[Milsurplus] 24 Volt BC-312's & KC-97L

Tue May 17 01:20:16 EDT 2005

If a BC-312 was found properly mounted in an aircraft, why is this bogus?
 Could it be the result of a need that was better filled by a BC-312?  As
for rarity, BC-348s appear to be more plentiful then BC-312s or BC-342s. 
eBay completed auctions confirm this by almost two to one, at least for
the last 30 days.

I am sure SAC was first in line for modern (post WW2 developed)
equipment.  Does anyone know when ARC-21s and ARC-27s were first
introduced?  I am guessing it was around 1952 for the ARC-27 and maybe
1953 for the ARC-21?  Anyone have an ARC-21 or any related subassemblies
in excess of their needs?
See you at Dayton,  I'll be lugging an updated Radio Flyer!
Jim

On Mon, 16 May 2005 08:38:29 -0700 (PDT) Mike Morrow <kk5f at earthlink.net>
writes:
> Ray wrote:
> 
> > ... they tell me this is how they received it from the National 
> Guard unit
> > that was flying it. The ship is a odd mix of technology with some 
> vintage
> >electronics on board like the BC-312, and what's stranger is the 
> APX-6
> >transponder that's above it,
> 
> They can claim what they will, I don't believe it for a moment.  
> IMHO, the BC-312 is undoubtedly bogus.  It weighs twice what a 
> BC-348 weighs, and runs off 12 vdc (or was it the very rare "X" 
> model, much more difficult to find than a BC-348), and lacks 200 to 
> 400 kc coverage.  Even the BC-348 and ART-13 (ARC-8) was very 
> obsolete for a SAC aircraft in 1955.  Certainly SAC would not have 
> installed a BC-312, and there would be no reason for the ANG to have 
> done this.
> 
> The AN/APX-6 IFF or the similar-looking AN/APX-25 derivative is 
> possibly genuine, though.  They were being used on SAC aircraft well 
> into the 1970s.
> 
> >and newer systems like two new encoding altimeters and a modern
> >altitude encoding transponder.
> 
> They wouldn't need the APX-6/25 then.  Sounds like a civilian 
> backfit.
> 
> >Their is no HF command transmitter installed, and no ARC-5 type 
> junk,
> 
> A KC-97 of this vintage and assigned to a command of such high 
> national priority as SAC would definitely have had an AN/ARC-21 (AM) 
> or later the AN/ARC-65 (USB) 140 lbm drum HF set installed, maybe 
> along with the associated AN/ARR-36 auxiliary HF receiver.  
> Possibly, a non-pressurized version of the AN/ARC-58 HF set might 
> have been installed.  Minor service/support aircraft might have had 
> the old AN/ARC-8 still in place, but not a KC-97.  There would have 
> been no reason for this gear to have been removed for ANG service.
> 
> No surprise about "ARC-5 junk"...HF "command sets" had been long 
> since supplanted by UHF command sets like the AN/ARC-27 and -34 by 
> 1955.  Contemporary VHF sets would likely have been the older 
> AN/ARC-3, 36, 49 type of sets.  VHF capability wasn't all that 
> important if UHF was available.
> 
> The ADF set of choice in 1955 would likely have been the AN/ARN-6.
> 
> >Perhaps in the conversion to a "L" in 65 is when they removed the 
> HF
> >transmitter, installed the new transponder and altimeters, ... also 
> all
> >the VHF and UHF communications appear to be from the mid sixties.
> 
> Military digital-tuned UHF sets commonly in use in the mid-1960s 
> would include the AN/ARC-27, 34, and 51(*).  Plus the USAF had a 
> host of other less common oddball UHF sets like the ARC-33, 66, 74, 
> etc.
> 
> The common military digitally-tuned VHF set of that era was the 
> AN/ARC-73.
> 
> >Brings up the question I brought up before, is this ship only
> >relevant if it is returned to the state that it was when delivered
> >from the factory, or as it was finally retired from active 
> service?
> 
> I'd say the last, but the lineup described is almost certainly NOT 
> what was in place when the aircraft was in military service.  It's 
> just too fishy and bizarre.  The museum folks need to do a better 
> job of figuring out where all that goof-ball stuff came from, and 
> get rid of it.
> 
> On a slightly different matter, but related to airborne commo gear, 
> I wonder how many list members realize how much communications 
> avionics was on the typical Vietnam-era Army UH-1 ("Huey") 
> helicopter.  Here'a list from a late-1960s UH-1D/H model:
> 
> AN/ARC-51BX   UHF         225-400 mc.
> AN/ARC-102     HF/SSB    2 to 30 mc.  (Only on command aircraft)
> AN/ARC-131     VHF-FM    30 to 76 mc.
> AN/ARC-134     VHF-AM    116 to 150 mc.
> AN/ARN-82       VHF-VOR  108 to 127 mc.
> AN/ARN-83       ADF         0.1 to 1.75 mc.
> 
> This doesn't include all the other IFF and navigation gear.  This 
> gear would do proud even the largest of military aircraft of the 
> mid-1960s.  Yet these small aircraft carried gear covering almost 
> all of the useful spectrum to 400 mc.
> 
> 73,
> Mike / KK5F
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
> 
> 