Spitfire vs Bf 109: A Detailed Cockpit Comparison

Two legendary fighters. Two very different pilot experiences. Which one had the better seat to war?

The Supermarine Spitfire and the Messerschmitt Bf 109 weren’t just rivals in the skies of WWII—they represented the pinnacle of British and German fighter design. But beyond speed, agility, and firepower, one critical factor defined how pilots lived—or died—in combat: the cockpit.

Visibility

The Bf 109’s cockpit is famously cramped. As pilot Volker Bau of the Messerschmitt Museum of Flight put it, “If you put in a small box that’s half your size, then you feel like you’re in the aircraft.” There’s virtually no wiggle room, and claustrophobia can become an issue—especially with poor rearward visibility.

By contrast, the Spitfire offers more headroom and a better view. Its outward-bulging canopy—especially with the Malcolm hood—improves all-around visibility. The Spitfire’s more oval fuselage shape also allows for cutouts that enhance rearward sightlines. In terms of space and situational awareness, the Spitfire wins this round.

Ergonomics and Ease of Use

Both cockpits were well-designed for their time, but they took different approaches.

The Spitfire’s cockpit is more spacious, especially around the arms and hands. Controls are easier to reach, and the control column has more freedom of movement. This made it more comfortable to fly and gave pilots better leverage in combat.

The Bf 109, while tighter, offered a key advantage: engine and radiator automation. Pilots didn’t have to manually manage engine settings mid-flight—a huge benefit in a dogfight. While the stick could get cramped between the pilot’s legs, automation eased the overall workload, especially for newer pilots.

So, while the Spitfire wins on ergonomics, the Bf 109 balances the scale with superior flight system management.

Instrumentation

Here’s where the Bf 109 E has the edge. Its layout is clean and logical, with a symmetric tiered arrangement that puts critical instruments where they’re needed—even if some sit behind the control stick.

The Spitfire Mk II boasts the classic “basic six” instrument set, with a bonus artificial horizon the 109 lacks. But beyond the center panel, the layout gets cluttered. The sides are cramped, and the stick can block the view of some gauges. It’s functional—but less intuitive than the German setup.

Final Verdict

Visibility: Spitfire
Ergonomics: Spitfire
Automation & Instrumentation: Bf 109

Ultimately, the Spitfire cockpit feels more open and user-friendly, especially for long flights or quick reactions in combat. But the Bf 109, despite its confined space, offered pilots a streamlined, efficient interface with advanced automation for its time.

In short, the Spitfire was more comfortable—but the Bf 109 was arguably more practical.