[ARC5] [Milsurplus] GP with ARB?
David Olean
k1whs at metrocast.net
Sat Oct 29 09:39:28 EDT 2022
Hi Mike
I really liked the ARB as a kid. I think the big draw was that it cost
about 1/2 of what a BC-348 cost surplus. We could cut a few lawns and
buy an ARB! The 348 took more lawn work! It did work great as a VHF rx
with an International Crystal 2M converter in front of it.
Dave K1WHS
On 10/28/2022 10:29 PM, Michael Hanz wrote:
> Well, Hue is right in a sense. But the ARB was intended to replace
> the RU as the wholeMegillah of the moment - liaison _and/or_ command
> receiver. Of course, that was in the time when the specialization
> movement began in earnest. By the end of the war, you had specialized
> liaison, command, automatic compass, landing, and what-all receivers
> going into aircraft. The ARB was certainly the equal of the BC-348
> performance-wise, but for hams it is a lot clumsier to use from the
> user-friendly perspective, and as a general search receiver, its RU
> procedural roots are less than stellar. I think that is why is rates
> lower on the scale these days.
>
> Contrasting opinions are encouraged.
>
> - Mike KC4TOS
>
> On 10/28/2022 8:44 PM, Hubert Miller wrote:
>> You're thinking of the ARB + ATB, which was the pilot's Command radio.
>> The radioman for CW position reports and so on, was GO + RU.
>> I do not know for sure what Command sets were used when some of the PBYs were given instead BC-348 and ATC for liaison radio.
>> -Hue Miller
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home:http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help:http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post:mailto:Milsurplus 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/20221029/91caf612/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the ARC5
mailing list