Best of the Battle of Britain
In this corner, the Vickers Supermarine Spitfire; across the ring, the Hawker Hurricane. Which is the more valuable restoration?
- By John Fleischman
- Air & Space magazine, March 2008
(Page 3 of 6)
Warbird intoxication is a widespread ailment, even if most of the afflicted get no closer than photographs or static aircraft displays and flybys at airshows. For those who can afford a serious case, there are few more dangerous afflictions than Spitfire fever. It burns brightly in hearts across the old Commonwealth, including India, Pakistan, Australia, New Zealand, and Canada, but also in places like the Netherlands and Israel, where after the war Spitfires served as air force founding fighters. Americans are susceptible too: U.S. Army Air Forces squadrons flew Spitfires out of England and in the Mediterranean theater until well into 1944. Not surprisingly, though, Spitfire fever is strongest in the United Kingdom.
For Britons of a certain age, the very name recalls a historic pageant: Dapper young pilots scramble from lawn chairs, London burns, and Luftwaffe aircraft break apart in gun camera films, all against a soundtrack of sirens, whistling bombs, and Winston Churchill growling his way through the Few, the Many, the Finest Hour, etc. Slicing down the middle is the Spitfire, the airplane that won the Battle of Britain.
Well, not exactly. Such a statement leaves out the Hawker Hurricane, the other frontline fighter the Royal Air Force fielded in the battle. In July 1940, when the fight began, the RAF Fighter Command had 396 operational Hurricanes and 228 Spitfires. That ratio, three Hurricanes to two Spitfires, held through the summer. Fighter Command tended to steer Spitfires against the Luftwaffe's high-altitude fighters, freeing the Hurricanes to attack the slower, lower-flying German bombers. By the battle's nominal close, at the end of October, Hurricanes had claimed 656 enemy aircraft, versus 529 for Spitfires.
Yet Spitfires got top billing. In the "after myth" of war, Hurricane supporters have long complained that their fighter was denied full credit. They even name the villain, British actor Leslie Howard, and the 1942 film he directed and starred in, The First of the Few. A half-century after its first run, John W. Fozard, a retired Hawker designer and aviation historian, wrote a book titled Sydney Camm and the Hurricane, in which he denounced First of the Few as the "infamous wartime movie…that fixed forever in the public mind the image of the Spitfire as the winner of the Battle of Britain thus performing a permanent assassination job on the Hurricane."
You can still catch The First of the Few, which has been released on video. It's a creaky, old-fashioned biopic about the Spitfire's designer, R.J. Mitchell, who died of cancer at age 42. (In the film, though, Mitchell succumbs to what the physician character refers to as "overdoing it, old boy.") Mitchell lived to see his prototype fly, but not the operational Spitfire squadrons that were filmed for the movie's opening montage. There is not a single Hurricane in sight.
Even today, the Battle of Britain is thickly barnacled with myths and celluloid memories, and historians approach the subject warily. Richard Overy, a professor of modern history at King's College, London, is one of the brave. Overy has chipped away at some of the crustiest legends: that the British public was 100 percent behind its bulldog prime minister (the government's top-secret surveys showed that the average Londoner's enthusiasm for Churchill was inversely proportional to how heavily he or she was being blitzed every night) and that Adolf Hitler was champing at the bit to invade England in 1940 (Hitler was an opportunist, says Overy, but was more interested in forcing the British into a one-sided "peace" treaty so he could devote all of his resources to conquering Russia).
On one point, Overy remains a True Blue about the battle. "Britain was forced to fight with what she could produce herself in 1940," he writes in his 2004 book The Battle of Britain. "The aircraft available were among the very best fighter aircraft in the world. There is no myth surrounding the performance of the Hawker Hurricane and Vickers Supermarine Spitfire, which between them formed the backbone of Fighter Command."
No matter what they flew, British pilots faced grim odds. Of the 2,917 men who flew for Fighter Command that summer, 544 —almost 20 percent—were dead by the end of October.
Single Page « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next »





Comments (5)
As a 52 year old Brit, with a WW2 father who was in the RAF, who wouldn't know about the Battle and the mythology of the Spit being better than Willy Messerschmidt's Bf109, etc., Radar, Rolls Royce Merlin, ad nauseum. Very good article. I have always wondered why 8 .303 Colt Brownings became the pre-WW2 British standard. I always assumed 2 then 4 then maybe 6, or hey, whatabout 8 as the pilot can't lean out and clear jams anymore. Besides the Air Ministry didn't like the idea of cannon, just not sporting Old Boy; just like the Army didn't like sub-machine guns. Of course, people like Douglas Bader and Stanford Tuck quickly found that even eight .303s didn't really cut it. Goering is quoted as saying that the cal .50" Browning was why the Luftwaffe couldn't hold it against all the B-17s daytime. I'm not sure about that the Finns knocked off that design for their Brewster Buffaloes!
Still loved the article - I for one am glad that Fighter Command had all the Hurribirds (or was it Hurry Backs?) and Spitfires at Dowding's disposal come the Fall of France.
About 12 years ago I had the chance to pay £1200 for a 20 minute flight from Panshanger in the back of a two-seat Spit. Did I? Well let's just say I still feel wistful, but did enjoy the article.
Posted by Edward Lisney on April 25,2008 | 04:33 PM
Has no-one else remarked on the fact that the cover photo (also on p6 of this article, above) is not a 'real' Spitfire at all - it's the modern Australian 'kit build' 3/4 scale one, which looks quite good from a distance, but has many very obvious differences from the real thing, one being a modern engine which doesn't sound a bit like a Merlin...
Posted by Dave Evans on May 6,2008 | 11:49 AM
Beverley Shenstone, a Canadian aerodynamicist, was perhaps the youngest member of the Spitfire design/engineering team. R.J.Mitchell reputedly did not take kindly to adice from such a young and inexperienced theoretician (see AEROPLANE,July 2008, P.57). The article above seems to misquote Shenstone re the He70 elliptical wing. The WIKIPEDIA aricle on Spitfire has Shenstone arguing that the He70 elliptical wing was not the basis for the wing design of the Spitfire. Furthermore, there were other aircraft makes with elliptical wings, so Heinkel's was neither original nor unique.
Posted by J. Fred Brailey on July 9,2008 | 07:24 PM
Sorry Dave,
Yourlooking at an actual Spit Mark Vb done in Polish colors of BM144. Circa 1942 - 1944.
The kit you speak of yes,indeed is very different from the photo and sound. Also it is approx 80% not 3/4 as mentioned.
You have the full meal deal here in the pic.
R.J.
Posted by R.J. on August 4,2008 | 08:02 PM
An excellent article, much appreciated.
It has been my 'opinion' for over 50 years, that Mitchell and or Shenstone were overawed by the performance of the HE-70, to the point where one or both of them decided to employ an elliptical type wing in the Supermarine Type 300, F.37/34 design submission.
Posted by J.C.S. on December 31,2012 | 06:19 AM