I agree. I'm not saying it's wrong. I'm just having a bout of healthy skepticism and saying that in a case where things are unclear, I'd rather see more primary sources.Gaetan, for it to be known in so many published sources I would expect this WNr. to be known from a period record somewhere. If Dr Prien thinks it is correct I'd go with that.![]()
If we are to agree that this aircraft is 27169 and that Prien's listing of WNr. is correct, then it is indeed a G-5.