[Milsurplus] Re: WW2 electronics reliability (was ARC-1 to '4...)

[Jim Whartenby]

Greetings Clete
Good question since "in trouble" is not defined.  One can only assume that it means that the equipment does not meet specification.

Facilities I would think are systems with redundant equipments. For example: the MPN-13 GCA radar.  I believe that the MPN-13 operations van had three each ARC-27s and ARC-3s for UHF and VHF communication.  One UHF/VHF set for each of the three operator positions.  Agreed, the loss on any one set would not shut down the facility.

I was in USAF Ground Radio (30454) so these sets were the only things I had responsibility for in the van.  Funny, Ground Radio had maintenance responsibility for aircraft radios!  Although the GRC-32 is an ARC-27 with a whopping big 27 volt power supply.

I picked up this book at a Hamfest in NJ many years ago.  There is no ISBN number.  The full title is:
"Reliability Factors for Ground Electronic Equipment"
Keith Henney, Editor in Chief
McGraw-Hill Book Company
Technical Writing Service, 1956
The project engineer was Joseph J. Naresky, Rome Air Development Center.

The following references are for Chapter 1, there are 12 chapters in the book dealing with all aspects of design reliability.
The reference to the Ad Hoc Group is:
"Progress Report on Reliability of Electronic Equipment",volumes 1 and 2, Research and Development Board, Department of Defense, EL/217, February 1952.

Other references which may be easier to find are:
Nordlund, R.J., "Complexity of Military Electronics", Skyways, February 1954; also in Engineering  Digest (RCA) March-April 1954.

"Investigation of Electron Tube Reliability in Military Applications" General Report No. 1, April 1954, summarized in Electronics, April 1954 and Aviation Week, April 5 and April 19, 1954

Hope this helps,
Jim




--- On Sat, 9/27/08, C Whitaker <whitaker at pa.net> wrote:

> From: C Whitaker <whitaker at pa.net>
> Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] Re: WW2 electronics reliability (was ARC-1 to '4...)
> To: milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
> Date: Saturday, September 27, 2008, 8:45 AM
> de WB2CPN
>  From my experience starting in early 1946
> I doubt those figures.  What is meant by
> "in trouble"?  We usually had a few Priority
> and NAIOP Requisitions in, but that didn't
> mean the facility was off the air.  On 611's,
> the big problem was batteries and frequency
> management.  And, in WWII people knew that
> many things were expendable.  Use it and toss
> it.  I suppose the figures included "lost"
> equipment.
> 73  Clete