Spitfire vs Hawker Hurricane: Which One Was the Best Fighter

During World War II, two British planes stood out for their amazing work in the sky: the Spitfire and the Hawker Hurricane. They both had huge jobs to do and did them differently. Let’s dig a bit deeper into what made each one special and how they matched up against each other.

How Spitfire and Hurricane Differed

Both planes had the same heart, a Merlin engine built by Rolls-Royce, which got better as the war went on. This powerful motor wasn’t just used in these fighters; it also was part of bigger planes like the four-engine Lancaster bomber and even the British version of the Mustang. But even with the same engine, the Spitfire and the Hurricane were different in many ways.

The shape of the wings is what stood out most. The Spitfire had an elliptical wing, which is sort of an oval shape, that was narrower than the Hurricane’s. This design made the Spitfire a star in the sky, giving it speed and the ability to twist and turn quickly. It did come with downsides, though; it was trickier and took more money to build compared to the Hurricane. The Hurricane’s wings were broader, which made it a more stable flyer, and it was way less of a hassle for pilots to handle.

Building a plane costs a lot, but in 1939, a Hurricane was much more wallet-friendly, costing about £4,000. The Spitfire, on the other hand, would set you back more—quite a bit more—at £12,600. That’s a big difference!

Canopies, Construction, and Firepower

If you looked up, you’d spot another difference—their canopies. The Spitfire wore a slick bubble canopy made of acrylic. This see-through dome gave pilots a killer view all around. The Hurricane had a more boxy, framed canopy that slid back and could be opened while flying, which was pretty cool but didn’t offer quite the same view.

The bodies of these planes were a tale of two materials. The Spitfire was all metal, shiny aluminum from nose to tail, making it sleek but also a little less forgiving if it got hit. The Hurricane was a mix; it started with metal at the front but switched to fabric covering over the frame from behind the cockpit, with a wider tail fin for good measure. This mix gave the Hurricane a tough edge, able to brush off some damage that might ground other planes.

Talking firepower, the Spitfire typically had eight machine guns, 303 Brownings to be precise, while the Hurricane packed four big 20-millimeter cannons. Later on, the Spitfire also got these cannons. The cannons on the Hurricane had a bit more boom per shot, but the Spitfire’s quicker guns were nothing to laugh at either.

Combat Roles and Performance

Both planes got better as engineers squeezed more power out of the engines. The Spitfire could fly up to 317 miles per hour, while the Hurricane could push to about 320 miles per hour. As for flying high, both could reach where the air gets thin and cold—up to 40,000 feet for the Spitfire and 36,000 feet for the Hurricane. At those heights, no heated jackets or pressurized cabins meant pilots had to be tough as nails.

In a fight, these two had their own dance cards. The more robust and slower Hurricane went after German bombers, hitting them hard. Meanwhile, the zip-zap, quick-moving Spitfire took on the nimble German escort fighters, like the BF-109. And interestingly, in the famous Battle of Britain, you’d find almost twice as many Hurricanes as Spitfires in the fray.

So, was the Hurricane the more reliable, steady, and cost-effective option, with a tough exterior able to survive a few knocks? Or was the Spitfire the speed demon, a sleek hunter in the sky that could face off against enemy fighters with grace and agility? Each had its roles, strengths, and moments where it shined. They both earned spots in the skies of history, and together, they formed a one-two punch that kept the sky over Britain safer during some of its darkest days.