They were often matched up with one or 2 multi seat aircraft to provide communications/navigation support.
This was not unique to the Japanese. Many of the fighter ferry flights to Malta had one or two multi seat aircraft providing the same support to the single seat fighters.
It might have been done by US fighter units on occasion.
If you are sending out planes on scout/ recon/ search missions you want a high likelihood that EACH plane will be able to succeed in it's function.
yes, sending combined flights with a navigation aircraft with single seat fighters was very common in many if not all Theaters. I know for sure it was done all over the Med, in the South Pacific, in China, and in Alaska. This was one of the many roles where the Hudson and later Ventura really shined. For whatever reason they were deemed optimal in this role and they routinely accompanied flights of P-40s, F4Fs, P-38s, Spitfire VIII, or Corsairs and other single engined types (including SBDs sometimes). Beaufighters were also used this way sometimes.
There is a kind of darkly amusing episode involving Clive Caldwell, in the Pacific he was with a small flight of (two or three IIRC) Spitfire Mk VIII, and a Beaufighter was flying with them, which he assumed was doing navigation. About an hour into the flight they hit weather and he was informed by the Beaufighter crew that they had not been navigating and had no idea where they were. He got so angry he charged his guns and moved into position to shoot down the Beaufighter. Lucky for everybody they soon sighted an island and found a place to land. I imagine things were a little tense on base after that.
On the Japanese side, recon flights of say, a half dozen A6Ms and one G4M were also very common in New Guinea according to the operational histories I've been reading recently. The Japanese bomber types, by the end of 1942, were becoming more vulnerable (although not as quickly or as thoroughly as you might think) and were increasingly deemed as needing escort, though they still went out by themselves too. Sometimes one flight of six or nine A6M were sent out and could be summoned via radio (apparently) to assist patrolling G4M, H6K or other types.
Combining multiple types of aircraft in a single patrol or scout mission was not unusual by any means. So long as they could fly at the same altitude and speed. Only a few types routinely went out on solo missions, for the Japanese that would be the Ki-46 and some of the older types. I know they were using the Ki-15 this way as well for a while in the Pacific. For the Americans pretty much flying boats, cruiser launched seaplanes and land based bombers (Hudson, B-17, B-24, B-25) were more typical. Sometimes P-40s and Wildcats went out solo as well. The AVG had a P-43 they used as a recon plane. The Brits had the Beaufighter, but they also used recon Spits and Hurrcanes for Tac-R missions. Loss rates were very high!
the passage is a also a bit selective.
. Power of the transmitter was 8 to 10 watts in voice mode and 30 watts in telegraph mode, called CW for 'continuous wave'. In 'At Dawn We Slept' Gordon Prange relates that one of the problems encountered in the IJN's preparation for Pearl Harbor was that they had never operated fighters farther than 90 miles from their carriers. 50 miles was the practical limit of utility of the voice radios under optimum conditions. Since the fighters would be venturing around 250 miles outbound on the mission
rule of thumb was telegraph mode was worth 3 times what voice mode was.
50 miles was the practical limit. Not average limit, or sure limit but not max limit either. It would allow for some repeated attempts. It was also not the limit in either optimum conditions or worsts conditions. But the Japanese were going to try for 5 times the range, not 3 times.
I think they did it, and that was definitely not the only time. I certainly wasn't being selective, it points out the obvious and you were wrong, which probably rubs you the wrong way. That ain't my problem.
Are the fighters supposed to report back to the carrier or did the multi seat aircraft relay the messages?
Was the greater range capacity (which is not spelled out in the passage) to help inure that aircraft that had been separated in combat had a larger margin of error to contact the carriers on the return flight?
Please note that the passage does say they operated, at least once, about 40 miles beyond radio range. They may not have been planning for full radio coverage. Just a larger are of the flight to be in contact to provide guidance for off course aircraft.
I think they did use radios for navigation / direction finding without a doubt. But it's also pretty clear they were communicating as well. And frankly, sending a short morse message isn't as challenging on a technical level as coordinating voice communication among maneuvering fighters, IMO.
