[Milsurplus] BC-224 in Aircraft

[David Stinson]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Marty Reynolds" <cosmoline at aa4rm.ba-watch.org>
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] BC-224 in Aircraft


> Say all 'militarized' DC3s were 12V & had a 191 & a 224, right?
> 
> What a horrible step backward fm the xtal'd / chanelized WECo gear
> they ran for civvy airlines... including the 233 140mc vhf

You did that just to yank my chain, right? ;-)

Not so, Marty.  The military had the global infrastructure for HF in place,
working well with lots of years of experiance, trained operators
available spares and men trained in repair of these simple,
reliable systems.  They needed something that would work NOW,
not some "pie-in-the-sky" magic fairy bunch of promises that was
going to be able to do the job "any day now."

VHF was new to the military and, 
*according to the commanders on the scene,*  not me,
was "not ready for prime time."  Spares not yet widely distributed,
men not yet trained in repair of things as complex as an ARC-1
or ARC-3 (or even the ARC-5 VHF).  The ETO and the Navy 
fighter wings got "force fed" VHF and had to make it work,
which is why you read of so many "boot-strap" and "jake-leg"
lash-ups in tanks and spotter aircraft.  I have Radioman
training records right here, and both of them show training in 
VHF radio as the last thing they did in 1945, just after training
for the ART-13, and that just a short familiarization.