[ARC5] A-10 Radios
Bill Cromwell
wrcromwell at gmail.com
Wed Jul 11 15:01:36 EDT 2018
Hi Bart,
SSB is essentially AM. Most of us are too lazy (or too efficient) to use
the entire description about carrier status and sideband count. It's a
big mouthful of words for casual conversation.
73,
KU8H
On 07/11/2018 02:10 PM, Bart Lee wrote:
> 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 <http://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
> <mailto: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 <mailto:kv6lee at gmail.com>>
> To: macklinbob <macklinbob at gmail.com <mailto:macklinbob at gmail.com>>
> Cc: To: ARC-5 <arc5 at mailman.qth.net <mailto:arc5 at mailman.qth.net>>;
> Robert Eleazer <releazer at earthlink.net <mailto: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 <http://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
> <mailto: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 <mailto:kb2vtl at gmail.com>
> *To:* Scott Johnson <mailto:scottjohnson1 at cox.net>
> *Cc:* arc5 at mailman.qth.net <mailto:arc5 at mailman.qth.net> ;
> Robert Eleazer <mailto: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 <mailto: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____
> <mailto:scottjohnson1 at cox.net>scottjohnson1 at cox.net
> <mailto:scottjohnson1 at cox.net>____
> <mailto:scott.johnson at ieee.org>scott.johnson at ieee.org
> <mailto:scott.johnson at ieee.org>____
> ____
> *From:* arc5-bounces at mailman.qth.net
> <mailto:arc5-bounces at mailman.qth.net>
> <arc5-bounces at mailman.qth.net
> <mailto: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 <mailto: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.
> <http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient>www.avg.com
> <http://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 <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 <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 <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
>
--
bark less - wag more
More information about the ARC5
mailing list