RAF Junkers F13 J7232

[QUOTE=..just take a look at the Revell-Kit´s wings … The trailing edge / ailerons doesn´t match at all, right?
It looks like the kit has the later long wing with parallel chord ailerons. There were several wing aileron combinations over the years and doubtless many unusual variations that have now been forgotten in the mists of time. I defy any “expert” to state that you are categorically wrong ,whatever you decide.
It’s your model after all!

The article you mentioned – what means “AE 16”?

Air Enthusiast No.16 It’s a magazine, now owned by Key Publishing, but not when 16 was published. Back issues are available.

Is it OK to reproduce or publicise sketches on the web that are taken from published articles without permission or acknowledgement ?

If the question is ‘is it legal to reproduce without permission or acknowledgement?’ – see a lawyer and pay for a proper answer.

My free response, which is worth what you paid for it – It depends on the law(s) applicable, but apart from the purposes of ‘fair use’ (English law) broadly, no. But people do. Is it legal to publicise? It’s not illegal to do so. If you are offering to clean up the web, go ahead. 😉 Is it moral to do so? That’s a conscience question.

Cheers

Talking about this very sketch (- quess the answer on your question will be “no” -), just take a look at the Revell-Kit´s wings … The trailing edge / ailerons doesn´t match at all, right?

http://modellversium.de/kit/bilder/1316-f132.jpg

The article you mentioned – what means “AE 16”?

[QUOTE=…starfire]Bingo! That sketch will do, thanks for the link James.

Is it OK to reproduce or publicise sketches on the web that are taken from published articles without permission or acknowledgement ?
I’m thinking of the F13 article in AE 16 and John Stroud in this particular case.

There’s a bit on the wings here:
http://www.airwarfareforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=5277 in a plan showing the wings

Bingo! That sketch will do, thanks for the link James. I do not know, if I can build new ailerons, but it´s good to know, just clipping the wings will be a good match …

So the F13’s wing was a strong structure and who knows maybe the RAF replaced the one tested to destruction and it survived to be dumped for exposure tests at the end of its cost effective life.

… or I pretend the old wings were replaced by a brand new set of wide-span-wings and build the kit out of the box. 😀

BTW: There is actually a undated small photo printed in the mentioned “RAF Aircraft …” – it shows the position of the fuselage markings, but nothing more than the wings leading edges …

I quote from ‘European Transport Aircraft Since 1910’ by John Stroud. Published by Putnam. Because of the strength of these aircraft, a considerable number of their occupants survived crashes and forced landings which did no more than bend the structure. Nevertheless, one aircraft, G-AAZK operated by Walcot Air Lines, broke up in the air over Meopham in Kent on the 21 July, 1930, killing its six occupants. This led the RAE at Farnborough to conduct the first full scale investigation into the disintergration of a metal monoplane and the pattern of break-up, and the reassembly of the pieces by the RAE led to the knowledge of failure in the F13’s tailplane. No other failures inflight are known. End of quote.
So the F13’s wing was a strong structure and who knows maybe the RAF replaced the one tested to destruction and it survived to be dumped for exposure tests at the end of its cost effective life.
Ray

A picture of J7232 appears in ‘Forever Farnborough’ by Peter J. Cooper ISBN 0-9519899-3-6.
Caption says ‘ Whatever was learnt from this German Junkers F.13 J7232 Acquired for evaluation and seen at the RAE on 5th November 1924, precious little of it seems to have influenced British civil aircraft manufacturers of the time . Possibly the most advanced aircraft in the world when this picture was taken,(five years after it first flew), all metal monoplane airframes, with high-lift cantilever wings were not found on comparable British types until shortly before World War 11’
Picture credited to the photographic archive of DERA Farnborough.

It would be a mistake just to clip the wing I think – the aileron shape would also probably need to be modified.

As illustrated in my second link. 😉

I understood that the UK received at least one F13 as reparations post WW1 . Years ago ( c.1970)I did see images of at least one aircraft in the RAE photo Archives at Farnborough. I am unaware of how much of this huge collection actually survived ( The first images ,incidentally were glass plates- starting with shots over London from an airship operated by Cody).

Good points. The FAST collection would be worth talking to in that case.

http://www.airsciences.org.uk/

Looks like a case where ‘real’ research (as opposed to ‘what I can find with Google’) is required and will net a fascinating story.

Evening all,

in 1923 the Air Ministry purchased a single Junkers F13 for all-metal-tests. According to Air Britain´s “RAF Aircraft J1-J9999” ist was an “early machine with short span wings” (14,4m, don´t know what´s that in ft.).

However, all 3-side-views I´ve found show always the “big span” 17,75m-wings. Revell´s F13 model kit ist also a “big span” version. The easiest way to reproduce a “short span” one would be clipping the wings to the correct lenght, but I wonder if the shape will be correct. Any idea if other photos of the real J7232 exist? Or just a good 3-side-view? :confused:

It would be a mistake just to clip the wing I think – the aileron shape would also probably need to be modified.
I understood that the UK received at least one F13 as reparations post WW1 . Years ago ( c.1970)I did see images of at least one aircraft in the RAE photo Archives at Farnborough. I am unaware of how much of this huge collection actually survived ( The first images ,incidentally were glass plates- starting with shots over London from an airship operated by Cody).

Did a bit of work on this, then I got distracted and deleted it in error!

There’s a bit of film in the RAF Museum ‘Navigator’, it MIGHT be the right a/c:
http://navigator.rafmuseum.org/ The film

There’s a bit on the wings here:
http://www.airwarfareforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=5277 in a plan showing the wings

And they have a walkaround here, but I think you have to sign up to get access to the walkrounds forum (no charges though.)
http://www.airwarfareforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=3197

And that’s the forum I think you are most likely to get useful answers on, too.

Finding a pic of the RAF machine will be a challenge – there’s a new book on Farnborough just out, and there’s a fair amount on the place out there, and you could probably work out the scheme from other similar acqusitions there.

HTH.

Hi super sioux,

my reference-article about the F13 quotes three spans – 14,4m, later 14,8m and 17,75m. Initially, only the Floatplanes got the “big wing”, but later all F13 were fittet with it. So maybe we´re talking about the 14,8m-wing.

However, could there be another mistake in the book? If the wings were destroyed in 6.23 by the AEE, how can the plane force-land at Frensham a year later, not to mention Netheravon?

J7232 – Early machine with short span wings, unbalanced rudder and ailerons, assembly at Handley Page, RAE (engine fitted) 7.22-1.23; AEE 6.23; Wing tested to destruction at Farnb. 6.23; RAE 10.23-5.25(…); FL (=Forced landed??), Frensham 7.24; SD Flight Netheravon 6/29 (airborne smoe devt); Fuselage dumped in open for exposure tests …

Only the prototype had the 14.47 m (47ft 5.75 ins.) wingspan, the production aircraft having the ‘big’ wing of 17.75m(58ft 2.75 ins.). The Junkers F13 was produced in SIXTY variants for 320 /322 built from 1919 until 1932 the reference books I have give just a few variants. They dont even mention the RAF having one !