[Milsurplus] mystery instrument
J. Forster
jfor at quik.com
Mon Jun 1 11:07:26 EDT 2009
It looks like the thing has an astronomy type dome with slit. I'd bet more
that it's a kinetheodolite or something like that. It looks optical to me.
It might have been used to triangulate test aircraft in flight.
FWIW,
-John
============
> 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
>> *****************************************
>>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
More information about the Milsurplus
mailing list