[ARC5] P-38 Photo

[Brian Clarke]

Hello Wayne,

 

What makes you think this was used in New Guinea? It has USAAF rather than
RAAF markings on the starboard wingtip and no fuselage or tail markings I
can see. The brown paint suggests a desert fighting mission / arena, eg,
Northern Territory, Queensland interior and northern West Australia, not New
Guinea, which is mostly green and tropical.

 

The ADF antenna would probably have been half-way along underneath the cabin
fuselage to get at least a minimally effective ground plane. Yes, A-N ranges
were in use in the South Pacific in WWII. A friend Billy, VK3AQB, who
part-owns the Civil Aviation Historical Society (CAHS) museum on the old
Essendon airfield in Melbourne, Vic, Australia has mockups (some still
operational for display purposes) of the ground and airborne equipment used
in WWII. Billy's job during WWII (and till he retired from the Civil
Aviation Authority in about 1980) was visiting all South Pacific airfields
to align all ground-based navigation equipment. He commanded a special
aircraft festooned with all manner of antennas for measurement and alignment
of navigation and landing equipment. I visit Billy approximately annually,
this time in January 2019; tell me if there any photos you'ld like me to
take for you.

 

I visited Parafield airfield in Adelaide, South Australia a couple of years
ago, where I saw a complete installation of SCR-274N equipment under the
canopy behind the pilot's seat of a fighter whose nomenclature I can't
recall. Being under the canopy would surely alleviate the condensation
problem experienced in unpressurised aircraft. There was no sign of SCR-522
or the ARC-3 family of radcoms equipment. Don't knock the BC-1206 too hard;
it's main claims to usefulness were that HT was derived directly from the 28
Vdc supply and it fitted in a standard 4" diameter hole in the pilot's
control panel; so, no dynamotor, and hence lighter than a BC-453 + dynamotor
+ rack +shock-mount + remote control + MC-215 tuning cable and clips. But,
in terms of serviceability, sensitivity and stability, no argument that the
BC-453 was superior.

 

BTW my first attempt to contract you got bounced by earthlink; that's why I
used the arc5 listing.

 

73 de Brian.

 

On Sunday, 2 December 2018 5:38 AM, you said:

 

Brian:


Here's the photo.  Based on another photo of an airplane from the same unit
on the ground I would guess it was taken in Dec 1943.

 

Now what good an NDB does if you lack an ADF, I do not know. Did they have
A-N ranges?  And you cannot install both SCR-522 and  SCR-274-N in a P-38.
I can send you the pages out of the manual if you wish.

 

Now, it would be entirely feasible to install both SCR-522 and also one
SCR-274-N receiver, like the BC-453.  That is just what the USAF did for the
P-51's in Korea.  They replaced the SCR-522 with ARC-3 and replaced the
BC-1206 with the vastly superior BC-453, mounting it atop the ARC-3 so it
was way up in the bubble canopy.

 

Any light you can shed on this I would appreciate!

 

73's,

 

Wayne

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/arc5/attachments/20181202/239fb5a2/attachment-0001.html>