[Milsurplus] C-405A/A vs. C-740/ART-13

[Michael Tauson]

Morning, all,

On 9/19/07, Mike Morrow <kk5f at earthlink.net> wrote:

> Yes, the ARB was (unfortunately) the best that the USN had for use with the
> ATC.  That's sad, because the ARB and various AN/ARC-5 receivers (including
> the R-26/ARC-5 plus C-131) are not even remotely equivalent as receivers to
> the magnificent engineering of the ATC as a transmitter.

I know.  In a separater discussion, one other member here and I
wondered at the fact that Collins didn't build a receiver to go with
it until much later.  There probably was reason but it simply doesn't
make sense.  Well, not to us anyway.

> The manuals that detail the connection and use of the AN/ART-13 with the ARB,
> AN/ARC-5, AN/ARR-2, or AN/ARC-4 are the AN/ARC-5 operator and
> maintenance manuals, oddly enough.

I have that and it is somewhat amusing.  The one with the autotune
R-26 has an ARC-1 instead of an ARC-4 but otherwise is an awful lot
like it.

> The ARB would have been more technologically comfortable with the ATD.

In the Navy's way of mixing things up, I believe it was used with this
transmitter in some installations.

> However, the AN/ARC-8, whose AN/ARR-11 (BC-348) so well compliments the
> associated T-47A except for remote control, was the finest airborne LF/MF/HF
> set flown by anyone anywhere in WWII.

You will NOT get an argument on that from me.  Nope, nope, just will not happen!

> I'm glad that the USN had sense enough to use the best gear available,

Again, no argument.  It wasn't just the B-24s.  The B-25s (PBJ), C-47s
(R4D), and other transfered aircraft were well equipped with the
latest & greatest. (On the other appendage, I think they got a few 12
volt C-47s with SCR-A*-183s in them.  I"m not sure what they did with
them.)

> I've never seen an installation with *both* a BC-348 and a AN/ARR-15 present.

Oops, bad wording.  What I meant was they were in use during the same
time frame, not that they were used in the same aircraft, though that
certainly was possible.

My one and only BC-348 is ex-Navy and has their SO-239 conversion on
it.  After I get done shooting pictures of the ARC-5/ATC combination
(in which I'll also have an autotuned ARR-2A so it's all autotuned), I
may adjust thigns a bit so I can shoot some of a Navy version of the
ARC-8 with the modified receiver.  I'll want a C-715 control head for
the transmitter since I already have rack mount heads for one of the
antenna switches ( one of which I'll also need) and the trailing wire
reel.

> In the era of the AN/ARC-25, I wonder what receiver was used for LF/MF
> operation of the AN/ART-13 and O-16/ART-13?

The R-23A/ARC-5 is the most likely candidate.  They were plentiful,
small, light and already known to the ATs.

Best regards,

Michael, WH7HG