Defending the Spitfire

Spitfire’s revenge: A rebuttal of the anti-Spitfire article, by Jon Lake –


5 responses to “Defending the Spitfire

  1. The Spitfire shouldn’t need to be defended! But thank you for pointing out so many reasons why this was such an important aircraft. And why we shouldn’t be distracted by a few statistical quirks and attempts at revisionism.

    Liked by 2 people

  2. Thanks for the heads-up – I ducked across and had a look. An interesting argument although wholly academic. The reality of the 1930s was that aircraft went through a very swift evolution with the advent of stressed-skin cantilever monoplanes. There wasn’t a whole lot to choose between each successive generation produced by the various major powers, though the Spitfire probably had the edge where it counted. Numerically it was in a minority during the Battle of Britain. However, what really mattered was the skill and determination of the pilots. It’s always down to people in the end.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s