I agree with Dorian. And will go a little further. The noise environment in most military aircraft is such that a speaker of just about any type is pretty useless. That’s why aircrew wore headsets with some sort of microphone set up, and larger multi position military aircraft had intercom systems. Same thing with most AFVs. Most tank radios don’t have speakers, and the crew wears a CVC helmet of some type, and communicates through the use of an intercom. A speaker would be seen more in a quieter environment like an HQ, or in the case of the USAAF and USAF, at the Controller Desk at a Watch Station or Control Tower, even though most folks on the ground involved directly with things like air traffic control used headsets 

Mark D. 
WW2RDO

“In matters of style, float with the current. In matters of Principle, stand like a rock. “.   -   Thomas Jefferson 

Sent from my iPhone

On Jun 1, 2023, at 7:29 AM, Doran Platt <[email protected]> wrote:


Well, let me nit-pick here.... and with all due respect. The ubiquitous LS-3 speaker is a ground radio speaker organic to the SCR-299 and 399 and not used in the aircraft environment. Owing to its impedance, it is universal use item. No self-respecting ARC-8 or ARC-25, et al would find itself with a speaker.  It is not the companion to the BC-348....   No speaker is.   That said, one will find that speaker used with the BC-348 in radio shops, ops centers, seen in mobile control towers, and in yours and my BC-348/ART-13 setups.  The LS-3 is the visiting uncle who stayed..... hi!!
Jeep K3HVG
On 05/31/2023 4:34 PM EDT Herb Mooney <[email protected]> wrote:
 
 
Ray, you are my kind of mentor, but a bad bad man so my wallet tells me LOL. :-) Yes,so I'd love to find someone with a working restored BC-348 with Dynamotor to trade for the BC-224 & Dynamotor I have. I have a few BC-348s that have been converted to12 volts, not tested yet, and an extra dynamotor, so I planned to learn how to restore one of the BC-348s black to original condition and power option with the dynamotor. If I can make a trade even better. NOW you open the can of worms and tell me about an APU I need to get. I'm all in, but how hard is that to find...in Florida and will it fit in my StapVan Bomber? I'm planning a hefty overhead console for the ART-13; BC-348, 3 ARC-5 receivers and an LS-3 speaker so far. I will need to find a home for the APU I guess. Here's a picture of my land based B-29 (actually a Grumman P-30 Step Van RV conversion) about to be polished up and vinyl wrapped like a WWII aircraft...
 
 
Herb - W4BCH

Virus-free.www.avg.com

On Wed, May 31, 2023 at 2:47 PM Ray Fantini <[email protected]> wrote:

Cool, you want a BC-348 to pair with your ART-13, USAF Museum has a good set of pictures of the B-29 including a 360 of the radio operators station. If you want to be uptown and do what no one else has done before, at least as far as I know  the next thing to do is start looking for the two cylinder Andover APU to install and then you will have the power source that was used in the B-29 or at least until they got the engines up and running.

Have seen a couple people who have done flight decks but never with authentic power. It would be a lot of work building up an enclosure and the sound proofing but  it would be uptown.

As to the BC-348 J,N and Q think they are representative of where technology was going by the end of the war and the other BC-348 with the grids top tubes and overbuilt capacitor decks are representative of what was “state of the art” prewar.

 

Ray F/KA3EKH

 

From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Herb Mooney
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2023 2:16 PM
To: Doran Platt <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [MRCA] BC-224 vs BC-348

 

 

Thank you, good info for a NOOB :-) So offering a working restored BC-224 with dynamotor for a working restored or original condition BC-348 with dynamotor might be a good trade or of interest to someone of the WWII radio persuasion? This BC-224 is a beauty, but I am trying to recreate the B-29 radio room in my mobile P-30 Bomber Step-Van (bread/UPS Truck). The BC-224 isn't exactly correct for a B-29 setup.                                                                                   

 

 

 

 

On Wed, May 31, 2023 at 1:56 PM Doran Platt <[email protected]> wrote:

Concur with Ray on almost all.  The non-concur is Ford vs. Chevy. I prefer the other-than J, N, and Q models. Much easier to remove the "modules".  Also, arguably easier to recap.  That said, the alignment variable caps on other than J, N, and Q models are more robust. The other than models are exhibiting split collars allowing the cap to short. The J, N, and Q models have non-shielded cans for Xtal filter and BFO.  But, when any model works, it does work. Antenna trimmer? Your call.  IMHO......

Jeep K3HVG

On 05/31/2023 11:13 AM EDT Ray Fantini <[email protected]> wrote:

 

 

May be wrong but I always though the BC-224 was the twelve volt version of the BC-348 and was paired up with things like the BC-191 transmitters for ground use and the BC-348 was most frequently paired with the ART-13 for the AN/ARC-8, then again the SCR-193 for ground operation used a BC-312 with a BC-191 transmitter, BC-312 and 342 receivers were more a ground radio where the BC-224 and 348 were built lighter for air use?

I have a BC-224 just because its so weird in being twelve volt but otherwise appears the same as a 348, personally I prefer the later production run BC-348Q  over the older design 224/348 although I think all were in production at the same time. Don’t think any of them are a good retirement investment. Collect what you like or find fun to use, once you get into perceived value things go downhill fast!

 

Ray F/KA3EKH

 

 

______________________________________________________________
MRCA mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/mrca
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[email protected]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html