|
Re: Pe-8 No 42107
Something else is wrong here
The site refers to a c/n 420107, in spite of the published document clearly shows
it was 42107.
Did there exist both a 42107 and a 420107?
Also, how can Gabor quote 42107 being flown after it crashed to pieces?
Also when reading the site's loss list, there are several losses that points both ways.
Perhaps a relevant production Pe-8 summary is needed as well....?
Cheers
Stig
|