In a work of this size a few mistakes were, sadly, inevitable. These are the ones spotted so far.

Second impression

p85Mention is made of the USAF U-2 shot down over Russia in 1960. Strictly speaking it was a joint CIA/USAF mission.

Most of the errata listed below apply only to the first print run/impression of the book, which is now sold out. All of these items have been corrected in the second impression (identifiable by a slight change in the cover image - the first impression shows a single black aerial ahead of the windscreen on the TSR2; subsequent impressions have replaced this with missile warning receiver fairings on either side of the nose, and the head up display generator is also now visible on the cockpit coaming).

First impression

p4The gremlins really did a job on the Acknowledgements I'm afraid. "Keith Elmslie" should read "Keith Emslie". Apologies to Keith's family for this error. Keith was a mine of information about the wind tunnel testing of the TSR2 and was very helpful in putting together the chapter on the design of the aircraft; I am greatly saddened that he never got the opportunity to see the final book. An obituary can be found here. Also, Albert Kitchener should be Albert Kitchenside (sorry Kitch!) and John Fulton should be John Pulford (sorry John!).
p82"(T2-2)" does not belong in the illustration caption.
p85Mention is made of the USAF U-2 shot down over Russia in 1960. Strictly speaking it was a joint CIA/USAF mission.
p88Illustration - the WE177 configurations shows the bombs mounted horizontally in the weapons bay; in fact they would have been mounted in a 1° nose down attitude.
p114At bottom left, where XR220's cameras are referred to, this should read " well as camera fairings on the intakes for pylon and store flutter monitoring which would also suit it for its reserve role as a backup for XR224..."
p121Top photograph - this photo was of the crew boarding for flight 1, rather than the taxi run earlier in the day.
p138Top photograph - caption explains that the Esk estuary is in the background - well, it would be, if it hadn't been cropped off the bottom of the photo! Click here for the uncropped photo.
p140Top photograph - for "late 1965" read "late 1964".
p241On the subject of maximum conventional bomb load rising to 16 x 1,000 lb bombs - further research since the book was completed has found no evidence that BAC were actually carrying out any serious work towards this despite some assumptions within the RAF that the stronger pylons being designed by the Royal Aircraft Establishment for Martel carriage would be up it; this now appears to have been a bit of wishful thinking rather than a concerted plan to up the bomb load any further (though the higher bomb load was used in the RAF's internal reports comparing TSR2 with TFX). As the big pylons and Martel carriage were cancelled in the last minute cost cutting anyway, it's a moot point. This issue also effects the lower photograph caption on p244 and the illustration on p245.
p245Illustration - as well as the comments above regarding maximum conventional bomb load, this illustration incorrectly depicts a maximum of one WE.177B internally; this of course should be two, side by side as shown in photographs earlier in the chapter. Click here for a corrected illustration
p246Napalm carriage - research since the book was completed has found that BAC had been authorised to proceed with design work on napalm carriage as late as 2nd March 1965.
p253Photo caption - insert "(a T.4 is seen here)" after "T.5".
p267Not an error, but an amplification: on French "Mirage Vs" - while the source material does state "V", it is probably that the writer, the Minister of Aviation (Peter Thorneycroft), was actually referring to the Mirage IIIV (a VTOL Mirage III variant then under development, and a competitor to the P.1154 - what became known as the Mirage V or 5 was not even on the drawing board in 1962 and was basically a simplified Mirage III produced, initially, for the Israelis).
p283Photo caption - this is XR226's fuselage being cut up at Weybridge, not Samlesbury.