Defiant: The Battle of Britain’s Forgotten Fighter

[Stig Jarlevik]

Unfortunately for the book I have grave doubts much new "revelations" will come out of it.

I really don't understand the sudden urge among British authors to try and re-write history and turn black into white.

The Defiant was not a good combat aircraft when there were enemy fighters around. It was not even designed to be that. Would it have been a success as an interceptor? Possibly, but its main drawback was its lack of speed and forward firing armament.

The two main squadrons using the aircraft in 1940 were both withdrawn from the BoB in late August/early September since their losses were simply too high.

Phil Listemann and Andy Thomas has done a very good job, in my mind, with their Allied Wings No 8 dealing with this early period. We have all the claims (86.66) and losses (38 including accidents) in detail. Can't see how a new book will change that. What we don't have is an objective view of how effective the 86 claims actually were. I believe the new BoB Archive (and Dunkirk) series by Simon Perry takes care of that.

So was the Defiant any good in its next role, as a nightfighter?
From what I remember it was doing OK, but again it certainly was surpassed very quickly by other more effective twin-engined aircraft and pretty much delegated to more "safer" areas of operation.

Would be interesting to hear someone elses views as well on this two-seat fighter.

Cheers
Stig