[Milsurplus] [ARC5] ARC-5 Receiver Question

[Mike Hanz]

mstangelo at comcast.net wrote:
> What was the purpose of the paint in the first place? Protection from corrosive elements such as salt spray?
> Maybe the Army determined that the AAF would not operate in such a corrosive environment so they saved money and weight by deleting the paint job.
> The Navy ARC radios continued to be painted so the corrosive environment theory makes sense.
>   

Absolutely!  It was the basis for the contract requirement and had a 
salt spray specification for testing.  Remember that many of these 
radios were installed in aircraft that were often tied down on a heaving 
carrier deck in a squall, and the Navy planes seem to have been 
particularly leaky.  I have photos of corrosion caused by salt spray 
dripping down on ARA and ARC-5 components, especially cable connectors 
and control boxes - following the cables downward to the equipment.  The 
usual solution was more goop on the cable ends...   :-P   Even 
condensation on a carrier deck is laden with salt.  Now, the Navy *did* 
have what appeared to be bare aluminum control boxes for some equipment 
(the RL-24 interphone system at 
http://aafradio.org/flightdeck/Interphone_systems.html ) comes to mind - 
but they were actually heavily anodized aluminum with a clear finish, so 
they had just about as good as, maybe even better protection than 
wrinkle paint.

73,
Mike