[ARC5] [Milsurplus] ARC-5 Receiver Question

[Mike Morrow]

Mike/N2MS wrote:

>What was the purpose of the paint in the first place? ...
>The Navy ARC radios continued to be painted so the corrosive
>environment theory makes sense.

I'm not a subscriber to the protective paint theory, at least
as it applies to the aluminum which comprised most of the
structure of almost all aircraft radio sets (connectors often
being a notable exception).

I believe that black wrinkle paint was above all chosen for its
cosmetic appeal, in spite of the fact that it scratches and flakes
easier and is harder to clean than more practical finishes such a
paint with a non-wrinkle surface, or just bare aluminum with its
natural oxide layer protection.

Western Electric had the philosophy that best suited practical
war time needs.  They often eliminated features of little value,
such as the paint on most SCR-274-N units.  The W.E. Co. R-28/ARC-5
and T-23/ARC-5 were always left in bare aluminum.  These VHF units
were widely deployed in U.S. Navy aircraft during and after WWII.
If corrosion was any more of a problem for these units, compared to
the pretty black wrinkle finish on the R-26/ARC-5 and T-20/ARC-5
sitting in the same racks, I've not heard remark on it.  The oddest
thing is that R-4/ARR-2 receivers made by W.E. Co. *were* painted.

As a former Navy guy, I still vote cosmetics as the principal
reason behind black wrinkle on Navy gear made of aluminum.

Mike / KK5F