[ARC5] A-10 Radios

Tue Jul 10 19:09:04 EDT 2018

Hi Bart,
 Isn't this also known as "picket fencing" from multipath reception?
 Jay KE6PPF

-----Original Message-----
From: Bart Lee <kv6lee at gmail.com>
To: macklinbob <macklinbob at gmail.com>
Cc: To: ARC-5 <arc5 at mailman.qth.net>; Robert Eleazer <releazer at earthlink.net>
Sent: Tue, Jul 10, 2018 2:00 pm
Subject: Re: [ARC5] A-10 Radios

FM received by a mobile (or air mobile) vehicle can "washboard" the received signal as the moving vehicle hits the incoming radio waves. Car radios on FM frequently have this issue. Aviation AM may or may not have been selected to avoid this problem, at 135 MHz and below. AM was the way aviation radio started, so there was some lock-in, especially after Curtis LeMay selected single sideband for SAC in the early 1950s. SSB's power advantages may also have come into play.  73 de Bart, K6VK ##

-- -- 

Bart Lee, K6VK, CHRS, AWA, ARRL

Texts only to: 415 902 7168 

www.bartlee.com 

{KV6LEE(at)gmail(dot)com} ##

On Wed, Jul 4, 2018 at 5:31 PM K5MYJ <macklinbob at gmail.com> wrote:

The reason for the use of AM in aviation is you can hear when somone doubles. Not so with FM.

The reason of low band FM is to communicate with the troops on the ground.

I was in Korea in 1953. We used AT-6s for FAC operations. Our AT-6s had ARC-5 VHF radios.

The people on the ground had ARC-3s in jeeps.

Bob Macklin
K5MYJ
Seattle, Wa.
"Real Radios Glow In The Dark"

----- Original Message ----- 

From:   Peter Gottlieb   

To: Scott Johnson 

Cc: arc5 at mailman.qth.net ; Robert   Eleazer 

Sent: Wednesday, July 04, 2018 2:45   PM

Subject: Re: [ARC5] A-10 Radios

In a practical sense for any of us the question might be   whether in regular AM and FM use the radio performs any better than other   radios. The answer is probably not. 

Peter

On Jul 4, 2018, at 12:45 PM, Scott Johnson <scottjohnson1 at cox.net>   wrote:

Most all USAF tactical assets now have the ARC-210, which     covers all the military bands and modes from 30-512 MHz, and has built in     ECCM and secure speech, as well as satcom capability (all with the proper     antennas and switching, of course).  It is an awesome radio, but at     $100K a copy, not on my wish list.  Like the ARC-164, it will probably     soldier on for at least thirty years (it’s already about fifteen years old,     but evolving, just like the -164)  

Scott V. Johnson P.E. W7SVJ

Sunburst Engineering Partners

5111 E. Sharon Dr.

Scottsdale, AZ 85254-3636

H (602) 953-5779

C (480) 550-2358

scottjohnson1 at cox.net

scott.johnson at ieee.org

From: arc5-bounces at mailman.qth.net     <arc5-bounces at mailman.qth.net>     On Behalf Of Robert Eleazer
Sent: Tuesday, July 3, 2018     9:55 AM
To: arc5 at mailman.qth.net
Subject:     [ARC5] A-10 Radios

When I was at the     Pentagon the idea was to get rid of the A-10 and use F-16's.  The F-16     equipped with a weapons load comparable to an A-10 could do a very nice job     of making sure no one got past the guard shack at the main gate of its     home base. 

The fear was that     the A-10 was so slow that when the Warsaw Pact came through the Fulda Gap     the A-10 would get hit on the first day of the war and although probably     survive to make it home but we would not have time to repair it before the     war was over.

Some on Congress     said that if USAF got rid of the A-10 the US Army should take over the     airplane, it being a much better "mud mover."  The Army was terrified,     saying that all their airplanes had to have at least two     seats.

Then came Saddam's     invasion of Kuwait and the A-10 was the machine to have.  And when the     war was over we had lost four A-10's and four F-16's  So much for     survivability concerns.  A re-engining program was started for the A-10     a few years later. And the USSR went out of business on 25 Dec 1991; so much     for the Fulda Gap concern

To some in the USAF     was faced with either keeping the A-10 or buying the F-35 - and the     F-35 won.   I do not know if that insanity     persists.

The A-10 would have     at a minimum VHF AM Air Band (108-132 MHZ), UHF AM (220-400 MHZ), and low     band FM (30-76 MHZ) radios.  The ARC-114, ARC-115, and ARC-116 such as     carried by US Army helicopters of the late 60's would do nicely but it no     doubt has gear later than that.

Anyway, look it up     yourself.  The pilot's manual for the A-10 is available for free     download here:

http://www.476vfightergroup.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=42

Wayne

WB5WSV

Virus-free.           www.avg.com           

______________________________________________________________
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

______________________________________________________________
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

______________________________________________________________
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

______________________________________________________________
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/20180710/e82205d2/attachment-0001.html>