[Milsurplus] New video - 13 mnutes

Sun Feb 1 18:30:54 EST 2026

I wish there was some resonable way to reduce the 200kc bandwidth on the BC
684 xmtr...
Paul
N6FEG

On Sun, Feb 1, 2026, 3:22 PM John Vendely <jvendely at cfl.rr.com> wrote:

> It's true that the WWII FM sets don't fit neatly in the "modern"
> communications world.  Despite this, they aren't totally absent from
> today's airwaves.  They communicate very nicely with the AN/GRC-3 family
> radios, which have a similar IF bandwidth.  Dare I mention that SCR-608s,
> BC-659s, and BC-1335s have been heard recently on the popular military FM
> radio frequency 29.4 Mc?  And at the Indiana Museum of Military History,
> which when in operation was the largest private collection of military
> vehicles, we had all the aforementioned radios installed in military
> vehicles and operational, plus the SCR-506, SCR-508, AN/GRC-3 through 8,
> and AN/VRC-12 families.  And a GRC-46 and a GRC-122.  The statute of
> limitations being long expired, I have no compunction in stating that all
> the old WWII sets were operationally demonstrated regularly and in their
> "natural habitats"...
>
>
> 73,
>
>
> John K9WT
>
>
> On 2/1/2026 3:50 PM, Ray Fantini via Milsurplus wrote:
>
> Cool, around here I am into Immersive history, so tend to like working
> with equipment that you can use. Not just put up on the shelf or talk
> about. Get on the air and make some QSO with it, and you will gain lots of
> experience that you will never get from a book. Think that is where support
> of the SCR-506 comes in being it's a still a useable radio today for some
> eighty years on.
> Personal preference tends to fall more into the Vietnam - Cold War stuff
> being I was around then but still will also play with the old WW2 stuff
> sometimes.
> No disrespect to the low band first generation FM equipment, but you see
> very little activity with that old 40 kHz super wide band technology.
> Nothing at all like the super wide acceptance of the more modern military
> FM tactical stuff in the Ham resto community, just look at the size of the
> "Cold War net" at Hamvention. You know how they stack them up for that!
> And I will say that anyone who is capable of getting a SCR-300/BC-1000 up
> and running gets my respect But today in 2026 I would propose that there
> are a lot of TCS sets, ARC-8 (BC-348 ART-13) various configurations of
> ACR-193 (BC-312 and BC-191) sets out there being used but not a lot of that
> old first generation  BC-652 or 653 being used.
>
>
> Ray F/KA3EKH
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net
> <milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net> <milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net>
> on behalf of John Vendely <jvendely at cfl.rr.com> <jvendely at cfl.rr.com>
> *Sent:* Sunday, February 1, 2026 3:17 PM
> *To:* milsurplus at mailman.qth.net <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
> <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
> *Subject:* Re: [Milsurplus] New video - 13 mnutes
>
> CAUTION: This email originated from outside of Salisbury University.
> Please exercise caution when clicking links or opening attachments from
> external sources.
>
> Howdy,
>
>
> The SCR-508 was not designed to replace the SCR-506.  Both were in
> development around the same time, and the SCR-508 was actually standardized
> before the SCR-506.  Rather, the two sets were intended for different
> roles.  There was a need for a short-range (e.g., 10 miles)
> crystal-controlled, tactical mobile FM set for use primarily in tanks, as
> well as a longer range HF vehicular radio capable of at least 50 miles
> range on CW or 20 miles on AM voice.  The SCR-508 was used primarily for
> inter-tank communications and liason with artillery groups using the
> artillery band SCR-608 FM sets.  They were simple to use and required
> minimal operator training.  The SCR-506, operated mainly in CW mode, was
> used primarily for communicating at the division command and admin net
> levels and required trained radio operators.  Relatively few SCR-506s were
> installed in tanks, and those that were, were used for communicating back
> to battalion and division level nets.
>
>
> The WWII FM sets were state-of-the-art and unique to the U.S. forces, and
> were a radical improvement in mobile tactical communications.  The SCR-506
> was also a pretty advanced design for its time.  The disparaging remarks
> about the 506 in amateur publications stems from its limited frequency
> range (and the limited viewpoint of hams), which includes only one amateur
> band.  In fact, the SCR-506 was an excellent, well-designed set that did
> just what it was designed to do.
>
>
> It's gratifying to see a youtube video on the important but completely
> overlooked subject of wideband FM tactical radio and its great effect on
> the course of WWII.  A fascinating episode not mentioned in the video and
> which demonstrates this, took place during the Battle of the Bulge.  As
> mentioned, the German tank sets were AM, and an airborne AM jammer system
> code-named "Jackal" had been developed to jam them.  However, the German AM
> sets and American FM sets overlapped in frequency, so commanders were
> unwilling to deploy Jackal for fear of jamming U.S. tank forces along with
> the German.  Armstrong urged them to proceed on the basis of the AM
> interference rejection capability of the wideband FM SCR-508 sets.  The
> Jackal jammers were installed in B-24s and flown in relays over the
> battlefield.  POW interviews conducted after the battle indicated the
> jamming seriously disrupted German communications, contributing greatly to
> the American breakout.  SCR-508 operators were unaware that jamming was
> even taking place...
>
>
> 73,
>
>
> John K9WT
>
>
> On 2/1/2026 1:09 PM, Ray Fantini via Milsurplus wrote:
>
> e 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/20260201/68f8be07/attachment.html>