[Milsurplus] Two TBY on eBay -

[Ray Fantini]

Never used on myself. Read many accounts of how bad they were. Think maybe the problem is the expectations that Hams bring to the table are in error. The Catalogue of Naval Electronic Equipment from 1946 describes the TBY as only being intended for limited range, line of sight. Looking at a box that size and complexity and the multipole issues of frequency control and the like today its regarded as a dog, but in the context of pre war communications where the only alternative would be signal flags or wired telephones it must have been worth the effort. Why else where so many produced?

Ray F/KA3EKH


From: milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net <milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net> On Behalf Of Brenda Gentry via Milsurplus
Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2025 10:43 AM
To: milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] Two TBY on eBay -



Just how bad is the TBY with regard to frequency stability and receive sensitivity?  Various publications decades ago gave the impression they were useless. There was a conversion to the transmitter to make it crystal controlled, but in general I have never heard anything good about it. One very real concern is radiation. The front panel has considerable area coated with Radium paint and the rigs are supposedly quite spicy.

    B. Gentry, KA2IVY
On 10/16/25 10:23 AM, arc5 at ix.netcom.com<mailto:arc5 at ix.netcom.com> wrote:

Ages ago, I got one of these working on my truck seat and talked to a couple of truckers on Chicken Band.  :-D



On 10/15/25, 3:46 PM, Nick England via Milsurplus <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net><mailto:milsurplus at mailman.qth.net> wrote:



Not mine, no relation, etc.



https://www.ebay.com/itm/277443289448



https://www.ebay.com/itm/286877544268


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20251016/8068f2be/attachment-0001.html>