[ARC5] ARC-27

[zakariya.abu at yandex.com]

Scott,

Interesting info on the ARC-33. I've just checked in the F-86 Sabre jet 
manual, and it says that the F-86A, E, and F used initially the ARC-3, 
then it was replaced with the ARC-33, and eventually the ARC-27 was used 
on these jets.

I am attaching an excerpt from the KC-135A manual, which lists two UHF 
and two HF liaison sets within the avionics package. I think that four 
men altogether sat in the cockpit to man that gear, incl. nav and radar 
equipment.

73,

Jan SP5XZG

W dniu 25.03.2024 o 19:27, scottjohnson1 at cox.net pisze:
> Heck, the ARC-33 ISN’T pressurized, and it is 50 % larger, and heavier! 
> (96 lbs, if memory serves)
> 
> -And it was installed in underpowered early jet fighters.  Maybe they 
> have weight and balance issues!
> 
> That being said, the ARC-33 is a heck of a lot easier to work on!
> 
> As for the ARC-116, which was part of the LHR program, you probably 
> needed two, until it got the PA revision, it was a true POS.
> 
> I have working ARC-114, 115, and 116, they are quite compact for the day.
> 
> A common load out these days for a heavy aircraft is 2 ARC-210s, plus an 
> ARC-164, so in effect you have dual VHF and Triple UHF.
> 
> One thing that has always confounded me is why SAC opted for only 1 HF 
> on bombers and tankers, when they were so dependent upon them for 
> command and control, and
> 
> MAC/AMC aircraft all had dual HF installations.  We ha one orphan 
> KC-135D that had two ARC-190s, but it was at one time a special mission 
> aircraft.  The KC-135s that had longwire antennas
> 
> Had the coupler installed above the galley, and when you were doing 
> pattern work, that speed range caused a sympathetic vibration that could 
> vibrate your fillings out!
> 
> Sorry for the ramble, stream of semi-consciousness!
> 
> Scott W7SVJ
> 
> *From:*arc5-bounces at mailman.qth.net <arc5-bounces at mailman.qth.net> *On 
> Behalf Of *Doran Platt
> *Sent:* Monday, March 25, 2024 11:00
> *To:* arc5 at mailman.qth.net
> *Subject:* Re: [ARC5] ARC-27
> 
> The ARC-27 is pressurized for high altitude use.  But, yes they are heavy.
> 
> K3HVG
> 
>     On 03/25/2024 9:22 AM EDT releazer at earthlink.net
>     <mailto:releazer at earthlink.net> wrote:
> 
>     Quote: "Yet in the 1980s the presence of two ARC-159s for redundancy
>     on a fighter jet was not unusual."
> 
>     I have an ARC-27, purchased for $10 at an aviation swap meet 25
>     years ago; it weighs about 80 pounds. I also have an ARC-116, which
>     is similar in size and weight to the ARC-159; it weighs no more than
>     10 lbs. I find it amusing that the ARC-116 is just about the same
>     size and weight as the control boxes I have for the ARC-27. I think
>     that may have influenced the decision to include two UHF sets.
> 
>     Wayne
> 
>     WB5WSV
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: kc135a com.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 215379 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/arc5/attachments/20240325/a3179892/attachment-0001.jpg>