[Milsurplus] BC-348-Q

Mike Morrow kk5f at earthlink.net
Mon Jul 30 13:12:04 EDT 2007


>... And I don't know whether the BC-348 cost was for the -JNQ el 
>cheapo models or for the others.  The BC-348 was no longer listed in 1955.

It's possible that the BC-348 could be found in equivalent US Air Force documentation.  There probably weren't many installations left in the US Army after the creation of the USAF in 1947.  There were lots of BC-348 (AN/ARR-11) sets in service as part of the AN/ARC-8 in older USAF aircraft even up to the early 1970s (I saw several).  One of my BC-348 manuals was officially reprinted in 1968.

I've always liked the R model best.  But it may be unfair to call the JNQ models cheapo sets, though no doubt they must have cost less to make.  It would be interesting to find out if the government actually paid less for them.  I've got NOS BC-348-P, -Q, and -R units im my collection.  The manuals for the JNQ explain why the 991-regulated B+ for the oscillator is no longer necessary, the gain-adjusting pot on the main tuning capacitor assembly of the non-JNQ modesl always seemed a bit over-engineered and unnecessary to me, and perhaps the antenna trim capacitor was also (That's the one thing missing on the JNQs that I'd like to have seen them retain).  I like the more modern single-ended tube design of the JNQs, although it's strange to see the AF output tube sitting on the RF amp shelf.  I think Wells-Gardner did a pretty good job revising the design of the first J models with these modern characteristics in 1942, while the other makers retained the pre-war electrical designs.

I have always wished that there had been an updated design of the BC-375, similar to that of the BC-348-J.  It doesn't seem to me that it would have been hard to come up with something more modern, utilizing a 837 MO, 813 PA, 811(2) modulator, etc. that costs about the same while maintaining most of the original design intact.

Mike / KK5F


More information about the Milsurplus mailing list