[Milsurplus] Where was RAL & RAK used?

[WA5CAB at cs.com]

Ken & Group,

That's the second time someone has mentioned that the RBB and RBC overload 
easily.  I beg to differ.  In the mid 60's, I did training duty aboard USS 
Bushnell at Key West, which still had RBB's and RBC's as the only communications 
receivers aboard.  As an E2 I didn't sit any radio watches (and a hurricane came 
through and threw another monkey wrench into things), but I distinctly recall 
the more senior RM's using the receivers (which of course had their own 
antenna(s)) as keying monitors (no muting or standby or any of that nonsense).  
>From not long after that until '73 when I moved to Houston, I had a Super Pro 
(SP-110-LX), an RBB, an RBC, a T-47/ART-13 and a BC-610-F.  The T-47 or the 610 
had one antenna.  The receivers used a separate one.  And I also used the 
RBB/RBC as a keying monitor.  The Super Pro took several seconds to recover after a 
dot.  I've never owned an RAL.

In a message dated 1/2/2006 3:55:47 PM Central Standard Time, 
kgordon at moscow.com writes: 
> I was told that the main reason the OT ops didn't care for the RBB 
> contraptions was that they tended to overload more easily than the 
> RAK/L, by nearby transmitters which were not on the receive frequency.

Robert Downs - Houston
<http://www.wa5cab.com> (Web Store)
MVPA 9480
<wa5cab at cs.com> (Primary email)
<wa5cab at houston.rr.com> (Backup email)