[R-390] Christmas Wish List
Barry Hauser
barry at hausernet.com
Thu Dec 8 00:05:23 EST 2005
Hi Guys,
As one of the gang of three, with supporting cast, let me cast some light on
the origins of the Y2K manual.
Al Tirevold and I had the idea virtually simultaneously. Ironically, I had
some problems with inconsistencies in the R-105(a)/ARR-15(a) manuals. I
posed the question -- are there anomalies/errors in the various R-390A
manuals and the answer came back in the affirmative. So that was one
reason -- a gone-over, proofed and corrected manual. But the ideas kept
flowing. Many photos and line drawings in the existing manuals aren't very
clear. Then someone suggested replacing many with color photos. That would
seem to be fluff, but it's much easier to make out the components in a
module in color. Then, while we were at it, adding additional
notations/blurbs with more up-to-date info and tips would make sense.
I did the original OCR work. After some consideration -- basically a
no-brainer -- the '85 Navlex (Navy) manual was my choice and another list
member supplied a good copy. The typography was much crisper and it was
laid out with a single wide column, not two. Apparently that manual was
word-processed by or for the Navy. It is one of the better ones in terms of
content, though one of the Army manuals has some material it does not have.
I OCR'ed the Navlex manual in sections and distributed (by email) the text
for proofing.
Pete Wokoun recreated many (most all) of the line drawings to improve
clarity and enhance them. When the pieces were all ready, Al did the
Acrobat (pdf) publishing. The original version of the manual was about 4.3
megs. A revision was done about a year later, incorporating a number of
corrections for errors that slipped through (OCR-ing is far from perfect and
proofing parts lists is a bear). It also included some enhancements. Al
re-published it with a newer version of Acrobat. It wasn't so much the
additional content, but the new version somehow produced a file on the order
of 14 megs or so.
(BTW -- the version on my website is the old one -- get the revised one from
Al's website. It's available as one big file or several sections.)
The intention was generally to develop it further. One area was the gear
train diagram, which is still the original. As I recall, Pete concluded
that it would be too time consuming to replicate/improve upon with a CAD-CAM
job. Perhaps Scott's gear train photo piece would be a nice addition -- or
it might be a bit much size-wise. It's a trade-off -- while it would be
nice to have one big book that covers just about everything you'd need to
know in one place, at some point, it may become unwieldy. Here are a few of
the things I had in mind ...
-- Incorporation of some of the more established mods/workarounds -- like 3
or 4 of the ballast tube subs, including the resistor, silicon rectifier
replacement for the power supply with recommended initial dropping resistor
value (yeah, basic, but document it),
-- Capacitor "hit list", updated for some of the silver micas that seem to
be failing.
-- More on PTO adjustment by make of PTO
-- Troubleshooting -- lifted from TM-4000
(TM-4000 is a training manual that covers a number of pieces of equipment -
but oddly not by name. The receiver section uses the R-390A as a model --
but never mentions "R-390A". It is rather extensive. However, an expert --
or several -- would have to read through the receiver section to make sure
that the authors did not take "literary license" anywhere, or fail to clean
up errors that were not significant for book training. )
But then again, is it necessary or that helpful to have everything
imaginable between a single set of (electronic) covers? I dunno. The idea
is not to usurp or render obsolete other works, such as the "Pearls of
Wisdom", also available on Al's site. Also might be difficult to get
permission from some who are now difficult if not impossible to reach.
Another approach is to organize an essential "library" consisting of the Y2K
and 3 or 4 other reference pieces.
Realistically, a lot depends on Al's availability if and when some new
volunteers contribute material or pitch in to prep it for inclusion. For
example, excerpting from other manuals generally means keystroking it --
they're not OCR-able.
But, the idea was to periodically enhance the Y2K manual, it's a question of
what belongs in there ... and time available. And, yes, we want to leave
some material as grist for this (reflector) mill, I suppose. So you're both
right ;-)
Barry
----- Original Message -----
From: <Flowertime01 at wmconnect.com>
To: <r-390 at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Wednesday, December 07, 2005 8:48 PM
Subject: Re: [R-390] Christmas Wish List
> Craig WD8KDG
>
> Warning NOT ONE IOTA in this post about getting to a wonderful receiving
> R390/A.
>
> I'll further clarify. Roger, KC6TRU, made a post on Sept.26, 2005 and it
> included a few sentences. "Once you get to the point where you have a
> calibration
> tone every 100 KC, you have a working R390/A. A working R390/A and a
> wonderful
> receiving R390/A should not be confused with a good looking R390/A. Now,
> Roger is to blame for my quest of a wonderful receiving R390/A.
>
> The Y2K manual is great. Without its content, I would not of been able to
> arrive at the point where I have a working R390/A. Heck, the manual is
> only 300
> and some pages, what's a couple more to take us to a wonderful receiving
> R390/A.
>
> Craig, I had nothing to do with the creation of the Y2K manual. The Army
> taught me R390A from lecture notes and no one I met in service from 1968
> to 1975
> waxed elegant about the wonders of TM 11-5820-358-32 8 December 1961 a
> copy of
> which is here in the desk as I work on this mail.
>
> I though when the Fellows did the Y2K manual it was to address the mush in
> the TM and the fact that many folks had R390/A and no TM of any Varity. I
> still
> like the Y2K manual, as the best book to start with when I reach beyond
> the
> front panel of my R390/A into is a warm glowing innards.
>
> If the Y2K manual did it all then we would not have this fine reflector
> discussion going. The begging and end of all R390 on the web would be the
> Y2K web
> site with down load instructions.
>
> So, addition one: How about something like Scott Seickel's illustration of
> how to reassemble the gear train. Using his information and good
> techniques on
> disassemble, I laid everything out on a clean bench in order, it still
> took
> over 12 hours to clean, reassemble, and lubricate the tranny. Note, I did
> not say
> copy his work without his permission. Great work Scott!
>
> 12 Hours not bad time for your first one.
>
> Did you look at the size of all those files to present Scott Seickel's
> illustration. These fellows have done a good job of getting a lot more
> good stuff
> out there on the web for use than was ever in the TM11-5820-358-32 of any
> printing.
>
> Learning R390's is a lot like your sex life. I do not care what they said,
> you know you did not learn it in school and you picked up a little here
> and a
> little there and along the way their was a lot of just plain hype.
>
> There is a lot of stuff that has also been archived from the mail here and
> stuff in the frequent questions web pages.
>
> Umpucky, ballast tubes, cap replacement, solid state rectifiers and
> Langford
> diode modifications are just not in the TM. Window covers and micro dials
> are
> not TM topics either.
>
> In 8 years of fixing R390 for a living I never took a gear train down
> further
> than needed to replace a clamp or a missing spring in a split gear. Back
> then
> those receivers were "new" and did not need a good deep cleaning to get a
> half-century of crud out of them.
>
> At some point the IF section has to be able to pass a 30db Signal + noise
> to
> noise test.
>
> Now you just get down to some inside information from the real been there
> done that guys. This stuff is just not in the TM. Strange as it is trouble
> shooting skills are also not in the TM. You will find trouble shooting
> procedures. A
> lot of skilled instructors at many military school taught some basic
> skills.
> All of the students had passed an aptitude test and had a minimum probable
> chance of being a good troubleshooter. In the field I knew many guys that
> were
> good at doing preventive maintenance. I knew others we would not let hold
> a
> screwdriver. Then there were the guys who did trouble calls. This was when
> something quit working. An op would drop in the shop and tell the trick
> lead that he
> had a problem. The item and its location was logged into the 2402 logbook
> and
> given a log in time. The trick did not get relived until every trouble
> call
> was fixed or accepted as passed. It was less than 20 minutes old and could
> get
> passed. In 20 minutes any one could walk out to the floor, go yep it
> broke, go
> get a spare and have it installed. That closed the trouble call and got a
> new
> one open. I have a broke critter here in the shop on the bench. A lot of
> small
> problems got fixed in place. But guys just hated to even think about doing
> a
> front panel diagnostic and making a fix in place. Much of the stuff was
> loose
> knobs and were give mes. One guy in five or six was willing to walk up to
> one
> of these on the bench and "fix it". The best solution to problems was
> prevention through maintenance. No one wanted to let anything run until it
> broke. If
> it just needed a wash, tube check, alignment peak and paper work, lots of
> guys
> were able to achieve that. The book says the receiver shall do 10:1 but
> how do
> you get there. How do you divide and conquer? When it ain't 10:1 what's a
> body to do and where do you start? How do you know your beating a dead
> horse?
> What does a dead horse look like? The TM goes on and on about smoked tube
> sections and oscillators that do not. It says nothing about a noisy tube.
> You check
> them in the tube tester and they are good or not good. All 1964 Ford
> Mustangs
> are not equal in 2005. What differentiates them? The blue book only gives
> a
> range of values. And some should not even be allowed on the road today.
> But the
> blue book does not tell you that. It just says for the one that should be
> on
> the road the range of values is as follows. You have to go to a different
> place
> to find "roadworthy" defined. And yet another place to judge how to
> inspect
> that poor mustang for its roadworthy attributes.
>
> More to Follow.
>
> Roger KC6TRU
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _____________________________________________________________
> R-390 mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/r-390
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/faq.htm
> Post: mailto:R-390 at mailman.qth.net
> Unsubscribe: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/options/r-390
>
More information about the R-390
mailing list