[Milsurplus] Re:ARC 65 and ARC 21 control heads, a rare exception

Mike Hanz AAF-Radio-1 at cox.net
Fri Nov 19 18:12:40 EST 2004


Mike Morrow wrote:

> That's interesting info. I was writing of the normally installed 
> airborne unit (C-451/ARC-21). I wonder what the nomenclature of the 
> test set control box was, and if the test set control supported the 
> slave remote controls (C-455/ARC-21) that were usually employed.


Mine is a C-1210/ARC, shown at 
http://members.cox.net/aaf-radio-4/ARC-65_control_head.jpg
As you can see, it tunes sort of like the R-1051, but you can at least 
flick through frequencies in a search mode as long as you let everything 
settle down for a bit between flicks.

>>As an interesting ARC 65 sidelight, Hughes Aircraft conducted worldwide
>>HF RTTY tests for the USAF in the 60s using a C-131 (Convair 340) and
>>both an ARC 65 and an ARC 58 onboard. The ARC 65 consistently
>>outperformed the ARC 58 in every test, thought to be because of a superior receiver.
>>
>
>The AN/ARC-65 is sort of awkward and heavy overall, compared to the AN/ARC-58.  The RT-400/ARC-65 drum just by itself weighs 140 lbm.  Add the racks, separate power unit, emergency keyer units, and antenna coupler, and I recall that you were looking at close to 300 lbm total.  
>

It's a heavy system, no question about that.  The 400~ power supply 
takes quite a bit of the total weight off the entire system, at the cost 
of coming up with a 2kva 400~ supply in your shack...  :-(   The ARC-21 
was actually 'type issued' before the end of the war, but interservice 
rivalry prevented its deployment until the 1950s.  The ARC-65 was 
basically a "throw everything out from the ARC-21 except the case and 
stuff it with a new radio set."  My case still has the ARC-21 
nomenclature plate on it.

73,
Mike



More information about the Milsurplus mailing list