Defiant: The Untold Story of the Battle of Britain

After 10 years of primary research on the Battle of Britain (MA) and night air defence (MA & PhD) I consider the Defiant was outclassed as a day fighter, and suffered from the same drawbacks as other visually intercepting (i.e. no radar) night fighters, so I was interested to see what compelling arguments would be presented. Unfortunately, such analysis will have to wait for a future book, as this one is littered with inaccuracies and contradictions, the product of superficial research and mistaken assumptions leading to faulty conclusions, as well as the misprints and spelling mistakes pointed out by previous reviewers.The author has failed to conduct a systematic survey of the subject matter, and does not seem able to decide what the book is about. He seems obsessed with where aircrew were educated, possibly a legacy from his book on public schools. Verkaik is convinced that the majority of RAF fighters during the 1930s were 2-seaters. This suggests that his understanding of air power and the history of aviation is flawed - there is a complete lack of understanding about the principles of combat, aircraft design and development, service evaluation and the establishment of tactical doctrine.As Seb Ritchie has demonstrated, the pace of technological change accelerated in the 1930s which meant as new aircraft (Spitfire & Hurricane) entered service it took an extended period of time before the RAF worked out how to use them. The Defiant 'turret fighter' was intended for use against unescorted enemy bombers, but the fall of France brought Luftwaffe fighters into range and invalidated the concept.The operational history is exaggerated, and combat results inflated (especially the events over Dunkirk on 29 May 1940), with no attempt to resolve the true numbers. Such numbers are repeated glibly on subsequent pages, without providing any historical evidence for them. Verkaik complains that Defiant losses in the Battle of Britain were due to them being unescorted, or based too far forward, and that Dowding & Park should have prevented this. He fails to understand the RAF Command and Control system, and that the limited experience of the Defiant squadrons could not dictate tactical doctrine for an entire Command.In conclusion, just in case you haven't picked up on it, I wasn't impressed with this rather strange, fatally flawed book. I am open to my opinions on the Defiant being challenged, but this is not the book that is going to do it.

The Boulton Paul Defiant has long fascinated aviation historians, a new 'wonder fighter' that entered service with the RAF only months before the Battle of Britain.The Defiant was built around a First World War aerial fighting tactic and championed by senior officers who had themselves fought in that war.The whole story of the type is fascinating, but this book only tells half of it, ending in 1940!Much of the book details the evolution of the principles of turret fighters in the late 1930s, with little or no groundbreaking facts or new theories. Students of the subject will no doubt wince (or chuckle) over the great many 'silly mistakes' which so easily could have picked up before publication.Did I learn anything new about the Defiant or experience what it would have been like to operate one? Sadly no.If you study this period in our history, the air war in particular, you will find little here to benefit you, but if you like books on aeroplanes and have never heard of the Boulton Paul Defiant, it's probably a very good place to start!

At long last I thought there would be a definitive book on the development and service history of the Defiant, the RAF's "forgotten" fighter. Sadly no. Although this book is very readable, the problems which were encountered during the aircraft's development are only referred to briefly and not discussed in depth and how these problems were resolved. As stated by another reviewer, the book is plagued with misprints and spelling mistakes, all of which detract from the text. The introduction of the Hurricane and Spitfire into service are mentioned as well but only by month, not the year, and these appear to be at odds with the chronological sequence of events regarding the introduction of the Defiant into squadron service.Despite these, the book is a tribute to very brave men who deserve to be recognised .

I awaited this book with eagerness; having lived on the doorstep of where they were built in Pendeford, Wolverhampton, and even through the Battle of Britain books of my childhood I looked for the sections on the BP Defiant with much gusto.There are many errors in the book; perhaps because it is not written by a recognised aviation expert; however, I did have to constantly check information with other sources to ensure the accuracy of facts that I had either forgotten or do not remember coming across before. I was thus happy with the few, little nuggets of new information that was presented.Overview: This is not a technical description; so if your looking for technical details you will be very disappointed. Is it an operational history - No not quite, it deals largely with 264 and 151 squadrons; and fragments of others but not all units of the Defiant. Book about Battle of Britain - Yes to a point, indeed some items will be a reminder to some readers of the importance of the "3 primary fighters" of the RAF at that time; and how the Defiant was at Dunkirk, and over the Channel.The Myths are dealt with, which is good (and correctly); and the fact that the Air Ministry and even Dowding was anti-Defiant at the beginning and up to the Battle of Britain; but Dowding had no choice but use and sacrifice the pilots and gunners to stave of the Luftwaffe because there were just not enough Hurricanes or Spitfires (the former due to heavy losses with the BEF in France/Belgium)The Defiant still needs a well written book that satisfies all.

It is very difficult to write review of this book. Verkaik ancestry was fighter pilot and that was probably the case in mishandling some assessment part of this book. The author is not historian and you can tell it by many examples of unfinished research or lack of knowledge. Verkaik tried, delivering a lot of information from archives and memoirs, but at the end he failed as a historian. Defiant gunners and pilots overclaimed heavily and he just accepted their claims. That is of course unacceptable for any historian. If you dont know anything about Defiant aeroplane, you will find this book fascinating, but if you do, its a little bit controversial work in its findings. Also, at the beggining 50+ pages are totaly unneccesary out of topic, unfortunately. Those should be focused solely on Defiant, not antyhing else. I could give Verkaik 2,5 to 3 stars for huge effort and delivery, but D for a historian.