Recently there have been various comments that this is a Spitfire forum – I think more a Lancaster forum

I wonder if the answer to this question really stems for wartime publicity – or am I biased because I work in publicity?

It strikes me that it was the propangandists of WWII – the PR men or Spin doctors in modern terms – who first gave the Spitfire it high public profile – possibly at the expense of other aircraft. The Spitfire was successful, it was also good looking and had a great PR name – so it attracted the focus of media attention, hence the Spitfire funds etc.

That attention becomes self perpetuating and continued post war. Then fighter squadrons chose a Spitfire as a gate guard – which greatly helped the survival rate – 40+ airworthy is remarkable for one type. Most general public (then and now) seeing a single engined aircraft would call it a Spitfire. When the Tucano was introduced, the RAF’s liaison teams received several requests for information about “a low flying red and white Spitfire” but never a complaint.

To briefly consider the Lancaster – I wonder how much does its reputation and profile today depend on the Dambusters Raid and the celebration of that success at the time?

Ask anybody to name two wartime aircraft and these two will be top of the list.

Of course, this forum is not populated with a representative selection of the general public, there is a great depth and breadth of knowledge. Just looking at the discussion on this thread so far you see an interest in the whole of Bomber Command, some, frankly, obscure areas of research and even classic cars.

Spitfire Forum? – no, but if a new thread is started everytime a restored aircraft flies, then Spitfires will still be the most represented types.

Allan