British Assessment of Soviet Union oil supplies/usage - Aug 41

[Richard Anderson]

Oh, I forgot to include ten odd years of reading in the Fischer-Tropsch archive.

[TheMarcksPlan]

Again we have an inability to follow the logical distinction between a feedstock issue and a refining issue.

The excellent new book The Secret Horsepower Race contains new archival research on German fuel that confirms TMP's contention that Germany's avgas issues in WW2 primarily related to feedstock issues. The author is cagey about sharing excerpts from his still-selling book on Twitter but has shared parts of his ongoing research on Twitter, so I'll share them here:

1st July 1936, IG Farben Ludwigshafen, Dr`s Cunradi, Otto and Penzig detail observations in trends in aviation fuels. The DVL was noted to have developed a leaded fuel with 133 Octane. "ET 100" was Iso-Octane, was the main ingredient which gave Allied 100 Octane its performance.

The point of this is just to demonstrate that had Germany not posessed difficulties in the supply of certain ingredients, they would have had no difficulty whatsoever in matching the fuel octane developments in any other nation. German fuels chemists were excellent.

Tweet attachment:



Author (Calum Douglas) also documents that later-war German C3 fuel was, at rich mixture, better than British Air Ministry 100 fuel:

Unless you`ve read my book, its almost certain that everything you think you know about German aviation fuel in WW2 is wrong. It definetly needs a lengthy video, but the German high grade fuel was in many situations, better than Allied 100 octane ("British Air Ministry 100")

[stg 44]

Again we have an inability to follow the logical distinction between a feedstock issue and a refining issue.

The excellent new book The Secret Horsepower Race contains new archival research on German fuel that confirms TMP's contention that Germany's avgas issues in WW2 primarily related to feedstock issues. The author is cagey about sharing excerpts from his still-selling book on Twitter but has shared parts of his ongoing research on Twitter, so I'll share them here:

1st July 1936, IG Farben Ludwigshafen, Dr`s Cunradi, Otto and Penzig detail observations in trends in aviation fuels. The DVL was noted to have developed a leaded fuel with 133 Octane. "ET 100" was Iso-Octane, was the main ingredient which gave Allied 100 Octane its performance.

The point of this is just to demonstrate that had Germany not posessed difficulties in the supply of certain ingredients, they would have had no difficulty whatsoever in matching the fuel octane developments in any other nation. German fuels chemists were excellent.

Tweet attachment:



Author (Calum Douglas) also documents that later-war German C3 fuel was, at rich mixture, better than British Air Ministry 100 fuel:

Unless you`ve read my book, its almost certain that everything you think you know about German aviation fuel in WW2 is wrong. It definetly needs a lengthy video, but the German high grade fuel was in many situations, better than Allied 100 octane ("British Air Ministry 100")

The fuel stuff has been known for a while. The author is just trying to repackage existing info as his new research. Yes the Germans had over 100 octane fuel...but so did the Allies. Late war both sides were using rich mixtures of up to 150 octane. Plus problems with ingredients, especially when the bombing of production started, is also pretty well known if you have an interest in the subject and access to google.
Research into the higher octane fuels was going on some time before they could be produced in more than just experimental quantities of course.

[TheMarcksPlan]

The fuel stuff has been known for a while.

I know the fuel rating of C3 has been cited elsewhere (~130 by US methods, IIRC). What's knew in Callum Douglas' book is the detailed description of historical process, including prewar documents such as I've linked upthread. Again, I don't feel it's fair to share everything here yet as the book is new and the author is still vigilant about copyright.

And new or not, it's just further evidence that Germany's main fuel issues in WW2 were feedstock issues rather than refining issues.

[Tom from Cornwall]

These are all interesting topics...

Hopefully another interesting piece of the jigsaw. This is a British assessment of the extent to which Germany would benefit from the capture of the Caucasus oilfields dated Aug 42:

CAB66-27-37 - German and oil of Caucasus - 12 Aug 42.JPG

CAB-66-27-37 - WP (42) 357 - Germany and Caucasus Oil p.2 - 12 Aug 42.JPG

Regards

Tom

[TheMarcksPlan]

Hopefully another interesting piece of the jigsaw.

Thanks.

This assessment is broadly in line with my ATL's assessment: transporting Russian oil by rail is impossible with an active Ostfront but possible after SU's defeat. My timing of that defeat - Fall 1942 - coincides with significant oil production from a Maikop/Grozny captured in the preceding winter.

It also captures the points I made far upthread regarding relatively little shipping needed due to short Black Sea distances. It projects ~25 roundtrips per year per ship, which enables moving a lot of oil with a relatively small fleet.

[Tom from Cornwall]

It also captures the points I made far upthread regarding relatively little shipping needed due to short Black Sea distances.

Also of concern to the British in August 1942 was the fate of Soviet warships and merchant ships in the event of the Axis capture of all Soviet ports in the Black Sea. Specifically for this thread (from CAB66/27/35 - 12 Aug 42):

CAB-66-27-35 - Soviet tankers in Black Sea - 12 Aug 42.JPG

My understanding is that some (5?) Soviet merchant ships were allowed through the Straits in 1941 after German invasion of SU and that 4 of these did make it out of the Aegean.

I will keep an eye out for a broader estimate of Axis tanker tonnage in the Mediterranean theatre in 1942 as clearly there would be a priority call between shipping oil across Black Sea and supplying fuel to Axis forces in North Africa.

Regars

Tom

[snowygrouch]

"The fuel stuff has been known for a while. The author is just trying to repackage existing info as his new research."

Indeed ?

Read the book have you ?