Replies

"After many years of reflection," said a former Spitfire pilot during the 1980s, "I take the view that it took both of them to win the Battle of Britain, and neither would have achieved it on its own.

For attacking formations of bombers, the Hurricane offered better visibility and much greater steadiness for shooting. The Spitfire was a slightly higher performance airplane-faster, a better rate of climb, and much more responsive to the controls, according to StanfordTuck. In other words, each had its good points and bad points. Or, as another pilot said, "The Spitfire and the Hurricane complemented each other."

A former pilot of No. 65 (Spitfire) Squadron observed that the Hurricane inflicted greater damage on the enemy bombers than did the Spitfire; but without the Spitfire squadrons to fight the Messerschmitts, the Hurricane-inflicted casualties might not have been enough to win the battle.

By 1939, the Spitfire was significantly faster and had a higher rate of climb, according to Dennis Richards and Richard Hough in The Battle of Britain, and they noted, "In handling, there was little to choose between the two," The authors went on to point out that the Hurricane's twin batteries of four Brownings closely grouped together in the wings was preferred to the "widely scattered' guns in the Spitfire's wings. Squadron Leader Douglas Bader, who became an ace in spite of losing both legs in an air accident, added that the Hurricane "had more room in the cockpit and a better view, and the Spit's much trickier to land ... on that little, narrow undercarriage."

Peter Townsend, who flew both Spitfires and Hurricanes, said that Spitfires were "faster and more nimble, the Hurricane more maneuverable at its own speed and undoubtedly the better gun platform." One of Townsend's fellow Battle of Britain pilots defended the Spitfire: "Our Spits were so well balanced they would fly themselves. Many pilots owe their lives to this property .... If a pilot passed out through lack of oxygen, the Spitfire would fall away in a dive and correct itself" But another of Townsend's contemporaries spoke up for the Hurricane: " [It] was built with the strength of a battleship, had an engine of great power and reliability, and was throughout an excellent and accurate flying machine." Some of the Hurricane's detractors (or Spitfire's defenders) point to the Hawker fighter's wood-and-fabric construction as one of its failings. But author Len Deighton claimed that this "old-fashioned" construction was actually one of the airplane's advantages. He noted that the exploding cannon shells of the Messerschmitt Bf- 109, which inflicted heavy damage to metal skin, had less effect on any sort of girder work-in the same way that bomb blasts so often failed to topple the skeletal British radar towers. He pointed out that the RAF had very few men who understood the complexities of the Spitfire's stressed-metal construction, but that its airframe and flight mechanics had spent their lives servicing and rigging wood-and-fabric aircraft like the Hurricane. In consequence, many seriously damaged Hurricanes were repaired in squadron workshops while badly damaged Spitfires were being written off.

Deighton also noted that the Hurricane had a tighter turning radius than the Spitfire-800 feet for the Hurricane compared with 880 for the Spitfire. This meant that the Hurricane could turn inside the Spitfire, like a sports car outmaneuvering a sedan--a vital attribute in air combat.

Additional Sources:

www.circlecity.co.uk
www.artworkoriginals.com
www.eagle.ca
www.raf.mod.uk
aerostories.free.fr
www.vflintham.demon.co.uk
www.silverstatenews.com
www.aoqz76.dsl.pipex.com
www.museumofflying.com
1000aircraftphotos.com
www.brooksart.com

The Spitfire's job was to engage the enemy's fighters, to draw the Messerschmitts away from the German bomber formations. Then, when the Bf-109s were out of position, the Hurricanes would attack the bombers. That was the plan, but it didn't always work out that way. Hurricane pilots found themselves fighting Messerschmitts as often as did the Spitfire pilots.

German pilots had a great deal more respect for the Spitfire than for the Hurricane. The standard wisecrack among Luftwaffe fighter pilots was that the Hurricane was "a nice little plane to shoot down." But this could be attributed to Spitfire snobbery-no German fighter pilot wanted to admit that he had been badly shot up by a fighter made of fabric and wood.

Some Spitfire pilots shared that bias in regard to the Hurricane. A former pilot of No. 65 Squadron admitted that he had become slightly partisan on the relative merits of the Hurricane and the Spitfire, and noted "I would not like to have been a Hurricane pilot in 1940 and greatly respect the courage and achievements of those who were." Among RAF pilots, the Spitfire-vs.-Hurricane controversy went on and on, with no quarter given by either side. And the argument was not always confined to the officers mess.

Shortly before the Battle of Britain began, a practice air raid had been arranged between a Spitfire squadron and a Hurricane squadron. The Hurricanes were to make a mock bomb run over the Kenley airfield in Surrey. Number 64 Squadron was to send six Spitfires to intercept the incoming "bombers." It all looked like a nice, easy practice drill on paper, but whoever planned the exercise had not reckoned on the rivalry between Spitfire and Hurricane pilots.

Each side thought its own airplane was the best. Now they had their golden opportunity to demonstrate which fighter really was superior, once and for all. The exercise began according to plan-the Spitfires patrolled above their aerodrome, and the Hurricanes showed up flying in bomber formation. But when the Spitfires dove to the attack, the plan quickly fell apart. When the Hurricane pilots saw their adversaries closing from behind, they broke formation and turned to meet their attackers--a highly unbomberlike maneuver! For the next several minutes, the two squadrons chased each other for miles in all directions. The strain of dogfighting quickly wore down the pilots' enthusiasm, and both squadrons landed after several minutes of wild aerobatics. Despite the great effort, however, nothing was accomplished by the little drill. Nobody's skills at breaking up bomber formations had improved, and neither side could brag about a clearcut victory over the other. But at least it had given the pilots something else to argue about.

The pilot at the controls of either a Hurricane or Spitfire was not the most comfortable person in the world. Both machines may have had their good points and bad points, but no one ever praised either one for its comfort or luxury. According to Wing Commander Raymond Myles Beacham Duke-Woolley, who flew with the all-American Eagle Squadrons, a fighter pilot was a lonely man. The cockpit was so narrow that his shoulders brushed against the sides whenever he rubbernecked for enemy fighters (which was constantly); his flying helmet, with his radio headset, covered his ears; his nose and mouth were covered by an oxygen mask, which also contained his microphone. He could not hear very well-even the engine roar was muffled; his vision was severely restricted, and his entire body was boxed in by the confines of the cockpit. He was, in short, not only lonely but also extremely uncomfortable.

The pilot's disposition was not improved by the fact that he was traveling at speeds in excess of 300 mph, and he felt even more anxious when a pilot in another machine-probably just as uncomfortable-began shooting at him.

Die-hard defenders of the Hurricane are quick to comment that the Hawker aircraft is credited with shooting down more enemy aircraft than the Spitfire. The Air Ministry confirmed this with its statement, "The total number of enemy aircraft brought down by single-seater fighters was in the proportion of 3 by Hurricanes to 2 by Spitfires," and also noted, "the average proportion ... of serviceable [aircraft] each morning was approximately 63 percent Hurricanes and 37 percent Spitfires." A cynic might be tempted to say that the Hurricane did most of the work, but the Spitfire got most of the glory. And the cynics would have a point. For in spite of all the facts, it is the myth that is best remembered-the myth of the Spitfire taking on the air fleets of the Luftwaffe single-handedly. In their jubilee edition of The Battle of Britain, Richard Hough and Denis Richards give their own version of the Spitfire myth: "The Battle of Britain, despite Fighter Command's being down to its last few aircraft, was won by unfailingly cheerful young officers flying Spitfires ... and directed by "Stuffy" Dowding ......

The reason for the Hurricane's second-class status was that it was competing not with another fighter, but with a genuine legend. William Green wrote: "The Supermarine Spitfire was much more than just a highly successful fighter. It was the material symbol of final victory to the British people in their darkest hour, and was probably the only fighter of the Second World War to achieve legendary status."

The fact that the Hurricane was responsible for more enemy aircraft destroyed is eclipsed by the Spitfire's graceful silhouette and romantic legend. Glamour usually outshines performance, in war as in love.

Both aircraft were modified many times as the war progressed; they were given larger engines, more spacious cockpits, and 20mm cannons. Both also saw active service until World War II ended in August 1945. Although they served on other fronts from Malta to Singapore, they reached their pinnacle during the high summer of 1940, when the Spitfire and Hurricane joined forces to thwart the Luftwaffe over the green fields of southern England.

In spite of their differences, both in origin and in performance, the two fighters became counterparts. Together, they turned the tide of history's first great air battle.

Good morning everyone.

"FALL IN" to the FReeper Foxhole!

Good Thursday Morning Everyone.

If you want to be added to our ping list, let us know.

If you'd like to drop us a note you can write to:

The Foxhole
19093 S. Beavercreek Rd. #188
Oregon City, OR 97045

Very interesting indeed, SAM.

Post-War mid-50's saw those Rolls-Merlin engines place in Unlimited hydroplanes. I was a young pup at that time, but remember watching the races in Seattle, Lake Chelan, and Coeur d' Alene Lake. Citizens in Spokane had a fund drive and had a community sponsored boat - the Miss Spokane U-25. It was later sold to the owner of Eagle Electric and that became the name of the boat. Later still, Eagle Electric became Pay'nPack and a new name for the U-25. Pay 'n Pack was the forerunner to present-day Home Depot and Lowes type stores.