The Hurricane or the Spitfire?

Had a great day out at the Science Museum, the Energy Show was brilliant. At night went off to see Rock of Ages .

Spitfire or Hurricane. Which was better?

Although they were both built to meet the same specification, they were designed to differing design outlooks and were both unbeatable in their chosen areas. The Spitfire route was flying performance even at the expense of other criteria - the "high technology" route. The Hurricane design was to ensuring that large numbers of operational aircraft were delivered in the shortest possible time.

The Hurricane was the RAF's first 300mph fighter and even as the Battle of Britain raged, Hawker were well on their way to providing the first 400mph fighter in the shape of the mighty Typhoon.

The Hurricane was larger than both the Spitfire and the Bf109. For absolute speed that may have been bad but that disadvantage gave an opposing advantage of greater wing area, with lower wing loading that resulted in a better rate of turn than either of its contemporaries. This is one of the key "performance indicators" of a fighter. A turning radius quoted as 800 feet for the Hurricane and 880 feet for the Spitfire.

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.

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.

All in all they came out about even.