2023年6月8日 星期四

回覆國外研究者詢問國軍SA-16的問題

The first 8 must be: 1012, 1013, 1014, 1015, 1016, 1017, 1018, 1019. 

I remember a pilot told me that 1019 was some kind of “first” aircraft and its photo had been on the cover of brochure or manual, so I would guess that 1019 is 80588.

The second batch must be 1020 and 1021.
1021 was shot down on Jan 9, not Jan. 10.

The third batch must be 1022. 1023, 1024 and 1025.

As the 110xx number, it is really very odd. My theory is in the beginning, it was a small code on the fin like (SA-)16012, I remember having seen this kind of number somewhere. Then when the RoCAF began to change the big code on fuselage from 3 digits to 4 digits, they change 160XX to 110XX to avoid duplication with F-860XX because F-86012’s big code will be 6012 and SA-16012 will be 6012 too.
The other odd thing is when everybody was carrying 3 digit big code, the SA-16 carried 2 digit code, like 12, 15, etc.  

 

沒有留言:

張貼留言

航空史謎團(已解謎):國軍的老霍克是霍克ㄧ還是霍克二?

  長久以來,一般認為國軍的老霍克是霍克二,但是新資料顯示應該是霍克一,同好光俊穎從書中找到一個方便識別的方法,霍克一的發動機罩長度是12吋,霍克二是18吋,後者是前者的一點五倍,我找到照片粗略的量,確實分得出來, 目前可找到的國軍(含廣東)老霍克全部都是霍克一。 廣東買的霍克一...