[ARC5] History and Context of the ARC-5 sets

[Michael Tauson]

On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 3:45 AM,  <arc5 at ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> Life and its history are not made-up of such snippets.
> They are like a great river, flowing into an ocean of time.
> There are many side-streams, eddys, back-washes
> a even dead-end swamps.  The history of the sets we
> call "ARC-5" is just as complex, with many causes and effects
> and many players blending into, and often contradicting, each other.

With this and Gordon's comments, a statement of the overall situation
is dead on.  What I tried to do was address the specific questions
without getting into what I call "history's tapestry" (same as your
river, just a different visual) far enough to bring more questions
into play.

There are questions like what divisions (or companies) actually made
what major components of A.R.C.-tagged equipment?  Did any Type K
equipment fly tagged as such in civilian aircraft?  (Same question for
Models B & D equipment.)  Where can I get information on the
SCR-A*-183/-283 models not covered by TM 11-200?  With that, what are
the differences between the non-compatible models?  Which GF and RU
transmitters and receivers (i.e., 46xxxA, B, C etc or no suffix or
52xxxA or no suffix etc) went with which models and what were the
changes?  Also, what was incompatible with what in the GF/RU
equipment?  What brought on the grand shakeup in 1934 that put A.R.C.
at the top of the food chain instead of RFL?  Who are all those other
companies under A.R.C. and why do they exist?  Who was RFL’s original
parent company?  (I’ve heard two different versions of this.)  Who
came up with creating A.R.C., RFL or their parent, and when?

Et cetera.  More et cetera than I can remember at the moment; those
were just off the top of my head from a really, really long list of
questions.  Every time something new is mentioned here I'd never seen
before (like the use of command receivers in glide bombs that you
mentioned a bit ago), it raises more questions.  How many were used
like this and under whose authorization?  Was it just BC-454s or did
BC-455s get into the act?  Who originally thought of this?  Again, et
cetera, et cetera, et cetera.

Another thing is the AN/APW-22(?) RT that fits modified command Tx
racks.  Whose idea and why and so very much more.

Why did the AAF decide it needed a VHF Rx & Tx to fit A.R.C.'s racks
when it already had the SCR-522?  Why did the Navy pick it up when it
had a good system going with HF and had alternatives for VHF?  I'm
sorry but I think the WE VHF equipment designed for the SCR-274-N and
AN/ARC-5 racks was a waste of time and money.  In my never humble
opinion, if anything they should have developed the 233 design to make
it fit expanded frequency and channel requirements.  Somehow I suspect
politics is involved.  :-)

And each question I come up with spawns more ... I have a 3 ring
binder of questions that still need answers and the only way I'll get
any of them covered is to go to Wright-Patt and DC to dig them out
myself.  Even then, there will be too many gaps for my liking and I
won't be satisfied.  Of course, paying for that trip is a small
problem but I'm working on it.

So many questions, so few answers ...

BEst regards,

Michael, WH7HG
-- 
http://www.nationalmssociety.org/chapters/NTH/index.aspx
http://wh7hg.blogspot.com/
http://kludges-other-blog.blogspot.com
Hiki Nô!