Battle of Britian

I was reading the thread and was thinking 'I can't believe no one has mentioned the Observer Corps yet', and someone beat me to it

Royal Observer Corps - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

To go back to the original question:

The RAF were prepared for such a battle, everything was in place, the radar, the wireless intercepts, the observer, corp, the co-ordination of information on the plotting tables, quality aircraft (i.e. better than the French used against the Lw), and professional senoir officers (well apart from the 'intrigue' with Leigh-mallory & Sholto Douglas). Moreover, they had already arranged a steady stream of replacement aircraft - straight of the production line, and the facilities to repair battle damaged planes.
The RAF's negatives - guns harmonised not close enough, 'fighting area' attacks, formation flying - too tight compared with the 'loose' Lw staffels, light armament - saved by the Dixon (De Wilde) incedinary round.

The Luftwaffe were the opposite.

The 'battle' was thrust upon the Luftwaffe, opinion was divided on the best course of the campaign. Little co-ordination between commanders, let alone the KM for Sealion targets. Inteligence of the RAF was faulty, and it was not corrected later when it was obvious it was wrong. Targeting priorities were curious - aircraft factories surely would have been hit early! Goering's interference - fighters must stay with the bombers - how are they going to shoot down RAF fighters! If RAF fighters ignored German fighter sweeps - surely they should have made the RAF pay for that by shooting up targets of opportunity on the ground e.g. trains - like the US fighters did in '44.
Advantages the Lw had - which eroded over time, skilled pilots, effective fighting formations - i.e. 'pair', canon armament.

They were not up to the task, they needed to achieve a 5 : 1 success rate, but it was the RAF who overall achieved 1.8 : 1.