[Milsurplus] mystery instrument

Ralph Cameron ramcam at magma.ca
Mon Jun 1 08:39:39 EDT 2009


I'd bet my money on the remains of a DF set .

Ralph
VE3BBM
----- Original Message ----- 
From: <milsurplus-request at mailman.qth.net>
To: <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Monday, June 01, 2009 3:37 AM
Subject: Milsurplus Digest, Vol 62, Issue 1


> 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: [ARC5] Was C-48/ARC-5 - Now A.R.C. Prototypes (Michael Tauson)
>   2. Manuals FS (Lloyd KK7IZ)
>   3. Re: WWII Japanese Radiosonde (Mike Morrow)
>   4. Re: WWII Japanese Radiosonde (jcoward5452 at aol.com)
>   5. BC-461 (Brad Latta)
>   6. Re: BC-461 (Mike Morrow)
>   7. Re: WWII Japanese Radiosonde (KD7JYK DM09)
>   8. SEM-25 (Robert Nickels)
>   9. Re: WWII Japanese Radiosonde (jcoward5452 at aol.com)
>  10. Mystery Instrument found in Navy Observation Dome in WA State
>      (Greg Werstiuk)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Sun, 31 May 2009 07:47:11 -1000
> From: Michael Tauson <wh7hg.hi at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] [ARC5] Was C-48/ARC-5 - Now A.R.C.
> Prototypes
> To: arc5 <arc5 at mailman.qth.net>, milsurplus
> <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
> Message-ID:
> <c34299fb0905311047r733e0b1asde6127785c024b3c at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 5:51 AM, Mike Morrow <kk5f at earthlink.net> wrote:
>> I should have added a caveat to my statement that excluded prototype
>> and developmental items. ?From my outlook, those are 
>> interesting...sometimes
>> very interesting...engineering stories. ?But I consider an item to be a
>> proper part of a system only if it actually survived to the point that
>> it was deployed for military mission use.
>
> Ah, okay.  My interest is far deeper due to the research I'm doing for
> my book so everything's fair game, including concepts that never left
> the drawing board.  This is why I sometimes bore in on details to what
> is a probably annoying degree and why I consider the SCR-274-N an
> A.R.C. product even though WE built the vast majority of them,
> including making manufacturing improvements along the way.
>
> Even here, though, some non-A.R.C. items have to be included such as
> the WE-produced VHF components and the ZA, ZB, AN/ARR-1 and AN/ARR-2
> simply due to their close association/integration with the other
> bitzenpieces.
>
> Also, my time scale is broader, ranging from 1927 through the "Cessna
> Era", though the latter will be difficult to manage due to
> documentation problems.  I have an excellent outline to follow
> provided by Gordon White leading up to Cessna's purchase of A.R.C. but
> after that is a fog that I need to cut through in one way or another.
>
>> Such items
>> should be listed outside of any canonical list of a system's components
>> to avoid any misinterpretation that military end-users ever saw it.
>
> Agreed, though they will be listed together.  Prototype only or
> limited production pieces will be marked as such and pieces that never
> left the drawing board won't go past the text portion.
>
>> My opinion only, of course.
>
> And a valid one.  :-)
>
>>>As a side note, the NRL design included two separate crystal channels
>>>plus retained the ability to be tuned which the A.R.C. redesign did
>>>not.
>> There was a control box for such on ebay a year or so ago. ?I stay
>> away from prototypes, so I didn't track the auction to see who got
>> it for how much.
>
> I saw it, though I didn't bid on it.  Basically, it was a 23155
> control box with side cars attached.  This is one of the things I need
> to chase down at the NASM or Silver Hill.
>
>>>It was the latter version that reduced the cockpit controls, not
>>>the Navy's which, instead, only complicated them more.
>> Are you referring to the final AN/ARC-5 configuration, using the
>> C-30A and C-38 controls? ?If so, I'd say I don't know how much
>> simpler a set of controls for three receivers and two (usually)
>> transmitters (including four channels of VHF) could have been made.
>
> Yep.  That was A.R.C.'s answer to the messy way the NRL did things and
> was, to me, an elegant solution.
>
>> I love the old Aircraft Radio Company gear, but I think A.R.C.
>> is often credited way too highly. ?Their last *major* military
>> contribution was the ARA/ATA in 1940. ?The AN/ARC-5 LF/MF/HF
>> system is really only a minor enhancement to that rapidly obsolete
>> ARA/ATA type of MF/HF command set.
>
> *chuckling* ... Okay, I don't want to get into the HF vs VHF
> "discussion" and I know that you see the SCR-274-N as being a WE
> product where, for my purposes, I see it as an A.R.C. product.  That
> said, the LF/MF/HF A.R.C. equipment served through the war with the
> R-23A/ARC-5 (if nothing else) used into the 70s while the LF/MF
> equipment and their earlier work with VHF equipment, though not used
> during WW II, provided the basis for the postwar Type 12 etc systems.
> (That gets into another part of the company's history that would
> likely be way boring to others here so I won't go there.)  It did what
> it had to do and it did it well.
>
> A.R.C. wasn't perfect by any stretch and, as someone whose opinion I
> respect highly mentioned to me, their ergonomics sucked most
> bodaciously (along with other issues) but as Gordon White pointed out
> a few months ago - right place, right time, right product.
>
> BEst regards,
>
> Michael, WH7HG
> -- 
> http://www.nationalmssociety.org/chapters/NTH/index.aspx
> http://wh7hg.blogspot.com/
> http://kludges-other-blog.blogspot.com
> Hiki N?!
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Sun, 31 May 2009 12:30:46 -0700
> From: "Lloyd KK7IZ" <kk7iz at cox.net>
> Subject: [Milsurplus] Manuals FS
> To: "Milsurplus" <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
> Message-ID: <3346D2B052064D84A7CF8062DF0EAB3D at userlvnwsus9dr>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
> reply-type=original
>
> Cleaning house and found:
> TM11-2601 Dated December 1943
> Manual for
> Radio set AN/TRC-1
> Radio terminal set AN/TRC-3
> Radio relay set AN/TRC-4
> Amplifier equipment AN/TRA-1
> Approx 140 pgs with diagrams
> Also 3 suppliments (2) dated August 1944 and (1) dated January 1945
> Manual is stapled construction, cover loose.
> $30.00 plus media mail shipping for all.
> Thanx
> Lloyd  KK7IZ
> kk7iz at cox.net
> 480-620-7145
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Sun, 31 May 2009 15:03:53 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
> From: Mike Morrow <kk5f at earthlink.net>
> Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] WWII Japanese Radiosonde
> To: milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
> Message-ID:
> <28586697.1243800233959.JavaMail.root at mswamui-billy.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> Kurt wrote:
>
>>I can understand why, he'd have to move the decimal point at least one 
>>space
>>to the left for a partial piece of untestable equipment.
>
> I wrote:
>
>>Actually, I think this item has a fair element of interest about it.  Any
>>Japanese WWII radio gear is desirable, and this radiosonde is particularly
>>interesting.  I'll bet the final price will well exceed the starting bid,
>>without any decimal point shifts.
>
> This item closed with six bids at $230.49, almost five times the starting 
> bid.
>
> Mike / KK5F
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Sun, 31 May 2009 16:27:44 -0400
> From: jcoward5452 at aol.com
> Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] WWII Japanese Radiosonde
> To: kk5f at arrl.net, milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
> Message-ID: <8CBB04563BFFB91-13E8-38E at webmail-mh42.sysops.aol.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> ?The decimal point did indeed move,but to the right! In general,Japanese 
> WWII artifacts command a high price due to the fact there is little of it 
> remaining and Japanese collectors are willing to pay? large sums since 
> even less seems to have survived in Japan.
> ?Bill Howard had quite a collection and I hope it is well taken care of 
> since he put a significant part of his life into establishing his 
> museum.He was kind enough to help me out a few times with my meager 
> collection.
> ?Jay
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mike Morrow <kk5f at earthlink.net>
> To: milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
> Sent: Sun, 31 May 2009 1:03 pm
> Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] WWII Japanese Radiosonde
>
>
>
> Kurt wrote:
>
>>I can understand why, he'd have to move the decimal point at least one 
>>space
>>to the left for a partial piece of untestable equipment.
>
> I wrote:
>
>>Actually, I think this item has a fair element of interest about it.  Any
>>Japanese WWII radio gear is desirable, and this radiosonde is particularly
>>interesting.  I'll bet the final price will well exceed the starting bid,
>>without any decimal point shifts.
>
> This item closed with six bids at $230.49, almost five times the starting 
> bid.
>
> Mike / KK5F
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Sun, 31 May 2009 13:50:44 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Brad Latta <bl_6000 at yahoo.com.au>
> Subject: [Milsurplus] BC-461
> To: milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
> Message-ID: <827181.69538.qm at web38003.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
>
>
>
> I have acquired a BC-461 Reel Control Box. What are the dimensions of the 
> reel, does the counter count feet?
> Also collected a red switch box BC-765, printed in white  'TO DESTROY 
> SPECIAL RADIO PRESS BOTH BUTTONS SIMULTANEOUSLY'
> The BC-451-A control box was used to select one of four transmitters, but 
> could the pilot select one of several command receivers in the rack?
>                                                                     Brad
>
>
>      Need a Holiday? Win a $10,000 Holiday of your choice. Enter 
> now.http://us.lrd.yahoo.com/_ylc=X3oDMTJxN2x2ZmNpBF9zAzIwMjM2MTY2MTMEdG1fZG1lY2gDVGV4dCBMaW5rBHRtX2xuawNVMTEwMzk3NwR0bV9uZXQDWWFob28hBHRtX3BvcwN0YWdsaW5lBHRtX3BwdHkDYXVueg--/SIG=14600t3ni/**http%3A//au.rd.yahoo.com/mail/tagline/creativeholidays/*http%3A//au.docs.yahoo.com/homepageset/%3Fp1=other%26p2=au%26p3=mailtagline
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Sun, 31 May 2009 17:39:59 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
> From: Mike Morrow <kk5f at earthlink.net>
> Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] BC-461
> To: Brad Latta <bl_6000 at yahoo.com.au>, milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
> Message-ID:
> <14253383.1243809599176.JavaMail.root at elwamui-little.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> Brad wrote:
>
>>I have acquired a BC-461 Reel Control Box. What are the dimensions of the 
>>reel,
>>does the counter count feet?
>
> It's a pretty arbitrary count of, IIRC, the number of reel wheel 
> rotations.  It
> normally connects to a RL-42-A motor-driven reel trough the same type 
> MC-215
> mechanical spline that the SCR-274-N uses.  The wire is led out of the 
> aircraft
> through an F-10 fairlead, with a WT-7-A weight on the end.  There is a 
> connection
> clamp at the entrance to the fairlead which the wire slides across.  The 
> output
> of the transmitter is connected at this clamp.  The complete trailing wire 
> system
> is fairly complex, requiring:
>
> BC-461 Reel Control
> F-10 Fairlead
> FT-470 Mount for MC-476
> M-396 Upper Clamp for F-10
> MC-163 Connector Clamp for F-10
> MC-215 Mechanical Spline Shaft Assembly - RL-42-B to BC-461
> MC-476 Lower Mounting Ball for F-10
> PL-112 Connector:  RL-42-B (1) to BC-461 (1)
> RL-42-B Reel
> W-106-A Antenna Wire
> WT-7-A Antenna Weight
> AN 08-10-3  Maintenance Manual
>
>>Also collected a red switch box BC-765, printed in white  'TO DESTROY
>>SPECIAL RADIO PRESS BOTH BUTTONS SIMULTANEOUSLY'
>
> That is part of the system used to destroy the innards of the SCR-595-A
> or SCR-695-A IFF "receivers".  It electrically activates a thermal
> igniter that is put in place from the front of the ABK or BC-966-A
> IFF unit.
>
>>The BC-451-A control box was used to select one of four transmitters,
>>but could the pilot select one of several command receivers in the rack?
>
> Normally, two-transmitter FT-226/227 racks were used.
>
> The BC-450-A three-receiver control box is normal also.  It has three
> identical mechanical/electrical control sections.  So yes, each receiver
> in the FT-220/221 rack could be completely controlled individually at the
> BC-450-A with its audio output directed to audio output bus A or B.
>
> Mike / KK5F
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Sun, 31 May 2009 16:00:04 -0700
> From: "KD7JYK DM09" <kd7jyk at earthlink.net>
> Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] WWII Japanese Radiosonde
> To: <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
> Message-ID: <00fa01c9e244$0dd0a1c0$b060f504 at classified>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> In my thirty years experience in buying, selling, refurbishing and
> collecting of radiosondes, I never would have gussed it.
>
> I'm hoping some FOOL didn't buy it due to the association of the words 
> "fire
> balloon".
>
> Kurt
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Sun, 31 May 2009 18:16:11 -0500
> From: Robert Nickels <ranickel at comcast.net>
> Subject: [Milsurplus] SEM-25
> To: Mil Surplus List <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>,
> "armyradios at yahoogroups.com" <armyradios at yahoogroups.com>
> Message-ID: <4A230FBB.7040802 at comcast.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> A long shot, but I'd like to find the antenna tuning unit for the German
> SEM-25 transceiver.   Probably the best source is someone who has
> stripped "that junk" out of a Unimog radio truck.  I'm not sure of the
> model or designation, but I can provide a pic on request.
>
> Thanks and 73,
> Bob W9RAN
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 9
> Date: Sun, 31 May 2009 20:09:54 -0400
> From: jcoward5452 at aol.com
> Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] WWII Japanese Radiosonde
> To: kd7jyk at earthlink.net, milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
> Message-ID: <8CBB0646CBA7BCC-934-51B2 at webmail-dh46.sysops.aol.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> It has nothing to do about "radiosondes". It has everything to do about 
> WWII Japanese relics, especially about things electrical or electronic.
> ?And, by the way anyone who collects anything is a FOOL.Myself included.I 
> have a passion for collecting certain things ,but I am on a fool's 
> erand,and I am fully aware that that erand will ultimatly bring me "no 
> joy".
> ?Jay
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: KD7JYK DM09 <kd7jyk at earthlink.net>
> To: milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
> Sent: Sun, 31 May 2009 4:00 pm
> Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] WWII Japanese Radiosonde
>
>
>
> In my thirty years experience in buying, selling, refurbishing and
> collecting of radiosondes, I never would have gussed it.
>
> I'm hoping some FOOL didn't buy it due to the association of the words 
> "fire
> balloon".
>
> Kurt
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 10
> Date: Mon, 1 Jun 2009 00:36:37 -0700
> From: "Greg Werstiuk" <greg_werstiuk at msn.com>
> Subject: [Milsurplus] Mystery Instrument found in Navy Observation
> Dome in WA State
> To: "Milsurplus" <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
> Message-ID: <BLU0-SMTP539812EFE4BF394817CDB49D4C0 at phx.gbl>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Anyone recognize the instrument shown in the article below?  (Very limited
> photo and they haven't yet published others.)
>
>
>
> http://www.peninsuladailynews.com/article/20090525/news/305259998
>
>
>
> -
>
>
>
> Greg
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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 62, Issue 1
> *****************************************
> 



More information about the Milsurplus mailing list