[ARC5] Re: [Milsurplus] C-30 vs C-30A/ARC-5 and other small details

[Jack Antonio]

Mike and the group,

First of all, I think the C-30A looks better. It looks more like a 
piece of a command set than the C-30.

But since when did the military care about aesthetics?

The pushbuttoned C-30 seems to be more at home in a busy
cockpit,  easier to push a button than fiddle with small levers.
Maybe the C-30A would be more at home in a transport than
a fighter, but that is just speculation on my part.

I own a C-30A, except that it is missing the nameplate. :-(

But while we are on the subject, I always thought the
VHF ARC-5 were primarily Navy, so why does my C-30
and T-23 have contract numbers that look Army contract numbers?

73

Jack

Jack Antonio WA7DIA
scr27@sbcglobal.net



> The C-30A by comparison is smaller, lighter, and much less mechanically
> complex inside.  It doesn't require the T-23 to be in the number 1 rack
> position.  It has the capability of selecting VHF channels on the R-28
> receiver without the need to turn on the transmitter set, while on the C-30
> depressing a VHF channel select button aways energizes the transmitter
> heaters.  I've just got to think that the C-30A was a lot less expesive to
> build to boot.
mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/arc5