Spitfire why so popular??

[skullblits]

Ive seen a few history shows about the spitfire's, They didnt build as many as they did hurricanes, and the designs 4 the spitfire's, were Rejected a few times.

I know this isnt alot to go by, But in Flight Sims I found it very hard to controll, But the hurricane was easy. Just wondering why the spitfire get's all the credit

[Soviet Ace]

Because later, the Spitfire sorta phased out the Hurricane, even though the Hurricane was still used as a fighter on the Eastern Front by the Lend-Lease treaty. But it was usually used against ground targets, and in some cases, night fighting. At least, they experimented with night fighting. I'm not 100% on my Hurricane education

But the Spitfire is well known because it wasn't just used in WW2. The Israeli's used the Mk19 or something like that in 48' against the Arabs, and Egypt used them as well in some cases. The Hurricane, though a great plane to see fly and hear, just became obsolete like many before it.

[Kamak86]

I think israel loves eastern engineering. They always get stuff from the UK and US, kinda like hand me downs. I never really thought that Mustangs, Spitfires, Corsairs were used after WW2, i knew the corsair was used minimally in Korean war( not 100% on this), but it doesnt really click that they were used after WW2.

[Soviet Ace]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1948_Arab–Israeli_War

[skullblits]

Never knew israel used em. Just odd the hurricane is completely side stepped, as the spitfire's, design was rejected a few times @ There where less of them in the Battle of Britan and more hurricanes

[redtiger02]

OK Soviet Ace, I have a real question. I did my thesis on the Luftwaffe, and as such delved very little into the Red Air Force. I know that the Russians used a lot of P-39's and P-40's that the US gave them, but did they use any British aircraft? The Russian mentality combined with the Spitfire's lethality would be a vicious combination.

[Soviet Ace]

Yes, the Red Air Force used the Spitfire MkVb and some MkIX's. They also used some Hurricanes, but from what I've read, the pilots actually liked the American P-39 better for some reason? But staying on the subject of Spitfires and Hurricanes, they were mostly used as ground-attack, but some saw combat against Me-109's and FW-190's. On the Eastern Front.

Also, the Hurricanes were also configured to be shot off the bow of convoy ships via catapult, being called Hurricats. They usually had a one way trip, having to either try for land if they were close, or ditching into the sea, being picked up by a convoy destroyer or something like that.

[skullblits]

intrestin

I wonder which was better handling, I say the hurricane

[David603]

Originally Posted by skullblits

Never knew israel used em. Just odd the hurricane is completely side stepped, as the spitfire's, design was rejected a few times @ There where less of them in the Battle of Britan and more hurricanes

The Hurricane was a reasonably good fighter in the first two years or so of the war, but it rapidly became obsolete as a fighter after that. The main limiting factor was the thick wing, which meant that short of a major redesign the Hurricane would always be slower than the Spitfire, assuming both planes had the same engine. In combat the only edge the Hurricane mkI had over the Spitfire mkI was it had a slightly tighter turning circle, and it was a bit more damage resistant. The Spitfire was 35mph faster, climbed, dived and rolled better and had better high speed handling.

Even during the Battle of Britain the Hurricane wasn't really a match for the Bf109E, and with the introduction of the Fw190A and Bf109F even the improved Hurricane mkII became totally outclassed as a fighter.

Hawker looked at various was of improving the Hurricanes performance, including fitting a more powerful Napier Sabre or Rolls Royce Griffon engine. The thick wing meant the resulting plane would still be slower than a Spitfire powered by the latest version of the Merlin, so Hurricane development was switched to the fighter bomber role. Hawker had recognised the limitations of the Hurricane design even before WWII started, and had been working on a successor, which was to emerge as the Typhoon.

By contrast the Spitfire went from strength to strength. Improved versions of the Merlin kept the Spitfires speed competitive, the Spitfire was always very agile compared to its enemies, and it had an excellent climb rate. The addition of the Rolls Royce Griffon engine turned the Spitfire MkXII into one of the best low level fighters in the world, and the MkXIV with an improved Griffon and a redesigned airframe was still one of the absolute best dogfighters in the world at the end of the war. The only real problem the Spitfire had was it lacked the range to carry out long range escort missions.

[Soviet Ace]

David likes to talk about the Spitfire MkXIV being the best, but really the MkIX was the best. It still had the Merlin engine, and even though slower, was a good opponent against 109F and G's. Even some of the 190s were outclassed in some ways by it. The Griffon was a good engine, but it just lacked the feel that the Spitfire had.