phat trev Posted June 29, 2010 Share Posted June 29, 2010 Would anyone know what RAF Squadrons used the C-45 Expeditor MkI and MkII (Beech 18) There is really not much around that i can find or maybe I just have not found it yet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Test Graham Posted June 29, 2010 Share Posted June 29, 2010 The simple answer is that it was not a "squadron" type, but used in small numbers on communications duties, Staff HQ duties, etc. Looking at the 93 a/c in the HBxxx range, the one unit to have more than just a handful was 1330 Conversion Unit, at Bilbeis, used to provide initial twin experience. For the rest you have ACC Bulgaria, 216 Group CF, Burma CF, BAFSEA CF, Austria CF etc. No squadrons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phat trev Posted June 29, 2010 Author Share Posted June 29, 2010 thanks for that Graham. I am interested therefore in the aircraft used in Burma and BAFSEA. (what was 216 group?) would you be able to recommend any sources for photos? The simple answer is that it was not a "squadron" type, but used in small numbers on communications duties, Staff HQ duties, etc. Looking at the 93 a/c in the HBxxx range, the one unit to have more than just a handful was 1330 Conversion Unit, at Bilbeis, used to provide initial twin experience. For the rest you have ACC Bulgaria, 216 Group CF, Burma CF, BAFSEA CF, Austria CF etc. No squadrons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Test Graham Posted June 29, 2010 Share Posted June 29, 2010 (edited) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No._216_Group_RAF I suspect the C-45s were used to ferry pilots about. Photos? Of second-line RAF aircraft overseas? Can I start laughing (hysterically) now? I wish. I have seen one photo of a SEAC C-45, but it was very plain jane bare metal with just roundels and serial. I suspect that was normal for the type. There was one recent warbird in FAA Sea Blue Gloss overall, and there is a photo justifying that in one or more of the Air Britain FAA books but you want RAF. OK, Putnam's Aircraft of the Royal Air Force. HB275, camouflaged top yellow(presumably, looks like it) undersides, 1943-type roundels (like the RAAF, fairly large blue and white only). 231 Gp CF. 231 Gp was a bomber group. (OK, I've seen two photos.....) There's nothing in Putnam's Beech Aircraft. Presumably there is at least one other batch of serials, as there's another 200 or so aircraft I haven't accounted for yet. Yup. KJxxx and KNxxx almost 150 aircraft. Including a nose-on shot of KN116 with late SEAC roundels (a bit large) bare metal and rank pennant on the nose - rear fuselage not seen. Some of these batches ended in 96 Sq and 353 Sq. 353 was a SEAC transport unit using three C-45s for local comms work. 96 was one of the units converted to transports postwar, which is presumably when it had it's two. The numbers don't seem to add up to the quoted totals, but that's got the majority of them. Edited June 29, 2010 by Graham Boak Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phat trev Posted June 29, 2010 Author Share Posted June 29, 2010 cheers Graham, this is a start anyway! I feel the 'plain jane' look is the one I am am to do as i can get some good panel shades going. I have found an example here http://airfixtributeforum.myfastforum.org/..._t__t_7951.html of the PM kit built, I like the larger style SEAC? roundles so will be using these. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No._216_Group_RAFI suspect the C-45s were used to ferry pilots about. Photos? Of second-line RAF aircraft overseas? Can I start laughing (hysterically) now? I wish. I have seen one photo of a SEAC C-45, but it was very plain jane bare metal with just roundels and serial. I suspect that was normal for the type. There was one recent warbird in FAA Sea Blue Gloss overall, and there is a photo justifying that in one or more of the Air Britain FAA books but you want RAF. OK, Putnam's Aircraft of the Royal Air Force. HB275, camouflaged top yellow(presumably, looks like it) undersides, 1943-type roundels (like the RAAF, fairly large blue and white only). 231 Gp CF. 231 Gp was a bomber group. (OK, I've seen two photos.....) There's nothing in Putnam's Beech Aircraft. Presumably there is at least one other batch of serials, as there's another 200 or so aircraft I haven't accounted for yet. Yup. KJxxx and KNxxx almost 150 aircraft. Including a nose-on shot of KN116 with late SEAC roundels (a bit large) bare metal and rank pennant on the nose - rear fuselage not seen. Some of these batches ended in 96 Sq and 353 Sq. 353 was a SEAC transport unit using three C-45s for local comms work. 96 was one of the units converted to transports postwar, which is presumably when it had it's two. The numbers don't seem to add up to the quoted totals, but that's got the majority of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Test Graham Posted June 29, 2010 Share Posted June 29, 2010 I think the colours on the SEAC one are, well, imaginative, but the roundels look about right. The missing examples were in the FTxxx range, and went to the Navy or the RCAF. I found several postwar views of bare metal FAA aircraft, but not yet the dark blue one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick Millman Posted June 29, 2010 Share Posted June 29, 2010 From April 1944 at least SEAC transport types were in TSS with Azure Blue under surfaces and this appears to include at least a couple of the C-45's. Nick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timbo33 Posted June 30, 2010 Share Posted June 30, 2010 This any help? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Fleming Posted June 30, 2010 Share Posted June 30, 2010 HB275 is probably the most common pic of an RAF Expeditor, and there is a flying shot of it in the IWM archive as well (You can get a thumbnail on their website) This one appeared in Flypast a few years ago in a 'personal photos' page of SEAC/Indian aircraft, and is about the only other pic I know of a camouflaged RAF one that you can make the serial out on (There is a 3/4 rear shot of one in Eyes of the Phoenix that makes a good case for TSS, especially as the pic appears to be taken on a Beach!) I've seen RAF natural metal ones in both European theatre and SEAC roundels, and I have seen a pic of an RAF one in Italy, but it was a small aircraft in a big photo! Wartime FAA ones were probably TSS over Yellow, with red/yellow serials. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Test Graham Posted June 30, 2010 Share Posted June 30, 2010 Interesting! If HB275 was a UK-based Oxford or Anson, I think there'd be no doubt about a TLS/Yellow interpretation. This was specified for trainers and civilian types used as communications aircraft. So is the Expeditor a light civilian Beech 18 being used for communications or is it a military transport C-45? (Yes, I know it was built as a C-45, I wasn't being literal.) The large roundel is what biased me to a 1943 period (and hence white in the roundel and the TLS/Y scheme). Other photos have since shown that this large roundel was common on Expeditors, so this was a false lead. Could this show TSS over Azure Blue? I think it could, although we are again in the region of interpreting white as light blue on somewhat less-than-firm ground. If you believe it has to be blue, then sure, but it can't be proven not-white from the photo. The difference in contrasts from KJ511 are considerable. The delivery date of HB275 would help. I suspect it was late, later than 1943, which may create a bias away from TLS/Y. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seahawk Posted June 30, 2010 Share Posted June 30, 2010 Interesting! If HB275 was a UK-based Oxford or Anson, I think there'd be no doubt about a TLS/Yellow interpretation. This was specified for trainers and civilian types used as communications aircraft. So is the Expeditor a light civilian Beech 18 being used for communications or is it a military transport C-45? (Yes, I know it was built as a C-45, I wasn't being literal.) The large roundel is what biased me to a 1943 period (and hence white in the roundel and the TLS/Y scheme). Other photos have since shown that this large roundel was common on Expeditors, so this was a false lead. Could this show TSS over Azure Blue? I think it could, although we are again in the region of interpreting white as light blue on somewhat less-than-firm ground. If you believe it has to be blue, then sure, but it can't be proven not-white from the photo. The difference in contrasts from KJ511 are considerable. The delivery date of HB275 would help. I suspect it was late, later than 1943, which may create a bias away from TLS/Y. Interesting indeed. I'd always assumed (as in "Never entered my head that it could be anything else") that HB275 was in DE/DG/Sea Grey Medium. Given the paucity of photos, do we know that the convention of yellow undersides was observed in SEAC? I notice that in the SAM article on Far Eastern colours (Feb 1994) Geoff Thomas and/or Mike Keep assumed that Argus HB578 and Sentinel KJ420 has SGM udersides. Nick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Test Graham Posted June 30, 2010 Share Posted June 30, 2010 Another twist - I hope that we can rule out US equivalent colours? (Yes, because as LL aircraft, these would have been delivered in USAAF bare metal.) The underside of HB275 looks too light for MSG, to me. Can we confirm yellow was used as undersides in SEAC on non-combat types? I can't, but if the official scheme called for it, then I don't see why not. It was used further East in Australia and New Zealand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCRanger Posted June 30, 2010 Share Posted June 30, 2010 Is this of interest? 742 Squadron were based Colombo tasked with communications between the scattered RN units. (Squadrons Of The FAA). There are a couple of others in bare metal one of which may have a white topped fuselage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Test Graham Posted June 30, 2010 Share Posted June 30, 2010 First edition, right? I did go through the second but hadn't got round to digging out the older one. Nice to see it, but it doesn't necessarily feed across to RAF use. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick Millman Posted June 30, 2010 Share Posted June 30, 2010 Can we confirm yellow was used as undersides in SEAC on non-combat types? I can't, but if the official scheme called for it, then I don't see why not. It was used further East in Australia and New Zealand. Yes, but not on transport types which were specified to be in TSS with Azure Blue underneath not MSG! However the Air HQ India orders 69-76 specifically state that this scheme does not have to be "introduced retrospectively" which leaves open the possibility of previously applied or delivered "non-standard" schemes being retained. IMHO HB275 could be yellow, Sky or even Sky Blue underneath. I doubt that it is Azure or MSG but it could be - I'm reminded of Geoff Thomas' admonition on page 176 of Phoenix. SEAC training aircraft were specified to be TLS over yellow with a stated exception for the Harvard which was permitted to remain overall yellow (and there are examples of it). Despite the prevailing view that all SEAC aircraft were TLS over MSG this was not the case. The Air India HQ orders are specific to aircraft roles rather than types and some Beaus on coastal duties were in TSS with Azure Blue rather than white undersurfaces. There was also the Day Fighter Scheme "interregnum" in SEAC, recently confirmed by Edgar. Nick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seahawk Posted June 30, 2010 Share Posted June 30, 2010 Yes, but not on transport types which were specified to be in TSS with Azure Blue underneath not MSG! However the Air HQ India orders 69-76 specifically state that this scheme does not have to be "introduced retrospectively" which leaves open the possibility of previously applied or delivered "non-standard" schemes being retained. IMHO HB275 could be yellow, Sky or even Sky Blue underneath. I doubt that it is Azure or MSG but it could be - I'm reminded of Geoff Thomas' admonition on page 176 of Phoenix.SEAC training aircraft were specified to be TLS over yellow with a stated exception for the Harvard which was permitted to remain overall yellow (and there are examples of it). Despite the prevailing view that all SEAC aircraft were TLS over MSG this was not the case. The Air India HQ orders are specific to aircraft roles rather than types and some Beaus on coastal duties were in TSS with Azure Blue rather than white undersurfaces. There was also the Day Fighter Scheme "interregnum" in SEAC, recently confirmed by Edgar. Nick Thank you: we live and learn. Are AFO(I) 69-76 available on line? Nick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Test Graham Posted June 30, 2010 Share Posted June 30, 2010 Two important qualifications. One. A point I have already made but is best repeated here. Was the Expeditor considered as a transport aircraft or a communications aircraft? The latter were normally camouflaged as trainers. It would not surprise me to find Expeditors in both schemes, depending upon whether the aircraft came under the control of Transport Command or not. Two. Edgar has not, to my knowledge which I believe is correct in this case, confirmed any Day Fighter interregnum. What he has discovered is a draft document suggesting the introduction of the Day Fighter Scheme in SEAC. He has not (yet?) discovered an example of the issued document corresponding to the draft, nor any evidence that this scheme was adopted in service. I think we are in danger of setting a false hare running here; creating another myth to confuse future generations of modellers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick Millman Posted June 30, 2010 Share Posted June 30, 2010 (edited) Two. Edgar has not, to my knowledge which I believe is correct in this case, confirmed any Day Fighter interregnum. What he has discovered is a draft document suggesting the introduction of the Day Fighter Scheme in SEAC. He has not (yet?) discovered an example of the issued document corresponding to the draft, nor any evidence that this scheme was adopted in service. I think we are in danger of setting a false hare running here; creating another myth to confuse future generations of modellers. Really? Postagram - Secret from Air HQ India dated 27th October 1943 to 308 & 320 MU, RAF Liaison Officer ARU Santa Cruz, AHQ Bengal and 226 Group HQ, copied to SASO and Ops 41, entitled "Camouflage of Day Fighter Aircraft" which is not a draft but specifies DFS. "These and other similar cases received at 320 MU are to be re-camouflaged prior to despatch. whilst those received at ARU Santa Cruz are to be flown to 308 MU for re-camouflaging. The Day-Fighter scheme with India markings is to be used." This postagram then goes on to specify precisely the DFS colours and markings, so there is no ambiguity. This document has also been mentioned by Paul Lucas as well as the queries and clarifications sought by MU's in response. And I have also mentioned this postagram in previous threads and postings too. So between the end of October 1943 and 4th April 1944 there is the possibility and probability of some day fighter aircraft being finished in this scheme. Now the interesting thing, perhaps, is whether certain squadrons of Hurricanes were considered not to be "day fighter". And, just to clarify, the AFO(I) 70 of 4th April 1944 copies the wording of the draft document (not the postagram) almost exactly, except that all fighter aircraft are therein specified to be in TLS with MSG undersurfaces. The draft is referred to in a minute dated 17th November 1943 (after the postagram was sent) so sometime between that date and April 1944 the requirement for DFS was challenged and changed to TLS. Hence "interregnum"! Nick Edited June 30, 2010 by Nick Millman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick Millman Posted June 30, 2010 Share Posted June 30, 2010 Thank you: we live and learn. Are AFO(I) 69-76 available on line? Nick I don't think so - not sure, but they are reproduced as facsimiles in Appendix IV of 'Eyes for the Phoenix', page 225. Nick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Test Graham Posted June 30, 2010 Share Posted June 30, 2010 (edited) You specified Edgar's recent find. The document covering the introduction of the Day Fighter Scheme he has recently discovered (and generously passed around) is clearly labelled as a draft, at the top of the page and in the text (although not on the cover). He has not mentioned nor passed to me any such follow-up documentation as you describe: although this obviously does not deny its existence, the description does apply to what he has found regarding the SEAC roundel. This seems a possibly significant co-incidence. I suggest that you revisit the documentation. There may have been such an interregnum, but according to what I've seen, Edgar's recent find does not confirm it. In support of your argument, perhaps you could point to other examples of SEAC fighters of this period (Spitfires Mk.V perhaps, or the earliest Mk.VIIIs, or the last Mohawks?) showing the Day Fighter Scheme? It is certainly a fair supposition that several of the Hurricane units were not considered as fighters - those converted from bomber units spring to mind, or the Mk.IIDs. As I understand it however, the photographic evidence remains one Hurricane away from the front line. Not so much a case of a few squadrons of Hurricanes NOT considered as Day Fighter, but only one that was? However, I feel we have drifted too far from the subject of Expeditors. If you have further evidence I'd love to see it, but can we take it offline or to another thread? Edited June 30, 2010 by Graham Boak Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick Millman Posted June 30, 2010 Share Posted June 30, 2010 You specified Edgar's recent find. The document covering the introduction of the Day Fighter Scheme he has recently discovered (and generously passed around) is clearly labelled as a draft, at the top of the page and in the text (although not on the cover). He has not mentioned nor passed to me any such follow-up documentation as you describe: although this obviously does not deny its existence, the description does apply to what he has found regarding the SEAC roundel. This seems a possibly significant co-incidence. I suggest that you revisit the documentation. There may have been such an interregnum, but according to what I've seen, Edgar's recent find does not confirm it.In support of your argument, perhaps you could point to other examples of SEAC fighters of this period (Spitfires Mk.V perhaps, or the earliest Mk.VIIIs, or the last Mohawks?) showing the Day Fighter Scheme? It is certainly a fair supposition that several of the Hurricane units were not considered as fighters - those converted from bomber units spring to mind, or the Mk.IIDs. As I understand it however, the photographic evidence remains one Hurricane away from the front line. Not so much a case of a few squadrons of Hurricanes NOT considered as Day Fighter, but only one that was? However, I feel we have drifted too far from the subject of Expeditors. If you have further evidence I'd love to see it, but can we take it offline or to another thread? The postagram was sent to me together with the draft document. Separate documents. And the postagram has already been cited in one of the Lucas books and Edgar's copy confirms that. It is not my argument just a statement that such an order did/does exist and is not a draft. It has nothing whatsoever to do with the SEAC roundel instruction. Again separate document. Since not all SEAC aircraft were photographed the existence of one aircraft (in India btw) in DFS raises the possibility that there were others - supported by the existence of the postagram. Photos of Spits and Hurris in SEAC are not as numerous as elsewhere which makes the determination of their schemes less certain. Nick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
airjiml2 Posted June 30, 2010 Share Posted June 30, 2010 Another twist - I hope that we can rule out US equivalent colours? (Yes, because as LL aircraft, these would have been delivered in USAAF bare metal.) Yes you can rule out U.S. equivalent colours, but only because they are two tone upper surfaces. However, I don't think we can definitively state that all Expeditors were delivered in bare metal. Some of the HB serial Expeditors diverted to the BCATP in Canada were natural metal and some were OD over NG. In fact I would guess that HD775 is OD over NG. Jim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timbo33 Posted June 30, 2010 Share Posted June 30, 2010 Could this show TSS over Azure Blue? I think it could, although we are again in the region of interpreting white as light blue on somewhat less-than-firm ground. If you believe it has to be blue, then sure, but it can't be proven not-white from the photo. The difference in contrasts from KJ511 are considerable. .....and there was me assuming it was DE/DG/Sky....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phat trev Posted June 30, 2010 Author Share Posted June 30, 2010 Great info and discussion guys Thanks. Just dug up the following details, hope they are usfull for others here also... (cut and pasted from an email so hope you don't mind the odd looking text layout) RAF Expediter Mk. I (52 delivered 1944) In 1944, the British needed commu- nications aircraft for use in Asia, the Middle East and at home. There also existed crew training require- ments for the British Commonwealth Air Training Plan, operated by the RCAF, in Canada. A total of 119 Expediter I models were received under Lend-Lease4.10 with distribution as follows: 52 for the RAF, six for the Royal Navy, and 61 for the RCAF.4.11 The 52 RAF aircraft bore serials from HB128 to HB206, and were shipped by sea beginning in April 1944, but few of the Expediter I models were destined for England. The majority went to Karachi, India, and the RAF Air Command South East Asia for assignment to Communications Squadrons or Flights. Examples served with the 3rd Tactical Air Force, 4th Air Delivery Unit, Director General of Aviation in India, 221st Group, 224th Group, 225th Group and 353rd Squadron. These transported personnel and equipment, and were in the natural metal finish with the RAF serial in black on the rear fuselage and South East Asia Command roundels. Those roundels had a dark blue outer circle and a light blue inner disc. The usual red cen- ter was eliminated to avoid confu- sion with the Japanese national insignia. The fin flash had light blue forward and dark blue in the rear. The 1941 Lend-Lease Act called for the return of surviving aircraft at the end of hostilities; RAF records show 26 were returned. Two of those went to the AAF, and the U.S. Navy accepted the remain- ing 24 at Norfolk, VA, on December 31, 1946. RAF Expediter Mk. II (217 delivered 1944-1945) The RAF was allocated 217 C-45Fs under the Lend-Lease program4.59 and designated them Expediter Mk. II models. The Expediter IIs were serialled KN100 to KN149 (50), KJ468 to KJ560 (93), and in the range from HB208 to HB299 (74). The RAF had a need for communi- cations aircraft, especially for use in South Asia, so 151 Expediter IIs were shipped by sea from the Port of Newark, NJ, (beginning in June 1944) to Karachi, India. The RAF Air Command South East Asia assigned them to various Communications Squadrons or Flights where they transported personnel and equip- ment. For example, Expediter Mk. IIs “in the KN series were flown dur- ing 1945-1946 by Polish pilots of the RAF 229 Group Communications Flight in India, operating with 9, 10 and 11 Ferry Units.”4.60Initial deliv- eries to the RAF in north Africa and the Middle East consisted of 62 Expediter IIs with four serving the RAF in the U.S. Note that the RAF spelled the name differently from its common- wealth partner, the RCAF, who spelled it “Expeditor Mk. II.” The 1941 Lend-Lease Act called for the return of surviving aircraft at the end of hostilities, and AAF aircraft record cards note that 145 were sent back to the AAF, many of which were stored in Germany. RAF Expediter II HB253 returned from service in the Mediterranean, and was turned over to the AAF in Romania on July 19, 1946. It was then registered YR-MIT to King Michael of Romania with the Certificate of Airworthiness issued on October 20, 1946. The King abdicat- edin December 1947 and left Romania, but there is no aircraft cancellation date in the Romanian records — just the note: “aircraft flown out of the country by Traian Udriski with his wife and child on board in 1948.”4.61 Udriski may have been the King’s pilot. In February 1950, the plane was registered to Air Import AG, Switzerland, as HB GAA, and then to CN de St. Yan until February 1967 as F-BFRO. Royal Navy Expediter Mk. II (61 Delivered 1944-1945) Sixty-one Lend-Lease Expediter IIs were delivered to the Royal Navy and most were delivered to India for communications work. Serials included FT980 to FT996 (17), HD752 to HD776 (25), and in the range KP100 to KP124 (19). Crated Expediter IIs arrived in Great Britain and India and were assembled at the British Reassembly Division, Lockheed Ltd., at Liverpool’s Speke Airport and Renfrew, Scotland; as well as places such as the Royal Navy Aircraft Repair Yard at Coimbatore, India. In early April 1946, it was announced that Britain had received full title to 25 Lend-Lease C-45s with the understanding that when they became surplus they would not be transferred to another nation without U.S. approval.4.64 It is probable that they were Royal Navy Expediter IIs since, by the end of 1946, the RAF only had a few left. In January 1949, the Royal Navy still had 24 in service. The three primary post-war Royal Navy Expediter II operators were: 728 Squadron, Fleet Radio Unit (FRU) at Hal Far, Malta; 781 Squadron (Southern Communications Unit) at Lee on- Solent, UK; and 782 Squadron (Northern Communications Unit) at Donibristle, UK. In addition the Flag Officer Reserve Aircraft (FORA unit) at Arbroath, Scotland, and the Flag Officer Flying Training (FOFT unit) at RAF Merryfield/Yeovilton used them. The last Expediter IIs were struck off charge by the Royal Navy and scrapped at Hal Far in August 1957. RAF Expeditors... TYPE SERIAL FY AT-7 FR879 42- 2508 AT-7 FR880 42- 2509 AT-7 FR881 42- 43475 AT-7 FR882 42- 43476 AT-7 FR883 42- 43477 C-45B FR940 43- 35535 C-45B FR941 43- 35540 C-45B FR942 43- 35541 C-45B FR943 43- 35629 C-45B FR944 43- 35635 C-45B FR945 43- 35639 C-45B FR946 43- 35645 C-45B FR947 43- 35651 C-45B FR948 43- 35653 C-45B FT975 43- 35539 C-45B FT976 43- 35613 C-45B FT977 43- 35621 C-45B FT978 43- 35623 C-45B FT979 43- 35624 UC-45F FT980 43- 35673 UC-45F FT981 43- 35674 UC-45F FT982 43- 35675 UC-45F FT983 43- 35676 UC-45F FT984 43- 35688 UC-45F FT985 43- 35728 UC-45F FT986 43- 35730 UC-45F FT987 43- 35732 UC-45F FT988 43- 35734 UC-45F FT989 43- 35738 UC-45F FT990 43- 35837 UC-45F FT991 43- 35839 UC-45F FT992 43- 35841 UC-45F FT993 43- 35843 UC-45F FT994 43- 35845 UC-45F FT995 43- 35847 UC-45F FT996 43- 35849 C-45B HB100 43- 35463 C-45B HB101 43- 35465 C-45B HB102 43- 35466 C-45B HB103 43- 35467 C-45B HB104 43- 35468 C-45B HB105 43- 35469 C-45B HB106 43- 35475 C-45B HB107 43- 35476 C-45B HB108 43- 35477 C-45B HB109 43- 35478 C-45B HB110 43- 35479 C-45B HB111 43- 35480 C-45B HB112 43- 35481 C-45B HB113 43- 35482 C-45B HB114 43- 35483 C-45B HB115 43- 35484 C-45B HB116 43- 35485 C-45B HB117 43- 35486 C-45B HB118 43- 35487 C-45B HB119 43- 35488 C-45B HB120 43- 35490 C-45B HB121 43- 35491 C-45B HB122 43- 35492 C-45B HB123 43- 35493 C-45B HB124 43- 35494 C-45B HB125 43- 35495 C-45B HB126 43- 35496 C-45B HB127 43- 35449 C-45B HB128 43- 35453 C-45B HB129 43- 35460 C-45B HB130 43- 35556 C-45B HB131 43- 35557 C-45B HB132 43- 35545 C-45B HB133 43- 35546 C-45B HB134 43- 35547 C-45B HB135 43- 35548 C-45B HB136 43- 35549 C-45B HB137 43- 35550 C-45B HB138 43- 35551 C-45B HB139 43- 35552 C-45B HB140 43- 35553 C-45B HB141 43- 35559 C-45B HB142 43- 35450 C-45B HB143 43- 35455 C-45B HB144 43- 35457 C-45B HB145 43- 35458 C-45B HB146 43- 35459 C-45B HB147 43- 35461 C-45B HB148 43- 35470 C-45B HB149 43- 35471 C-45B HB150 43- 35473 C-45B HB151 43- 35474 C-45B HB152 43- 35512 C-45B HB153 43- 35570 C-45B HB154 43- 35571 C-45B HB155 43- 35572 C-45B HB156 43- 35573 C-45B HB157 43- 35574 C-45B HB158 43- 35579 C-45B HB159 43- 35580 C-45B HB160 43- 35581 C-45B HB161 43- 35582 C-45B HB162 43- 35606 C-45B HB163 43- 35520 C-45B HB164 43- 35522 C-45B HB165 43- 35523 C-45B HB166 43- 35524 C-45B HB167 43- 35525 C-45B HB168 43- 35521 C-45B HB169 43- 35596 C-45B HB170 43- 35585 C-45B HB171 43- 35586 C-45B HB172 43- 35589 C-45B HB173 43- 35526 C-45B HB174 43- 35527 C-45B HB175 43- 35528 C-45B HB176 43- 35534 C-45B HB177 43- 35615 C-45B HB178 43- 35616 C-45B HB179 43- 35617 C-45B HB180 43- 35618 C-45B HB181 43- 35619 C-45B HB182 43- 35620 C-45B HB183 43- 35622 C-45B HB184 43- 35625 C-45B HB185 43- 35614 C-45B HB186 43- 35537 C-45B HB187 43- 35630 C-45B HB188 43- 35632 C-45B HB189 43- 35634 C-45B HB190 43- 35636 C-45B HB191 43- 35638 C-45B HB192 43- 35640 C-45B HB193 43- 35642 C-45B HB194 43- 35644 C-45B HB195 43- 35646 C-45B HB196 43- 35648 C-45B HB197 43- 35650 C-45B HB198 43- 35652 C-45B HB199 43- 35654 C-45B HB200 43- 35656 C-45B HB201 43- 35658 C-45B HB202 43- 35660 C-45B HB203 43- 35662 C-45B HB204 43- 35664 C-45B HB205 43- 35666 C-45B HB206 43- 35667 UC-45F HB207 43- 35668 UC-45F HB208 43- 35669 UC-45F HB209 43- 35670 UC-45F HB210 43- 35671 UC-45F HB211 43- 35672 UC-45F HB212 43- 35690 UC-45F HB213 43- 35691 UC-45F HB214 43- 35692 UC-45F HB215 43- 35693 UC-45F HB216 43- 35694 UC-45F HB217 43- 35695 UC-45F HB218 43- 35696 UC-45F HB219 43- 35697 UC-45F HB220 43- 35698 UC-45F HB221 43- 35699 UC-45F HB222 43- 35700 UC-45F HB223 43- 35701 UC-45F HB224 43- 35702 UC-45F HB225 43- 35704 UC-45F HB226 43- 35706 UC-45F HB227 43- 35708 UC-45F HB228 43- 35710 UC-45F HB229 43- 35712 UC-45F HB230 43- 35714 UC-45F HB231 43- 35716 UC-45F HB232 43- 35718 UC-45F HB233 43- 35720 UC-45F HB234 43- 35722 UC-45F HB235 43- 35724 UC-45F HB236 43- 35726 UC-45F HB237 43- 35741 UC-45F HB238 43- 35745 UC-45F HB239 43- 35749 UC-45F HB240 43- 35753 UC-45F HB241 43- 35757 UC-45F HB242 43- 35761 UC-45F HB243 43- 35777 UC-45F HB244 43- 35781 UC-45F HB245 43- 35785 UC-45F HB246 43- 35790 UC-45F HB247 43- 35801 UC-45F HB248 43- 35805 UC-45F HB249 43- 35809 UC-45F HB250 43- 35813 UC-45F HB251 43- 35817 UC-45F HB252 43- 35821 UC-45F HB253 43- 35825 UC-45F HB254 43- 35829 UC-45F HB255 43- 35831 UC-45F HB256 43- 35833 UC-45F HB257 43- 35835 UC-45F HB258 43- 35851 UC-45F HB259 43- 35853 UC-45F HB260 43- 35855 UC-45F HB261 43- 35857 UC-45F HB262 43- 35861 UC-45F HB263 43- 35859 UC-45F HB264 43- 35865 UC-45F HB265 43- 35869 UC-45F HB266 43- 35873 UC-45F HB267 43- 35877 UC-45F HB268 43- 35881 UC-45F HB269 43- 35885 UC-45F HB270 43- 35889 UC-45F HB271 43- 35893 UC-45F HB272 43- 35898 UC-45F HB273 44- 47080 UC-45F HB274 44- 47082 UC-45F HB275 44- 47084 UC-45F HB276 44- 47086 UC-45F HB277 44- 47088 UC-45F HB278 44- 47090 UC-45F HB279 44- 47092 UC-45F HB280 44- 47094 UC-45F HB281 44- 47096 UC-45F HB282 44- 47098 UC-45F HB283 44- 47122 UC-45F HB284 44- 47126 UC-45F HB285 44- 47130 UC-45F HB286 44- 47134 UC-45F HB287 44- 47138 UC-45F HB288 44- 47142 UC-45F HB289 44- 47146 UC-45F HB290 44- 47150 UC-45F HB291 44- 47154 UC-45F HB292 44- 47158 UC-45F HB293 44- 47162 UC-45F HB294 44- 47166 UC-45F HB295 44- 47170 UC-45F HB296 44- 47174 UC-45F HB297 44- 47178 UC-45F HB298 44- 47182 UC-45F HB299 44- 47186 UC-45F HB488 44- 47295 UC-45F HB489 44- 47297 UC-45F HD752 44- 47102 UC-45F HD753 44- 47106 UC-45F HD754 44- 47110 UC-45F HD755 44- 47114 UC-45F HD756 44- 47118 UC-45F HD757 44- 47202 UC-45F HD758 44- 47206 UC-45F HD759 44- 47210 UC-45F HD760 44- 47214 UC-45F HD761 44- 47218 UC-45F HD762 44- 47302 UC-45F HD763 44- 47304 UC-45F HD764 44- 47307 UC-45F HD765 44- 47309 UC-45F HD766 44- 47312 UC-45F HD767 44- 47400 UC-45F HD768 44- 47404 UC-45F HD769 44- 47408 UC-45F HD770 44- 47412 UC-45F HD771 44- 47415 UC-45F HD772 44- 47499 UC-45F HD773 44- 47503 UC-45F HD774 44- 47507 UC-45F HD775 44- 47511 UC-45F HD776 44- 47515 UC-45F KJ468 44- 47190 UC-45F KJ469 44- 47194 UC-45F KJ470 44- 47198 UC-45F KJ471 44- 47222 UC-45F KJ472 44- 47226 UC-45F KJ473 44- 47230 UC-45F KJ474 44- 47234 UC-45F KJ475 44- 47238 UC-45F KJ476 44- 47242 UC-45F KJ477 44- 47246 UC-45F KJ478 44- 47250 UC-45F KJ479 44- 47254 UC-45F KJ480 44- 47258 UC-45F KJ481 44- 47262 UC-45F KJ482 44- 47266 UC-45F KJ483 44- 47271 UC-45F KJ484 44- 47276 UC-45F KJ485 44- 47280 UC-45F KJ486 44- 47285 UC-45F KJ487 44- 47290 UC-45F KJ490 44- 47300 UC-45F KJ491 44- 47315 UC-45F KJ492 44- 47320 UC-45F KJ493 44- 47325 UC-45F KJ494 44- 47329 UC-45F KJ495 44- 47334 UC-45F KJ496 44- 47339 UC-45F KJ497 44- 47343 UC-45F KJ498 44- 47347 UC-45F KJ499 44- 47352 UC-45F KJ500 44- 47356 UC-45F KJ501 44- 47360 UC-45F KJ502 44- 47364 UC-45F KJ503 44- 47368 UC-45F KJ504 44- 47372 UC-45F KJ505 44- 47376 UC-45F KJ506 44- 47380 UC-45F KJ507 44- 47384 UC-45F KJ508 44- 47388 UC-45F KJ509 44- 47392 UC-45F KJ510 44- 47396 UC-45F KJ511 44- 47418 UC-45F KJ512 44- 47422 UC-45F KJ513 44- 47429 UC-45F KJ514 44- 47432 UC-45F KJ515 44- 47436 UC-45F KJ516 44- 47440 UC-45F KJ517 44- 47444 UC-45F KJ518 44- 47448 UC-45F KJ519 44- 47452 UC-45F KJ520 44- 47456 UC-45F KJ521 44- 47460 UC-45F KJ522 44- 47463 UC-45F KJ523 44- 47467 UC-45F KJ524 44- 47471 UC-45F KJ525 44- 47475 UC-45F KJ526 44- 47479 UC-45F KJ527 44- 47483 UC-45F KJ528 44- 47487 UC-45F KJ529 44- 47491 UC-45F KJ530 44- 47495 UC-45F KN100 44- 47704 UC-45F KN101 44- 47705 UC-45F KN102 44- 47707 UC-45F KN103 44- 47708 UC-45F KN104 44- 47709 UC-45F KN105 44- 47710 UC-45F KN106 44- 47711 UC-45F KN107 44- 47712 UC-45F KN108 44- 47713 UC-45F KN109 44- 47714 UC-45F KN110 44- 86945 UC-45F KN111 44- 86947 UC-45F KN112 44- 86948 UC-45F KN113 44- 86949 UC-45F KN114 44- 86951 UC-45F KN115 44- 86952 UC-45F KN116 44- 86953 UC-45F KN117 44- 86954 UC-45F KN118 44- 86990 UC-45F KN119 44- 86991 UC-45F KN120 44- 86992 UC-45F KN121 44- 86993 UC-45F KN122 44- 86994 UC-45F KN123 44- 86995 UC-45F KN124 44- 86996 UC-45F KN125 44- 86997 UC-45F KN126 44- 87078 UC-45F KN127 44- 87079 UC-45F KN128 44- 87080 UC-45F KN129 44- 87081 UC-45F KN130 44- 87082 UC-45F KN131 44- 87083 UC-45F KN132 44- 87084 UC-45F KN133 44- 87085 UC-45F KN134 44- 87152 UC-45F KN135 44- 87153 UC-45F KN136 44- 87154 UC-45F KN137 44- 87155 UC-45F KN138 44- 87156 UC-45F KN139 44- 87157 UC-45F KN140 44- 87158 UC-45F KN141 44- 87159 UC-45F KN142 44- 87235 UC-45F KN143 44- 87236 UC-45F KN144 44- 87237 UC-45F KN145 44- 87238 UC-45F KN146 44- 87239 UC-45F KN147 44- 87240 UC-45F KN148 44- 87241 UC-45F KN149 44- 87242 UC-45F KP100 44- 47701 UC-45F KP101 44- 47702 UC-45F KP102 44- 47703 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seahawk Posted June 30, 2010 Share Posted June 30, 2010 I don't think so - not sure, but they are reproduced as facsimiles in Appendix IV of 'Eyes for the Phoenix', page 225.Nick Aha. Thank you. Excellent spot. Nick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now