IJN Specification 10-Shi (F1, Reconnaissance Seaplane, 1934)

blackkite

blackkite

Don't laugh, don't cry, don't even curse, but.....
Joined
31 May 2007
Messages
8,597
Reaction score
6,849
Hi Aichi F1A. Competitor of Mitsubishi F1M.
There was a sea plane version and a land base plane version of F1A.
 

Attachments

  • AICHI_F1A_3_SIDE_DRAWING_2.jpg
    AICHI_F1A_3_SIDE_DRAWING_2.jpg
    112.7 KB · Views: 520
  • MITSUBISHI F1M.jpg
    MITSUBISHI F1M.jpg
    55.3 KB · Views: 138
  • F1M prototype.jpg
    F1M prototype.jpg
    49.1 KB · Views: 116
  • r48-7.jpg
    r48-7.jpg
    163.8 KB · Views: 110
  • Mitsubishi F1M.jpg
    Mitsubishi F1M.jpg
    32.2 KB · Views: 142
  • F1M2.jpg
    F1M2.jpg
    51.1 KB · Views: 446
  • LAND BASE F1A.jpg
    LAND BASE F1A.jpg
    28.1 KB · Views: 446
  • Aichi F1A land base version.jpg
    Aichi F1A land base version.jpg
    40.1 KB · Views: 468
  • F1A1.jpg
    F1A1.jpg
    48.5 KB · Views: 479
More Aichi AB-13 (F1A1):
 

Attachments

  • AB-13 = F1A1.jpg
    AB-13 = F1A1.jpg
    46.2 KB · Views: 101
  • AB-13.jpg
    AB-13.jpg
    68.9 KB · Views: 127
Anybody know if the IJN ever ordered for a successor gunnery spotting aircraft of the F1M Pete?
Something like F2M F2A F2K?
 
Tzoli said:
Anybody know if the IJN ever ordered for a successor gunnery spotting aircraft of the F1M Pete?
Something like F2M F2A F2K?
Click to expand...
Hmmm.....I can't find such a aircraft in 11-shi and 12-shi series aircraft.
 
Hi,

there is an old question ?

hesham said:
Hi,

when we discussed the Japanese projects pre-1945,we forgot many
projects in the period from 1920 to 1940.
For example,in 1934 for 10-Shi competition for two seat recce/observation
floatplane,the tenders were Aichi F1A1,Mitsubishi F1M1 and Kawanishi.
To Kawanishi,it supposed to be F1K1,and it was a project only,does anyone
know more info about it ?.
Click to expand...
 
Pacific ocean sea battle were mainly aircraft carrier to aircraft carrier battle.
So I believe the IJN did not plan F1M successor.
 
blackkite said:
Pacific ocean sea battle were mainly aircraft carrier to aircraft carrier battle.
So I believe the IJN did not plan F1M successor.
Click to expand...

Yes that was happened, but not planned, IJN wanted a decisive battle with it's battleships supported by the carriers, hence gunnery spotting aircraft was important.
 
Tzoli said:
blackkite said:
Pacific ocean sea battle were mainly aircraft carrier to aircraft carrier battle.
So I believe the IJN did not plan F1M successor.
Click to expand...

Yes that was happened, but not planned, IJN wanted a decisive battle with it's battleships supported by the carriers, hence gunnery spotting aircraft was important.
Click to expand...
HmHm........
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yGzJZ9D2IBw
 
Maybe any other further development of the Pete?
Like F1M3 or F1M4?
Maybe even a kamikaze variant?
 
Zero Observation Aircraft

Mitsubishi Zero observation aircraft was a two-seat surface observation aircraft of the Japan Navy. The Allies used to call her by the code name "Pete."

In naval battles, when the range of gunfire exceeded 30,000 meters, it became difficult to hit enemy ships because of the inaccuracy of projectile impact observations from the water. Therefore, the Navy thought of obtaining accurate bullet landing information by observing the impact from the air and giving it a hit bullet , and the observation aircraft was developed for that purpose

The observation aircraft did not require a long range, but they did need air combat capability to eliminate some enemy planes that interfered with them.

The Navy ordered three companies, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Aichi Aircraft, and Kawanishi Aircraft, to build prototypes of the observation aircraft under the name of "10 Experimental Surface Observation Aircraft". However, Kawanishi soon dropped out, and prototypes were made with Mitsubishi and Aichi.

The Mitsubishi prototype was superior to the Aichi prototype in air combat performance, but it was 60 km/h behind the Aichi prototype in speed. Mitsubishi thought that it would be at a disadvantage if this situation continued, so hurriedly built a prototype with a new engine, and the speed difference was reduced to 25 km/h.

As a result of the examination, the Mitsubishi aircraft was adopted, and in December 1940 it was formalized as the "Zero Type 1 Observation Aircraft Type 1".

In the Pacific War, there was not much surface combat, so it was rarely used as an observation aircraft, which was its original mission, and was mainly used for reconnaissance and anti-submarine patrols. In addition, he used his excellent air combat performance to engage in air battles with F4Fs and SBDs, and shot them down.

By 1943, 608 Zero observation aircraft had been produced, of which 528 were produced by Mitsubishi and 180 by Sasebo Arsenal.

In 1942, the name of this aircraft was changed to "Zero Type 11".
 
So Mitsubishi built two, different, aircraft types both called 'Zero' . . . you learn something new every day . . .

cheers,
Robin.
 
robunos said:
So Mitsubishi built two, different, aircraft types both called 'Zero' . . . you learn something new every day . . .
Click to expand...
"Zero" was never a name. The term "Type Zero" was simply allocated in Japanese to any aircraft submitted during the year 1937. You need to understand that the traditional Japanese calendar works quite differently from ours. For instance, a "Type 92 fighter" was a fighter submitted in 1932, a "Type 93 fighter" was a fighter submitted in 1933, etc. up to "Type 99" for 1939. "Type 0 (Zero)" was just a way to simplify designations instead of using "Type 100". Later wartime aircraft used the "Type 1" (1941), "Type 2" (1942) and perhaps "Type 3" and "Type 4" for 1943-1944 (though I've never encountered such designations).
So really, the confusion stems from the Western lack of knowledge of that system. The Mitsubishi A6M was NEVER called the "Zero", it was called the "Type 0 Carrier Fighter", which Americans transcribed as the "Zero Fighter", hence the nickname.
 
Last edited:
Stargazer said:
"Zero" was never a name. The term "Type Zero" was simply allocated in Japanese to any aircraft submitted during the year 1937. You need to understand that the traditional Japanese calendar works quite differently from ours. Years were numbered by era. The then-current era had begun in 1841. For instance, a "Type 92 fighter" was a fighter submitted in 1932, a "Type 93 fighter" was a fighter submitted in 1933, etc. up to "Type 99" for 1939. "Type 0 (Zero)" was just a way to simplify designations instead of using "Type 100". Later wartime aircraft used the "Type 1" (1941), "Type 2" (1942) and perhaps "Type 3" and "Type 4" for 1943-1944 (though I've never encountered such designations).
So really, the confusion stems from the Western lack of knowledge of that system. The Mitsubishi A6M was NEVER called the "Zero", it was called the "Type 0 Carrier Fighter", which Americans transcribed as the "Zero Fighter", hence the nickname.
Click to expand...

Sorry, my comment was meant tongue-in-cheek . . . I do understand the IJN aircraft designation system, and that it's 'Type Zero' and not just 'Zero'. It's just that 'Zero' is such an iconic name, and I didn't know that the F1M was also the Type Zero Observation Aircraft.

As an aside, I always wanted Mitsubishi Cars to produce a competitor to the Mazda MX-5 / Miata called the Zero. It would only be available in three colours, pale grey, green, or orange, all of course with a black bonnet . . .

cheers,
Robin.
 
robunos said:
I didn't know that the F1M was also the Type Zero Observation Aircraft.
Click to expand...
Aichi E13A ("Jake")= Type 0 Three-Seat Reconnaissance Seaplane
Kawanishi K8K= Type 0 Primary Trainer Seaplane
Mitsubishi A6M ("Zeke")= Type 0 Carrier Fighter
Mitsubishi F1M ("Pete")= Type 0 Observation Seaplane
Mitsubishi L4M ("Topsy")= Type 0 Transport
Yokosuka E14Y ("Glen")= Type 0 Small Reconnaissance Seaplane
 
My memory of the Japanese date system was a little rusty. Here is the exact concordance:

GregorianNationalShowaNavyArmyExp.
19202580————
19212581————
19222582—10——
19232583—11——
19242584—12——
19252585—13——
19262586114 (1)861-Shi
19272587215 (2)872-Shi
1928258833883-Shi
19292589489894-Shi
19302590590905-Shi
19312591691916-Shi
19322592792927-Shi
19332593893938-Shi
19342594994949-Shi
1935259510959510-Shi
1936259611969611-Shi
1937259712979712-Shi
1938259813989813-Shi
1939259914999914-Shi
1940260015010015-Shi
19412601161116-Shi
19422602172217-Shi
19432603183318-Shi
19442604194419-Shi
19452605205520-Shi
19462606216621-Shi
 
Last edited:
I believe that that the Type number used by the army was 100 - for year 1600 or 15-Shi. For example the Ki-49 Donryu "Helen" was the Type 100 bomber. The navy used 0 as in the Type 0 carrier fighter or A6M "Zero" and the Type 0 floatplane or E13A "Jake".
 
windswords said:
I believe that that the Type number used by the army was 100 - for year 1600 or 15-Shi. For example the Ki-49 Donryu "Helen" was the Type 100 bomber. The navy used 0 as in the Type 0 carrier fighter or A6M "Zero" and the Type 0 floatplane or E13A "Jake".
Click to expand...
Yeah, the Army used "100" while the Navy used "0". Somehow the two got jumbled in my chart, which I'm correcting right away.
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom