Hi,
Been looking for info on Junkers J-1 in the forum. Could have missed 'em.
Is there any stat made for this plane and which movement cards it uses?
I have an old Reviresco and was hoping to bring it into service.
Thanks.
Rafa
Junkers J-1
Hi,
Been looking for info on Junkers J-1 in the forum. Could have missed 'em.
Is there any stat made for this plane and which movement cards it uses?
I have an old Reviresco and was hoping to bring it into service.
Thanks.
Rafa
[Edit: Card redone to newer stats]
For information on planes, please consult this post: WGS Unofficial aircraft list Version 1.0
PS: This thread should really have started in this section: WWI Aircraft stats
Last edited by OldGuy59; 12-22-2019 at 21:58.
Mike
"Flying is learning to throw yourself at the ground and miss" Douglas Adams
"Wings of Glory won't skin your elbows and knees while practicing." OldGuy59
20 Damage Points
That's one sturdy bird!
Might have to add to my hangar ...
Mike; That sub forum is for the unofficial aircraft committee. It's not open to the general members.Originally Posted by OldGuy59
Karl
It is impossible for a man to begin to learn what he thinks he knows. -- Epictetus
Or visible even !
The stats in the 2016 unofficial stats show it as:
Junkers J.I; Germany 18/Q1 - 18/Q4; Manoeuvre deck Y; Gun -/B; Health 20; Alt 9; Climb rate 8
(Though the steep sideslips in the G* deck may be appropriate.)
Deck Y (17) – Slow speed - 2.9cm - (arrow is 40% of the card)
3 straight
3 right turn
3 left turn
2 stall - steep
2 right sideslip
2 left sideslip
1 climb
1 dive
You can use the Albatros C.III deck for it Rafa, it would make an ideal target ! Low & slow.
Looks very nice by the way.
PS - look here in the files for WW1 aircraft stats & Manoeuvre deck info: https://www.wingsofwar.org/forums/do...p?do=cat&id=59
Last edited by flash; 12-22-2019 at 08:27.
Sapiens qui vigilat "He is wise who watches"
From the Wikipedia entry on the Junkers J-1:20 Damage Points
That's one sturdy bird!
Might have to add to my hangar ...
An array of 42 cm (17 in) wide sheet steel panels, reinforced in key load-bearing areas by additional sheets of corrugated steel, were wrapped around the fuselage to form its external covering. This arrangement was the first use of an all-metal stressed-skin construction.[3] The single vertical tail surface was of an "all-flying" design, with no fixed fin, and the entire tail surface structure and covering also consisted of formed sheet steel, much like the wings. The angle of incidence of the stabilizer could be adjusted on the ground.
--------------------------------------------------
Explains just why 20 points is justified.
Many thanks everyone for the quick reply. The Junk is flying soon! ��
Oh... the stats state "gun - /B"
Does it mean no forward firing gun?
A nice target indeed.
From Wiki
The Junkers J.I (manufacturer's name J 4) was a German "J-class" armored sesquiplane of World War I, developed for low-level ground attack, observation and army cooperation.
I guess it's not a fighter... suitable for strafing and recon scenarios only. Strafing without thefrontal gun is... strange
There are sources which mention some of these planes fitted with a single forward firing gun, twin forward firing guns or twin guns firing downwards through the floor at an angle for trench strafing. The latter experiment was not successful because they were so difficult to aim.
Sam, you're quoting on the Junkers J 1 - a monoplane, not the J.I the sesquiplane, another flying tank ! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Junkers_J.I
Sapiens qui vigilat "He is wise who watches"
Grey and Thetford says 2 forward guns, but there may be confusion with the CL.I.
IIRC, the Windsock book mentions a single forward gun, and that the twin downward firing guns didn't work. It was definitely a slow plane with a long takeoff length, so the weight of forward guns would have been a burden. I have mine equipped with a single forward gun.
Karl
It is impossible for a man to begin to learn what he thinks he knows. -- Epictetus
Ah, yes, indeed. So easily confused, the Junkers J 1 and the Junkers J 4/J 1.
To quote the entry on Junkers Flugzeug und Motorenwerke:
The Junkers firm's early aircraft were identified by the letter J for Junkers followed by an Arabic type number. From 1919 they introduced an additional sales designation using the same number but prefixed by a letter indicating the role of the aircraft:
(snip)
Just once, the same number was used to identify two different completed types. This pair was the T 23 and G23, both also known as J 23.
During World War I, machines in service used the regular Idflieg aircraft designation system to specify their design's purpose, also promoted by the Flugzeugmeisterei (Air Ministry), again a letter number system indicating role
(snip)
The best known and most confusing example is the Junkers J 4 armored-fuselage, all-metal sesquiplane, known to the military as the Junkers J.I.
This Russian site (pardon the translation) says:
Like other J-class aircraft, the Junkers J.I was not equipped with synchronised machine guns, the machine was not fast enough and manoeuvrable for active air combat, and ground targets from diving due to the low flight altitude and lack of manoeuvrability were impossible.From that it seems to me additional guns were at best an experiment on a single airframe rather than the norm so one for an Ares release methinks !In addition, an airplane (J.816 / 17) experimented with installing a battery in the fuselage floor with forward-down barrels at an angle of 45 ° from two LMG 08/15 Spandau machine guns for firing at ground targets. In January 1918, the Becker 20 mm cannon was also mounted on an Albatros JI-type bracket, as were the additional machine guns; the Junkers cannon remained at the experimental level.
Sapiens qui vigilat "He is wise who watches"
Don't give them ideas, Dave.
Good point Pete
Sapiens qui vigilat "He is wise who watches"
According to Windsock Datafile 39: Junkers J.I by Peter Grosz:
"Forward-firing armament was not installed. In January 1918, work was underway to install a battery of two guns in the floor of the observer's cockpit (J816/17) which necessitated the removal of the camera installation. The gun battery, pioneered by the Austro-Hungarian air service, had the guns fixed at a 45 degree angle, firing forward. ... Both the angled machine gun and the Becker cannon installation remained experimental."
And in German Armored Warplanes of WWI by Herris:
"The armament specified (for the J-class) was a flexible machine gun for the observer and, initially, a fixed machine gun for the pilot. However, Idflieg considered armored aircraft too slow and cumbersome to successfully attack enemy aircraft with the forward-firing gun. Furthermore, to attack ground targets the pilot would have to go into a shallow dive, which Idflieg considered too dangerous for such ponderous airplanes at low altitude. Therefore the requirement for a forward-firing machine gun was eliminated before any J-types were built, thus saving weight, an important consideration due to the heavy armor."
Now, IMHO, I think we frequently misunderstand the mission of these J-class planes. As mentioned above, they weren't all that heavily armed.. I don't see any mention of provision for small bomb or grenade racks on the J.I, like you might expect on a CL-class plane. I think they were more commonly used for contact patrol and low-level reconnaissance than for direct ground attack. (Note the mention of a camera above.) While plenty of planes can fly over a target at 3000m and take pictures, how many can fly over enemy territory at 100m and come back in one piece?
Last edited by ReducedAirFact; 12-22-2019 at 10:37.
They were also used to resupply isolated ground units I read somewhere - an interesting game scenario. As Karl said previously you may need some house rule to cope with the armour.
Sapiens qui vigilat "He is wise who watches"
The armour is represented in the 20 Damage Points but I have thought that maybe the plane should also be considered immune to damage from small arms (pistols, rifles and machine guns) fired from the ground.
Considering that almost all aircraft weapons were rifle-calibre machine guns, it makes for a pretty one-sided game, if you go this route.
Mike
"Flying is learning to throw yourself at the ground and miss" Douglas Adams
"Wings of Glory won't skin your elbows and knees while practicing." OldGuy59
You overlooked the words "fired from the ground", Mike.
I'm not seeing the difference? I noted above the '100m' above the ground. That's closer than most air-to-air engagements. Perhaps we aren't considering the same things?You overlooked the words "fired from the ground", Mike.
There were armored plates added to the floor (lower fuselage) and engine cowlings of some German ground attack planes to protect them from ground fire. If that is what you're thinking of, I'd think reducing damage to the plane should be considered.
PS: Hmmm... The Sopwith Salamander was the first RAF ground attack plane designed with an armored bottom? And it wasn't put into operational use during WWI?
Last edited by OldGuy59; 12-22-2019 at 21:12.
Mike
"Flying is learning to throw yourself at the ground and miss" Douglas Adams
"Wings of Glory won't skin your elbows and knees while practicing." OldGuy59
Card in Post #2 above redone with updated stats.
Mike
"Flying is learning to throw yourself at the ground and miss" Douglas Adams
"Wings of Glory won't skin your elbows and knees while practicing." OldGuy59
Thanks!
Thanks Mike!
I was about to attempt an updated card myself.
I laugh in the face of danger - then I hide until it goes away!
Thanks to everyone who contributed to the discussion, giving references and quotes from sources.
The Official Unofficial Aircraft Stats committee makes no claim to perfection. In this particular case, we had read and considered all the sources listed, plus a few more. However, we aren't perfect, we miss some, and the more others can contribute, the better the stats will be.
Moreover, we are open to discussion on what the raw data actually means. No Junkers J1 was ever lost to combat causes, and this as much as any of the theoretical data about metal construction contributed to the decision to give it such an outrageous number of damage points. Others may reasonably argue that we got it wrong, too many or too few, and if there are any evidence supported arguments then we'd love to hear them. We may not agree, but we will listen, and thank you for your contribution, even if we don't end up changing our decision.
Thanks.
There's also gameplay. The J1 seems fun and challenging to play - low, slow and without a forward gun. Balances the armor i think. I'll field it with my son's Central Powers and use it for target practice :-)
Thanks to the committee for making it possible to field these planes.
... and wishing ever one a Merry Christmas!
Last edited by 50cal; 12-23-2019 at 18:59.
Just saw this and I was looking for a list like this. I have the WWII list. This is a great addition.
Thanks
The WWI list actually came first. Wayyyy back when, before 3D printing, there were a handful of resin and white metal kits of WWI aircraft. No big deal to come up with a dozen sets of stats, and as Nexus no longer was producing aircraft models, and no sign of a new manufacturer, this helped keep the game alive.
Then Ares took up the baton, and 3D printing started. Quickly a dozen became dozens, then, over time, hundreds... many of the unofficial sets of stats were replaced as new, official models became available. We got all of them very close, and many exact - we are in contact with the game designer, and he uses us as a research resource and for peer review.
Andrea is a crackerjack military historian, with a vast research library, as well as being on my list of top half dozen game designers. There's far more behind the models than meets the eye.
Zoe you and all the others that have put the time and effort onto these list have done a fantastic job. It is very much appreciated.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks