[ARC5] [Milsurplus] ARC-5 Receiver Question

[Lloyd Godsey]

Naw, the Polock that had the wrinkle paint formula died without revealing 
the secret. He also took the formula to make ice cubes with him.
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mike Morrow" <kk5f at earthlink.net>
To: <arc5 at mailman.qth.net>; <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Thursday, February 18, 2010 4:20 PM
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] ARC-5 Receiver Question


> Marvin wrote:
>
>>If I had to guess, (which I am doing now!) I would suggest that they were
>>painted for useability reasons, that being that the black wrinkle paint is 
>>non-
>>reflective, mostly, and the white-on-black lettering is easy on the eyes 
>>in a
>>darkened aircraft.
>
> Good, except that command radios were operated from their remote control 
> boxes.
> Those usually were black wrinkle, except for some late SCR-*-183/283 
> stuff.
>
> That reminds me of another inconsistency in "paint/no paint" philosophy at
> W.E. Co.:  They made the RU-16/GF-11 and RU-17/GF-12, plus the RU-18 and 
> RU-19.
> These were always painted, but they didn't really need to be.  But the 
> RU-18
> and RU-19 were liason receivers for the GO or GP transmitters, so maybe 
> those
> did need paint.
>
> Mike / KK5F
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>