[MRCG] WTB AB-15 antenna masks and TBY parts
kalvin kelley
slohappy2 at gmail.com
Mon Oct 1 21:52:49 EDT 2018
Hello,
I have a military vehical with an AB-15 antenna base and I am looking for
the MS-117a and MS-118a section or a complete set. I believe a AB-23 and
AB-24 will also work.
I am also looking for the tip section of a UMSC TBY antenna, a carry bag and
a headset for same.
Thank you
Kalvin Kelley
KJ6WGH in San Luis Obispo
-----Original Message-----
From: mrcg-bounces at mailman.qth.net <mrcg-bounces at mailman.qth.net> On Behalf
Of mrcg-request at mailman.qth.net
Sent: Monday, October 1, 2018 5:38 PM
To: mrcg at mailman.qth.net
Subject: MRCG Digest, Vol 75, Issue 2
Send MRCG mailing list submissions to
mrcg at mailman.qth.net
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/mrcg
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
mrcg-request at mailman.qth.net
You can reach the person managing the list at
mrcg-owner at mailman.qth.net
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than
"Re: Contents of MRCG digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. [FS] NOS AN-130-B antenna for sale (Glen.Closson)
2. Re: [Milsurplus] [MRCA] WTB - Vintage Mil Aircraft Radio
Components (Francesco Ledda)
3. Re: [Milsurplus] [MRCA] WTB - Vintage Mil Aircraft
Radio
Components (Scott Johnson)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2018 14:45:35 -0700
From: "Glen.Closson" <glen.closson at gmail.com>
To: "'West Coast Military Radio Collectors Group'"
<mrcg at mailman.qth.net>
Subject: [MRCG] [FS] NOS AN-130-B antenna for sale
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
From: Glen.Closson [mailto:glen.closson at gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, October 01, 2018 2:35 PM
Subject: [FS] NOS AN-130-B antenna for sale
Good afternoon from muggy Silicon Valley!
I have a NOS AN-130-B antenna for sale. It's in excellent condition!
Used with the BC-1000 transceiver and possibly others.
$40
Regards,
Glen
Work like you don't need the money,
love like you've never been hurt
and dance like no one is watching.
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2018 17:21:38 -0500
From: "Francesco Ledda" <frledda at att.net>
To: "'West Coast Military Radio Collectors Group'"
<mrcg at mailman.qth.net>, "'mrca'" <mrca at mailman.qth.net>,
"'milsurplus'" <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
Subject: Re: [MRCG] [Milsurplus] [MRCA] WTB - Vintage Mil Aircraft
Radio Components
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
The devil is in the details.
As Jim said before, MTBF numbers should be provided with the operational
context in which were obtain. A 618T on the back of a Jeep in South Vietnam
will have different MTBF respect to a 618T in the pressurized belly of a
B-747.
The ARC-58 was tested by the Air Force and Collins in 1959. If I remember
correctly, they were installed in a mix of 11 B-52s and KC-135. The test
report issued by Collins (with supervision of the Air Force) gave a ~300
hours MTBF. This MTBF analysis is valid only for this application, and
nothing else.
Few considerations:
-Helping Collins - New radios and best of the best provided by Collins
-Helping Collins ? Radios maintained by very knowledgeable Collins engineers
-Against Collins ? New radios with still few design and manufacturing bugs
-Against Collins ? High early mortality (reliability curve - bathtub shape)
Therefore, the 300h MTBF must be seen as a starting point that can be
improved with the proper effort. This is exactly what happened to the ARC-58
in the B-52; it got better with age, like a good wine.
The same ARC-58 was used on the AN/TSC-15 Communication Central for the
USAF, but it was used differently. The TSC-15 was carried to the field on a
truck or air dropped. When in full duplex mode, the ARC-58 could be ON and
radiating (transmitting) 24 hours a day. I am sure that its reliability
numbers were not as good.
Jim is 100% right. The operational context is half of the story when we
talk about MTBF.
Best, Frank K5URG
From: milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net
[mailto:milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Jim Whartenby
Sent: Monday, October 1, 2018 12:21 PM
To: 'West Coast Military Radio Collectors Group'; 'mrca'; 'milsurplus'
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] [MRCG] [MRCA] WTB - Vintage Mil Aircraft Radio
Components
Ray
Don't know about the KC-135, "Standard Aircraft Characteristics" has no
information on it but some articles in the "Collins Signal" indicate that
the ARC-58 was originally installed. Seems logical to me since the KC-135
refueled the B-52 and world wide comm would be desirable. But military
logic is not the same as common sense; it is easy to loose sight of why
something was done. It is relatively easy to find B-52 avionics
designations (again, Standard Aircraft Characteristics to the rescue) but
little seems to be available on the KC-135, possibly since it is in the
support role.
Frank Ledda is the expert, as far as I am concerned, he has access to all
sorts of information on Collins radios.
I don't know where you are getting your MTBF information but your numbers
seem wildly optimistic to me. DTIC article A061734 from November, 1966 has
reliability information on the ARC-58 and 618T-2 under the ARC-94
designation. AGREE data for the ARC-94 is 154 hours; 79 hours for the
ARC-58. This is far from what you reported so I would be interested in
getting a copy of your MTBF data.
Now we can quibble about AGREE test data compared to Operational Conditions
data but it is difficult to factor in the aircraft and it's affect on
equipment reliability. Each aircraft is its own unique environment. The
aircraft determines where on the airframe the equipment is located and what
are the environmental conditions that the particular radio is exposed too.
So some radios will have high MTBF hours while the same radio installed in
another aircraft will have lower MTBF hours. At least AGREE test data is
arguably the same for all radios tested since it is done under laboratory
controlled conditions of altitude, humidity, temperature and vibration.
AGREE test chambers are available on eBay so one can do their own tests!
<grin> But kidding aside, if anyone has found other reliability data on
DTIC or any other reliable source, please let me know; always looking for
published reliability data. It is surprising to me how secretive
reliability data is. I see reports all the time that do not even name the
manufacturer nor equipment designation, it is all so hush-hush.
To answer the question about how common the ARC-58 mounts are, the ARC-58
was designed to fit an ARINC standard ATR-1 mount so any ATR-1 mount will
accept the ARC-58 receiver-exciter or transmitter-power supply. They show
up on eBay often enough, that is where I got the examples I have. Some have
tags on them showing what equipment it was made for, other mounts have no
tags at all.
Regards,
Jim
I wonder why people argue over the 10% of their differences and ignore the
90% they agree on?
_____
From: Ray Fantini <RAFANTINI at salisbury.edu>
To: Scott Johnson <scottjohnson1 at cox.net>; 'West Coast Military Radio
Collectors Group' <mrcg at mailman.qth.net>; 'mrca' <mrca at mailman.qth.net>;
'milsurplus' <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Monday, October 1, 2018 7:45 AM
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] [MRCG] [MRCA] WTB - Vintage Mil Aircraft Radio
Components
Still beings up the question what would you be using it for. I thought most
KC-135 had been refitted with 618T transceivers as soon as they became
available being the ARC-58 was hardly the most reliable radio. The MTBF of
the ARC-58 was around 400 hours and the MTBF of the 618T was 4,000 hours.
But imagine that if you had a large aircraft that came with an ARC-58 only
an ARC-58 will do.
Going to assume that this is just for static display or Ham use being that
none of this stuff would meet type acceptance these days.
Sorry for all the questions but this is a fascinating subject.
And if you decide that a 618T/ARC-94 would work may be able to help.
-----Original Message-----
From: Scott Johnson [mailto:scottjohnson1 at cox.net]
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2018 9:45 PM
To: 'West Coast Military Radio Collectors Group' <mrcg at mailman.qth.net>; Ray
Fantini <RAFANTINI at salisbury.edu>; 'mrca' <mrca at mailman.qth.net>;
'milsurplus' <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
Subject: RE: [MRCG] [MRCA] WTB - Vintage Mil Aircraft Radio Components
-And the civil version, the 18Z3/4 was used in the early 747
Scott V. Johnson W7SVJ
5111 E. Sharon Dr.
Scottsdale, AZ 85254-3636
H (602) 953-5779
C (480) 550-2358
scottjohnson1 at cox.net
scott.johnson at ieee.org
-----Original Message-----
From: mrcg-bounces at mailman.qth.net <mrcg-bounces at mailman.qth.net> On Behalf
Of Scott Johnson
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2018 6:38 PM
To: 'Ray Fantini' <RAFANTINI at salisbury.edu>; 'MRCG' <mrcg at mailman.qth.net>;
'mrca' <mrca at mailman.qth.net>; 'milsurplus' <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
Subject: Re: [MRCG] [MRCA] WTB - Vintage Mil Aircraft Radio Components
They were also used on the KC-135.
Scott V. Johnson W7SVJ
5111 E. Sharon Dr.
Scottsdale, AZ 85254-3636
H (602) 953-5779
C (480) 550-2358
scottjohnson1 at cox.net
scott.johnson at ieee.org
-----Original Message-----
From: mrca-bounces at mailman.qth.net <mrca-bounces at mailman.qth.net> On Behalf
Of Ray Fantini
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2018 10:07 AM
To: MRCG <mrcg at mailman.qth.net>; mrca <mrca at mailman.qth.net>; milsurplus
<milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
Subject: Re: [MRCA] WTB - Vintage Mil Aircraft Radio Components
Just curious, what are you restoring that's big enough to accommodate an
AN/ARC-58? I thought they were only used on the B-52
Ray F/KA3EKH
-----Original Message-----
From: mrca-bounces at mailman.qth.net [mailto:mrca-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On
Behalf Of boatanchor at martasystems.com
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2018 12:54 PM
To: MRCG <mrcg at mailman.qth.net>; mrca <mrca at mailman.qth.net>; milsurplus
<milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>; arc5 at mailman.qth.net
Subject: [MRCA] WTB - Vintage Mil Aircraft Radio Components
All -
I'm working on the restoration of several aircraft and need the following
components. If you can help, please tell me what you have and how much $$
you require for it.
Thanks !
John WB6AZP
-- Big Black Avionics Boxes --
UHF Transmitter/Receiver "RT-178 / ARC-27"
Transmitter "T-605 / ARC-58"
Receiver/Exciter "R-761 / ARC-58"
Receiver "R-540 / ARN-14C"
Receiver "R-322 / ARN-18"
Dynamotor "DY-66 / ARN-14"
Vertical Gyro "332D-6"
Antenna Coupler "C-1940 / ARC-58"
Antenna Coupler "CU-523 / ARC-58"
HF Power Supply "416W-1"
Altimeter Indicator "I-152C"
-- Mounting Trays --
ARC-73 Tray "MT-2699"
Shockmount for HF Power Supply "350T-1"
Mount for AN/APS13 "MT-149"
Mounting Plate "MT-80 / ARC-5"
Mounting Plate "MT-78 / ARC-5"
Mounting Plate "MT-109 / APX-1"
-- Control Boxes --
UHF Control "C-1904 / ARC-27"
TACAN Control "C-1763 / ARN-21A"
Receiver Control "C-1939 / ARC-58"
ARC-5 Control "C-38 / ARC-5" - can be rough, just need the backing plate
Control "C-54 / APX-1"
-- Instruments & Other --
Jack Box "J-22A / ARC-5"
Frequency Meter "AW59"
Navigator's Radar Scope Shield "801410"
Visor for Altitude Indicator "M387"
______________________________________________________________
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
This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net <http://www.qsl.net/>
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
<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
This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net <http://www.qsl.net/>
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
______________________________________________________________
MRCG mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/mrcg
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:MRCG at mailman.qth.net
Website: http://www.mrcgwest.org <http://www.mrcgwest.org/>
This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net <http://www.qsl.net/>
Please 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 <http://www.qsl.net/>
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2018 17:37:50 -0700
From: "Scott Johnson" <scottjohnson1 at cox.net>
To: "'West Coast Military Radio Collectors Group'"
<mrcg at mailman.qth.net>, "'mrca'" <mrca at mailman.qth.net>,
"'milsurplus'" <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
Subject: Re: [MRCG] [Milsurplus] [MRCA] WTB - Vintage Mil Aircraft
Radio Components
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Anecodotally, I can relate some representative MTBF number for C-130A/B and
KC-135E aircraft.
In the first case, the C-130 A, two 618T-1 systems were installed, using
180L-3 couplers to long wires. The aircraft were ex- Rhode Island Air
National Guard, and had been converted to a constant-flow slurry system for
firefighting use. The aircraft also served off-season as US military
contract aircraft, performing myriad functions that required a nearly
complete military avionics suite, including UHF and HF comms. Typically,
the 618-T R/Ts were not problematic, despite being over forty years old, and
in a typical season, perhaps 1 R/T unit out of a 3 aircraft fleet would
require service. Most typically, the bench repair involved aligning the RF
translator, and perhaps replacing a driver tube. Based up this service, the
R/T's were exhibiting perhaps 1 failure per 150-200 flying hours. On the
other hand, the 180L-3 couplers might have exhibited perhaps ten times that
failure rate. They were, for the most part, worn out. I replaced silver
ribbons, re-plated autotransfo rmer windings, and replaced a lot of relays.
In the second case, I was working on Wyoming Air Guard C-130Bs, same 618T-1
installation x2, but the failure rate was much lower, as we would order
490T-9 couplers to replace the 180L-3s until our 9 aircraft all had two
490Ts. This made the tuning cycle much shorter, much to the relief of the
crew, and the radio!
In the last case, it was the ARC-190 in the KC-135E/R in Phoenix.
Basically, it never failed. Even when it would sit on the ramp in Phoenix
on a 120 degree day and bake, it didn't fail. We would remove the radios
for bench check just so the new guys would know were they were located.
Occasionally, we would get a coupler fault, which was almost always fixed
with a shot of nitrogen to top off the pressurized coupler up at the top of
the vertical stab. (not the most pleasant work) I think in 20 years at the
161 ARW, I had exactly one opportunity to troubleshoot an ARC-190 on the
bench, and it turned out to be a smashed pin that someone had overlooked on
a connector. By the way, there was only one HF system on the KC-135, even
when they had the ARC-65. Some special mission -135s had two HFs.
My assumption is that MAC aircraft had two HF systems due to their role in
carrying passengers on a regular basis.
Scott V. Johnson W7SVJ
5111 E. Sharon Dr.
Scottsdale, AZ 85254-3636
H (602) 953-5779
C (480) 550-2358
scottjohnson1 at cox.net
scott.johnson at ieee.org
-----Original Message-----
From: mrcg-bounces at mailman.qth.net <mrcg-bounces at mailman.qth.net> On Behalf
Of Francesco Ledda
Sent: Monday, October 1, 2018 3:22 PM
To: 'West Coast Military Radio Collectors Group' <mrcg at mailman.qth.net>;
'mrca' <mrca at mailman.qth.net>; 'milsurplus' <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
Subject: Re: [MRCG] [Milsurplus] [MRCA] WTB - Vintage Mil Aircraft Radio
Components
The devil is in the details.
As Jim said before, MTBF numbers should be provided with the operational
context in which were obtain. A 618T on the back of a Jeep in South Vietnam
will have different MTBF respect to a 618T in the pressurized belly of a
B-747.
The ARC-58 was tested by the Air Force and Collins in 1959. If I remember
correctly, they were installed in a mix of 11 B-52s and KC-135. The test
report issued by Collins (with supervision of the Air Force) gave a ~300
hours MTBF. This MTBF analysis is valid only for this application, and
nothing else.
Few considerations:
-Helping Collins - New radios and best of the best provided by Collins
-Helping Collins ? Radios maintained by very knowledgeable Collins engineers
-Against Collins ? New radios with still few design and manufacturing bugs
-Against Collins ? High early mortality (reliability curve - bathtub shape)
Therefore, the 300h MTBF must be seen as a starting point that can be
improved with the proper effort. This is exactly what happened to the ARC-58
in the B-52; it got better with age, like a good wine.
The same ARC-58 was used on the AN/TSC-15 Communication Central for the
USAF, but it was used differently. The TSC-15 was carried to the field on a
truck or air dropped. When in full duplex mode, the ARC-58 could be ON and
radiating (transmitting) 24 hours a day. I am sure that its reliability
numbers were not as good.
Jim is 100% right. The operational context is half of the story when we
talk about MTBF.
Best, Frank K5URG
From: milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net
[mailto:milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Jim Whartenby
Sent: Monday, October 1, 2018 12:21 PM
To: 'West Coast Military Radio Collectors Group'; 'mrca'; 'milsurplus'
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] [MRCG] [MRCA] WTB - Vintage Mil Aircraft Radio
Components
Ray
Don't know about the KC-135, "Standard Aircraft Characteristics" has no
information on it but some articles in the "Collins Signal" indicate that
the ARC-58 was originally installed. Seems logical to me since the KC-135
refueled the B-52 and world wide comm would be desirable. But military
logic is not the same as common sense; it is easy to loose sight of why
something was done. It is relatively easy to find B-52 avionics
designations (again, Standard Aircraft Characteristics to the rescue) but
little seems to be available on the KC-135, possibly since it is in the
support role.
Frank Ledda is the expert, as far as I am concerned, he has access to all
sorts of information on Collins radios.
I don't know where you are getting your MTBF information but your numbers
seem wildly optimistic to me. DTIC article A061734 from November, 1966 has
reliability information on the ARC-58 and 618T-2 under the ARC-94
designation. AGREE data for the ARC-94 is 154 hours; 79 hours for the
ARC-58. This is far from what you reported so I would be interested in
getting a copy of your MTBF data.
Now we can quibble about AGREE test data compared to Operational Conditions
data but it is difficult to factor in the aircraft and it's affect on
equipment reliability. Each aircraft is its own unique environment. The
aircraft determines where on the airframe the equipment is located and what
are the environmental conditions that the particular radio is exposed too.
So some radios will have high MTBF hours while the same radio installed in
another aircraft will have lower MTBF hours. At least AGREE test data is
arguably the same for all radios tested since it is done under laboratory
controlled conditions of altitude, humidity, temperature and vibration.
AGREE test chambers are available on eBay so one can do their own tests!
<grin> But kidding aside, if anyone has found other reliability data on
DTIC or any other reliable source, please let me know; always looking for
published reliability data. It is surprising to me how secretive
reliability data is. I see reports all the time that do not even name the
manufacturer nor equipment designation, it is all so hush-hush.
To answer the question about how common the ARC-58 mounts are, the ARC-58
was designed to fit an ARINC standard ATR-1 mount so any ATR-1 mount will
accept the ARC-58 receiver-exciter or transmitter-power supply. They show
up on eBay often enough, that is where I got the examples I have. Some have
tags on them showing what equipment it was made for, other mounts have no
tags at all.
Regards,
Jim
I wonder why people argue over the 10% of their differences and ignore the
90% they agree on?
_____
From: Ray Fantini <RAFANTINI at salisbury.edu>
To: Scott Johnson <scottjohnson1 at cox.net>; 'West Coast Military Radio
Collectors Group' <mrcg at mailman.qth.net>; 'mrca' <mrca at mailman.qth.net>;
'milsurplus' <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Monday, October 1, 2018 7:45 AM
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] [MRCG] [MRCA] WTB - Vintage Mil Aircraft Radio
Components
Still beings up the question what would you be using it for. I thought most
KC-135 had been refitted with 618T transceivers as soon as they became
available being the ARC-58 was hardly the most reliable radio. The MTBF of
the ARC-58 was around 400 hours and the MTBF of the 618T was 4,000 hours.
But imagine that if you had a large aircraft that came with an ARC-58 only
an ARC-58 will do.
Going to assume that this is just for static display or Ham use being that
none of this stuff would meet type acceptance these days.
Sorry for all the questions but this is a fascinating subject.
And if you decide that a 618T/ARC-94 would work may be able to help.
-----Original Message-----
From: Scott Johnson [mailto:scottjohnson1 at cox.net]
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2018 9:45 PM
To: 'West Coast Military Radio Collectors Group' <mrcg at mailman.qth.net>; Ray
Fantini <RAFANTINI at salisbury.edu>; 'mrca' <mrca at mailman.qth.net>;
'milsurplus' <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
Subject: RE: [MRCG] [MRCA] WTB - Vintage Mil Aircraft Radio Components
-And the civil version, the 18Z3/4 was used in the early 747
Scott V. Johnson W7SVJ
5111 E. Sharon Dr.
Scottsdale, AZ 85254-3636
H (602) 953-5779
C (480) 550-2358
scottjohnson1 at cox.net
scott.johnson at ieee.org
-----Original Message-----
From: mrcg-bounces at mailman.qth.net <mrcg-bounces at mailman.qth.net> On Behalf
Of Scott Johnson
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2018 6:38 PM
To: 'Ray Fantini' <RAFANTINI at salisbury.edu>; 'MRCG' <mrcg at mailman.qth.net>;
'mrca' <mrca at mailman.qth.net>; 'milsurplus' <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
Subject: Re: [MRCG] [MRCA] WTB - Vintage Mil Aircraft Radio Components
They were also used on the KC-135.
Scott V. Johnson W7SVJ
5111 E. Sharon Dr.
Scottsdale, AZ 85254-3636
H (602) 953-5779
C (480) 550-2358
scottjohnson1 at cox.net
scott.johnson at ieee.org
-----Original Message-----
From: mrca-bounces at mailman.qth.net <mrca-bounces at mailman.qth.net> On Behalf
Of Ray Fantini
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2018 10:07 AM
To: MRCG <mrcg at mailman.qth.net>; mrca <mrca at mailman.qth.net>; milsurplus
<milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
Subject: Re: [MRCA] WTB - Vintage Mil Aircraft Radio Components
Just curious, what are you restoring that's big enough to accommodate an
AN/ARC-58? I thought they were only used on the B-52
Ray F/KA3EKH
-----Original Message-----
From: mrca-bounces at mailman.qth.net [mailto:mrca-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On
Behalf Of boatanchor at martasystems.com
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2018 12:54 PM
To: MRCG <mrcg at mailman.qth.net>; mrca <mrca at mailman.qth.net>; milsurplus
<milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>; arc5 at mailman.qth.net
Subject: [MRCA] WTB - Vintage Mil Aircraft Radio Components
All -
I'm working on the restoration of several aircraft and need the following
components. If you can help, please tell me what you have and how much $$
you require for it.
Thanks !
John WB6AZP
-- Big Black Avionics Boxes --
UHF Transmitter/Receiver "RT-178 / ARC-27"
Transmitter "T-605 / ARC-58"
Receiver/Exciter "R-761 / ARC-58"
Receiver "R-540 / ARN-14C"
Receiver "R-322 / ARN-18"
Dynamotor "DY-66 / ARN-14"
Vertical Gyro "332D-6"
Antenna Coupler "C-1940 / ARC-58"
Antenna Coupler "CU-523 / ARC-58"
HF Power Supply "416W-1"
Altimeter Indicator "I-152C"
-- Mounting Trays --
ARC-73 Tray "MT-2699"
Shockmount for HF Power Supply "350T-1"
Mount for AN/APS13 "MT-149"
Mounting Plate "MT-80 / ARC-5"
Mounting Plate "MT-78 / ARC-5"
Mounting Plate "MT-109 / APX-1"
-- Control Boxes --
UHF Control "C-1904 / ARC-27"
TACAN Control "C-1763 / ARN-21A"
Receiver Control "C-1939 / ARC-58"
ARC-5 Control "C-38 / ARC-5" - can be rough, just need the backing plate
Control "C-54 / APX-1"
-- Instruments & Other --
Jack Box "J-22A / ARC-5"
Frequency Meter "AW59"
Navigator's Radar Scope Shield "801410"
Visor for Altitude Indicator "M387"
______________________________________________________________
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
This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net <http://www.qsl.net/>
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
<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
This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net <http://www.qsl.net/>
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
______________________________________________________________
MRCG mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/mrcg
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:MRCG at mailman.qth.net
Website: http://www.mrcgwest.org <http://www.mrcgwest.org/>
This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net <http://www.qsl.net/>
Please 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 <http://www.qsl.net/>
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
MRCG mailing list
MRCG at mailman.qth.net
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/mrcg
Website: http://www.mrcgwest.org
End of MRCG Digest, Vol 75, Issue 2
***********************************
More information about the MRCG
mailing list