OT (sorta OT anyway) Doctor Doolittle and his GAS (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition



Message

RangerJoe -> OT (sorta OT anyway) Doctor Doolittle and his GAS (4/23/2021 10:53:15 PM)

[X(]

quote:

How High Octane Gasoline Saved Untold Allied Pilots During WWII
by Sean Spoonts Mar 12, 2021

The group of Luftwaffe Bf-109 fighters passed high above the English channel at 38,000 feet. At that altitude, they were almost invisible to the naked eye and had little to fear from ground fire. Their job was to get over London, before the HE-111 bombers trailing behind them, and clear out any British fighters. At their current speed and altitude, they were faster and flying higher than any Spitfire or Hurricane could reach. And being faster and higher than your enemy made all the difference in winning a dogfight.

The Germans had fought the Spitfire and Hurricane in the skies over France the year before and were not impressed. The Bf-109 was at least 40 mph faster and could climb several thousand feet higher.

The flight leader scanned the skies below looking for RAF fighters when his wingman began to furiously wag his wings, trying to get his attention. The flight leader dipped his wing to acknowledge and saw his wingman gesture over his right shoulder with an extended thumb. “They must be behind us and below,” he thought as he craned his neck to see behind his aircraft. He then picked up the glint of metal above and behind him. A squadron of Spitfires was at least 2,000 above them and diving fast.

The flight leader hesitated for a moment. The Spitfires couldn’t fly higher or faster than them. Yet, there they were. A whole squadron, like Furies, descending on the Germans from above. The flight leader signaled to his men to break. His flight of 109s split left and right to try and spoil the RAF fighters’ diving attack.

In the dogfight that followed the German pilots would be astonished to find that the Spitfires were now just as fast and could climb just as high as them. “These can’t be the same planes we fought against in France,” the flight leader thought as he twisted and turned trying to shake off the Spitfire on his tail. “They can’t be.”
.
.
.


https://sofrep.com/news/filler-up-how-high-octane-gasoline-saved-untold-allied-pilots-during-wwii/

Read more about how a French-American also helped make this happen and think if he would have been in France when Germany occupied it. [:(]



spence -> RE: OT (sorta OT anyway) Doctor Doolittle and his GAS (4/23/2021 11:52:12 PM)

Very interesting article - never really understood octane ratings in spite of having driven cars for 55 years or so.



RangerJoe -> RE: OT (sorta OT anyway) Doctor Doolittle and his GAS (4/24/2021 12:27:42 AM)

I thought that it would be interesting to some people. Now you also know why if your automobile or other gasoline engine runs fine on regular grade gasoline why you do not need to use a higher octane rating. I also thought that it would also be sort of pertinent to the various ratings of the different aircraft in the game, especially the difference in the Japanese results of their aircraft tests and the US military (not to mention other nation's tests) of the same Imperial Japanese aircraft. I remember reading that the Japanese even used turpentine made from trees in some of their aircraft.

I also did not know that Doolittle was a Doctor. [;)]



PaxMondo -> RE: OT (sorta OT anyway) Doctor Doolittle and his GAS (4/24/2021 2:51:36 AM)

It's a good article, but missing some pieces. FCC was developed during the war (..."the first commercial fluid catalytic cracking plant (known as the Model I FCC) began processing 13,000 barrels per day (2,100 m3/d) of petroleum oil in the Baton Rouge refinery on May 25, 1942...")

Houdry discovered that alumina silicates were an effective catalyst in cracking heavy oil into lighter gasoline, but his process was a batch process that was not efficient; meaning it worked, but it was costly and used a LOT of real estate in a refinery. Standard oil had been developing the FCC process in the late 20's, but suspended efforts in '28 due to the Great Depression. In the late 30's they realized that Houdry's catalyst with their process was the key and the rest is history.

The last piece is the alkylation unit .... FCC produces a lot of light gases (propane, ethane, butane) along with octanes. Alkylation builds these lights gases back up into heavier liquids like octanes. The combination of FCC and Alkylation allows a refinery to make just about any octane fuel from most crudes.



PaxMondo -> RE: OT (sorta OT anyway) Doctor Doolittle and his GAS (4/24/2021 3:06:04 AM)

I should add that UOP, Universal Oil Products, was far more involved in FCC development that how is typically portrayed. When Standard Oil was broken up, UOP was formed as the joint holding company for the patents of Standard Oil; it was the technology holding company. Kellogg built the first FCC, but the design came from UOP. UOP holds essentially all of the key global FCC patents, like this one:

"Fluidized catalytic cracking process utilizing a high temperature reactor"
Patent Number(s):US 5234578; A

Inventors:
Stine, L O; Hemler, C L; Cabrera, C A; Lomas, D A

I had the great fortune to work with Carlos on several occasions; Stine, Lomas, and Hemler were all colleagues who I knew, this even though FCC was NOT my specialized process.



RangerJoe -> RE: OT (sorta OT anyway) Doctor Doolittle and his GAS (4/24/2021 3:09:36 AM)

Methane can also be turned into methanol which can then be turned into decane.

But this article did point out what a difference it made to some aircraft. If you want a complete story, it would take a lot of books probably.



Ian R -> RE: OT (sorta OT anyway) Doctor Doolittle and his GAS (4/24/2021 6:47:42 AM)


quote:

The group of Luftwaffe Bf-109 fighters passed high above the English channel at 38,000 feet.


No house rule about strato sweeps, then.[:'(]



Leandros -> RE: OT (sorta OT anyway) Doctor Doolittle and his GAS (4/24/2021 9:15:49 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

Methane can also be turned into methanol which can then be turned into decane.

But this article did point out what a difference it made to some aircraft. If you want a complete story, it would take a lot of books probably.


This is a very interesting subject and I have often been into it during discussions on comparisons between the P-36 and the P-40. It is often not understood that the Pratt & Whitney Twin Wasp used in the P-36 was uprated from 1.050 hp to 1.200 hp. merely by using 100 octane fuel, while the P-40s Allison engine was normally rated with 100 octane fuel on the beginning of the war.

With this taken into account the P-36 had a much better r/c and power/weight ratio, actually on par with the Zero. This in
addition to other parameters made it the best US dogfighter (against the Zero) at the US entry into the war.

Fred



fcooke -> RE: OT (sorta OT anyway) Doctor Doolittle and his GAS (4/24/2021 9:51:53 AM)

Did a P-36 ever fight a Zero? I am guessing only Pearl Harbor or the Philippines would give that opportunity?



RangerJoe -> RE: OT (sorta OT anyway) Doctor Doolittle and his GAS (4/24/2021 11:21:48 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: fcooke

Did a P-36 ever fight a Zero? I am guessing only Pearl Harbor or the Philippines would give that opportunity?


That depends upon the nomenclature.

The Hawk 75 and the Mohawk are export models.



Denniss -> RE: OT (sorta OT anyway) Doctor Doolittle and his GAS (4/24/2021 12:44:33 PM)

early BoB, Bf 109 at 38k feet and Spits at 40k? That's highly questionable. 10k feet lower sounds more reasonable and is within the flight envelope of Bf 109Es.



fcooke -> RE: OT (sorta OT anyway) Doctor Doolittle and his GAS (4/24/2021 6:55:13 PM)

I forget about the French using the P-36 for almost all of WW2.



Leandros -> RE: OT (sorta OT anyway) Doctor Doolittle and his GAS (4/24/2021 10:04:04 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: fcooke

I forget about the French using the P-36 for almost all of WW2.

And the Finns...and the British in Burma. But those were Hawk H-75s - I am talking about the USAAC P-36 version with Twin Wasp engines against the Zero.

With 100 octane fuel the Twin Wasp's 1.050 hp was increased to 1.200 as was the Wright Cyclone used in some variants.

Fred




bomccarthy -> RE: OT (sorta OT anyway) Doctor Doolittle and his GAS (4/24/2021 10:06:45 PM)

A much more complete account is in a recent book: Calum Douglas, The Secret Horsepower Race: Western Front Fighter Engine Development (Tempest Books, 2020). Douglas is a mechanical engineer who consults on racing engine development; the book appears to be a compilation of the content in his presentations to F1 teams over the past 10 years.

Because of his relationship with Mercedes, he had access to Daimler Benz archives, which makes this book probably the most complete account of the problems of aircraft engine development at Daimler, as well as BMW and Junkers. As such, it is a great study on how things can go wrong when corporate and military leadership fails to provide a sensible organizational process for technical development. Especially illuminating are the copious transcripts of correspondence and meetings between Erhard Milch and the technical leaders at Daimler Benz concerning the failure of the DB series engines when operating on C3 fuel (which was 100 octane) from 1939 through 1943 - Bf-109 engines ultimately had to be derated in the field to operate on B4 fuel.

The book is also an excellent account of the evolution of supercharging during the war, with the German manufacturers giving up technical parity when they failed to advance second stage supercharging into production engines until the last months of the war. Again, the chief reason was not technical but organizational - too many advanced projects dividing the attention of too few engineers and no willingness on the part of the corporate and military leadership to provide guidance on priorities.



JeffroK -> RE: OT (sorta OT anyway) Doctor Doolittle and his GAS (4/24/2021 10:07:38 PM)

An excellent article from a website with a lot of historical documents.

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/150grade/150-grade-fuel.html

Same website
http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spit1vrs109e.html
Also during February and March 1940 Spitfire and Hurricane Squadrons were converting their aircraft over to 100 octane fuel, which made possible an increase in engine power by raising the boost to +12 lb/sq.in.. Combat reports show that +12 lb boost was used by the Spitfire (and Hurricane) squadrons during their first combats with the Me 109 E in May 1940 while covering the Dunkirk evacuation. Hurricane Squadrons based in France during May of 1940 were also employing +12 lbs/sq.in. boost in combat.

Jeffrey Quill recalled:

It was only shortly before the Battle of Britain that we changed over to 100 octane. It had the effect of increasing the combat rating of the Merlin from 3000 rpm at 6 1/2 lb boost (Merlin III) or 9 lb boost (Merlin XII) to 3,000 rpm at 12 lb boost. This, of course, had a significant effect upon the rate of climb, particularly as the constant speed propellers (also introduced just before the battle) ensured that 3,000 rpm was obtainable from the ground upwards whereas previously it was restricted by the two-pitch propellers. It also had an effect upon the maximum speed but this was not so significant as the effect upon rate of climb.

V. A. Kalichevsky, author of the 1943 book The Amazing Petroleum Industry wrote:

It is an established fact that a difference of only 13 points in octane number made possible the defeat of the Luftwaffe by the R.A.F. in the Fall of 1940. This difference, slight as it seems, is sufficient to give a plane the vital "edge" in altitude, rate of climb and maneuverability that spells the difference between defeat and victory.

Service ceiling:- Spitfire I - 34,700 ft., Me 109E - 33,792 ft.



fcooke -> RE: OT (sorta OT anyway) Doctor Doolittle and his GAS (4/25/2021 7:24:27 AM)

The Finns did an exceptional job of using 'dated' airframes during the war. They got a lot of good work out of their Buffaloes.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.53125