[Milsurplus] No GO-9 On Display. Likely GO-2.

Tue Jul 18 20:53:09 EDT 2017

Mike,

It is a misunderstanding... I wasn't expicit enough.
I meant QTY 1 of a  two-receiver RU-19 system. A single-receiver set is also an option, as it is outlined in the original manual I have for the RU-19 setup.
I also didn't imply that all Catalinas had GO-9's. I just said that I didn't pay attention to the GO-* details in the cutout photo, so without closer scrutiny I assumed it was a GO-9 in this case, because I remembered that the PBY-5A  manual I have, lists the GO-9.

Meir WF2U/4

⁣Sent from BlueMail 

On Jul 18, 2017, 6:34 PM, at 6:34 PM, Mike Morrow <kk5f at earthlink.net> wrote:
>Meir,
>
>I wasn't disputing the installation of the GO-9 on PBY-5 aircraft. 
>There's no doubt about that.
>
>I was only calling attention to the very very remarkable existence of a
>much earlier GO-series set, which I believe is a now-unique 1935
>Western Electric GO-2.  It's on that former 1942 PBY-5B which became a
>1944 non-flying training exhibit, which became a cutaway exhibit at
>NMNA.  Apparently after that PBY-5B became a "training exhibit" its
>GO-9 got replaced with the earlier model of GO-*.  I did not mean to
>imply that any PBY-5 aircraft flew with a GO-2 instead of a GO-9.
>
>The PBY-5A Pilots Handbook AN 01-5MA-1 dated 20 January 1945 is the
>document that Nick provides at:
>
>https://books.google.com/books?id=DxDDz5KSWdYC&pg=PA72&lpg=PA72&dq=%22pby%22+%22go-9%22&source=bl&ots=J-jt9r4Aa7&sig=-h53T5lahglfyCoaCBemsKWbfak&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwii6NatiJPVAhXD64MKHdt9CuYQ6AEILjAB#v=onepage&q=%22pby%22%20%22go-9%22&f=false
>
>On page 72 the following radio communications sets are listed:
>
>-  One RU-19 and one GO-9 for the radio operator (long-range/liaison
>set)
>-  One ARB for the radio operator
>-  One ARB and one ATB for the pilots (intrasquadron/command set).
>
>There is no mention of a second RU-19 set with its own two receivers. 
>Such a set (with likely one receiver) may have been provided in similar
>aircraft before the radio operator had a dedicated ARB.  It would not
>have been part of the GO-9 one-transmitter/RU-19 two-receiver liaison
>set installation.
>
>All of the long range (liaison) service RU-series receiver systems
>RU-4, 5. 6. 10, 11, 12, 18, 19) normally used TWO nt-46048* receivers
>served by ONE junction box and ONE dynamotor unit in each system.
>
>On what page of your 20 Jan 45 pilots' manual are two RU-19 systems
>(with four total receivers) described?  A single RU-19 set should
>normally have two CW-46048D receivers.  Those two receivers would not
>be properly considered to be two RU-19 sets.
>
>Unrelated to all that...There is an interesting photo of the pilots'
>communications gear on page 6 of Nick's pilots' handbook.  It shows the
>ATB control box and the pilots' ARB control box plus tuning dial.  All
>just as expected.
>
>But...also present is a nt-23087 or nt-23096 RU-* receiver control box
>plus nt-23012 tuning dial.  There is no description elsewhere of an
>RU-* receiver controlled by the pilot.  There should be none, unless it
>is an RU-* receiver dedicated to a ZB-* homing adapter.  Possibly it
>was considered adequately covered when the ZB-* was briefly
>mentioned...apparently soon to be replaced by an AN/ARR-2 'ZB' homing
>receiver
>
>Mike / KK5F
>
>-----Original Message-----
>Mike and all,
>
>I didn't give more than a cursory look at that transmitter in the
>cutaway display (I looked at it on my "smart"phone screen as I wasn't
>by my computer) and didn't notice the difference. 
>
>I know that the GO-9 is paired with the double setup (including the
>double RU-19 junction box) of RU-19's, because it states so and is
>illustrated in clear photos in the PBY-5A flight manual, revised 20
>January 1945 I'm looking at. The radio equipment listed and
>illustrated, not to mention components such as junction and control
>boxes, is as follows: command (intersquadron as the manual says)
>transmitter ATB,  command  receivers  2x ARB. Liaison transmitter GO-9,
>liaison receivers 2x RU-19. The manual also shows and lists an LM-10
>frequency meter. The manual also notes that the ZA equipment was
>deleted from the equipment installation,  although it shows on the
>photos.
>
>73, Meir WF2U/4
>
>Sent from BlueMail 
>On Jul 17, 2017, at 8:36 PM, Mike Morrow  wrote:
>Meir wrote:
>
> You can see the radio compartment of a PBY-5 aircraft with the GO-9
> and a pair of RU-19 receivers here:
>   http://tlbigley.com/Cutaway%20PBY/  
>
>Meir,
>
>The photos in that cutaway have intrigued me for several years.
>
>The GO-series transmitter pictured is definitely NOT a GO-9...there's
>not a bit of doubt about that.  So...wbat is it???
>
>There were only four makers of the GO-series:
>
>Hygrade Sylvania
>GO      1933
>
>Western Electric
>GO-1    1934
>GO-2    1935
>
>Westinghouse Electric
>GO-3    1937
>GO-7    1940
>GO-8    1940
>GO-9    1940
>GO-9a   1944
>
>General Electric
>GO-4    1938
>GO-5    1939
>GO-6    1939
>
>If the photos are enlarged and studied, the largest lettering is the
>manufacturer's name, which appears to be the stylized "Western
>Electric".  The cutaway likely has a 1935 GO-2 installed on a 1943
>PBY-5B.
>
>That's not so unlikely...the website explains that the aircraft was
>damaged in 1944 and subsequently turned into a non-flying training
>exhibit.  It would be very possible that older gear would wind up
>replacing a set that was currently needed for flying service.  The
>preservation of what is likely the only surviving GO-2 is a happy
>consequence.
>
>For similar reasons, it is uncertain that the receiver system is
>actually the expected RU-19 system.  There would only be ONE RU-19
>system with its TWO CW-46048D receivers.  Regardless, the
>liaison-service receivers RU-4 (1935) through RU-19 (1941) are visually
>and electrically essentially identical.
>
>I've been wanting to make a trip to see this cutaway and try to verify
>what is really installed.  One thing is certain...there is no GO-9
>there.  :-)
>
>Mike / KK5F
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20170718/bdce0ac5/attachment-0001.html>