[ARC5] Re: [milsurplus] History of ham mods; opinions?

[Todd, KA1KAQ]

On Sun, Jun 15, 2008 at 12:08 PM, Mike Morrow <kk5f at earthlink.net> wrote:
> Howie wrote:
>
>>So YES, the ham mods are a part of the surplus story, IMHO.
>
> So is the story of these radios buried in landfills and melting
> in scrap metal salvage operations.
>
> I don't want to read of either story in a collector's guide.

Hmmm....you one of those revisionists, Mike?  (o: Would you only have
shown the history that is 'pretty', denying future collectors the full
picture?

Howie makes a very good point IMO, and it would be a shame to miss the
opportunity not only to include such information, but also to utilize
this history to highlight why it was done, and why it need not be done
now. What better way to stress the urgency of preservation than by
telling future generations that these wonderful radios were buried,
dumped off ships, and otherwise destroyed.

My first Command set followed a similar path as the BC-348 in that it
allowed me to get up close and personal with the set as well as making
it work. It also opened my eyes in later years to the futility of
continuing down such a path with additional surplus sets. Not unlike
the FT-101E, DX-100, and any other number of rigs, they were once
plentiful, not R at RE or 'collectible' but rather a tool for getting on
the air. Some guys today cringe at the classic old broadcast
transmitters that have been hacked up over the years by trained
engineers. One needs to keep in mind that they were a tool, like a
hammer or power saw is to a carpenter. Down time meant lost revenue
for the business. Surplus sets in the thousands, even tens of
thousands plus, were no different. They not only gave thousands
affordable access to the amateur bands, they gave many a deep respect
and appreciation for the gear.

Though not a collector per say myself, I do know several
dyed-in-the-wool collectors who have been at it for decades. They
appreciate the modded sets for what they represent: a point in radio
history. Some have heavily modified sets in their collections (the
Leary Hammarlunds come to mind) as well as surplus sets used by true
OTs or even modified by the military for a specific purpose.

These sets also represent an opportunity for new arrivals to pick up
an already-hacked set to play with, learn on, or to relive their
Novice days. Several folks have posted here and elsewhere in recent
years expressly for these sets to avoid hacking up an untouched
example. Best of all for the user/conservator is the opportunity the
modified sets provide for parts. I've sent parts to other from my
stash of ARC 5 and Command sets too rough for much of anything else,
and have a nice box of those tiny screws that always seem to escape.
All for a few bucks or even in a FREE pile at a hamfest.

Only the New Age collectors seem to turn their noses up at certain
historical artifacts and events which don't meet with their image of
'pristine' condition for bragging rights or such. I know a few guys
like this as well, it's all about impressing others, not about
accurately representing history.

Then of course, there's the old saying (paraphrased) about those who
forget [or ignore] history being doomed to repeating it. Nothing wrong
with preferring the proverbial 'mint' examples only, but to ignore the
rest seems a bit reckless and irresponsible to me. The fact that an
event wasn't 'pretty' doesn't make it any less relevant or any less a
part of history. Showing only the pretty history seems to miss the
point.

Opinion only, of course.

~ Todd,  KA1KAQ