[ARC5] Re: ARC-3

[Mike Morrow]

>Is there any collecting interest in the ARC-3 these days? 

>To expand on the theme, how about interest in any/all of the old surplus 
>stuff that can be used on 2M AM, i.e., SCR-522, ARC-1/3/4/5, (other)?

Over the 40 years that I've been interested in military communications gear, the predominant common error of opinion among hams seems to be that MF/HF gear is the important stuff, the VHF gear much less so.  Historically that is 180 degrees out from fact, and doubtless stems more from a ham mentality rather than a technical historian's outlook.  VHF was extremely important, and while I'm not one who makes the error of discounting HF communications especially (but not only) in liason applications, I believe that VHF was *overall* the most important aircraft communications medium in the ETO.  In the PTO, I believe VHF was also important, judging by US submarine patrol reports I've read documenting VHF communications with USN aircraft.  The very important VHF ZB and AN/ARR-2 homing systems were integral and vitally important to PTO USN aircraft operations.  If 246 mc homing was effective, certainly 140 mc comms would be as well.

The AN/ARC-3 is a tremendously important late WWII set.  In significant ways it is superior to the USN's AN/ARC-1, especially in being able to automatically tune itself up (when all is working as intended) after a new crystal is inserted and selected, with only the receiver even requiring a simple manual thumbwheel setting to select the proper crystal harmonic.  The AN/ARC-3 and later AN/ARC-36 and -49 variants served on for decades after WWII in the USAF.  IMO, the best aircraft communications suite of WWII and many year afterwards in the world was the USAAF/USAF AN/ARC-3 (VHF) command and AN/ARC-8 (LF/MF/HF) liason sets.  This opinion is coming from an old Navy man.

I've been looking for the transmitter mounting rack MT-238/ARC-3 for years for my set.  I would not mind finding a C-197/ARC-3 either.

I prefer the C-404A/ARC-3 control panel over the pushbutton C-118/ARC-3 control box.  What ever possessed the US to copy the large, awkward, mechanically complex, and expensive pushbutton select boxes that the British were so fond of?  For another example, the C-30A/ARC-5 is far superior to, and lighter and smaller and doubtless less expensive than, the earlier C-30/ARC-5 pushbutton control box.

There's not much to talk to on VHF-AM.  I don't care.  I collect to preserve historical items in their exact original configuration.  My AN/ARC-1, AN/ARC-3, AN/ARC-4, and VHF AN/ARC-5 sets have all the military channel crystals from their last military service.  If I want to talk to somebody, I'll do it with modern equipment and not try to re-design 65 year old gear that has irreplacable stuff inside that will fail someday.  I don't fault anyone for actually operating old gear today...the technical challenges can be significant and it is interesting to read about that and to hear the gear on the air.  In the 1960s I did likewise.  Today it doesn't fit in to my personal collecting philosophy, developed years ago after multiple experiences of hearing the sickening sound of a dynamotor slowing down after a failed bypass or electrolytic capacitor had shorted the HV.

Mike / KK5F