[ARC5] MFP- Before or After

[J. Forster]

OK, but doesn't it seem very odd, that after a MFP coat, the unit would
not be tested in any way?

-John

=================



>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "J. Forster" <jfor at quikus.com>
> To: <ARC5 at mailman.qth.net>; <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
> Cc: <Vintage-Military-RADAR at yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2012 7:38 PM
> Subject: [ARC5] MFPO- Before or After
>
>
>> Recently, I got a NOS (?) Output Meter for an ASB-5 RADAR
>> set. I powered
>> it today and smelt like something was burning, so powered
>> it down.
>>
>> It turns out the filament series resistor, a standard
>> ceramic wirewound
>> type had burn marks on it. I was puzzled because the
>> resistor had looked
>> new ten minutes before. It turns out, there was some
>> varnish on the
>> resistor that had charred when the resistor got hot. (It
>> scraped off
>> easily).
>>
>> Now, I would have expected that the unit would have been
>> tested before
>> shipment. Had that happened, the resistor would have been
>> charred.
>>
>> So, the question is, would an MFP coating have been
>> applied after final
>> test or before. This unit implies it was applied after,
>> but that doesn't
>> really make sense either.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> -John
>>
>      I have seen a number of pieces of military equipment
> with dates stamped on them for the MFP treatment, some
> several years after original manufacture. I suspect some
> equipment was built and put into stock for a time, and then
> MFP treated and returned to stock.  I don't know this for
> certain but think its true.
>      BTW, just today I saw a notice in a 1945 QST that
> stated that "now that the European war is ended un-needed
> equipment is being tropicalized and sent to the Pacific".
>
>
> --
> Richard Knoppow
> Los Angeles
> WB6KBL
> dickburk at ix.netcom.com
>
>