Does anyone have any information or research on the effectiveness of the 3x5 mirror compared with the 2x3 mirror?
It would certainly seem that the larger mirror, the more light you can send downrange . .does it translate into a better chance of being sighted?
It's certainly brighter, and can be seen farther[1]. While I'd expect that to make it more noticable, I don't recall any straightup studies on comparative human perception at 5 miles or less (e.g., comparative apparent brightness, perceptibility to peripheral vision, etc.)
In 1905, the US Signal Corps was of the opinion that the difference
was perceptible to human vision at 5 mile range. I infer this from the advice in the 1905 US Signal Corps manual to mask down the (4.5"x4.5") heliograph mirror to 2"x2" at ranges of 5 miles or less to make it "less tiresome on the eyes of the reader".
[1]I've seen (naked-eye) the signal from a 3"x5" glass MIL-M-18371E at 44 miles, and a 2"x3" glass Coghlan's at 22 miles. Colonel Everest (who led the survey of India in the 1830s) figured on 10 miles of naked-eye range for each inch of side, which would be a bit less than 24 miles for the 2"x3" and 39 miles for the 3"x5".