If it didn't look like this, it wouldn't make it. Winkle Brown didn't like it and 670 pilots died flying it. A squadron of Tiffies bounced some FW-190s at Dieppe, and shot 3 down, but two Tiffies failed to pull out from their dives.
Only 3300 Typhoons were built and there were still well over 1000 on hand at the end of the war, and I strongly doubt that 25% of Typhoon losses were due to accidents - and that's not counting occasions when the Typhoon crashed and the pilot survived. On the other hand if you are including combat losses then I suspect that you would see a similar percentage of losses for the Spitfire/P51/P47 etc.
The issue with the Typhoon's tail has been seriously overstated: it was a problem for a few months but was soon corrected. Someone once showed that Typhoons in Normandy actually had a lower loss-rate than P47's engaged on similar tasks, so it clearly can't have been
that unreliable.
Lastly, I don't know why people keep saying that the Typhoon was a 'low-altitude' fighter. Basically its performance profile was pretty close to that of the FW190, and no-one calls
that a 'low-altitude' fighter. Certainly, neither aircraft performed well above 25,000 feet, but most air combat in WWII took place below that altitude.