[MRCA] SCR-284 PE-103

Tue Oct 3 14:12:18 EDT 2017

Think the Marines used PRC-47 sets for long range recon and patrols in Vietnam and that’s hardly small or portable. Also its gasoline powered generator was not all that quiet. Would be curious to know what the manpower requirement was for a radio squad with a PRC-47, I know someone out there will come across with one man can do it but what were the Mil specs? Would assume that at least three men are required to operate that radio in the field.

Ray F/KA3EKH

From: mkdorney at aol.com [mailto:mkdorney at aol.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 03, 2017 2:01 PM
To: Ray Fantini <RAFANTINI at salisbury.edu>
Cc: mrca at mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: Re: [MRCA] SCR-284 PE-103

And yet the Marines in WW2 were using it, and the BC-1306 later on, in exactly that way ( Some sick S.O.B. called them portable.  They were, provided you had either a pack animal or a 3 man team to carry the radios). So I wouldn't blame the Marines for not liking  those radios.

Mark
WW2RDO

In a message dated 10/3/2017 1:52:34 PM Eastern Standard Time, RAFANTINI at salisbury.edu<mailto:RAFANTINI at salisbury.edu> writes:

Why would anyone want to operate something as big and clunky as a SCR-284 that far forward in the first place? The only thing I can think of is fire control or remote OP but then there is always telephone remotes for the radio sets so they can be placed some distance back.
It’s easy to think in terms of how the PRC-25/77 was used in Vietnam or how radios are used today but the SCR-284, or later SCR-694 is hardly a grab and go radio.

Ray F/KA3EKH

From: mrca-bounces at mailman.qth.net<mailto:bounces at mailman.qth.net> [mailto:mrca-bounces at mailman.qth.net<mailto:mrca-bounces at mailman.qth.net?>] On Behalf Of WW2RDO via MRCA
Sent: Tuesday, October 03, 2017 12:25 PM
To: timsamm at gmail.com<mailto:timsamm at gmail.com>
Cc: mrca at mailman.qth.net<mailto:mrca at mailman.qth.net>
Subject: Re: [MRCA] SCR-284 PE-103

       If it "sounds" like anything, it it too loud for a front line position, especially at night.  Any man-made noise gives away your position.  How far does sound travel at night.   To give you an example, during one training exercise I was involved while posted on an OP/LP, the position of what turned out to be a platoon size element sent to eliminate our LP/OP was given away when somebody operated the charging handle on their rifle and we heard it - and they were almost 2 miles away from us when that happened.  Also, while modern technology is a wonderful thing, we had an ambush blown when the alarm on one of our guys electric watch went off just before the ambush was to be sprung ( thank God that was in training ).  That alarm wasn't very loud - I'd say that the PE-103 makes more noise than that alarm did.  After that happened, watches with any type of alarm were forbidden to be worn by our guys in the field, and until I left, we checked regularly.

     Maybe for units "in the rear, with the gear",  where noise discipline isn't a matter of life or death, radios with dynamotors, generators, or vibrator power supplies are OK to use.  But if you're at the very tip of the spear, like the Marines were, you don't want anything that makes noise, no matter how slight.

Mark D.
WW2RDO

In a message dated 10/3/2017 11:24:30 AM Eastern Standard Time, timsamm at gmail.com<mailto:timsamm at gmail.com> writes:

I would agree that the PE-103 in my SCR-284 system is very quiet..Sounds like "precision"....
Certainly much quieter than that jeep engine running to keep the poor battery charged...
If one is "noisy" it may be because the bearings were not re-lubed properly...
Dynamotors - The Song of Our People  !   LOL
Tim
N6CC

On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 4:15 AM, Garret Scott <scottgs at bellsouth.net<mailto:scottgs at bellsouth.net>> wrote:
Surprised to hear this. The two PE-103's I have are exceptionally quiet, more so than even some hand crank generators. You can barely hear them outside a tent. Compared to other dynamotors, they seem the quietest of all.

Perhaps there's differences among them?

Garret
W8BUG

On October 3, 2017 12:41:53 AM EDT, WW2RDO via MRCA <mrca at mailman.qth.net<mailto:mrca at mailman.qth.net>> wrote:
Hello Mike,
     I have powered up a PE-103 with my BC-654.  There is no way I would want that thing in any forward position I was serving in - the noise would attract way too much attention at night ( I served with the 10th Mountain Division in the early 1990s).   Like I said, Hellen Keller could find you in the dark when that thing fired up.

Mark
WW2RDO

In a message dated 10/2/2017 2:55:47 PM Eastern Standard Time, kk5f at earthlink.net<mailto:kk5f at earthlink.net> writes:

Mark wrote:

>> As far as the noise made by the PE-103, I would have to agree with
>> the Marines - way too noisy, especially at night. Hellen Keller
>> could find you in the dark when that thing fires up

Robert wrote:

> The PE-103 (or at least the two that I used to run regularly)
> is pretty quiet as medium size dynamotors go.

I spent many an hour and a mile in an old Ford when I was a kid in the 1950s and 1960s with my dad (W5WRR/SK) using a PE-103 for his Multi-Elmac AF-67.

The PE-103 was probably THE most desirable surplus dynamotor ever for hams operating mobile for twenty years after WWII and were pretty expensive in surplus. I don't recall any particularly notable objectionable noise levels from it, compared to any other similar-size dynamotor... like a DY-31/ARC-2.

I have not powered up the PE-103 for my SCR-284.

Mike / KK5F
______________________________________________________________
MRCA mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/mrca
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:MRCA at mailman.qth.net<mailto:MRCA at mailman.qth.net?>

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

______________________________________________________________
MRCA mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/mrca
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:MRCA at mailman.qth.net<mailto:MRCA at mailman.qth.net>

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
______________________________________________________________
MRCA mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/mrca
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:MRCA at mailman.qth.net<mailto:MRCA 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/mrca/attachments/20171003/a36a6083/attachment-0001.html>