Single Engined Aircraft in Service for the whole European War?

The Hurricane was in service with the RAF from 1935, and the last of the Mk.IVs (a tank-buster and ground attack aircraft) was retired in 1946, so that would be my choice.

EDIT: Hurricane IV's were operational in the UK in 1943-44 with 184, 186, 438, 439 and 440 squadrons until replaced by Typhoons. They also saw service in Italy and the Balkans with 6 Squadron, RAF (alongside 351 Squadron, Yugoslavian Air Force) operating them in 1944-45 in Northern Italy, the Adriatic, Yugoslavia and Greece.

I don't know if the Bolton-Paul Defiant was still in front-line action at the end of the war, but it was operational in 1939. As regards the Hurricane, the Sea Hurricane version was probably operational in May, 1945. On the German side, possibly the Ju-87, though it was extremely vulnerable to enemy fighters and would likely have been restricted to night operations. I leafed through my Jane's Fighting Aircraft of World War II and couldn't find that much.

Of course the Curtiss P-40 was operational before September 1939, but was not in use in Europe at that time and likely had been withdrawn by 1945.

bear in options that there's no "one length matches all" fighter plane. there are a substantial kind of concerns that flow into fighter plane layout. Payload and speed are 2 concerns. another concerns comprise maneuverability, maximum torque/G-rigidity tolerance, unmarried function vs. multi-function (is the craft for use for aerial dogfighting in basic terms, or will it also be used to attack floor targets?), touchdown platform (air field or plane service), etc. to research the F-16 battling Falcon with the F-18 Hornet, the F-16 is a lighter, shorter plane it extremely is extra maneuverable than the F-18. even although the F-16 has in basic terms one engine at the same time as the F-18 has 2, the F-18 doesn't have two times the thrust (surely, the F-18 in basic terms has about 15% to 20% extra thrust than the F-16, it extremely is extremely almost thoroughly countered via the extra weight). final analysis: there's no one rationalization for version between unmarried-engine and twin-engine combatants. The designers ought to make certain what the plane will be used for, what attributes are maximum substantial for that function, and no matter if a unmarried-engine or twin-engine platform will carry out extra effective for that kind of software.

Just the basic designation really doesn't matter all that much

The 109 went through at least A-G models,

The Spitfire at least 12

I believe the Stuka saw service throughout the war.

What about the F.W. 190 , (again many versions)?

The Hurricane?

Hawker Hurricane

Fairey Swordfish (a bi-plane that took part in the attack on the Bismark)