Now if you want something a bit different. I am thinking "CAS". Here's a history lesson for you. Nicknamed ‘the flying tank’ or ‘the moving van’, the Junkers J.I was the A-10 Thunderbolt of its day, designed to attack enemy ground targets while remaining almost impervious to ground fire. Despite being heavy, relatively slow and requiring a long take off and landing area, the J.I was popular with its crews due to the protection provided by its armoured front section and all metal airframe. Now you all may remember these next shots from the last 2009-10 GB. This is not my submission of course but it will help you see where I am going.

Junkers J.I kit review

J.I Build thread

I am just guessing that WNW will not bring Junk. J.I 816/17 out the twin parabellum set up in their pending super kits. So I chose to build it. This airframe was unique in that it was the only known prototype of an German Armoured Close Air Support Gunship.

The gun mounts are in the rear cockpit near the floor with the barrels of the Parabellums sticking out through holes cut the rear cockpit flooring area. There is also a framework for stacking the ammo drums to act as a feed for their belts to the breeches of the Parabellum 14 MGs. Note these were later found by my research to be Spandaus Maxims.

Images here are from the WNW site and were taken by Giorgio Dorat. They show the rear cockpit of the Junkers J.I in Milan.





The divider wall between the front and rear cockpit has been removed to accomidate the twin parabellum installation. At this angle they would have cut holes in the lower wing to clear action for the MG barrels and fretted gun jackets.

". . .This application of the term for military aircraft is more specific, describing an aircraft that circles its target instead of performing strafing runs. Such aircraft have their armament on one side harmonized to fire at the apex of an imaginary cone formed by the aircraft and the ground when performing a banking turn. . . Such gunships with an operational profile that relies on flying in circles can only operate with the guarantee of air superiority. . . "

Here is what is left of Junker J.I 816/17. The red arrows show the gun paths.

This sould be an interesting build Stephen , looking forward to your progress

I only hope that my build can measure up...

Thanks for the interesting history lesson, can hardly wait to bee continue

Hi Stephen

Wow – very interesting conversion and project – I am really looking forward to this one!

Best Regards

Mikael

Some interesting and important facts can be gleaned from the images above. These must be identified BEFORE you begin altering the plastic kit. For instance, note the opening for the right hand gun in the lower fuselage. The fuel tank that doubles as the pilot's chair has a wedge cut back at its lower rear facing edge. This is then repaired with a curved piece welded in place. This is for the right hand gun jacket clearance. The gun mounts are staggered because the ammo drums were stacked.

The spindle that holds the ammo drums in place has two different thickness'. This is so they could use drums with two different sized holes. Why would they do that? The ammo drums had to be different sized so not to get them mixed up if the gunner had to rearm in flight. Again why? Because there were two different types of ammo used.

1. Normal, exploding & tracer rounds for sighting in or hitting soft targets - human.
2. Armour piercing tracer rounds. The crew had to carry special documents so if brought down they might not be criminally charged for carrying them.

So it seems this aircraft was designed to hit both soft (human) & hard targets (Tanks and convoy vehicles).

The Central Powers developed their own variants of the tracer and the "LS" was in use by late 1916. LS stood for Leuchtspur - luminous tracing ammunition. An armour piercing tracer was introduced in early 1917, known as the PL - Panzer Leuchtspur. British tests showed this round to be almost as effective as a standard armour piercing round. As has been noted in tech manuals, as the tracing element (usually phosphorous) burned out, bullet weight changed and trajectory was affected. However, since most ground war combats were conducted nearly at pistol range, trajectory shift woulda been minimal.

Here we see the first element of the problematic issues that arose from this weapon. The German Parabellum guns would have to be more substantial and have longer & larger rounds to be effective. Standard Parabellums would not be able to carry ordinance that would be highly effective. The standard German round was 7.92mm. Even the British developed a Vickers mg balloon gun that used 11mm rounds.

In addition some German aircraft carried a normal round intended to explode with a puff of smoke after some 350-400 meters. The purpose was to give the pilot an idea of range rather than that the explosion was intended to do any damage since rifle caliber rounds were to small to carry a meaningful explosive charge.

German pilots had to get permission for every time they went up with incendiary ammo ( LS or PL)- therefore the pilot had a passport/booklet saying that he was allowed to use this ammo for a (balloon or vehicle) attack. His commander had to sign it verifying the use for every such mission.

Note I have come to the conclusion that Spandau Maxims were used instead of Parabellums. Thanks to Richard Alexander and Dave Watts.

Hi Stephen:

Thanks for the history lesson and the Rules of Engagement. Interesting stuff indeed.

Best

Mark

Hi Stephen  – a very fascinating piece of aviation history. Interesting to read that there were defined rules of engagemnt even in this most guesome conflict...

Mikael

Thank you all for your support.

Now the plan is coming together. I have just rec'd (Yesterday) my

1. WNW 1:32 Junkers J.I kit
2 @ Master 1:32 Spandau detail sets. As you may recall I reviewed these sets here.

Here we go again!

What happened to the one you already had started? Did I miss your build of that one?

Ok, Carl I know the drugs are messing with your head. The first one I built for the GB 2009-10 and some of the finished build images are posted at the beginning of this thread. The second kit I purchased is shown above with the Air Master Spandau gun sets include for the image. Thats the one I am doing here.

His back surgery has our man Carl a little groggy from the meds. folks.

I remember you starting the kit, but I can't remember seeing you finish it. I think even the medication can't explain this memory lapse folks. (I can explain the lapse... it was the )

I went back and foud your thread. Somehow, I missed most of the build, but I did make a comment after you had finished. So I do remember the build now. I guess there are just so many beautiful builds to be found here, it is hard for me to remember them all.

Greetings all;

I have started hacking away at the sprues for the kit. I have only one image to go on from the Datafile (p.24) and the serial # as Junk. J.I 816/17. Now you may recall my first build was 802/17 and the momocoloured uppersurface camouflage. (I was kind of hoping to do some lozenge but no such luck.) It appears that the 5 colour lozenge was on later machines.

So far I have done some basic work to the guns, engine and upper wing tips. As mentioned earlier I will use the Air Master Parabellum detail sets. Air Master heard of my build and offered these two additional sets. I note that with the arrival of these, the Parabellum 14 fretted tubes are in segments of vacuformed plastic. A very neat item that protects the tube from damage during shipping. Also the gun barrles and the other PE items are in compartments with in the same bag. Here you simply notch the edge of the bag and retrieve the parts you want to use without the problem of accidentally dropping the bag and loosing all the parts to the black hole beneath your workbench.

More clipping and snipping to come. I will be intrested to see if I have to modify the wing connections like the first kit I built.

Looking forward to seeing your progress Stephen . You mention on the wing correction , would this be the control surfaces being short with that gap which folks keep talking about , or did WNW fix this ? You lost me here .......

I will be interested to see how you approach the control cables, as I had to use my imagination after reviewing archival photos...

Greetings Terri;

The following is from the original first build I did.

I kept it simple in the first build. But in this second attempt I note the cable protection shields for 816/17 are in different locations.

Hi Stephen:

I read your review of your first kit, and the mods you did to the wing root to make them fit. I remember much discussion about it and some members didn't have that problem and attributed it to your location. Did you have adjust it this time, or did fit alright?

Best

Mark

Greetings Mark. This of course is one of my concerns. I took some images while I was assembling the wings and can report the top wing went together without a hitch. So I'll post those images a little later in the AM tomorrow. The lower wing goes together tonight.

While some paint dries I did some reading about early close air support ops. I like the fact that Wikipedia uses and image of 802/17 as its header image.


"World War I
The Junkers J.I, a First World War German Ground-attack aircraftThe use of aircraft in the close air support of ground forces dates back to World War I, the first significant use of aerial units in warfare. Air warfare, and indeed aviation itself, was still in its infancy - and the direct effect of rifle calibre machine guns and light bombs of World War I aircraft was very limited compared with the power of (for instance) a World War II fighter bomber, but close support aircraft still had a powerful psychological impact. The aircraft was a visible and personal enemy - unlike artillery - presenting a personal threat to enemy troops, while providing friendly forces assurance that their superiors were concerned about their situation. Most successful attacks of 1917 - 1918 included planning for co-ordination between aerial and ground units, although it was very hard at this early date to co-ordinate these attacks due to the primitive nature of air-to-ground radio communication. Though most airpower proponents sought independence from ground commanders and hence pushed the importance of interdiction and strategic bombing, they nonetheless recognised the need for close air support.

The British Royal Flying Corps and the U.S. Army Air Service saw "trench strafing" as another task for ordinary pursuit or fighter aircraft, such as the Airco DH.5 and Sopwith Camel, and did not seek out specialized units or equipment until the late months of the war. The first British specialised ground attack aircraft, the Sopwith Salamander, was too late to see action. Since pilots lacked specific training, and their aircraft were both slow and fragile, they suffered heavy casualties while flying low over enemy positions. For example, No. 80 Squadron RAF averaged 75% losses for the last 10 months of the war. The Germans and French, however, developed tactics, training, and formations for ground support. Germany also built specialist aircraft, culminating in the well armoured Junkers J.I. By spring 1918, Germany had 38 Schlachtstaffeln (battle squadrons, often abbreviated to Schlasta) trained to bomb and strafe below 200 feet in support of ground forces. . ."

Thanks Stephen , I miss understood what you where refering to . I should have know better and went back and had a peek for your last build . Thanks for taking the time on refreshing this girls mind .

No worries Terri, I am sure you have a lot on your mind. Model On!