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

[Robo.]

So basically I was not too far from the truth saying that meeting a E-7 in the BoB was as likely as meeting a Spitfire Mk.Ib 30 vs. 32 pieces and that information is for January.

E-4/Ns also listed in January at 54 pcs, one Gruppe of JG26 used them quite early, that might be cca 40 aircraft in the Summer already (makes sense). I guess Perez's aircraft was part of this Gruppe. It seems that 100 octane fuel and 601N engines were more relevant for Bf 110s Squadrons in the sim. In the actual Battle of Britain, these subtypes were present at rather marginal numbers - at 31.8.1940 we've got 871 Bf 109s in service, let's say some 1é or less % were fighters with DB 601N.

Same with droptanks coming in November - this is very important for next stage of the war (the Blitz as the British call it).

[Kurfürst]

Originally Posted by Robo.

So basically I was not too far from the truth saying that meeting a E-7 in the BoB was as likely as meeting a Spitfire Mk.Ib 30 vs. 32 pieces and that information is for January.

Again, there's E-7 (601Aa) and E-7/N (601N).

Now there was 32 E-7 in the end of August, I agree not very significant, according to the paper they entered service and went on operation just a few days earlier. I think the Ib analogy doesn't stands, it was a single Squadron, and a completely unsuccessful one. Personally I wouldn't mind having it, I just consider it a compete waste of time of developer resources to model a completely useless plane (because of insta-jams). I think Galland's own Gruppe flew the E-4/N and I would bet a leg on it they ranked up quite score during BoB.

Probably because their production just started (none listed as produced as of end of June 1940 yet, so production just started in July or early August). Following that however a total of 186 were produced until the end of October (these would be certainly with 601Aa, again the priority of 601N distribution to 109s did not come into effect until November), so I would expect that in September-October there were fair numbers of them around. Say, 80-90 or more? Pretty much like Mk IIs (was it 5 or seven operational Sqns?).

In any case, I do not see why a Spitfire II, which saw service in similiar numbers and time (1-2 Sqns in August and best, and about half a dozen Sqns by the end of the Battle, is a more justified as an aircraft model than E-4/Ns or E-7s, which at the minimum equipped 2 Gruppen (Six Squadrons), by late August, and probably more in the automn.

The second strenght return list from January only list E-7/N, so its additional to 'normal' E-7.

The absolutely correct historical way would be to model separately an E-4/N (601N) and an E-7 (early 601Aa variant), both were there but in small numbers, say about a hundred or so combined by the late Battle.

What I think would actually make sense and fit into the sim nicely is to model an E-7/N straight away. This is sort of a hybrid but can represent the number of E-4/N and E-7 participating in the battle economically with modelling resources, moreover the E-7/N can be re-usable for 1941 scenarios (North Africa, Malta, Moscow, France 1941), since in 1941 it was the main type and the only 109E type remaning in production, with several hundred produced (ie. all late E-7 seems to have been E-7/N). Its probably being done for the Moscow sim anyway.. and would require little more than a minor change in the external model (pointed spinner, spark plug cooling holes on the cowl, drop tank rack) and FM of existing E-4.

E-4/Ns also listed in January at 54 pcs, one Gruppe of JG26 used them quite early, that might be cca 40 aircraft in the Summer already (makes sense). I guess Perez's aircraft was part of this Gruppe. It seems that 100 octane fuel and 601N engines were more relevant for Bf 110s Squadrons in the sim. In the actual Battle of Britain, these subtypes were present at rather marginal numbers - at 31.8.1940 we've got 871 Bf 109s in service, let's say some 1é or less % were fighters with DB 601N.

Same with droptanks coming in November - this is very important for next stage of the war (the Blitz as the British call it).

Absolutely agree. Its important for the 110s, since about half of them had the 601N, and its a real performance boost for them, being much faster. A BoB sim without 110/Ns is pretty much like a BoB sim without Hurricanes, given their historical force ratios... or +12 boosted variants for that matter.

[Crumpp]

Originally Posted by Glider

I know this is going to sound very obvious but I have always believed that pilots notes were there to help the pilot avoid crashing the aircraft, not an historical document showing the roll out of things like fuel.

Now I know why most of my flying experience was in Gliders, none of the smelly stuff that can catch fire.

It is a fact the RAF did not complete conversion to 100 Octane until around January 1942. That is evident in the Operating Notes.

This is total bull, I would love to see you prove it, why not March 1942, or even have a punt at 1943. Why not 1944 as I know there was a shortage of 100 Octane just before the Invasion, maybe they converted some squadrons back to 87 Octane, they didn't, but what the heck, there is more logic for such a move as there was a shortage then.

Its worth remembering that you still haven't shown us the pilots notes for the Spit I you were quoting as being June 1940. So why on earth should we believe that it was as late as 1942

Glider,

Of course the Operating Notes provide a chronological order to technical changes. We know that technical updates are first published they become supplements to the Operating Notes. It is the operators responsibility to keep the Operating Notes up to date with the latest changes. However, the problem is in dissemination of technical updates. Somebody always does not get the word when updates are published. That is why for major changes like changing fuel a new edition with updates to paragraph 1, Operating Limitations would be published.

Look at all the issues with trying to find a replacement for 100LL in todays fleet!

Technically it was not a quick and easy change over to convert a Merlin from running 87 Octane only to having the ability to use 100 Octane fuel at +12lbs. It involved major modifications and was service level maintenance as noted in the technical order.

This is total bull, I would love to see you prove it, why not March 1942,

No it is true according the Operating Notes. It is a fact. The National Archives probably has multiple copies of the various editions of the Spitfire Mk I Operating Notes.

You can check there to see if an early edition notes changes to paragraph 1, Operating Limitations. Otherwise, January 1942 is the first edition to note 100 Octane is in use for all operational units. If the Operating Notes only mention 100 Octane in Paragraph 7 without changes to paragraph 1, Operating Limitations, then you know the fuel is not being used for all operational aircraft! It is really that simple.

[41Sqn_Banks]

Crumpp your theory require that in January 1942 at least one operational squadron used at least one Spitfire I aircraft.
Otherwise the restriction for operational units to 100 octane noted in the Pilot's Notes would be obsolete and by your theory would have been instantly removed and changed to "all units 87 octane fuel".
Please name at least one operational Squadron that used at least a one Spitfire I aircraft at that time.

[pstyle]

Hi all, does anybody here have membership to oxford journals?

http://ehr.oxfordjournals.org/conten...en007.full.pdf
Might help....

[winny]

Originally Posted by pstyle

Hi all, does anybody here have membership to oxford journals?

http://ehr.oxfordjournals.org/conten...en007.full.pdf
Might help....

The guy who wrote that has already been on here..

[winny]

Originally Posted by Crumpp

Glider,

Of course the Operating Notes provide a chronological order to technical changes. We know that technical updates are first published they become supplements to the Operating Notes. It is the operators responsibility to keep the Operating Notes up to date with the latest changes. However, the problem is in dissemination of technical updates. Somebody always does not get the word when updates are published. That is why for major changes like changing fuel a new edition with updates to paragraph 1, Operating Limitations would be published.

Look at all the issues with trying to find a replacement for 100LL in todays fleet!

Technically it was not a quick and easy change over to convert a Merlin from running 87 Octane only to having the ability to use 100 Octane fuel at +12lbs. It involved major modifications and was service level maintenance as noted in the technical order.



No it is true according the Operating Notes. It is a fact. The National Archives probably has multiple copies of the various editions of the Spitfire Mk I Operating Notes.

You can check there to see if an early edition notes changes to paragraph 1, Operating Limitations. Otherwise, January 1942 is the first edition to note 100 Octane is in use for all operational units. If the Operating Notes only mention 100 Octane in Paragraph 7 without changes to paragraph 1, Operating Limitations, then you know the fuel is not being used for all operational aircraft! It is really that simple.

Unless you can provide a print run history for the manual it's all guess work.

What we really need is a list of all the vol.II leaflets issued as these over rode the manual it's self.

Anyone live near kew?

[fruitbat]

Well, i don't, but i am planning to go quite soon, because i want to get 92 squadrons operational reports for 1941 for a online il2 1946 campaign i'm going to do for my squad (can only find 1940 on the web).

Could have a look at this as well, won't be for a month or so though.

[pstyle]

For the purposes of CloD, does it matter if ALL operational RAF units were using 100?

Does it not only matter if units operating from the airfields in the south east, as mapped in game were using it?

[fruitbat]

Originally Posted by pstyle

For the purposes of CloD, does it matter if ALL operational RAF units were using 100?

No.

Originally Posted by pstyle

Does it not only matter if units operating from the airfields in the south east, as mapped in game were using it?

Yes. And you'd have to be mad to think they weren't, after reading this thread.

From the point of view of CloD.....