RAF 150 octane

[LRRP22]

Can we lay the 100/150 grade as 'Special Project' thing to rest now?

A photo from the Inglewood, CA factory:

[Crumpp]

Looking at the 56th FG, I cannot find any references of valve seat damage to the R-2800 from the use of 100/150 with PEP. It may be that this engine was not as susceptible to this problem or that there was insufficient data from its limited use (over 3 months) and limited P-47M sorties.

Really??  I found these in about 4 minutes of googling.

The 56th was the only group to operate them.

While some were delivered in 1945 they had serious problems that did not get worked out until the wars end.

The performance of the YP-47M was excellent, with a top speed of 761 km/h (473 mi/h), and the variant was put into limited production. While it is commonly thought that the P-47M was a specific counter to the threat of German V-1 pulsejet missiles, project dates disprove this; work began on the YP-47M before the first V-1 attacks. 130 P-47Ms were built, with the first arriving in Europe in early 1945. However, the type suffered serious teething problems in the field due to the highly-tuned engine, and by the time the bugs were worked out, the war in Europe was over.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P-47_Thunderbolt

The production P-47M fighters did not reach operational status until after many of the V-1 launch sites were over-run by Allied ground forces. Deployed to 3 squadrons of the 56th Fighter Group, the new fighter likely did not chase very many flying bombs. Inasmuch as most aviation historians claim that the P-47M was designed specifically to intercept the V-1, it will come as a surprise to them to learn that the prototype existed more than a year before the first V-1 was launched at Britain. Moreover, the P-47D, deployed in large numbers, was certainly fast enough to overtake the V-1. It was only coincidence that the XP-47M and the R-2800 C series engines were available when the V-1's began falling on London.

The new M models also suffered a fair amount of teething troubles. The C series engines suffered from high altitude ignition leaks and burned pistons.  The 56th kept many of their older D models until the new M had its bugs corrected.

http://www.cradleofaviation.org/history/aircraft/p-47/7.html

With the constant rush of wartime production, complete testing was sometimes not undertaken. What worked under hasty factory testing would not function under operational conditions. This, unfortunately, was true with the P-47M. M model pilots were horrified to find their engines stopping completely or cutting in and out once they reached cruising altitude. Missions were hastily aborted and maintenance men were puzzled. Other engine problems began to manifest themselves, including corrosion and low cylinder head temperatures which affected the correct operation of the engine. The problem soon grew to nightmare proportions when it became obvious that every P-47M operated by the 56th was stricken with the same problem.

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3901/is_200410/ai_n9438499

The operational dates are conflicting. Most have Republic developing semi-reliable fixes in April 1945. Many sources say the type never saw combat while others claim it conducted unopposed armed recons the last two days of the war.

I think the He-162 would be just as appropriate for the game. In fact it would be much more appropriate as it actually fired shots in anger.

All the best,

Crumpp

[LRRP22]

Originally posted by Crumpp
 Many sources say the type never saw combat while others claim it conducted unopposed armed recons the last two days of the war.

I think the He-162 would be just as appropriate for the game. In fact it would be much more appropriate as it actually fired shots in anger.

All the best,

Crumpp [/B]

Crumpp,

"Beware the Thunderbolt" is a day-by-day history of the 56th Fighter Groups combat operations.  It shows unequivically that the P-47M saw much combat beginning in January of '45.  There were continual problems with engine reliability, but the M's were never grounded for more than a few days at a time.  The cause of the problems was finally determined to be improper weather proofing during shipment to the U.K.


BTW, most of my 3 yrs active duty time was with Patrol 2-2, Co. E (Long Range Surveillance) 109th MI at Lewis- hence the LRRP22 handle!

.

[Squire]

We arent talking about the P-47M.

Or the use of C3 in the 109K.

And its not relevent, either.

[MiloMorai]

P-47Ms piloted by Ball, Lear and Gould shot down 2 Ar 234s on March 14 1945. Four Ar234s were lost in total that day (pilots > Johne, Baumler, Schulte, Hirschberger). Another P-47M, piloted by Faringer shot down a Me262 on April 5 1945. On April 10 1945, P-47Ms piloted by Sharbo and Wilkenson each claimed a Me262.

On April 13, 48 P-47Ms attacked Eggebeck airfield with great success.

You should find a better reference sources than wikipedia.

[Karnak]

Crump,

I've talked to a pilot who ditched his P-47M behind German lines after taking damage and then snuck through to the Allied side.

Don't try to insinuate that the P-47M didn't see combat.  Don't start pulling Kurfurst's tactics where anything Allied needs confirmation in triplicate whereas anything German that is vaguely referenced is a shoe in for having seen heavy service.

In any case, the P-47M's service is documented well in above triplicate.

[Scherf]

We now return you to your regularly scheduled program:

"RAF 150 Octane"

[Crumpp]

You should find a better reference sources than wikipedia.

Milo,

You should understand what you read before writing something stupid like Operation Diver did not exist or this.  

My use of wikpedia was in response to Widewing saying he was unable to find reference to the R-2800C having difficulties.


Hence the first line of my post:

Really?? I found these in about 4 minutes of googling.

Just games people play when they do not like the facts.

Facts are everyone here is speculating about the 100/150 grade fuel use.

Even the USAF Museum cannot say for sure the extent.  They feel it could not have been used extensively as no T.O.'s exist for it and none of the wartime or post war manuals allow it's use.  

They do make more than one copy of a T.O. so it one was written clearing the use 100/150 grade fuel for general use in the 8th USAAF we should be able to find it rather easily.

Next we have the NACA reports.  Obviously fuel technology had reached an stumbling point with high octane fuels that was not resolved until the post war years.

100/150 was used by all 8th AF fighter groups, and it was used up until VE day.

That is a nice opinion but in the end that is all.

Freemans book Widewing clearly says that ALL 8th AF tactical aircraft used 100/150 grade.   Aircraft types are classified as either tactical or strateagic in the USAF.  Fighters are tactical aircraft as they do not have the capabililty to strike outside the theater.

http://www.military.com/Resources/EQG/EQGmain?file=EG_Tactical&cat=a&lev=2

http://www.military.com/Resources/EQG/EQGmain?file=EG_Strategic&cat=a&lev=2

Seems rather odd that he would contradict himself in the same paragraph.

However there are plenty of unclear points in his narative.

For example refering to the highlighted sentence below.  If they did return to 100/130 grade as the USAF believes and they had plenty of 100/150 grade fuel....

Why was supply difficult??

Enthusiasm for the new fuel waned quickly and in the same month some units requested a return to 100/130. As the old grade had been largely replaced by 100/150, supply was difficult.

On the other hand we have the supply of 100/150 grade.

We know the allies had it and we know they used it.

Operation Diver was a large operation.  It had priority over the Campaign even.

While the Germans maintained their launching rate of 100 a day the continuation of Vsite bombing was an essential part of the defence. Towards the end of June, over 40% of the Allied bomber effort from Britain was directed against Crossbow targets- despite objections from some Allied commanders who wanted more strategic air operations to be flown over Germany. Despite the bombing of the V-sites and supply centres, an average of almost 120 flying bombs a day were launched in the first week of July. After the first two weeks of bombing, some 1,769 people had been killed and in the Strand the Air Ministry itself was hit and 198 people killed. On July 1 a flying bomb crashed in Chelsea, killing 124; four days later the total death roll was 2,500. Reprisals against German towns and villages were considered but such reprisals were not likely to ease the situation. Moreover, Eisenhower was opposed to this kind of retaliation.

The last flying bomb was launched at London on March 29, 1945, only six weeks before Germany surrendered.

http://www.fiddlersgreen.net/aircraft/WWII/v1/v1_info/vi_info.htm

http://www.edenbridgetown.com/in_the_past/reference/v1.shtml

As Neil says:

The fuel was not standard during 1944 and the extent of its RAF use unkown to me outside of 1944 A.D.G.B and 1945 2nd TAF.

All the best,

Crumpp

[Angus]

I have a conspiracy theory.
In RL the allied didn't have much fuel, nor was it any good, nor was their engine technology good enough to benefit from it anyway.
The Axis had ample fuel of all grades desired, allthough synthetic it was perfect, and they mounted hoardes of aircraft and aero engines that could consume it all the way to VE day.
So, the conspiracy is about implying otherwise. And VE day????

[Karnak]

It is interesting to see how incompetent some Axis fans think the US and UK were.  I'd guess they'd hold the USSR in even greater contempt, but that doesn't come up much so I'm not sure.

Obviously the only thing we could do, given the absolute crap engineers we had, is make tons and tons of crap and overwelm the masterful designs of the Germans with sheer numbers of aircraft that would be helpless without a five to one advantage in numbers.

[Scherf]

And put hundreds of thousands of tons of fuel in seeeeecret reserves.

[Crumpp]

I have a conspiracy theory.

No conspiracy Theory Here, Angus.  Just an ambigious part of WWII history.

So stop with the silly answers.  I don't know if you are on AAW boards but I posted a rather long reply:

Interesting Kurfurst.

Do you have documentation showing these shortages or are you just making an assumption?

While stocks of 150 grade fuel did make up a smaller percentage of the Allied Aviation fuels it maybe a misleading conclusion to state there was a shortage.

Certainly in the very begining of it's introduction I would agree but by early 1945 it appears to me that the allies had plenty for the aircraft (fighters) that used it.

Below is a report from the 2nd TAF, RAF on 150 grade stocks.

Compare that with the number of flying hours flown by the USAAF single engine fighters, which IIRC had priority for 150 Octane fuel. The majority of allied aircraft did use 100/130 as their was little to gain when 150 was used in multiengine bombers and auxilery aircraft.

So while the allies did have larger stocks of 130 Octane it does not mean an "operational" shortage for the aircraft that could use it and gain benefit.

If the Mossie squadrons felt comfortable requesting to use it, it is not a great leap of logic to conclude that the single engine fighter units were not in a crunch. Especially when you consider the multi engine flying hours using 100/130.

Included is a USAAF document on fuel use for the entire USAAF during the war. The usefulness of this information is debateable. However it does show that 150 Grade fuel is not distinguished in anyway. The USAAF listed fuels by their lean octane rating of 100 octane. Additionally you can compare consumption for the entire USAAF with the stocks on hand in the RAF's 2nd TAF to get an idea of the scope.

I don't think there was an operational shortage of 150 Octane fuel. The allies had some major advantages in fuel production. Rich oil fields, production under no military pressure, plenty of production facilities, and open supply lines. Hardly the scenario for major shortages.

Can you produce some documentation showing this shortage?

All the best,

Crumpp

I have good reason to change my opinion on the use of 100/150 grade fuel including the USAF Museum opinion.

And some experienced gained researching.

It is interesting to see how incompetent some Axis fans think the US and UK were.

Where do you see me claiming that??

BTW, I don't know the circumstances of your anecdotal evidence on the P47M but I can say be careful.  

Several of the veterans have related anecdotes only to later change the details.  It was 60 years ago.

They are ordinary men who experienced exordinary circumstances and rose to the occasion.

And put hundreds of thousands of tons of fuel in seeeeecret reserves.

There were a surprisingly large number of fighters that did use it consistantly.  It was in AFDU and the 2nd TAF in 1945.

All the best,

Crumpp

[Squire]

I tell you what Crummp, how about this oft quoted USAF museum provides either a book or a doc.

Just one. Concerning 130 grade usage thats relevent to our debate. If its so cut and dry, and these guys are the super gurus of all USAF history, how hard can it be? Do they have any info, or not.

Quite frankly, I find it bemusing that I can find more docs (dozens so far), doing google and yahoo searches of flight sim BBSs than your great source of knowledege at the USAF museum who says "probably not" but has bupkiss past that, and not a single document supporting your position.

[Widewing]

Originally posted by Crumpp
Really??  I found these in about 4 minutes of googling.

The 56th was the only group to operate them.

While some were delivered in 1945 they had serious problems that did not get worked out until the wars end.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P-47_Thunderbolt



http://www.cradleofaviation.org/history/aircraft/p-47/7.html



http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3901/is_200410/ai_n9438499

The operational dates are conflicting. Most have Republic developing semi-reliable fixes in April 1945. Many sources say the type never saw combat while others claim it conducted unopposed armed recons the last two days of the war.

I think the He-162 would be just as appropriate for the game. In fact it would be much more appropriate as it actually fired shots in anger.

All the best,

Crumpp

Sorry Bud, you are going to have to do better than quote my own work... Yeah, I wrote that P-47 piece for CAM, and it's also on my website.

Few people on earth are better versed on the P-47 than I am. I have spent hundreds of hours pouring through Republic documents over the years.

P-47Ms had issues with ignition systems breaking down at high altitude and engine/accessory corrosion due to improper preparation for shipment to Britain by the Army. Some engines suffered from burned piston crowns due to excessively lean mixtures in top-rear cylinders, the result of vacuum leaks and incorrect rigging of turbo controls. Modified baffles were employed to reduce cylinder head temps of top-rear cylinders as well. Similar problems were experienced with early P-47C models as well.

I have never seen any reports of 100/150 related engine failures in any P-47s.

P-47Ms of the 56th saw a significant amount of combat in the last three months of the war.

My regards,

Widewing

[Crumpp]

I tell you what Crummp, how about this oft quoted USAF museum provides either a book or a doc.

I get a copy of the TO.

Again,  

Not a single document has been produced that is a command to use the fuel or a technical order for the aircraft clearing it for general use.

In all these searches of the Internet, produce one, please.

Sorry Bud, you are going to have to do better than quote my own work... Yeah, I wrote that P-47 piece for CAM, and it's also on my website.

I thought it was a little leaning toward fandom.

Better give Micheal O'Leary a call to tell him he is wrong.

The P47M had no problems and flew all the time in combat!

Only 130 P-47Ms were produced and the 56th FG received virtually the entire production run but trouble soon followed. With the constant rush of wartime production, complete testing was sometimes not undertaken. What worked under hasty factory testing would not function under operational conditions. This, unfortunately, was true with the P-47M. M model pilots were horrified to find their engines stopping completely or cutting in and out once they reached cruising altitude. Missions were hastily aborted and maintenance men were puzzled. Other engine problems began to manifest themselves, including corrosion and low cylinder head temperatures which affected the correct operation of the engine. The problem soon grew to nightmare proportions when it became obvious that every P-47M operated by the 56th was stricken with the same problem.

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3901/is_200410/ai_n9438499/pg_7

 

As the war in Europe fought to a close, the P-47M was finally operationally deployed during April 1945 and its high top speed meant that the Luftwaffe more advanced adversaries such as the Me 262 jet could, if conditions were right, be caught and destroyed. The rocket-powered Me 163 was an other matter and these aircraft, which were fortunately deployed in a limited number, were extremely difficult to destroy and could usually only be attacked after they had exhausted their fuel supply and were heading back to home field. For all its speed and power, the P-47M remained a "limited production" version.

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3901/is_200410/ai_n9438499/pg_8

I always though the War ended in May 1945, not July.

Looks like Micheal might know a thing or two about the aircraft. His Pom-Pom’s are not as brightly colored, though.

http://www.findarticles.com/p/search?tb=art&qt=%22O%27Leary%2C+Michael%22&sn=0

All the best,

Crumpp