[ARC5] Re: A.R.C. Alternatives

[Michael Tauson]

On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 2:05 PM, Michael Tauson <wh7hg.hi at gmail.com> wrote:

Okay, let's try this again.  The original message read in whole as follows:

> For discussion's sake, let's suppose that A.R.C. failed to impress
> anyone with the Type K so, instead of producing them in quantity
> (along with other manufacturers), wound up building Model D-based
> equipment instead, replacements for already existing equipment.  The
> question is, then, what other equipment would have been available to
> become the standard HF command equipment as well as LF/MF nav sets
> where the BC-453 et al were used for such.  Also, would this have
> hastened the move to VHF for command use?

So, let's cut out all the conspiracy stuff, unknowns and other malarky
that a few decided were all that was left.

Will Donzelli and I discussed this briefly and he came up with the
SCR-240 & -261, the RAM (production continued past the original 16
units) and RAX.  Also, the Bendix entries (SCR-274-A and -B) were
mentioned plus the fact that A.R.C. wouldn't just give up but the Type
K would probably be well delayed while they worked the kinks out.  One
other that came to mind was the Bendix TA-12 and its companion
receiver, though I don't know how well they'd survive combat
conditions.  (Could they be ruggedized sufficiently?)

Keep in mind this is for command service & not laiason so the
transmitters also have to fit that role in fighters, bombers and other
aircraft.  FDR is pressing the Army for a 50,000 plane air force so
they're under the gun.  Likewise, the Navy is smart enough to know
that the RU/GF won't last forever and that there is more current
technology available.

Does this make more sense now?

BEst regards,

Michael, WH7HG