[ARC5] US Military Aircraft Radios - Opinions

[Mike Morrow]

Dave wrote:

>I have a commercial control box for this set.  Photos on request.
>It has a "Navy anchor" acceptance stamp above the commercial
>nomenclature.  It is different from the later ARC-4 control box.
>It is derived from the SCR-274N control box, and uses the A.R.C.-designed
>SCR-274N control box connector.
>This would mean the WE-233A had to have been on the drawing board
>about the same time as SCR-274N (engineering/ prototyping late
>'39 to '40, production in '40-41 or so), and would have been
>available for commercial use only during a small window of time,
>before it was "drafted" early in the war.  This box also includes
>an intercom / radio switch not included on the later box.

That describes the C-51/ARC-4 control box, which uses a USN version of
the PL-153.  It also has mic and phone jacks, and a volume control, all
missing on the later simplified C-52/ARC-4A.  (Yesterday I erroneously
refered to this as "C-54/ARC-4" in one of my postings.)  The simplified
control box, which forces use of a jack box like the J-22A/ARC-5 with
integral volume control, is one of the main distinctions between the
AN/ARC-4 and the AN/ARC-4A.  The C-51 is my favorite control box (is that
weird?) because it has in one box every control and connection needed
to utilize the RT-19/ARC-4.

>The WE-233A wasn't "ready for prime time", but the SCR-522 
>was even more crude and troublesome.

IMO, the SCR-522-A is far more capable, and has a much better receiver,
than the AN/ARC-4.  But it is larger and heavier and far more complex,
and provides no guard receiver.  The SCR-522-A is a very important
radio set, while I'm not so sure about the AN/ARC-4.  Even the USN
used some SCR-522-A sets.

>As an aside: I don't personally count the AN/ARC-3 as a major contributor
>to WWII, since it did not see wide use until after the war.  Most USAAF
>aircraft equiped with VHF finished the war with the SCR-522.

It's interesting that there is documentation of some USAAF aircraft (such
as the P-61) being listed as having either two SCR-522-A sets or one AN/ARC-3
set.  It's not uncommon to run across AN/ARC-3 components with early 1945
MFP dates stamped on them.  The B-29A flight manual I have lists the AN/ARC-3.
  
>IMHO, it's a cool set, but it's more a vet of Korea than WWII.

The USAF seems to have been attached to it throughout the 1950s.  They employed
it (or the AN/ARC-36 or -49) along side the AN/ARC-27 UHF command set, for reasons
unknown to me.  The USN during the same period appears to have almost totally
abandoned VHF-AM.

>most of the Navy aircraft that were equipped with VHF used the AN/ARC-5
>MF/HF/VHF/ARR-2 combo.

Re-channeling efforts ignored, the combo that you mention provided quite a bit
of capability per pound and cubic foot for carrier-based aircraft.

>Many were using ARC-1 (especially heavy aircraft), but that was not general.

It would be interesting to know how many AN/ARC-1 sets were flying by war's end.
I have doubts similar to yours.  I suspect that AN/ARC-1 usage peaked AFTER
the war, but only until the UHF RT-58/ARC-12 became available to slide into the
AN/ARC-1 rack in place of the RT-18.  The USN seems to have prosecuted the switch
to UHF with vigor, totally dropping VHF in the process.

>The ARC-1 is a complex, expensive and hard to mass-produce set...

The RT-18/ARC-1 has always seemed Collins-inspired, yet that seems to apply only
to the auto-tune mechanism.  I believe it is principally a Westinghouse creation.
Does anyone on the list have any development history to share?

I've considered a good radio installation to have on an aircraft after WWII would
have been an AN/ARC-1 VHF-AM, AN/ARC-2 HF-AM, AN/ARR-2 VHF homing, and AN/ARN-6 ADF.
Add the USAAF's excellent RC-103-A and AN/ARN-5A ILS and a marker beacon receiver.
What more would one need?  These would have been state of the art around 1946 or 1947.

Mike / KK5F