[ARC5] Radio Equipment installed in Grumman F6F-3 at NMNA

[Kenneth G. Gordon]

On 8 Jun 2010 at 14:07, w4thq at cox.net wrote:

> Work on the F6F-3 at the National Museum of Naval Aviation has been
> underway for several months

Hooray! The F6F(*) was one of my favorite aircraft of the period. 

> and today I inventoried the radio
> equipment prior to beginning restoration.  The following were removed
> from the aircraft:
> 
> A 3 receiver rack/mount was present containing three receivers: an ATA
> receiver 0.19 - 0.55 MC;

That could be the R-23/ARC-5, or a CBY/CCT-46144 I believe.

>  an R-27/ARC-5 6 - 9.1 MC ; and an ATA
> receiver 0.52 - 1.5 MC.

That may be the R-24/ARC-5, or a CBY-46145, or CCT-46145 ?

>  Also, a receiver control box for 3 receivers,
> ATA CBY- 23251 was included.  Two receiver nameplates were not
> readable as to Type.

See above...but I am certainly no expert on these either. DaveS?

> 
> A 2 transmitter rack/mount ATA CBY- 52212 was present containing: two
> transmitters: ATA Type CBY- 52210, 5.3 - 7.0 MC; and ATA Type CBY -
> 52208, 3 - 4 MC.  Also, an ATA Type CBY - 23243, Transmitter Control
> Box and an ATA Type CBY - 29125, Antenna Relay Unit were included
> supported by an an ATA Type CBY - 50083, Modulator/Dynamotor unit.
> 
> A Model ZB-3 Homing Adaptor was also removed.

I wish I knew more about these, and their cousins...

> An RT-19/ARC-4 and Mount with a C-51/ARC-4 Control Box and a
> J-23/ARC-4 Junction Box were also in the aircraft.

That is ALL very interesting. I suppose the .52 -1.5 Mhz receiver was 
also used for navigation?
 
> Since some of the NMNA aircraft used for carrier qualifications often
> retained equipment from prior service, I cannot say for sure which of
> the above were only along for the ride and not needed during training.
>  I thought it would be interesting to pass along to the group what was
> found on this particular aircraft.

Well, it is very interesting to me.

Especially the ARC-4. I had no idea it was used extensively. 
Compared with the other VHF rigs of the period, it was not very good. 
Limited frequency range, almost deaf receiver, unstable when 
compared with the others.

The AN/ARC-3 was, possibly, near the top of the VHF rigs, and there 
were a couple of subsequent models with more and more channels.

Of course, the AN/ARC-1 was, IMHO, THE best.

I would be pleased to hear of anything else you find in that "new" F6F-
3.

Supposedly, they were called, "The box the F4U came in", but I don't 
think they were all that ugly.

Furthemore, they were gotten to the fleet after an unusually short 
gestation period, unlike the F4Us (Hose Nose) which were pulled from 
carrier service at least twice. 

I never could understand why Chance-Vought wouldn't add a fin to the 
rudder like North American did to the P-51 when they went to a bubble 
canopy.

I also could never really understand why the F4U remained in fleet 
service so long (possibly its greater load-carrying capability?) while the 
F6F was removed very shortly after WWII.

I always thought the F6F was the better plane.

Ken Gordon W7EKB