• The Spitfire was not war winning. It was one good interceptor among several. The Hurricane shot down more enemy aircraft in the Battle of Britain because it was more numerous and easier to repair.• It was fragile and maintenance heavy. Thin wings meant cramped guns, awkward ammo feeds, frequent jams, and slower turnaround than propaganda admits.• Range was poor. It was useless for deep escort early on, which is why the RAF could not protect bombers over Europe and took heavy losses.• It was not uniquely British genius. The engine that made it viable, the Merlin, owed a lot to international engineering norms and later American mass production kept it relevant.• Pilot survival was grim. RAF losses were enormous, training was rushed, and replacement pilots were often sent into combat with minimal hours. The myth focuses on the machine, not the expendability of the men.• The RAF narrative is selective memory. Area bombing of German cities killed civilians at scale. This is reframed as moral necessity rather than examined honestly.• Britain romanticises the RAF because it needs a clean story. The Army lost equipment at Dunkirk, the Navy avoided decisive fleet action, and the RAF got a defensible myth built around a narrow window in 1940.• The Spitfire became a symbol because it looks elegant and photographs well. That mattered more for morale and postwar identity than its actual strategic impact.Bottom line. The Spitfire was a good aircraft, not a miracle, and RAF mythology is nation building propaganda polished over decades, not sober military history.
yes everybody knows the Hurricane was the workhorse and did most of the work and the Spitfire was the media darling because it was cutting edge.
>>218268890Wasn't the spit the better aircraft platform? Kill/Loss ratio show that it was the better performing aircraft. It was comparable to the 109, until 1944 when they were already outperforming everything else the allies had.
It's the P-51 Mustang for me.>>218268969Tu juegas HoI IV no?
>>218269030Si un poco. Pero prefiero ver los vídeos de Greg. El Spitfire es un hermoso avión, recuerdo jugarlo en warthunder hace ya algunos años.>https://youtu.be/dg-bjkH47bo?si=sKmD6omJ0_b0oV4H
>>218268890didn't ask, don't care
>>218269030For me it's the F4U Corsair
>>218268890iirc it only got good when ww2 was nearly over also IDF spitfire 9 defeated RAF spitfire 16 in battle
>>218268890What were the Brits thinking with that tail decal
>>218268890also>it looks elegant and photographs wellcome on are we gonna pretend tempest doesnt looxmog it?
>>218268890Why did they paint targets on their planes?Were they stupid?
>>218269127Basically in WW1 the tail decal and decals on the wings used to be the Union jack (British flag) but, there were several friendly fire incidents because from far away especially the Union jack looked a lot like the Iron cross on German aircraft. The French who were our ally suggested we use French decals on our planes (the French flag on the tail and the French cockade on the wings and fuselage) We used that for a bit in ww2 before swapping around the colours to make ourselves a little more distinct before eventually getting rid of white entirely on later aircraft
>>218269147The Tempest has that big radiator nose with that odd shaped engine. Even if it's my favorite aircraft. The sleek curves of the eleptical wings mogg hard and the nose of the inline engine elevates it more.
>>218268890VPN off, hans
>>218269231spitfire has an underside radiator too its just small because the engine is weak as shitalso the radiator looks cool
>>218269303Cute, had that pic as my PC's wallpaper for a very long time.>I like my aircraft with a big chin/nose100% jew right here.
>>218268890spitfire is cool though
