[ARC5] A-10 Radios

Tue Jul 10 19:46:27 EDT 2018

I guess it was back in the early 70's when one of the magazines, Popular Electronics, Popular Mechanics, etc, had a question and answer page where someone asked about the flutter you hear on AM broadcast radio when driving 

The answer was: "This is due to the Doppler effect and it is a reason why circular beltways are popular for driving in cities, since the curving path minimizes Doppler shift."

All of the other answers that month were similarly absurd - and it was not the April issue.  The regular guy must have been on vacation.

Wayne
WB5WSV     
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Jay Coward 
  To: kv6lee at gmail.com ; macklinbob at gmail.com 
  Cc: arc5 at mailman.qth.net ; releazer at earthlink.net 
  Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2018 7:09 PM
  Subject: Re: [ARC5] A-10 Radios

  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

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/arc5/attachments/20180710/7ae41449/attachment-0001.html>