[Milsurplus] TCS ... AN/WRC-1 etc.

[Glenn Little WB4UIV]

When I was in Navy MARS, the Director was issued a NIB URC-35. I got it 
running. In contact with another MARS member that worked for the Contractor 
that made the URC-35, I was told to drill as many holes as I could in the 
case of the 100 Watt PA. He stated that the required power density for the 
contract was too high to cool the 100 Watt PA and that it would fail 
without the holes if we used the URC-35 for continuos duty. From what I 
saw, the URC-35 say little use as a main rig. The ones that I saw were on 
tug boats where they saw very little transmit duty.

73
Glenn
WB4UIV

At 02:37 PM 07/04/06, Mike Morrow wrote:
>Robert wrote:
>
> > ... a TCS (later an AN/WRC-1) ...
>
>When I was in the service, the AN/WRC-1 [R-1051, T-827, AM-3007] was a set 
>that I'd have loved to have owned personally.   I used to tell my 
>Communications Officer not to worry if he ever came up missing 
>one.  <g>  That was in the era before modern Asian HF ham gear became much 
>more technically sophisticated than this type of military set.  I remember 
>a couple of these sets sitting exposed to the weather for weeks on the MSO 
>piers at Charleston.  It would be my luck to get one of those!
>
>The similar AN/URC-35 replaced the R-1051 and T-827 with a RT-618/URC.  I 
>saw a lot more AN/WRC-1 sets in service than AN/URC-35 sets.  I own an 
>RT-618, a very interesting piece of gear (must have cost a fortune), but 
>it needs the AM-3007 for power supply and transmitter amplification to be 
>of any use.  I could kick myself for not buying one of several NIB R-1051 
>sets that a fellow was selling an a local hamfest for $300 ten years ago, 
>or one of the AM-3007 units that a fellow was selling for $125 at Dayton 
>in 1996.
>
>These sets would make great authentic commo gear for restored military 
>ships that were in service into the mid-1960s or later.  They could be 
>used for actual memorial station use...so much better than seeing a bunch 
>of ham or ham+military gear being "demonstrated" on a military vessel.  I 
>remember seeing a YAESU HF station connected to ham antennas on a WWII 
>submarine museum ship for a "special commemorative event" related to the 
>ship's history.  That's a sure sign that the "operators" are more 
>interested in hamming it up than presenting a usefully informed and 
>researched operation that such ships deserve.  I had to wonder what the 
>point was.
>
>I really respect and thank those, such as several who are on this list, 
>who go to great pains of research, donated time, and personal expense to 
>help restore old surviving military ships and aircraft to **accurately** 
>reflect the radio installations they carried in active service.   They 
>definitely didn't use Japanese transceivers or Heathkit linear 
>amplifiers!  The same thanks goes to those preserving commercial maritime 
>ship and coastal radiotelegraph facilities.  It's good to see these valued 
>radio historians defeat the common hacker half-a**ed ham mentality that 
>would put ham gear, TA-33s, trap dipoles, and Butternut verticals in place 
>of the authentic stuff.
>
>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