Warbird Information Exchange

Doing some Tiger Moth research and stumbled across this one in California, N5444, which has the serial number 3312, making it one of the oldest Tiger Moths around, if correct.


But that serial number was originally delivered to Uruguay in 1935, and this airplane is said to have been imported from the Philippines in the 1960s. It seems an unlikely story, but maybe our Uruguayan member from the Curtiss Wright SNC-1 thread can help. There is a good web site on the Uruguayan Air Force, http://www.pilotoviejo.com/historiatigermothen.htm , and according to that this aircraft would've been scrapped after World War 2, but maybe it somehow found its way to the Philippines. If it is s/n 3312 it has quite a history, and was used in bombing raids to put down an insurrection in 1935. But N5444 has slats which the Uruguayan Tigers did not, and the rear cockpit doors are different as well, so maybe it was just assigned a serial number of convenience when it was imported to the US.

A photo of s/n 3312 in the 1930s




-

I would agree its unlikely to be mfrs s/n 3312 given the physical differences and unexplained travel from South America to the Philippine's before import to the USA.

Particularly as its recorded as being written off in a crash in 1947 and I cant imagine its parts being recovered and set overseas for use in any rebuild in those days.

http://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/wiki.php?id=136709

Date: 18-DEC-1947
Time:
Type: Silhouette image of generic DH82 model; specific model in this crash may look slightly different
de Havilland DH.82 Tiger Moth
Owner/operator: Fuerza Aérea Uruguaya (FAU)
Registration: 600
C/n / msn: 3312
Fatalities: Fatalities: / Occupants:
Other fatalities: 0
Airplane damage: Written off (damaged beyond repair)
Location: Mazangano - Uruguay
Phase:
Nature: Military

Given its slats, and its Asia/Pacific recovery location, its far more likely to be an ex RAAF example escaped from Australia (or RAF example from Singapore) with a corrupted or fictitious serial number.

Ie if the first number is an 8 rather than a 3 etc

As an example these are UK built RAAF examples

R5262 83121 Served with RAAF, retained RAF serial.
R5263 83122 Served with RAAF, retained RAF serial.
R5264 83123
T140 Served with RAAF, retained RAF serial.
Registered VH-BCB 22/05/47 to 02/04/55.
Registered VH-PCI from 02/04/55.
R5265 83124 Served with RAAF, retained RAF serial.
Registered VH-BUZ 30/06/49 to 06/05/60.
Registered VH-WFW 06/05/60 to 29/05/63.
Withdrawn from use.
Registered VH-WFW from 17/03/99.
T5360 83127 Served with RAAF, retained RAF serial.
T5361 83128 Served with RAAF, retained RAF serial.
Registered VH-AQL 03/04/46 to 20/10/47, 11/04/48 to 10/04/49, 25/06/49 to 14/12/60.
Withdrawn from use.
Registered VH-AQL 10/11/66 to 08/09/72.
Lost without a trace over Bass Strait 08/09/72.

But it could equally be a local DHA built example with any strange part number mistaken as the serial number?

Regards

Mark Pilkington

That's a good theory, makes sense. It would be interesting to see if the Tiger Moth in California has a data plate to support its identity.



-

I asked some friends about E-600 (N° 4) serial 3312.
Based on some historians comments it was almost impossible at the time that such airplane would be sold out of Uruguay.
So the TM registered in the US with N5444 would be another frame using the uruguayan serial 3312 for some reason...

In the first photo the aircraft has English built wings with leading edge slats
The second photo shows is with Canadian built wings no slats

They're both British built aircraft, for some reason the Uruguayans ordered their Tiger Moths without slats. This was 1935, which I think is long before the Canadian versions? The web site I linked to in the first post has lots of interesting history and information, including the use of Tiger Moths as bombers in 1935.



-

It would make a neat color scheme for a restored Tiger:



-

Baldeagle wrote:They're both British built aircraft, for some reason the Uruguayans ordered their Tiger Moths without slats. This was 1935, which I think is long before the Canadian versions? The web site I linked to in the first post has lots of interesting history and information, including the use of Tiger Moths as bombers in 1935.



-

Thats very interesting Andrew , thanks for posting

Another give away that picture #2 is a much older Tiger, is the square cut doors.
Picture #1 shows the later, and much more common style of cockpit door.
Australian built Tigers were also built with no slats.

Andy

Anyone know where a guy could get a Tiger Moth checkout in the U.S.?