Junkers "Unnamed" Ground Attack Aircraft

[Michel Van]

during 1944 Junkers company made R&D on a Ground Attack Aircraft with 2 pilots
powert with two Daimler Benz ZTL 109-007 double-bypass jet engines
Armed with one MK 103 30mmø cannon in the nose and two MG 151/20 20mmø cannon in both lower wing roots.

there is a intriguing detail on illustration and graphic of Junkers ground attack aircraft
they show engine nozzle with flaps, is this a early proposal in Thrust vectoring ?

some Picture by Gino Marcomini
http://www.luft46.com/gmart/gmjga.html

 

[Jemiba]

Can't see a clue, that it really was a movable flap. Looks more, as
if the exhaust nozzle was divided by the trailing edge. Vectoring the
exhaust downwards perhaps would have been helpful for take-off,
but probably would have damaged the main wheels, I think.

 

[Michel Van]

Can't see a clue, that it really was a movable flap. Looks more, as
if the exhaust nozzle was divided by the trailing edge. Vectoring the
exhaust downwards perhaps would have been helpful for take-off,
but probably would have damaged the main wheels, I think.

on some picture show that landing-gear cover "overlaid" the main wheels
If this is not a a movable flap, can this be a "Shield" to protect tail elevator flaps ?

 

[Justo Miranda]

Takeoff auxiliar flap

 

[Michel Van]

THX Justo Miranda

So it seem that is really a Takeoff auxiliar flap on Junkers Ground Attack Aircraft
and that German Aircraft industry was in 1944 ahead of there time, again...

 

[Justo Miranda]

Heavy nose

 

[Stargazer]

Two more pics of the Junkers ground attack project I have on my hard disk, hope they aren't already elsewhere on this forum:

 

[theponja]

Very interesting.

From luft46 site:

"The main landing gear retracted sideways into the fuselage, and the nose "gear" consisted of a retractable, pneumatically sprung skid"

Why an skid? Anyone has an idea?

 

[Michel Van]

i think because not much free space
the cockpit is for two person and a one MK 103 30mmø cannon in the nose
also the lack for material play also important role
see most german aircraft proposal in end of war had "landing skids" instead normal landing gear

 

[Basil]

Michael,

there is a very high probability this "Junkers project" is a fake. Never saw any hint at an original drawing or any German war time source which refers to such Junkers aircraft.

 

[Jemiba]

On the artists impression with the shark mouth, it rather looks like a single seat aircraft and
a single pilot, I think is all this cockpit could accommodate, alhough even a conventional nose-
wheel probably wouldn't be obstructed by the cockpit, but probably by the Mk 103. But so does
the skid ! Indeed in the Ar.234 or Me 163 a skid was used to save internal space and weight, but
here I cannot see any savings.
As Basil said, there's still no known original source for this type and it not even relates to the
configurations, which were tested in the windtunnel, as they are described and many of them
shown in Wolfgang Wagners book "Hugo Junkers - Pionier der Luftfahrt und seine Flugzeuge".
So, several doubts and no confirmation. I like to browse through the "Geheimprojekte der
Luftwaffe" series, but I cannot help the feeling, that its content sometimes is on the quite
speculative side. :-\

 

[Michel Van]

there is a very high probability this "Junkers project" is a fake.

I have also my doubt, because there must be a Junker EF or RLM designation for this project

As Basil said, there's still no known original source for this type and it not even relates to the
configurations, which were tested in the windtunnel, as they are described and many of them
shown in Wolfgang Wagners book "Hugo Junkers - Pionier der Luftfahrt und seine Flugzeuge".
So, several doubts and no confirmation. I like to browse through the "Geheimprojekte der
Luftwaffe" series, but I cannot help the feeling, that its content sometimes is on the quite
speculative side. :-\

i found this in "Luftwaffe Secret Projects: Ground Attack and Special Purpose Aircraft" by Dieter Herwig and Heinz Rode, Midland Publishing, german original at Motorbuch)
page 36 + 37

Junkers Nameless Ground Attack Project
mid 1941 the Development Department of Junkerswerke in Dessau commenced work
on o project for a Low-level and ground attack aircraft as a replacement for the Henschel Hs129.
The Project Study involved a rather plump-looking mid-wing aircraft with two wingroot-mounted turbojets.
According to works documentation, the turbojets were to have been two Daimler-Benz 109-107 ZTL...
...Besides this new type of turbojet, strong armour plating was to have been provide for the fuselage and powerplants.
As a Ground Attack Aircraft, it was to have been equipped with FOUR 30mm MK103 and FOUR 20mm MG151/20 Cannon.
The undercarriage Main-whells were to retract forward into the fuselage sides as shown in the three-view drawing.
As little experience had been gathered with nosewheels which for a long time had been rejected by RLM as "too American"
The long gestation period of turbojet development at Daimler-Benz that resulted in the fist Turbojet test-bed runs only march 1943
led to termination of the [Junkers] project...

as Data give Dieter Herwig
the Archives of the "Deutschen Studienbüro für Luftfahrt" in Frankfurt/Main (german Aviation study Centre)

so the first info in book form pop up in The classics "Die Deutsche Luftrüstung 1933-1944 Band 3" by Heinz J. Nowarra (1993 edition)
on Page 148 wat include the first drawing of the aircraft. (already post here)

Junkers Schlachtflugzeug project
Project from 1941
Armed with ONE MK 103 30mmø cannon in the nose and TWO MG 151/20 20mmø cannon in both lower wing roots.
Part of under fuselage , engine and ammunition depot are ironclad
engine two Jumo 004B.

the Aircraft is put between Junker EF 128 and EF 130, a clue for designation Junkers EF 129 ? ? ?

also is dissenting opinion between Nowarra and Dieter Herwig data
while Nowarra it more realistic, while Herwig data make this aircraft into Luftwaffe "A-10" overkill.

Heavy nose

 

[Pem Tech]

Two more pics of the Junkers ground attack project I have on my hard disk, hope they aren't already elsewhere on this forum:

Looks suspiciously modern, like an A-9A/A-10 hybrid...

 

[theponja]

Two more pics of the Junkers ground attack project I have on my hard disk, hope they aren't already elsewhere on this forum:

Looks suspiciously modern, like an A-9A/A-10 hybrid...

Nice pictures but a lot of german projects well documented looks very modern ever for today standards. The problem here is the lack of evidence of this project.
BTW I love this "project" looks cool B)

 

[Barb]

Yes, it looks neat. Some of the details are troublesome, though. I'm neither an aeronautical engineer nor a pilot, but I'd hate to try to rotate the airplane off the ground at take off with those main wheels so far behind the apparent center of gravity. I also wonder about ground handling with that front skid design. Maybe the Nazis would jack it up on some sort of trolley after roll out, but that's just one more bit of airfield equipment that might not be available while Jugs and Typhoons are shooting up the field and you want to get the planes into revetments.

 

[Michel Van]

in 1944 the trolley option was very popular at RLM
see Me 162 or Arado Ar 234a prototype, they start on trolley and land on skid landing gear.

the RLM refused long time landing gear with front wheel, it was consider to "American"
it likely that Junkers try to make a compromise here ?

 

[Jemiba]

The trolley-and-skid method was used, when internal volume was too scarce,
to be sacrificed up for wheel wells, instead for fuel, I think.
Here we really should face the fact, that this arrangement was impractical
from all points of view. The front skid didn't really safe much space in the fuselage, it
just made ground handling more cumbersome. And as Barb pointed out, the main
wheels are way too far behind the CG, I think.
The whole thing looks, as if it was drawn after a short description, without any drawing
available ... and without much thinking by the artist !

 

[iverson]

The trolley-and-skid method was used, when internal volume was too scarce

I have no opinion on the realness of the project. But skids have also been used for soft-field, off-runway operations. The experimental SE.5000 Baroudeur used skids exclusively, and the Sukhoi Su-7 could be fitted with them, in place of all wheels, in place of the main wheels, or, on the Su-7BKL, as supplements to the wheels. The Su-7 skids performed well on muddy, wet, or frozen surfaces, particularly when used with RATO. For an aircraft like this, faced with regular counter-air attacks on runways, such an operating mode might be attractive.

In this alleged Junkers design, the center of gravity issue might be a matter of perception. Perhaps the landing gear was not meant to be a tricycle type with the twin rear wheels bearing the main loads. Maybe they were intended to be more like twin tail wheels, with the skid handling the loads and the rear wheels serving for steering and ground handling, much as the nosewheel did on some of the Su-7 configurations. It would explain the relatively large size of the skid. Whether such an approach would be practical, I can't say. But it seems at least plausible.

 

[Jemiba]

Well, you're right with those examples of skid equipped attack aircraft. That
in this example, the landing gear looks somewhat unrealistic may have its reason
in a wrong interpretation of the source material, whatever it was. And we should
keep in mind, that quite probably not all concepts drawn by German engineers at
the end of WW II would have worked well in reality without major changes.
What we really need to know, is a clue about the original source. Was it a kind of concept
drawing by a Junkers engineer, or was it a just a mention of thoughts about a twin jet
engined attack aircraft in a record of an interrogation of the gatekeeper of one of the
Junkers facilities ?