Though it was not unexpected, I was disappointed that Hsinsher Open House yesterday did not have any flight demo. Luckily, I had an chance to get a very close look at UH-1H 424, a helicopter that seemed mysterious to me, until yesterday.
It is well known that AIDC license-built 118 UH-1H from 1969 to 1976 (or 1977), their serial numbers from 301 to 418. But last year I saw UH-1H 424 at one of the open houses. So what is the deal? A little research showed that ROCA received seven UH-1H from ROCAF in 1985/1986. So 424 could be one of the seven. But I need more proof.

At Hsinsher yesterday, UH-1H 386 (64-2086) and 424 (69-2124) were on display. One would think that 424 is the newer of the two. But is it? The aircraft identification plate of 424 shows that its original serial number is 69-16678, confirming that it is one of the nine UH-1H acquired by ROCAF in 1970 and one of the seven transferred to ROCA. So it is in fact older than 386.

But wasn’t 386 built in 1964 given its serial number 64-2086? Because it was built by AIDC, 64 does not mean “the year of 1964”, but “the 64th year of the Republic”, which is equivalent to 1975. (To get 1975, simply add 1911 to 64.) Its identification plate says that its Bell serial number is 18086, which comes after 424’s Bell serial number 17024.

Well, a mystery solved, I think… But the crew present were not interested in my discovery. I told them that, unlike 386, 424 was the original Bell work. Their response was that both helicopters had been overhauled by Air Asia. I bet they had no idea what I was talking about…
And there is more. Although many military publications are correct in saying that the Hueys previously used by ROCAF for SAR missions were built by Bell, they claim these helicopters are HH-1H. Now you know they are wrong!
我有次去龍潭採訪看到424
機尾還是漆美軍序號
後來又看到424
已經改成陸軍所獨自創獲的中西合璧式的怪序號
還好有我們這些喜愛研究飛機號碼甚於樂透號碼的人
真相才有機會大白
真希望研究飛機序號也可以中大獎!