[Milsurplus] Abuse of radio "relics"

[Michael Tauson]

This is gonna get long - Kludge is on a tear.  :-)

Okay, I'm a 'tweener here.  I think.

For most of my equipment, I would like it to operate presicely as
designed, whether I'm using in a ham rig (like my completely stock
BC-312-N and/or BC-348Q which will be along side HB transmitters) or
as complete installations like the ATA/ARA and GF/RU "show and tell"
setups and others.  Some of the operating display equipment came to me
(and shall come to me, I'm sure) pre-hacked which means restoration
both electrically and mechanically - filling in holes etc.  Sometimes
capacitors have to be restuffed (leaving the original appearance and
function with new innards) and sometimes things like resistors have
gone to their rewards which means they have to be replaced as well.
In the end, though, the equipment will look and operate precisely as
God intended it and A.R.C. (or Stromberg-Carlson or WE) built it.

I've already been told that, because I restore the equipment, I don't
appreciate quality when, from my standpoint, if it's a choice between
having a restored piece or none at all, restored is far, far better.
Having it not only restored but in an operating display that people
can see and touch (with the transmitters deselected, just in case) and
ask questions about is even more so better.  I guess "quality" is a
variable because I see that last as being the top dawg* of the line
rather than having it tucked away out of anyone's sight just so you
can say "I have this."  With that, what about the BC-348 for which I
don't yet have a dynamotor or mount?  According to certain souls,
simply installing a replacement dynamotor proves I "don't appreciate
quality".

* Well, no.  Top dawg would be to have a fuselage [section] in which
the equipment would be mounted as original but I haven't seen many F4U
(for example) fuselages around for me to chop up for this and I don't
think I'm up to making one.  (20-30 years ago, yeah, but not now.)

The other foot is in a place where the equipment is not feasible,
economically or otherwise, to restore.  There I have no qualms about
making a "typical 50s-60s conversion" rig to show what was done with
them by hams after the war.  Is this part of their original history?
Not by a long shot but it is a postwar branch from it that is part of
ham radio's history.  Those two threads cross and recross fairly
consistantly, most especially immediately after WW II and continuing
to today.  Since I see history as a tapestry and not a single thread,
I can't find any contradiction in this.  Obviously some will but
that's their kuleani, not mine.

But what about the 18S-4 and AN/ARC-38A, the former in house and the
latter planned.  The 18S-4 still needs a dynamotor but it won't be run
using it's usual antenna mathcing box.  The AN/ARC-38A won't even have
its original power source since I have an AC supply that will keep it
quite happy for HV and bias, and I can make the 24vdc and 115vac, 400
cps supplies.  For that matter, if I wind up with a 618T-3 it will
have a few minor changes from original as well.  Operationally, no
except probably I won't have the original antenna matching unit
(again) and I hope to find the pieces parts from a B model so it can
tune in .1 KCs increments.  But I haven't seen a mount for one
anywhere and that comes down to presenting an interesting problem.

I guess I live somewhere in both worlds.  Or maybe I see an entirely
different picture than anyone else does.  I don't know.  What I do
know is that, so far, I haven't seen an opinion I disagree with ...
except maybe not apprciating quality.

Hau'oli Makahiki Hou.

Best regards,

Michael, WH7HG
-- 
http://www.nationalmssociety.org/chapters/NTH/index.aspx
http://wh7hg.blogspot.com/
http://kludges-other-blog.blogspot.com
Hiki Nô!