I happened to run across Busa01 today in LW Blue. I asked him directly and he said yet these are A6M3s. I said I don't think they fit on the A6M5 plane in AH, more like the M2 than the M5.
He tried to tell me that the A6M3 is exactly identical to the A6M5. I tried to tell him it's not. He kept asking me if I had the TAIC reports that he had. I said it doesn't matter, when almost every resource in every book says they are different.
Not only are the weapons different:
M3: 2x 7mms; 100 rpg for the 20mm Type 99 Mk.1 cannons,
M5: 1x 7mm, 1x 13mm; only 125 rpg for the 20mm Type 99 Mk.2
But the performance is different:
M3: Clipped wingtips, increased roll, reduced turn, many pilots disliked the loss of lift and loss of manuverability in the M3, but otherwise was VERY similar to the A6M2.
M5: Noticably faster, redesigned engine, with thrust ejector stubs to increase top speed. Better climb rate, worse turn due to shorter (not clipped, just shorter rounded) wingspan.
Not the least of which is top speed/power:
M3: some claims say top speeds is around 10-15mph faster than the M2, of which most is probably from clipping the wings. Many list in the 330s the top speed at 6000m. In AH2 the A6M2 does about the upper 330s for max speed around 15k (5000m-ish).
M5: some claims say top speeds is around 20+ mph faster than the M3. Top speeds over 350mph, and in AH2 the top speed just barely breaks 350mph at 20k.
The timeline is different:
M3 was out halfway through 1942
M5 didn't start flight trials until mid '43, most were 1944 planes.
Busa's misrepresented the A6M3 as an A6M5b, I say. He says the M5 IS an M3. It clearly is not. His argument is all about how the planes were named and the classifications, but when I pointed out they were distinct, regardless of how they were named, he didn't see my point.
So I'll post from wiki, because from all I've ever read on the A6M3, it has all been along these lines:
The new Sakae was slightly heavier and somewhat longer due to the larger supercharger, which moved the center of gravity too far forward on the existing airframe. To correct for this the engine mountings were cut down by 8 inches (200 mm), moving the engine back towards the cockpit. This had the side effect of reducing the size of the main fuel tank (located to the rear of the engine) from 518 litres to 470 litres.
[snip]
On the downside, maneuverability was reduced, and range suffered due to both decreased lift and the smaller fuel tank. Pilots complained about both. The shorter range proved a significant limitation during the Solomons campaign of 1942.
The first Model 32 deliveries began in April 1942, but it remained on the lines only for a short time, with a run of 343 being built.
And then on the A6M3a model:
In order to correct the deficiencies of the Model 32, a new version with the Model 21's folding wings, new in-wing fuel tanks and attachments for a 330 litre drop tank under each wing were introduced. The internal fuel was thereby increased to 570 litres in this model, regaining all of the lost range.
As the airframe was reverted from the Model 32 and the engine remained the same, this version received the navy designation Model 22, while Mitsubishi called it the A6M3a. The new model started production in December, and 560 were eventually produced.
So basically the first A6M3 had some changes over the A6M2 already in service, but the second A6M3a reversed most of those changes. The few mph advantage gained by clipping the wings was gone, the range was the same as the M2. Essentially it closely matched the performance of AH2's in-game A6M2 model.
However, the A6M5s had increased wing strength (thicker skins as well) to withstand much higher diving speeds and stresses, had a changed cowl flap system, ejector stubs, shorter wingspans (increased roll rate), different wing cannons (belt fed, not drum fed), a higher top speed, new improvements like armored glass and fire fighting equipment in the fuel tanks. None of which the M3 shared.
A6M3 is NOT an A6M5b. I'm sorry. I don't think these skins belong. It's like putting P-51C skins on a P-51D, despite all the differences, because of the way somebody reads how the name is spelled.
