[Milsurplus] BC-348 series CORRECTION

Tue Jun 27 11:21:01 EDT 2017

I think Radio Shake also had one available?

$-------&
Moe Fretz
Collection and Preservation
Canadian Tube Radios, Communication Equipment, Vintage Ham gear and
Military Radios.
Hallicrafters, RCA, National, Hammarlund,TMC, RME and Racal.

www.radiopreservationguy.com

Don't part them out ---- Restore them.

Cambridge
Ontario Canada

On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 10:24 AM, James Whartenby <antqradio at sbcglobal.net>
wrote:

> Ray
> Can't speculate on why the Navy or any other service would need AC power
> for the BC-348 but I easily found a photo and schematic of a Hallicrafters
> made power supply at: http://www.ohio.edu/people/postr/bapix/BC348Q_3.htm
>
> Jim
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Ray Fantini <RAFANTINI at salisbury.edu>
> *To:* "COURYHOUSE at aol.com" <COURYHOUSE at aol.com>; 'Milsurplus' <
> milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, June 27, 2017 8:41 AM
> *Subject:* Re: [Milsurplus] BC-348 series CORRECTION
>
> What possible advantage would there be in the Military building an AC
> power supply for the BC-348? There were plenty of other better suited
> receivers for ground use during the war like the BC-342 or the
> SP-200/BC-779 that already had AC power supplies and by the wars end newer
> and better ground receivers were starting to come on line like the
> 51J/R-388 family so why waste time and money on a AC version of the 348?
> In training applications the radios were run from 28 volts just like in
> the aircraft, perhaps some radios that were repurposed from nonfunctional
> aircraft were used in unofficial ground roles but beyond that cannot
> imagine except maybe the one circumstance as being used in a FAC setup
> where the BC-348 would have been used in a ground role.
> This is in no way demeaning or disparaging the quality and utility of the
> radio, it did work in some aircraft as late as the seventies and may have
> had as long a history of operational use in the ARC-8 configuration as any
> radio fielded but it is what it is.
> The problems I see with the idea of the drop in AC power supply replacing
> the internal Dynamotor deck are first all the primary distribution of the
> 28 volts to the radio would be wrong for AC power. When doing the Ham
> modification to convert the set to AC you almost always install a new
> circuit for the AC primary, fuse and AC power switch. Second, the radio has
> its filament string wired for 28 volts, in Ham service you always convert
> the filament string for six volt operation. A drop in supply would have to
> provide 28 volts for the filament string.
> If you can show me a picture or other evidence of a factory built drop in
> AC supply that can address these two issues then I will stand corrected but
> until that time I tend to think that it never occurred and perhaps there is
> some weird bias about how some work that has been done by hams in
> converting is too high a quality as to not have been conducted by Hams.
> It’s true there are a lot of hacks out there but there are also a lot of
> Hams that have more than adequate experience and expertise to design and
> install a AC power system in this receiver that meets or exceeds Mill
> Standards.
> Think part of this goes back to the same drum that I am always beating
> that the history of this radio also includes its long time in service with
> Ham radio operators and SWL operators that often exceeds its time in
> military service, including its modifications and adaptions for use in that
> service. The base radio was a great radio in the ARC-8 package but with the
> AC power supply and a couple simple audio modifications like a low
> impedance output transformer it’s a great AM and SWL set that was used by
> tens of thousands in the Ham community for decades and to ignore that
> aspect of its history is to ignore reality itself.
> At least that’s my opinion, have to respect those who insist on wanting
> the radio to be in pristine condition as to how it appeared in its military
> role. And I do respect that. But how many of us were introduced to the
> world of SWL or Ham radio by the hacked and modified BC-348 and will always
> have a palace in there hart for that hacked 348 with the additional knobs,
> S meter and vent holes cut in the cabinet?
>
> Ray F/KA3EKH
>
>
> *From:* milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net [mailto:milsurplus-bounces@
> mailman.qth.net] *On Behalf Of *Ed Sharpe Archivist for SMECC via
> Milsurplus
> *Sent:* Tuesday, June 27, 2017 12:40 AM
> *To:* kk5f at arrl.net; glennmaillist at bellsouth.net;
> milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
> *Subject:* Re: [Milsurplus] BC-348 series CORRECTION
>
> Thanks  for this  Mike -   It is  a great reference!
>
> was there any resolve on   the AC power supply  being made at time  of
> Mfr  or was it aftermarket?
> Ed# KF7RWW    www.smecc.org
>
> In a message dated 6/26/2017 8:52:17 P.M. US Mountain Standard Time,
> kk5f at earthlink.net writes:
>
> That's an OK but unintended BC-348 link.  Here's the correct URL for Ken's
> work:
>
>   https://www.nonstopsystems.com/radio/pdf-radio/article-bc348-kf6nur.pdf
>
> 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
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20170627/d7843243/attachment-0001.html>