Did you niotice the post office box was 34567 .... come on that has to be made up ...
Well, 12345 would have been too obvious, wouldn't it?
Surely someone in the Houston Area can check out that address and see if it is legit. There must be some kind of old city directory in the library that lists the address of that squadron (and should't it be on an Air Base Post Office and not the general Houston PO?).
That is on another document. It may not be made up, but it is one strange quirk of luck.
My house address is 12345, so what are the chances?
Let's check the PO Box ownership records for that time....
These are just too perfectly written...
G
Haven't had time to read all thru this thread, so sorry if this was already mentioned:
The memos are not written on any kind of pre-printed letterhead. They appear to have been printed on plain paper; thus the need to type in the sender's address info at the very top.
But in the May 4 memo, the "111th" on the letterhead has the "th" in the same font as the rest of text, while the "111th" within item number 2 has the "th" as superscript.
The August 18 memo to file also has a superscript on "187th".
All other numerical contractions, such as the "1st" in reference to Lt. Bush's rank, are typed as regular text (not superscript).
I doubt that even high quality typewriters in the hands of our armed forces in the early '70's printed in superscript. But even if they could, why the inconsistencies within the same document, utilizing superscript on some and not others? Especially in the top letterhead address, where you would make an effort to use all the bells and whistles available?
I would like to see similar TX ANG documents from this time frame from that office to see if they were of similar print style.