[Milsurplus] RAT(-1) & RAV: Another Viewpoint.

Kludge wh7hg.hi at gmail.com
Tue Jun 7 12:04:20 EDT 2011


In reading the archives to get caught up on what’s the what in these lists,
I read the threads related to the above two sets and believe that perhaps
they fulfilled their purpose admirably.

 

The GE-built GO-4, -5, and -6 came out in 1938 & 1939 but the RAX didn’t
shine until 1940.  In the meantime, the Navy had these transmitters for
which they had no accompanying receivers to match the full frequency
coverage and apparently GE wasn’t in a position to deliver on time.  ARC, in
the meantime, already had a positive relationship with the Navy
(specifically BuAer) via the RU & GF equipment and really wanted to sell
them a complete command system to replace the GF/RU based on the Type K
design*.  Either the Navy went to ARC or vice versa but however it happened,
ARC wound up providing *stop gap* equipment until the RAX was ready for
prime time – fifty systems to extend the coverage beyond existing RU
installations and fifty that were complete entities unto themselves – while
proving the designs to the Navy’s satisfaction.  

 

* While the system had originally been designed with the AAC in mind, they
didn’t have money.  The Navy did and those were pockets to pick to
eventually get the ARA/ATA system out and visible in an operational
environment.  This worked to their advantage since the AAC/AAF wound up
buying their own versions as the SCR-274-N in carload quantities.  (Which
reminds me, did ARC derive any income from the WE built systems?)

 

In any event, I do not believe there was ever any intent or need to build
more of either the RAT(-1) or RAV since the RAX finally became available
although too late to perform its intended role of accompanying the GO-4, -5,
and -6.  The dates work out fairly well to support this possibility although
I don’t know the production quantities for the various models of the
GO-series.

 

As a side note, their use for ELINT comes under the “Absence of evidence is
not evidence of absence” rule.  There is no evidence either way which leaves
that question open for speculation but only that, speculation.  

 

Thoughts?  Other commentary?

 

Best regards,

 

Michael, WH7HG ex-K3MXO, ex-KN3MXO, WPE3ARS, BL01xh ex-Mensa A&P PP BGI 

Share and Enjoy!

 <http://www.nationalmssociety.org/chapters/NTH/index.aspx>
http://www.nationalmssociety.org/chapters/NTH/index.aspx

 <http://wh7hg.blogspot.com/> http://wh7hg.blogspot.com/

 <http://kludges-other-blog.blogspot.com/>
http://kludges-other-blog.blogspot.com

Hiki Nô! 



More information about the Milsurplus mailing list