Comparison of the Gloster F.5/34 and the Mitsubishi A6M2.

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

The unit itself wasn't all that large, so it would have certainly been able to be used aboard an A6M or KI-43 without much of a penalty.
If Japanese philosophy at the time considered a steel plate behind the pilot, or a radio to be excessive additional weight, then I suspect that the addition of the gyro autopilot, with its extra instruments and hydraulic or pneumatic flight control actuators would be an absolute non-starter. Especially considering that the autopilot didn't contribute anything that a well disciplined pilot couldn't do himself already
 
Just because you have an auto pilot does not mean you can put your feet up and take a nap.
Agreed. Though I wonder how often that's been attempted successfully without a CFIT.

 
It would be interesting to see how many IJN and IJA planes (and pilots) were lost to fatigue during extended flights.
In addition to fuel starvation and fatigue, it must challenge your navigation skills. It's November 1943, and four A6Ms from Taiwan are sent to reinforce the garrison in Guam, departing for Orote field, located 1,700 miles away. At a cruising speed of 200 mph it's at least nine hours flying, meaning that a portion of the flight may be at night.



The flight looks simple enough, set your compass for SE and off you go. But the winds will push you around, its nothing but wide open sea, and it's also typhoon season, meaning visibility may be limited. And with a max ferry range of 1,900 miles, our IJN pilots do not have a ton of endurance for course deviations. I'd want a G3M Betty or similar with a dedicated navigator onboard to guide the way.
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread