[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