Moynet Jupiter
type of aircraft

The Moynet M 360 Jupiter was a small executive transport built in France in the 1960s. It had an unusual twin-push-pull, single-fuselage configuration. Two prototypes were produced, the second with more power and seating, but no sales resulted.
Design and development
Some civil propeller driven aircraft that have used one or more pairs of engines in push-pull configuration have been flying boats, with engines mounted above the wing and clear of spray. Others have had a pair of engines, one at either end of a pod fuselage with a tail unit mounted on a pair of booms, for example the Cessna Skymaster, the Adam A500 or the Rutan Voyager. The Moynet 360 Jupiter was an example of a push-pull aircraft of a less common configuration, where a single conventional fuselage has an engine at either end; the Dornier Do 335 fighter used the same arrangement. For light civil aircraft, the aim was to combine the performance of a conventional twin-engined aircraft with the ease of handling of a single-engined one.
The Jupiter was an executive transport with between four and seven seats, depending on engine power. It was designed by André Moynet, a member of the National Assembly of France and a former government minister, while also a test-pilot, and built by S.S. Engins Matra (so it is sometimes referred to as the Matra Moynet Jupiter), the first prototype flying on 17 December 1963 with the designer and Lucien Tieles at the controls. Its wing had a straight trailing edge, but the centre section had strong taper on the leading edge which continued more weakly outboard.
The public source identifies “Moynet Jupiter” as type of aircraft. This brief keeps that definition visible, then builds a research path around Moynet, Jupiter and type.
Why this record matters
A short description can identify a subject without explaining its stakes. For “Moynet Jupiter”, the useful work is to connect “type of aircraft” to the records capable of establishing context and consequence.
The citation trail is more important than the brevity of the summary: it shows where individual claims can be examined in context. The source revision retrieved here is dated Aug 6, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q3327027. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1963.
A concise general-reference account can conceal disagreements about scope, terminology or the weight assigned to individual sources. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Moynet Jupiter”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Moynet Jupiter primary sources, Moynet Jupiter archive and Moynet research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Moynet Jupiter”?
- What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
- Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Moynet Jupiter” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.