I'm not going to claim to be an expert on Spitfire and Lancaster construction, but I could tell you both aircraft were probably made from 24T aluminum Which basically means it's an aluminum alloyed with a percentage of copper. Skin material was usually solution heat treated then cold worked and items like frames, stringers bulkheads were fabricated from thicker sheet, formed in a drop hammer die and then solution heat treated. Where wings and landing gear were attached use of aluminum forgings that were 75T (7075) may have been used. These were alloyed with zinc.
Although heavy and dissimilar with aluminum, steels may have used as attach fittings as well.
As far as the Mossie - I understand it was made from a laminated molded plywood. In the mold were placed strips of spruce plywood, and then saturated with glue. Once the strips were in position, the mold was covered with a rubber bag and then a cover was bolted to the bottom mold. The rubber bag inside was inflated and pressure was maintained. This produced a fuselage half that was again glued together. What i am describing here is very generic and others may have additional information on the Mossie's construction.
here's some more info...
"The split fuselage scheme allowed many critical systems to be installed before the two halves were bonded together. This reduced the need for workers to crawl around in the fuselage and sped up assembly, though getting the halves to fit was something of a chore for early prototypes. However, work crews claimed that modifying the airframe was not difficult, the only tool required being a saw. Once fitted together, the fuselage was covered with fabric and painted. The fuselage was sawed out to allow fit of the wing, with part of the sawed-out piece replaced after wing installation. Holes for doors were also sawed out of the fuselage.
The glue and wood construction not only led to light weight, elegant lines, and reduced demand for strategic materials, but also minimized demands on production tooling, meaning that sub assemblies could be and were built by such firms as furniture and piano manufacturers. The modular design of the machine also helped support distributed production, with various subcontractors providing sub assemblies that could be integrated in the factory.
There were potential drawbacks. The casein glues were strong, but there were worries that they weren't up to high temperature, high humidity tropical conditions found in South Asia, and that Mosquitos sent there might come "unglued". There were in fact some structural failures of Mosquitos in the Far East, but it is possible they were blamed on the glues partially because nobody in charge wanted to suggest to aircrew that they were riding in badly-manufactured machines. In any case, the casein glues were completely replaced by synthetics, and the problem was declared solved.
Except for the flaps, which were made of fabric over wood frames, the framework for the flight control surfaces was made of light alloy, with metal skinning on the ailerons, fabric on the tail surface, and wood on the flaps."
Personally I believe the aluminum construction was better. In time Mosquitoes did rot and come apart (like any other wood aircraft). Wood repairs are also critical and usually you needed a clean surrounding to make these repairs. Aluminum, while being somewhat time consuming doesn't require the skill level like wood structures.
Hope this helps....