[Milsurplus] RE: Contents Milsurplus Digest,

Thu Oct 26 10:04:33 EDT 2006

Hugh Boat-Anchors Supply in New hampshire

Recently I was in Hillsboro, N.H. and I visited the PIEXX store on Main Street. It is owned and operated by Christopher Sleg. I have found him to be amicable and knowedgeable. He has more "Boat-Anchors" in storage that than you will find at Hosstraders! Not everything he has is sceen in the store front. I find you have to ask to for what you want and he may well have it... His web address www.piexx.com. I suggest you e-mail PIEXX, or visit the store. I have found phone calling is difficult to get through.

Thanks,
John

 --- On Mon 10/23,  < milsurplus-request at mailman.qth.net > wrote:
From:  [mailto: milsurplus-request at mailman.qth.net]
To: milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2006 19:35:12 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Milsurplus Digest, Vol 30, Issue 33

Send Milsurplus mailing list submissions to 	milsurplus at mailman.qth.net To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit 	http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to 	milsurplus-request at mailman.qth.net You can reach the person managing the list at 	milsurplus-owner at mailman.qth.net When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Milsurplus digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re:RAL (Brad Latta) 2. Re: RAL receiver (Richard Brunner) 3. Re: RAL (C Whitaker) 4. Re: Re: RAL (Bob W7AVK) 5. f.s. WW2 books and control box (Patrick Marineau) 6. Command set, CCT46104 (Military1944 at aol.com) 7. Re: Command set, CCT46104 (Mike Morrow) 8. Re: Command set, CCT46104 (WA5CAB at cs.com) 9. Re: Re: RAL (Marty Reynolds) 10. Navy shipboard radio question 
(SHAEF1944Returns at aol.com) 11. Re: Re: RAL (Kenneth G. Gordon) 12. Re: Estate things redux (Unserviceable but Repairable) 13. Re: Command set, CCT46104 (W7QHO at aol.com) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2006 18:18:52 +1000 (EST) From: Brad Latta <bl_6000 at yahoo.com.au> Subject: [Milsurplus] Re:RAL To: milsurplus at mailman.qth.net Message-ID: <20061023081852.11061.qmail at web38009.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 I don't know why we need AGC on SSB signals. I have a bit of test gear called a 3724A(display 3725A) 'Baseband Analyser' , made by HP, basically in selective mode it can be used as a HF rx up to 18.6Mhz, no AGC here, just a range hold control that prevents it switching range as the SSB signal goes up & down. If someone's signal is stronger or closer, you just hear them louder! Works fine. I guess 
the designers of the RAL wouldn't have considered AGC! Maximum sensitivity would have been their goal, Brad 		 ____________________________________________________ On Yahoo!7 Fuel Price Watch: Find the cheapest petrol in your area http://au.maps.yahoo.com/fuelwatch/ ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2006 05:57:14 -0400 From: Richard Brunner <rbrunner at gis.net> Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] RAL receiver Cc: Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net Message-ID: <453C91FA.8020204 at gis.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > On 22 Oct 2006 at 14:24, Hue Miller wrote: > Or a pilot light and an audio gain control...which was about all it could > have used...sometimes. By coincidence my 2'nd RAL came with a pilot light, nicely installed, and I will add an af volume control in place of the dc power 
switch. When I opened up the response on the af amplifier on the other one the gain came up enormously (I think) and I had to add the af volume control to balance rf-af gain. With high af gain I had to keep the rf gain way down, starving the detector, and all signals were weak-sounding and watery. Conversely, with too much rf gain on a busy band the detector is overdriven with bad results. It works very well now, and even SSB sounds as good or better than on modern receivers. Richard Brunner, AA1P ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2006 09:34:34 -0400 From: C Whitaker <whitaker at pa.net> Subject: [Milsurplus] Re: RAL To: milsurplus at mailman.qth.net Message-ID: <453CC4EA.5090409 at pa.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed de WB2CPN I do know that up until about the middle of WWII the ships at sea were required to carry a crystal 
detector emergency receiver for 500 KHz I think. Maybe later. Per International Agreements and Treaties. 73 Clete ------------------------------ Message: 4 Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2006 06:49:43 -0700 From: Bob W7AVK <rsrolfne at atnet.net> Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] Re: RAL To: whitaker at ieee.org Cc: milsurplus at mailman.qth.net Message-ID: <453CC877.5040500 at atnet.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Clete - You are correct. All ships had 500 khz emergency receiver most of which were nothing more than a crystal set. Being a crystal dectector couldn't receive CW or A1 mode that was the reason all 500 khz emergency transmitters had an A2 mode or a modulated tone that was keyed. 73 Bob W7AVK C Whitaker wrote: > de WB2CPN > > I do know that up until about the middle of WWII the > ships at sea were required to carry a crystal 
detector > emergency receiver for 500 KHz I think. Maybe later. > Per International Agreements and Treaties. > > 73 Clete > > > > > ______________________________________________________________ > 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 > > ------------------------------ Message: 5 Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2006 14:14:48 GMT From: "Patrick Marineau" <wa9sui at mybluelight.com> Subject: [Milsurplus] f.s. WW2 books and control box To: milsurplus at mailman.qth.net, baswaplist at foothill.net, 	boatanchors at mailman.qth.net Message-ID: <20061023.071520.375.1091808 at webmail50.nyc.untd.com> Content-Type: text/plain For Sale: 1. Surplus radio Conversion Manuals Vol. 1. Like new condition $20 Vol. 2. V.G. to exc. cond. $17 Both for $35 shipped 
CONUS 2. Radio News - Special National Defense Issue - January 1942 - V.G. condition. $25 shipped CONUS 3. Remote Control Unit - Type CGX-23280 (ATD) Contract Date May 20, 1940 Excellent condition $35 shipped CONUS Check, MO or cash. No Pay Pal Thanks, Pat K9HF ------------------------------ Message: 6 Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2006 11:28:08 EDT From: Military1944 at aol.com Subject: [Milsurplus] Command set, CCT46104 To: Wireless-Set-No19 at yahoogroups.com, milsurplus at mailman.qth.net Message-ID: <390.2157040.326e3988 at aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Evening all, (bending at the knees) Just received a 1.5-3Mhz comand set, the ARA unit. Looking at the generic command rx circuit the audio o/p transformer is 600 or 8k o/p. This one seems much lower imp though, using a hi to lo z transformer audio is low, using a 15 to 3 ohm transformer the audio is 
far louder. Internal transformer is orig. So, Q, whats the actual af o/p imp of this set ? Ben G4BXD. ------------------------------ Message: 7 Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2006 11:13:15 -0500 (GMT-05:00) From: Mike Morrow <kk5f at earthlink.net> Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] Command set, CCT46104 To: Military1944 at aol.com, Wireless-Set-No19 at yahoogroups.com, 	milsurplus at mailman.qth.net Message-ID: 	<32047121.1161619995977.JavaMail.root at elwamui-ovcar.atl.sa.earthlink.net> 	 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Ben wrote: >Just received a 1.5-3Mhz comand set, the ARA unit. > >Looking at the generic command rx circuit the audio o/p transformer is 600 >or 8k o/p. This one seems much lower imp though, using a hi to lo z >transformer audio is low, using a 15 to 3 ohm transformer the audio is >far louder. Internal transformer is orig. > >So, Q, whats the actual af o/p imp of this set 
? The audio output transformer in an ARA set is about 500 to 600 ohms, although the parts list in the ARA/ATA manual does not actually state the AC impedances for which the transformer is designed. The same applies to the the transmitter sidetone audio output of the ATA modulator. This is the major electrical variance of the USN ARA/ATA gear compared to the almost electrically identical USAAF SCR-274-N gear. The SCR-274-N gear will have either a hi-z output only (-A suffix receivers and modulators) or an internally connected hi-z or lo-z tap (-B suffix units). There will normally be a decal on the outside stating that the selectable impedance units have been connected for low impedance output. Thus, there are three distinct transformer part numbers: One for the ARA/ATA, and two for the different SCR-274-N variations. The USN seems to have always used low impedance for their headsets. The USAAF began WWII using hi-z headsets like the HS-23, but 
ultimately converted to low-z headsets like the HS-33. Mike / KK5F ------------------------------ Message: 8 Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2006 12:33:34 EDT From: WA5CAB at cs.com Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] Command set, CCT46104 To: Military1944 at aol.com, milsurplus at mailman.qth.net Message-ID: <394.d17dc73.326e48de at cs.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Ben, The parts list in NAVAER 08-5Q-4 does not list the rated output transformer impedance (nor did I find it anywhere in the text although I didn't spend a lot of time looking). But it does give the winding data. Says primary is 4000 turns #40 AWG and secondary is 500 turns #32 AWG. Primary tapped at 2000 turns. In any case, the 2/42 Final manual does not show a tap on the secondary. The SCR-274-N manual says 4000 turns #40 center-tapped primary and 1800 turns #38 secondary (-A models) or 1800 turn secondary tapped at 
1325 turns (-B models). In a message dated 10/23/2006 10:32:53 AM Central Daylight Time, Military1944 at aol.com writes: > Evening all, (bending at the knees) > > Just received a 1.5-3Mhz comand set, the ARA unit. > > Looking at the generic command rx circuit the audio o/p transformer is 600 > or 8k o/p. This one seems much lower imp though, using a hi to lo z > transformer audio is low, using a 15 to 3 ohm transformer the audio is far > louder. > Internal transformer is orig. > > So, Q, whats the actual af o/p imp of this set ? > > Ben G4BXD. Robert Downs - Houston <http://www.wa5cab.com> (Web Store) MVPA 9480 <wa5cab at cs.com> (Primary email) <wa5cab at houston.rr.com> (Backup email) ------------------------------ Message: 9 Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2006 14:21:33 -0400 (EDT) From: "Marty Reynolds" <cosmoline at aa4rm.ba-watch.org> Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] Re: RAL To: 
whitaker at ieee.org Cc: milsurplus at mailman.qth.net Message-ID: 	<50381.76.17.125.155.1161627693.squirrel at fracas.netboobie.org> Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1 > > I do know that up until about the middle of WWII the > ships at sea were required to carry a crystal detector > emergency receiver for 500 KHz I think. Maybe later. > Per International Agreements and Treaties. > >... 'nother guy sez mcw (a2) req'd since no bfo Norwegian put rule to sleep just 4 years back. Seems there were scads old trawlers that still had 600hz ROTARY SPARK GAPS! I've a RCA radiomarine tx that has 4 #10 tubes in a p-p Hartley. Was run on a 600hz mo-gen & had a plug-board to move from company freq.s to calamity freq. (& of course, chart for new "C" readings). Minimalist is under-stmt. ------------------------------ Message: 10 Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2006 15:00:13 EDT From: 
SHAEF1944Returns at aol.com Subject: [Milsurplus] Navy shipboard radio question To: milsurplus at mailman.qth.net Message-ID: <cca.edbfe1.326e6b3d at aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Hello folks. I am making a website for the American Veterans Museum and currently working on a page about communications aboard American Standard battleships. These are the older ones like the Arizona and Nevada, built before and right after WWI. What I am looking for is any references to the specific radio sets that would have been used on this ships at various times, from launch through WWII. Most of the websites I have found list a few Navy radios, but not their specific use, and none are very exhaustive. I am really trying to make the page as informational as possible and need to be able to include at least a good sampling of the different sets and transmitters, receivers etc... that made them up, along with pictures. Any 
help or ' point me in the right direction ' source guides would be greatly appreciated. Thanks a lot, Richard ------------------------------ Message: 11 Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2006 12:24:31 -0700 From: "Kenneth G. Gordon" <kgordon2006 at verizon.net> Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] Re: RAL To: Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net Message-ID: <453CB47F.11648.DC41383 at localhost> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII On 23 Oct 2006 at 14:21, Marty Reynolds wrote: > >... 'nother guy sez mcw (a2) req'd since no bfo > > Norwegian put rule to sleep just 4 years back. Seems there were scads > old trawlers that still had 600hz ROTARY SPARK GAPS! Cool! I've always wanted a rotary spark transmitter....just for emergencies... :-) Back in the 60s, I heard a Canadian ham on 40 meters using one. He was WAAAAAAAAY up North and I suppose the authorities couldn't get to him. It didn't really sound all that bad to 
me...but I guess that would depend on your definition of "bad". Another electro-mechanical transmitter I have always wanted to use is an ARC. Not manufactured by Aircraft Radio Corp. Ken W7EKB ------------------------------ Message: 12 Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2006 18:33:57 -0400 (EDT) From: Unserviceable but Repairable <cosmoline at aa4rm.ba-watch.org> Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] Estate things redux To: cosmoline at netboobie.org, milsurplus at mailman.qth.net Message-ID: <200610232233.k9NMXvGU020015 at fracas.netboobie.org> Couple of new things. Maybe 12. There's two "where's waldo" pics there that someones gonna grok. again http://qsl.asti.net/AEM.est/idxmilsu.htm Marty ------------------------------ Message: 13 Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2006 19:28:35 EDT From: W7QHO at aol.com Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] Command set, CCT46104 To: WA5CAB at cs.com, Military1944 at aol.com, 
milsurplus at mailman.qth.net Message-ID: <c3e.73967bf.326eaa23 at aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" In a message dated 10/23/06 9:33:52 AM, WA5CAB at cs.com writes: > The parts list in NAVAER 08-5Q-4 does not list the rated output transformer > impedance (nor did I find it anywhere in the text although I didn't spend a > lot > of time looking).  But it does give the winding data.  Says primary is 4000 > turns #40 AWG and secondary is 500 turns #32 AWG.  Primary tapped at 2000 > turns.  In any case, the 2/42 Final manual does not show a tap on the > secondary.  > OK, 4000 turn primary and 500 turn secondary gives an 8:1 turns ratio transformer. AN 16-30AEC5-2 gives the same turns ratio for the ARC-5 series receivers and goes on to list 600 ohm headsets for use with these. Notes that several of these headsets may be connected to the same output. Interesting to note, though, that 
the SCR-274-N receivers appear to use a 3:1 transformer to drive low Z (600 ohm?) headsets. Dennis D. W7QHO Glendale, CA ------------------------------ ______________________________________________________________ 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 End of Milsurplus Digest, Vol 30, Issue 33 ******************************************

_______________________________________________
Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com
The most personalized portal on the Web!