Spitfire vs Hurricane




 
--
 
November 2nd, 2005  
Springfield
 
 

Topic: Spitfire vs Hurricane


I found this article on a website about the Spitfires and the Hurricanes and it talked a little about which one of the planes was better and which one was more of a success. Post any other information or your opinion if you want about these two planes in here.

----------

Contrary to popular belief, it was the Hurricane, not the Spitfire that saved Britain during the dark days of 1940. The turn-around time (re-arm, refuel etc.) for the Spitfire was 26 minutes. That of the Hurricane, only 9 minutes from down to up again. During the Battle of Britain the time spent on the ground was crucial and as one fitter/mechanic of No. 145 Squadron quipped: "If we had nothing but Spits we would have lost the fight in 1940."

The Spitfire was an all metal fighter, slightly faster, had a faster rate of climb and had a higher ceiling, while the Hurricane had a fabric covered fuselage, was quicker to repair and withstood more punishment. With the for's and against's of both fighters they came out about even. The majority of German planes shot down during the four month period were destroyed by Hurricanes. For much of the Battle of Britain, the Spitfires went after the German BF 109s at the higher altitudes, while the Hurricanes attacked the bomber formations flying at lower altitudes. This cost the enemy a total of 551 pilots killed or taken prisoner. During the war a total of 14,231 Hurricanes and 20,334 Spitfires were produced. The famous Rolls-Royce 'Merlin' engine evolved through 88 separate marks and was fitted in around 70,000 Allied aircraft during the six years of war.

In the hectic battles in the sky over southern England many pilots returned to base utterly exhausted and routinely fell asleep as they taxied their plane to a stop. Ground crews often had to help the sleeping pilot from the cockpit after he returned from combat.
November 3rd, 2005  
Fox
 
 
Hurricanes and Spitfire are the best airplane in my opition.
I like Spitfire they are looks good but their cockpit is too small for me to get in. LOL!
November 3rd, 2005  
Springfield
 
 
It sounds like the Hurricane could take more damage than the Spitfire which I would like better than speed and agility.
--
November 3rd, 2005  
Whispering Death
 
 
Well, the Spitfire was the better plane.

It was the impliamentation of the two planes that made them so effective. Instead of trying to phase of Hurricaines or put them in reserve duty or something, they specialized and used the spittfires to busy the fighters while the slower hurricaines powered through the lumbering bombers.

The truth is that the Hurricaine is underrated because it was the work horse, not the race horse... but by the same token if England had only Hurricaines they would have all been knocked out of the sky.
November 3rd, 2005  
LeEnfield
 
 
The Hurricane was a very reliable aircraft and was a fantastic gun platform but it was a cross between the old WW1 aircraft and the more newer designs. Much of the body work on a Hurricane was just cloth which was stretched over a frame and doped to make it firm. This made it very light and easy to repair, also the explosive bullets would go straight threw it with out exploding. The draw back was that there was no room for the this design to be upgraded to much. One of it's great success stories was in the western desert where fitted a 40 mm cannon under each wing and it was used to smash the Germans tanks and was so successful it was nicknamed the can opener. The other thing that should be remembered is that this plane accounted for two thirds of all German Planes shot down in the Battle Britain. This came about as there far more Hurricanes that Spitfires, also the Spitfires took on the German fighter escorts while the Hurricanes got stuck into the Bombers.

The Spitfire was far faster and the design of the Aircraft allowed it to be upgraded over 20 times and was still in service with the RAF until the early 1950's. It had it engines mountings stretched to take far greater power plants. It was one of those planes that say if it looks right it feels right and you never hear a bad word spoken about it from any of the pilots. The pilots always reckoned that you strapped the plane on to you and it became one with you.
November 3rd, 2005  
Springfield
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whispering Death
Well, the Spitfire was the better plane.

It was the impliamentation of the two planes that made them so effective. Instead of trying to phase of Hurricaines or put them in reserve duty or something, they specialized and used the spittfires to busy the fighters while the slower hurricaines powered through the lumbering bombers.

The truth is that the Hurricaine is underrated because it was the work horse, not the race horse... but by the same token if England had only Hurricaines they would have all been knocked out of the sky.
You've got a good point there. I see how it would hurt if either one of the planes was never manufactered. If the Spitfire was never made, there would be no planes to distract the enemy so that the Hurricanes could shoot them down. But if there were no Hurricanes made, then there would be no plane to actually shoot down the enemy. The two planes kind of tie together and come as one.
November 3rd, 2005  
LeEnfield
 
 
It should be remembered that the speed difference between the Spitfire and Hurricane was not a great deal on the early marks. As I said earlier the Hurricane was mainly fabric covered which made it very light and it could out turn any German fighter. By 1941 the Spitfire with increased power in its engines was now pulling well ahead of the Hurricane and the Hurricane could not be upgraded due to its design and from this point and was used as fighter bomber and was shipped of to the Middle East and the Far East.
November 6th, 2005  
MightyMacbeth
 
 
yep..spitfires managed to be better. Twas built for it. Was goodn everything. Just listen to that engine of hers 8)
November 6th, 2005  
knight01
 
actually it was the hurricane that one the battle for the raf think about it it took at least 30mins for the spitfire to get refuelled and about 10 for the hurricane think about it the germans had better armour, firepower and could climb better. but they only had enough fuel for a one way trip. the hurricane could refuel and be back up before the spitfire crew had even finished the damage report. plus the hurricane was cheaper to produce the spitfire was a much better plane but it was no wear near as cheap as the hurricane plus the tok half as long as it did for the spitfire. in my opinion the spitfitfire and the hurricane won it through team work. its not the plane who wins it its the people behind the controls. the germans didn't use half as much teamwork as the british and look at 1944 onwards they couldn't even defend germany and they had much better planes and equitment than the british did in 1940 so in my opinion the spitfire might be better but the hurricane was much more cost affective. i think that they all did a splendid job
November 6th, 2005  
LeEnfield
 
 
As I said earlier the Hurricane could be repaired far quicker as it was mainly covered in fabric. You just stitched another bit over the hole stuck some dope on the patch and let it dry for a few minutes and the repair was completed. The problem was that the fabric was at it top end for the speed that the plane was being flown at if the Hurricane flew much faster episcopally in a dive then the fabric could be ripped off