A nice looking machine compared with the AOP9 but the 9 was a good aircraft for its role and I have no doubt that the 2/45 would have been also. Unfortunately as it never went into service we shall never know.
Think that a little bit more development was needed for the 2/45 as it seemed through trials to be unsuitable for use:
Trials quickly showed that Auster’s contender for the A2/45 specifications had some very pecuilar habits. It was a tandem seater in which the rear observer faced aft. The overall silhouette was a distinct breakaway from the traditional Auster and owed a lot, to the wartime Fi.156 Storch.
Apart from a 300 yard take-off, the flap handling was most odd. Outsized flaps were wound down by a handwheel at the pilot’s left hand. These flaps, when down, produced a very high drag coupled with a strong downwash on the tailplane.
These combined affects brought the aircraft’s nose up sharply as flap was applied and during the subsequent approach to land, the stick had to be held fully forward against the instrument panel. A three point landing was made by releasing the forward pressure on the stick. The climax of the trials came when, with a rear observer providing maximum aft C of G, the luckless pilot found that a flapped landing was impossible and in the attempt neatly removed the starboard undercarriage leg.
During subsequent investigation it was disclosed that Boscombe Down had forgotten to tell anyone that they considered the aircraft unsafe in this configuration. None of the A2/45 series were accepted.
Excerpt from article first published in the ‘Journal of Army Aviation’ 1966.
And as you quite rightly said the AOP9 was a superb aircraft for the role until the helicopter took over.
Best wishes,
Martin
Sign In
