[ARC5] Data tags and contract delivery dates

[Mike Morrow]

David Stinson wrote:

>It isn't as simple as "we always used this; we never used that."
>In short: tactical aircraft at the front, in England and in France
>had to have the SCR-522 by D-Day.  ...you'd better have HF
>or you're "flying blind."  This was also true of most of the western
>hemisphere throughout the war, the Caribbean theater until 1943,
>and the Pacific theater far later (the Air Corps prioritized SCR-522
>to the ETO because of the requirement to coordinate with the Brits).


Hi David,

Thanks for the great info, as usual.

I think the documents that Taigh posted show among other things, the
importance of the SCR-522 in the ETO (including Iceland), and the continuing
importance of the HF SCR-274-N in nearly all other theaters.  I didn't mean
to imply that I interpreted the documents to show that the SCR-274-N was not
utilized to some degree in the ETO.  I like the SCR-274-N, and have
assembled a complete NOS three-receiver, two-transmitter set over the years,
with some unsolicited and greatly appreciated assistance for several items
from Mike Hanz.  I do think that among us collectors, there's a tendency to
ignore the SCR-522/524 set.  From what little I know, were one to somehow
rate the relative importance of the command set systems used in the ETO, it
would be hard NOT to award first place to the SCR-522/524.  I'm proud of my
almost complete SCR-522 (just missing the mounts for the PE-94 and the RT
unit) as a representative of a set with great historical significance.

>they were "burning down the woods" to get SCR-522 on line by this
>time, yet here they are spending precious resources to retrofit with
>SCR-274N

And also making the obsolete SCR-183/283 sets at least into 1943.  (Isn't
the SCR-AS-183 the last version?)

>I swear, I do not understand this continuing resistance
>to the role of the SCR-274N in the war.


I guess I see it from the opposite angle:  As an item of interest among the
WWII aircraft radio collecting community, the SCR-522's importance is
usually unappreciated.

>The role of the SCR-522 was pivotal in the advancement of
>aircraft communications; no question about it.  But it is *not*
>the whole story.  The SCR-274N, praised by those who used it,

Yet one can find WWII pilot memoirs where the four-channel SCR-522's ease of
use and performance are praised in direct comparison to "coffee-grinder"
radios.  Bruce Vaughn, NR5Q, who writes frequently for "Electric Radio," was
a radio tech in the ETO and has told me that the SCR-522 was the set which
carried the lion's share of communications load, by large margin.

>was a vital bridge linking the "old world" of the 1930s micro-powered
>TRF sets to the "new world" of VHF.   That's no mean feat.


I agree completely, for what little that's worth.

Meanwhile, in the PTO the USN was continuing to field an interesting variety
of HF and VHF sets.  I hope one day to be able to complete an ARC-5/ARR-2
set that combines a little of both, along with a homing receiver (R-4A/ARR-2
250 mc homing, R-26 fixed-tuned HF, R-28 VHF receiver in one rack, T-20 HF
and T-23 VHF transmitter in one rack).   That three-receiver,
two-transmitter set would make a great contrast to my three-receiver,
two-transmitter SCR-274-N set.

73,
Mike / KK5F