of fuel being used.

You continue to fail to mention that 87 Octane was being used by heavy bombers and flying boats in June 1940.

You have not yet accounted for 52,000 tons of 100 Octane being used by 16 squadrons between July and October, in spite of being asked several times.

You have not provided any documentation showing proof of the logistical arrangements the RAF used to ensure only 16 squadrons ran on 100 Octane for "intensive operational trials".

While you're asking others to post the August 1940 Pilot's Notes how about you post the relevant information requested for your "June 1940" notes, viz: front cover, inner front cover, fly leaves showing date and the A.P1590B you insist is inserted? You can still scan and you don't need a PC to post them.