[Milsurplus] (no subject)
Mon Sep 21 14:37:00 EDT 2015
Jack is correct. It's perhaps useful to note that the Army and Navy had
two different acquisition systems, and Service insularity largely kept
them from crossing over (with resulting economies of scale) until well
after the war ended. Lip service was given to such initiatives to
please Congress, like the JAN (Joint Army Navy) nomenclature system, but
careful examination shows that it was mostly a sham except in
sub-components like tubes and other commodity small parts. With a few
exceptions the Signal Corps controlled the AAC/AAF equipment acquisition
system (the early SCR-274N is one the famous exceptions, though even
*it* had its Signal Corps "customizations", like bare aluminum sets,
once they were able to break free of the Navy supplier (Aircraft Radio
Corporation)). So, it would be *extremely* unlikely to find an AN/ARC-1
in a front line Army bomber until after the war...if then.
If you look at the USAAF VHF radio progression, it was basically a path
from a smattering of WE-233 commercial; to the SCR-522 (primarily for
the European theater, to be compatible with the huge numbers used by the
Brits for logistics reasons); to the SCR-274/BC-950/BC-942 VHF set
(mostly for the Pacific...the Navy uncharacteristically began buying
those too, especially the ARC-5 redesign, because it gave them some
flexibility in the transition to VHF); to the set they always wanted,
the AN/ARC-3. This last excellent set began deployment in late 1944,
mostly to high value aircraft like the B-29 force and others who needed
the increased capabilities the most.
In the final analysis, the logistics chain ruled the equipment being
used in the field, rather than expediency of sharing between the
Services. So what might seem reasonable to us today would have caused a
Navy or Army procurement manager to shrink in horror at the inhumanity
of the suggestion... :-)
73,
Mike KC4TOS
On 9/21/2015 1:44 PM, Ray Fantini wrote:
> I forget directly where I read this, may have been in a magazine called "Air Classics" back in the seventies or eighties. But would assume that if it were an ARC-1 that would make sense being it was a radio that served long after the war for VHF service where the SCR-522 was such a dog would assume that no way one would be in military service in 1958 after the ARC-1 or ARC-3 set became available. I saw where the ARC-3 sets were in use as late as the sixties and seventies.
> Don't get me wrong in saying the SCR-522 was not significant but it was a dog compared to the sets that replaced it, so doubt that something like that would be in use in the C-47 that was used in 58 but can see the ARC-1 that would have been new in terms of its use on the B-24D appearing to be useable in that ship. Pure speculation on my part would be to say it would have been the HF equipment like the ARC-8 set being that was basically the same equipment that was used in WW2 and the late fifties but somehow remember it as being the AN/ARC-1 To this day every time I see an ARC-1 think of that story. Would assume someone here can comment on what the radio equipment that was on a B-24D series would be in April of 1943, remember it was their first combat mission so it would have been a fairly new ship.
>
> Ray F
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Milsurplus [mailto:milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Jack Antonio
> Sent: Monday, September 21, 2015 11:39 AM
>
> On 9/21/2015 10:33 AM, Ray Fantini wrote:
>> My understanding was that it was an AN/ARC-1 VHF transceiver that was
>> thought to be working better than the one that was in the C-47 that
>> was taken to the site so they decided to change out the radio with the one from the LBG.
> Not trying to pick an argument, but if it could be documented that it was an AN/ARC-1, it would be an interesting data point.
>
> The LBG disappeared in April '43, and I always thought the AN/ARC-1 didn't see service until late in '43, and then by the Navy.
>
> I did see in print somewhere where it referred to the LBGs command radio was the radio taken, but I don't remember where I read it.
>
> IF the LBG had VHF, I'd be thinking that it would be the SCR-522, but in wartime, strange things do happen.
>
> Of course, it seems that when it comes to VHF, who had what, when, during the war stirs up controversy.
More information about the Milsurplus
mailing list