[Milsurplus] WTB: AN/ARC-38 transceiver

[Ray Fantini]

Myself was referring to Ham use, SSB is the preferred mode and why so few of the non modified 38 sets are still around. A channelized USB only transceiver with no ability offset tune would be a difficult thing to use in today's Ham environment. But in the Ham AM community a 100 watt plate modulated transceiver that works in 1 KHz increments is very useable. Myself have maybe over a hundred QSO on 7.29 and 7.16 using the ARC-38. Maybe at one time people may have wanted to use a USB only radio on the Ham bands but today would speculate that the AM/CW only 38 is way more valuable to someone who wants to use it then the 38A, not to mention that the Frankenstein like nature of the 38A with all the added cables and parts have to impact reliability. 
Think it has to be a given that when we talk about using much of this stuff today it's going to be for Ham radio, other than a museum who would want or use radios with limited capabilities and requiring this much effort? No one in their right mind would attempt to use one in a operational aircraft, the ART-13/BC-348, all the ARC-5 stuff and the ARC-38 are way out of type acceptance and not compatible with any air operations in the US today, maybe the ARC-38A can work within the HF SSB structure for aviation but who would rely on a fifty year old radio? Epically when more modern radios that require a fraction of the power, are a fraction of the weight and are reliable. It is within this context that I put forth my comment about the ARC-38A compared to the ARC-38, myself I am not qualified to comment about the military use, I will let people like you address the historical aspects.

Ray KA3EKH


-----Original Message-----
From: milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net [mailto:milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Mike Morrow
Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2011 10:46 AM
To: milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] WTB: AN/ARC-38 transceiver

> ...most were converted to ARC-38A and the SSB conversion was not
> a good thing.

Really?

I suppose it depends upon whether the set is being used for military purposes
or for ham hobbyist purposes.  The USB AN/ARC-38A was far superior for long
range aircraft communications than the AM AN/ARC-38.  The RT-594/ARC-38A
from 1961 into the mid-1970s had more than twice the military active duty
service life of the RT-311/ARC-38.  It was gradually replaced by the AN/ARC-94
(Collins 618T-2).  The AN/ARC-38, 38A, and associated auxiliary receiver
AN/ARR-41 were all US Navy sets.

The Collins 618S-1 system was purchased by the USAF, and one of those will
have USAF property marks on the nomenclature plate.  It will not have a JAN
nomenclature.  Fifteen years ago it was hard to give away 618S-1 units. 
Fair Radio sold them for $75, and they would go unsold at Dayton at $50.
If you don't mind crystals, the 618S-1 would be the easiest set to get into
operation.

The set I've been looking for is the RT-380/AR, part of AN/ARC-59.  It is
the military version of the Collins 18S-4, AM 20-channel crystal-controlled.
At one time, the RT-380/AR was also dirt cheap from Fair Radio.

When you come right down to it, in *all* truth, AM-mode really sucks if the 
communications really matter!  For us hobbyists, it doesn't matter.

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