I feel that your 2nd supervisor has good attitude and he was trying to help you..., at least he never misses a meeting.
Unfortunately, he is still inexperienced, but we need not expect a professor to know 'everything' about 'everything'.

Meanwhile, you could email some of the authors of the papers to clarify some frameworks or any doubts. Better still, start preparing for a conference paper soon. You may get feedback from some famous researchers in conference too. The second sup may not question you later when you have the support from first sup and other experts.

It is not uncommon that a PhD supervisor is recruited because of 'strong networking' rather than impressive publications.
Anyway, this so-called incompetent supervisor could be reading your message in this forum as it may not be difficult to identify you who is into "human computer interaction with psychology and education technology".

However, it may not be uncommon for a professor to have knowledge in these three areas.
It is probably common nowadays to utilize education technology to enhance learning.

One professor told me that a PhD-er who could not publish at least two papers in high impact journal are weak candidates.
So, those PhD-ers who pass without publications could be considered to be very weak by these professors. My point is: You have to be very careful. Your second supervisor could be using another adjective for his PhD-er.

My suggestion for you is to get more support from your first supervisor.
Next, probe for more details whenever you interact with your second supervisor.
Thirdly, thank him with his advice in email. That is, you have documentation of his incompetent advice in email....

I happen to know of a PhD student who insisted to submit the thesis early...
The supervisor agreed but she told the external examiner that she had difficulty understanding this thesis.

There could be ethical issues when there is such communication between the supervisor and external examiner.
However, this student passed the viva with minor revision. But it is a risk.

I remember you. Your situation is special. Your supervisor claimed in a paper that she was the main author and you only contributed by performing the experiment.

It seems that your supervisor may not help you in getting an academic job.
However, even PhD candidates who have the support of supervisor applied for more than 60 jobs.

You may also share that the revision is mainly introduction.
No problem with methodology and results...
Congrats! Dr Bragon!

Probably they won't demand you to provide the viva detail during interview.
If they really ask, you may honestly tell them that it was a 'borderline minor', and emphasize that there is no re-viva.
They should be happy to know that you need not apply leave for viva.

Meanwhile, quickly complete the revisions with rigour!

Are you absolutely sure? R&R?

This is the fault of your supervisor! You have cited the examiner's papers etc...
It is a rule of the PhD game.

Another interesting article: Science PhD: New Track to Unemployment
http://www.the-american-interest.com/blog/2013/02/26/science-phd-new-track-to-unemployment/

There are a few positive things for me. For example, publications in SCI and SSCI journals, as well as grants to attend overseas conference and awards for papers presented...

However, isn't it possible that sharing positive things may also be perceived negatively? :-(

It seems that the outcome was based on an impression or insufficient communication.
These "8 months of thesis amendment" really seem crazy as they could have been done within 2 to 3 weeks.

Perhaps the moral of the story is three papers published may not help in viva.
Anyway, this is a road less travelled. Good luck! Dr Brit27.

The question could be "postdoc with a HOD or Editor of a journal?"
I'm not joking.

If I remember correctly, Einstein was in similar situations for some years.
He was probably providing private tuition service...

Just a few more ideas:

1. The problem could also be related to the recruitment process of an academic. It is sometimes possible that a professor was recruited through connection or has "good networking"; not about his technical knowledge.

2. Alternatively, it was also the person who recruited your supervisor or the one who assigned you the supervisor that caused you having these difficulties. However, your supervisor was also under pressure to publish papers and to perform other duties assigned by the HOD.

3. A professor may have so much workload that supervision duty is not of higher priority for him to survive. In fact, your supervisor could be under pressure from the HOD before he left. Hope you will realize that the situation may be more complicated than it seems.