[MRCA] A.R.C.'s Last MF/HF Set - AN/ARC-39

[D. Platt]

Mike,

Small world, indeed.  The USAF T-37 Tweets used used the ARC-60.  I've 
no idea why unless it was unless that the ARC-34 or the ARC-27 were 
deemed simply too heavy.   That and the fact that most tweet flight were 
either local or XC to a predetermined location with the attendant 
frequencies set up.   Nothing much around Vance, Webb, Reese, and all 
the others in the SW CONUS, anyway.  It was a step down in that the 
replaced T-33A's  had an ARC-27 UHF (replacing the ARC-3 and ARC-33 
VHF).  Ain't radio swell!!

Jeep - K3HVG

On 4/27/2012 10:52 PM, Mike Morrow wrote:
> One doesn't read much on the development of A.R.C.'s mid-1950's MF/HF-AM
> crystal-controlled set, the RT-427/ARC-39.  That's somewhat surprising,
> given the tremendous commitment A.R.C. always had to MF/HF gear...the
> last in the line should be worth some examination.
>
> One can doubt that A.R.C., builder of the world's finest *MF/HF* command sets,
> would have had much chance of financial survival in the post-WWII VHF-AM
> world, if the U.S. government/taxpayers had not purchased all that Type 12,
> Type 15, and AN/ARC-60 gear.  No later VHF/UHF set from any manufacturer,
> including A.R.C., propagated the design of these post-war models.  It was
> a dead end that took a long time dying.  The USN T-34s in which I took some
> training in 1972 still had the AN/ARC-60 as their only comm set.  It had
> rather poor performance, even for training aircraft use.
>
> The late-1950s Type 21A ADF and Type 210 VHF-AM sets certainly had almost
> nothing in their interesting designs that developed from post-war gear.
> These two sets showed some refreshing innovation and up-to-date technique.
>
> Around the same time (late 1950s), A.R.C. made a series of light aircraft
> VHF-COM/NAV and ADF sets called, IIRC, the Starflite line.  I've got a stack
> of them in storage.  These are predominantly wire-in sub-miniature tube sets.
> They seem to have decent electrical design, and the mechanical design was at
> least equal to contemporary competitors in the light aircraft avionics market.
>
> 73,
> Mike / KK5F
>