From the History of war website…

So looks like it was designed as a fighter Rob !

I think a single quote from a single website is a long way off ‘proof’, but it is actually quite possible that it was lumped under ‘fighter’ as it couldn’t really be called a Bomber or Seaplane or Transport. But within that it (Defiant) was certainly intended as a Bomber Destroyer, never a dogfighter.

Design background

In internet articles, magazine articles and books the one phrase that is used again and again about the Roc is that it was designed to “deliver a broadside” to an enemy aircraft. The author then usually goes on to ridicule the concept and make disparaging comparisons with three-masted sailing ships. The Roc, assuming it could catch up with its prey, would be much more likely to approach from below and try to bring its target down with no-allowance shooting; firing ahead and over the top of the pilot. The tactic of no-allowance shooting was very much at the heart of the philosophy behind the Roc and Defiant and yet it is hardly ever mentioned in descriptions of both aircraft, and the few articles available today on this subject only serve to obfuscate the principles behind it.

No Allowance Shooting described here

http://freespace.virgin.net/john.dell/Nodeflect.htm

Moggy