[ARC5] RAT/RAV radios question

[Tom Lee]

These were designations for different radio series. For a nice summary, 
see https://armyradio.com/Command_Sets.html

I was told long ago that "RAT" stood for "receive and transmit", but I 
think that was made up after the fact. I never got a story for what RAV 
was supposed to stand for.

-- Tom

-- 
Prof. Thomas H. Lee
Allen Ctr., Rm. 205
350 Jane Stanford Way
Stanford University
Stanford, CA 94305-4070
http://www-smirc.stanford.edu

On 6/22/2020 16:22, kn7sfz wrote:
> I for one, would be interested in what RAT and RAV stand for?
>
> Thanks in advance to anyone willing to educate the great unwashed...:-)
>
> Richard  kn7sfz
>
> On 6/22/2020 3:34 PM, Kenneth G. Gordon wrote:
>> On 22 Jun 2020 at 17:52, Michael Hanz wrote:
>>
>>> Well, the owner would have had to have some patience to use it without modification, but maybe
>>> the band wasn't as crowded back then.  The receiver has a selectivity of about 14kHz, and the
>>> 12SK7s are probably starting to pant a little at that frequency, requiring 20uV to produce the
>>> 10mW audio power output described in the manual athttps://aafradio.org/flightdeck/RAT.htm
>>>
>>> On 6/22/2020 4:43 PM, Tim wrote:
>>>      OK Mike (and Mike) - thanks for recalibrating me!  HiHi.  The TX in use must have been
>>>      something more mundane at the time.  Guys were Hammering command transmitters to 10
>>>      meters back then so that was likely what I remembered seeing.. But I DO kind of remember
>>>      that the RX actually had a dial that covered 27 mc - I knew enough about them to realize it
>>>      was not the typical lower HF coverage set that I was seeing in the surplus shops at the
>>>      time...
>> Although I am not knowledgeable about the RAT/RAV receivers, some of you may remember
>> my adventure with a BC-454 which someone had begun to convert to cover 10 meters back
>> in 1950 or so, but never finished, and my travails with it. I described that in detail here, asking
>> for advice when I ran into problems.
>>
>> When the entire project was finished, I was most surprised to measure an MDS (Minimum
>> Discernible Signal) of 1 microvolt on CW (BFO on) at 29 MHz using the original 12SK7s. It
>> showed about 3 microvolts for AM.
>>
>> Switching the RF amp and 1st IF to 12SG7s did reduce the noise, but didn't really appear to
>> improve MDS at all. S+N/N ratio obviously improved, but I didn't measure that yet.
>>
>> The receiver tunes just short of 28 MHz to just above 30 MHz and works very well.
>>
>> Ken W7EKB
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> 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:https://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: https://www.qsl.net/donate.html

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/arc5/attachments/20200622/0a650b22/attachment.html>