Warbird Information Exchange

The serial number of the C-124C Globemaster II at Charleston AFB is 52-01072. The number painted on the tail is 0-21072. This does not seem to me to be correct. Can someone who knows the correct tail number please tell me what it should be?

Thanks,

Walt

I've found that somethings leading zeros after the "date" are dropped.

But I'd love to know the anwser to this also.

_________________
www.tailhookstudio.com

....and the O stands for "Obsolete" which was applied often to aircraft older than 10 years, leading to a different serial-number presentation - in its youger years, this C-124 carried the serial "21072" for 52-1072

Martin

For some reason, the numbers physically painted on the tails don't always match the serials precisely.

In both my F-15E squadron and my T-38C squadron, there have been aircraft with the last three numbers of the serial the same. Since only the last three are painted on the tail, both squadrons have used a leading "8" to differentiate the two jets.

Example:

F-15E 86-0186 has "0186" on the tail. Another jet further down the flightline at SJAFB, 87-0186, ha(d) "8186" on the tail.

It appears to me that this is a locally-designed method to differentiate aircraft, versus some kind of USAF-wide official policy. It would not surprise me if this is the sort of thing that was going on with the C-124.

One other thing.
Take our b-25J for example..........
s/n 44-86725 the first 2 numbers before the -
is the contact year (not the year manufactured).
Our's was built in mid 45 and the tail displays
486725.

_________________
Don't touch my junk!!

Sometime when the a/c was partially repainted, the shop would get lazy and drop the leading "0" and the contract year when the numbers were repainted.

52-01702 would be the correct form of the tail number from what all of my documentation shows.

As to using "O" for obsolete, I've never seen it done or seen it documented anywhere. I maintain a couple of Block 5 F-16's that are nearing 30 years old and they carry standard s/n markings.

USAF tail #s DO reflect the year of the contract, not nessisarily the year of manufacture, just like the model year of your car may not represent the year of manufature(My old Dodge P/U is a "91", built in "90", sold new to me in "92" so is it 14, 15 or 16 years old?! ).

_________________
I never said the jokes were Good, they're just Free! You gets whatchyas pays for!

Hi,

52-939/1089 Douglas C-124C Globemaster II c/n 43848/43998
1072 on display at Charleston AFB, SC

In the 1950s, many airplanes left over from World War II were still in service, thus exceeding their expected service lives of less than 10 years. In order to avoid confusion with later aircraft given the same tail number, these older aircraft had the prefix "0" and a dash added in front of the tail number to indicate they were over 10 years old. It was hoped that this would avoid confusion caused by duplication of tail numbers between two aircraft built over ten years apart. However, this was not always done, and it was not always possible to identify an aircraft by the knowledge of its tail number. This practice was eventually discontinued when people started referring to the "0" as being the letter "O", standing for Obsolete.

Amado

Thanks for the clarification Amado - so I was only half-wrong there.

Saludos
Martin

*EDIT* n/t (double-posting)

Saludos
Martin

Hi Martin,

No problem. I have had my share of problems with the USAAF/USAF serial number assignment system. Sometimes I have trouble understanding how serial numbers used by the Air Mobility Command and USAF-Europe aircraft are or have been displayed, i.e, formats used for the tail number - the first digit of the tail number being the last digit of the Fiscal Year, etc, etc.

Saludos,

Amado

Here you go. This is P-51D 44-72990, ex N6322T, which the US Army purchased in April 1967. You can see clearly that the tail marking is O-72990.

Interesting picture, but it brings up some big questions. I found one reference to using the leading "0" for a/c over ten years old, but it also says that it was phased out in the 1950's. That paint scheme, other than the number is a very late 60's early 70's design. Why is it wearing a tail number scheme that had been out of use for nearly 10 years at that point? I did find a supposed recent picture of her at Ft. Rucker and she is wearing the exact same paint scheme and numbering.... I'm wondering if since she went through Cavalir program, if she might have been reserialized. Inquiring minds want to know.....

The registry says it did indeed go to Cavalier at one point.

_________________
Dan Johnson

'72990 is NOT a Cavalier Mustang - it was used alongside two real Cavaliers (s/n 68-15795 & 68-15796) in the YAH-56A "Cheyenne" helicopter programme as chase planes. - All sported similar paint-schemes - in the case of 44-72990, however, the conversion was done by Aero-Sport. (right Randy ?)

Martin