I was watching an episode of the documentary 'Spitfire Ace' today and during the interviews with veteran WW2 Spitfire pilots, some of them said that they had the chance to fly both the Spitfire and Hurricane and their opinion, the early versions of the two aircraft didn't have much between them in terms of turn rates when it came to a dogfight. At higher speeds, the Spitfire was actually slower in terms of rate of turn, as the ailerons became heavier to use and the wing loading increased. The Hurricane's higher wing aspect ratio helped turn rates at higher speeds due to the increased lift created.
Some veterans on the programme did remark that the Spitfire was a lot easier to throw around the sky, as it was designed as a thoroughbred fighter By Reginald Mitchell, unlike the Hurricane, that was derived as a monoplane version of the Hawker Fury by Sidney Camm; in fact, the Hurricane was originally called the 'Fury Monoplane' until it was renamed the Hurricane. The Spitfire was originally called the 'Shrew', until somebody at the RAF renamed it after a nickname for one of his daughters. Not the most romantic name for a classic fighter....
The veteran pilots also remarked that the Hurricane was far more robust, could suffer more damage and keep flying and was a more stable gun platform, hence the reason it was sent after the bombers, although the numerical superiority of the Hurricane compared to the available Spitfires in 1940 also had a lot to do with it. The Spitfire was left to deal with the fighter escorts on more equal terms of numbers.
Here's a link to the series on Youtube, if you want to hear it for yourselves..... from people who were actually there and flew them....
Episode 1, with links to the other episodes.....
05-13-2011, 08:36 PM
Threaded Mode