tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2407910486855366813.post3375896939530893877..comments2024-02-04T03:02:15.142+01:00Comments on Warthog News: A-10 remains want to be identified by serial numberJoachim Jacobhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13520848658094551427noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2407910486855366813.post-21668748948548416092013-02-14T20:11:20.586+01:002013-02-14T20:11:20.586+01:00This jet was most likely a weapons load trainer an...This jet was most likely a weapons load trainer and not operational. Look where the UARRSI door should be on the nose. Its removed and a plate put in its place. This aircraft would not fly like that Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2407910486855366813.post-45723010357169450242012-05-05T17:25:01.614+02:002012-05-05T17:25:01.614+02:00The number on the Escapac seat is 0305 or 0306. I ...The number on the Escapac seat is 0305 or 0306. I think that part of the aircraft's serial number was painted on the seat.If this is correct it would place this aircraft in the 1975 production run. 75-0305 was noted in 2008 at Robins.75-0306 was stored at AMARC in 2008.<br />(according to your database)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2407910486855366813.post-10256459629789522642012-05-01T07:08:59.884+02:002012-05-01T07:08:59.884+02:00First comment is correct. The ejection seat is not...First comment is correct. The ejection seat is not an ACES II, but instead appears to be the old ESCAPEPAC (sp?) seat only found in pre-production Hogs. Of additional note, close observation of the wingtip in the stack of parts reveals that this aircraft was not NVIS-modified (there are no covert position lights or "EL" lights on the wingtip). Since all operational A-10s received the NVIS mod (starting in the early-mid '90s), this fact presents further evidence that this was a pre-production aircraft. The viewer will also note a green paint undercoat on the same wingtip photo. All these facts together point to probability that this Hog had been either on display or had been used as a maintenance or weapons load trainer, and probably was painted to represent a specific jet in specific unit markings. If that conclusion is accurate, the tail number in question doesn't belong to this particular airframe.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2407910486855366813.post-38941160440340388662012-04-22T04:41:41.753+02:002012-04-22T04:41:41.753+02:00Look at the ejection seat that is not an ACES IILook at the ejection seat that is not an ACES IIAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com