[Milsurplus] "ART-13" Variants

[WA5CAB at cs.com]

I hadn't thought about it but that's true.  The ATC was something new.  The 
ATD was sorta new.  And the GP had been in production for years.

In a message dated 1/19/2007 11:12:31 AM Central Standard Time, 
wdonzelli at gmail.com writes: 
> >  ATC (later re-nomenclatured AN/ART-13) is to ATD sorta like AN/GRC-19 is 
> to
> >AN/GRC-14.  Competing designs by different contractors with the same
> >intended function (multi-channel medium power MF/HF aircraft transmitter).
> >Receivers used with the ATD were the same mix as used with the ATC.  Which
> >means not normally a BC-348, which was a Signal Corps set.
> 
> I think there could be a decent dose of "backup contract" in the mix
> as well. ATC and ATD were contracted very close to each other,
> timewise, along with Westinghouse GP-7s.
> 
> The Collins Autotune was a new technology for the Navy. They had a few
> shore transmitters that used them just before the ATC came into being.
> With no long term experience, I would bet the Navy did not want to
> sink everyting into the fancy, expensive, unproven megamechanical
> design.
> 
> This was probably a good idea. What if the Autotunes failed? The Navy
> would be in a jam if they had no backup.
> 

Robert Downs - Houston
<http://www.wa5cab.com> (Web Store)
MVPA 9480
<wa5cab at cs.com> (Primary email)
<wa5cab at houston.rr.com> (Backup email)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20070119/2956a983/attachment.htm