1C Home   |   Register   |   Today Posts   |   Members   |   UserCP   |   Calendar   |   Search   |   FAQ

Go Back   Official 1C Company forum > 1C 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
  #931  
Old 04-13-2012, 02:49 PM
Glider Glider is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 442
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Al Schlageter View Post
Glider, it is even less HP than that. Morgan and Shacklady in Spitfire: The History gives 990 hp for early Merlin engines. So that would be 330hp according to Eugene's generalization.
How foolish of me. I know that the Rolls Royce Eagle in WW1 was producing 300 hp, do you think that he is mixing up Eagle and Merlin?
  #932  
Old 04-13-2012, 10:25 PM
NZtyphoon NZtyphoon is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: NZ
Posts: 543
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 28_Condor View Post
The writer Michael Korda, who served in the RAF, said in his latest book ("With Wings Like Eagles") that the RAF as a whole was served by american 100-octane fuel since 1939. And that was the advantage used against the German fighters that had fuel injection (but 87 octane fuel).

The British only really manufactured the fuel of 87 octane. It was Dowding who insisted that the British government to acquire the fuel from the Americans.
The British were manufacturing the iso-octane needed to produce 100 Octane fuel at Heysham, Billingham and Stanlow in Britain, while there were other sources of 100 Octane fuel from the Dutch East Indies, Trinidad etc, mostly from the British Shell Company and Anglo-American Oil Co, so it's not correct to say that all 100 Octane fuel came from the United States. (see attachments)

For Crumpp's benefit: the Trimpell article states that by 31 July 1940 there were 384 Spitfires in 19 Squadrons using the fuel, as well as PR Spitfires -

* On 13 July the OOB's show 19 Spitfire squadrons; in addition there are 31 Hurricane squadrons and 2 Defiant.

Crumpp can sneer all he likes, but this alone scuppers his blind addiction to 16 fighter squadrons.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg 100octane-29oct40.jpg (132.5 KB, 18 views)
File Type: jpg Trimpell-1200.jpg (287.9 KB, 14 views)
File Type: jpg BOB OOB 13th July 1940 a web.jpg (136.1 KB, 13 views)
File Type: jpg BOB OOB 13th July 1940 b web.jpg (167.4 KB, 13 views)

Last edited by NZtyphoon; 04-14-2012 at 11:58 AM.
  #933  
Old 04-14-2012, 04:03 PM
Al Schlageter Al Schlageter is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 657
Default

NZt, there is that river in Egypt called the da nile.
  #934  
Old 04-14-2012, 05:42 PM
Kwiatek's Avatar
Kwiatek Kwiatek is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 367
Default

I think some forgot about these:

Pilot's Notes. Spitfire I Aircraft. AP 1565.

Merlin III Engine limitation:

  #935  
Old 04-14-2012, 05:54 PM
28_Condor 28_Condor is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 108
Default

Thanks for the info, NZtyphoon!

The author probably meant the largest supplier. The book is well written, but not detailed. I think the author wanted to emphasize the drama of the fuel transported by sea in wartime
  #936  
Old 04-14-2012, 09:27 PM
28_Condor 28_Condor is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 108
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NZtyphoon View Post

For Crumpp's benefit: the Trimpell article states that by 31 July 1940 there were 384 Spitfires in 19 Squadrons using the fuel, as well as PR Spitfires -

* On 13 July the OOB's show 19 Spitfire squadrons; in addition there are 31 Hurricane squadrons and 2 Defiant.
Interesting! That would mean a mission built historically at least 4/5 of the available fighters should have the option of 100 octane! And almost all squads spits...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...tain_squadrons

Very good research, NZtyphoon!
  #937  
Old 04-14-2012, 10:10 PM
NZtyphoon NZtyphoon is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: NZ
Posts: 543
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 28_Condor View Post
Interesting! That would mean a mission built historically at least 4/5 of the available fighters should have the option of 100 octane! And almost all squads spits...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...tain_squadrons

Very good research, NZtyphoon!
Not my research - thank Glider and lane in particular, who have spent hours delving into archives - note that it can cost about £3.50 to copy each of the files (?), so it adds up - and who have presented these, and many other papers, time and again in this thread, only to have them sneered at, dismissed as being "scraps of paper used out of context", or a "misuse of information" or "propaganda" by the likes of Barbi and Crumpp, who have not presented a shred of real evidence showing that the majority of frontline RAF fighters were still using 87 Octane fuel during the battle.

As for misusing and misrepresenting material? Not so long ago Crumpp, in post #921 for example, quoting A.P.1590B of March 1940 (attachment), tried to make out that the modifications needed on Merlin IIs and IIIs to use 100 Octane fuel were so extensive that very few of them could be modified in time for the battle...

What he conveniently left out is that the necessary modifications had already been introduced on the production lines, and the document was discussing modifying older engines to the required standards.

Starting way back in post #376 Crumpp, quoting from a pre-war paper said:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crumpp View Post
That is the RAF built up a strategic reserve and it was not until September 1940 that 16 squadrons from Fighter Command converted to 100 octane.
Crumpp has been asked time and again to present documentary evidence that only 16 squadrons of RAF fighters used 100 Octane fuel, and that the RAF went ahead with its pre-war plans, regardless of the fact that a full scale air assault was underway, but of course he has not come up with anything.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crumpp View Post
Sure, some of consumed fuel was used in aircraft and all of it issued to the fields operating those aircraft. It appears that we have 16 squadrons on 31 July 1940 and we still have 16 squadrons by September.


The next thing you seem to refuse to deal with is 87 grade remains the predominate fuel in the RAF until September 1940. Only then do we see 100 grade beginning to equal 87 grade. That corresponding rise in consumption very much agrees with Morgan and Shacklady.

Until then, it appears the RAF is simply building up the logistical base required to support the eventual change to 100 grade.
He has not explained how the RAF managed to issue 61,000 tons or 19,245,500 imperial gallons of 100 Octane fuel July - October 1940, consumed 52,000 tons (16,406,000 gal), while needing only 15,184 tons (4,790,552 gal) to fly all defensive sorties, day and night, flown between 10 July - 6 October 1940 post #784. And all the while the reserves of 100 Octane fuel continued to increase.

He has not explained how only 16 squadrons of single-engined fighters managed to consume all that fuel. Instead we get blather about "strategic reserves".

Nor has Crumpp explained, and it has not yet registered with him, that heavy bombers, flying boats etc were all still using 87 Octane fuel, which might explain why it was "predominate".

Crumpp has had all of this explained very carefully, time and time again, but has continued to insist, and will continue to insist that he alone is right. If nothing else it's entertaining.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg ap1590b.jpg (252.5 KB, 4 views)

Last edited by NZtyphoon; 04-14-2012 at 11:54 PM.
  #938  
Old 04-14-2012, 10:54 PM
28_Condor 28_Condor is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 108
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NZtyphoon View Post
Not my research - thank Glider and lane in particular, who have spent hours delving into archives - note that it can cost about £3.50 to copy each of the files (?), so it adds up - and who have presented these, and many other papers, time and again in this thread, only to have them sneered at, dismissed as being "scraps of paper used out of context", or denied as "propaganda" by the likes of Barbi and Crumpp, who have not presented a shred of real evidence showing that the majority of frontline RAF fighters were still using 87 Octane fuel during the battle.
My congratulations then also for Glider and Lane

As a university researcher I know and recognize good research

I think this whole collection of documents should be taken seriously by Luthier!
  #939  
Old 04-15-2012, 07:12 AM
NZtyphoon NZtyphoon is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: NZ
Posts: 543
Talking

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kwiatek View Post
I think some forgot about these:

Pilot's Notes. Spitfire I Aircraft. AP 1565.

Merlin III Engine limitation:

If I read things rightly this is where we came in...about 94 pages ago! Really, this thread has run its course - if Crumpp wants to continue with his evidence avoidance, fact evasion, all round inability to respond to direct questions and general time wasting he can do so alone. I have far more important things to do with my life.

28_Condor; lane, aka Mike Williams has an excellent site here Well worth the time to go through.

Last edited by NZtyphoon; 04-15-2012 at 07:15 AM.
  #940  
Old 04-15-2012, 06:49 PM
28_Condor 28_Condor is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 108
Default

Thanks again, Typhoon

I do not advocate the balance of planeset, because to me it makes no sense ...

But as they say in my language, "we need to put all cards on the table" (hope that makes sense in English )

If 100-octane fuel was used it had to be represented in the CLOD, no doubt
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 10:04 PM.

Based on a design by: Miner Skinz.com

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 1C Company. All rights reserved.