[R-1051] Six pack attack

[Nick England]

My (probably flawed) understanding -
By the time of their introduction, there was really not any call for an HF
transceiver on larger ships.
The URC-58 (RF-301) transceiver was installed on smaller craft "pending
availability of URC-35" - but I guess there wasn't much reason to replace
the URC-58 with something bigger and heavier...
On larger ships, you had separate transmit and receive antennas. The
receivers were doubled up for diversity for receiving fleet broadcasts plus
ship-shore terminations. Fewer transmitters were needed because they just
didn't need to do that much HF transmission - inter-ship relay and tactical
circuits were UHF.
And then satellites came along.......

Nick England K4NYW
www.navy-radio.com


On Thu, Dec 12, 2019 at 3:57 PM Ray Fantini <RAFANTINI at salisbury.edu> wrote:

> Mr. B has one of his T-827 listed on EBay now and looking at it can see
> it has the 1000 CPS knob so I imagine that makes it the same six pack as
> the 1051 B/C? think only the oldest straight 1051 did not have that
> additional knob?
>
> You can see the item in question at:
>
>
> https://www.ebay.com/itm/NAVY-Military-Radio-T-827b-HF-Transmitter-USB-LSB-AM-CW-FSK-2-30MC/113709635486?hash=item1a799f579e:g:O7YAAOSwSv9cqAWf
>
> If anyone is interested in one of those things he told me he would sell
> them for less. Looking at what's stuffed into a R-1051 and the T-827 makes
> you wonder just how they fit all that into the same box for the RT-618?
>
> Question: There are tons of R-1051 receivers around, so you know a lot
> were deployed in large numbers. For some strange reason seeing some T-827
> also but the RT-618/URC-35 from my experience just don't show up in the
> same numbers. Was the URC-35 a dog? Is that why you don't see them? I had
> one opportunity to buy one years ago and that was for a lot of money so did
> not do it and it went fast. The Sunair URC-92 and stuff is plentiful and
> cheap and at least in my experience a way better radio but it has the
> advantage of being ten years newer. I have owned, repaired and sold several
> of them along with owning several R-1051 receivers and I have a strange
> Harris URC-94 that I love but in years of dealing with this stuff have
> never owned and only saw maybe one or two URC-35 (RT-618) sets.
>
> Ray F/KA3EKH
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: r-1051-bounces at mailman.qth.net <r-1051-bounces at mailman.qth.net> On
> Behalf Of Nick England
> Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2019 2:37 PM
> To: R-1051 Discussion Group <r-1051 at mailman.qth.net>
> Subject: Re: [R-1051] Six pack attack
>
> FWIW, I have started a chart of all the module part numbers towards the
> bottom of a page at http://www.navy-radio.com/rcvrs/r1051.htm
>
> I have numbers for several R-1051 models and a couple of RT-618 models. I
> need to dig around for T-827 info.
> Please let me know of additions, corrections, etc.
>
> Nick England K4NYW
> www.navy-radio.com
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 12, 2019 at 12:23 PM John P. Caldwell <jcaldwell at rbcos.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Ray,
> >
> > The six pack assembly is "sort of" interchangeable with the T-827,
> > depending on the synthesizer module.  Six packs are NOT
> > interchangeable between the
> > 1051 and 1051B/C.  The 1051 six pack has a 500 CPS synth module, the
> > 1051B and later uses a 100 CPS synth module so they can't be
> > substituted.  I believe the same applies with the T-827
> >
> >
> >
> > John Caldwell
> >
> > W8SDA (ex WD8INC)
> >
> >
> ______________________________________________________________
> R-1051 mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/r-1051
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:R-1051 at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> ______________________________________________________________
> R-1051 mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/r-1051
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:R-1051 at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>