[ARC5] "Rare"

Sat Sep 9 22:17:03 EDT 2017

There is indeed an ARA/ATA manual.  Curiously, it doesn't appear to have 
been placed on the web like the other two.  Like Walt Hutchens (KJ4KV), 
the author of so many WWII set reviews in ER, I share the opinion that 
it was the foundational manual for the series, with a bit more design 
information than in the other manuals.  It has always been useful to me 
to compare the three manuals, despite the design differences.

On 9/9/2017 8:28 PM, J Mcvey via ARC5 wrote:
> It was an afterthought type question, so it was not a well formulated 
> inquiry.
> I, personally, have seen very few ARA sets, thus made me think that 
> they may be rare in general.
> It may well be a matter of geography in more ways than one. One could 
> encounter more Naval surplus if they are near a Naval base, whereas 
> another person will find more Army surplus if they are closer to an 
> Army base.
>
> Another interesting thing is the manuals I have an original SCR-274 
> and soon to have an original ARC-5 manual. Is there such a thing as 
> ATA/ARA manual? SCR-274 makes no mention of ATA/ARA
>
>
> On Saturday, September 9, 2017 4:28 PM, AKLDGUY . 
> <neilb0627 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Yes, all good points and I like your rarity scale.
>
> My point was that the original poster asked an ambiguous question.
> If he meant to ask whether the ARA series is rare, the answer is no.
> If he meant the CCT-46104, the answer is "rarer" which is what I 
> should have said,
> meaning not as common as the 190-550 Kc and 3-6 and 6-9.1 Mc models.
>
> Perhaps there should be another class on your scale:
> Uncommon.
>
> Neil ZL1ANM
>
>
> On Sun, Sep 10, 2017 at 3:30 AM, David Stinson <arc5 at ix.netcom.com 
> <mailto:arc5 at ix.netcom.com>> wrote:
>
>     *From:*AKLDGUY .
>     *Subject:* Re: [ARC5] Any difference in the front plugin pin out
>     on CCT-46104
>     ARA receivers are common, but those 1.5-3.0 MC receivers are rare.
>     Neil ZL1ANM
>     ------------------------------ ---
>     (This is just my opinion, YMMV of course.)
>
>     Respectfully-
>     That’s an interesting matter of perspective.  “Rare” is a subjective
>     term, involving matters of personal understanding and even geography.
>     The term gets applied so loosely it’s almost lost meaning.
>
>     I tried to suggest an objective standard for “rare” several years
>     ago,
>     but got no traction.  I do still apply it to my writing and
>     understanding.  The core premise of what I called the “Scarcity Scale”
>     was the difficulty or ease for a collector to acquire an **intact**
>     (i.e. not gutted or drilled-out) example of a piece after diligent
>     efforts
>     to do so.  The item’s place on the scale depended on how many
>     examples were known to be available for acquisition.  i.e.,
>     examples in the stacks of the Smithsonian
>     (where they will remain unseen until Judgment Day),
>     are not available to the collector, nor are they likely to ever be,
>     so they are not accounted in the reckoning of “scarcity.”
>     It’s also important to carefully define the set of which we are
>     speaking.
>     For example:  Someone once said that RAT sets were not “rare” because
>     so many of them had surfaced.  I suggested to this person (whom I
>     esteemed and still esteem highly) that was not a correct
>     interpretation.
>     There are **four** models of radio within the designation of “RAT.”
>     These need to be considered individually, just as one would not class
>     a T-17 transmitter as “common” just because T-22s are common.
>     Less than 10 of each model of RAT (and RAT-1) are known to have
>     survived, and that makes each of them authentically “rare,”  IMHO.
>     The individual models of BC-348 are another good example
>     Geography is an issue as well.  What is common in North America
>     can be authentically “rare” in the South Pacific.  The 8^th Airforce
>     modified BC-455 “Lorenz” sets are authentically rare in North America,
>     but not hard to find in the U.K.  A 1.5-3 MC ARA is “Scarce” in
>     North America, but likely “Rare” indeed in New Zealand.
>     “Each to his own lights,” of course.
>     For the sake of discussion, here is my suggested “Scarcity Scale,”
>     again premised on the ability of a collector to acquire an example
>     after diligent effort:
>
>     Extinct:  No examples of this item are known to have survived.
>          i.e. RAV 9-13.5 MC receiver.
>     Unique:  Only one in existence:  A.R.C. Morgue “Circle-M,”
>          proven prototypes.  These should be carefully preserved
>     regardless
>          of their modification status.  A collector may search a lifetime
>         and never acquire such a piece.
>     Rare:  Less than 10 of these items are known to have survived,
>          to be in private hands and thus, may be available at some time.
>          Diligent search over a period of several years may result in
>          collecting one (it has taken me 40 years to acquire one each
>          of the four models of RAT).  These should also be preserved
>          regardless of their modification status.
>     Scarce:  An average one or two of these items become available
>           to collectors each year.  Persistent search should reward the
>           collector with an example within a year to three.
>     Common:  Multiple examples of these items surface every year.
>          The collector should have no trouble acquiring an example
>          after modest effort.  i.e. unpainted  BC-45*, BC-348Q.
>     GL OM DE Dave AB5S
>
>     ______________________________ ______________________________ __
>     ARC5 mailing list
>     Home: http://mailman.qth.net/ mailman/listinfo/arc5
>     <http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/arc5>
>     Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq. htm
>     <http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm>
>     Post: mailto:ARC5 at mailman.qth.net <mailto:ARC5 at mailman.qth.net>
>
>     This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net <http://www.qsl.net/>
>     Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> ARC5 mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/arc5
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:ARC5 at mailman.qth.net <mailto:ARC5 at mailman.qth.net>
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net <http://www.qsl.net/>
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>
>
> <http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail> 
> 	Virus-free. www.avg.com 
> <http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail> 
>
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> ARC5 mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/arc5
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:ARC5 at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/arc5/attachments/20170909/dd90b7f9/attachment-0001.html>