[Milsurplus] Re: Nomenclature whimery (Was TRC-77)

[Mike Morrow]

Jack wrote:

>And I've often wondered why the
>AN/ARC-58 consists of an R-*** unit and T-*** unit
>when it seems like it really should be and RT-*** and AM-***
>like the GRC-106.

Hi Jack,

I've got a R-761 and T-605/ARC-58 at home and have wondered the same thing.

Then, how about the nomenclature frenzy of the 1950s and 1960s where almost all of the *subassemblies* inside a radio set cabinet each had their own individual full-blown JAN nomenclature assigned?  That approach was used in most of the AN/ARC- major components of the era, especially Collins-made stuff.

And why do major components of some systems have no *individual* JAN nomenclature?  For examples of a few of many, the main units of the URC-64, URC-68, URT-33, PRC-49, PRC-34, PRC-36, PRC-64, PRC-90, PRR-9, PRT-4, ARC-108, ARC-114, ARC-115, ARC-116, etc. have no associated RT-xxx, R-xxx, or T-xxx numbers.  Yet minor accessories to these sets will often have a formal specific AS-xxx, CU-xxx, H-xxx, BB-xxx, CX-xxx etc. designation.

Then there are those official JAN nomenclatures applied to commercial or other previously-tagged military gear:  AN/ARC-9 (Bendix RTA-1B), AN/ARN-11 (Bendix MN-26C), AN/ARR-11 (BC-348), AN/ARR-13 (Setchell-Carlson Model 512), AN/ARC-8 (AN/ART-13, AN/ARR-11), AN/ARC-25 (AN/ART-13, AN/ARR-15), etc.

Gotta' love this stuff!

73,
Mike / KK5F