[ARC5] A-10 Radios

Wed Jul 11 14:10:38 EDT 2018

Yes, the wiki says:

Originally from amateur radio <https://wikivisually.com/wiki/Amateur_radio>,
the phrase was used to describe the way an FM
<https://wikivisually.com/wiki/FM_broadcasting> transmitter will cut in and
out as it nears the capture threshold
<https://wikivisually.com/wiki/Capture_effect> of a moving receiver or
transmitter as it passes through fresnel zones
<https://wikivisually.com/wiki/Fresnel_zone>, thus chopping the speech of
the transmitting operator. It is not clear if the phrase was intended to
describe the loss of the speech, or if it actually referred to the chopping
sound itself, which imitates the noise produced by dragging a stiff object
across a picket fence.

I first heard the term all too many decades ago in the Civil Air Patrol, as
just a quick explanation for why AM instead of FM in aviation.  I
have heard the effect on FM radio while driving.  I think Jeep is right
that it's lock-in more than anything else that keeps aviation radio in AM,
other than for long distance communications where power matters, hence SSB.

73 de Bart, K6VK ##

-- --
Bart Lee

Texts only to: 415 902 7168

www.bartlee.com

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

<http://www.LawForHams.com>

On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 4:09 PM Jay Coward <jcoward5452 at aol.com> wrote:

> 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} ##
>
> <http://www.LawForHams.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 <kb2vtl at gmail.com>
> *To:* Scott Johnson <scottjohnson1 at cox.net>
> *Cc:* arc5 at mailman.qth.net ; Robert Eleazer <releazer at earthlink.net>
> *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
>
> <http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient>
> Virus-free. www.avg.com
> <http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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 <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 <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/20180711/b8d3946d/attachment-0001.html>