[Milsurplus] Re: [ARC5] New addition

Thu, 8 May 2003 15:07:50 -0600

Mike,
 All of the receivers you mention can be remotely operated by the pilot except the BC-348.
 And Paul,Thanks for your pictures.
 Jay

-----Original Message-----
From: Morrow, Michael A. [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, May 08, 2003 12:28 PM
To: [email protected]; COWARD,JAY (A-SanJose,ex1)
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: RE: [Milsurplus] Re: [ARC5] New addition

David Stinson wrote of the R-27/ARC-5, C-131/AR:

> The set was specifically designed to be used with the ART-13
> transmitter...

David's posting is the most information I've ever seen on this arrangement.  Thanks!  (I was tempted to bid on the item too.)

It's always seemed odd to me that the USN had only a jury-rigged hodge-podge of receivers to go with the excellent ATC during and just after WWII, except for those few USN installations which used the USAAF's BC-348-x.  The ARB, the RAX, the ARC-5 units as David described, (and even a RU wouldn't surprise me)...all USN HF aircraft receivers are somewhat ill-matched to the AN/ART-13 until the R-105/ARR-15 came along after the war.  Does anyone have any info on the earliest deployment of the AN/ARR-15?

Yet, even the AN/ARR-15 is not fully capable of matching AN/ART-13 capabilities.  It has no coverage in the LF/MF band to match the O-16 and -17/ART-13, and CW mode is not selectable remotely as it is on the AN/ART-13.

I suppose without doubt, the best receiver match in any service for the AN/ART-13 during WWII was the BC-348-x (AN/ARR-11).

Mike / KK5F