From robandpj at earthlink.net  Sun Jun  1 11:45:16 2008
From: robandpj at earthlink.net (Rob Flory)
Date: Sun Jun  1 11:56:47 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Sangamo 3S timer
Message-ID: <14055976.1212335117287.JavaMail.root@elwamui-royal.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

Hi,
I've got a Sangamo Model 3S form 61S3 timer with Sig. Corps stamp on it.  6 terms, 2 of which are 115VAC 60cycles in.  4 more terminals seem to be outputs.

Anyone know what for and/or need it for the cost of shipping?

RF

From rickb at tx.rr.com  Sun Jun  1 12:05:13 2008
From: rickb at tx.rr.com (Rick Brashear)
Date: Sun Jun  1 12:16:38 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Parasitic Suppressor
Message-ID: <001201c8c401$46be09d0$aceef218@main>

Would any of you guys happen to have a couple of Ohmite P-300 suppressors
you'd be willing to sell?  I am in need o fat least two.  Please respond off
list at rsbtexas@gmail.com

Thanks,
Rick/K5IAR

From ross at hypertools.com  Sun Jun  1 16:52:45 2008
From: ross at hypertools.com (David Ross)
Date: Sun Jun  1 16:05:16 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Who was the original designer of the "Old Family" FM
	radios?
Message-ID: <48430C1D.7060207@hypertools.com>

I mean the RT-66, RT-67, RT-68, RT-70, R-108, R-109, R-110, and all the 
attendant power supplies & racks.

It is nice old stuff, and the whole bunch has a 'family resemblance'.  
What company was responsible for the original design?

Love that OD wrinkle-finish paint.

Oh yeah, and who has a PRC-16 that they want to get rid of?

Dave Ross    N7EPI
From baldi.1 at www.dottorbaldi.it  Sun Jun  1 17:59:10 2008
From: baldi.1 at www.dottorbaldi.it (federico)
Date: Sun Jun  1 18:37:40 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] WOTAN SYSTEM request of infos
In-Reply-To: <003301c8c374$1c8092b0$c9454246@ourcomputer>
References: <003301c8c374$1c8092b0$c9454246@ourcomputer>
Message-ID: <20080601215419.M68986@dottorbaldi.it>

Hi to All,
?????????????? anybody have any information about a system marked WOTAN made by Harris with : one PRC-138, one PA 125 W (embedded in a plastic case) plus a PS, a shielded computer, an RF-382 AATU, a coil of 50 meters of coax and control cable for tuner, and an antenna RF-1912 Fan Dipole ? 73 de Federico IZ1FID
 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080602/630c40b6/attachment.htm
From asmagal at fc.up.pt  Sun Jun  1 18:34:57 2008
From: asmagal at fc.up.pt (asmagal@fc.up.pt)
Date: Sun Jun  1 18:46:43 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Western Electric 725A Magnetron
Message-ID: <20080602003457.8hymo3u308w44w04@webmail.fc.up.pt>

Greetings.

The 725A Magnetron has a waveguide flange that is unfamiliar to me.
The WR112 waveguide port ends with a flat disk without any screws
nor any evident means of connection to go ahead. I would like to
receive clever info on this matter from the members of this list.
A photo of this magnetron can be seen at

http://tubecollector.org/725a.htm.

Thanks.
Antonio/CT1TE

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
A FCUP utiliza o sistema open source de webmail Horde/IMP (www.horde.org)
Visite: http://www.fc.up.pt/ http://info.fc.up.pt/


From jvendely at cfl.rr.com  Sun Jun  1 20:34:14 2008
From: jvendely at cfl.rr.com (John Vendely)
Date: Sun Jun  1 20:45:47 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Who was the original designer of the "Old Family"
	FMradios?
References: <48430C1D.7060207@hypertools.com>
Message-ID: <00b501c8c448$62e2cfa0$6401a8c0@j1p0k4t1japqei>

Relatively little information still exists about the origins of these 
remarkable radio sets.  However, some research I did years ago indicated 
these radios were designed by Crosley, incorporating a number of circuit 
techniques that came out of research conducted at Bell Laboratories.   I 
think I may still have one or two technical papers published on the subject 
back in the early 1950s.  These fabulous and historic sets were truly state 
of the art, and have been unfortunately neglected by the "collecting" 
community...

73,

John K9WT


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "David Ross" <ross@hypertools.com>
To: "milsurplus" <milsurplus@mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Sunday, June 01, 2008 4:52 PM
Subject: [Milsurplus] Who was the original designer of the "Old Family" 
FMradios?


>I mean the RT-66, RT-67, RT-68, RT-70, R-108, R-109, R-110, and all the 
>attendant power supplies & racks.
>
> It is nice old stuff, and the whole bunch has a 'family resemblance'. 
> What company was responsible for the original design?
>
> Love that OD wrinkle-finish paint.
>
> Oh yeah, and who has a PRC-16 that they want to get rid of?
>
> Dave Ross    N7EPI
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus@mailman.qth.net
> 

From antqradio at sbcglobal.net  Sun Jun  1 23:58:56 2008
From: antqradio at sbcglobal.net (Jim Whartenby)
Date: Mon Jun  2 00:10:30 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Who was the original designer of the "Old Family"
	FMradios?
In-Reply-To: <00b501c8c448$62e2cfa0$6401a8c0@j1p0k4t1japqei>
Message-ID: <863103.66848.qm@web82701.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

If you know an IEEE member or live near a College Library then check
out:

Vehicular Communications, Transactions of the IRE Professional Group on
Volume 1, Issue 1, Feb 1952 Page(s): 117 - 121

I just Googled "GRC-3 radio" it was the 43rd hit.
Jim


--- John Vendely <jvendely@cfl.rr.com> wrote:

> Relatively little information still exists about the origins of these
> 
> remarkable radio sets.  However, some research I did years ago
> indicated 
> these radios were designed by Crosley, incorporating a number of
> circuit 
> techniques that came out of research conducted at Bell Laboratories. 
>  I 
> think I may still have one or two technical papers published on the
> subject 
> back in the early 1950s.  These fabulous and historic sets were truly
> state 
> of the art, and have been unfortunately neglected by the "collecting"
> 
> community...
> 
> 73,
> 
> John K9WT
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "David Ross" <ross@hypertools.com>
> To: "milsurplus" <milsurplus@mailman.qth.net>
> Sent: Sunday, June 01, 2008 4:52 PM
> Subject: [Milsurplus] Who was the original designer of the "Old
> Family" 
> FMradios?
> 
> 
> >I mean the RT-66, RT-67, RT-68, RT-70, R-108, R-109, R-110, and all
> the 
> >attendant power supplies & racks.
> >
> > It is nice old stuff, and the whole bunch has a 'family
> resemblance'. 
> > What company was responsible for the original design?
> >
> > Love that OD wrinkle-finish paint.
> >
> > Oh yeah, and who has a PRC-16 that they want to get rid of?
> >
> > Dave Ross    N7EPI
> > ______________________________________________________________
> > Milsurplus mailing list
> > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> > Post: mailto:Milsurplus@mailman.qth.net
> > 
> 
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus@mailman.qth.net
> 

From jcoward5452 at aol.com  Mon Jun  2 00:10:30 2008
From: jcoward5452 at aol.com (jcoward5452@aol.com)
Date: Mon Jun  2 00:22:14 2008
Subject: Fwd: [Milsurplus] Who was the original designer of the "Old Family"
	FMradios?
In-Reply-To: <8CA927D015ED8C7-C9C-51A6@webmail-nf14.sim.aol.com>
References: <48430C1D.7060207@hypertools.com>
	<00b501c8c448$62e2cfa0$6401a8c0@j1p0k4t1japqei>
	<8CA927D015ED8C7-C9C-51A6@webmail-nf14.sim.aol.com>
Message-ID: <8CA927DBABA6E49-C9C-51DD@webmail-nf14.sim.aol.com>





I had a RT-68 with p.s.,aux Rx ,mount, ant. etc. I used to drag out and 
set up in the back of my pickup and drive up to Castle Rock,above 
Silicon Valley, and try to check in to the Armyradios net.I did this 
exercise numerous times and never made contact with anyone.Everything 
was working,even had a watt meter and a separate monitor rx so I know I 
was getting out.Heard plenty of CA Highway Patrol and Taxi service and 
a few others but no hams.Sold it all for a song at Foothill flea market 
and have not regretted it?for one minute...My back is doing much better 
now....These radios were built like tanks, for tanks.No doubt they were 
state of the art.Even had cloth schematics stuffed in a tube for 
emergency repair,although I'd hate to be the techie in the field trying 
to fix any part of this set.These are depot repair unless its a 
vibrator or tube?failure.
?Jay KE6PPF


-----Original Message-----
From: John Vendely <jvendely@cfl.rr.com>
To: David Ross <ross@hypertools.com>; milsurplus 
<milsurplus@mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Sun, 1 Jun 2008 5:34 pm
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] Who was the original designer of the "Old 
Family" FMradios?


Relatively little information still exists about the origins of these 
remarkable radio sets. However, some research I did years ago indicated 
these radios were designed by Crosley, incorporating a number of 
circuit techniques that came out of research conducted at Bell 
Laboratories. I think I may still have one or two technical papers 
published on the subject back in the early 1950s. These fabulous and 
historic sets were truly state of the art, and have been unfortunately 
neglected by the "collecting" community...?
?
73,?
?
John K9WT?
?
----- Original Message ----- From: "David Ross" <ross@hypertools.com>?
To: "milsurplus" <milsurplus@mailman.qth.net>?
Sent: Sunday, June 01, 2008 4:52 PM?
Subject: [Milsurplus] Who was the original designer of the "Old Family" 
FMradios??
?
>I mean the RT-66, RT-67, RT-68, RT-70, R-108, R-109, R-110, and all 
the >attendant power supplies & racks.?
>?
> It is nice old stuff, and the whole bunch has a 'family resemblance'. 
> What company was responsible for the original design??
>?
> Love that OD wrinkle-finish paint.?
>?
> Oh yeah, and who has a PRC-16 that they want to get rid of??
>?
> Dave Ross N7EPI?
> ______________________________________________________________?
> Milsurplus mailing list?
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus?
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm?
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus@mailman.qth.net?
> ?
______________________________________________________________?
Milsurplus mailing list?
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus?
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm?
Post: mailto:Milsurplus@mailman.qth.net?


------------------------------------------------------------
Stay informed, get connected and more with AOL on your phone.

From kargo_cult at msn.com  Mon Jun  2 02:44:42 2008
From: kargo_cult at msn.com (Hue Miller)
Date: Mon Jun  2 02:57:34 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] BC-474 FT
References: <863103.66848.qm@web82701.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <BAY125-DAV280E6437086EAD118D86FE4BB0@phx.gbl>

Just file this away. Not urgent for me, but i am thinking i 
ought to keep only gear i REALLY REALLY like and not 
stuff that i keep because it's what a Collector would have.
And i realized that i maybe don't care that much for the
SCR-288/ BC-474. I have one complete except key, w/
hand crank, also one with split-front early model, potential
trade. Only thing is, i have about every HF portable set from
the era except the SCR-694-AW, so i don't know what would
make a trade. -Hue Miller 
From robandpj at earthlink.net  Mon Jun  2 06:31:46 2008
From: robandpj at earthlink.net (Rob Flory)
Date: Mon Jun  2 06:43:21 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Museum Ships Weekend
Message-ID: <2998170.1212402706991.JavaMail.root@elwamui-huard.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

Coming in 4 days.

see  http://users.tellurian.com/Freddie/nj2bb/ship-event.html

Rob K2WI
From baldi.1 at www.dottorbaldi.it  Mon Jun  2 06:44:37 2008
From: baldi.1 at www.dottorbaldi.it (federico)
Date: Mon Jun  2 07:23:09 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] WOTAN SYSTEM request of infos
In-Reply-To: <411714.58763.qm@web45101.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
References: <20080601215419.M68986@dottorbaldi.it>
	<411714.58763.qm@web45101.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20080602104208.M68279@www.dottorbaldi.it>

Thanks Mack,
            I found this :

Summary:The WOTAN technique to estimate oceanic winds from underwater ambient
sound developed in the FASINEX experiment is evaluated using measurements from
the Surface Wave Dynamics Experiment (SWADE). The WOTAN was deployed from the
Minimet buoy, MET-3, which was part of the SWADE array, and carried sensors
for measuring the surface meteorology with sufficient accuracy. The WOTAN
sensor was located at a depth of 513 m and recorded ambient noise levels at 11
frequencies in the range 3-25 kHz every 7.5 minutes for over six months. These
noise sound spectrum levels are compared with the observed buoy wind speeds
and other computed wind variables to establish frequency and wind speed
dependencies. The ambient sound timeseries are first screened to eliminate
contamination from shipping and precipitation (rain) noise. This quiet data
set is then standardized to 1 m depth using site and frequency-dependent
correction factors. The variation with wind speed of the sound spectrum level
at 1 kHz and the spectral slope is further examined. Linear and quadratic
relationships between noise level and wind variables are derived. These
relationships are then inverted for estimating the wind variables using the
noise spectrum and pressure levels. Statistical comparisons are made between
the WOTAN derived estimates and the buoy observations. Differences between the
FASINEX and SWADE algorithm are also examined

but I beleve that the WOTAN SYSTEM that I found was (or is) emploied in
military environment as HF rapid deploynent system.

Thanks anyway. 73 de Federico IZ1FID



Federico BALDI
-Direttore S.C. Malattie Metaboliche e Diabetologia A.S.L. 11 - Vc
-Direttore del Dipartimento per la Cura delle Malattie di Lunga Durata
 A.S.L. 11 - Vercelli



Visit my website entirely devoted to military radio, military handguns 
and aircraft clocks :

www.dottorbaldi.it/militaryradio

---------- Original Message -----------
From: Mack Rogers <n4vgb@yahoo.com>
To: federico <baldi.1@www.dottorbaldi.it>
Sent: Sun, 1 Jun 2008 15:49:18 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] WOTAN SYSTEM request of infos

> WOTAN stands for Weather Observation Through Ambient
> Noise. I believe there is also reference to WOTAN in
> some radio navigation systems. I have no specific
> knowledge of either system.
> 
> Mack Rogers
> N4VGB
> 
> --- federico <baldi.1@www.dottorbaldi.it> wrote:
> 
> > Hi to All,
> >                anybody have any information about a
> > system marked WOTAN made by Harris with : one
> > PRC-138, one PA 125 W (embedded in a plastic case)
> > plus a PS, a shielded computer, an RF-382 AATU, a
> > coil of 50 meters of coax and control cable for
> > tuner, and an antenna RF-1912 Fan Dipole ? 73 de
> > Federico IZ1FID
> >  
> > >
> ______________________________________________________________
> > Milsurplus mailing list
> > Home:
> > http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> > Post: mailto:Milsurplus@mailman.qth.net
> >
------- End of Original Message -------

From n3rht at yahoo.com  Mon Jun  2 09:19:11 2008
From: n3rht at yahoo.com (Don Merz)
Date: Mon Jun  2 09:30:46 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] FS Pogo Stick
Message-ID: <333146.99519.qm@web56808.mail.re3.yahoo.com>

I have a complete pogo stick radio for sale with the stick, antenna, strap, audio amplifier, cables, many tuning units and 2 spare radio chassis. No rust or corrosion--all in good physical shape. Electrically untested.?$700
This is part of a?small estate I am?working on. Other items to be available: BC-342, BC-312, ART-13, command sets, and a beautiful GO-9 with the inverter. Let me know if any of that is of interest.
Thanks.
73, Don Merz, N3RHT
From nick at 3rdtech.com  Mon Jun  2 10:28:32 2008
From: nick at 3rdtech.com (Nick England)
Date: Mon Jun  2 10:40:24 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Who was the original designer of the
	"Old Family"FMradios?
In-Reply-To: <863103.66848.qm@web82701.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <00b501c8c448$62e2cfa0$6401a8c0@j1p0k4t1japqei>
	<863103.66848.qm@web82701.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <056701c8c4bc$ef92f320$fd0212ac@Heathkit2>

I was able to download a PDF of the following article at
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/iel5/10783/33970/01621548.pdf?isnumber=33970&prod
=JNL&arnumber=1621548&arSt=+24&ared=+32&arAuthor=Durrer%2C+J.H.

It says development was cooperative effort of Ft. Monmouth, Bell Labs, RCA,
Raytheon, & Federal.

---------------------------
New developments in army mobile communication equipment
Durrer, J.H.   

This paper appears in: Vehicular Communications, Transactions of the IRE
Professional Group on
Publication Date: Aug 1952
Volume: 2,  Issue: 1
On page(s): 24- 32
ISSN: 0097-6628 
Date Published in Issue: 2006-06-26 10:57:25.0
 
Abstract
In 1945 the operation of vehicular and field equipments in World War II was
carefully analyzed and military characteristics for a new series of
vehicular equipments established. The primary improvements over World War II
equipments considered necessary were: reduction in the number of crystals
required; more flexibility of channel assignment; complete
immersionproofing; and capability of operating from storage batteries or
from hand generators and dry battery sources in the field. The new
equipments developed to meet these requirements, Radio Sets AN/GRC-3 through
8, are comprised of various assemblies of a group of major standardized
components. Vehicular equipments to meet various communication needs may be
assembled from these components on a building block principle. Each of the
components and the acoustic accessories have been made immersionproof, this
much-needed protection that was found necessary to attain reliability under
tropical conditions. The equipments are designed for operation over an
ambient temperature range from -40?C to up to 65?C.   



From ua6hgy at kmv.ru  Mon Jun  2 10:45:30 2008
From: ua6hgy at kmv.ru (Igor)
Date: Mon Jun  2 10:57:14 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] R-807
References: <333146.99519.qm@web56808.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <007a01c8c4bf$4e1907c0$0201a8c0@home1>

Hi, all !

I made new page R-807 on the our site http://oldradio.cqham.ru/. 
Please push ''What's new'' gif.
Very interesting site of Russian radios. Update every week.

Regards, Igor UA6HGY.Russia, Pyatigorsk.
VY73!

From wf2u at ws19ops.com  Mon Jun  2 11:04:53 2008
From: wf2u at ws19ops.com (wf2u@ws19ops.com)
Date: Mon Jun  2 11:16:54 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] R-807
In-Reply-To: <007a01c8c4bf$4e1907c0$0201a8c0@home1>
References: <333146.99519.qm@web56808.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
	<007a01c8c4bf$4e1907c0$0201a8c0@home1>
Message-ID: <20080602100453.7xs783wgxwok4gwo@webmail.opentransfer.com>

Igor,

Thanks for the update.

The R-807 is of particular interest for me as I have one, and I'm in  
the process of getting it on the air, together with the US-9 receiver.
I just modified an ART-13 power plug to fit the R-807 (just had to  
sand down the metal shell just a hair, because the size is just too  
tight to fit as it is. It's going to run side-by-side with the  
ART-13/BC-348 station, using the ART-13 dynamotor (I don't have the  
original U-600 dybnamotor).

I also have a US-8 receiver with the power supply, junction box, and  
pilot's control box. I also have  the connectors so I can make up all  
the cables for the set. Is there a technical manual available for it  
somewhere? I only have a low-quality copy of the schematic diagram of  
the receiver.

Keep up the good work with the website!

73, Meir WF2U
Landrum, SC

Quoting Igor <ua6hgy@kmv.ru>:

> Hi, all !
>
> I made new page R-807 on the our site http://oldradio.cqham.ru/. Please
> push ''What's new'' gif.
> Very interesting site of Russian radios. Update every week.
>
> Regards, Igor UA6HGY.Russia, Pyatigorsk.
> VY73!
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus@mailman.qth.net


From jfor at quik.com  Mon Jun  2 12:42:50 2008
From: jfor at quik.com (J Forster)
Date: Mon Jun  2 12:51:46 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Western Electric 725A Magnetron
References: <20080602003457.8hymo3u308w44w04@webmail.fc.up.pt>
Message-ID: <4844230A.E317E560@quik.com>

I'm not 100% sure, but I think it mated with an identical flange, having a
choke ring, and the two parts were held together with a small band clamp. The
band clamps have a cross section like:

<         >

and are typically made of steel or stainless with a single radial cut and
captive screw-nut to provide a compressive hoop stress. Larger versions are
used to hold the tops on hermetic sealed shipping cans and giant versions
hold the tops on 55 gallon drums.

If the WG is pressurized, there is typically an O-ring groove cut into the
flange face or the O-ring is placed into the choke groove.

You might want to look in the MIT Rad. Lab books for further information.

FWIW,
-John

===========

asmagal@fc.up.pt wrote:

> Greetings.
>
> The 725A Magnetron has a waveguide flange that is unfamiliar to me.
> The WR112 waveguide port ends with a flat disk without any screws
> nor any evident means of connection to go ahead. I would like to
> receive clever info on this matter from the members of this list.
> A photo of this magnetron can be seen at
>
> http://tubecollector.org/725a.htm.
>
> Thanks.
> Antonio/CT1TE

From ross at hypertools.com  Mon Jun  2 14:46:24 2008
From: ross at hypertools.com (David Ross)
Date: Mon Jun  2 13:59:20 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Who was the original designer of the "Old Family"
	FM radios?
In-Reply-To: <056701c8c4bc$ef92f320$fd0212ac@Heathkit2>
References: <00b501c8c448$62e2cfa0$6401a8c0@j1p0k4t1japqei>	<863103.66848.qm@web82701.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<056701c8c4bc$ef92f320$fd0212ac@Heathkit2>
Message-ID: <48444000.7080100@hypertools.com>

Nick -

  Thanks for doing the research and for posting this link:
<http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/Xplore/login.jsp?url=/iel5/10783/33970/01621548.pdf?isnumber=33970&prod=JNL&arnumber=1621548&arSt=+24&ared=+32&arAuthor=Durrer%2C+J.H.>
  It would be nice to see the entire .PDF file but membership is 
required to do more than just see the abstract.

  I have seen lots of these "Old Family" radios built by Lewyt and 
'small' subcontractor outfits like that, and just could not imagine that 
they would have the engineering resources to come up with that whole 
family design.  But yeah, Raytheon & RCA & Federal would have the 
engineering & production horsepower to do it.  After the designs are 
finished & debugged and the production tooling is created and the pilot 
runs are shipped and the high-dollar contracts are fulfilled, the little 
guys can take over manufacturing.

73
Dave Ross    N7EPI



Nick England wrote:
> I was able to download a PDF of the following article at
> http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/iel5/10783/33970/01621548.pdf?isnumber=33970&prod
> =JNL&arnumber=1621548&arSt=+24&ared=+32&arAuthor=Durrer%2C+J.H.
>
> It says development was cooperative effort of Ft. Monmouth, Bell Labs, RCA,
> Raytheon, & Federal.
>
> ---------------------------
> New developments in army mobile communication equipment
> Durrer, J.H.   
>
> This paper appears in: Vehicular Communications, Transactions of the IRE
> Professional Group on
> Publication Date: Aug 1952
> Volume: 2,  Issue: 1
> On page(s): 24- 32
> ISSN: 0097-6628 
> Date Published in Issue: 2006-06-26 10:57:25.0
>  
> Abstract
> In 1945 the operation of vehicular and field equipments in World War II was
> carefully analyzed and military characteristics for a new series of
> vehicular equipments established. The primary improvements over World War II
> equipments considered necessary were: reduction in the number of crystals
> required; more flexibility of channel assignment; complete
> immersionproofing; and capability of operating from storage batteries or
> from hand generators and dry battery sources in the field. The new
> equipments developed to meet these requirements, Radio Sets AN/GRC-3 through
> 8, are comprised of various assemblies of a group of major standardized
> components. Vehicular equipments to meet various communication needs may be
> assembled from these components on a building block principle. Each of the
> components and the acoustic accessories have been made immersionproof, this
> much-needed protection that was found necessary to attain reliability under
> tropical conditions. The equipments are designed for operation over an
> ambient temperature range from -40?C to up to 65?C.
From ramcam at magma.ca  Mon Jun  2 16:35:12 2008
From: ramcam at magma.ca (Ralph Cameron)
Date: Mon Jun  2 16:46:41 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] WR 514 Controller
Message-ID: <000801c8c4f0$2857d8a0$0201a8c0@CAMERON>

Anyone identify a Standard Radio WR 514 Controller Unit 402-LRU-8D. I know it was used with an aircraft radio but don't know the model. 

Anyway, its looking for a home . 

Ralph
VE3BBM
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080602/ff0dda72/attachment.htm
From jvendely at cfl.rr.com  Mon Jun  2 19:57:43 2008
From: jvendely at cfl.rr.com (John Vendely)
Date: Mon Jun  2 20:09:21 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Who was the original designer of the "Old Family"FM
	radios?
References: <00b501c8c448$62e2cfa0$6401a8c0@j1p0k4t1japqei>	<863103.66848.qm@web82701.mail.mud.yahoo.com><056701c8c4bc$ef92f320$fd0212ac@Heathkit2>
	<48444000.7080100@hypertools.com>
Message-ID: <003b01c8c50c$72cfce80$6401a8c0@j1p0k4t1japqei>

Gents,

This article is one of those I referred to in my earlier post.  The article 
is unfortunately vague about who did what in the development of this 
generation of radios.  But Raytheon did most of the design work on the 
AN/PRC-6, RCA did the AN/PRC-8, -9, and -10, and Federal Telephone & Radio 
Corp. evidently did the RT-66, 67, 68, and probably RT-70 development.  All 
reportedly worked closely with Bell Laboratories and Ft. Monmouth.  Another 
article I once had, but which I haven't yet managed to dig up, indicated 
that Crosley was involved in development of the latter four radios, but 
their role may have been a small one compared to Federal.  Crosley did 
produce the radios in large quantity, perhaps their role was limited to 
rework or production engineering.

Later Crosley, by then a division of Avco, developed the AN/VRC-12 family 
vehicular radios, again with the  involvement of Bell Laboratories, as well 
as with Ft. Monmouth, to a lesser extent.  A couple of interesting technical 
articles on development of the CRS frequency control system and center-fed 
whip antenna for the "new family" radios were published, and may still be 
available.  I believe Bell's main contribution was the phase locked loop 
techniques used in the CRS, plus the wide deviation VCXO with 
lumped-constant quarter wave line used in the modulator.  It's interesting 
to note that Crosley's earliest VRC-12 prototypes featured the unique 
"textured" case design of the GRC family sets.

It's good to see some discussion of the "old family" FM gear--perhaps it 
will generate further interest...

73,

John K9WT


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "David Ross" <ross@hypertools.com>
To: <Milsurplus@mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Monday, June 02, 2008 2:46 PM
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] Who was the original designer of the "Old 
Family"FM radios?


> Nick -
>
>  Thanks for doing the research and for posting this link:
> <http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/Xplore/login.jsp?url=/iel5/10783/33970/01621548.pdf?isnumber=33970&prod=JNL&arnumber=1621548&arSt=+24&ared=+32&arAuthor=Durrer%2C+J.H.>
>  It would be nice to see the entire .PDF file but membership is required 
> to do more than just see the abstract.
>
>  I have seen lots of these "Old Family" radios built by Lewyt and 'small' 
> subcontractor outfits like that, and just could not imagine that they 
> would have the engineering resources to come up with that whole family 
> design.  But yeah, Raytheon & RCA & Federal would have the engineering & 
> production horsepower to do it.  After the designs are finished & debugged 
> and the production tooling is created and the pilot runs are shipped and 
> the high-dollar contracts are fulfilled, the little guys can take over 
> manufacturing.
>
> 73
> Dave Ross    N7EPI
>
>
>
> Nick England wrote:
>> I was able to download a PDF of the following article at
>> http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/iel5/10783/33970/01621548.pdf?isnumber=33970&prod
>> =JNL&arnumber=1621548&arSt=+24&ared=+32&arAuthor=Durrer%2C+J.H.
>>
>> It says development was cooperative effort of Ft. Monmouth, Bell Labs, 
>> RCA,
>> Raytheon, & Federal.
>>
>> ---------------------------
>> New developments in army mobile communication equipment
>> Durrer, J.H.
>> This paper appears in: Vehicular Communications, Transactions of the IRE
>> Professional Group on
>> Publication Date: Aug 1952
>> Volume: 2,  Issue: 1
>> On page(s): 24- 32
>> ISSN: 0097-6628 Date Published in Issue: 2006-06-26 10:57:25.0
>>  Abstract
>> In 1945 the operation of vehicular and field equipments in World War II 
>> was
>> carefully analyzed and military characteristics for a new series of
>> vehicular equipments established. The primary improvements over World War 
>> II
>> equipments considered necessary were: reduction in the number of crystals
>> required; more flexibility of channel assignment; complete
>> immersionproofing; and capability of operating from storage batteries or
>> from hand generators and dry battery sources in the field. The new
>> equipments developed to meet these requirements, Radio Sets AN/GRC-3 
>> through
>> 8, are comprised of various assemblies of a group of major standardized
>> components. Vehicular equipments to meet various communication needs may 
>> be
>> assembled from these components on a building block principle. Each of 
>> the
>> components and the acoustic accessories have been made immersionproof, 
>> this
>> much-needed protection that was found necessary to attain reliability 
>> under
>> tropical conditions. The equipments are designed for operation over an
>> ambient temperature range from -40?C to up to 65?C.
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus@mailman.qth.net
> 

From WA5CAB at cs.com  Tue Jun  3 01:11:23 2008
From: WA5CAB at cs.com (WA5CAB@cs.com)
Date: Tue Jun  3 01:23:04 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] T.O. for AN/GRT-21 & -22 Ready including AM-6154 &
	AM-6155
Message-ID: <cd7.31b1d2da.35762c7b@cs.com>

Tonight I finally finished the scan, clean and straighten work on the manual 
for the AN/GRT-21 and AN/GRT-22, T.O. 31R2-2GRT-102.  This manual covers 
T-1108/GRT-21, T-1109/GRT-22, AM-6154/GRT-21, AM-6155/GRT-22 and KY-668/GRT.  
Complete reprint available for $37.10 plus shipping.

As the VHF and UHF exciters and amplifiers share so many components (and the 
main schematics and wiring diagrams cover both), it really isn't practical to 
do a manual extract for any one of the components, given the probable limited 
interest.  As two of the foldouts are D-size (22 x 34) and I have to have 
those printed commercially, if you were one of those waiting or anyone else who 
would like a copy, please contact me direct.  I'll wait about a week to hear 
back before ordering them.  After that, additional copies will have to wait upon 
several order requests before they can be done again.

Robert Downs - Houston
<http://www.wa5cab.com> (Web Store)
MVPA 9480
<wa5cab@cs.com> (Primary email)
<wa5cab@comcast.net> (Backup email)
   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080603/207e1e5b/attachment.htm
From ramcam at magma.ca  Tue Jun  3 16:41:24 2008
From: ramcam at magma.ca (Ralph Cameron)
Date: Tue Jun  3 16:40:43 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Cannon connectors
Message-ID: <001001c8c5ba$30e28680$0201a8c0@CAMERON>

I have two Cannon type 14S, six pin mil type connectors with retainers and screw type shields. The connector part number on the knurled ring is MS310E14S-6S(C). 

They appear to have been used to supply DC power as well as RF or audio via small coax. Certainly reuseable. 

Free for the postage. 

Ralph
VE3BBM
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080603/57ee2513/attachment.htm
From john.brewer at us.schneider-electric.com  Wed Jun  4 05:31:20 2008
From: john.brewer at us.schneider-electric.com (john.brewer@us.schneider-electric.com)
Date: Wed Jun  4 05:31:43 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Out of the office, away from email. 
Message-ID: <OF0C4AE378.87AF2A60-ON8525745E.00344EBB-8525745E.00344EBB@US.Schneider-Electric.com>

I will be out of the office starting  06/04/2008 and will not return until 06/09/2008.

I will respond to your message when I return. Please contact Robert Brown if you need help in
my absence.

From arc5 at ix.netcom.com  Thu Jun  5 00:13:24 2008
From: arc5 at ix.netcom.com (David Stinson)
Date: Thu Jun  5 00:48:33 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] ATC, ART-13 Order Numbers and Makers
Message-ID: <5C258E9727BE49DD92D55CB6F9F83D91@boudreaux>

Need a small favor, when you can:
Might you please reply off-list with the order number, 
serial number and maker from the nomen plate
on your ART-13 transmitter(s)?  
Thanks!

Example:   7295  CWS  596-DAY-44




From WA5CAB at cs.com  Thu Jun  5 10:59:00 2008
From: WA5CAB at cs.com (WA5CAB@cs.com)
Date: Thu Jun  5 11:00:02 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] test
Message-ID: <cf8.347aaceb.35795934@cs.com>


test timeout

Robert Downs - Houston
<http://www.wa5cab.com> (Web Store)
MVPA 9480
<wa5cab@cs.com> (Primary email)
<wa5cab@comcast.net> (Backup email)
   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080605/c1c33547/attachment.htm
From WA5CAB at cs.com  Thu Jun  5 10:59:00 2008
From: WA5CAB at cs.com (WA5CAB@cs.com)
Date: Thu Jun  5 11:05:14 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] test
Message-ID: <cf8.347aaceb.35795934@cs.com>


test timeout

Robert Downs - Houston
<http://www.wa5cab.com> (Web Store)
MVPA 9480
<wa5cab@cs.com> (Primary email)
<wa5cab@comcast.net> (Backup email)
   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080605/c1c33547/attachment-0001.htm
From Military1944 at aol.com  Thu Jun  5 11:35:20 2008
From: Military1944 at aol.com (Military1944@aol.com)
Date: Thu Jun  5 11:53:43 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] PRC74 mic plug ? 
Message-ID: <d54.30a567b3.357961b8@aol.com>

Does anyone have a spare mic/phone/key plug as used on the PRC74, 6 pin  
version ? 
 
 
cheers, Ben. 



   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080605/d03ce29f/attachment.htm
From jfor at quik.com  Thu Jun  5 22:47:38 2008
From: jfor at quik.com (J Forster)
Date: Thu Jun  5 22:45:34 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] eBay Phone Support ?
References: <g28s05+koir@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <4848A54A.65014DB3@quik.com>

I just received an email that genuinely appears to have come from them, offering a phone
support number beginning June 16.

Has anybody else received this or researched it? What's it all about?  I can't believe
they are opening up a telephone complaint department.

Best,
-John

From kk7iz at cox.net  Thu Jun  5 22:47:47 2008
From: kk7iz at cox.net (Lloyd KK7IZ)
Date: Thu Jun  5 22:47:48 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] eBay Phone Support ?
References: <g28s05+koir@eGroups.com> <4848A54A.65014DB3@quik.com>
Message-ID: <112701c8c77f$b45766e0$0201a8c0@userlvnwsus9dr>

Was it dated April 1?
Thanx
Lloyd  KK7IZ
kk7iz@cox.net


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "J Forster" <jfor@quik.com>
To: <armyradios@yahoogroups.com>; "milsurplus" <milsurplus@mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2008 7:47 PM
Subject: [Milsurplus] eBay Phone Support ?


>I just received an email that genuinely appears to have come from them, 
>offering a phone
> support number beginning June 16.
>
> Has anybody else received this or researched it? What's it all about?  I 
> can't believe
> they are opening up a telephone complaint department.
>
> Best,
> -John
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus@mailman.qth.net
> 

From kim.herron at sbcglobal.net  Thu Jun  5 22:53:36 2008
From: kim.herron at sbcglobal.net (kim.herron@sbcglobal.net)
Date: Thu Jun  5 22:53:12 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] eBay Phone Support ?
References: <g28s05+koir@eGroups.com> <4848A54A.65014DB3@quik.com>
Message-ID: <001901c8c780$854fcd00$acc2eb4c@HPa550y>

Well, if you share that number, we all can give it a call to find out.
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "J Forster" <jfor@quik.com>
To: <armyradios@yahoogroups.com>; "milsurplus" 
<milsurplus@mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2008 10:47 PM
Subject: [Milsurplus] eBay Phone Support ?


>I just received an email that genuinely appears to have come from them, 
>offering a phone
> support number beginning June 16.
>
> Has anybody else received this or researched it? What's it all about? 
> I can't believe
> they are opening up a telephone complaint department.
>
> Best,
> -John
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus@mailman.qth.net 

From wrecktech at yahoo.com  Thu Jun  5 22:58:17 2008
From: wrecktech at yahoo.com (Meyer Gottesman)
Date: Thu Jun  5 22:57:58 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Tuning unit for sale.
Message-ID: <364419.69312.qm@web56703.mail.re3.yahoo.com>

I am offering for sale a tuning unit for the GP-7 transmitter. Range "F". This covers the 40 meter ham band.
Perfect condition. No mods.
$100.00 plus shipping.
73,
Meyer Gottesman, W6GIV
Tel: (478)741-1710
Macon, GA


      
From jfor at quik.com  Thu Jun  5 23:02:18 2008
From: jfor at quik.com (J Forster)
Date: Thu Jun  5 22:59:17 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] eBay Phone Support ?
References: <g28s05+koir@eGroups.com> <4848A54A.65014DB3@quik.com>
	<112701c8c77f$b45766e0$0201a8c0@userlvnwsus9dr>
Message-ID: <4848A8BA.BBF04A61@quik.com>

No. Today. It's not my joke, if it's a joke at all.

Best,
-John

=========

Lloyd KK7IZ wrote:

> Was it dated April 1?
> Thanx
> Lloyd  KK7IZ
> kk7iz@cox.net
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "J Forster" <jfor@quik.com>
> To: <armyradios@yahoogroups.com>; "milsurplus" <milsurplus@mailman.qth.net>
> Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2008 7:47 PM
> Subject: [Milsurplus] eBay Phone Support ?
>
> >I just received an email that genuinely appears to have come from them,
> >offering a phone
> > support number beginning June 16.
> >
> > Has anybody else received this or researched it? What's it all about?  I
> > can't believe
> > they are opening up a telephone complaint department.
> >
> > Best,
> > -John

From hankarn at pacbell.net  Thu Jun  5 23:14:53 2008
From: hankarn at pacbell.net (Dan Arney)
Date: Thu Jun  5 23:14:45 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] eBay Phone Support ?
In-Reply-To: <001901c8c780$854fcd00$acc2eb4c@HPa550y>
References: <g28s05+koir@eGroups.com> <4848A54A.65014DB3@quik.com>
	<001901c8c780$854fcd00$acc2eb4c@HPa550y>
Message-ID: <4848ABAD.9070202@pacbell.net>

I have had a support umber for a few years which is tied to my sellers 
ID and is verified each time I contact them and is not fro public 
release. They may be listening to people for a change, but don't hold 
your breath.

Hank
KN6DI
From jpwatkins9 at yahoo.com  Fri Jun  6 07:35:32 2008
From: jpwatkins9 at yahoo.com (John Watkins)
Date: Fri Jun  6 07:35:15 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] June 6th
Message-ID: <408918.5592.qm@web32404.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

All

Haven't seen anything yet, but a very important date.  Thanks to all that gave their all for us on this date in 1944,  the invasion of Normandy by Allied forces.

Cheers,

John  WD5ENU/A45XV 


      
From whitaker at pa.net  Fri Jun  6 09:08:18 2008
From: whitaker at pa.net (C Whitaker)
Date: Fri Jun  6 09:08:25 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] eBay Phone Support ?
In-Reply-To: <001901c8c780$854fcd00$acc2eb4c@HPa550y>
References: <g28s05+koir@eGroups.com> <4848A54A.65014DB3@quik.com>
	<001901c8c780$854fcd00$acc2eb4c@HPa550y>
Message-ID: <484936C2.5000100@pa.net>

de WB2CPN
I'd think they would be to big an
organization to do that.  Imagine how
many phone lines and operators they
would need.
73  Clete


From prc74b at fuse.net  Fri Jun  6 09:43:34 2008
From: prc74b at fuse.net (Joe Munson)
Date: Fri Jun  6 09:54:44 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] LST 325/Reenactment
Message-ID: <001201c8c7dc$d7c0d2d0$6900a8c0@munsonswl0e4df>

All,

This weekend, June 7th and 8th, a WWII Reenactment involving the LST 325 docked at Evensville, Ind will take place in Evansville.  The LST 325 will be on the air along with myself providing como for the ship and ground forces.  3885 AM will be in use for most of the AM.   CW will also be used.  If you have a chance to listen or take part, please  do. Would be great to have some "DX" to work to imprerss the crowd with.    TCS, equipment on the boat and BC 191/312, BC 1306, and BC 654 along with TBX, BC 611, MAB and DAV 2 will be with the ground units.  

Some calls in use with be WA4VAG, W8AU among others.  

Thanks,

Joe Munson
WA4VAG
513-919-1210
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080606/8e9e07ea/attachment.htm
From Military1944 at aol.com  Tue Jun  3 10:12:10 2008
From: Military1944 at aol.com (Military1944@aol.com)
Date: Fri Jun  6 10:38:14 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Yugo RUP-15 set
Message-ID: <bc4.246350ac.3576ab3a@aol.com>

Anyone have one of these hf manpacks ? 
 
Just acquired one, nice cosmetic condition, performance wise bit  
disappointed. 
 
I cannot get the built-in atu to tune at anything like the marked  
frequencies on the knobs. I'm getting 15w out now (set needed looking at) into  50 ohm 
and the dummy load but on the whip attached to the set the atu controls  are no 
where near the marked frequency ranges. 
 
Also, the audio could do with some compression, pwr meter read 5w on  speech, 
peaking to 15 on whistle of course but compared to other manpacks here,  
PRC74, SEG15D etc, the o/p could do with squeezing. 
 
Anyway, if anyone on the group has this set please get in touch.
 
regards, Ben G4BXD



   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080603/470ca8ad/attachment.htm
From ejones at hiwaay.net  Fri Jun  6 11:35:11 2008
From: ejones at hiwaay.net (Eric A. Jones)
Date: Fri Jun  6 11:37:12 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] AN/CUP-1 and mystery speaker-box ID
Message-ID: <26BE84A0-33DE-11DD-80C2-0050E420676D@hiwaay.net>

de N4TGC Eric

Two things: the speaker box is smooth OD (original, not a re-paint), 
5.5" cylindrical, 3.25" deep, with removable 5-louver front and 
2-threaded-mounting-hole rear covers, grommeted hole out the bottom.  
The covers don't appear to have ever have had gaskets, tho there's room 
for them.  The 4" speaker may not have been original - it was damaged 
(transformer ripped off) and not wx-sealed.  There's no holes for a 
nomen plate, tho it could have been a sticker, as Robt. W. Downs 
opines.  Should I just assign it a number and put it on ebay?!

The AN/CUP-1 AUXILIARY EQUIP, COFFEE (serial #303) was made by/for 
Raytheon (Lexington, Massachusetts), and says it's intended for use 
with AN/POT-1.  How common are they?  The nomen "plate" is unusual in 
that its printed on and then enameled over, rather than external.  haha
	e

From w4bws at comcast.net  Fri Jun  6 12:32:35 2008
From: w4bws at comcast.net (rev. don)
Date: Fri Jun  6 13:02:46 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] eBay Phone Support ?
In-Reply-To: <001901c8c780$854fcd00$acc2eb4c@HPa550y>
References: <g28s05+koir@eGroups.com> <4848A54A.65014DB3@quik.com>
	<001901c8c780$854fcd00$acc2eb4c@HPa550y>
Message-ID: <7D98E0E0FB9C4999AA67E16130ED4F39@homepc>

If you want almost free internet phone service($19.95 per year) to USA and 
Canada check out www.magicjack.com.
I believe you can send a unit overseas to a relative and they can call to 
USA if they have high speed internet.
W4BWS
----- Original Message ----- 
From: <kim.herron@sbcglobal.net>
To: "J Forster" <jfor@quik.com>; <armyradios@yahoogroups.com>; "milsurplus" 
<milsurplus@mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2008 9:53 PM
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] eBay Phone Support ?


> Well, if you share that number, we all can give it a call to find out.
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "J Forster" <jfor@quik.com>
> To: <armyradios@yahoogroups.com>; "milsurplus" 
> <milsurplus@mailman.qth.net>
> Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2008 10:47 PM
> Subject: [Milsurplus] eBay Phone Support ?
>
>
>>I just received an email that genuinely appears to have come from them, 
>>offering a phone
>> support number beginning June 16.
>>
>> Has anybody else received this or researched it? What's it all about? I 
>> can't believe
>> they are opening up a telephone complaint department.
>>
>> Best,
>> -John
>>
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> Milsurplus mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:Milsurplus@mailman.qth.net
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus@mailman.qth.net
> 


From kargo_cult at msn.com  Fri Jun  6 15:48:40 2008
From: kargo_cult at msn.com (Hue Miller)
Date: Fri Jun  6 15:48:27 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] AN/CUP-1
In-Reply-To: <26BE84A0-33DE-11DD-80C2-0050E420676D@hiwaay.net>
References: <26BE84A0-33DE-11DD-80C2-0050E420676D@hiwaay.net>
Message-ID: <BAY125-W40849ABD8B007694C08026E4B70@phx.gbl>

It's a revelation to me to know that the AN/CUP-1 was  genuine Cold War equipment.
I saw a photo in ER magazine some years back and reckoned it was some kind of 
postwar souvenir gimcrack. Nice find, Eric. Are you going to power it up? -Hue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080606/557f35f9/attachment.htm
From w8au at sssnet.com  Fri Jun  6 17:08:21 2008
From: w8au at sssnet.com (w8au@sssnet.com)
Date: Fri Jun  6 17:08:20 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] LST 325/Reenactment
In-Reply-To: <001201c8c7dc$d7c0d2d0$6900a8c0@munsonswl0e4df>
References: <001201c8c7dc$d7c0d2d0$6900a8c0@munsonswl0e4df>
Message-ID: <20080606210819.938AD859BBF@mailman.qth.net>

At 09:43 AM 6/6/2008, Joe Munson wrote:
>  June 7th and 8th, a WWII Reenactment involving the LST 325 docked 
> at Evensville, Ind will take place in Evansville.  The LST 325 will 
> be on the air along with myself providing como for the ship and 
> ground forces.  3885 AM will be in use for most of the AM.   CW 
> will also be used.  If you have a chance to listen or take part, 
> please  do. Would be great to have some "DX" to work to imprerss 
> the crowd with.    TCS, equipment on the boat and BC 191/312, BC 
> 1306, and BC 654 along with TBX, BC 611, MAB and DAV 2 will be with 
> the ground units.
>
>Some calls in use with be WA4VAG, W8AU among others.

FYI:  USS LSTS325 will be using callsign WW2LST.   Tactical callsign 
(was) Checker Five.
Maybe we'll use that during the exercises.

73,
Perry   w8au
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080606/211ae0ac/attachment.htm
From telegrapher at att.net  Fri Jun  6 17:38:08 2008
From: telegrapher at att.net (telegrapher@att.net)
Date: Fri Jun  6 17:37:55 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Ping
Message-ID: <060620082138.29263.4849AE40000349FB0000724F22230706129B0A02D29B9B0EBF9D0A089F0E9D090A040A9B@att.net>

Ping!
-------------- next part --------------
Skipped content of type multipart/related
From telegrapher at att.net  Fri Jun  6 17:42:53 2008
From: telegrapher at att.net (telegrapher@att.net)
Date: Fri Jun  6 17:42:39 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Ping
Message-ID: <060620082142.12960.4849AF5D00054D51000032A022230706129B0A02D29B9B0EBF9D0A089F0E9D090A040A9B@att.net>

I tried to send messages to both Milsurplus and Boatanchors a bit ago and was refused by the ISP.  Now my ping worked.  Why me?

Try this URL for a great radio and vehicle collection from overthere.

http://www.aviation-radio.com/ON8PO/ON8POmuseum.html

Hope that works or at least some version of it.  Made me drool over all that was there.

Larry
W0OGH

-------------- next part --------------
Skipped content of type multipart/related
From mark.richards at massmicro.com  Fri Jun  6 17:46:06 2008
From: mark.richards at massmicro.com (Mark Richards)
Date: Fri Jun  6 17:45:53 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Ping
In-Reply-To: <060620082138.29263.4849AE40000349FB0000724F22230706129B0A02D29B9B0EBF9D0A089F0E9D090A040A9B@att.net>
References: <060620082138.29263.4849AE40000349FB0000724F22230706129B0A02D29B9B0EBF9D0A089F0E9D090A040A9B@att.net>
Message-ID: <4849B01E.5010704@massmicro.com>

telegrapher@att.net wrote:
> Ping!
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus@mailman.qth.net

iptables -A INPUT -s 127.0.0.1 -p icmp -j DROP



From mark.k3msb at gmail.com  Fri Jun  6 22:25:45 2008
From: mark.k3msb at gmail.com (Mark K3MSB)
Date: Fri Jun  6 22:25:34 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] WW2 Weekend Reading PA
Message-ID: <9ee269240806061925h1d6c7a99kb60cd7019d01ffb0@mail.gmail.com>

Some nice radios and some nice planes.

http://www.k3msb.com/ww2/ww2.html

73 Mark K3MSB
From kargo_cult at msn.com  Sat Jun  7 14:52:58 2008
From: kargo_cult at msn.com (Hue Miller)
Date: Sat Jun  7 14:54:12 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] OT:  Seattle + Tom? + GN-45
References: <20080523233315.2D009859C1C@mailman.qth.net><EA77CA9BB99C4210A212224F9805E346@unk1>
	<20080524002619.GB3002@mikea.ath.cx>
Message-ID: <BAY125-DAV1BD7E565FDA34431D1934E4B60@phx.gbl>

Fellow in Seattle, we talked abt GN-45 & PE-103.
I am going to Seattle / Lynnwood area, will be 
maybe contactable there Mon-Wed for possible
handoff. My cell 541 829 3473, maybe lv msg
both there & email? Will have limited email 
access. Not positive will be bringing heavy metal,
but will try. -Hue 
From kk7iz at cox.net  Sat Jun  7 14:58:30 2008
From: kk7iz at cox.net (Lloyd KK7IZ)
Date: Sat Jun  7 14:58:24 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Goodies FS
Message-ID: <008901c8c8d0$79c908b0$0201a8c0@userlvnwsus9dr>

Just dug out
3 each AM-142/AIC amplifiers, each presumably contains a 26A7 tube. A bit 
dusty but intact.
1 each TypeRRF5 Radio range filter by United transformer
1 each Range filter, the one with the sloping face. No knoba or sords
1 each mic cord? About 4' long, has PL-68 on 1 end, other end has a round 
flat pancake switch and a flat 2 prong connector.
First one says they will put $30.00 in my Paypal account ownes it all, 
shipped flat rate, along with any other junk I sweep up.
Pix upon begging, (grin)
Thanx
Lloyd  KK7IZ
kk7iz@cox.net


From cosmoline at aa4rm.ba-watch.org  Sun Jun  8 09:06:10 2008
From: cosmoline at aa4rm.ba-watch.org (Marty Reynolds)
Date: Sun Jun  8 09:09:30 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Museum ships heyday
In-Reply-To: <001201c8c7dc$d7c0d2d0$6900a8c0@munsonswl0e4df>
References: <001201c8c7dc$d7c0d2d0$6900a8c0@munsonswl0e4df>
Message-ID: <15999.24.30.81.88.1212930370.squirrel@fracas.netboobie.org>


Yo readers esp. Rob Flory & Joe & Perry

Any national calling frequencies other than BC-611 central (3885)?

BTW I had a kid that always pronounced museum 'museneeum'

   Marty
From holden7471 at msn.com  Sun Jun  8 09:24:55 2008
From: holden7471 at msn.com (howard holden)
Date: Sun Jun  8 09:24:57 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] 1MC Alarm Signal Generator
Message-ID: <BLU125-DAV51ACEA5FC8F5105820AB6C4B10@phx.gbl>

Looking for the 1MC alarm signal generator. Specific model preferred is MI-2590 made by RCA, but any similar chassis vintage WW2 should work. Suffered a catastrophic loss of the unit aboard the USS Ling due to a severe power surge.

Howie WB2AWQ/NX2ND
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080608/939b2c59/attachment.htm
From mike at aspirationsoftware.com  Sun Jun  8 11:15:54 2008
From: mike at aspirationsoftware.com (Mike Davidsen)
Date: Sun Jun  8 11:16:21 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] need battery pack schematic for GRR-5
Message-ID: <00a001c8c97a$8f84b050$ae8e10f0$@com>

Has anyone home-brewed their own battery pack for a GRR-5?  I will be taking
my friend's unit on a trip next weekend, nowhere near 120VAC power supply,
so I have to rig up something for juice.  Any suggestions?  I am kinda a
dummy, so I need a schematic or drawing, not just a list of directions of
what to do.

 

Thanks,

 

Mike

KI4JSC

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080608/2deeda29/attachment.htm
From ersmar at verizon.net  Sun Jun  8 11:34:26 2008
From: ersmar at verizon.net (Gene Smar)
Date: Sun Jun  8 11:34:49 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] need battery pack schematic for GRR-5
Message-ID: <6232947.13503821212939266547.JavaMail.root@vms244.mailsrvcs.net>

Mike:

     Maybe this will help: http://www.antiqueradio.org/ANGRR5TM11-295.pdf .


73 de
Gene Smar  AD3F


  From: Mike Davidsen <mike@aspirationsoftware.com>
Date: 2008/06/08 Sun AM 11:15:54 EDT
To: milsurplus@mailman.qth.net
Subject: [Milsurplus] need battery pack schematic for GRR-5


Has anyone home-brewed their own battery pack for a GRR-5??I will be taking my friend?s unit on a trip next weekend, nowhere near120VAC power supply, so I have to rig up something for juice.? Anysuggestions?? I am kinda a dummy, so I need a schematic or drawing, not just alist of directions of what to do.
?
Thanks,
?
Mike
KI4JSC
?
?

______________________________________________________________
Milsurplus mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Milsurplus@mailman.qth.net

From WA5CAB at cs.com  Sun Jun  8 11:44:15 2008
From: WA5CAB at cs.com (WA5CAB@cs.com)
Date: Sun Jun  8 11:43:44 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] need battery pack schematic for GRR-5
Message-ID: <c4b.2caa9a31.357d584f@cs.com>

Mike,

Far and away the simplest (and likely the cheapest) thing to do is to run it 
off of 6, 12 or 24 VDC.  Probably the easiest would be 12, as you can buy a 
small boat battery with wing-nut posts and probably the boating supply place 
would have a plastic carrying box for it.  Then a two-wire cord with appropriate 
ring lugs one end, either #14-2 or #12-2 SJO (common black extension cord 
material) and the 4-pin right angle plug (same plug as for AC).  Connect Minus 
(ground) to Pin C and Plus 6/12/24 VDC to Pin B.  Be sure that you set the PP-308 
front panel voltage select switch for the proper battery voltage.

In a message dated 6/8/2008 10:17:03 AM Central Daylight Time, 
mike@aspirationsoftware.com writes: 
> Has anyone home-brewed their own battery pack for a GRR-5?  I will be 
> taking my friend?s unit on a trip next weekend, nowhere near 120VAC power supply, 
> so I have to rig up something for juice.  Any suggestions?  I am kinda a 
> dummy, so I need a schematic or drawing, not just a list of directions of what to 
> do.
> 
>  Thanks,
> 
> 

Robert Downs - Houston
<http://www.wa5cab.com> (Web Store)
MVPA 9480
<wa5cab@cs.com> (Primary email)
<wa5cab@comcast.net> (Backup email)
   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080608/9b01170f/attachment.htm
From smithab11 at comcast.net  Sun Jun  8 11:47:15 2008
From: smithab11 at comcast.net (B. Smith)
Date: Sun Jun  8 11:47:02 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] need battery pack schematic for GRR-5
References: <00a001c8c97a$8f84b050$ae8e10f0$@com>
Message-ID: <001201c8c97e$ed6e7300$7536c847@HAL1000>

You can purchased a BA-48 battery from Fair radio and rebuilt it and use it 
on the receiver.
See my info at:
http://solo11.abac.com/zorroab1/BA48/BA48pg1.htm

73 breck k4che
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mike Davidsen" <mike@aspirationsoftware.com>
To: <milsurplus@mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Sunday, June 08, 2008 11:15 AM
Subject: [Milsurplus] need battery pack schematic for GRR-5


| Has anyone home-brewed their own battery pack for a GRR-5?  I will be 
taking
| my friend's unit on a trip next weekend, nowhere near 120VAC power supply,
| so I have to rig up something for juice.  Any suggestions?  I am kinda a
| dummy, so I need a schematic or drawing, not just a list of directions of
| what to do.
|
|
|
| Thanks,
|
|
|
| Mike
|
| KI4JSC
|
|
|
|
|
|


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


| ______________________________________________________________
| Milsurplus mailing list
| Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
| Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
| Post: mailto:Milsurplus@mailman.qth.net
| 

From wh7hg.hi at gmail.com  Sun Jun  8 13:31:05 2008
From: wh7hg.hi at gmail.com (Michael Tauson)
Date: Sun Jun  8 13:31:09 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Test, please reply off list
Message-ID: <c34299fb0806081031n67358d67va478b3ba8acae539@mail.gmail.com>

Test
From btuttleman at worldnet.att.net  Sun Jun  8 13:36:49 2008
From: btuttleman at worldnet.att.net (barry tuttleman)
Date: Sun Jun  8 13:36:54 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] ARB Spare Parts question
Message-ID: <484C18B1.8080707@worldnet.att.net>

what came in the ARB spare parts kit?  how was it arranged inside
the box?

TIA,
barry
carson city nv


From WA5CAB at cs.com  Sun Jun  8 14:39:07 2008
From: WA5CAB at cs.com (WA5CAB@cs.com)
Date: Sun Jun  8 14:38:37 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] ARB Spare Parts question
Message-ID: <d11.2a7ccc68.357d814b@cs.com>

The base spares list is Table IV in the ARB manual.  But (a) there's no 
indication of whether it is supposed to be per receiver, per aircraft, per 
squadron, or what, and (b) it doesn't specify how it was to be packed or packaged.  
>From the same era and through Korea, I've seen a few wooden spares boxes and 
several steel ones.  The ATA/ARA box I once had was wood as was one for some 
radar set whose nomenclature I can't recall.  The TCS and ARD boxes I have are 
steel, as were the ones for AN/URA-6.

In a message dated 6/8/2008 12:37:11 PM Central Daylight Time, 
btuttleman@worldnet.att.net writes: 
> what came in the ARB spare parts kit?  how was it arranged inside
> the box?
> 
> TIA,
> barry
> carson city nv
> 

Robert Downs - Houston
<http://www.wa5cab.com> (Web Store)
MVPA 9480
<wa5cab@cs.com> (Primary email)
<wa5cab@comcast.net> (Backup email)
   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080608/610c2832/attachment.htm
From jfor at quik.com  Sun Jun  8 14:59:56 2008
From: jfor at quik.com (J Forster)
Date: Sun Jun  8 14:57:32 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] ARB Spare Parts question
References: <d11.2a7ccc68.357d814b@cs.com>
Message-ID: <484C2C2C.245559D1@quik.com>

There was a spares box and contents sold on eBay w/in the last couple of
months, but I can't find the listing now.

Best,
-John

========

WA5CAB@cs.com wrote:

> The base spares list is Table IV in the ARB manual.  But (a) there's
> no indication of whether it is supposed to be per receiver, per
> aircraft, per squadron, or what, and (b) it doesn't specify how it was
> to be packed or packaged.  From the same era and through Korea, I've
> seen a few wooden spares boxes and several steel ones.  The ATA/ARA
> box I once had was wood as was one for some radar set whose
> nomenclature I can't recall.  The TCS and ARD boxes I have are steel,
> as were the ones for AN/URA-6.
>
> In a message dated 6/8/2008 12:37:11 PM Central Daylight Time,
> btuttleman@worldnet.att.net writes:
>
>> what came in the ARB spare parts kit?  how was it arranged inside
>> the box?
>>
>> TIA,
>> barry
>> carson city nv
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080608/005498df/attachment-0001.htm
From jcoward5452 at aol.com  Sun Jun  8 14:57:48 2008
From: jcoward5452 at aol.com (jcoward5452@aol.com)
Date: Sun Jun  8 14:57:52 2008
Subject: Fwd: [Milsurplus] ARB Spare Parts question
In-Reply-To: <8CA97AFFB80607E-570-3904@webmail-nb14.sysops.aol.com>
References: <d11.2a7ccc68.357d814b@cs.com>
	<8CA97AFFB80607E-570-3904@webmail-nb14.sysops.aol.com>
Message-ID: <8CA97B0AD5E6E70-570-3927@webmail-nb14.sysops.aol.com>



My spares box has 7 boxed tubes,several small boxes with caps,coils,1 
large box with a large cap,and many paper envelopes with 
resistors,caps,etc. per the list on the inside cover.Also, a piece of 
newspaper for stuffing dated 1943.
?I also added a spare dynamotor I had.I believe each receiver was 
supplied with one set of spares.
Jay KE6PPF


-----Original Message-----
From: WA5CAB@cs.com
To: btuttleman@worldnet.att.net; milsurplus@mailman.qth.net
Sent: Sun, 8 Jun 2008 11:39 am
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] ARB Spare Parts question


The base spares list is Table IV in the ARB manual.? But (a) there's no 
indication of whether it is supposed to be per receiver, per aircraft, 
per squadron, or what, and (b) it doesn't specify how it was to be 
packed or packaged.? From the same era and through Korea, I've seen a 
few wooden spares boxes and several steel ones.? The ATA/ARA box I once 
had was wood as was one for some radar set whose nomenclature I can't 
recall.? The TCS and ARD boxes I have are steel, as were the ones for 
AN/URA-6.

In a message dated 6/8/2008 12:37:11 PM Central Daylight Time, 
btuttleman@worldnet.att.net writes:

what came in the ARB spare parts kit?? how was it arranged inside
the box?

TIA,
barry
carson city nv



Robert Downs - Houston
</" target=_blankhttp://www.wa5cab.com>; (Web Store)
MVPA 9480
<wa5cab@cs.com> (Primary email)
<wa5cab@comcast.net> (Backup email)


______________________________________________________________
Milsurplus mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Milsurplus@mailman.qth.net




______________________________________________________________
Milsurplus mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Milsurplus@mailman.qth.net


------------------------------------------------------------
Stay informed, get connected and more with AOL on your phone.

From arc5 at ix.netcom.com  Sun Jun  8 15:22:15 2008
From: arc5 at ix.netcom.com (David Stinson)
Date: Sun Jun  8 15:22:24 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Speaking of Spares Boxes
Message-ID: <3E63E61DB6634501B54271D2DB098991@boudreaux>

Spares boxes are a favorite of mine.
Does anyone have a TCS-12 spares box #1?
I have #2, and it would be cool to have both.
73 Dave S.


From WA5CAB at cs.com  Sun Jun  8 15:35:04 2008
From: WA5CAB at cs.com (WA5CAB@cs.com)
Date: Sun Jun  8 15:34:25 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Speaking of Spares Boxes
Message-ID: <c0e.323d3e4a.357d8e68@cs.com>

I don't, but I do have several of the spares boxes for the single unit 
dynamotor supply.  

In a message dated 6/8/2008 2:23:16 PM Central Daylight Time, 
arc5@ix.netcom.com writes: 
> Spares boxes are a favorite of mine.
> Does anyone have a TCS-12 spares box #1?
> I have #2, and it would be cool to have both.
> 73 Dave S.

Robert & Susan Downs - Houston
<http://www.wa5cab.com> (Web Store)
MVPA 9480
<wa5cab@cs.com> (Primary email)
<wa5cab@comcast.net> (Backup email)
   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080608/f0ef0b98/attachment.htm
From jfor at quik.com  Sun Jun  8 16:52:07 2008
From: jfor at quik.com (J Forster)
Date: Sun Jun  8 16:49:33 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Speaking of Spares Boxes
References: <c0e.323d3e4a.357d8e68@cs.com>
Message-ID: <484C4677.394D7742@quik.com>

I'd love to find the spares box for the Canadian High Power Amp. for the
WS 19. Unobtanium, I know, but you don't ask, you don't get.

Best,
-John

========

From asmagal at fc.up.pt  Sun Jun  8 17:12:47 2008
From: asmagal at fc.up.pt (asmagal@fc.up.pt)
Date: Sun Jun  8 17:13:01 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Speaking of Boxes
Message-ID: <20080608231247.8l4s4zg0pc8swc0k@webmail.fc.up.pt>

I have a box marked MK-47 UPM and I would like to know
the Radar Test Set AN/UPM-? it could belong to.

Best regards,
Antonio/CT1TE


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
A FCUP utiliza o sistema open source de webmail Horde/IMP (www.horde.org)
Visite: http://www.fc.up.pt/ http://info.fc.up.pt/


From jcoward5452 at aol.com  Sun Jun  8 20:07:35 2008
From: jcoward5452 at aol.com (jcoward5452@aol.com)
Date: Sun Jun  8 20:07:41 2008
Subject: [ARC5] Re: [Milsurplus] Speaking of Spares Boxes
In-Reply-To: <c0e.323d3e4a.357d8e68@cs.com>
References: <c0e.323d3e4a.357d8e68@cs.com>
Message-ID: <8CA97DBF409DD87-CA8-3CE8@webmail-ne01.sysops.aol.com>

Groups,

I have always been intrigued by the fact that Navy "spares" boxes are 
so well built,either of wood or steel and the fact that provision for a 
lock  and handles on even the smallest boxes was a requirement.Army 
"spares" boxes make more sense to me with the felt lining,snug fit, and 
simple snap hasp and no resistors and caps in paper envelopes.Of 
course,a Navy has to carry everything due to its logistical situation 
and an Army on land only has to send a truck...
 I would very much like to be enlightened!

Jay
From wh7hg.hi at gmail.com  Sun Jun  8 21:26:50 2008
From: wh7hg.hi at gmail.com (Michael Tauson)
Date: Sun Jun  8 21:26:54 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] New things
Message-ID: <c34299fb0806081826i5a009311tfc6d6a2ac72477de@mail.gmail.com>

Hi, folks,

With hope, qth.net will allow this to pass ...

Two things have recently dropped into my lap, figuratively, at least.

The first is a BC-GL-183 BFO.  Since I don't have an appropriate
vintage BC-229 for it to go with, I'm probably going to mate it with a
BC-AO-229 and hope no one notices the age difference.  I do need at
least a schematic and would prefer a manual if someone might have one
available.

The second is a very interesting cable.  It is six feet long and has
fairly conventional A.R.C. 6577 cable-type 8-pin connectors on the
ends.  What makes it interesting is that it's fabric covered rather
than shielded or rubber covered which I suspect makes it date to the
original Model K sets.  I hope to incorporate it in the displays
intact with a note regarding its age.

An accidental (I intentionally bid low to see where it would go and it
wasn't low enough.) R-174/GRR-5 is headed this way which is cool
because I like that receiver.  With them are some other things for the
displays, the Jeep rig and the Noelle-machines.  The e-place was nice
to me this month.

BEst regards,

Michael, WH7HG
From kargo_cult at msn.com  Mon Jun  9 02:34:37 2008
From: kargo_cult at msn.com (Hue Miller)
Date: Mon Jun  9 02:34:37 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] New things
In-Reply-To: <c34299fb0806081826i5a009311tfc6d6a2ac72477de@mail.gmail.com>
References: <c34299fb0806081826i5a009311tfc6d6a2ac72477de@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BAY125-W55FF63FA9EEEBD64DF8576E4B00@phx.gbl>



Michael, how much of a GRR-5 did you get? -Hue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080608/dac738c9/attachment.htm
From wh7hg.hi at gmail.com  Mon Jun  9 02:43:37 2008
From: wh7hg.hi at gmail.com (Michael Tauson)
Date: Mon Jun  9 02:43:38 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] New things
In-Reply-To: <BAY125-W55FF63FA9EEEBD64DF8576E4B00@phx.gbl>
References: <c34299fb0806081826i5a009311tfc6d6a2ac72477de@mail.gmail.com>
	<BAY125-W55FF63FA9EEEBD64DF8576E4B00@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <c34299fb0806082343k172f3adbw6a3145c7bf7d43c3@mail.gmail.com>

> Michael, how much of a GRR-5 did you get? -Hue

Receiver, power supply, case, internal cable, some dust and a big
smile on my part.  I have some connectors to make power cables so
they're not an issue but I need to scope out how the mount works since
it seems to be entirely missing and I do want to be able to install it
in the Jeep.  With the antenna sections I have coming, I'll even be
able to raise the appropriate whip for it.

Best regards,

Michael, WH7HG
From bl_6000 at yahoo.com.au  Mon Jun  9 05:13:53 2008
From: bl_6000 at yahoo.com.au (Brad Latta)
Date: Mon Jun  9 05:13:56 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Spares Boxes
Message-ID: <617193.18023.qm@web38004.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

I have spares boxs for the RDO receiver, cream colored
steel. They sure put plenty of spares in, almost
enough to rebuild a complete chassis! They weigh a
ton!
                                          Brad


      Get the name you always wanted with the new y7mail email address.
www.yahoo7.com.au/mail
From Military1944 at aol.com  Mon Jun  9 06:46:33 2008
From: Military1944 at aol.com (Military1944@aol.com)
Date: Mon Jun  9 06:46:38 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Ebays Fait accompli
Message-ID: <c5a.325c6ed0.357e6409@aol.com>

 
Ebays Fait accompli
 
Well, seems the new Ebay system, paying to list an item, paying a % of  final 
sold value and forcing one to accept Paypal (an Ebay company) so that your  
buyers payment is yet further fleeced by Ebay is perfectly acceptable according 
 to Trading Standards. They can see nothing wrong in that. 
 
So, three chunks of the pie for Ebay, crumbs and scraps for the punters. 
 
Don't you just love Capitalism?
 
Ben. 




   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080609/d40796e9/attachment.htm
From ka1kaq at gmail.com  Mon Jun  9 09:01:13 2008
From: ka1kaq at gmail.com (Todd, KA1KAQ)
Date: Mon Jun  9 09:01:20 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] New things
In-Reply-To: <c34299fb0806082343k172f3adbw6a3145c7bf7d43c3@mail.gmail.com>
References: <c34299fb0806081826i5a009311tfc6d6a2ac72477de@mail.gmail.com>
	<BAY125-W55FF63FA9EEEBD64DF8576E4B00@phx.gbl>
	<c34299fb0806082343k172f3adbw6a3145c7bf7d43c3@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <9ccb8c510806090601x63c574c5haad456f8769a6ac5@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 2:43 AM, Michael Tauson <wh7hg.hi@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Michael, how much of a GRR-5 did you get? -Hue
>
> Receiver, power supply, case, internal cable, some dust and a big
> smile on my part.  I have some connectors to make power cables so
> they're not an issue but I need to scope out how the mount works since
> it seems to be entirely missing and I do want to be able to install it
> in the Jeep.  With the antenna sections I have coming, I'll even be
> able to raise the appropriate whip for it.

Hey, congrats Michael - it's a wonderful little receiver in a compact
(but very dense) package. I often haul mine to hamfests and other
events to set up on the tailgate for casual listening. It always draws
a crowd and offers to buy.

Keep your eyes peeled online for a clunker with the mount, they do
show up from time to time with rough electronic decks, but
complete/restorable cabinets with mounts. Also, the CW-206 accessory
bags have been showing up a lot lately, apparently through surplus
auctions as most are NOS. The actual radio covers show up too, though
not as often.

~ Todd,  KA1KAQ
From Military1944 at aol.com  Mon Jun  9 10:21:10 2008
From: Military1944 at aol.com (Military1944@aol.com)
Date: Mon Jun  9 10:21:21 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Re: [The WS No.19 Group] Ebays Fait accompli
Message-ID: <d2e.236d1fd1.357e9656@aol.com>

 
In a message dated 09/06/2008 13:55:30 GMT Daylight Time,  
fredschneider@planet.nl writes:

It's  there service, they make the rules, if enough people dislike it they 
stop  
using it and ebay is forced to change their policy. I don't like the  bidding 
concept anyhow. I never buy something that way. If I sell  something through 
internet (i seldom have done that) I name the price I  want for it so that's 
no more but also no less.. Ebay, worlds biggest  garbage bin. :-) You pull a 
rusty nail out of the wall, put it on ebay,  tell it its 80 years old and ask 
20 euro for it and probably sell it  too....



---------------------------------
 
Well, I'm amazed. "its their service",  "its their rules" So what? 
 
And all the other comments, via the groups and direct (also, its polite to  
put your name to personal messages). 
 
Something is a "service" when one has the option of taking it or not. When  
its forced upon everyone its not a "service". 
 
Regardless of Ebays rule why should someone be 'compelled' to use PP?
 
I have paid Ebay to list my item, I have paid Ebay their commission on  the 
sale. Now, when a totally independent party, the buyer, wants to pay me why  
should Ebay have a say in that?  They have been paid for their "service",  the 
listing on the world wide web of my item. Now, once sold it has nothing  to do 
with them. Its now a deal between me and my buyer.  What  other auction house 
forces buyers to pay via their subsidiaries?
 
Frankly, if that cannot be seen, well, maybe you do deserve to have more of  
your money taken off you. 
 
You had better watch out. If Ebay can do why not others. Other suppliers of  
"services" might start telling you to pay via their own off shoot company.  
You'll not be able to pay with cash, not with cheque, not with postal orders,  
not with 3rd party credit cards. You will be forced to use their card, for 
which  they will charge you a fee. 
 
As for the message above, well, if you don't like bidding and don't use  
Ebay, what are you commenting for?  The 'garbage bin' as you call it has  brought 
some interesting items to the surface, which might have gone to the tip  
otherwise. Ebay has its good points, I just feel they are now taking advantage. 
 
But, sapienti sat, Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes and Caveat  
Emptor. 
 
Ben.
 



   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080609/70898b57/attachment.htm
From WA5CAB at cs.com  Mon Jun  9 10:31:11 2008
From: WA5CAB at cs.com (WA5CAB@cs.com)
Date: Mon Jun  9 10:31:18 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Re: [The WS No.19 Group] Ebays Fait accompli
Message-ID: <d49.2e8f6833.357e98af@cs.com>

Not that I care one way or the other but it's actually a partial regression 
to an earlier way, not something new.  When "credit cards" first became common, 
small outfits who couldn't afford to issue their own credit cards could, for 
a heft fee, set up to take the general purpose ones.  Large ones, like oil 
companies, Sears, etc., issued their own cards.  If you wanted to use a credit 
card you used theirs.  Period.  If you didn't, you paid cash (or check, etc.).  

In a message dated 6/9/2008 9:22:16 AM Central Daylight Time, 
Military1944@aol.com writes: 
> You had better watch out. If Ebay can do why not others. Other suppliers of 
> "services" might start telling you to pay via their own off shoot company. 
> You'll not be able to pay with cash, not with cheque, not with postal orders, 
> not with 3rd party credit cards. You will be forced to use their card, for 
> which they will charge you a fee. 
> 

Robert & Susan Downs - Houston
<http://www.wa5cab.com> (Web Store)
MVPA 9480
<wa5cab@cs.com> (Primary email)
<wa5cab@comcast.net> (Backup email)
   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080609/5f1ac591/attachment.htm
From mark.richards at massmicro.com  Mon Jun  9 10:49:40 2008
From: mark.richards at massmicro.com (Mark Richards)
Date: Mon Jun  9 10:49:44 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Re: [The WS No.19 Group] Ebays Fait accompli
In-Reply-To: <d2e.236d1fd1.357e9656@aol.com>
References: <d2e.236d1fd1.357e9656@aol.com>
Message-ID: <484D4304.5050001@massmicro.com>

Military1944@aol.com wrote:
> 
  > As for the message above, well, if you don't like bidding and don't use
> Ebay, what are you commenting for?  The 'garbage bin' as you call it has 
> brought some interesting items to the surface, which might have gone to 
> the tip otherwise. Ebay has its good points, I just feel they are now 
> taking advantage.
>  
> But, sapienti sat, Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes and 
> Caveat Emptor.

That says it all.  I agree.

We just purchased some file servers.  They're 7 years old, but for our 
purposes they're just fine.

Without the e-bay service, these may have ended up in a landfill, 
leaching heavy metals.  Instead, we're putting them to good service.

Sure, there's a few scum of the earth stealing via e-bay, but eventually 
they are caught up with and thrashed.  Use of payment methods that offer 
protection is the best insurance; getting to know the seller is another.

/m

From arc5 at ix.netcom.com  Mon Jun  9 11:12:03 2008
From: arc5 at ix.netcom.com (David Stinson)
Date: Mon Jun  9 11:12:20 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Re: [The WS No.19 Group] Ebays Fait accompli
References: <d2e.236d1fd1.357e9656@aol.com> <484D4304.5050001@massmicro.com>
Message-ID: <FE836858277C4146A7718BE55C1E3F3F@boudreaux>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mark Richards" <mark.richards@massmicro.com>
> Sure, there's a few scum of the earth stealing via e-bay, but eventually 
> they are caught up with and thrashed. 

I've been working with Ebay since right after they started,
and have done around 2000 deals; maybe more.
I can still count on my fingers how many of those
went "bad."  That's extraordinary, and has brightened
my outlook on mankind.
73 D.S.


From WA5CAB at cs.com  Mon Jun  9 11:27:59 2008
From: WA5CAB at cs.com (WA5CAB@cs.com)
Date: Mon Jun  9 11:28:09 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] T.O. for AN/GRT-21 & -22 Ready including AM-6154 &
	AM-6155
Message-ID: <ccd.3675de5f.357ea5ff@cs.com>

Group,

Please pardon the direct.

Bill & Ed, the T.O.'s are ready.  I sent you the details a couple of times.  
Please check your sp-am buckets.

Robert Downs - Houston
<http://www.wa5cab.com> (Web Store)
MVPA 9480
<wa5cab@cs.com> (Primary email)
<wa5cab@comcast.net> (Backup email)
   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080609/0d5c4a08/attachment.htm
From nick at 3rdtech.com  Mon Jun  9 11:53:34 2008
From: nick at 3rdtech.com (Nick England)
Date: Mon Jun  9 11:58:40 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Ebays Fait accompli
In-Reply-To: <c5a.325c6ed0.357e6409@aol.com>
References: <c5a.325c6ed0.357e6409@aol.com>
Message-ID: <040401c8ca48$f93f9950$fd0212ac@Heathkit2>

Well, yeah I do love Capitalism - which means that you or anyone else are
perfectly free to start up your own auction site with whatever rules you
want - and if your business model appeals to more people than ebay's does,
then you'll probably make more money than they do. Go for it - if they are
doing such a horrible job then you can just run 'em out of business.
 
Have you not noticed that no one is forcing you to use ebay?
Or perhaps you'd rather have the Ministry of Auctions regulating things?
 
Nick, unrepentantly in favor of freedom

  _____  

From: milsurplus-bounces@mailman.qth.net
[mailto:milsurplus-bounces@mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of
Military1944@aol.com
Sent: Monday, June 09, 2008 6:47 AM
To: milsurplus@mailman.qth.net; Wireless-Set-No19@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Milsurplus] Ebays Fait accompli


Ebays Fait accompli
 
Well, seems the new Ebay system, paying to list an item, paying a % of final
sold value and forcing one to accept Paypal (an Ebay company) so that your
buyers payment is yet further fleeced by Ebay is perfectly acceptable
according to Trading Standards. They can see nothing wrong in that. 
 
So, three chunks of the pie for Ebay, crumbs and scraps for the punters. 
 
Don't you just love Capitalism?
 
Ben. 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080609/6066cd0d/attachment-0001.htm
From k2gkk at hotmail.com  Mon Jun  9 12:58:07 2008
From: k2gkk at hotmail.com (D C *Mac* Macdonald)
Date: Mon Jun  9 12:58:11 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Re: [The WS No.19 Group] Ebays Fait accompli
In-Reply-To: <d49.2e8f6833.357e98af@cs.com>
References: <d49.2e8f6833.357e98af@cs.com>
Message-ID: <BLU129-W14763B08959CFE24DF24E6F1B00@phx.gbl>


And NOW, many of those companies who did issue 
their own credit cards have found that it is cheaper for 
them to pay the transaction charges of the "majors "
than to pay the payrolls, health insurance, worker 
comp, etc. to support their own consumer credit. 
 
I have made close to 1,000 eBay purchase of ham
gear, motorcycle stuff (including a 2007 Harley) and 
also have had less than five sour deals.  A couple 
of those were due to my failure to read the auction 
description correctly.
 
 
73 - Mac, K2GKK/5 
Oklahoma City, OK 






________________________________

From: WA5CAB@cs.com
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2008 10:31:11 -0400
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] Re: [The WS No.19 Group] Ebays Fait accompli
To: milsurplus@mailman.qth.net

Not that I care one way or the other but it's actually a partial regression to an earlier way, not something new.  When "credit cards" first became common, small outfits who couldn't afford to issue their own credit cards could, for a heft fee, set up to take the general purpose ones.  Large ones, like oil companies, Sears, etc., issued their own cards.  If you wanted to use a credit card you used theirs.  Period.  If you didn't, you paid cash (or check, etc.).

In a message dated 6/9/2008 9:22:16 AM Central Daylight Time, Military1944@aol.com writes:

You had better watch out. If Ebay can do why not others. Other suppliers of "services" might start telling you to pay via their own off shoot company. You'll not be able to pay with cash, not with cheque, not with postal orders, not with 3rd party credit cards. You will be forced to use their card, for which they will charge you a fee.


Robert & Susan Downs - Houston
 (Web Store)
MVPA 9480
 (Primary email)
 (Backup email)
From ai4wm at yahoo.com  Mon Jun  9 21:29:19 2008
From: ai4wm at yahoo.com (Bill MacLane)
Date: Mon Jun  9 21:29:28 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Ebays Fait accompli
In-Reply-To: <c5a.325c6ed0.357e6409@aol.com>
Message-ID: <276549.23507.qm@web57908.mail.re3.yahoo.com>

Switch to www.ioffer.com, craigslist (for those in the
USA) or one of the many ham websites to list gear like
www.qrz.com and others.  I quit Ebay when they started
the no feedback for buyers crap.  I may list some
things there, but generally everyone - everywhere
should just tell Ebay to stick it by boycotting the
site.


--- Military1944@aol.com wrote:

>  
> Ebays Fait accompli
>  
> Well, seems the new Ebay system, paying to list an
> item, paying a % of  final 
> sold value and forcing one to accept Paypal (an Ebay
> company) so that your  
> buyers payment is yet further fleeced by Ebay is
> perfectly acceptable according 
>  to Trading Standards. They can see nothing wrong in
> that. 
>  
> So, three chunks of the pie for Ebay, crumbs and
> scraps for the punters. 
>  
> Don't you just love Capitalism?
>  
> Ben. 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>    
> >
______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home:
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus@mailman.qth.net
> 


73,
Bill
AI4WM


      
From Military1944 at aol.com  Tue Jun 10 05:10:42 2008
From: Military1944 at aol.com (Military1944@aol.com)
Date: Tue Jun 10 05:10:52 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Ebays Fait accompli
Message-ID: <c35.36b57c06.357f9f12@aol.com>

Not that it affects our iems (yet) but have you seen this on the great ebe  
site:
 
" from Tuesday 10th June 2008 the eBay.ie motors classified ad fee  will 
change from ?9 to ?20. "
 
thats 120% increase.  Now thats real inflation for you. 
 
Ben.
 
 



   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080610/e6bbf52c/attachment.htm
From wb3akd at earthlink.net  Tue Jun 10 10:39:58 2008
From: wb3akd at earthlink.net (Tom Dawson)
Date: Tue Jun 10 10:38:55 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] PE-75 spark plug
Message-ID: <b93e01c8cb07$db864ac0$9001a8c0@ASP>

Anyone have any thoughts on where I can find a replacement shielded spark 
plug for a Briggs engine like that used on a PE-75?


What I have is a BC-20L 12 volt Engine driven battery charger, but looks 
like the engine is the same as the PE-75


regards,

Tom

WB3AKD



From revcom at wbsnet.org  Tue Jun 10 12:40:02 2008
From: revcom at wbsnet.org (Revcom)
Date: Tue Jun 10 12:41:58 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] PE-75 spark plug
References: <b93e01c8cb07$db864ac0$9001a8c0@ASP>
Message-ID: <001701c8cb18$a137c720$0401a8c0@alltel>

NAPA Stocks them. Standard Briggs, Model -Z- Plug
K0EQH

----- Original Message -----
From: "Tom Dawson" <wb3akd@earthlink.net>
To: <milsurplus@mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2008 9:39 AM
Subject: [Milsurplus] PE-75 spark plug


> Anyone have any thoughts on where I can find a replacement shielded spark
> plug for a Briggs engine like that used on a PE-75?
>
>
> What I have is a BC-20L 12 volt Engine driven battery charger, but looks
> like the engine is the same as the PE-75
>
>
> regards,
>
> Tom
>
> WB3AKD
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus@mailman.qth.net

From kc5ijd at bellsouth.net  Tue Jun 10 13:27:59 2008
From: kc5ijd at bellsouth.net (Joseph Pinner)
Date: Tue Jun 10 13:28:11 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Cubic R-3080 receiver modules needed
Message-ID: <95959413-0988-46CD-B660-DA3D32B2FEE8@bellsouth.net>

Folks,

I am looking for the following modules for a Cubic R-3080. This is  
the single receiver, half rack version of the R-3030.

1   Panel Interface Module
1   Power Supply Module

Thanks for any help you can provide!!!!


Joseph Pinner +
818 Hill Street
Kingston, TN  37763

KC5IJD / NN0PPHR

From n3rht at yahoo.com  Tue Jun 10 13:36:55 2008
From: n3rht at yahoo.com (Don Merz)
Date: Tue Jun 10 13:37:10 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] FS: Quality Mil Gear, Mostly Navy
Message-ID: <74793.99824.qm@web56803.mail.re3.yahoo.com>

FS: Military and BA Gear. This gear has been lovingly cared for by someone who knew what they were doing. It's in way-above-average looking and working condition. 
?
ART-13 transmitter.?In very good or excellent looking, original working condition. With original power connector and short cord. No accessories. No ham mods. No bottom plate. Working as Collins intended. $355
?
GO-9 transmitter--all 3 sections in wonderful condition with rotary inverter and key. Go to Sears, buy 2 12VDC car batteries and charger, connect them?in series to the rotary 800hz generator with the supplied cable, connect the generator to the TX?and be on the air tonight. The rig works great and looks great. $1,275
?
BC-312-N.?1944 contract date. ?All original except possibly the fuse holders. Missing the lock that locks the tuning. Great looking. A BC-342 AC supply has been put into this radio. Working well. $225
?
BC-342-N.?1943 contract date. All original. Looks very good or excellent and works about the same. With original AC supply inside. $250
?
BC-312. Fuse holders may not be original, but maybe are--I'm not sure. Missing several 1/4 inch phone jacks with those spring-loaded covers (the ones on the lower right hand side. Otherwise is original, looks good and works. $150
?
Complete RBM set up with both radios in the waterproof transport case, both AC supplies, control box, and?dynamotor?unit in its own waterproof case? (the meter on the dyno unit was removed due to the dreaded radium issue).? With all original cables. The external cases have a few scuffs and scrapes but this set looks fabulous and works well. Purchased as new surplus from Fair Radio Sales in 1968. $975
?
Harvey Wells TBS-50C TX with matching VFO. Looks absolutely sparkling and works as designed on 160 through 6. $250
?
TCS-14 receiver with shock mount. Made by Air King. Looks great and works good enough to use every day. $150
?
E. F. Johnson Viking II transmitter with VFO,?the small matchbox and the EFJ low-pass filter. This stuff has either been flawlessly repainted (I think this is the case) or it has the best original EFJ paint I've ever seen on one of these transmitters. Works perfectly. Buy it, pull it out of the box and be on the air as fast as you can hook it up. All original as far as I can see. $350/all 4 pieces
?
73, Don Merz, N3RHT
From al at ar88.net  Tue Jun 10 19:08:06 2008
From: al at ar88.net (Al Klase)
Date: Tue Jun 10 19:08:37 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] SAQ 17.2 KHz OTA 29 June
Message-ID: <484F0956.2060106@ar88.net>

FYI

Hi
This year we will have the "Alexandersondagen" on 29th June and SAQ will be
on air at 09.00 UTC and 13.00 UTC.
For more details please see www.alexander.n.se.

Regards
Alexander GVV
Jan Steinbach


-- 
Al Klase - N3FRQ
Flemington, NJ
http://www.skywaves.ar88.net/

From WA5CAB at cs.com  Tue Jun 10 19:50:09 2008
From: WA5CAB at cs.com (WA5CAB@cs.com)
Date: Tue Jun 10 19:50:35 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] T.O. for AN/GRT-21 & -22 Ready including AM-6154 &
	AM-6155
Message-ID: <bf5.35385904.35806d31@cs.com>

Bill,

I answered your email this morning but it must have also gone to the bucket.  
Total 42,70.  pbm yhu

RD
   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080610/32adc31d/attachment.htm
From w2obr at comcast.net  Wed Jun 11 18:50:14 2008
From: w2obr at comcast.net (Rich)
Date: Wed Jun 11 18:50:33 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Wanted: Operational T-195 Transmitter
Message-ID: <000b01c8cc15$8451c4f0$5b5f8b45@homecomputer>

Wanted to purchase in my local area, or receive shipment ( Which ever comes 
first ) a T-195 transmitter. Must be in operational ( " Up and Running 
condition " ), no fixer-uper, or handy man special. Contact,
w2obr@comcast.net
Tnx, de Rich W2OBR 

From k3ui at comcast.net  Thu Jun 12 08:28:39 2008
From: k3ui at comcast.net (Richard Spargur)
Date: Thu Jun 12 08:29:15 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Looking for meters for a T-195
In-Reply-To: <20080612080158.646F1859D20@mailman.qth.net>
References: <20080612080158.646F1859D20@mailman.qth.net>
Message-ID: <7A5B13FE5CFD4190BC1930F947B79483@unk1>

I am looking for the meters for a T-195.  Prefer original, but I am also
interested in alternatives.

Richard
K3UI

From cosmoline at aa4rm.ba-watch.org  Thu Jun 12 10:09:25 2008
From: cosmoline at aa4rm.ba-watch.org (Marty Reynolds)
Date: Thu Jun 12 10:12:59 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] SAQ 17.2 KHz OTA 29 June
In-Reply-To: <484F0956.2060106@ar88.net>
References: <484F0956.2060106@ar88.net>
Message-ID: <19274.24.30.81.88.1213279765.squirrel@fracas.netboobie.org>


They picked Field Day Sunday

May be a boon for FD folks on upper NE seacoasts

  'rm

-- 
Time flies like an arrow

Fruit flies like a bananna

   Groucho Marx
From ianmwilson73 at gmail.com  Thu Jun 12 13:05:47 2008
From: ianmwilson73 at gmail.com (Ian Wilson)
Date: Thu Jun 12 13:06:12 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Looking for TCS-12 connector
Message-ID: <7de2d65c0806121005k273e5359wac28958627aec4a5@mail.gmail.com>

Looking for something affordable - bad cosmetic condition
is fine.

73, ian K3IMW
From wf2u at ws19ops.com  Thu Jun 12 13:31:41 2008
From: wf2u at ws19ops.com (wf2u@ws19ops.com)
Date: Thu Jun 12 13:32:39 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Looking for TCS-12 connector
In-Reply-To: <7de2d65c0806121005k273e5359wac28958627aec4a5@mail.gmail.com>
References: <7de2d65c0806121005k273e5359wac28958627aec4a5@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20080612123141.tqglqyihsg84scww@webmail.opentransfer.com>



  William Perry has them.

Just Google for William Perry Co.

73, Meir WF2U
Landrum, SC

Quoting Ian Wilson <ianmwilson73@gmail.com>:

> Looking for something affordable - bad cosmetic condition
> is fine.
>
> 73, ian K3IMW
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus@mailman.qth.net
>


From arc5 at ix.netcom.com  Thu Jun 12 19:00:01 2008
From: arc5 at ix.netcom.com (David Stinson)
Date: Thu Jun 12 19:00:35 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] HAMCOM DALLAS FRIDAY:  GOOD STUFF
Message-ID: <D642CDF843AE4C6A8B2374131950D63F@boudreaux>

Available tomorrow at Hamcom Dallas:

RBM-5 Equipment, including:
  both radios
  receiver case with lid
  spare receiver
  original AC power supply
  dynamotor
  control unit
  All except AC supply and spare matching serial numbers
  All for best offer over $400.00 before noon on Saturday

TBW power supply with case and lid

Gonset GSB-201 amplifier- untested

National RBL-5 receiver

Millen Transmatch Type-92200 project

Heathkit- SB-620

Heathkit- SB-303

ART-13 Transmitter

Other good stuff!!

Dave ab5s
214-632-4510
sorry no shipping


From jupete at bigpond.net.au  Fri Jun 13 01:10:25 2008
From: jupete at bigpond.net.au (Pete Williams)
Date: Fri Jun 13 01:10:51 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] . Auction site  and paypal
Message-ID: <000001c8cd13$ca7fb960$0200000a@REDORADIO>



 FOR INFO.. The Australian  ACCC  (Australian Competition and Consumer
Commission) is wary of the PayPal push re making customers make and accept,
payments exclusively using the Paypal payment service.
The Chairman said ' .. consumers are in the best position to decide which
payment method is most suitable for them--- benefits do not outweigh the
anti-competitive effects ' No definitive position/action yet been advised or
taken.
  LINK ..The full  ACCC investigation can be read on  tinyurl.com/4dz6ud

INFORMATION from ''The Age ", Melbourne  newspaper  June 13, 2008

 Pete D.Williams
jupete@bigpond.net.au
METUNG 3904 AUSTRALIA

From wpileggi at juno.com  Fri Jun 13 01:12:41 2008
From: wpileggi at juno.com (Bill Pileggi)
Date: Fri Jun 13 01:14:42 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] RT-68/GRC Outside aluminum cover available
Message-ID: <20080613.011241.5962.0@webmail15.vgs.untd.com>

I have the outside cover from an RT-66/67/68/GRC available. It's from a junked unit I had more than 20 years ago. I've been using it all this time to hold car-care supplies... It's the "bumpy" style. LOTS of paint worn off the bumps, but in decent shape otherwise for a unit/cover that saw actual use. No holes, 'dents', etc. Will cost a few dollars to ship because it does weigh 5 pounds, 11 ounces/2.5Kg. Best offer (amazingly, even the AL scrap value today is about $4). Bill KA3AIS

____________________________________________________________
You'll never get over going Down Under. Click now for great Australia travel deals!
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2131/fc/Ioyw6iigKveZVwozbQ08VGRz8NYBaFiKbTgP8aESrAdiFv9zYMTqKm/
From cosmoline at aa4rm.ba-watch.org  Fri Jun 13 11:09:03 2008
From: cosmoline at aa4rm.ba-watch.org (Unserviceable but Repairable)
Date: Fri Jun 13 11:12:39 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] ARC-5 tx metal
Message-ID: <200806131509.m5DF93Hj028140@fracas.netboobie.org>

I could use the top cover & bottom plate fm one.  Mine's the 160m T18
but I'd be grateful for one fm a T-16 thru a T-22.  Any bottom plate
in the range wud be fb

Don't know who wanted the 85kc rx I.F. xfrmr last week, but I've a 
no-strings freebie to throw in the kharma bucket.  In other words just 
write with a usps address & I'll send it.

   tnx

        Marty

From n3rht at yahoo.com  Fri Jun 13 11:25:26 2008
From: n3rht at yahoo.com (Don Merz)
Date: Fri Jun 13 11:25:55 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] . Auction site  and paypal
Message-ID: <904133.94445.qm@web56807.mail.re3.yahoo.com>

Sheesh, what a reference point. The US gave up prosecuting "anti-competitive effects" 35 years ago. We regularly drive down our streets and see two "competing" oil company gas stations with prices exactly matching to 1/10th of a cent and we are told "that's free enterprise", not anti-competitive monopoly. The whole idea that there could be "anti-competitive" business practices is a dead concept in the USA. Our drugs cost 3 times what people pay 250 miles away across an artificial national border. But that's "free enterprise" too. 
Paradoxically, people recognize the joke immediately when anyone uses the?oxymoron "business ethics". Yet the idea of prosecuting monopolies even ehen their effects are egregiously harmful goes nowhere in this country.
So, to read of a governemnt agency in another nation refering to "anti-competitive effects" is positively refreshing!
73, Don Merz, N3RHT


----- Original Message ----
From: Pete Williams <jupete@bigpond.net.au>
To: milsurplus@mailman.qth.net
Sent: Friday, June 13, 2008 1:10:25 AM
Subject: [Milsurplus] . Auction site and paypal



FOR INFO.. The Australian? ACCC? (Australian Competition and Consumer
Commission) is wary of the PayPal push re making customers make and accept,
payments exclusively using the Paypal payment service.
The Chairman said ' .. consumers are in the best position to decide which
payment method is most suitable for them--- benefits do not outweigh the
anti-competitive effects ' No definitive position/action yet been advised or
taken.
? LINK ..The full? ACCC investigation can be read on? tinyurl.com/4dz6ud

INFORMATION from ''The Age ", Melbourne? newspaper? June 13, 2008

Pete D.Williams
jupete@bigpond.net.au
METUNG 3904 AUSTRALIA

______________________________________________________________
Milsurplus mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Milsurplus@mailman.qth.net

From n2lxm at juno.com  Fri Jun 13 15:50:02 2008
From: n2lxm at juno.com (n2lxm@juno.com)
Date: Fri Jun 13 15:52:47 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] PRC-74
Message-ID: <20080613.155005.4048.4.n2lxm@juno.com>

Greetings All,
 
        Well after all most a year of collecting bits and pieces I am all
most ready to get my PRC-74 on the air. I am looking for information and
suggestions on what would be a good antenna to use for portable work.
Also having just received an CY-6121( wet ) battery box, I have been
looking for specifications for the BB-418/U battery. From my research
using the radio with a 9 to 1 RX / TX ratio would require a 12 -15 volt
battery with a 15Ah rating. Can anyone confirm this as fact.  I am hoping
to be ready for Field Day and to have some fun this summer going back
packing. Any input will be greatly appreciated. Thank You.
 
 
                                Jeff N2LXM
                  AMATEUR RADIO OPERATOR
                                AMERICAN
                                  PATRIOT
                  Proud Father of two US MARINES
____________________________________________________________
Live the good life! Click now for great retirement planning assistance!
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3mK7CAyiXA56F09C6K7PpolgwhRL0oy8qaJqsOCEULpcykBE/
From kk5f at earthlink.net  Fri Jun 13 19:38:19 2008
From: kk5f at earthlink.net (Mike Morrow)
Date: Fri Jun 13 19:38:47 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] PRC-74
Message-ID: <5825386.1213400299865.JavaMail.root@elwamui-karabash.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

>Well after all most a year of collecting bits and pieces I am all
>most ready to get my PRC-74 on the air.
>...
>I am hoping to be ready for Field Day and to have some fun this
>summer going back packing.

Jeff,

I think that the ham band usefulness of the AN/PRC-74 and -74A units
is pretty much limited to CW, since these models only cover 2 to 12 MHz,
and the AN/PRC-74, -74A, -74B, and -74C are USB only.  You can't use
them on 60 meters, because those five frequencies require the ability
to set frequency in 0.5 kHz increments.  These sets only tune in 1.0 kHz
increments.

I've got a couple of AN/PRC-74B sets, which along with ths -74C tune
2 to 18 MHz.  These models can be used on 20 meter USB.

These 40-plus year old sets were pretty advanced and compact for their era.
For backpacking today, though, I carry a small and efficient QRP CW rig
(Elecraft K1).  The AN/PRC-74 series would be a killer to carry by
today's standards.

Mike / KK5F

From ersmar at verizon.net  Fri Jun 13 19:54:55 2008
From: ersmar at verizon.net (Gene Smar)
Date: Fri Jun 13 19:55:31 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] PRC-74
Message-ID: <550524.4812691213401295248.JavaMail.root@vms172.mailsrvcs.net>

Jeff:

     Here's a URL http://www.radiowavz.com/html/nvis.htm that discusses NVIS (Near-Vertical Incidence Skywave) antennas.  You can also search on NVIS and find numerous other sources.  Theses antennas are essentially low-to-the-ground horizontal dipoles that exhibit high take-off angles for low-band HF signals.  The high T.O. angles of NVIS antennas permits signals of up about 12 MHz to be returned to earth within 300-500 miles of the transmitter (between ground wave and first e-layer skip range) with very little attenuation.

     One military antenna model designed specifically for NVIS work is the AS-2259.  This is two crossed dipole inverted V wire sets, resonant at about 6.5 MHz and 9.0 MHz, that are supported by sections of fifty-Ohm rigid transmission line.  You would need a tuner between this antenna and your -74.  I, and others on this reflector, have made similar antennas, but the wires are resonant on 80M and 40M (or 60/40 or 80/60, etc.)  Coverage from my antenna on the low bands (80 and 40) is excellent, with highly readable signals out to several hundred miles with 80 Watts from my own batt operated IC-746.

     Scroll down on the above URL to M-7. There are results from tests done by the US Army in Thailand's jungles with PRC-74's.  If you team up your own -74 with one of these NVIS wire sets, you WILL be heard out to several hundred miles.


73 de
Gene Smar  AD3F


 From: n2lxm@juno.com
Date: 2008/06/13 Fri PM 03:50:02 EDT
To: milsurplus@mailman.qth.net
Subject: [Milsurplus] PRC-74

Greetings All,
 
        Well after all most a year of collecting bits and pieces I am all
most ready to get my PRC-74 on the air. I am looking for information and
suggestions on what would be a good antenna to use for portable work.
Also having just received an CY-6121( wet ) battery box, I have been
looking for specifications for the BB-418/U battery. From my research
using the radio with a 9 to 1 RX / TX ratio would require a 12 -15 volt
battery with a 15Ah rating. Can anyone confirm this as fact.  I am hoping
to be ready for Field Day and to have some fun this summer going back
packing. Any input will be greatly appreciated. Thank You.
 
 
                                Jeff N2LXM
                  AMATEUR RADIO OPERATOR
                                AMERICAN
                                  PATRIOT
                  Proud Father of two US MARINES
____________________________________________________________
Live the good life! Click now for great retirement planning assistance!
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3mK7CAyiXA56F09C6K7PpolgwhRL0oy8qaJqsOCEULpcykBE/
______________________________________________________________
Milsurplus mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Milsurplus@mailman.qth.net

From WA5CAB at cs.com  Fri Jun 13 20:04:22 2008
From: WA5CAB at cs.com (WA5CAB@cs.com)
Date: Fri Jun 13 20:04:53 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] PRC-74
Message-ID: <c5e.3845ce25.35846506@cs.com>

The AS-2259/GR was apparently originally designed for AN/PRC-47.  The base 
section screws directly into the bowl insulator of the RT-671.  When AN/PRC-74 
replaced AN/PRC-47, the newer radio wasn't hefty enough to do this with so they 
designed the MX-9313/GR matching unit to sit under the antenna.  I have been 
looking for one of the matching units for a long time, with no luck.  However, 
I do have two extra complete AS-2259's available.  $125.00 plus shipping.

In a message dated 6/13/2008 6:55:33 PM Central Daylight Time, 
ersmar@verizon.net writes: 
>      Here's a URL http://www.radiowavz.com/html/nvis.htm that discusses 
> NVIS (Near-Vertical Incidence Skywave) antennas.  You can also search on NVIS 
> and find numerous other sources.  Theses antennas are essentially 
> low-to-the-ground horizontal dipoles that exhibit high take-off angles for low-band HF 
> signals.  The high T.O. angles of NVIS antennas permits signals of up about 12 
> MHz to be returned to earth within 300-500 miles of the transmitter (between 
> ground wave and first e-layer skip range) with very little attenuation.
> 
>      One military antenna model designed specifically for NVIS work is the 
> AS-2259.  This is two crossed dipole inverted V wire sets, resonant at about 
> 6.5 MHz and 9.0 MHz, that are supported by sections of fifty-Ohm rigid 
> transmission line.  You would need a tuner between this antenna and your -74.  I, 
> and others on this reflector, have made similar antennas, but the wires are 
> resonant on 80M and 40M (or 60/40 or 80/60, etc.)  Coverage from my antenna on 
> the low bands (80 and 40) is excellent, with highly readable signals out to 
> several hundred miles with 80 Watts from my own batt operated IC-746.
> 
>      Scroll down on the above URL to M-7. There are results from tests done 
> by the US Army in Thailand's jungles with PRC-74's.  If you team up your own 
> -74 with one of these NVIS wire sets, you WILL be heard out to several 
> hundred miles.
> 
> 
> 73 de
> Gene Smar  AD3F
> 
> 
> From: n2lxm@juno.com
> Date: 2008/06/13 Fri PM 03:50:02 EDT
> To: milsurplus@mailman.qth.net
> Subject: [Milsurplus] PRC-74
> 
> Greetings All,
> 
>         Well after all most a year of collecting bits and pieces I am all
> most ready to get my PRC-74 on the air. I am looking for information and
> suggestions on what would be a good antenna to use for portable work.
> Also having just received an CY-6121( wet ) battery box, I have been
> looking for specifications for the BB-418/U battery. From my research
> using the radio with a 9 to 1 RX / TX ratio would require a 12 -15 volt
> battery with a 15Ah rating. Can anyone confirm this as fact.  I am hoping
> to be ready for Field Day and to have some fun this summer going back
> packing. Any input will be greatly appreciated. Thank You.
> 

Robert & Susan Downs - Houston
<http://www.wa5cab.com> (Web Store)
MVPA 9480
<wa5cab@cs.com> (Primary email)
<wa5cab@comcast.net> (Backup email)
   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080613/4ec6e1a9/attachment.htm
From smithab11 at comcast.net  Fri Jun 13 20:17:54 2008
From: smithab11 at comcast.net (B. Smith)
Date: Fri Jun 13 20:18:19 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] AS-2259
Message-ID: <002c01c8cdb4$182c6870$7536c847@HAL1000>

I did some actually testing of the AS-2259 on the ham bands, did some 
modeling of the antenna as well as develop  a "cheap" base mount. See:
http://solo11.abac.com/zorroab1/AS-2259%20Notes/AS-2259%20Page%201.htm

73

breck k4che 

From n2lxm at juno.com  Fri Jun 13 21:00:18 2008
From: n2lxm at juno.com (n2lxm@juno.com)
Date: Fri Jun 13 21:03:23 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] RE: PRC-74
Message-ID: <20080613.210020.4048.5.n2lxm@juno.com>

Greetings All,

        I had forgot to mention that I own a -B model which covers 2 -
17.999 Mhz. . So this will allow me Voice and Data on 20 and  17 Meters.
How ever I will also be doing CW on 80 and 40. 


                                Jeff N2LXM
                  AMATEUR RADIO OPERATOR
                                AMERICAN
                                  PATRIOT
                  Proud Father of two US MARINES
____________________________________________________________
Smart Girls Secret Weapon
Read Unbiased Beauty Product Reviews, Get Helpful Tips, Tricks and Sam
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/JKFkuJi7U3xwkUYoQQqUvOTTuOpYOvMqCRkxNMbP2TJrK3IlQYGtFo/
From kk5f at earthlink.net  Fri Jun 13 22:56:18 2008
From: kk5f at earthlink.net (Mike Morrow)
Date: Fri Jun 13 22:56:46 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] PRC-74
Message-ID: <14903678.1213412178735.JavaMail.root@elwamui-karabash.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

>I had forgot to mention that I own a -B model

That's an important piece of info.

>which covers 2 - 17.999 Mhz. . So this will allow me Voice and Data
>on 20 and  17 Meters.

Nope.  You won't be doing *anything* on 17 meters.

The AN/PRC-74B can't cover 18.068 to 18.168 MHz, which is the 17 meter ham band.

These old military dogs truely are dogs for modern ham band usage.

Mike / KK5F

From wh7hg.hi at gmail.com  Fri Jun 13 23:02:53 2008
From: wh7hg.hi at gmail.com (Michael Tauson)
Date: Fri Jun 13 23:03:28 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] PRC-74
In-Reply-To: <14903678.1213412178735.JavaMail.root@elwamui-karabash.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
References: <14903678.1213412178735.JavaMail.root@elwamui-karabash.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <c34299fb0806132002u3173d94fr76aff427e826c7eb@mail.gmail.com>

> Nope.  You won't be doing *anything* on 17 meters.

As built, you're right.  But, clever people like Mark have addressed
that problem with not only a USB/LSB mod but also a way to recrystal
the rig for 17 and 160m  and a variable tuning mod for those tweener
frequencies.

Left pure, they're a problem.  Slightly tweaked, they're versatile ...
kind of like a tweaked PRC-47 but with wider coverage and less power.

BEst regards,

Michael
From WA5CAB at cs.com  Fri Jun 13 23:26:27 2008
From: WA5CAB at cs.com (WA5CAB@cs.com)
Date: Fri Jun 13 23:27:00 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] PRC-74
Message-ID: <c2b.2a0aaf0b.35849463@cs.com>

I've never understood why anyone would bother with these micro-bands at 10 
and 18 MC.  

In a message dated 6/13/2008 9:56:40 PM Central Daylight Time, 
kk5f@earthlink.net writes: 
> >I had forgot to mention that I own a -B model
> 
> That's an important piece of info.
> 
> >which covers 2 - 17.999 Mhz. . So this will allow me Voice and Data
> >on 20 and  17 Meters.
> 
> Nope.  You won't be doing *anything* on 17 meters.
> 
> The AN/PRC-74B can't cover 18.068 to 18.168 MHz, which is the 17 meter ham 
> band.
> 
> These old military dogs truely are dogs for modern ham band usage.
> 
> Mike / KK5F

Robert & Susan Downs - Houston
<http://www.wa5cab.com> (Web Store)
MVPA 9480
<wa5cab@cs.com> (Primary email)
<wa5cab@comcast.net> (Backup email)
   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080613/adfa51f8/attachment.htm
From kk5f at earthlink.net  Fri Jun 13 23:45:47 2008
From: kk5f at earthlink.net (Mike Morrow)
Date: Fri Jun 13 23:46:17 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] PRC-74
Message-ID: <7266425.1213415148062.JavaMail.root@elwamui-karabash.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

>> Nope.  You won't be doing *anything* on 17 meters.
>
>As built, you're right.  But, clever people like Mark have addressed
>that problem with not only a USB/LSB mod but also a way to recrystal
>the rig for 17 and 160m  and a variable tuning mod for those tweener
>frequencies.

In which case it is no longer a piece of military gear, and it deserves
no consideration beyond being some ham's franken-radio.  Hey, wouldn't it
be wonderful if some ham found an A.R.C. Type K transmitter and "cleverly"
converted it to 20 meter SSB?  He could work contests on 20m with it.
What an improvement to an old piece of gear!

IMHO, half-ass ham-ball kludges of the original military design are
both pointless and offensive, unless the gear is considered to be just
so much electronic junk that is to be shaped to the whims of some ham's
"bright" mind.  That has much left earlier vintage gear as trash today.

IMHO, there is only one sane reason to operate vintage gear, and that is to
experience the capabilities and limitations of the design as used by the
original operators.

When I was looking for an AN/PRC-74B several years ago, I was willing to
spend several hundred dollars for one.  But I would not have given $10 for
one with such ham "improvements."

A ham has every right to turn his gear into junk, but I won't sing praises.

Mike / KK5F
From wh7hg.hi at gmail.com  Fri Jun 13 23:58:22 2008
From: wh7hg.hi at gmail.com (Michael Tauson)
Date: Fri Jun 13 23:58:51 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] PRC-74
In-Reply-To: <7266425.1213415148062.JavaMail.root@elwamui-karabash.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
References: <7266425.1213415148062.JavaMail.root@elwamui-karabash.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <c34299fb0806132058q7881e90q5329078664e3b9eb@mail.gmail.com>

> Hey, wouldn't it be wonderful if some ham found an A.R.C. Type K transmitter and "cleverly"
> converted it to 20 meter SSB?  He could work contests on 20m with it.

Dude, it's a Type K receiver and when did you peek at my workbench?
Anyway, it was in a box that some guy named Hull wrote all over.
Figured it must have been a reject 'cuz the bathtub's in the wrong
position.  Anyway, looks real snazzy in its patriotic red, white and
blue paint job.

Best regards,

Michael, WH7HG
From kargo_cult at msn.com  Sat Jun 14 04:41:15 2008
From: kargo_cult at msn.com (Hue Miller)
Date: Sat Jun 14 04:43:23 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] PRC-74
References: <7266425.1213415148062.JavaMail.root@elwamui-karabash.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <BAY125-DAV1E3944C8A0F7FCD152D60E4AF0@phx.gbl>

After World War the 2nd, there was 

> so much electronic junk that is to be shaped to the whims of some ham's
> "bright" mind.  That has much left earlier vintage gear as trash today.

Perhaps, for example, Command Sets would not be collectible, but would be
common as cockroaches, if the supply had not been thinned out. 
Back then, to build an SSB rig out of leftover Command Sets was really something.

Probably it would have been better if a few more, for example, SCR-240's, RAT's,
and BC-721s had been preserved, but with a market system working by the rules
of demand-supply, the process was about as precise as it could get. 

For the "pedestrian mobile" rigs, i'm not convinced ex-mil gear is the way to go, except
as Mike suggests, you want to replicate the original type experience. For just plain 
mobile-pedestrian SSB on the hambands, for about the same money, available ham
radios do a better job, altho you have to rig your own backpack and antenna setup.
-Hue

From kargo_cult at msn.com  Sat Jun 14 04:44:09 2008
From: kargo_cult at msn.com (Hue Miller)
Date: Sat Jun 14 04:46:11 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] SCR-284   MWO ??
References: <c5e.3845ce25.35846506@cs.com>
Message-ID: <BAY125-DAV66A618B56E3891D4F4ADBE4AF0@phx.gbl>

Anyone here know what the MWO listed as to improve the
filament voltage stability in the BC-654, consists of?
Tnx- Hue
From kargo_cult at msn.com  Sat Jun 14 06:02:59 2008
From: kargo_cult at msn.com (Hue Miller)
Date: Sat Jun 14 06:05:01 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Solution to the rarity problem
References: <c5e.3845ce25.35846506@cs.com>
	<BAY125-DAV66A618B56E3891D4F4ADBE4AF0@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <BAY125-DAV1125DF65FD00594B786FBCE4AF0@phx.gbl>

I discovered this "1:1 scale model" offered for auction.
There is a potential savings of several hundreds of dollars.
I am thinking  of contacting the builder and showing him my
SCR-240 manual.

http://cgi.ebay.com/TORN-EB-RADIO-GERMAN_W0QQitemZ200230257053QQihZ010QQcategoryZ36049QQssPageNameZW
DVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

Item number: 200230257053

 -Hue Miller

From Military1944 at aol.com  Sat Jun 14 06:14:07 2008
From: Military1944 at aol.com (Military1944@aol.com)
Date: Sat Jun 14 06:12:41 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] PRC-74 & NVIS
Message-ID: <cd7.32fb5232.3584f3ef@aol.com>

 
In a message dated 14/06/2008 01:05:04 GMT Daylight Time, WA5CAB@cs.com  
writes:

Theses antennas are essentially low-to-the-ground horizontal dipoles that  
exhibit high take-off angles for low-band HF signals.  The high T.O.  angles of 
NVIS antennas permits signals of up about 12 MHz to be returned to  earth 
within 300-500 miles of the transmitter (between ground wave and first  e-layer 
skip range) with very little attenuation.



-----------------------------
 
What happens if you are using a NVIS aerial but the other guy is running a  
long wire, high dipole, vertical etc etc. 
 
Your signal might be going straight up and down hence he gets good copy of  
you but if his signal is low angle your not going to hear him too well. 
 
Don't both ends of the path need to be using NVIS aerials? 
 
Ben G4BXD



   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080614/1b23b0b8/attachment.htm
From hankarn at pacbell.net  Sat Jun 14 07:23:02 2008
From: hankarn at pacbell.net (Dan Arney)
Date: Sat Jun 14 07:23:34 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] RE: Dummy Load
Message-ID: <4853AA16.5050802@pacbell.net>

I managed to drag/wrestle a heavy huge dummy load to the van at HAM-COM 
yesterday it is a DA242A/U S/N A 6 by Electra Impulse. labs  Inc of Red 
Bank NJ. Anyone know what the rating might be? It is 24x 6 1/2 x 10 1/2 
built for a US Navy contract. Any INFO
TIA
Hank
KN6DI
From sdaitch at KUW.IBB.GOV  Sat Jun 14 07:56:24 2008
From: sdaitch at KUW.IBB.GOV (sdaitch@KUW.IBB.GOV)
Date: Sat Jun 14 07:57:15 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] RE: Dummy Load
Message-ID: <17e1917406.1740617e19@KUW.IBB.GOV>

Hank,

assuming those are inch measurements, and 
not feet, and the unit isn't exotically cooled,
I'd make an educated guess it might handle about 
1.5 kW or maybe 2 kW.

A Bird 8860, 1.5 kW is 7.5" x 13" x 19" or
thereabouts, and the 8890-300 series, 2.5 kW,
is 7" x 18" x 24", or so.  

73
Sheldon
WA4MZZ

----- Original Message -----
From: Dan Arney <hankarn@pacbell.net>
Date: Saturday, June 14, 2008 12:23 pm
Subject: [Milsurplus] RE: Dummy Load

> I managed to drag/wrestle a heavy huge dummy load to the van at 
> HAM-COM 
> yesterday it is a DA242A/U S/N A 6 by Electra Impulse. labs  Inc 
> of Red 
> Bank NJ. Anyone know what the rating might be? It is 24x 6 1/2 x 
> 10 1/2 
> built for a US Navy contract. Any INFO
> TIA
> Hank
> KN6DI
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: Milsurplus@mailman.qth.net
> 

From WA5CAB at cs.com  Sat Jun 14 10:22:35 2008
From: WA5CAB at cs.com (WA5CAB@cs.com)
Date: Sat Jun 14 10:23:16 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] SCR-284   MWO ??
Message-ID: <d54.31c8a61c.35852e2b@cs.com>

I'm not certain but the title of MWO-SIG-275-12 mentions PE-104-A and 
Filament Circuit (from a list of MWO's).  The later production PE-104-A's had a shunt 
regulator added across the filament voltage line (selenium of course).

In a message dated 6/14/2008 3:45:58 AM Central Daylight Time, 
kargo_cult@msn.com writes: 
> Anyone here know what the MWO listed as to improve the
> filament voltage stability in the BC-654, consists of?
> 

Robert & Susan Downs - Houston
<http://www.wa5cab.com> (Web Store)
MVPA 9480
<wa5cab@cs.com> (Primary email)
<wa5cab@comcast.net> (Backup email)
   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080614/37a342c6/attachment.htm
From ersmar at verizon.net  Sat Jun 14 10:24:02 2008
From: ersmar at verizon.net (Gene Smar)
Date: Sat Jun 14 10:24:33 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] PRC-74 & NVIS
Message-ID: <388055.2553051213453442637.JavaMail.root@vms227.mailsrvcs.net>

Ben:

     What an NVIS antenna does is put a signal into a zone on the ground that is an annular region extending from about 200-500 miles or so from the transmitter.  That is, it is intended to fill in the <skip zone> that is normally created by using high dipoles, long wires, verticals, etc.  

     Of course, if both sides of the transmission were using NVIS antennas, and they were located from 200 to 500 miles or so away from each other, then both signals would be very loud on receive.  The TO angles of the antennas would be optimized for the distances between the stations.  However, if only one side had the NVIS antenna, then IT'S signals would be louder at the opposite end than would the other station's be at the NVIS end.  

     An NVIS antenna is NOT intended as an all-purpose transmitting wire; it is NOT for low TO angle DX paths.  What it IS intended for is to fill in the skip zone, for frequencies up to about 12 MHz only, that would otherwise exist around a transmitter with a non-NVIS antenna.  

     As an example, last year at the Gilbert, PA MRCA meet, I brought the NVIS crossed-dipole array (two inverted V wires on the same coax) for use during one of our HF field exercises.  We set up in a mountain valley about 20 miles from base camp.  There were at least two 2,000-foot tall ridges between us and the base.  When we called the base camp, we were heard 59+ while we were running 15 W AM from a milrad (not sure of the model.)  We were also heard loud and clear by a station in upstate New York, a distance of a couple hundred miles from our location in the Pocono Mountains of Pennsylvania.  The 80M wires for our NVIS antenna were at the top of my sectionalized poles - 19 feet AGL.  We continued to operate while we lowered the wires to within three feet of the ground.  We were still heard L/C at base camp and our sigs diminished somewhat in New York.  

     BOTTOM LINE:  An NVIS antenna is not a general purpose Ham antenna, but one that is intended to communicate via ionospheric paths on HF up to 12 MHz or thereabouts between points that would otherwise be missed by either ground wave or by first-hop e-layer paths.  


73 de
Gene Smar  AD3F
P.S.  The US Army found in its tests that NVIS signals are hard to DF as they seem, at the DF'ing end, to originate from overhead.


From: Military1944@aol.com
Date: 2008/06/14 Sat AM 06:14:07 EDT
To: milsurplus@mailman.qth.net
Subject: [Milsurplus] PRC-74 & NVIS

In a message dated 14/06/2008 01:05:04 GMT Daylight Time, WA5CAB@cs.com writes:?   Theses antennas are essentially low-to-the-ground horizontal dipoles that   exhibit high take-off angles for low-band HF signals.? The high T.O.   angles of NVIS antennas permits signals of up about 12 MHz to be returned to   earth within 300-500 miles of the transmitter (between ground wave and first   e-layer skip range) with very little attenuation.
-----------------------------?What happens if you are using a NVIS aerial but the other guy is running a long wire, high dipole, vertical etc etc. ?Your signal might be going straight up and down hence he gets good copy of you but if his signal is low angle your not going to hear him too well. ?Don't both ends of the path need to be using NVIS aerials? ?Ben G4BXD   

______________________________________________________________
Milsurplus mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Milsurplus@mailman.qth.net

From jfor at quik.com  Sat Jun 14 13:38:12 2008
From: jfor at quik.com (J Forster)
Date: Sat Jun 14 13:36:04 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] ARB Manual Strangeness
References: <904133.94445.qm@web56807.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <48540204.D337F4AE@quik.com>

Having recently bought an ARB manual to replace the "Preliminary" one I had,  noticed the following:

Prelimnary Instructions,   Contract  NXsa/s-022210,  Contract Date: 15 June 1943

Instructions, Contract NOs-98559, Contract Date 23 February 1942

WHY is a preliminary manual dated AFTER the manual?

Best,
-John


From WA5CAB at cs.com  Sat Jun 14 15:13:04 2008
From: WA5CAB at cs.com (WA5CAB@cs.com)
Date: Sat Jun 14 15:13:42 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] ARB Manual Strangeness
Message-ID: <d60.2e100818.35857240@cs.com>

I noticed the same thing with the GP-7.  There is a complete Instruction Book 
covering GP-6, GP-6A and GP-7 with a contract date of 27 June 1940 revised 20 
April 1942.  There is a complete (meaning it has all the photographs) only on 
GP-7 but with the same date.  And there is an incomplete Preliminary IB on 
the GP-7 only with the same date.  Plus another Preliminary IB dated 11 November 
1942 also missing the photos.

In a message dated 6/14/2008 12:35:54 PM Central Daylight Time, jfor@quik.com 
writes: 
> Having recently bought an ARB manual to replace the "Preliminary" one I 
> had,  noticed the following:
> 
> Prelimnary Instructions,   Contract  NXsa/s-022210,  Contract Date: 15 June 
> 1943
> 
> Instructions, Contract NOs-98559, Contract Date 23 February 1942
> 
> WHY is a preliminary manual dated AFTER the manual?
> 

Robert & Susan Downs - Houston
<http://www.wa5cab.com> (Web Store)
MVPA 9480
<wa5cab@cs.com> (Primary email)
<wa5cab@comcast.net> (Backup email)
   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080614/228e8e21/attachment-0001.htm
From jcoward5452 at aol.com  Sat Jun 14 15:39:49 2008
From: jcoward5452 at aol.com (jcoward5452@aol.com)
Date: Sat Jun 14 15:40:27 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] photo of interest FA
Message-ID: <8CA9C6D8A8CF0C6-126C-3983@webmail-nf11.sim.aol.com>

Not mine,know nothing!Usual place.

350068342818

Jay
From whitaker at pa.net  Sat Jun 14 16:34:08 2008
From: whitaker at pa.net (C Whitaker)
Date: Sat Jun 14 16:35:23 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] PRC-74
In-Reply-To: <c2b.2a0aaf0b.35849463@cs.com>
References: <c2b.2a0aaf0b.35849463@cs.com>
Message-ID: <48542B40.5000008@pa.net>

de WB2CPN
Why use 18?
Because 18 is nicer that 20 mtr.
It's somewhat like 160 mtr when
propagation is not so good.  Also
some good beacons(?)in the 17.5 to
18 MHz broadcast band.
See?
73  Clete in South Central PA USA
P.S. Trivia:  There were NVIS tests
run during the H-Bomb test in the
early 60's.  Question was what did
the blast radiation do to radio waves?
HF Log-Periodic antennas were placed
around the Pacific area.  All had
Tx and Rx capability.  Now get this,
the LP's were made of wire strung up
between two tall poles, and the short
element was on the bottom.  The antenna
was shooting into the ground.  So I guess
the earth was used as a reflector.
I was involved with puting the LP up on
Okinawa.  To add to comments, Army was
experimenting with small horizontal loops
in Nam, I've heard.  73 Agn

From kargo_cult at msn.com  Sat Jun 14 17:48:43 2008
From: kargo_cult at msn.com (Hue Miller)
Date: Sat Jun 14 17:50:49 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] ARB Manual Strangeness
References: <d60.2e100818.35857240@cs.com>
Message-ID: <BAY125-DAV12D95D75D4B221C68D9C0DE4AF0@phx.gbl>

I have noted the same peculiarity with an RBM
manual, and if i recall, another one, maybe RBC.
-Hue
From hankarn at pacbell.net  Sat Jun 14 18:01:21 2008
From: hankarn at pacbell.net (Dan Arney)
Date: Sat Jun 14 18:01:59 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] [Fwd: Re: Dummy Load]
Message-ID: <48543FB1.9040703@pacbell.net>

Thanks Guys,
Arden Allen sent me the data sheet on it attached for FYI.
Thanks es 73

Hank
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded message was scrubbed...
From: "Arden Allen" <gumbear@pacbell.net>
Subject: Re: Dummy Load
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2008 14:35:23 -0700
Size: 3145
Url: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080614/a3d83106/DummyLoad.eml
From smithab11 at comcast.net  Sat Jun 14 18:20:42 2008
From: smithab11 at comcast.net (B. Smith)
Date: Sat Jun 14 18:21:11 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] BC-474 Conversion
Message-ID: <001501c8ce6c$e37a1dc0$7536c847@HAL1000>

Does anyone have any information or reference to a magazine article on 
converting the BC-474 to 40 meters. I have one that is pretty hacked up and 
would like return it to its original configuration. I have looked in the 
usual Surplus Conversion manuals.

73
breck k4che 

From kargo_cult at msn.com  Sat Jun 14 18:54:23 2008
From: kargo_cult at msn.com (Hue Miller)
Date: Sat Jun 14 19:29:17 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] BC-474 Conversion
References: <001501c8ce6c$e37a1dc0$7536c847@HAL1000>
Message-ID: <BAY125-DAV1031A099E7A9C8A5487BBCE4AF0@phx.gbl>

Breck, there's not much conversion that was required for 40m.
I last week found a leaflet from a place in California advertising
BC-474s for $39.95    The page says for 40 just realigning the
receiver to cover 80 and 40 and the transmitter already doubles
to 40. ( I don't think the rec. bandspread would be too wonderful
on 40. )  When i last used one circa 20 years ago, i was concerned
about the plate mA meter bouncing on keying and did something
non-radically-destructive to limit the meter to reading on tune-up
only, but i don't recall now how i solved that.
I was recently thinking about dumping my 3 or so BC-474 but on
a trip north recently i unearthed my cute chocolate-drop of a 474 
that apparently was surplused new or near new and my resolve
totally broke down. Also they only weigh 23 lbs.  ( "Only" ). 
I noticed in the list of MWOs there is no MWO listed for the SCR-288.
It's also interesting that some BC-474 were surplused in such good
condition altho come to think of it, i don't recall seeing any ads for
NIB type surplus ones. 
Who will be the first to jump the Atlantic ( or Pacific, hi ) with a BC-474 ?
Dave, are you listening? ( hi hi )
-Hue 
From kargo_cult at msn.com  Sat Jun 14 19:02:47 2008
From: kargo_cult at msn.com (Hue Miller)
Date: Sat Jun 14 19:32:53 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] RT-67 question
References: <d60.2e100818.35857240@cs.com>
	<BAY125-DAV12D95D75D4B221C68D9C0DE4AF0@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <BAY125-DAV131407AD78D7480C39F657E4AF0@phx.gbl>

Let's say you found a point inside the RT-67 FM radio
where you could pick off AM - like off the cathode of a
limiter tube - 
Then:  is the tuning, i mean not selectivity, but actual
tuning rate, too fast to practically manage AM reception?
I have not looked at one of these sets in MANY many 
years. I cannot remember the tuning system - there is
a Mcs. knob and a 100 kcs knob and then? Somehow
the rest is variable or not? Tnx - Hue. 
From W7QHO at aol.com  Sat Jun 14 20:07:32 2008
From: W7QHO at aol.com (W7QHO@aol.com)
Date: Sat Jun 14 20:08:09 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] RT-67 question
Message-ID: <c99.29984395.3585b744@aol.com>


In a message dated 6/14/08 4:32:31 PM, kargo_cult@msn.com writes:


> there is
> a Mcs. knob and a 100 kcs knob and then? Somehow
> the rest is variable or not? Tnx - Hue.
> 

Used what the Army called "Detent Tuning"   i.e., the knobs clicked into 
position at 1 mHz and 100 kHz positions respectively. The 100 kHz knob could be 
used in either detent or continuous mode tuning.   Rate in the latter mode would 
be VERY quick for tuning in a 6 kHz AM channel but possible I would guess.

Dennis D. W7QHO
Glendale, CA



**************
Vote for your city's best dining and nightlife. City's Best 
2008.
      (http://citysbest.aol.com?ncid=aolacg00050000000102)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080614/68e03254/attachment.htm
From kk5f at earthlink.net  Sun Jun 15 08:38:26 2008
From: kk5f at earthlink.net (Mike Morrow)
Date: Sun Jun 15 08:39:03 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] PRC-74 (now Type K)
Message-ID: <1885381.1213533506830.JavaMail.root@elwamui-huard.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

I wrote, :

>Hey, wouldn't it be wonderful if some ham found an A.R.C. Type K transmitter
>and "cleverly" converted it to 20 meter SSB? 

Michael wrote:

>Dude, it's a Type K receiver ...

Well, hams did convert command set receivers to receiver/transmitter combos.  I did it myself in the mid-1960s by adding a small crystal-controlled transmitter with a 5763 PA tbe (my favorite) in the dynamotor well, but only using an incomplete and real junker R-26/ARC-5.  Even back then I thought that this stuff deserved preservation.

Now about that Type K.  That was a complete radio set, including transmitters, a modulator, and a large control box for four receivers and two transmitters.  Mike Hanz has an A.R.C. diagram of the system, dated December 1938, at:

http://aafradio.org/NASM/Hmmmm.html

No one knows of any surviving transmitters, which is why I chose it as an extreme example for my rant.  Apologies!

>... and when did you peek at my workbench?

Hey, I truely wish there were some under your bench.  Then I'd know that they'd get proper care and preservation.

Mike / KK5F
From arc5 at ix.netcom.com  Sun Jun 15 09:53:20 2008
From: arc5 at ix.netcom.com (David Stinson)
Date: Sun Jun 15 09:53:22 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] History of Ham Mods: Opinions?
Message-ID: <552E4E6FAA8D4A2CA804D11A8297038B@boudreaux>

Should a collector's guide to WWII radios, 
which emphasizes the history of the equipment,
include a section citing examples of exceptional 
ham radio mods?  On one hand- it is a part of the history 
of these sets.  On the other; such a citation might encourage
further destruction of what are now historic pieces.
Your Opinion?



From holden7471 at msn.com  Sun Jun 15 10:29:34 2008
From: holden7471 at msn.com (howard holden)
Date: Sun Jun 15 10:30:39 2008
Subject: [milsurplus] History of ham mods; opinioons?
Message-ID: <BLU125-DAV9165868E152BEA097FA27C4AE0@phx.gbl>

Dave et al,

Interesting thought. I have always felt the surplus angle was instrumental in getting many a ham on the air, myself included. Specifically, my dad bought a BC-348Q, probably in the late 40s or early 50s. My first memories of it are from about 1952 or so. He added an AC supply, made the requisite audio stage modification, and added an octal socket PTO on the front panel. While that did disfigure the radio some , going that route was the only way he, at the time a young man with a growing family, could afford to get into the hobby without having great building skills. His mods were pretty crude, a little dangerous even given his skills at the time, but effective, and that BC-348Q got him, myself, and my older brother started in the hobby. Copying W1AW code practice, and making my first Novice QSO are memories that are as fresh today as when they  happened. Dad has been gone about 5 years now, but about 7 years ago I restored that radio, keeping Dad's mods intact, as that radio with those mods are an integral part of MY radio history. The radio lives on today, proudly doing yeoman duty on 75/80 and 40 meters. I get a lump in my throat whenever I use it.

So YES, the ham mods are a part of the surplus story, IMHO.

Howie WB2AWQ
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080615/1e3c1998/attachment.htm
From kk5f at earthlink.net  Sun Jun 15 11:50:40 2008
From: kk5f at earthlink.net (Mike Morrow)
Date: Sun Jun 15 11:51:19 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Re: [ARC5] History of Ham Mods: Opinions?
Message-ID: <20013243.1213545040722.JavaMail.root@elwamui-milano.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

>Should a collector's guide to WWII radios, which emphasizes the history of
>the equipment, include a section citing examples of exceptional ham radio mods?

No.  AFAIK, there has never been a ham modification of such equipment that should
be of any interest to a collector or military historian, unless details of the
modification was to aid restoration of a violated piece of equipment.  But
restoration techniques should not be part of a written history of the sets.

>On one hand- it is a part of the history of these sets.

The notable history of these sets ended when they were removed from military service.  

Ham use of modified sets is essentially one in which the original set is viewed as
a cheap source of parts for a ham rig.  There was never any interest in the
function or history behind the original.  Look at all the horribly disfiguring
conversions (ARB, RT-91/ARC-2, R-105/ARR-15, etc.) that appeared in CQ and 73 magazines.
Gordon White's articles in CQ were a refreshing and very positive contrast, and the
ONLY reason for buying CQ 40 years ago.  Many (but unfortunately not all) surplus 
articles in Electric Radio continue Gordon's pioneering approach of discussing the
original history and use of the subject equipment.

I've been a ham for more than 40 years.  I understand why, 40 to 60 years ago, hams
would modify such gear for parts or actual use.  I don't understand why anyone would be
doing such things today, even when it's done to gear of much more recent vintage.  None
of the recent gear will ever be made and released in the quantity that the WWII gear was.

Mike / KK5F
From jfor at quik.com  Sun Jun 15 11:57:13 2008
From: jfor at quik.com (J Forster)
Date: Sun Jun 15 11:55:13 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] History of Ham Mods: Opinions?
References: <552E4E6FAA8D4A2CA804D11A8297038B@boudreaux>
Message-ID: <48553BD9.6C2C8F2C@quik.com>

Destruction (modification) of pristine sets is to be very strongly
discouraged, IMO. OTOH, there are plenty of ham hacked sets around and I
see no real problem in using those as examples of what was done, or even
cleaning up the mods that were poorly done.

FWIW,
-John

===============

David Stinson wrote:

> Should a collector's guide to WWII radios,
> which emphasizes the history of the equipment,
> include a section citing examples of exceptional
> ham radio mods?  On one hand- it is a part of the history
> of these sets.  On the other; such a citation might encourage
> further destruction of what are now historic pieces.
> Your Opinion?

From quixote2 at ix.netcom.com  Sun Jun 15 12:01:34 2008
From: quixote2 at ix.netcom.com (Thomas Adams)
Date: Sun Jun 15 12:02:49 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] History of Ham Mods: Opinions?
In-Reply-To: <552E4E6FAA8D4A2CA804D11A8297038B@boudreaux>
References: <552E4E6FAA8D4A2CA804D11A8297038B@boudreaux>
Message-ID: <E1K7ugF-0005Aq-EH@elasmtp-spurfowl.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

At 08:52 AM 6/15/2009, David Stinson wrote:
>Should a collector's guide to WWII radios, which emphasizes the 
>history of the equipment,
>include a section citing examples of exceptional ham radio mods?  On 
>one hand- it is a part of the history of these sets.  On the other; 
>such a citation might encourage
>further destruction of what are now historic pieces.
>Your Opinion?
>
>


First off...  I start to get uneasy whenever somebody starts talking 
about "Collector's Guides" for ANYTHING.

It tells me that the item in question is no longer appreciated for 
it's intrinsic value. A "Collector's Guide" is Step One in converting 
it into a commodity, traded in solely for an artificial, monetary value.

"Historic Pieces" is another warning flag that pops up, mainly used 
to justify and prop up the "necessity" of the Collector's Guide.

A BC-348 was intended to be used as the main long range liaison 
receiver aboard US multiengine aircraft; it's most famous for being 
used aboard the 8th and 15th Air Force's B-17s that pounded the Third 
Reich to rubble.

Now, 70 years later, some yahoo says that a pretty BC-348 that 
probably sat on some workbench at Fort Monmouth all through WW2 is a 
Holy Relic, and a piece with "historic significance"...  and 
therefore commands a selling price that is several times it's 
original government acquisition cost.

And that's where it's at, really...  nowadays, the biggest question 
is HOW MUCH CAN I GET FOR IT?

It has NOTHING to do with history or the significance of the role a 
particular item played in events.

These phony "historic value" fairy tales are EASY to start, in order 
to increase selling price. In fact, using this very internet posting 
I'M going to start one, RIGHT HERE AND NOW.


There's a thread going on right now about the BC-1031 panoramic 
adaptor. Did you know that there was a BC-1031 aboard the ENOLA GAY 
when she left Tinian, bound for Hiroshima?

It was there because it was necessary to know prior to the drop if 
Japanese radio or RADAR operations could interfere with the RADAR 
altitude trigger aboard "Little Boy"...   which was, believe it or 
not, a modified APS-13 "Tail End Charlie"  RADAR set, used in the 
P-51 Mustang to cover it's ass in the event that a 
Messerschmidt  slipped in behind without the pilot noticing.

Now that we know these facts about the BC-1031 and the APS-13, what's 
the effect? Does this bit of information make ALL BC-1031s and 
APS-13s MORE VALUABLE on the so-called "collector's market"...  just 
because a few similar sets played a significant role in the climactic 
mission of the Pacific war?

WHERE DID WE GET THIS IDEA THAT WE'RE MUSEUM CURATORS???


OK...   Off of my soap box.


As far as the eternal question of "Modify It" or "Run It Stock" is concerned...

I try to run WW2 surplus gear as Uncle Sam originally intended 
whenever possible, but when it's not economically reasonable, or when 
I can see improvements in performance as a possibility, there's 
nothing sacred about ANY chun of WW2 refuse...  it's getting modified.

If possible, I'll make the mods in a way that allows return to the 
original state...  but if I can't, then Tough Noogies.

If I owned the Mona Lisa and I thought she'd look better with a 
mustache,  then she'd get one!


Mr. T., W9LBB

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080615/5407cfb0/attachment.htm
From kk5f at earthlink.net  Sun Jun 15 12:08:07 2008
From: kk5f at earthlink.net (Mike Morrow)
Date: Sun Jun 15 12:08:46 2008
Subject: [ARC5] Re: [milsurplus] History of ham mods; opinions?
Message-ID: <7250824.1213546087976.JavaMail.root@elwamui-milano.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

Howie wrote:

>So YES, the ham mods are a part of the surplus story, IMHO.

So is the story of these radios buried in landfills and melting
in scrap metal salvage operations.

I don't want to read of either story in a collector's guide.

Mike / KK5F


From argus210 at yahoo.com  Sun Jun 15 13:04:49 2008
From: argus210 at yahoo.com (Marek Argus)
Date: Sun Jun 15 13:05:49 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] PRC-80S / RT-3088
Message-ID: <532026.64597.qm@web59511.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>

Greetings all,
I'm seeking any informations, manuals and service
manuals for VHF tactical radio PRC-80 S (RT-3088 main
unit and VAU-6088 aux. unit, made in Belgium under
Tadiran licence). I bought this equipment in surplus
without cables (only with handset), then I must make
self all external connections. Without manuals it
seems be hard. Most important for me are infos about
pinout of  supply connector on rear side of VAU-6088
unit. I will be thankful for any assistance.
Best regards
Marek SP2BOK



      __________________________________________________________
Sent from Yahoo! Mail.
A Smarter Email http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html

From scr287 at sbcglobal.net  Sun Jun 15 13:13:12 2008
From: scr287 at sbcglobal.net (Jack Antonio)
Date: Sun Jun 15 13:10:08 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Re: [ARC5] History of Ham Mods: Opinions?
In-Reply-To: <552E4E6FAA8D4A2CA804D11A8297038B@boudreaux>
References: <552E4E6FAA8D4A2CA804D11A8297038B@boudreaux>
Message-ID: <48554DA8.3030906@sbcglobal.net>

My thought is, only to the extent of describing typical
modifications made to the gear, so that a prospective
buyer of a piece of equipment would have an idea of what
is stock, and what is not.

Although most of the modifications to the gear were obvious,
some were well done, and could look "official". An example is
the placing of an S-meter on a panel of a BC-348. Properly done,
with an appropriate (not Lafayette or Calectro) meter, it could look
like it was supposed to be there. A novice radio collector might
think they were receiving a pristine set, when in fact such was
not the case.

In the 15 years that I've been collecting WWII radios, I've mainly
concentrated on aircraft gear, and after that time, I can pretty
much tell by intuition what is right or wrong on a given aircraft
set. BUT, if I decided to start concentrating on ground gear, a
guide to typical modifications would probably be very helpful.

My 2 cents worth.

Jack Antonio WA7DIA
scr287@sbcglobal.net


David Stinson wrote:
> Should a collector's guide to WWII radios, which emphasizes the history 
> of the equipment,
> include a section citing examples of exceptional ham radio mods?  On one 
> hand- it is a part of the history of these sets.  On the other; such a 
> citation might encourage
> further destruction of what are now historic pieces.
> Your Opinion?
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> ARC5 mailing list
> ARC5@mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/arc5
> 
From kk5f at earthlink.net  Sun Jun 15 13:26:31 2008
From: kk5f at earthlink.net (Mike Morrow)
Date: Sun Jun 15 13:27:11 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] History of Ham Mods: Opinions?
Message-ID: <15069221.1213550791865.JavaMail.root@elwamui-milano.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

>First off...  I start to get uneasy whenever somebody starts talking 
>about "Collector's Guides" for ANYTHING.
>
>It tells me that the item in question is no longer appreciated for 
>it's intrinsic value. 

You are really living in a dream world at all odds with reality.

Did you ever hear about stamp, coin, and currency collecting?  How about
firearms collecting?  I'm citing two common areas out of many thousands?

Just what is the "intrinsic" value of, say, a Confederate T-35 "Indian Princess"
$5 note?  One with your outlook would say "zero."  A collector would likely say
$40,000 to $60,000, if one was on market for sale.

Just what is the "intrinsic" value of, say, a Model 1860 Spencer Carbine in
excellent condition?  One with your outlook would say "zero" especially since
ammo isn't available for it in any quantity.  A collector would likely say 
$2,000 to $3,000.

>... some yahoo says that a pretty BC-348 that probably sat on
>some workbench at Fort Monmouth all through WW2 is a 
>Holy Relic, and a piece with "historic significance" ...

This is analogous to someone claiming that a Sharps Rifle was
General Grant's personal firearm.  A collector knows the worth of
such claims...a fool does not.  Yet that Sharps rifle still has
historic value regardless of knowledge of who actually used it where.

>... therefore commands a selling price that is several times it's 
>original government acquisition cost.

Never happened, AFAIK.  I've seen figures somewhere that a BC-348
typically cost the US government in WWII about $400.  That is
equivalent to about $5,000 in 2008 dollars.  No one has ever seen
a BC-348 go for even a significant fraction of that, even on ebay.
Most don't even go for $400 in 2008!  

Was a BC-348 worth $70 in 1968?  Was a T-22/ARC-5 worth $15 in 1968?
Most BC-348s and T-22s on ebay sell for less than that, corrected to
2008 dollars. 

But this side discussion hasn't much to do with the main principle
of collectibility. 

>...nowadays, the biggest question is HOW MUCH CAN I GET FOR IT?

I guess I must have missed those days when folks offered their
possessions for sale based on how *little* they could get for them.

>It has NOTHING to do with history or the significance of the role a 
>particular item played in events.

With the equipment that I, and many others on this list, claim proudly
to COLLECT, it is immaterial if my BC-453 flew with Doolittle over
Tokyo.  It represents the history of engineering and manufacturing
of a vital piece of gear in support of US military requirements in
time of nation emergency.  That limited history may be of no value
to you above the value of some old beacon band radio, but by God it
has value to me.

>These phony "historic value" fairy tales are EASY to start, in order 
>to increase selling price.

Having monitored ebay claims for vintage radio gear for more than a
decade (as a buyer...I trade but never sell), I have seen no examples
of the excess that one would conclude from your epistle are frequent.
Certainly you grossly mis-characterize *at least* 99.99 percent of
the claims.   Most claim overstatements are of the "this T-18/ARC-5
was used on a B-17" variety.

>It was there because it was necessary to know prior to the drop if 
>Japanese radio or RADAR operations could interfere with the RADAR 
>altitude trigger aboard "Little Boy"...   which was, believe it or 
>not, a modified APS-13 "Tail End Charlie"  RADAR set

The WWII bombs each used four AN/APS-13 sets, modified in frequency of
operation in order to not mutually interfere.

>...used in the P-51 Mustang to cover it's ass in the event that a 
>Messerschmidt slipped in behind without the pilot noticing.

Used also on night fighters like the P-61, but not for long.  Someone
figured out that German aircraft could home in on the signal.

>Now that we know these facts about the BC-1031 and the APS-13, what's 
>the effect? Does this bit of information make ALL BC-1031s and 
>APS-13s MORE VALUABLE on the so-called "collector's market"

It adds interesting information.  What's your point?  That the value of
an AN/APS-13 should only be based on its "intrinsic" value for use today
as a "proximity warning" radar (Zero!)?  Not many of those RT-34/APS-13
sets used on the bombs ever reached the surplus market! :-)

>WHERE DID WE GET THIS IDEA THAT WE'RE MUSEUM CURATORS???

Why do you find that an offensive concept?  In limited-interest areas such
as WWII electronics, it is very very very fortunate that some individuals
undertake to preserve this material, since precious few real museums ever
will.  I thank God there are people who see value to, say, an AN/ART-13
beyond its use as a ham rig on 3885 kHz.

Almost NOTHING that has any collectible value has much of what you term
"intrinsic" value.  Defining the value of a surplus radio by "intrinsic"
value is applying a constraint that ABSOLUTELY NO other collector's 
interest area has EVER practised.

Mike / KK5F
From jcoward5452 at aol.com  Sun Jun 15 14:19:21 2008
From: jcoward5452 at aol.com (jcoward5452@aol.com)
Date: Sun Jun 15 14:20:07 2008
Subject: [ARC5] Re: [Milsurplus] History of Ham Mods: Opinions?
In-Reply-To: <15069221.1213550791865.JavaMail.root@elwamui-milano.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
References: <15069221.1213550791865.JavaMail.root@elwamui-milano.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <8CA9D2B7762E926-151C-3E67@webmail-nb17.sysops.aol.com>

One might include Mods in an appendix with references to the conversion 
manuals and conversion articles.And maybe helpful hints on undoing mods 
and retoration tips.

As for collecting, I am still seeking an unmodified AN/ARC-5 T-15.....

Jay KE6PPF


From sestokes at sonic.net  Sun Jun 15 15:19:46 2008
From: sestokes at sonic.net (Hole In The Head Press)
Date: Sun Jun 15 15:20:24 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Head and Chest Set HS-17
Message-ID: <48556B52.6080001@sonic.net>

Hello everybody... Looking for a complete Head and Chest Set HS-17 to 
plug into an EE-91 telephone
for display in Battery Townsley at Fort Cronkhite in the Golden Gate 
National Recreation Area.

Any ideas welcome.

Thanks
From wh7hg.hi at gmail.com  Sun Jun 15 16:08:21 2008
From: wh7hg.hi at gmail.com (Michael Tauson)
Date: Sun Jun 15 16:09:00 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] PRC-74 (now Type K)
In-Reply-To: <1885381.1213533506830.JavaMail.root@elwamui-huard.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
References: <1885381.1213533506830.JavaMail.root@elwamui-huard.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <c34299fb0806151308r786b68c3sf11306e0db0cbc@mail.gmail.com>

> Well, hams did convert command set receivers to receiver/transmitter combos.

Yep, we did.  And I further must admit to having modified original
equipment for which I'm doing much penitence today, although I
preferred unwhole and unhealthy equipment as starting points.  (The
NIB and NOS equipment got sold to raise funds for my own conversions &
homebrew projects.)  More on this in the related thread.

> Now about that Type K.  That was a complete radio set, including transmitters, a
> modulator, and a large control box for four receivers and two transmitters.

Yep.  The design actually came into being following the Airmail
Disaster of 1934 which saw the immediate upgrade of the SCR-A*-183 and
later -283 (plus the GF/RU) from being based on the Model B to the
Model D.  The idea was a radical approach of having individual
transmitters & receivers for each band rather than using plug in
coils, using superhetereodyne receivers and having the transmitter
modulator & power supply as a separate unit.  I'll have to check on
this but I think Dr. Drake handled the receiver design while Dr.
Farnham was brought in (from GR?) to design the transmitters.  This
was in 1935 with the initial Type K-derived offerings to the services
a few years later.

While the Army was the principle service interested, the Navy was the
first to purchase any, starting with the RAT receivers.  The RAT
receivers differed from the original Type K physically (front panel
changes) and in frequency coverage but retained the same basic
planform that continued after WW II with the Type 12 and Type 15
receivers.

The Navy had a lot more money than the Army due, in large part, to
Teddy Roosevelt's emphasis on the Navy.  This became "business as
usual" for budgetary purposes until FDR ordered up a 50,000 plane air
force by 1940 which made some budgetary adjustments in Congress which,
in turn, gave the USAAC some room to buy what they needed.  In a fit
of absolute desperation (interservice rivalry being what it was - and
is), the Army wound up ordering the SCR-274-N which was nothing more
than elements of the ARA/ATA system with different tags.

> No one knows of any surviving transmitters, which is why I chose it as an extreme example
> for my rant.  Apologies!

No worries.  My answer was lighthearted since I know you know my love
for ... well, about everything A.R.C.-ish.

> Hey, I truely wish there were some under your bench.  Then I'd know that they'd get proper
> care and preservation.

Or would be sent somewhere I know they'd be safe.  I can think of
several museums and collectors who would qualify as such.

Best regards,

Michael, WH7HG
From wh7hg.hi at gmail.com  Sun Jun 15 16:15:36 2008
From: wh7hg.hi at gmail.com (Michael Tauson)
Date: Sun Jun 15 16:16:16 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Solution to the rarity problem
In-Reply-To: <BAY125-DAV1125DF65FD00594B786FBCE4AF0@phx.gbl>
References: <c5e.3845ce25.35846506@cs.com>
	<BAY125-DAV66A618B56E3891D4F4ADBE4AF0@phx.gbl>
	<BAY125-DAV1125DF65FD00594B786FBCE4AF0@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <c34299fb0806151315v12427627o789320cfbbe5c9c1@mail.gmail.com>

On Sat, Jun 14, 2008 at 12:02 AM, Hue Miller <kargo_cult@msn.com> wrote:

> I discovered this "1:1 scale model" offered for auction.

*chuckling* ... and I thought my idea of making a 1:4 model of the
TBM's radio deck and operator's position (and a few others, if need
be) was unique.  This is even better!

Best regards,

Michael, WH7HG
From wh7hg.hi at gmail.com  Sun Jun 15 16:39:56 2008
From: wh7hg.hi at gmail.com (Michael Tauson)
Date: Sun Jun 15 16:40:42 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] PRC-74 & NVIS
In-Reply-To: <388055.2553051213453442637.JavaMail.root@vms227.mailsrvcs.net>
References: <388055.2553051213453442637.JavaMail.root@vms227.mailsrvcs.net>
Message-ID: <c34299fb0806151339r7330de26na63ef57326123f57@mail.gmail.com>

On Sat, Jun 14, 2008 at 4:24 AM, Gene Smar <ersmar@verizon.net> wrote:

>     What an NVIS antenna does is put a signal into a zone on the ground that is an annular
> region extending from about 200-500 miles or so from the transmitter.

This is why it's used in Hawaii for HF EARC nets.  Well, that and
geography.  From the Big Island to Kauai is around 250 miles with Oahu
(major population center) closer to the Kauai end.  Being volcanic in
origin, there's a lot of vertical with the old cones and, in the case
of the Big Island, not so old cones getting in the way.  It doesn't
take a whole lot of power but it does require that the atmosphere be
cooperative which, at the moment, isn't happening as much as would be
nice.

One other note is that soil quality also affects transmission.  Oahu
has poor soil (electrically) so reflector wires have to be laid under
the antenna elements to make them work properly.

Okay, that was more than anyone asked about.

Best regards,

Micahel, WH7HG
From kargo_cult at msn.com  Sun Jun 15 17:11:55 2008
From: kargo_cult at msn.com (Hue Miller)
Date: Sun Jun 15 17:14:10 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] History of Ham Mods: Opinions?
References: <552E4E6FAA8D4A2CA804D11A8297038B@boudreaux>
Message-ID: <BAY125-DAV57E17E5B38BD6604FB3E9E4AE0@phx.gbl>

I think it's kinda too late now for a "Collector's Guide" or
a large picture book something along the lines  of "Wireless
for the Warrior".  We are almost in the post-book era.

Unfortunately, there's not really a good website i've seen
that compiles photos of this equipment. The photos i have
seen online are more often than not,  crappy.  I don't mean
just poor resolution, but also too small, and poor presentation. 
-Hue
From kargo_cult at msn.com  Sun Jun 15 17:39:30 2008
From: kargo_cult at msn.com (Hue Miller)
Date: Sun Jun 15 17:41:45 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Solution to the rarity problem
References: <c5e.3845ce25.35846506@cs.com><BAY125-DAV66A618B56E3891D4F4ADBE4AF0@phx.gbl><BAY125-DAV1125DF65FD00594B786FBCE4AF0@phx.gbl>
	<c34299fb0806151315v12427627o789320cfbbe5c9c1@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BAY125-DAV11E75F94231CBEA70042C7E4AE0@phx.gbl>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Michael Tauson" <wh7hg.hi@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] Solution to the rarity problem


> On Sat, Jun 14, 2008 at 12:02 AM, Hue Miller <kargo_cult@msn.com> wrote:
> 
> > I discovered this "1:1 scale model" offered for auction.
> 
> *chuckling* ... and I thought my idea of making a 1:4 model of the
> TBM's radio deck and operator's position (and a few others, if need
> be) was unique.  This is even better!
 
> Michael, WH7HG

The 1:1 scale model of Torn E.b. receiver would go well with your 1:1 scale
polystyrene scratch-built armored car. 

It has occurred to me several times over the years that maybe i should convert
to collecting "military radio miniatures".  With the new model kits available of  military
field radio operator sets, the field is expanding. The oldest are lead toy soldiers with
somewhat fanciful radio sets, these dating ( i think ) back to the 1930s. With this 
collectible, my whole collection would fit in one cardboard bushel box, making it easy
for the next move.
However, the tactile feature would be missing. I knew if i bought that polystyrene 
Torn E.b., the toggle switches would be painted on the front panel, not 3-dimensional.
Also the connector shell has no pins in it. Hard to connect to. I would be as disappointed
as when at young age i ordered from a comic book advertisement, "100 Toy Soldiers
Bombers Ships Packed in Army Foot Locker" for $1.98.  The "foot locker" was about
as big as a cube of butter. -Hue
From wh7hg.hi at gmail.com  Sun Jun 15 18:15:13 2008
From: wh7hg.hi at gmail.com (Michael Tauson)
Date: Sun Jun 15 18:15:53 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Solution to the rarity problem
In-Reply-To: <BAY125-DAV11E75F94231CBEA70042C7E4AE0@phx.gbl>
References: <c5e.3845ce25.35846506@cs.com>
	<BAY125-DAV66A618B56E3891D4F4ADBE4AF0@phx.gbl>
	<BAY125-DAV1125DF65FD00594B786FBCE4AF0@phx.gbl>
	<c34299fb0806151315v12427627o789320cfbbe5c9c1@mail.gmail.com>
	<BAY125-DAV11E75F94231CBEA70042C7E4AE0@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <c34299fb0806151515o206ecd6fv9bba50f3a6f24df6@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Jun 15, 2008 at 11:39 AM, Hue Miller <kargo_cult@msn.com> wrote:

> The 1:1 scale model of Torn E.b. receiver would go well with your 1:1 scale
> polystyrene scratch-built armored car.

It broke so I'm making a poured resin one instead with real rubber tires.  :-)

> It has occurred to me several times over the years that maybe i should convert
> to collecting "military radio miniatures".

I know that the connectors don't have pins and there are a lot of
other problems involved with scale models.  That's a good part of why
there won't be any such model made.  I would love to find an airframe
(or portion thereof) to build up an accurate display but 1.) airframes
in my price range tend to be in short supply, and 2.) where would I
put it?  The 1:4 scale model idea grew out of the ensuing frustration.

Oh, well.  Flames anyone?

BEst regards,

Michael, WH7HG
From dsmaples at comcast.net  Sun Jun 15 20:15:57 2008
From: dsmaples at comcast.net (Dave Maples)
Date: Sun Jun 15 20:08:22 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Receiver to use with Hammarlund HC-10 SSB converter
Message-ID: <AHECKNPGGIGGPEFIAONFGEDNEPAA.dsmaples@comcast.net>

All: I reconditioned a Hammarlund HC-10 SSB converter a few months ago, and
I'm interested in suggestions on what kind of general coverage receiver I
might marry it with.  I'm thinking I want something that's stable with a
reasonably high IF (higher than 455 kHz to provide good image rejection).
Not having a 455 kHz IF means I'd have to build a converter for it, but that
shouldn't be that bad.

My first thought was a BC-348 (915 kHz IF).  Another possibility is an
NC-183D, but that's kinda pricey.

Thoughts?  All opinions welcome!

Dave WB4FUR


From AAF-Radio-1 at aafradio.org  Sun Jun 15 20:22:22 2008
From: AAF-Radio-1 at aafradio.org (Mike Hanz)
Date: Sun Jun 15 20:23:36 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] History of Ham Mods: Opinions?
In-Reply-To: <E1K7ugF-0005Aq-EH@elasmtp-spurfowl.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
References: <552E4E6FAA8D4A2CA804D11A8297038B@boudreaux>
	<E1K7ugF-0005Aq-EH@elasmtp-spurfowl.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <4855B23E.9020601@aafradio.org>

Thomas Adams wrote:

> At 08:52 AM 6/15/2009, David Stinson wrote:
>
>> Should a collector's guide to WWII radios, which emphasizes the 
>> history of the equipment,
>> include a section citing examples of exceptional ham radio mods?  On 
>> one hand- it is a part of the history of these sets.  On the other; 
>> such a citation might encourage
>> further destruction of what are now historic pieces.
>> Your Opinion?
>
> */First off...  I start to get uneasy whenever somebody starts talking 
> about "Collector's Guides" for ANYTHING.
> /*


While I'm sympathetic to your unease, as far as I'm concerned it really 
depends greatly on the definition and purpose of the guide.  I've never 
been much on what a person decides to name something, as long as the 
product is useful for me.  For example, Michael Tauson's wonderful 
little booklet "A Users Guide to Aircraft Radio Corporation Receivers" 
has been an active reference for me for years, and one could easily 
ascribe a "Collector's Guide" definition to it.

> */There's a thread going on right now about the BC-1031 panoramic 
> adaptor. /*


Could you share the group that is discussing it?  I might have one or 
two inputs....heh.

> */Did you know that there was a BC-1031 aboard the ENOLA GAY when she 
> left Tinian, bound for Hiroshima?
> /*


No, I didn't know that, Tom.   :-D   It surprises me just slightly, 
since I have spent many hours getting the equipment list correct for all 
the countermeasures equipment I donated and actually installed in the 
Enola Gay.  The BC-1031 (and BC-1032) were used in USAAC/USAAF aircraft 
for a very limited time - primarily in the desperate year of 1942 after 
the war started - entirely because they were the only Signal Corps 
panadapters available that could do the job at the time.  See 
http://aafradio.org/flightdeck/early.htm for a more elaborate 
explanation.  They were impossibly heavy, the physical envelope didn't 
conform to the ATC aircraft rack standard, and required two separate 
units to interface the two Hallicrafters sets that were the lower 
frequency mainstays for the early countermeasures tasks.  Early in 1942 
it became apparent that military grade aircraft countermeasures gear was 
going to be essential, and a number of programs were started to 
design/adapt equipment for this role.  The vastly superior AN/APA-10 was 
the initial panadapter product of this effort, covering three different 
IF frequencies by a simple switch setting (though to be truthful the 
30MHz IF had to be manually swept.)  That allowed it to serve an 
AN/ARR-5 (repackaged Hallicrafters S-27/S-36), AN/ARR-7 (repackaged 
Hallicrafters SX-28, with -A improvements), and APR-1/4 series of 
surveillance receivers.  If you want a solid, documented list of what 
was on the Enola Gay on 6 August 1945, see 
http://aafradio.org/NASM/Flight_report_Aug-6-1945.jpg - the RCM (Radio 
Counter-Measures) equipment is listed in a separate line.

> */It was there because it was necessary to know prior to the drop if 
> Japanese radio or RADAR operations could interfere with the RADAR 
> altitude trigger aboard "Little Boy"...   which was, believe it or 
> not, a modified APS-13 "Tail End Charlie"  RADAR set, used in the P-51 
> Mustang to cover it's ass in the event that a Messerschmidt  slipped 
> in behind without the pilot noticing.
> /*


To elaborate, there were four of the APS-13s in each weapon, in both 
Little Boy and Fat Man - all having a different set of frequencies to 
avoid interference.. There was an averaging system to account for spin 
of the bomb casing in flight. The weaponeer could have switch selected 
an alternate set of frequencies if Jacob Beser (the RCM officer) had 
identified potential interference.

> */WHERE DID WE GET THIS IDEA THAT WE'RE MUSEUM CURATORS???
> /*


Don't know that we did...everyone has a different view of things, and I 
never try to ascribe my personal motivations/values to anyone 
else...they're mine alone.  Have a cool 807 and relax...nothing in this 
hobby is worth getting all hot and bothered about.

73,

Mike de KC4TOS


From kulow at epix.net  Sun Jun 15 20:59:14 2008
From: kulow at epix.net (Bob Kulow)
Date: Sun Jun 15 20:59:57 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Receiver to use with Hammarlund HC-10 SSB converter
In-Reply-To: <AHECKNPGGIGGPEFIAONFGEDNEPAA.dsmaples@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <005601c8cf4c$3223a4c0$06fea8c0@DeepThought2>

I've used mine with an R-392.  Works very well.

73
Bob WA2UEH


From kim.herron at sbcglobal.net  Sun Jun 15 21:48:01 2008
From: kim.herron at sbcglobal.net (kim.herron@sbcglobal.net)
Date: Sun Jun 15 21:48:42 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Receiver to use with Hammarlund HC-10 SSB converter
References: <AHECKNPGGIGGPEFIAONFGEDNEPAA.dsmaples@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <00f001c8cf53$037fc700$34cdeb4c@HPa550y>

Hi Dave,

    Just so you (and everyone else that's not familiar) know, you don't 
need to build a converter for that box to put it on a different IF 
frequency.  If you have the manual, it tells you how to tune it to a 
different IF freq and if memory serves, it will tune up to about 3300 
kHz.  If memory services, you can run it down in frequency as well. 
That's a rather hard to find and very useful little box.  Don't let it 
get away if you like older sets that can't detect SSB.  It's very 
versatile.
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Dave Maples" <dsmaples@comcast.net>
To: "Milsurplus" <milsurplus@mailman.qth.net>; "Glowbugs" 
<glowbugs@piobaire.mines.uidaho.edu>
Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2008 8:15 PM
Subject: [Milsurplus] Receiver to use with Hammarlund HC-10 SSB 
converter


> All: I reconditioned a Hammarlund HC-10 SSB converter a few months 
> ago, and
> I'm interested in suggestions on what kind of general coverage 
> receiver I
> might marry it with.  I'm thinking I want something that's stable with 
> a
> reasonably high IF (higher than 455 kHz to provide good image 
> rejection).
> Not having a 455 kHz IF means I'd have to build a converter for it, 
> but that
> shouldn't be that bad.
>
> My first thought was a BC-348 (915 kHz IF).  Another possibility is an
> NC-183D, but that's kinda pricey.
>
> Thoughts?  All opinions welcome!
>
> Dave WB4FUR
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus@mailman.qth.net 

From prc74b at fuse.net  Sun Jun 15 21:36:19 2008
From: prc74b at fuse.net (Joe Munson)
Date: Sun Jun 15 21:49:46 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] History of Ham Mods
Message-ID: <001401c8cf51$60d7dfc0$6900a8c0@munsonswl0e4df>

Group,  

It should include Ham Modifications.  Many times at hamfest, sitting under a
table I have found a butchered ARC 5 Transmitter, or other piece equipment,
and bought the same for a few bucks usually 5 bucks or under.  Upon getting
it on the bench, many times found a mod right out of CQ, QST, or one of the
surplus conversion manuals.   One recent addition was a ARC 5 conversion to
40 meter sideband.   It works fine business.   Newer hams who would come
across this may not have this old conversion information available.  This
old converted equipment is still fun to get back on the air and put to use.
For this reason, it should be available to the milsurplus collector.
Pristine unmodified equipment is not easy to find.   Some times with the
modifications documented, it can be reversed.

Joe Munson
WA4VAG
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080615/d26df9c0/attachment.htm
From Radioman390 at cs.com  Sun Jun 15 21:53:07 2008
From: Radioman390 at cs.com (Radioman390@cs.com)
Date: Sun Jun 15 21:53:58 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Receiver to use with Hammarlund HC-10 SSB converter
Message-ID: <482283D1.5909C31E.3DF7D0A7@cs.com>

Dave: As I recall the HC-10 was for 455 to 500 kHz IFs (though  I vaguely recall a 262 kHz IF modification)

The Collins R-388 would be my pick  (not the A which already would have mechanical filters, plus the crystal filter).

Of course, for laughs, you could try it with a Hammarlund HQ-180.  :-)



"Dave Maples" <dsmaples@comcast.net> wrote:

>All: I reconditioned a Hammarlund HC-10 SSB converter a few months ago, and
>I'm interested in suggestions on what kind of general coverage receiver I
>might marry it with. ?I'm thinking I want something that's stable with a
>reasonably high IF (higher than 455 kHz to provide good image rejection).
>Not having a 455 kHz IF means I'd have to build a converter for it, but that
>shouldn't be that bad.
>
>My first thought was a BC-348 (915 kHz IF). ?Another possibility is an
>NC-183D, but that's kinda pricey.
>
>Thoughts? ?All opinions welcome!
>
>Dave WB4FUR
>
>
>______________________________________________________________
>Milsurplus mailing list
>Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
>Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>Post: mailto:Milsurplus@mailman.qth.net
>
From wh7hg.hi at gmail.com  Sun Jun 15 22:12:18 2008
From: wh7hg.hi at gmail.com (Michael Tauson)
Date: Sun Jun 15 22:13:00 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] After the last dance
Message-ID: <c34299fb0806151912l414be180gf1ffb5129d7e5705@mail.gmail.com>

I've been thinking a lot about what happens after the book is finished
and I want to reclaim my apartment space.  I could put all the radios
et al in storage but that doesn't seem a good way to go about things.
I could sell it off piecemeal but that also doesn't handle the whole
lot.

The best plan I've come up with is to donate the whole kit to the Ford
Island Museum to help equip the airplanes they're slowly getting ready
for display, either directly or by trade with other
institutions/individuals who are able to offer equipment they need.
It's a fairly new museum and doesn't have the resources the older more
established ones have so every little bit helps.

That was actually my second choice but the first is highly unlikely.
That choice would be to sell the equipment for a "fair market value"
(whatever that is!) with the proceeds going to Noelle to help with her
medical expenses.  I guess a 1-1/2 choice would be a compromise
between the two but I can't see how to manage that.

Part of the problem is the area of concentration.  Unlike most, who
tend to concentrate on wartime or prewar equipment, I'm expanding more
in the postwar period with a little wartime & prewar equipment
included for special cases and exemplars.  (This is only regarding the
equipment on hand, not the historic or reference material.  That may
well be quite the opposite.)  This, in turn, means a lot of Types 12 &
15 and later equipment which has historically not been of much
interest to anyone.

I still hope to locate an A.R.C. built/modified APR-9, an ARN-72(?)
and an ARC-39 (which, interestingly enough, fits the APR-9 rack &
mount, and more of which seem to have been built by Sunair than by
A.R.C.) with all the goodies that go with them along with other
equipment I may have missed along the way.  These also will need to
find homes afterward but not until I've had an opportunity to study,
set up and photograph them.

At least I have a while to figure all this out.  I hope.

Best regards,

Michael, WH7HG
From k2gkk at hotmail.com  Sun Jun 15 22:39:47 2008
From: k2gkk at hotmail.com (D C *Mac* Macdonald)
Date: Sun Jun 15 22:40:27 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] After the last dance
In-Reply-To: <c34299fb0806151912l414be180gf1ffb5129d7e5705@mail.gmail.com>
References: <c34299fb0806151912l414be180gf1ffb5129d7e5705@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BLU129-W3872812C9440A95345FC05F1A90@phx.gbl>


Michael Tauson's comment about wanting an AN/APR-9 (below)
is interesting.  When I was going through EWO training at Mather
AFB, CA back in 1962-1963, our training manuals for the APR-9
were classified CONFIDENTIAL, but surplus dealers in the
Sacramento area were selling the danged things!  Weird!

We were still using them in our B-52Fs at Carswell AFB, TX
and in early days of ArcLight missions.

73 - Mac, K2GKK/5
Oklahoma City, OK
Crew E-55, 9BS/7BW
(1963-1966)



___________________________________ 
> Date: Sun, 15 Jun 2008 16:12:18 -1000 
> From: wh7hg.hi@gmail.com 
> To: arc5@mailman.qth.net; milsurplus@mailman.qth.net 
> CC: 
> Subject: [Milsurplus] After the last dance 
> 
> ORIGINAL TEXT SNIPPED 
> 
> I still hope to locate an A.R.C. built/modified APR-9, an ARN-72(?) 
> and an ARC-39 (which, interestingly enough, fits the APR-9 rack & 
> mount, and more of which seem to have been built by Sunair than by 
> A.R.C.) with all the goodies that go with them along with other 
> equipment I may have missed along the way. These also will need to 
> find homes afterward but not until I've had an opportunity to study, 
> set up and photograph them. 
> 
> At least I have a while to figure all this out. I hope. 
> 
> Best regards, 
> 
> Michael, WH7HG 
From kim.herron at sbcglobal.net  Sun Jun 15 22:59:51 2008
From: kim.herron at sbcglobal.net (kim.herron@sbcglobal.net)
Date: Sun Jun 15 23:00:33 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Receiver to use with Hammarlund HC-10 SSB converter
References: <482283D1.5909C31E.3DF7D0A7@cs.com>
Message-ID: <000801c8cf5d$0c8637d0$34cdeb4c@HPa550y>

No mod is needed.  The HC-10 has an adjustable coil for the LO that's 
accessible on the rear chassis apron and the manual tells you to adjust 
it for the freq of the receiver that you're going to use it with.
----- Original Message ----- 
From: <Radioman390@cs.com>
To: ""Dave Maples"" <dsmaples@comcast.net>; ""Milsurplus"" 
<milsurplus@mailman.qth.net>; ""Glowbugs"" 
<glowbugs@piobaire.mines.uidaho.edu>
Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2008 9:53 PM
Subject: RE: [Milsurplus] Receiver to use with Hammarlund HC-10 SSB 
converter


> Dave: As I recall the HC-10 was for 455 to 500 kHz IFs (though  I 
> vaguely recall a 262 kHz IF modification)
>
> The Collins R-388 would be my pick  (not the A which already would 
> have mechanical filters, plus the crystal filter).
>
> Of course, for laughs, you could try it with a Hammarlund HQ-180.  :-)
>
>
>
> "Dave Maples" <dsmaples@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>>All: I reconditioned a Hammarlund HC-10 SSB converter a few months 
>>ago, and
>>I'm interested in suggestions on what kind of general coverage 
>>receiver I
>>might marry it with. I'm thinking I want something that's stable with 
>>a
>>reasonably high IF (higher than 455 kHz to provide good image 
>>rejection).
>>Not having a 455 kHz IF means I'd have to build a converter for it, 
>>but that
>>shouldn't be that bad.
>>
>>My first thought was a BC-348 (915 kHz IF). Another possibility is an
>>NC-183D, but that's kinda pricey.
>>
>>Thoughts? All opinions welcome!
>>
>>Dave WB4FUR
>>
>>
>>______________________________________________________________
>>Milsurplus mailing list
>>Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
>>Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>>Post: mailto:Milsurplus@mailman.qth.net
>>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus@mailman.qth.net 

From jfor at quik.com  Sun Jun 15 23:08:04 2008
From: jfor at quik.com (J Forster)
Date: Sun Jun 15 23:06:27 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] eBay Hiding IDs does NOT Work
Message-ID: <4855D914.F6E0BB50@quik.com>

Here's a a perfect case of why eBay hiding user IDs from other bidders
does not stop fraudulent "Second Chance" offers:

The first auction, ending on May 15, 2008 could well have been
legitimate. The price is high, but not out of the question:

       Hewlett Packard Laser Calibration System     Item number:
300222289987

Earlier today, a friend emailed me about this auction:

      Hewlett Pacrkard Laser Calibration System    Item number:
250257487810

He bid on it, but was outbid. Then today he got a Second Chance offer
from the seller.  There are very few of these systems out there, BTW.
There is absolutely no question that the sale pics were copied, because
one of the cases shown is not HP. Also, compare the text. I'll bet all
the bidders on the latter sale got second chance offers too.

This is a perfect example that eBay is not really trying to prevent
fraud, because they apparently make bidder IDs available to sellers.

Best,
-John




From jfor at quik.com  Sun Jun 15 23:43:38 2008
From: jfor at quik.com (J Forster)
Date: Sun Jun 15 23:41:43 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Re: [AILtech] Re: [TekScopes2] eBay Hiding IDs does
	NOT Work
References: <4855D914.F6E0BB50@quik.com> <4855DF04.7010905@erols.com>
Message-ID: <4855E16A.E2A3D702@quik.com>

My point is that a seller can crib an auction, set it up as a fake and harvest
the bidders IDs available now only to the seller, and  then send out phony
offers. Their policy has made it much harder to detect schilling at the expense
of a trivial increase in security for second chance offers.

Best,
-John

=============

Chuck Harris wrote:

> Hi John,
>
> Yes, it was most likely a fraudulent sale,... bidders with zero feedback
> and recently set up accounts are always suspect... but I think you are
> missing the point:
>
> Most second chance offers previously did not come from the seller, but
> rather from someone who saw the auction, and used the list of bidders
> in the bid history list as their phishing list.
>
> Ebay's change to blanking out the bidders id's was to slow down the
> large number of second chance offers coming from outside of the auction
> system.  I think you will have to agree that it was successful at achieving
> that one goal.
>
> Your friend got a second chance offer from a fraudulent seller.  That
> is a different kettle of fish.
>
> The only way to mop up the fraudulent sellers is for ebay to require
> verifiable credentials from each seller.  I believe that you have already
> expressed yourself as being firmly against anyone on the internet having
> a way of knowing who *you* are.
>
> Unfortunately, I don't believe you can have it both ways.
>
> -Chuck Harris
>
> J Forster wrote:
> > Here's a a perfect case of why eBay hiding user IDs from other bidders
> > does not stop fraudulent "Second Chance" offers:
> >
> > The first auction, ending on May 15, 2008 could well have been
> > legitimate. The price is high, but not out of the question:
> >
> >        Hewlett Packard Laser Calibration System     Item number:
> > 300222289987
> >
> > Earlier today, a friend emailed me about this auction:
> >
> >       Hewlett Pacrkard Laser Calibration System    Item number:
> > 250257487810
> >
> > He bid on it, but was outbid. Then today he got a Second Chance offer
> > from the seller.  There are very few of these systems out there, BTW.
> > There is absolutely no question that the sale pics were copied, because
> > one of the cases shown is not HP. Also, compare the text. I'll bet all
> > the bidders on the latter sale got second chance offers too.
> >
> > This is a perfect example that eBay is not really trying to prevent
> > fraud, because they apparently make bidder IDs available to sellers.
> >
> > Best,
> > -John

From WA5CAB at cs.com  Mon Jun 16 00:19:29 2008
From: WA5CAB at cs.com (WA5CAB@cs.com)
Date: Mon Jun 16 00:20:16 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] eBay Hiding IDs does NOT Work
Message-ID: <d51.2d9947d0.358743d1@cs.com>

John,

I think you're confused.  Although I don't like the bidder ID hiding either, 
as I used to look at who was bidding on something I was interested in and 
often avoided bidding on it if a friend or good customer was at or near the top of 
the bidder list.  But the bidder ID's have never been hidden from the seller. 
 If you look on the bidder screen, it clearly says so.

I do concur that this was a fraudulent auction.  The seller account was set 
up the day that the ad launched.  And there are several other signs if you just 
look for them.  I'll suggest that your friend should have been suspicious 
about the second auction, given all the signs.

However, although I do not like defending eBay as they have done several 
particularly stupid things recently that were deliberately designed to screw 
sellers, they never do anything designed to hurt buyers.  The hidden bidder ID's 
did prevent the crook in London (or wherever he actually is - note the 
translation warning message) from sending 2nd Chance offers to bidders on the original 
auction.  Which is exactly what the hidden bidder ID was intended to prevent.

I've no interest whatsoever in the hardware involved, but if I had, when I 
saw the several warning signs in the second auction, I would have thought up a 
few trick questions to send the seller.  Or just assume it was a scam and gone 
on.

In a message dated 6/15/2008 10:05:57 PM Central Daylight Time, jfor@quik.com 
writes: 
> Here's a a perfect case of why eBay hiding user IDs from other bidders
> does not stop fraudulent "Second Chance" offers:
> 
> The first auction, ending on May 15, 2008 could well have been
> legitimate. The price is high, but not out of the question:
> 
>        Hewlett Packard Laser Calibration System     Item number:
> 300222289987
> 
> Earlier today, a friend emailed me about this auction:
> 
>       Hewlett Pacrkard Laser Calibration System    Item number:
> 250257487810
> 
> He bid on it, but was outbid. Then today he got a Second Chance offer
> from the seller.  There are very few of these systems out there, BTW.
> There is absolutely no question that the sale pics were copied, because
> one of the cases shown is not HP. Also, compare the text. I'll bet all
> the bidders on the latter sale got second chance offers too.
> 
> This is a perfect example that eBay is not really trying to prevent
> fraud, because they apparently make bidder IDs available to sellers.
> 

Robert & Susan Downs - Houston
<http://www.wa5cab.com> (Web Store)
MVPA 9480
<wa5cab@cs.com> (Primary email)
<wa5cab@comcast.net> (Backup email)
   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080616/56e8496f/attachment.htm
From kargo_cult at msn.com  Mon Jun 16 00:19:51 2008
From: kargo_cult at msn.com (Hue Miller)
Date: Mon Jun 16 00:22:12 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Receiver to use with Hammarlund HC-10 SSB converter
References: <482283D1.5909C31E.3DF7D0A7@cs.com>
Message-ID: <BAY125-DAV13D3AB4C5534CD269EEC0DE4A90@phx.gbl>

You should certainly not pair it with a BC-348 - no one
(back then) who could afford an HC-10 would be using 
a BC-348 as main receiver. The NC-183 sounds like a 
good match. HQ-180 ? Doesn't that already have SSB
provision built in? -Hue M. 
From mcenfalz at humboldt1.com  Mon Jun 16 00:38:33 2008
From: mcenfalz at humboldt1.com (Laura and Jim)
Date: Mon Jun 16 00:39:23 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] TCS Antenna advice
Message-ID: <209BCD61BAC14D3D8421CCB073D52D21@HomePC>

I am trying to approximate the vertical antenna system a TCS drove while in typical service so as to maximize its output. From what I have collected online from PT Boat and Landing Craft sites, looks like the radio sat on the side closest to the antenna trunk (~8 " square vertical metal conduit w/feed line centered inside it). These trunks were located next to the conn/bridge and look similar to what I have seen in photos of the LCI(L)-1091. Both had a fat isolator/antenna mount at the top of the trunk to support the whip.

However.......as I understand these beasts from prior discussions on this forum, the TX expects the antenna to begin at the antenna lug on the exterior of the case. So, my quandary: if this thing was designed to drive a "20 foot whip" what about that extra cable running from the TX to the trunking and up to the antenna? Is there an optimum feed line length? I have not found anything in my TCS-13 manual as to onboard/vehicular mounting regarding whips and feed line configurations.

On the LCI(L)-1091, I understand that the feed line was a fat, 3/4"-1" wide strap of copper braid that went from the TX in the radio room up the interior wall to several insulators on the ceiling, forward most of 10-15 feet into another cabin, then up thru the deck another ~15' inside the cable trunk that ended near the top of the bridge/conn, and then into the famous 20' whip. By definition, you had RF in the shack and a 50 foot inverted-L "antenna" partially enclosed in a steel box.

I ran mine at a local air show last week using a 16 foot whip and 15 feet of feed line (RF safety) in conjunction w/ a single 1/4 wave tuned counterpoise expecting great results, but the thing only indicated 0.7 RF A at best. It supposedly should run closer to 1.5 A. When hooked into my old OCFD (pseudo-Windom) via T network tuner, I would push 1 A. Figured the sky was the limit w/the whip.

I tried to "do the right thing" and go vertical w/dismal results. What gives?

Jim Falls
KG6FWT
Eureka, CA
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080615/4f5ccfff/attachment-0001.htm
From bsugarberg at core.com  Mon Jun 16 01:40:46 2008
From: bsugarberg at core.com (BSugarberg)
Date: Mon Jun 16 00:41:48 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] History of Ham Mods: Opinions?
In-Reply-To: <BAY125-DAV57E17E5B38BD6604FB3E9E4AE0@phx.gbl>
References: <552E4E6FAA8D4A2CA804D11A8297038B@boudreaux>
	<BAY125-DAV57E17E5B38BD6604FB3E9E4AE0@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <4855FCDE.1030906@core.com>

Hello Hue,

If this kind of a book is not written now, I do not think it
will be written.  No one else will ever have the personal
knowledge and experience that we do, and our displays,
collections, and libraries will probably not survive us.

Bruce WA8TNC
=================
Hue Miller wrote:
> I think it's kinda too late now for a "Collector's Guide" or
> a large picture book something along the lines  of "Wireless
> for the Warrior".  We are almost in the post-book era.
> 
> Unfortunately, there's not really a good website i've seen
> that compiles photos of this equipment. The photos i have
> seen online are more often than not, crappy.  I don't mean
> just poor resolution, but also too small, and poor presentation. 
> -Hue

From WA5CAB at cs.com  Mon Jun 16 00:44:08 2008
From: WA5CAB at cs.com (WA5CAB@cs.com)
Date: Mon Jun 16 00:44:54 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Receiver to use with Hammarlund HC-10 SSB converter
Message-ID: <c3a.38160698.35874998@cs.com>

I haven't figured out what this thread was doing on the Milsurplus reflector 
to begin with, but it finally reminded me that I have an NC-183, speaker and 
manual that I need to get off my patio.  I'll call it fair condition but 
unhacked.  Belonged to a friend of the owner of a (actually the only remaining) 
local surplus emporium.  $150.00.  Prefer local pickup.

In a message dated 6/15/2008 11:21:55 PM Central Daylight Time, 
kargo_cult@msn.com writes: 
> You should certainly not pair it with a BC-348 - no one
> (back then) who could afford an HC-10 would be using 
> a BC-348 as main receiver. The NC-183 sounds like a 
> good match. HQ-180 ? Doesn't that already have SSB
> provision built in? -Hue M. 

Robert Downs - Houston
<http://www.wa5cab.com> (Web Store)
MVPA 9480
<wa5cab@cs.com> (Primary email)
<wa5cab@comcast.net> (Backup email)
   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080616/641e9971/attachment.htm
From WA5CAB at cs.com  Mon Jun 16 00:46:08 2008
From: WA5CAB at cs.com (WA5CAB@cs.com)
Date: Mon Jun 16 00:46:51 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Re: [AILtech] Re: [TekScopes2] eBay Hiding IDs does
	NOT Work
Message-ID: <bd0.2e5d96df.35874a10@cs.com>

Bid schilling has nothing to do with bidder ID harvesting. I agree completely 
with Chuck. Bidder ID hiding can't and wasn't intended to do anything about 
someone stealing the information in a legitiment auction and running it as 
though it were their own. The two problems are totally unrelated. There is no 
doubt, as obnoxious as it is, that bidder ID hiding achieved it's primary purpose.

n a message dated 6/15/2008 10:41:47 PM Central Daylight Time, jfor@quik.com 
writes: 
> My point is that a seller can crib an auction, set it up as a fake and 
> harvest
> the bidders IDs available now only to the seller, and then send out phony
> offers. Their policy has made it much harder to detect schilling at the 
> expense
> of a trivial increase in security for second chance offers.
> 


Robert & Susan Downs - Houston
<http://www.wa5cab.com> (Web Store)
MVPA 9480
<wa5cab@cs.com> (Primary email)
<wa5cab@comcast.net> (Backup email)
   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080616/10e07062/attachment.htm
From kargo_cult at msn.com  Mon Jun 16 01:09:59 2008
From: kargo_cult at msn.com (Hue Miller)
Date: Mon Jun 16 01:12:17 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] History of Ham Mods: Opinions?
References: <552E4E6FAA8D4A2CA804D11A8297038B@boudreaux><BAY125-DAV57E17E5B38BD6604FB3E9E4AE0@phx.gbl>
	<4855FCDE.1030906@core.com>
Message-ID: <BAY125-DAV13CBD0D85BFDC0B591B24E4A90@phx.gbl>


> Hello Hue,
> 
> If this kind of a book is not written now, I do not think it
> will be written.  No one else will ever have the personal
> knowledge and experience that we do, and our displays,
> collections, and libraries will probably not survive us.
> 
> Bruce WA8TNC

Well, i disagree. I think that: there are still more manuals
and documents that will appear; these will be shared more
than in the past, this being made possible by our new 
communications systems ( this one, versus old way enthusiasts
communicated years ago - magazine articles and paper mail );
and people will have more access to government archives.

I am certain our document collections will survive us. Our
collections won't: but the actual equipment will.

However, that brings up another issue: will anyone be interested
in this stuff? If not, why publish any such book?
Actually, i just thought of the answer to my own question: the 
re-enactor and mil-vehicles collections will ensure that the
equipment is appreciated. -Hue
From WA5CAB at cs.com  Mon Jun 16 01:23:41 2008
From: WA5CAB at cs.com (WA5CAB@cs.com)
Date: Mon Jun 16 01:24:29 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] TCS Antenna advice
Message-ID: <bfd.35810598.358752dd@cs.com>

Jim,

You've run into the quandry faced by all of the WW-II vintage sets that used 
open wire from the radio to the antenna.  However, I've never heard of a 
"standard" 20' whip antenna.  I've seen reference to a 16' whip used on small 
craft.  But I don't know of anyone who ever acquired one.  And there may have been 
a 25' whip, although I can't recall where I saw the reference.  The standard 
Navy shipboard whip antenna is (or at least was when I left the Blue Water Navy 
and transferred to the Mine Force in 1975) 35' tall and about 2" or 3" in 
diameter at the base insulator.  Generically referred to by all hands concerned 
with them as 35' whips.  An Essex Class Carrier would have had maybe two dozen 
of them in fixed mounts on the island structure and on fold-over mounts along 
the flight deck edge.  FRAM-2 DD's had maybe eight.  I never served on 
anything in between.

TCS's modified for submarine service have Type N connectors on the front 
panel and a different antenna loading coil unit also equipped with N connectors.

In Army vehicles early to mid-War, the length of the antenna (number of 3' 
mast sections used if the radio was VHF) was adjusted for the feed-line length 
inside the vehicle.  After which, conversions to coaxial cable became more 
common.

The two TCS on USS Valley Forge were both located in the island structure and 
fed wire antennas of about 30' length.  And can't recall the details of one 
of them but the one I often played with had about a 10' feedline supported on 
stand-off insulators to a feed-through insulator on the starboard bulkhead.  
The antenna was connected to the outer end of the insulator.  Coincidentally, 
that's about the same antenna that I have here.  Except that the antenna portion 
is nearly horizontal instead of nearly vertical up to the yard-arm.

In a message dated 6/15/2008 11:38:59 PM Central Daylight Time, 
mcenfalz@humboldt1.com writes: 
> I am trying to approximate the vertical antenna system a TCS drove while in 
> typical service so as to maximize its output. From what I have collected 
> online from PT Boat and Landing Craft sites, looks like the radio sat on the 
> side closest to the antenna trunk (~8 " square vertical metal conduit w/feed 
> line centered inside it). These trunks were located next to the conn/bridge and 
> look similar to what I have seen in photos of the LCI(L)-1091. Both had a fat 
> isolator/antenna mount at the top of the trunk to support the whip.
>   
>  However.......as I understand these beasts from prior discussions on this 
> forum, the TX expects the antenna to begin at the antenna lug on the exterior 
> of the case. So, my quandary: if this thing was designed to drive a "20 foot 
> whip" what about that extra cable running from the TX to the trunking and up 
> to the antenna? Is there an optimum feed line length? I have not found 
> anything in my TCS-13 manual as to onboard/vehicular mounting regarding whips and 
> feed line configurations.
>   
>  On the LCI(L)-1091, I understand that the feed line was a fat, 3/4"-1" wide 
> strap of copper braid that went from the TX in the radio room up the 
> interior wall to several insulators on the ceiling, forward most of 10-15 feet into 
> another cabin, then up thru the deck another ~15' inside the cable trunk that 
> ended near the top of the bridge/conn, and then into the famous 20' whip. By 
> definition, you had RF in the shack and a 50 foot inverted-L "antenna" 
> partially enclosed in a steel box.
>   
>  I ran mine at a local air show last week using a 16 foot whip and 15 feet 
> of feed line (RF safety) in conjunction w/ a single 1/4 wave tuned 
> counterpoise expecting great results, but the thing only indicated 0.7 RF A at best. It 
> supposedly should run closer to 1.5 A. When hooked into my old OCFD 
> (pseudo-Windom) via T network tuner, I would push 1 A. Figured the sky was the limit 
> w/the whip.
>   
>  I tried to "do the right thing" and go vertical w/dismal results. What 
> gives?
>  
> 

Robert & Susan Downs - Houston
<http://www.wa5cab.com> (Web Store)
MVPA 9480
<wa5cab@cs.com> (Primary email)
<wa5cab@comcast.net> (Backup email)
   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080616/9edc0a8c/attachment.htm
From jupete at bigpond.net.au  Mon Jun 16 02:32:21 2008
From: jupete at bigpond.net.au (Pete Williams)
Date: Mon Jun 16 02:33:03 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] RE   Paymeent and competition
Message-ID: <004701c8cf7a$bb79a390$0100000a@REDORADIO>


G'dy... sorry to take up time /space with non related surplus info, but re
my earlier post on this topic, the OZ  ACCC ( consumer competition watch
dog) has just announced that it has banned Ebay from demanding payment using
Paypal  indefinitely.
 SOURCE" Australian broadcasting Commission  news service 1600 AEDST


 Pete D.Williams
jupete@bigpond.net.au
METUNG 3904 AUSTRALIA


From kargo_cult at msn.com  Mon Jun 16 03:13:17 2008
From: kargo_cult at msn.com (Hue Miller)
Date: Mon Jun 16 03:15:38 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Identify Dynamotor Canvas ?
References: <482283D1.5909C31E.3DF7D0A7@cs.com>
	<BAY125-DAV13D3AB4C5534CD269EEC0DE4A90@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <BAY125-DAV8CF9A11661A55D2504D63E4A90@phx.gbl>

I have a couple canvas covers, no markings on them, i 
think are dynamotor covers. Can you identify these?

#1  has rectangular opening flap about 5 x 7 inches in 
one long side, also strap that runs across the bottom,
front to back side.  For PE-103 ?

#2  larger than above, has 2 flaps with zipper close,
one on left upper side, one on right upper side. 

Tnx- Hue M. 
From cosmoline at aa4rm.ba-watch.org  Mon Jun 16 07:14:55 2008
From: cosmoline at aa4rm.ba-watch.org (Marty Reynolds)
Date: Mon Jun 16 07:18:49 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] USAF desert storm - 2007 re-enactors?
Message-ID: <17414.24.30.81.88.1213614895.squirrel@fracas.netboobie.org>


My son the C130 pilot is doing a closet cleaning & offers lots of
uniforms, etc.

I'll send list if there's interest

   Marty aka 'rm



From jupete at bigpond.net.au  Mon Jun 16 07:31:54 2008
From: jupete at bigpond.net.au (Pete Williams)
Date: Mon Jun 16 07:32:37 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] SURPLUS PLACES
Message-ID: <005501c8cfa4$944f4bb0$0100000a@REDORADIO>



 G'day all... I'll be having a month in and around  San Jose , Ca. as from
the end of  June ... any info as to where one might suss out places of
surplus would be appreciated . I'd settle for a radius of say 100 miles or
so.
Tks 
Pete

 Pete D.Williams
jupete@bigpond.net.au
METUNG 3904 AUSTRALIA


From jfor at quik.com  Mon Jun 16 09:11:14 2008
From: jfor at quik.com (J Forster)
Date: Mon Jun 16 09:09:23 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] History of Ham Mods: Opinions?
References: <552E4E6FAA8D4A2CA804D11A8297038B@boudreaux><BAY125-DAV57E17E5B38BD6604FB3E9E4AE0@phx.gbl>
	<4855FCDE.1030906@core.com>
	<BAY125-DAV13CBD0D85BFDC0B591B24E4A90@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <48566672.377D77AF@quik.com>

The equipment will not survive long in the hands of re-enactors. It gets
taken out to the field and dinged up pretty quickly. They consider the
stuff as props, even the most careful of them.

Best,
-John

=================

Hue Miller wrote:

> [snip]
> However, that brings up another issue: will anyone be interested
> in this stuff? If not, why publish any such book?
> Actually, i just thought of the answer to my own question: the
> re-enactor and mil-vehicles collections will ensure that the
> equipment is appreciated. -Hue

From arc5 at ix.netcom.com  Mon Jun 16 09:08:42 2008
From: arc5 at ix.netcom.com (David Stinson)
Date: Mon Jun 16 09:09:40 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Donating to "Museums" (was "Dance")
References: <c34299fb0806151912l414be180gf1ffb5129d7e5705@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <49965BF3EEBD4E1CB3DCC052CA135CBE@boudreaux>

While I've encountered good ones,
like the 8th Air Force Museum at Barksdale,
I've had bad experiences with some of them.
Museums are not my first choice.  
They will either put your stuff in a box in a warehouse, 
where it will stay, unstudied and unseen until Judgment Day,
or, after a few years of the above, throw it out during a "clean up"
or after they fail financially. 

Or something worse:
I won't mention any names or places (these people have free lawyers),
but a friend of mine was a serious collector and scholar 
of American Civil War items.  He was also an amateur archeologist.
He would find and dig sites no one else knew, 
carefully documenting everything.  When he passed away,
his entire collection and documentation were donated
to what is supposed to be a respected, state college-run "museum."
All of his documentation- the work of his life- has been lost.
Almost 50% of the relic collection has disappeared,
with no accounting of any kind.  "Museum" officials,
too busy with tuxedoed wine and cheese parties,
will "look into it."  Uh huh.......

I have the guidance head for a Nike Ajax missile.
Pretty neat piece of 1960s tech.
Ya'll may remember me looking for a good place to donate it.
Three "museums" wanted it; practically slavered over it.  
One was suspect, since it seemed to want anything 
and everything that had an electron in it, 
yet no one had ever heard of  them. 
Two others, both themed for this kind of item,
spent most of their time telling me the people
who ran the other museum were a bunch of jerks.
None of them are going to get it; it's still in storage
and will stay there until I get the bad taste of 
"gimme gimme" out of my mouth.
People usually don't appreciate or value 
"give away" stuff anyhow....

Give me an appreciative and responsible
private collector over a "museum" any day.
Private collectors have passion for the items
for which they have become the temporary caretakers.
For a "museum," it's just business.

73 Dave S.



From cosmoline at aa4rm.ba-watch.org  Mon Jun 16 09:07:27 2008
From: cosmoline at aa4rm.ba-watch.org (Marty Reynolds)
Date: Mon Jun 16 09:11:40 2008
Subject: [ARC5] Re: [Milsurplus] History of Ham Mods: Opinions?
In-Reply-To: <4855B23E.9020601@aafradio.org>
References: <552E4E6FAA8D4A2CA804D11A8297038B@boudreaux><E1K7ugF-0005Aq-EH@elasmtp-spurfowl.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
	<4855B23E.9020601@aafradio.org>
Message-ID: <12505.24.30.81.88.1213621647.squirrel@fracas.netboobie.org>



>
> To elaborate, there were four of the APS-13s in each weapon, in both
> Little Boy and Fat Man - all having a different set of frequencies to
> avoid interference.. There was an averaging system to account for spin
> of the bomb casing in flight. The weaponeer could have switch selected
> an alternate set of frequencies if Jacob Beser (the RCM officer) had
> identified potential interference.
>

Mike I've read the 'averaging' was that 3 of four sets had to agree on
altitude.  Provoking.  I've wondered just how with VT electronics.  Then
comes an epiphany.  Bet each APS-13 pulled in a relay with contact sourced
by a resistor-seriesed reference voltage.  That grounded it's own resistor
back to same resistor-seriesed reference voltage

When three such resistors parallelled, a plate-sensitive relay engaged
who's coil across same resistor-series reference voltage. In came it's
contact & BLOOOIE

Crude, simple, but effective

Next note the APS-13 antennas were half-folded dipoles with a half
reflector.  Someone a long time back wondered why USA avoided yagis
in ww2.  Know of another use & that was TRC-1.  Employed on D-day across
channel on 80 mhz +/-.  Then there was an Aussie B24 DF with the half-yagi
set-up.

Immitation is the sincerest form of appreciation, collector san

I have pictures
From jfor at quik.com  Mon Jun 16 09:14:46 2008
From: jfor at quik.com (J Forster)
Date: Mon Jun 16 09:13:20 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] RE   Paymeent and competition
References: <004701c8cf7a$bb79a390$0100000a@REDORADIO>
Message-ID: <48566746.750EDFCC@quik.com>

Great news.  I hope other places follow. Thanks very much.

Best,
-John

============

Pete Williams wrote:

> G'dy... sorry to take up time /space with non related surplus info, but re
> my earlier post on this topic, the OZ  ACCC ( consumer competition watch
> dog) has just announced that it has banned Ebay from demanding payment using
> Paypal  indefinitely.
>  SOURCE" Australian broadcasting Commission  news service 1600 AEDST
>
>  Pete D.Williams
> jupete@bigpond.net.au
> METUNG 3904 AUSTRALIA
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus@mailman.qth.net

From jfor at quik.com  Mon Jun 16 09:26:11 2008
From: jfor at quik.com (J Forster)
Date: Mon Jun 16 09:24:27 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] SURPLUS PLACES
References: <005501c8cfa4$944f4bb0$0100000a@REDORADIO>
Message-ID: <485669F3.C4E22CFF@quik.com>

http://www.halted.com/

http://www.sanjose.com/haltek-electronics-b2594061
although there is some information these guys are gone.

I don't think either were much into Mil stuff. More like industrial and high
tech stuff.  It's Silicon Valley, after all. You might score some
Lockheed-Martin aerospace oddments.

Best,
-John

================

Pete Williams wrote:

>  G'day all... I'll be having a month in and around  San Jose , Ca. as from
> the end of  June ... any info as to where one might suss out places of
> surplus would be appreciated . I'd settle for a radius of say 100 miles or
> so.
> Tks
> Pete
>
>  Pete D.Williams
> jupete@bigpond.net.au
> METUNG 3904 AUSTRALIA
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus@mailman.qth.net

From jfor at quik.com  Mon Jun 16 09:42:12 2008
From: jfor at quik.com (J Forster)
Date: Mon Jun 16 09:40:20 2008
Subject: [ARC5] Re: [Milsurplus] History of Ham Mods: Opinions?
References: <552E4E6FAA8D4A2CA804D11A8297038B@boudreaux><E1K7ugF-0005Aq-EH@elasmtp-spurfowl.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
	<4855B23E.9020601@aafradio.org>
	<12505.24.30.81.88.1213621647.squirrel@fracas.netboobie.org>
Message-ID: <48566DB4.9AB26FC3@quik.com>

Possible, but it could also have been done with a simple configuration of
relays w/o any analog "voting". Each of the four APS-13's would simply have to
have 4 independent NO contacts and the contacts wired as follows:

Connected as follows: (A.B.C)+(A.B.D)+(A.C.D)+(B.C.D)= Poof !

Much easier, IMO.

Best,
-John

=============

Marty Reynolds wrote:

> >
> > To elaborate, there were four of the APS-13s in each weapon, in both
> > Little Boy and Fat Man - all having a different set of frequencies to
> > avoid interference.. There was an averaging system to account for spin
> > of the bomb casing in flight. The weaponeer could have switch selected
> > an alternate set of frequencies if Jacob Beser (the RCM officer) had
> > identified potential interference.
> >
>
> Mike I've read the 'averaging' was that 3 of four sets had to agree on
> altitude.  Provoking.  I've wondered just how with VT electronics.  Then
> comes an epiphany.  Bet each APS-13 pulled in a relay with contact sourced
> by a resistor-seriesed reference voltage.  That grounded it's own resistor
> back to same resistor-seriesed reference voltage
>
> When three such resistors parallelled, a plate-sensitive relay engaged
> who's coil across same resistor-series reference voltage. In came it's
> contact & BLOOOIE
>
> Crude, simple, but effective
>
> Next note the APS-13 antennas were half-folded dipoles with a half
> reflector.  Someone a long time back wondered why USA avoided yagis
> in ww2.  Know of another use & that was TRC-1.  Employed on D-day across
> channel on 80 mhz +/-.  Then there was an Aussie B24 DF with the half-yagi
> set-up.
>
> Immitation is the sincerest form of appreciation, collector san
>
> I have pictures
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus@mailman.qth.net

From jfor at quik.com  Mon Jun 16 09:47:06 2008
From: jfor at quik.com (J Forster)
Date: Mon Jun 16 09:45:14 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Re: [ARC5] Donating to "Museums" (was "Dance")
References: <c34299fb0806151912l414be180gf1ffb5129d7e5705@mail.gmail.com>
	<49965BF3EEBD4E1CB3DCC052CA135CBE@boudreaux>
Message-ID: <48566EDA.66F5FDD0@quik.com>

The problem with private collections is they are very vulnerable to
single point failures and the stuff is gone forever.. I saw a huge
collection for free on Craig's list. The kid wanted the stuff outta his
basement NOW after his dad died suddenly to make space for his "band" to
practice.

FWIW,
-John

==============

David Stinson wrote:

> While I've encountered good ones,
> like the 8th Air Force Museum at Barksdale,
> I've had bad experiences with some of them.
> Museums are not my first choice.
> They will either put your stuff in a box in a warehouse,
> where it will stay, unstudied and unseen until Judgment Day,
> or, after a few years of the above, throw it out during a "clean up"
> or after they fail financially.
>
> Or something worse:
> I won't mention any names or places (these people have free lawyers),
> but a friend of mine was a serious collector and scholar
> of American Civil War items.  He was also an amateur archeologist.
> He would find and dig sites no one else knew,
> carefully documenting everything.  When he passed away,
> his entire collection and documentation were donated
> to what is supposed to be a respected, state college-run "museum."
> All of his documentation- the work of his life- has been lost.
> Almost 50% of the relic collection has disappeared,
> with no accounting of any kind.  "Museum" officials,
> too busy with tuxedoed wine and cheese parties,
> will "look into it."  Uh huh.......
>
> I have the guidance head for a Nike Ajax missile.
> Pretty neat piece of 1960s tech.
> Ya'll may remember me looking for a good place to donate it.
> Three "museums" wanted it; practically slavered over it.
> One was suspect, since it seemed to want anything
> and everything that had an electron in it,
> yet no one had ever heard of  them.
> Two others, both themed for this kind of item,
> spent most of their time telling me the people
> who ran the other museum were a bunch of jerks.
> None of them are going to get it; it's still in storage
> and will stay there until I get the bad taste of
> "gimme gimme" out of my mouth.
> People usually don't appreciate or value
> "give away" stuff anyhow....
>
> Give me an appreciative and responsible
> private collector over a "museum" any day.
> Private collectors have passion for the items
> for which they have become the temporary caretakers.
> For a "museum," it's just business.
>
> 73 Dave S.
>
> _______________________________________________
> ARC5 mailing list
> ARC5@mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/arc5

From jfor at quik.com  Mon Jun 16 10:05:01 2008
From: jfor at quik.com (J Forster)
Date: Mon Jun 16 10:03:08 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] eBay Hiding IDs does NOT Work
References: <d51.2d9947d0.358743d1@cs.com>
Message-ID: <4856730D.1BFA2FD1@quik.com>

I'm not confused. I was pointing out the trivial way a scammer can get
many bidder IDs for fraudulent second chance offers (by putting up a
clone) and that eBay hiding IDs does not protect against that. It does
somewhat hinder what you suggested though, not bidding against friends.

I was not personally interested in the sale .

Best,
-John

============

WA5CAB@cs.com wrote:

> John,
>
> I think you're confused.  Although I don't like the bidder ID hiding
> either, as I used to look at who was bidding on something I was
> interested in and often avoided bidding on it if a friend or good
> customer was at or near the top of the bidder list.  But the bidder
> ID's have never been hidden from the seller.  If you look on the
> bidder screen, it clearly says so.
>
> I do concur that this was a fraudulent auction.  The seller account
> was set up the day that the ad launched.  And there are several other
> signs if you just look for them.  I'll suggest that your friend should
> have been suspicious about the second auction, given all the signs.
>
> However, although I do not like defending eBay as they have done
> several particularly stupid things recently that were deliberately
> designed to screw sellers, they never do anything designed to hurt
> buyers.  The hidden bidder ID's did prevent the crook in London (or
> wherever he actually is - note the translation warning message) from
> sending 2nd Chance offers to bidders on the original auction.  Which
> is exactly what the hidden bidder ID was intended to prevent.
>
> I've no interest whatsoever in the hardware involved, but if I had,
> when I saw the several warning signs in the second auction, I would
> have thought up a few trick questions to send the seller.  Or just
> assume it was a scam and gone on.
>
> In a message dated 6/15/2008 10:05:57 PM Central Daylight Time,
> jfor@quik.com writes:
>
>> Here's a a perfect case of why eBay hiding user IDs from other
>> bidders
>> does not stop fraudulent "Second Chance" offers:
>>
>> The first auction, ending on May 15, 2008 could well have been
>> legitimate. The price is high, but not out of the question:
>>
>>        Hewlett Packard Laser Calibration System     Item number:
>> 300222289987
>>
>> Earlier today, a friend emailed me about this auction:
>>
>>       Hewlett Pacrkard Laser Calibration System    Item number:
>> 250257487810
>>
>> He bid on it, but was outbid. Then today he got a Second Chance
>> offer
>> from the seller.  There are very few of these systems out there,
>> BTW.
>> There is absolutely no question that the sale pics were copied,
>> because
>> one of the cases shown is not HP. Also, compare the text. I'll bet
>> all
>> the bidders on the latter sale got second chance offers too.
>>
>> This is a perfect example that eBay is not really trying to prevent
>> fraud, because they apparently make bidder IDs available to sellers.
>
> Robert & Susan Downs - Houston
> <http://www.wa5cab.com> (Web Store)
> MVPA 9480
> <wa5cab@cs.com> (Primary email)
> <wa5cab@comcast.net> (Backup email)
>
>    ----------------------------------------------------------------
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus@mailman.qth.net
>

From kyrrin at bluefeathertech.com  Mon Jun 16 10:06:22 2008
From: kyrrin at bluefeathertech.com (Bruce Lane)
Date: Mon Jun 16 10:06:43 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] SURPLUS PLACES
In-Reply-To: <005501c8cfa4$944f4bb0$0100000a@REDORADIO>
References: <005501c8cfa4$944f4bb0$0100000a@REDORADIO>
Message-ID: <200806160706220906.000B7096@192.168.42.129>

Hi, Pete,

	At the risk of shameless self-promotion, my web site has extensive listings of electronic surplus places in and around the Silly-Con Valley. If you discover a new place that's not in the list, please let me know.

	http://www.bluefeathertech.com/technoid/calswapindex.html

	Happy hunting.

*********** REPLY SEPARATOR  ***********

On 16-Jun-08 at 21:31 Pete Williams wrote:

>G'day all... I'll be having a month in and around  San Jose , Ca. as from
>the end of  June ... any info as to where one might suss out places of
>surplus would be appreciated . I'd settle for a radius of say 100 miles or
>so.
>Tks 
>Pete
>
> Pete D.Williams
>jupete@bigpond.net.au
>METUNG 3904 AUSTRALIA
>
>
>______________________________________________________________
>Milsurplus mailing list
>Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
>Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>Post: mailto:Milsurplus@mailman.qth.net


-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Bruce Lane, Owner & Head Hardware Heavy,
Blue Feather Technologies -- http://www.bluefeathertech.com
kyrrin (at) bluefeathertech do/t c=o=m
"If Salvador Dali had owned a computer, would it have been equipped with surreal ports?"

From ka1kaq at gmail.com  Mon Jun 16 10:08:18 2008
From: ka1kaq at gmail.com (Todd, KA1KAQ)
Date: Mon Jun 16 10:09:03 2008
Subject: [ARC5] Re: [milsurplus] History of ham mods; opinions?
In-Reply-To: <7250824.1213546087976.JavaMail.root@elwamui-milano.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
References: <7250824.1213546087976.JavaMail.root@elwamui-milano.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <9ccb8c510806160708i4f27c14fk3bca51a8a88e8d7e@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Jun 15, 2008 at 12:08 PM, Mike Morrow <kk5f@earthlink.net> wrote:
> Howie wrote:
>
>>So YES, the ham mods are a part of the surplus story, IMHO.
>
> So is the story of these radios buried in landfills and melting
> in scrap metal salvage operations.
>
> I don't want to read of either story in a collector's guide.

Hmmm....you one of those revisionists, Mike?  (o: Would you only have
shown the history that is 'pretty', denying future collectors the full
picture?

Howie makes a very good point IMO, and it would be a shame to miss the
opportunity not only to include such information, but also to utilize
this history to highlight why it was done, and why it need not be done
now. What better way to stress the urgency of preservation than by
telling future generations that these wonderful radios were buried,
dumped off ships, and otherwise destroyed.

My first Command set followed a similar path as the BC-348 in that it
allowed me to get up close and personal with the set as well as making
it work. It also opened my eyes in later years to the futility of
continuing down such a path with additional surplus sets. Not unlike
the FT-101E, DX-100, and any other number of rigs, they were once
plentiful, not R@RE or 'collectible' but rather a tool for getting on
the air. Some guys today cringe at the classic old broadcast
transmitters that have been hacked up over the years by trained
engineers. One needs to keep in mind that they were a tool, like a
hammer or power saw is to a carpenter. Down time meant lost revenue
for the business. Surplus sets in the thousands, even tens of
thousands plus, were no different. They not only gave thousands
affordable access to the amateur bands, they gave many a deep respect
and appreciation for the gear.

Though not a collector per say myself, I do know several
dyed-in-the-wool collectors who have been at it for decades. They
appreciate the modded sets for what they represent: a point in radio
history. Some have heavily modified sets in their collections (the
Leary Hammarlunds come to mind) as well as surplus sets used by true
OTs or even modified by the military for a specific purpose.

These sets also represent an opportunity for new arrivals to pick up
an already-hacked set to play with, learn on, or to relive their
Novice days. Several folks have posted here and elsewhere in recent
years expressly for these sets to avoid hacking up an untouched
example. Best of all for the user/conservator is the opportunity the
modified sets provide for parts. I've sent parts to other from my
stash of ARC 5 and Command sets too rough for much of anything else,
and have a nice box of those tiny screws that always seem to escape.
All for a few bucks or even in a FREE pile at a hamfest.

Only the New Age collectors seem to turn their noses up at certain
historical artifacts and events which don't meet with their image of
'pristine' condition for bragging rights or such. I know a few guys
like this as well, it's all about impressing others, not about
accurately representing history.

Then of course, there's the old saying (paraphrased) about those who
forget [or ignore] history being doomed to repeating it. Nothing wrong
with preferring the proverbial 'mint' examples only, but to ignore the
rest seems a bit reckless and irresponsible to me. The fact that an
event wasn't 'pretty' doesn't make it any less relevant or any less a
part of history. Showing only the pretty history seems to miss the
point.

Opinion only, of course.

~ Todd,  KA1KAQ
From jfor at quik.com  Mon Jun 16 10:27:24 2008
From: jfor at quik.com (J Forster)
Date: Mon Jun 16 10:26:12 2008
Subject: [ARC5] Re: [milsurplus] History of ham mods; opinions?
References: <7250824.1213546087976.JavaMail.root@elwamui-milano.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
	<9ccb8c510806160708i4f27c14fk3bca51a8a88e8d7e@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4856784C.8531A479@quik.com>

Todd, KA1KAQ wrote:

> Then of course, there's the old saying (paraphrased) about those who
> forget [or ignore] history being doomed to repeating it. Nothing wrong
> with preferring the proverbial 'mint' examples only, but to ignore the
> rest seems a bit reckless and irresponsible to me.

==========

A goodly number of the mods that were done were because the hams either
didn't read and understand the manuals or magazines touted solutions to
nonexistent problems. There are still many even today that have no
understanding of the correct antenna hookup for ARC-5 or WS 19 sets and try
and feed them into a 50 ohm system causing problems, AKA TVI. I see little
point in perpetuating such mistakes.

The people who designed the sets were a lot better at engineering than many
hams who wrote mod articles. I prefer to preserve and celebrate their
competence and achievements.

Best,
-John

=========

> The fact that an
> event wasn't 'pretty' doesn't make it any less relevant or any less a
> part of history. Showing only the pretty history seems to miss the
> point.
>
> Opinion only, of course.
>
> ~ Todd,  KA1KAQ

From ka1kaq at gmail.com  Mon Jun 16 10:49:19 2008
From: ka1kaq at gmail.com (Todd, KA1KAQ)
Date: Mon Jun 16 10:50:04 2008
Subject: [ARC5] Re: [milsurplus] History of ham mods; opinions?
In-Reply-To: <4856784C.8531A479@quik.com>
References: <7250824.1213546087976.JavaMail.root@elwamui-milano.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
	<9ccb8c510806160708i4f27c14fk3bca51a8a88e8d7e@mail.gmail.com>
	<4856784C.8531A479@quik.com>
Message-ID: <9ccb8c510806160749i35968753ja8a5a14995bb78ef@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Jun 16, 2008 at 10:27 AM, J Forster <jfor@quik.com> wrote:

> A goodly number of the mods that were done were because the hams either
> didn't read and understand the manuals or magazines touted solutions to
> nonexistent problems. There are still many even today that have no
> understanding of the correct antenna hookup for ARC-5 or WS 19 sets and try
> and feed them into a 50 ohm system causing problems, AKA TVI. I see little
> point in perpetuating such mistakes.

Going forward in the 'Brave, New World' of amateur radio, I really
don't think you have a lot to worry about here. With so few newbies
arriving on scene, while more and more of the old buzzards who knew
these rigs and did the mods continue to kick the bucket, chances of
someone coming along looking for surplus gear to modify is pretty
slim. Granted, a few have mentioned it here and on other lists in
recent years, but all that I remember were OTs looking to rebuild
their Novice station and relive their past. New hams today are much
more in tune with the 'plug-n-play, then-throw-away' mentality.

> The people who designed the sets were a lot better at engineering than many
> hams who wrote mod articles. I prefer to preserve and celebrate their
> competence and achievements.

Couldn't agree more. Hacking up a nice BC-455B in the late 70s really
brought this home to me not so many years later. I still wander
between guilt and enlightenment some days. Not unlike that whole
'chicken vs egg' dilemma. And my project didn't come from an article,
rather from a professor, former WWII Navy tech who provided it all
from memory.

To me, this later history could be (and should be) framed in such a
way as to outline the events without detailing how it's done. Folks
wanting to undo someone else's work will do as we've done - locate the
old surplus books and reverse engineer. I really think the history
could easily be covered and documented in a way that doesn't involve
schematics, diagrams, or specific tips. Maybe a few hideous photos of
a severely-hacked up transmitter or receiver next to a new, untouched
example would help reinforce the point.

I disagree that the history of these fine rigs ended with the end of
their deployment as someone eluded to. A rich history has continued
since, and we're in a great position to further enhance the
opportunity for future generations to appreciate something we so
deeply enjoy.

~ Todd,  KA1KAQ
From rafantini at salisbury.edu  Mon Jun 16 11:28:09 2008
From: rafantini at salisbury.edu (Ray Fantini)
Date: Mon Jun 16 11:29:01 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] History of ham mods; opinions?
In-Reply-To: <9ccb8c510806160749i35968753ja8a5a14995bb78ef@mail.gmail.com>
References: <7250824.1213546087976.JavaMail.root@elwamui-milano.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
	<9ccb8c510806160708i4f27c14fk3bca51a8a88e8d7e@mail.gmail.com>
	<4856784C.8531A479@quik.com>
	<9ccb8c510806160749i35968753ja8a5a14995bb78ef@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <48564E49020000310000B976@mail2.salisbury.edu>

I have been working with military surplus radios since the seventies.
When I started I was not able to afford much of anything beyond surplus.
Working with the BC-348 and ARC -5 sets thought me much, reading the
military manuals and modification articles thought me more. The exposure
to this technology and the modifications and endless hours working with
this equipment affected me to the point of working in the radio and
television field, and today being a successful engineer. In the past ten
years I have restored several radios to their original, or as near
original condition as practical but I also have to say I have received
much joy from purchasing hacked radios that have no possibility of being
restored and installed internal power supplies, local controls and S
meters. This year I finished a BC-348Q that I purchased for $20 at a
hamfest that had several holes in the front, a badly hacked hole for an
S meter and an abomination for an internal power supply. After striping
the radio, returning much of the internal circuit and adding a internal
power supply, new output transformer (original was missing) and S meter
circuit I find this a fun radio to use and challenge anyone to question
the quality of my work. Yes, its true that this will never be a shining
example of what a BC-348 should be but this radio was in sad shape when
purchased and is way more fun to use then  the original one I have with
the dynamotor and high impedance output transformer. Perhaps all I am
trying to say that this is a broad group on the reflector and there is
room for everyone, from the serious collector who wants everything to be
only the way it was used in government service to the person like myself
who feels there is a place for the modified and adapted sets that
represent a real period of time in ham radio, and in some ways a longer
period of services for many radios then in their military role. And as a
foot note, I recently obtained a 1967 ARRL handbook and in the
transmitter section there is a project on conversion of the ARC-5
transmitter to crystal control, the only way a Novice of that time could
use one. I remember using that circuit and being ?rock bound? back
in the seventies. That?s how I did my first transmitter. To ignore the
role WW2 surplus played in Ham radio may be to ignore history itself.
Ray Fantini
KA3EKH

From kk5f at earthlink.net  Mon Jun 16 12:17:06 2008
From: kk5f at earthlink.net (Mike Morrow)
Date: Mon Jun 16 12:17:51 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Re: History of ham mods; opinions?
Message-ID: <10749887.1213633026514.JavaMail.root@elwamui-royal.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

>I disagree that the history of these fine rigs ended with the end of
>their deployment as someone eluded to. 

That someone would be me.  The statement included "notable history"
and I fully stand behind the assertion.  The only history of this
gear that's worth the ink or electrons to document is why and how
it was developed, and then operated by the intended user (the
military).

>A rich history has continued since...

Really?  Who could give a flying fart about what hams did with
stuff that they generally valued only as parts for their hobby rigs?
Was that use acceptable?  Sure it was.  Was that use interesting
to anyone but (perhaps) another ham?  Not the least little bit!
 
If a ham thinks that future historians of military technology will
care at all about ham use of surplus, then he grossly over estimates
the impact and value (both very minimal at best, except for the days
well before WWII) of ham operations to society in general.

I don't preserve any of my gear for, or because of, ham use.  I
preserve it for the technical and military history it represents.

Mike / KK5F

From W7QHO at aol.com  Mon Jun 16 12:55:09 2008
From: W7QHO at aol.com (W7QHO@aol.com)
Date: Mon Jun 16 12:56:03 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Re: History of ham mods; opinions?
Message-ID: <cdf.2e05bd2c.3587f4ed@aol.com>


In a message dated 6/16/08 9:17:34 AM, kk5f@earthlink.net writes:


> >A rich history has continued since...
> 
> Really?? Who could give a flying fart about what hams did with
> stuff that they generally valued only as parts for their hobby rigs?
> 

Well, me for one and I am confident many others as well are with Ray on this 
one.

Dennis D. W7QHO
Glendale, CA



**************
Vote for your city's best dining and nightlife. City's Best 
2008.
      (http://citysbest.aol.com?ncid=aolacg00050000000102)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080616/1b0c210d/attachment.htm
From AAF-Radio-1 at aafradio.org  Mon Jun 16 12:55:16 2008
From: AAF-Radio-1 at aafradio.org (Mike Hanz)
Date: Mon Jun 16 12:56:28 2008
Subject: [ARC5] Re: [Milsurplus] History of Ham Mods: Opinions?
In-Reply-To: <12505.24.30.81.88.1213621647.squirrel@fracas.netboobie.org>
References: <552E4E6FAA8D4A2CA804D11A8297038B@boudreaux><E1K7ugF-0005Aq-EH@elasmtp-spurfowl.atl.sa.earthlink.net>	<4855B23E.9020601@aafradio.org>
	<12505.24.30.81.88.1213621647.squirrel@fracas.netboobie.org>
Message-ID: <48569AF4.5080007@aafradio.org>

Marty Reynolds wrote:

>>To elaborate, there were four of the APS-13s in each weapon, in both
>>Little Boy and Fat Man - all having a different set of frequencies to
>>avoid interference.. There was an averaging system to account for spin
>>of the bomb casing in flight. The weaponeer could have switch selected
>>an alternate set of frequencies if Jacob Beser (the RCM officer) had
>>identified potential interference.
>>
>
>Mike I've read the 'averaging' was that 3 of four sets had to agree on
>altitude.  Provoking.  I've wondered just how with VT electronics.  
>

It was a little more complicated than that, Marty.  Remember that this 
weapon was built with WWII electronics, and they often failed in 
flight.  The task was to design a weighted system that would tolerate 
the failure of any two of the APS-13s while ensuring that the fuse would 
operate properly with any remaining two, so two had to agree that it was 
at the proper height, not three.  Their decision logic was used 
elsewhere in the weapon - called "series/parallel" logic, but the 
electronics used delay lines and gated times to detect coincidence.  The 
four APS-13s were turned on by a set of six redundant barometric 
switches that "voted" their output in a similar way to turn on power 
when the weapon reached 17,000 feet.  This also reduced the ECM exposure 
time of the weapon.  There was no backup fusing system, at least for 
Little Boy.  Tests had shown that the gun weapon was essentially 
"self-assembling" on contact with the ground, so that was the backup 
plan.  The whole process was started by a set of eight mechanical timers 
in a "Clock Box" that initially limited anything happening for 15 
seconds after it left the bomb bay...they were worried about radar 
reflections from the B-29 triggering the weapon in the event there were 
multiple failures of the baro switches and radars.

73,
Mike


From kk5f at earthlink.net  Mon Jun 16 13:44:44 2008
From: kk5f at earthlink.net (Mike Morrow)
Date: Mon Jun 16 13:45:30 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Re: History of ham mods; opinions?
Message-ID: <22557684.1213638284736.JavaMail.root@elwamui-royal.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

I asked:

>Who could give a flying fart about what hams did with stuff
>that they generally valued only as parts for their hobby rigs?

Dennis wrote:

>Well, me for one and I am confident many others as well are
>with Ray on this one.

The *only* reason anyone would be interested in the history of ham use of military gear is because they themselves are hams.  Non-hams, and even most hams, will not be interested in any degree.

Were ham usage in any way noteworthy, one wonders why that famous three-volume post-war history of Signal Corps communications failed to contain some details about how all that gear was used post-war by hams. :-)

An exact analog would be the history of the US Model 1903 Springfield rifle, whose development and military use have been well documented in several lengthy books.  Only its military use is ever discussed in these books, because no one cares or wants to think about about what Joe the Hunter/Hobby Gunsmith did to them with his hacksaw, reamer, and drill post-War.

Mike / KK5F
From W7QHO at aol.com  Mon Jun 16 14:47:18 2008
From: W7QHO at aol.com (W7QHO@aol.com)
Date: Mon Jun 16 14:48:26 2008
Subject: [ARC5] Re: [Milsurplus] Re: History of ham mods; opinions?
Message-ID: <d44.280d64ed.35880f36@aol.com>


In a message dated 6/16/08 10:45:12 AM, kk5f@earthlink.net writes:


> The *only* reason anyone would be interested in the history of ham use of 
> military gear is because they themselves are hams.? Non-hams, and even most 
> hams, will not be interested in any degree.
> 
> 
I would judge that the number of people who would be interested in a purely 
Military history of radio gear would be very small indeed, limited primarily to 
those engineers, technicians and surviving ex-Signal Corps types who were 
directly involved.   Far more hams are still around who got started using and 
yes, on occasion, mutilating the stuff. 

> Were ham usage in any way noteworthy, one wonders why that famous 
> three-volume postwar history of Signal Corps communications failed to contain some 
> details about how all that gear was used postwar by hams. :-)
> 
Because the "Green" books were specifically a WW2 history.   Note that the 
books do talk about field mods made in equipment, especially post Normandy, in 
response to combat needs and most probably made by on the spot by ex-hams.

> An exact analog would be the history of the US Model 1903 Springfield 
> rifle, whose development and military use have been well documented in several 
> lengthy books.? Only its military use is ever discussed in these books, because 
> no one cares or wants to think about about what Joe the Hunter/Hobby Gunsmith 
> did to them with his hacksaw, reamer, and drill post-War.
> 
> 
As I recall (having grown up in Montana) the Springfield has a very long and 
rich history of sportrerizing and wildcatting, much of which I remember being 
thoroughly covered in numerous books and also in   NRA publications (note that 
you are a proud member).   Very high interest in this as I recall and my dad 
and I sporterized (mutilated?) an 03 and an Enfield and put meat on the table 
with both of them.   Just as I couldn't afford an SX-42 in the late 40's/early 
50's, a Winchester Model 70 was only a dream too but that DCM Springfield was 
a great prize.....

Dennis D. W7QHO
Glendale, CA



**************
Vote for your city's best dining and nightlife. City's Best 
2008.
      (http://citysbest.aol.com?ncid=aolacg00050000000102)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080616/285f7c6c/attachment.htm
From cosmoline at aa4rm.ba-watch.org  Mon Jun 16 15:48:23 2008
From: cosmoline at aa4rm.ba-watch.org (Marty Reynolds)
Date: Mon Jun 16 15:52:25 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Donating to "Museums" (was "Dance")
In-Reply-To: <49965BF3EEBD4E1CB3DCC052CA135CBE@boudreaux>
References: <c34299fb0806151912l414be180gf1ffb5129d7e5705@mail.gmail.com>
	<49965BF3EEBD4E1CB3DCC052CA135CBE@boudreaux>
Message-ID: <3901.76.17.121.1.1213645703.squirrel@fracas.netboobie.org>


Darned if I didn't have a success at Warner Robbins w.
what amounted to a SCS-1... the BCs 638, 639 (2), & 640

They're set up in hut next to portable ww2 control tower
along w. TRC-1 entry point into ww2 carrier telephony
network

Then I gave a speaker infinate baffle that was a turret crate
sideboard stenciled to Bell Bomber plant from Glen L Martin Co.
That's on display in Marietta, GA B29 / Bell plant museum

But I faced bad rejection for a loan @ Atlanta History's
WW2 exhibit in 06 & o7

Have a pal that operated in Oran in 8/42 w. a SCR-188 (I
think)  BC-191, RA-42, PE-75, BC-342 (they used a '224 or
'348 in a foto - maybe from a wreck.  And amazingly this
was a 11-man crew-served 'portable' precursor to the SCR-299
bread truck)

Were gonna run on 3885 & give demos.  But curators wanted
things Atlantans did @ home like sew on battle ribbons,
make pomade sent overseas, etc.  Seriously.

Too bad.  Oobla di - oobla da - life goes on


From ka1kaq at gmail.com  Mon Jun 16 16:25:05 2008
From: ka1kaq at gmail.com (Todd, KA1KAQ)
Date: Mon Jun 16 16:25:53 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Re: History of ham mods; opinions?
In-Reply-To: <10749887.1213633026514.JavaMail.root@elwamui-royal.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
References: <10749887.1213633026514.JavaMail.root@elwamui-royal.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <9ccb8c510806161325g66b064b7ie30ac11a10f696d8@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Jun 16, 2008 at 12:17 PM, Mike Morrow <kk5f@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>I disagree that the history of these fine rigs ended with the end of
>>their deployment as someone eluded to.
>
> The only history of this
> gear that's worth the ink or electrons to document is why and how
> it was developed, and then operated by the intended user (the
> military).

In *your* opinion. I think that's why so many folks 'misunderstand'
you, Mike: you insist your way is the *only* way.

>>A rich history has continued since...
>
> Really?  Who could give a flying fart about what hams did with
> stuff that they generally valued only as parts for their hobby rigs?
> Was that use acceptable?  Sure it was.  Was that use interesting
> to anyone but (perhaps) another ham?  Not the least little bit!

Hmmm.....well, how about the fact that many of those hams were in fact
WWII vets who used, maintained, and knew the gear in its previous
military life as well? Perhaps you should consider rephrasing your
opinions to reflect that -you- feel this way as opposed to
any/everyone. They obviously do not.

> If a ham thinks that future historians of military technology will
> care at all about ham use of surplus, then he grossly over estimates
> the impact and value (both very minimal at best, except for the days
> well before WWII) of ham operations to society in general.

And conversely, if any collector of this gear thinks that *only* the
military history of a given piece of equipment matters, then he
grossly underestimates the impact the military and associated surplus
have had on our engineers and technology throughout the years - and
vice versa, whether you choose to believe it or not. Do a little
research into where many of the trained radio and electronics folks
who joined the military came from in WWII and before. While you're at
it, talk to folks about civilian gear being 'borrowed' by the
government and military specifically, from civilian amateurs in early
WWII. Like it or not, the commoners are thick in the mix: designing,
building, using, instructing. Did you just *twitch*, Mike?  (o:

> I don't preserve any of my gear for, or because of, ham use.  I
> preserve it for the technical and military history it represents.

I don't think Dave's original query had to do with preserving or
documenting the gear specifically for one purpose or another, more how
it was developed, used, served and continues to serve. When you think
about it in a little more depth: if not for the perceived monetary
value to hams after WWII, what is the likelihood that so much of this
gear would've ever survived? If there wasn't some value above scrap,
how many NOS ARC-5s would still be turning up? Probably few, if any,
since much more would've gone to the smelters instead of surplus
houses.

You're certainly free to follow a narrow, specialized side of
collecting, Mike. But to look down your nose at post-military history
related to this stuff as unworthy seems to do a disservice to the gear
as much as the people who designed, used, and maintained it.

73, OM -

~ Todd,  KA1KAQ
From revcom at wbsnet.org  Mon Jun 16 17:04:58 2008
From: revcom at wbsnet.org (Revcom)
Date: Mon Jun 16 16:54:47 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] RE: Dummy Load
References: <4853AA16.5050802@pacbell.net>
Message-ID: <003201c8cff4$a2cd6a00$0401a8c0@alltel>

Question on Dummy Load:

I have one---Anyone know what this might be rated at?
I have used it on Bcst TX at 1KW, didn't get warm.

Dummy Load, Modulator
P/N 1773-5016G1
Raytheon Mfg Co,
IBM P.O. TT60276J10A
Boeing P.O. 991514-0622
Contract: W33-038-AC-22291
It is 2ft long, 1ft diameter, 50 ohm with sampling port at 10 ohms.
Uses very large resistor bank with high volume fan for cooling.
Has a houmongous coax connect for input. Has snap on end caps
and makes a large carrying package when all buttoned up.
Am sure it has something to do with radar, etc?  B-52 etc maybe.
Any info appreciated.

Rod
K0EQH

From ejones at hiwaay.net  Mon Jun 16 16:53:43 2008
From: ejones at hiwaay.net (Eric Jones)
Date: Mon Jun 16 16:55:37 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Springfield '03 A3 (was: Ham mods)
Message-ID: <004401c8cff3$35620d00$ef04b4d8@yourxb2x7j77gn>

de N4TGC Eric

Good discussion (argument? cussing?) re: mods.  My nickel's worth: 
revisionists = correctionists; the true liars are the Court Historians; or 
in effect, they themselves are the "revisionists", if you want to use it as 
a derogatory term as they do.

The military use of gear is relatively unimportant: sorry, Mike, but most 
soldiers haven't a clue what rigs were inflicted on them; fewer still even 
care.  They were not put to any valid use til AFTER the war, by Hamguys who 
sliced and diced them into something that didn't kill, in a war that 
shouldn't have been fought against people who weren't our enemies.  Like 
now, in Iraq, et al.

If not for Hams, the stuff would have been scrapped and/or land-filled long 
ago.  We are the caretakers/curators, and if we want anything to be saved, 
it's up to us.  So, take Tauson's ARC-guide, flesh it out with "perversion" 
info to help ID hacked units and how to restore/re-use them, and hope 
somebody eventually cares besides us.  Like the rock-band in the basement 
example: the brat hated his father for using Ham radio as an escape and 
neglecting his familial duties.  Do we do that?  While VP of the local Ham 
(repeater) Club and thus publisher of the Newsletter, I profiled a member 
every month, and encountered family resentment nearly every time!

As a hobby gunsmith, if I didn't have info on the hacking/conversions for 
the '03A3 ad infinitum, I would have a much harder time knowing what to do 
about it. For example, my favorite .30'06 is an Eddystone Model 17, on which 
someone whacked off the sight wings and dropped it in a Herter's stock. 
Still one of the sweetest-shooting rifles I've ever handled, and just as 
good, to me, as an original M-17 (if not better!  It was a dang sight 
cheaper!)

Whenver someone wants to get into Ham radio, gunsmithing, or any kind of 
collecting field especially, my advice is always to spend your first $100 on 
books:  you'll still wind up buying unsuitable stuff you'll want to sell 
later, but at least you'll be making more informed decisions along the way. 
Or if you buy a few pieces and realize you don't know enough about it, 
having the collector's info out there on CD, internet, or for us old farts, 
in print, is veddy veddy useful.
    e 

From wf2u at ws19ops.com  Mon Jun 16 17:27:21 2008
From: wf2u at ws19ops.com (wf2u@ws19ops.com)
Date: Mon Jun 16 17:28:40 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Springfield '03 A3 (was: Ham mods)
In-Reply-To: <004401c8cff3$35620d00$ef04b4d8@yourxb2x7j77gn>
References: <004401c8cff3$35620d00$ef04b4d8@yourxb2x7j77gn>
Message-ID: <20080616162721.i2mzp7e4dcgccwo8@webmail.opentransfer.com>


Right - so the Germans, Japanese, the Communist North Koreans,  
Chinese, North Vietnamese, and more recently the Islamo-fascists  
(Taliban, Al-Qaida, and the rest of such benevolent old ladies' social  
clubs) are not or were not our enemies...

A long as you're mentioning Iraq, the Iraqis are not our enemies, but  
these terrorists are, in case you slept through the last 8 years or so  
- and for your information they're enemies of the Iraqis as well, as  
in other places such as Afghanistan.

DUH....


73, Meir WF2U
Landrum, SC




Quoting Eric Jones <ejones@hiwaay.net>:

> de N4TGC Eric
>

> .....The military use of gear is relatively unimportant: sorry, Mike, but
> most soldiers haven't a clue what rigs were inflicted on them; fewer
> still even care.  They were not put to any valid use til AFTER the war,
> by Hamguys who sliced and diced them into something that didn't kill,
> in a war that shouldn't have been fought against people who weren't our
> enemies.  Like now, in Iraq, et al.
>
>
From wf2u at ws19ops.com  Mon Jun 16 17:27:52 2008
From: wf2u at ws19ops.com (wf2u@ws19ops.com)
Date: Mon Jun 16 17:28:43 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Springfield '03 A3 (was: Ham mods)
In-Reply-To: <004401c8cff3$35620d00$ef04b4d8@yourxb2x7j77gn>
References: <004401c8cff3$35620d00$ef04b4d8@yourxb2x7j77gn>
Message-ID: <20080616162752.phcz8v8ao4kkgsow@webmail.opentransfer.com>


Right - so the Germans, Japanese, the Communist North Koreans,  
Chinese, North Vietnamese, and more recently the Islamo-fascists  
(Taliban, Al-Qaida, and the rest of such benevolent old ladies' social  
clubs) are not or were not our enemies...

A long as you're mentioning Iraq, the Iraqis are not our enemies, but  
these terrorists are, in case you slept through the last 8 years or so  
- and for your information they're enemies of the Iraqis as well, as  
in other places such as Afghanistan.

DUH....


73, Meir WF2U
Landrum, SC




Quoting Eric Jones <ejones@hiwaay.net>:

> de N4TGC Eric
>

> .....The military use of gear is relatively unimportant: sorry, Mike, but
> most soldiers haven't a clue what rigs were inflicted on them; fewer
> still even care.  They were not put to any valid use til AFTER the war,
> by Hamguys who sliced and diced them into something that didn't kill,
> in a war that shouldn't have been fought against people who weren't our
> enemies.  Like now, in Iraq, et al.
>
>
From wammes at greenradios.com  Mon Jun 16 17:48:11 2008
From: wammes at greenradios.com (Wammes Witkop)
Date: Mon Jun 16 17:48:36 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Springfield '03 A3 (was: Ham mods)
In-Reply-To: <004401c8cff3$35620d00$ef04b4d8@yourxb2x7j77gn>
References: <004401c8cff3$35620d00$ef04b4d8@yourxb2x7j77gn>
Message-ID: <4856DF9B.40708@greenradios.com>

Group,

After sitting on them hands for what feels like ages I *do* jump in. 
'Cause Eric does make some valuable remarks here...
Me, I am a pacifist. I hate the army. I got out of it too, being too 
tall. Nope, they did not draft me. No way - I'd have gone for Section 
Five, the local - Dutch - Loony Bin, if I had not been just too tall to 
fit them uniforms. Great word actually, uniform, if you are over two 
meters...

And still I do collect and restore Mil Comms. Why?
'Cause I do like technical stuff. Engineering, where cost was not the 
first frontier. Ever looked at the Old Family with a technical eye? 
Great stuff alltogether! Fot it's timeframe.

That is my personal fascination and the reason I will argue with my 
beloved mate, who does not agree in the least with my personal 
collection stressing the attic beams. We Dutch do not do cellars, 
mostly. For a good reason too.

Just good engineering where cost is not the first measure did it for me. 
Then, I became a collector. Like stamps, only somewhat heavier. I want 
every part of every setup ever thought up - within my field of 
expertise. And I *do* hate guns...

Grtz. Wammes

Eric Jones schreef:
> de N4TGC Eric
> 
> Good discussion (argument? cussing?) re: mods.  My nickel's worth: 
> revisionists = correctionists; the true liars are the Court Historians; 
> or in effect, they themselves are the "revisionists", if you want to use 
> it as a derogatory term as they do.
> 
> The military use of gear is relatively unimportant: sorry, Mike, but 
> most soldiers haven't a clue what rigs were inflicted on them; fewer 
> still even care.  They were not put to any valid use til AFTER the war, 
> by Hamguys who sliced and diced them into something that didn't kill, in 
> a war that shouldn't have been fought against people who weren't our 
> enemies.  Like now, in Iraq, et al.
> 
> If not for Hams, the stuff would have been scrapped and/or land-filled 
> long ago.  We are the caretakers/curators, and if we want anything to be 
> saved, it's up to us.  So, take Tauson's ARC-guide, flesh it out with 
> "perversion" info to help ID hacked units and how to restore/re-use 
> them, and hope somebody eventually cares besides us.  Like the rock-band 
> in the basement example: the brat hated his father for using Ham radio 
> as an escape and neglecting his familial duties.  Do we do that?  While 
> VP of the local Ham (repeater) Club and thus publisher of the 
> Newsletter, I profiled a member every month, and encountered family 
> resentment nearly every time!
> 
> As a hobby gunsmith, if I didn't have info on the hacking/conversions 
> for the '03A3 ad infinitum, I would have a much harder time knowing what 
> to do about it. For example, my favorite .30'06 is an Eddystone Model 
> 17, on which someone whacked off the sight wings and dropped it in a 
> Herter's stock. Still one of the sweetest-shooting rifles I've ever 
> handled, and just as good, to me, as an original M-17 (if not better!  
> It was a dang sight cheaper!)
> 
> Whenver someone wants to get into Ham radio, gunsmithing, or any kind of 
> collecting field especially, my advice is always to spend your first 
> $100 on books:  you'll still wind up buying unsuitable stuff you'll want 
> to sell later, but at least you'll be making more informed decisions 
> along the way. Or if you buy a few pieces and realize you don't know 
> enough about it, having the collector's info out there on CD, internet, 
> or for us old farts, in print, is veddy veddy useful.
>    e
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus@mailman.qth.net
From grc142 at verizon.net  Mon Jun 16 17:47:56 2008
From: grc142 at verizon.net (grc142@verizon.net)
Date: Mon Jun 16 17:48:44 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Springfield '03 A3 (was: Ham mods)
Message-ID: <23782915.357951213652876262.JavaMail.root@vms168.mailsrvcs.net>

I don't concur with the original message either.  My father spoke in great detail of the BC-375 in his airplane.  Another aquaintenance told me of years spent in the jungles of Asia operating a BC-610 and BC-654.  My 'NAM buddies certainly have a lot to say about the PRC-6 and PRC-10 (not all of it is nice either).  I have a GRC-142B system which I bring to work when the local tower is closed, and I get a lot of feedback from the 'NAM guys about that one too (One guy told me he received two Bronze Stars just because he stayed inside the hutch during a fire fights.  I guess that the hutches made good targets for the NVM.).  I also receive a bunch of feedback from the latest generation of GI's when they look at my HMMWV - and wonder why I don't have the radio's installed!
John 
KA7AHJ
=====================
From: wf2u@ws19ops.com
Date: 2008/06/16 Mon PM 04:27:52 CDT
To: Eric Jones <ejones@hiwaay.net>
Cc: milsurplus@mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] Springfield '03 A3 (was: Ham mods)


Right - so the Germans, Japanese, the Communist North Koreans,  
Chinese, North Vietnamese, and more recently the Islamo-fascists  
(Taliban, Al-Qaida, and the rest of such benevolent old ladies' social  
clubs) are not or were not our enemies...

A long as you're mentioning Iraq, the Iraqis are not our enemies, but  
these terrorists are, in case you slept through the last 8 years or so  
- and for your information they're enemies of the Iraqis as well, as  
in other places such as Afghanistan.

DUH....


73, Meir WF2U
Landrum, SC




Quoting Eric Jones <ejones@hiwaay.net>:

> de N4TGC Eric
>

> .....The military use of gear is relatively unimportant: sorry, Mike, but
> most soldiers haven't a clue what rigs were inflicted on them; fewer
> still even care.  They were not put to any valid use til AFTER the war,
> by Hamguys who sliced and diced them into something that didn't kill,
> in a war that shouldn't have been fought against people who weren't our
> enemies.  Like now, in Iraq, et al.
>
>
______________________________________________________________
Milsurplus mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Milsurplus@mailman.qth.net

From jfor at quik.com  Mon Jun 16 18:02:38 2008
From: jfor at quik.com (J Forster)
Date: Mon Jun 16 18:01:00 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Springfield '03 A3 (was: Ham mods)
References: <004401c8cff3$35620d00$ef04b4d8@yourxb2x7j77gn>
	<20080616162721.i2mzp7e4dcgccwo8@webmail.opentransfer.com>
Message-ID: <4856E2FE.25539660@quik.com>

Makes sense, NOT!

 "The Iraqis are not our enemies"....  yet we invaded them. There's no credible
evidence Iraq was or is a major terrorist sponsor or haven or had anything
significantly to do with 9/11.

Smart thinking !!!

-John

===========


wf2u@ws19ops.com wrote:

> [snip]
> A long as you're mentioning Iraq, the Iraqis are not our enemies, but
> these terrorists are, in case you slept through the last 8 years or so
> - and for your information they're enemies of the Iraqis as well, as
> in other places such as Afghanistan.
>
> DUH....
>
> 73, Meir WF2U
> Landrum, SC

From kargo_cult at msn.com  Mon Jun 16 18:02:33 2008
From: kargo_cult at msn.com (Hue Miller)
Date: Mon Jun 16 18:03:20 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Springfield '03 A3 (was: Ham mods)
In-Reply-To: <004401c8cff3$35620d00$ef04b4d8@yourxb2x7j77gn>
References: <004401c8cff3$35620d00$ef04b4d8@yourxb2x7j77gn>
Message-ID: <BAY125-W3260DAB198D53F080E276AE4A90@phx.gbl>

> de N4TGC Eric
> The military use of gear is relatively unimportant: sorry, Mike, but most > soldiers haven't a clue what rigs were inflicted on them; fewer still even > care. They were not put to any valid use til AFTER the war, by Hamguys who > sliced and diced them into something that didn't kill, in a war that > shouldn't have been fought against people who weren't our enemies. Like > now, in Iraq, et al.
A couple caveats come to mind, first. You would best inquire, maybe, to 
someone who was an involuntary guest of Japan in those years, if the people
weren't our enemies. Not just the uniform-wearing ones, but the ones bidding
to lease your labor from their government. 
Also, Gandhi's advice to the the Jews comes to mind: Submit yourself to the
butchers, and you will shame their conscience and bring them to understanding.
And Gandhi's advice to England: give your land to the attacker, give up your 
island. 
 
Uh-huh, i say. 
 
I like the gear, because like an old musical instrument, it has "character".
It holds the memories of messages, important, critical, some mundane.
( The "ghost of electricity", to steal a phrase? )
I like to fire up something that hasn't had life in it, for maybe 60 years.
That's one way to easy time travel, for me.
-Hue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080616/e9b2b4f4/attachment.htm
From wh7hg.hi at gmail.com  Mon Jun 16 18:26:38 2008
From: wh7hg.hi at gmail.com (Michael Tauson)
Date: Mon Jun 16 18:27:31 2008
Subject: [ARC5] Re: [Milsurplus] History of Ham Mods: Opinions?
In-Reply-To: <8CA9D2B7762E926-151C-3E67@webmail-nb17.sysops.aol.com>
References: <15069221.1213550791865.JavaMail.root@elwamui-milano.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
	<8CA9D2B7762E926-151C-3E67@webmail-nb17.sysops.aol.com>
Message-ID: <c34299fb0806161526v246756c4ib80bee6c425915c3@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Jun 15, 2008 at 8:19 AM,  <jcoward5452@aol.com> wrote:

> One might include Mods in an appendix with references to the conversion manuals and
> conversion articles.  And maybe helpful hints on undoing mods and retoration tips.

How is it so many people are looking over my shoulder while the work
on the book is being done?  :-)

As to the T-15 ... I'll be happy with an unmodified T-19, MT-70 and
MT-71.  (There's actually a lot more but those seem to be adept at
invisiblity.)

BEst regards,

Michael, WH7HG
From kim.herron at sbcglobal.net  Mon Jun 16 18:46:30 2008
From: kim.herron at sbcglobal.net (kim.herron@sbcglobal.net)
Date: Mon Jun 16 18:47:16 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Receiver to use with Hammarlund HC-10 SSB converter
References: <482283D1.5909C31E.3DF7D0A7@cs.com>
	<BAY125-DAV13D3AB4C5534CD269EEC0DE4A90@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <00a101c8d002$d2380da0$7ab8ec4c@HPa550y>

Yup!  The HC-10 is nothing more than the 3rd IF and audio section of an 
HQ170/180 packaged in a small cabinet.  They also made a military 
version of the thing as well, but I'm not sure on the model number.
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Hue Miller" <kargo_cult@msn.com>
To: ""Milsurplus"" <milsurplus@mailman.qth.net>; ""Glowbugs"" 
<glowbugs@piobaire.mines.uidaho.edu>
Sent: Monday, June 16, 2008 12:19 AM
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] Receiver to use with Hammarlund HC-10 SSB 
converter


> You should certainly not pair it with a BC-348 - no one
> (back then) who could afford an HC-10 would be using
> a BC-348 as main receiver. The NC-183 sounds like a
> good match. HQ-180 ? Doesn't that already have SSB
> provision built in? -Hue M.
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus@mailman.qth.net 

From scr287 at sbcglobal.net  Mon Jun 16 19:04:30 2008
From: scr287 at sbcglobal.net (Jack Antonio)
Date: Mon Jun 16 19:05:27 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Re: [ARC5] Re: History of ham mods; opinions?
In-Reply-To: <9ccb8c510806161325g66b064b7ie30ac11a10f696d8@mail.gmail.com>
References: <10749887.1213633026514.JavaMail.root@elwamui-royal.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
	<9ccb8c510806161325g66b064b7ie30ac11a10f696d8@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4856F17E.2060507@sbcglobal.net>

Something overlooked in this dialogue
of modified WWII gear, are the "professional modifications".
These usages probably rate just as much mention as amateur
usage.

Examples.

I have heard of the airlines rebuilding BC-348s into rack
panels, with AC supplies. Saw an ad once for a BC-348 so
rebuilt by Delta Airlines, I was too late to snag it.

I have an NAB (National Association of Broadcasters)Engineering
Handbook which has a chapter on converting an SCR-508 for use on the 26 
MC/s remote pickup frequencies.

SCR-269s being used on fishing boats for direction finding.

Any other examples of WWII surplus being used professionally?

Jack Antonio WA7DIA


From kyrrin at bluefeathertech.com  Mon Jun 16 21:52:58 2008
From: kyrrin at bluefeathertech.com (Bruce Lane)
Date: Mon Jun 16 21:53:46 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] SURPLUS PLACES
In-Reply-To: <485669F3.C4E22CFF@quik.com>
References: <005501c8cfa4$944f4bb0$0100000a@REDORADIO>
	<485669F3.C4E22CFF@quik.com>
Message-ID: <200806161852580644.09948C6A@192.168.42.129>

Good eve,

*********** REPLY SEPARATOR  ***********

On 16-Jun-08 at 09:26 J Forster wrote:

>http://www.halted.com/
>
>http://www.sanjose.com/haltek-electronics-b2594061
>although there is some information these guys are gone.

	Haltek Electronics has been gone for several years. They closed up shop around 2001 or so.

	Halted is still around. They have decent enough pricing and variety on most components, but their test gear pricing has proven to be remarkably clue-resistant.

	Happy hunting.


-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Bruce Lane, Owner & Head Hardware Heavy,
Blue Feather Technologies -- http://www.bluefeathertech.com
kyrrin (at) bluefeathertech do/t c=o=m
"Quid Malmborg in Plano..."

From wh7hg.hi at gmail.com  Mon Jun 16 22:11:07 2008
From: wh7hg.hi at gmail.com (Michael Tauson)
Date: Mon Jun 16 22:11:55 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Re: [ARC5] Re: History of ham mods; opinions?
In-Reply-To: <4856F17E.2060507@sbcglobal.net>
References: <10749887.1213633026514.JavaMail.root@elwamui-royal.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
	<9ccb8c510806161325g66b064b7ie30ac11a10f696d8@mail.gmail.com>
	<4856F17E.2060507@sbcglobal.net>
Message-ID: <c34299fb0806161911x36270853nd2fcdf06ae9a9fd6@mail.gmail.com>

It's no secret I'm working on a book about Aircraft Radio Corporation
and the company's equipment.  The company's history is a no-brainer
since no one seems to actually care about that according to the
discussions so far.  I think it has an important albeit small place in
the Known History of the Western World and in this case only one
opinion counts.  Mine.

On the other appendage to be determined at a later date, the equipment
is subject to intense debate.  Yes, the original use is important.
That's why it was designed and built in the first place.  Not the
military use or the civilian use but the original use in general.  But
it's about the EQUIPMENT and that includes what happened after the
original users didn't need them anymore.  That part includes
conversions, modifications and repurposing in a variety of forms.

Discussion of the post-original service fate is NOT promotion of that
activity.  It isn't promotion of landfill or smelting or being thrown
en masse into the ocean ... or being converted to satisfy some other
need.  It IS discussion of what was and is the current state of
A.R.C.'s equipment, both civilian and military, and possibly an answer
to why it's not so common anymore.

The tables & lists in my original book (Thanks for the plug, Mike! :-)
) were informational and quite useful for the preservation aspect as
well as for conversion.  They're neutral.  The (vastly expanded)
tables & lists in the new one are there for the same purpose -
information.  They also are neutral.

"Neutral" also describes my stance on the information being included.
If I wanted "pretty" I wouldn't include the post-Cessna parts or the
company's attempts at branching out (APR-9, sonar, coffee makers, etc)
or any of those other non-pretty parts.  As I've said before, not all
of it's pretty but it is part of the equipment's history.  Not its
useful history as originally designed and utilized but the whole
story, end to end.

So, as far as the book is concerned, only one opinion counts as to
what goes in it (which is pretty much everything I can find).  Mine.

Oh, as originally built, the 03A3 barrel had a nasty habit of walking
after a few rounds were fired through it.  Sporterizing included
bedding in the barrel much better which made a significant improvement
in its accuracy.  I got all mine via the NRA and not a one of them
could fire a decent group until they were hacked up ... er,modified.

Bring on the flames!

BEst regards,

Michael, WH7HG
From kargo_cult at msn.com  Mon Jun 16 22:35:36 2008
From: kargo_cult at msn.com (Hue Miller)
Date: Mon Jun 16 22:37:58 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Re: [ARC5] Re: History of ham mods; opinions?
References: <10749887.1213633026514.JavaMail.root@elwamui-royal.atl.sa.earthlink.net><9ccb8c510806161325g66b064b7ie30ac11a10f696d8@mail.gmail.com>
	<4856F17E.2060507@sbcglobal.net>
Message-ID: <BAY125-DAV42C8B45A94A5630E36DB2E4A80@phx.gbl>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jack Antonio" <scr287@sbcglobal.net>

> Something overlooked in this dialogue
> of modified WWII gear, are the "professional modifications".
> These usages probably rate just as much mention as amateur
> usage.

Jack - good point. Another example would be the AM boat
radios built out of BC-375s, ARBs, and BC-654s by a couple
of firms in California. 

I have come to appreciate well-done "c*nversions" ( sorry about
using that word ). I would like to some a website collection of photos
of nicely done modified equipment. For example a SSB rig built out
of a Command Set. ( Anyone with the ability and smarts to be able
to do that, is pretty sure to do a neat job. )

I saw a BC-348 a few years back that it took me some minutes to
recognize it, the repackaging was so radical. But- if one held no
a priori purist complaints, it actually looked like a neat receiver.
I do regret not buying it at the time. -Hue 
From wh7hg.hi at gmail.com  Mon Jun 16 22:38:40 2008
From: wh7hg.hi at gmail.com (Michael Tauson)
Date: Mon Jun 16 22:39:27 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Re: [ARC5] Re: History of ham mods; opinions?
In-Reply-To: <c34299fb0806161911x36270853nd2fcdf06ae9a9fd6@mail.gmail.com>
References: <10749887.1213633026514.JavaMail.root@elwamui-royal.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
	<9ccb8c510806161325g66b064b7ie30ac11a10f696d8@mail.gmail.com>
	<4856F17E.2060507@sbcglobal.net>
	<c34299fb0806161911x36270853nd2fcdf06ae9a9fd6@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <c34299fb0806161938k715eacc7ma862d21aaaa2e47e@mail.gmail.com>

Fast followup ...

On a personal level, I do not promote modification of virgin equipment
but do support the idea of recovery of equipment that can be restored
economically, with "economically" being defined on an individual
basis.  I do not insist that equipment in my collection be pristine
and in NOS/NIB condition but prefer that it have some "character" to
it.  Others feel otherwise which makes it easier for me in a way.

On the other talon, non-virgin and seriously broken equipment is
subject to ... whatever.  That can include conversion, parts, being
made into something entirely different or being "kitbashed" into
something quite useful to replace something no longer available.

Part of that includes an attempt at creating the bathtubless Type K
varient shown in one of Gordon White's articles that was shown the
Army prior to their purchase of the ARA/ATA equipment as the
SCR-274-N.  Another part includes creating a "best guess" at the NRL
crystal controlled ARA/ATA equipment.  And yet another part is to
locate bent, broken & twisted racks & shock mounts to rebuild into the
ones I need using skills learned as an aircraft mechanic - including
soldering & welding aluminum.

Oh, and one part will be a rig made from converted Command equipment.

BEst regards,

Michael, WH7HG
From etgreeley at earthlink.net  Mon Jun 16 22:46:59 2008
From: etgreeley at earthlink.net (Edward Greeley)
Date: Mon Jun 16 22:47:55 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Re: [ARC5] Re: History of ham mods; opinions?
In-Reply-To: <4856F17E.2060507@sbcglobal.net>
References: <10749887.1213633026514.JavaMail.root@elwamui-royal.atl.sa.earthlink.net>	<9ccb8c510806161325g66b064b7ie30ac11a10f696d8@mail.gmail.com>
	<4856F17E.2060507@sbcglobal.net>
Message-ID: <485725A3.2050304@earthlink.net>

Well, I know for a fact, having observed it, that AN/APN-9 LORAN 
receivers were used, unmodified, aboard commercial fishing boats until 
the old 1700 KHz LORAN system was phased out. That was easy to do since 
the boats were mostly diesels with 24 to 32 volt elec. systems and 
rotary inverters to supply the 115 volt, 400 Hz needed for primary power 
were readily available then. I also "heard", but never saw, that the 
earlier AN/APN-4 LORANs were also used on some vessels. Then, too, I 
"heard" that BC-375s were used on fishing boats in the far east until 
fairly recently (late 1970s). Since I was never in the far east I can't 
vouch for that, but some US surplus dealers told me that "a lot" of 
BC-375s were being sold to far east interests for that purpose.

BTW, if anyone is interested, I have a fairly decent AN/APN-9 that would 
be suitable for a war-bird resto or a collection that I would sell for 
real cheap. Complete except for the rubber viewing hood, but otherwise 
unmolested and original, but well used. I need the space for other "new" 
toys.

FWIW,
Ed Greeley



  Jack Antonio wrote:

> Something overlooked in this dialogue
> of modified WWII gear, are the "professional modifications".
> These usages probably rate just as much mention as amateur
> usage.
> 
> Examples.
> 
> I have heard of the airlines rebuilding BC-348s into rack
> panels, with AC supplies. Saw an ad once for a BC-348 so
> rebuilt by Delta Airlines, I was too late to snag it.
> 
> I have an NAB (National Association of Broadcasters)Engineering
> Handbook which has a chapter on converting an SCR-508 for use on the 26 
> MC/s remote pickup frequencies.
> 
> SCR-269s being used on fishing boats for direction finding.
> 
> Any other examples of WWII surplus being used professionally?
> 
> Jack Antonio WA7DIA

From w1eof at hamnutz.com  Mon Jun 16 23:24:28 2008
From: w1eof at hamnutz.com (w1eof@hamnutz.com)
Date: Mon Jun 16 23:25:20 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] WANTED: SO-80 connector
In-Reply-To: <20080616212857.17E7C859BF6@mailman.qth.net>
References: <20080616212857.17E7C859BF6@mailman.qth.net>
Message-ID: <48572E6C.1060205@hamnutz.com>

I now have two PL-160s to make up the cable from my BC-223 to the PE135 
dynamotor assy. I even found a company in the midwest that has rubber 
jacketed cable. Yeehah! Getting greedy but now I want a matching SO-80 
chassis connector for a power supply that will take the place of the 
dynamotor when I'm not in the mood for the whine. Anyone have one? Maybe 
an old dyno that is beyond repair?
 
73,

Mark W1EOF
From kk7iz at cox.net  Mon Jun 16 23:33:35 2008
From: kk7iz at cox.net (Lloyd KK7IZ)
Date: Mon Jun 16 23:34:37 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Re: [ARC5] Re: History of ham mods; opinions?
References: <10749887.1213633026514.JavaMail.root@elwamui-royal.atl.sa.earthlink.net><9ccb8c510806161325g66b064b7ie30ac11a10f696d8@mail.gmail.com><4856F17E.2060507@sbcglobal.net>
	<c34299fb0806161911x36270853nd2fcdf06ae9a9fd6@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <017d01c8d02a$ecd49de0$0201a8c0@userlvnwsus9dr>

Michael
No flames from this quarter. I applaud your efforts, having spent my life in 
general aviation.
Words from my mentor:
"Working in aviation is like working in a whore house. the better you 
perform, the more often they want to screw you".

rippppp sput  rippppp sputt sputt rippppp  sputter sputter 
roarrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
Now I got the Evenrude running in the cesspool, hear this. Everybody has an 
opinion. Opinions are like assholes, everybody has one, they all stink.
If it wasn't for mil surplus many of us would not be hams today. They give 
us hell for what we did to radios. I remember, 1955-57 there was a surplus 
yard at the south end of Boeing field on Federal Blvd where you waded thru 
the stuff and kicked it out of the way, they moved it around with a small 
tractor and sold it by the pound, or the guy up in the hills in Pennsylvania 
who had/has the stuff setting out in the weather.
Maybe I should have put the BC-375 and BC-348 I had away until I had a B-17 
to put them in. I can just see the thousands of B-17 ham shacks setting in 
back yards all over the country.
My soap box is on fire, so gotta go now.
Thanx
Lloyd  KK7IZ
kk7iz@cox.net


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Michael Tauson" <wh7hg.hi@gmail.com>
To: <arc5@mailman.qth.net>; <milsurplus@mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Monday, June 16, 2008 7:11 PM
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] Re: [ARC5] Re: History of ham mods; opinions?


> It's no secret I'm working on a book about Aircraft Radio Corporation
> and the company's equipment.  The company's history is a no-brainer
> since no one seems to actually care about that according to the
> discussions so far.  I think it has an important albeit small place in
> the Known History of the Western World and in this case only one
> opinion counts.  Mine.
>
> On the other appendage to be determined at a later date, the equipment
> is subject to intense debate.  Yes, the original use is important.
> That's why it was designed and built in the first place.  Not the
> military use or the civilian use but the original use in general.  But
> it's about the EQUIPMENT and that includes what happened after the
> original users didn't need them anymore.  That part includes
> conversions, modifications and repurposing in a variety of forms.
>
> Discussion of the post-original service fate is NOT promotion of that
> activity.  It isn't promotion of landfill or smelting or being thrown
> en masse into the ocean ... or being converted to satisfy some other
> need.  It IS discussion of what was and is the current state of
> A.R.C.'s equipment, both civilian and military, and possibly an answer
> to why it's not so common anymore.
>
> The tables & lists in my original book (Thanks for the plug, Mike! :-)
> ) were informational and quite useful for the preservation aspect as
> well as for conversion.  They're neutral.  The (vastly expanded)
> tables & lists in the new one are there for the same purpose -
> information.  They also are neutral.
>
> "Neutral" also describes my stance on the information being included.
> If I wanted "pretty" I wouldn't include the post-Cessna parts or the
> company's attempts at branching out (APR-9, sonar, coffee makers, etc)
> or any of those other non-pretty parts.  As I've said before, not all
> of it's pretty but it is part of the equipment's history.  Not its
> useful history as originally designed and utilized but the whole
> story, end to end.
>
> So, as far as the book is concerned, only one opinion counts as to
> what goes in it (which is pretty much everything I can find).  Mine.
>
> Oh, as originally built, the 03A3 barrel had a nasty habit of walking
> after a few rounds were fired through it.  Sporterizing included
> bedding in the barrel much better which made a significant improvement
> in its accuracy.  I got all mine via the NRA and not a one of them
> could fire a decent group until they were hacked up ... er,modified.
>
> Bring on the flames!
>
> BEst regards,
>
> Michael, WH7HG
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus@mailman.qth.net
> 

From kargo_cult at msn.com  Tue Jun 17 00:09:48 2008
From: kargo_cult at msn.com (Hue Miller)
Date: Tue Jun 17 00:12:14 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Re: [ARC5] Re: History of ham mods; opinions?
References: <10749887.1213633026514.JavaMail.root@elwamui-royal.atl.sa.earthlink.net><9ccb8c510806161325g66b064b7ie30ac11a10f696d8@mail.gmail.com><4856F17E.2060507@sbcglobal.net><c34299fb0806161911x36270853nd2fcdf06ae9a9fd6@mail.gmail.com>
	<017d01c8d02a$ecd49de0$0201a8c0@userlvnwsus9dr>
Message-ID: <BAY125-DAV82C0BCDF9216CC7D463B8E4A80@phx.gbl>

Lloyd-  if you were around Puget Sound in the  1950s ( i was not - til a decade later )
do you recall:

-The Lynnwood WA tool rental place out on Hwy 99 that had a surplus single engine 
trainer plane up on the roof as an attention getter? I think it was finally sold off to some
collector in the 1970s. When i was in high school, the owner's son brought in to our 
electronics class a Command Set receiver from the plane, to try to figure out how to
fire it up.

-That surplus place over in West Seattle run by Bill Zinn?  He passed away in the
1970s sometime. In the early 1980s i and another ham or 2 would get periodic invitations
over to the widow's home, these visits mediated by an old family friend ham, to dig out
things to buy, from his leftover stock. Wm. Zinn had been a super packrat too, bless his
soul, and thus i have some rare manuals from his marine radio work days, such as spark
equipment manuals and instructions for some uncommon receivers. Unfortunately, the visits
all had to fit into a 10:00 to 15:00 time frame, every several months, which altho we harvested
TONS and TONS of goodies, when her ham friend who mediated the visits passed on, the
visit invitations ended. A couple years ago i spoke with a local fellow there who had been in
on the final-final estate sale there, and there was still mucho stuff there. He told me about
a couple SW-3's i had not had time to find. One SW-3 he said was unused in box. 
I remember seeing a modulator for the TA-12, crates of NIB MN-26's, and TONS of trans-
formers and god knows what else. 
We got stuff at a reasonable price but you know what, by my knowledge of the early 
equipment and what to look for, i am carrying on the chain of preservation of material
that otherwise might well have perished.

One friend got a Japanese walkie talkie there, this was a Nippon knock off of a BC-611
in package style but they were only able to fit a one-tube walkie talkie circuit in it.
This is about the rarest of any Japanese radio. You can reckon its value.  The fellow
who got it, my friend, all i've been able to figure out from sketchy hints, is that when he
brought it into his home, his wife started having bad dreams of  Japanese soldiers screaming.
I offered him some super trades for it. My suspicion is that it ended up being thrown into a 
lake in the north of Everett WA area. 

-I wonder if you're thinking of "Aircraft  Equipment and Salvage", i think the name was?
Strange incident: in the late 1970s i bought a Japanese one-tube walkie-talkie, type 94-6,
from a guy who told me he'd literally picked it up off the ground, one step ahead of a
bulldozer, at that firm's yard. Explain that! I can't!

-Western Surplus, across from Radar Electric? I worked there for a time. Heard lots of
interesting tales, like the guy who got an aircraft radio ARC-whatever from a crashed
USAF plane out on the Olympic Peninsula forests?

-Pacific Surplus on First Avenue ( "skid road", then )?

-Nuclear Surplus? I never was there myself. Heard lots of stories - like the owner 
staggering around outside, drunk...

-"Black and Tan" surplus (that's not the real name, but what it was called, based on the
owners.

Regards- Hue  ( don't start me talkin' )
From kargo_cult at msn.com  Tue Jun 17 00:21:39 2008
From: kargo_cult at msn.com (Hue Miller)
Date: Tue Jun 17 00:24:04 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] SCR-240 in surplus ???
References: <10749887.1213633026514.JavaMail.root@elwamui-royal.atl.sa.earthlink.net><9ccb8c510806161325g66b064b7ie30ac11a10f696d8@mail.gmail.com><4856F17E.2060507@sbcglobal.net><c34299fb0806161911x36270853nd2fcdf06ae9a9fd6@mail.gmail.com><017d01c8d02a$ecd49de0$0201a8c0@userlvnwsus9dr>
	<BAY125-DAV82C0BCDF9216CC7D463B8E4A80@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <BAY125-DAV1FD20F289D04AD67038CAE4A80@phx.gbl>

I have a book that's entitled 
" OAD Surplus Property Display III
Electronics and Communications Equipment"

undated. It lists the SCR-240.
Did these, any, make it to the surplus market?????
WHERE did they go?????
-Hue M.
From jcoward5452 at aol.com  Tue Jun 17 01:20:25 2008
From: jcoward5452 at aol.com (jcoward5452@aol.com)
Date: Tue Jun 17 01:21:21 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] TCS Antenna advice
In-Reply-To: <bfd.35810598.358752dd@cs.com>
References: <bfd.35810598.358752dd@cs.com>
Message-ID: <8CA9E50FAF4ADCC-136C-6D1@webmail-nd02.sysops.aol.com>

Jim and Robert,
  I was under the impression,from on line conversations some years back, 
with PT Boat crew members,that the PT whip was solid Monel, about 20 ft 
long.The ground was probably a hull mounted plate back near the shafts 
so as to always be in the water.My uncle, Commander Richard 
Lamborn,deceased, could have told us all...Sadly I was too young to ask.
  A large number of PT's were burned en masse in the Phillapeans when 
the war ended, including my uncles.A dive on the site may render 
clues...but who has the dough to go and look?
  The last time I had my TCS loaded it worked fine into a 60 ft long 
wire on 80 meters with a good copper rod 6 feet under.
 Jim,
  you saw how poorly my TCS worked at MRCG 2007! De-Oxit is the cure but 
with careful application.
 Jay KE6PPF


-----Original Message-----
From: WA5CAB@cs.com
To: mcenfalz@humboldt1.com; milsurplus@mailman.qth.net
Sent: Sun, 15 Jun 2008 10:23 pm
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] TCS Antenna advice


Jim,

You've run into the quandry faced by all of the WW-II vintage sets that 
used open wire from the radio to the antenna.? However, I've never 
heard of a "standard" 20' whip antenna.? I've seen reference to a 16' 
whip used on small craft.? But I don't know of anyone who ever acquired 
one.? And there may have been a 25' whip, although I can't recall where 
I saw the reference.? The standard Navy shipboard whip antenna is (or 
at least was when I left the Blue Water Navy and transferred to the 
Mine Force in 1975) 35' tall and about 2" or 3" in diameter at the base 
insulator.? Generically referred to by all hands concerned with them as 
35' whips.? An Essex Class Carrier would have had maybe two dozen of 
them in fixed mounts on the island structure and on fold-over mounts 
along the flight deck edge.? FRAM-2 DD's had maybe eight.? I never 
served on anything in between.

TCS's modified for submarine service have Type N connectors on the 
front panel and a different antenna loading coil unit also equipped 
with N connectors.

In Army vehicles early to mid-War, the length of the antenna (number of 
3' mast sections used if the radio was VHF) was adjusted for the 
feed-line length inside the vehicle.? After which, conversions to 
coaxial cable became more common.

The two TCS on USS Valley Forge were both located in the island 
structure and fed wire antennas of about 30' length.? And can't recall 
the details of one of them but the one I often played with had about a 
10' feedline supported on stand-off insulators to a feed-through 
insulator on the starboard bulkhead.? The antenna was connected to the 
outer end of the insulator.? Coincidentally, that's about the same 
antenna that I have here.? Except that the antenna portion is nearly 
horizontal instead of nearly vertical up to the yard-arm.

In a message dated 6/15/2008 11:38:59 PM Central Daylight Time, 
mcenfalz@humboldt1.com writes:

I am trying to approximate the vertical antenna system a TCS drove 
while in typical service so as to maximize its output. From what I have 
collected online from PT Boat and Landing Craft sites, looks like the 
radio sat on the side closest to the antenna trunk (~8 " square 
vertical metal conduit w/feed line centered inside it). These trunks 
were located next to the conn/bridge and look similar to what I have 
seen in photos of the LCI(L)-1091. Both had a fat isolator/antenna 
mount at the top of the trunk to support the whip.
?
However.......as I understand these beasts from prior discussions on 
this forum, the TX expects the antenna to begin at the antenna lug on 
the exterior of the case. So, my quandary: if this thing was designed 
to drive a "20 foot whip" what about that extra cable running from the 
TX to the trunking and up to the antenna? Is there an optimum feed line 
length? I have not found anything in my TCS-13 manual as to 
onboard/vehicular mounting regarding whips and feed line configurations.
?
On the LCI(L)-1091, I understand that the feed line was a fat, 3/4"-1" 
wide strap of copper braid that went from the TX in the radio room up 
the interior wall to several insulators on the ceiling, forward most of 
10-15 feet into another cabin, then up thru the deck another ~15' 
inside the cable trunk that ended near the top of the bridge/conn, and 
then into the famous 20' whip. By definition, you had RF in the shack 
and a 50 foot inverted-L "antenna" partially enclosed in a steel box.
?
I ran mine at a local air show last week using a 16 foot whip and 15 
feet of feed line (RF safety) in conjunction w/ a single 1/4 wave tuned 
counterpoise expecting great results, but the thing only indicated 0.7 
RF A at best. It supposedly should run closer to 1.5 A. When hooked 
into my old OCFD (pseudo-Windom) via T network tuner, I would push 1 A. 
Figured the sky was the limit w/the whip.
?
I tried to "do the right thing" and go vertical w/dismal results. What 
gives?





?
However.......as I understand these beasts from prior discussions on 
this forum, the TX expects the antenna to begin at the antenna lug on 
the exterior of the case. So, my quandary: if this thing was designed 
to drive a "20 foot whip" what about that extra cable running from the 
TX to the trunking and up to the antenna? Is there an optimum feed line 
length? I have not found anything in my TCS-13 manual as to 
onboard/vehicular mounting regarding whips and feed line configurations.
?
On the LCI(L)-1091, I understand that the feed line was a fat, 3/4"-1" 
wide strap of copper braid that went from the TX in the radio room up 
the interior wall to several insulators on the ceiling, forward most of 
10-15 feet into another cabin, then up thru the deck another ~15' 
inside the cable trunk that ended near the top of the bridge/conn, and 
then into the famous 20' whip. By definition, you had RF in the shack 
and a 50 foot inverted-L "antenna" partially enclosed in a steel box.
?
I ran mine at a local air show last week using a 16 foot whip and 15 
feet of feed line (RF safety) in conjunction w/ a single 1/4 wave tuned 
counterpoise expecting great results, but the thing only indicated 0.7 
RF A at best. It supposedly should run closer to 1.5 A. When hooked 
into my old OCFD (pseudo-Windom) via T network tuner, I would push 1 A. 
Figured the sky was the limit w/the whip.
?
I tried to "do the right thing" and go vertical w/dismal results. What 
gives?



Robert & Susan Downs - Houston
<http://www.wa5cab.com>; (Web Store)
MVPA 9480
<wa5cab@cs.com> (Primary email)
<wa5cab@comcast.net> (Backup email)


______________________________________________________________
Milsurplus mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Milsurplus@mailman.qth.net




______________________________________________________________
Milsurplus mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Milsurplus@mailman.qth.net

From robandpj at earthlink.net  Tue Jun 17 06:12:55 2008
From: robandpj at earthlink.net (Rob Flory)
Date: Tue Jun 17 06:13:45 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] TCS Antenna Advice
Message-ID: <4146894.1213697576082.JavaMail.root@elwamui-milano.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

Hi,

.7A antenna current could be satisfactory.  The impedance of the antenna will determine how much current you can get.  I don't think you mentioned whether that was in AM or CW mode.

Short antennas, 1/8 wave and lower have lower resistive components of impedance and will show higher currents, but not necessarily work better. My 10' whip on my car loads on 3.8Mc with over 1.5A, but doesn't work that well(no surprise).  The TCS does want an antenna that shows capacitive reactance, ie shorter than a quarter wavelength, but you can trick it into loading into a longer antenna with external circuits.  

In addition to antenna current you need to pay attention to your maximum loaded plate current. When you get maximum antenna current, you should be close to the plate current marked on the meter.  If you are not able to load fully, you might need to change something with your antenna.  

Now, you are replicating a historical antenna, so you don't have as much flexibility as those of us who are just hamming.  One thing about whips on ships, is that they are great for communicating between ships sitting on salt water on surface wave.  That is all a TCS on an LCI was probably ever expected to do.  On a larger ship like the MASSACHUSETTS that was expected to be able to communicate over long distances they had 500-watt transmitters.

You will get much better results on CW as well.  I have worked stations out to 500 miles on 3.5Mc with the 10-foot whip from my car on CW.  On AM I think 7 miles is about as far as I have worked.

Long story short, if you are getting full plate current, adjust your expectations of what you will be able to do on the air.  How about a buddy "on the beach" with a TBX to talk your LCI in?  

Good luck,
Rob Flory

From cosmoline at aa4rm.ba-watch.org  Tue Jun 17 07:24:59 2008
From: cosmoline at aa4rm.ba-watch.org (Marty Reynolds)
Date: Tue Jun 17 07:29:02 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Re: [ARC5] Re: History of ham mods; opinions?
In-Reply-To: <4856F17E.2060507@sbcglobal.net>
References: <10749887.1213633026514.JavaMail.root@elwamui-royal.atl.sa.earthlink.net><9ccb8c510806161325g66b064b7ie30ac11a10f696d8@mail.gmail.com>
	<4856F17E.2060507@sbcglobal.net>
Message-ID: <10687.24.30.81.88.1213701899.squirrel@fracas.netboobie.org>

Jack you wrote:

>
> Any other examples of WWII surplus being used professionally?
>

There was a company in Miami called Airinc that re-did ARC-4s
to again become WE 233s.  But this time outside the short-lived
pre-ww2 140-144 vhf window

Have seen an example or 2 @ Dayton


From arc5 at ix.netcom.com  Tue Jun 17 09:38:53 2008
From: arc5 at ix.netcom.com (David Stinson)
Date: Tue Jun 17 09:39:59 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Very OT: Pacifists  (Was: opinions?)
References: <10749887.1213633026514.JavaMail.root@elwamui-royal.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
	<9ccb8c510806161325g66b064b7ie30ac11a10f696d8@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <C80EF61E25484B4BA8B821FF73652F44@boudreaux>

Ever read the history of the Quakers in the early settlement 
of the Americas, and how many people died to protect those
who would not help protect either themselves or their neighbors?  

     "Pacifism is a fashion statement purchased
        with other people's blood..."

    " Peace and brotherhood are wonderful dreams
       which are dead impotent against cold steel...."

http://home.netcom.com/~arc5/usa2100.jpg

From whitaker at pa.net  Tue Jun 17 09:56:47 2008
From: whitaker at pa.net (C Whitaker)
Date: Tue Jun 17 09:58:24 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Springfield '03 A3 (was: Ham mods)
In-Reply-To: <23782915.357951213652876262.JavaMail.root@vms168.mailsrvcs.net>
References: <23782915.357951213652876262.JavaMail.root@vms168.mailsrvcs.net>
Message-ID: <4857C29F.1080904@pa.net>

de WB2CPN
In my experience with USAF radio equipment
the operators and/or maintenance men who were
technically inclined did have a closer
relationship to the radio equipment.  To others
it was just a "Push-To-Talk" (tm) environment.
We always had some "Hams" around, and they often
made equipment do what it was never intended to
do.  Such as doubling in the final of the BC-610
to work 10 meters.  Or building a Tri-Tet type
oscillator inside a BC-610 tuning unit.  Or
putting fans on the outside of the BC-191.  Or
building AC supplies for BC-312 and BC-348.  All
this was in the 1947 time frame.
Fun Time back then.
73  Clete


From whitaker at pa.net  Tue Jun 17 10:14:17 2008
From: whitaker at pa.net (C Whitaker)
Date: Tue Jun 17 10:15:53 2008
Subject: [ARC5] Re: [Milsurplus] History of Ham Mods: Opinions?
In-Reply-To: <12505.24.30.81.88.1213621647.squirrel@fracas.netboobie.org>
References: <552E4E6FAA8D4A2CA804D11A8297038B@boudreaux><E1K7ugF-0005Aq-EH@elasmtp-spurfowl.atl.sa.earthlink.net>	<4855B23E.9020601@aafradio.org>
	<12505.24.30.81.88.1213621647.squirrel@fracas.netboobie.org>
Message-ID: <4857C6B9.20500@pa.net>

de WB2CPN
Those "half folded dipoles" were quarter
wave, or odd multiple thereof, verticals.
As you said, they had one reflector element.
You see a lot of folded verticals on the
50 MHz Commercial band.
The first Yagi arrays I ever saw were on a
German night fighter.  It had four on the
plane's nose. All it took was a simple antenna
switch and a synchronized CRT for the pilot.
73  Clete




From wf2u at ws19ops.com  Tue Jun 17 10:19:19 2008
From: wf2u at ws19ops.com (wf2u@ws19ops.com)
Date: Tue Jun 17 10:20:28 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Springfield '03 A3 (was: Ham mods)
In-Reply-To: <4856DF9B.40708@greenradios.com>
References: <004401c8cff3$35620d00$ef04b4d8@yourxb2x7j77gn>
	<4856DF9B.40708@greenradios.com>
Message-ID: <20080617091919.pcbfpj8ois08kw4g@webmail.opentransfer.com>


I'm all for pacifism! Which means pacifying your enemies until they  
either make peace or are dead.
Pacifism is when you want and hopefully have peace but prepare for  
war, just in case the other side doesn't believe in pacifism.

Your king of pacifism, withoput an army (you so hate) to protect you  
and your beliefs, you either end up being dead or a slave, inflicted  
on you by others, who don't believe in peace.
To be a pacifist and hate the military invites others to shed their  
blood for you so you can go on and continue with your self-delusion.

I pity you, sir!

de WF2U


Quoting Wammes Witkop <wammes@greenradios.com>:

> Group,
>
> After sitting on them hands for what feels like ages I *do* jump in.
> 'Cause Eric does make some valuable remarks here...
> Me, I am a pacifist. I hate the army. I got out of it too, being too
> tall. Nope, they did not draft me. No way - I'd have gone for Section
> Five, the local - Dutch - Loony Bin, if I had not been just too tall to
> fit them uniforms. Great word actually, uniform, if you are over two
> meters...
>
>
From Military1944 at aol.com  Tue Jun 17 11:33:21 2008
From: Military1944 at aol.com (Military1944@aol.com)
Date: Tue Jun 17 11:32:46 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Springfield '03 A3 (was: Ham mods)
Message-ID: <c43.35ebd3bb.35893341@aol.com>

 
In a message dated 16/06/2008 22:48:16 GMT Daylight Time,  
wammes@greenradios.com writes:

Me, I am  a pacifist. I hate the army. I got out of it too, being too 
tall. Nope,  they did not draft me. No way - I'd have gone for Section 
Five, the local  - Dutch - Loony Bin, if I had not been just too tall to 
fit them uniforms.  Great word actually, uniform, if you are over two  
meters...



----------------------------
 
You 'hate' the army eh?   All armies? How about them armies that  travelled 
to foreign shores in 44 and 45, spilt their blood, just to free up a  bunch of 
tall loony Dutch people?
 
Frankly matey, I know a lot of people who have been in the army and  suffered 
for it, just for others, so I find your comments offensive. 
 
You collect mil radios? lets hope you don't get one with some heroes blood  
on it.
 
So nice to know they died so you could collect. 
 
Loony? I should say so. 
 
Ben G4BXD
 
A 'pacifist' is the last one left standing.
 
 
. 
 
 



   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080617/97ea9f06/attachment.htm
From WA5CAB at cs.com  Tue Jun 17 13:05:12 2008
From: WA5CAB at cs.com (WA5CAB@cs.com)
Date: Tue Jun 17 13:06:21 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] TCS Antenna advice
Message-ID: <d56.136eac65.358948c8@cs.com>

Ooops.  Wrong button.

Come to think of it, I've heard the same story, but know of no one who ever 
found one of the things.

In a message dated 6/17/2008 12:20:25 AM Central Daylight Time, 
Jcoward5452@aol.com writes: 
> Jim and Robert,
>   I was under the impression,from on line conversations some years back, 
> with PT Boat crew members,that the PT whip was solid Monel, about 20 ft 
> long.The ground was probably a hull mounted plate back near the shafts 
> so as to always be in the water.My uncle, Commander Richard 
> Lamborn,deceased, could have told us all...Sadly I was too young to ask.
>   A large number of PT's were burned en masse in the Phillapeans when 
> the war ended, including my uncles.A dive on the site may render 
> clues...but who has the dough to go and look?
>   The last time I had my TCS loaded it worked fine into a 60 ft long 
> wire on 80 meters with a good copper rod 6 feet under.
> Jim,
>   you saw how poorly my TCS worked at MRCG 2007! De-Oxit is the cure but 
> with careful application.
> Jay KE6PPF
> 

Robert Downs - Houston
<http://www.wa5cab.com> (Web Store)
MVPA 9480
<wa5cab@cs.com> (Primary email)
<wa5cab@comcast.net> (Backup email)
   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080617/6bf70868/attachment.htm
From radio at telus.net  Tue Jun 17 14:41:29 2008
From: radio at telus.net (Bruce MacMillan)
Date: Tue Jun 17 13:42:30 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] RAB receiver info
Message-ID: <48580559.7040008@telus.net>

Looking for info or a source of info for the RAB receiver made by RCA 
for the US Navy. If I don't get a hernia getting this home from Tom 
Brent I want to check it out before the smoke test.

Bruce   ve7mt

From al at ar88.net  Tue Jun 17 14:13:03 2008
From: al at ar88.net (Al Klase)
Date: Tue Jun 17 14:11:06 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] RAB receiver info
In-Reply-To: <48580559.7040008@telus.net>
References: <48580559.7040008@telus.net>
Message-ID: <4857FEAF.5030206@ar88.net>

Hi Bruce,

There's some info on my website, including a schematic, and pix from the
manual.
See:  http://www.skywaves.ar88.net/commrx/RCA/RCA.html

I have, on loan, an RAE manual that I haven't had time to scan.  RAE is
three RAB's in diversity for a gross weight of about 3/4 tom.  The book
includes all the RAB details.

Do you have the radio?

Al

Bruce MacMillan wrote:
> Looking for info or a source of info for the RAB receiver made by RCA 
> for the US Navy. If I don't get a hernia getting this home from Tom 
> Brent I want to check it out before the smoke test.
>
> Bruce   ve7mt
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus@mailman.qth.net
>
>

-- 
Al Klase - N3FRQ
Flemington, NJ
http://www.skywaves.ar88.net/


From wa3bzt at verizon.net  Tue Jun 17 14:17:37 2008
From: wa3bzt at verizon.net (Edward J White)
Date: Tue Jun 17 14:20:44 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] RAB receiver info
In-Reply-To: <4857FEAF.5030206@ar88.net>
References: <48580559.7040008@telus.net> <4857FEAF.5030206@ar88.net>
Message-ID: <4857FFC1.2000805@verizon.net>

Hi Gang:
Well that is what I call a "RECEIVER" True brute force.
Wish I had one?
Ed
WA3BZT


Al Klase wrote:
> Hi Bruce,
>
> There's some info on my website, including a schematic, and pix from the
> manual.
> See:  http://www.skywaves.ar88.net/commrx/RCA/RCA.html
>
> I have, on loan, an RAE manual that I haven't had time to scan.  RAE is
> three RAB's in diversity for a gross weight of about 3/4 tom.  The book
> includes all the RAB details.
>
> Do you have the radio?
>
> Al
>
> Bruce MacMillan wrote:
>> Looking for info or a source of info for the RAB receiver made by RCA 
>> for the US Navy. If I don't get a hernia getting this home from Tom 
>> Brent I want to check it out before the smoke test.
>>
>> Bruce   ve7mt
>>
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> Milsurplus mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:Milsurplus@mailman.qth.net
>>
>>
>
From wf2u at ws19ops.com  Tue Jun 17 14:27:57 2008
From: wf2u at ws19ops.com (wf2u@ws19ops.com)
Date: Tue Jun 17 14:31:48 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] RAB receiver info
In-Reply-To: <48580559.7040008@telus.net>
References: <48580559.7040008@telus.net>
Message-ID: <20080617132757.qq6jdo8qgw8g8cwo@webmail.opentransfer.com>



Bruce,

You lucky dog...

You realize that Tom may have the only RAB in "captivity"?
Does he have the original desk it's mounted on?

Enjoy! It should be a great performing receiver even in today's environment.

73, Meir WF2U
Landrum, SC


Quoting Bruce MacMillan <radio@telus.net>:

> Looking for info or a source of info for the RAB receiver made by RCA
> for the US Navy. If I don't get a hernia getting this home from Tom
> Brent I want to check it out before the smoke test.
>
> Bruce   ve7mt
>
>
From etgreeley at earthlink.net  Wed Jun 18 00:22:11 2008
From: etgreeley at earthlink.net (Edward Greeley)
Date: Wed Jun 18 00:23:17 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] R-649A Coast Guard Receiver parts available gratis.
Message-ID: <48588D73.8030106@earthlink.net>

Good evening all,

Last week (I think it was) there was a thread running about a different 
subject but which mentioned the R-649 as a sort of side issue. That 
reminded me that 20 - 25 or so years ago I bought five or six R-649s 
from the DRMO at Griffiss AFB, NY. IIRC, the units had been removed from 
Coast Guard Station Sodus Point (?) on Lake Ontario. The units were in 
so-so condition and most of them came with a nice power line isolation 
transformer since they were used in a shoreside environment.

I thought I was going to keep the best of the lot for myself and sell 
the rest of them to folks who wanted a so-so general coverage receiver.
Silly me! They were pretty lousy receivers - all of them. I wound up 
giving the things away to get them out of my way. The unit I kept for 
myself became parts after a couple of years. So here's the deal: I have 
the set of IF transformers, the BFO transformer, and the 12 RF coils for 
the front end. I'm not sure if that's all the front end coils or not but 
it must be most of them. I saved the tuning gang too, but haven't turned 
it up yet and may no longer have it. I also have the "R-649A/UR" 
nomenclature plate, for serial number 97, contract number TCG 39599, in 
pretty nice condition, as well as the "Operating Instructions" plate 
that goes on the front panel. I DO NOT have any of the Halliscratchers 
skirted knobs - sorry, traded them off years ago.

This stuff is available to anyone who needs/can use it just for the cost 
of USPS postage from ZIP 36605 - Mobile, AL. Please reply off-list if 
interested.

Ed Greeley
From wh7hg.hi at gmail.com  Wed Jun 18 01:10:42 2008
From: wh7hg.hi at gmail.com (Michael Tauson)
Date: Wed Jun 18 01:11:41 2008
Subject: [ARC5] Re: [Milsurplus] History of Ham Mods: Opinions?
In-Reply-To: <4857C6B9.20500@pa.net>
References: <552E4E6FAA8D4A2CA804D11A8297038B@boudreaux>
	<E1K7ugF-0005Aq-EH@elasmtp-spurfowl.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
	<4855B23E.9020601@aafradio.org>
	<12505.24.30.81.88.1213621647.squirrel@fracas.netboobie.org>
	<4857C6B9.20500@pa.net>
Message-ID: <c34299fb0806172210h8b389ffubeedd43766c48712@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 4:14 AM, C Whitaker <whitaker@pa.net> wrote:

> The first Yagi arrays I ever saw were on a German night fighter.  It had four on the plane's
> nose.

That wouldn't happened to have been an HE-219 Uhu, would it?  I know
it had an array on it like that.  The Ju-88 and Bf-110 night fighter
variants had a different array.  I think.

Best regards,

Michael, WH7HG
From jcoward5452 at aol.com  Wed Jun 18 01:54:27 2008
From: jcoward5452 at aol.com (jcoward5452@aol.com)
Date: Wed Jun 18 01:55:27 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Re: [ARC5] Re: History of ham mods; opinions?
In-Reply-To: <485725A3.2050304@earthlink.net>
References: <10749887.1213633026514.JavaMail.root@elwamui-royal.atl.sa.earthlink.net>	<9ccb8c510806161325g66b064b7ie30ac11a10f696d8@mail.gmail.com>	<4856F17E.2060507@sbcglobal.net>
	<485725A3.2050304@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <8CA9F1EE729FA28-BAC-3928@webmail-nc04.sysops.aol.com>



Gee, No one liked my idea of an appendix for the Ham Mod info.It could 
be short and sweet and provide the nessessary references.And who reads 
appedices anyway except those looking for further info?
  Why all the "hot and bother"? I got tired of reading all the "sour 
grapes" mail on this thread... so I just deleted about 10 or 15 
messages as I learned nothing and my eyes are sore...
  Sounds like this project of a "guide" has become a "tome" before it 
has even been written.The gathered opinions may just deter the 
prospective author from even attepting to publish his "guide".
 Too bad.
 Nite All,
             Jay
From kargo_cult at msn.com  Wed Jun 18 03:26:50 2008
From: kargo_cult at msn.com (Hue Miller)
Date: Wed Jun 18 03:29:25 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Re: : History of ham mods; opinions?
References: <10749887.1213633026514.JavaMail.root@elwamui-royal.atl.sa.earthlink.net>	<9ccb8c510806161325g66b064b7ie30ac11a10f696d8@mail.gmail.com>	<4856F17E.2060507@sbcglobal.net><485725A3.2050304@earthlink.net>
	<8CA9F1EE729FA28-BAC-3928@webmail-nc04.sysops.aol.com>
Message-ID: <BAY125-DAV139728F8895835191CDBC5E4AB0@phx.gbl>

I have been thinking a long time of a "guide" or introduction
but at my usual progress, which will include another job 
change or two and a major move also, i'm sure, Michael 
will be into his 3rd edition before i even get down to it.
I was thinking more of something the size of an old FAIR
RADIO catalog; photos black&white and larger but not more
than 1/5 page size; an odd color photo; some photos scanned
in from Radio News magazine or others, or privately held photos;
no attempt at comprehensiveness or completeness; but photos
and info on interesting and practically found sets, but including
PRC-1 and and MBM and such; and some interesting lore, as
well as teaser photos with prices of SCR-240, for example;
1955 prices (post Korea War); Dymo label maker used to label
photos; about 20 pages; not expensively priced; and must 
include somewhere the words "Reparable" and "Same but 
different".  Oh, if i'm not clear yet, the format would be of a
pseudo-surplus catalog. Maybe it should even include an aircraft
or liberty ship advertisement listing also; i have the material to 
copy.  What fun! And oh yeah, would probably include a BC-14
and up to the GRC- FM Cold War equipment.  -Hue M. 
From bl_6000 at yahoo.com.au  Wed Jun 18 04:16:27 2008
From: bl_6000 at yahoo.com.au (Brad Latta)
Date: Wed Jun 18 04:17:32 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Code machine?
Message-ID: <686957.21574.qm@web38007.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Have a look at item #160249801881 . Looks like some sort of code machine.  Fairly expensive too,
                      Regards, Brad 


      Get the name you always wanted with the new y7mail email address.
www.yahoo7.com.au/mail
From holden7471 at msn.com  Wed Jun 18 07:03:55 2008
From: holden7471 at msn.com (howard holden)
Date: Wed Jun 18 07:04:55 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Code machine?
In-Reply-To: <686957.21574.qm@web38007.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <BLU125-F15CA84A466428DCEC2F9FEC4AB0@phx.gbl>

Hi Brad,

Googled M209B.

That's a WW2 signal corps field low level cipher machine, according to what 
I've read, only used for low level tactical situations. Easy to use, easy to 
teach, but also easy apparently to break. One source said average of 30 
characters per minute. 6 WPM? Really slow. Originally made by the Hagellin 
Corp, vintage late 30s? Neat little piece, but not in my wallet for $2500!

Howie WB2AWQ


>From: Brad Latta <bl_6000@yahoo.com.au>
>Reply-To: bl_6000@yahoo.com.au
>To: milsurplus@mailman.qth.net
>Subject: [Milsurplus] Code machine?
>Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2008 01:16:27 -0700 (PDT)
>
>Have a look at item #160249801881 . Looks like some sort of code machine.  
>Fairly expensive too,
>                       Regards, Brad
>


From mikea at mikea.ath.cx  Wed Jun 18 07:37:31 2008
From: mikea at mikea.ath.cx (Mike Andrews W5EGO)
Date: Wed Jun 18 07:38:32 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Code machine?
In-Reply-To: <686957.21574.qm@web38007.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <686957.21574.qm@web38007.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20080618113731.GB13497@mikea.ath.cx>

On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 01:16:27AM -0700, Brad Latta wrote:
> Have a look at item #160249801881 . Looks like some sort of code machine.  Fairly expensive too,
>                       Regards, Brad 
> 

It's a Hagelin C-36 cipher machine, which was used by the US military
as a field cipher machine under the name M-209. The price is in the 
usual range. I sure wish I had the one my math mentor had. Nice gadget
indeed, though only moderately secure. 

WOuld you believe it is based on hardware from a change-making 
system for use in coin-operated vending machines? True!

-- 
Mike Andrews, W5EGO
mikea@mikea.ath.cx
Tired old sysadmin 
From Military1944 at aol.com  Wed Jun 18 09:34:04 2008
From: Military1944 at aol.com (Military1944@aol.com)
Date: Wed Jun 18 09:35:03 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] French TRC-300 transeiver
Message-ID: <bfe.3d6615dc.358a68cc@aol.com>

Regarding the French Thomson TRC-300 hf rig.
 
I took mine off the shelf to play with, knew the batteries needed changing  
so dug out the original cells and cleaned the battery box up. While I thought  
how best to refill it I put it on an external supply only to find the auto 
tune  atu was not working. It appears to be 'hunting' and unable to know when its 
on  tune. 
 
Ah I thought, easy, obviously there must be a swr board in it, probably one  
of the diodes had somehow, while switched off and on the shelf, gone u/s. 
 
(I don't understand how things go faulty when they sit on shelves.  Obviously 
it was working the last time I used it and put it out to rest.)
 
Anyway, opens up the atu. Oh my gwad !!! there is a lot of stuff in there.  I 
cannot really figure it but I can see three sets of ferrite rings with wires  
and diodes near so its measuring forward and reflected power etc but there is 
a  whole bunch of electronics in there, even tuned circuits that look VHF if 
not  UHF in frequency, God knows what they are measuring. Anyway, its more 
than a  1N914 that's needed. 
 
So, does anyone have circuits ?   I did find one web site where  the guy 
stated he had info but have had no replay to a request as of yet. 
 
cheers, Ben G4BXD



   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080618/45f8792e/attachment.htm
From ka1kaq at gmail.com  Wed Jun 18 09:37:48 2008
From: ka1kaq at gmail.com (Todd, KA1KAQ)
Date: Wed Jun 18 09:38:48 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Re: [ARC5] Re: History of ham mods; opinions?
In-Reply-To: <8CA9F1EE729FA28-BAC-3928@webmail-nc04.sysops.aol.com>
References: <10749887.1213633026514.JavaMail.root@elwamui-royal.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
	<9ccb8c510806161325g66b064b7ie30ac11a10f696d8@mail.gmail.com>
	<4856F17E.2060507@sbcglobal.net> <485725A3.2050304@earthlink.net>
	<8CA9F1EE729FA28-BAC-3928@webmail-nc04.sysops.aol.com>
Message-ID: <9ccb8c510806180637x53209ab6qa2fcdfc00282e73b@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 1:54 AM,  <jcoward5452@aol.com> wrote:

> Gee, No one liked my idea of an appendix for the Ham Mod info.It could be
> short and sweet and provide the nessessary references.And who reads
> appedices anyway except those looking for further info?

I don't think that's completely the case, Jay. Most folks seem to
agree with including information about amateur history and use, just
not a road map for destruction. The assumption being that anyone
getting a modded unit could and would do the same as the rest of us,
if desired: locate the original surplus articles for
reverse-engineering. Maybe even having a listing of the publications
and dates under a special 'Removing Modifications' heading would be
appropriate.

Putting the actual diagrams and instructions for modification in the
same book as the description and history might end up making it the
latest and greatest 'Command Sets' modification guide, with enhanced
history. Probably not what the author has in mind.

Of course, anyone who is determined to modify an old set can and will.
I just wouldn't care to give them step-by-step instructions.
Considering the interests (and limited numbers) of today's new hams,
it's not likely to be a problem anyhow.

73 -

~ Todd,  KA1KAQ
From whitaker at pa.net  Wed Jun 18 12:09:08 2008
From: whitaker at pa.net (C Whitaker)
Date: Wed Jun 18 12:10:59 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Code machine?
In-Reply-To: <686957.21574.qm@web38007.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <686957.21574.qm@web38007.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <48593324.2050908@pa.net>

de WB2CPN
I saw one in use while in USAF in 1948.
They were discontinued just after that.
I understand Macy's in NYC had some for
sale in the early 50's.
73  Clete


From whitaker at pa.net  Wed Jun 18 12:20:46 2008
From: whitaker at pa.net (C Whitaker)
Date: Wed Jun 18 12:22:31 2008
Subject: [ARC5] Re: [Milsurplus] History of Ham Mods: Opinions?
In-Reply-To: <c34299fb0806172210h8b389ffubeedd43766c48712@mail.gmail.com>
References: <552E4E6FAA8D4A2CA804D11A8297038B@boudreaux>	<E1K7ugF-0005Aq-EH@elasmtp-spurfowl.atl.sa.earthlink.net>	<4855B23E.9020601@aafradio.org>	<12505.24.30.81.88.1213621647.squirrel@fracas.netboobie.org>	<4857C6B9.20500@pa.net>
	<c34299fb0806172210h8b389ffubeedd43766c48712@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <485935DE.7030603@pa.net>

de WB2CPN
The three, (maybe four), element arrays
were on the left and right side, and on
the top and bottom, of the nose.  When
looking from the front the arrays formed
a square.  Each array had a mount which
stuck out of the fusalage, and looked to
be about a quarter wave long.  I'm looking
for a picture here.  It looked like the
frequency was higher that 50 MHz.
73  Clete


From dedsall at crocker.com  Wed Jun 18 12:24:51 2008
From: dedsall at crocker.com (David Edsall)
Date: Wed Jun 18 12:26:06 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Code machine?
In-Reply-To: <48593324.2050908@pa.net>
References: <686957.21574.qm@web38007.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<48593324.2050908@pa.net>
Message-ID: <1BF9A829BC314E3C9822111EA9EC8234@DavidPC>

Hi Clete and the group,

I was in a AAA battery (90mm guns) in 1954-55 above the Golden Gate. We were 
probably near the bottom of the Army's food chain.
Shortly after I left in December 1955 the unit converted to Nike missiles.
We had the M-209, which we set up daily from a mimeographed sheet that 
covered a month of settings.
Once in a great while battalion would send us a message in cipher which we 
would decipher, followed by our reply in cipher.
Very time consuming at both ends as each letter of a message had to be 
entered one at a time.
Any error in the setup produced gibberish.
You get the idea.
The price of these things keeps going up.  They were half that price just a 
short time ago.
73, David W1TDD

> de WB2CPN
> I saw one in use while in USAF in 1948.
> They were discontinued just after that.
> I understand Macy's in NYC had some for
> sale in the early 50's.
> 73  Clete

From Military1944 at aol.com  Wed Jun 18 12:42:16 2008
From: Military1944 at aol.com (Military1944@aol.com)
Date: Wed Jun 18 12:43:17 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Code machine?
Message-ID: <c3f.2664cce2.358a94e8@aol.com>

 
In a message dated 18/06/2008 17:25:38 GMT Daylight Time,  
dedsall@crocker.com writes:

Very  time consuming at both ends as each letter of a message had to be 
entered  one at a time.
Any error in the setup produced gibberish.
You get the  idea.
The price of these things keeps going up.  They were half that  price just a 
short time ago.



----------------------
 
Its amazing when you think even the simplest of laptops or mini palm pilots  
etc could far outdo the complexity of producing/deciphering codes like  this.
 
I think my cell phone has more computing power than that which landed on  the 
moon.
 
30 sec of fuel left... 30 sec of battery time left,   what  changes. 
 
Ben.
 



   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080618/ec740ab7/attachment.htm
From brunneraa1p at comcast.net  Wed Jun 18 14:33:52 2008
From: brunneraa1p at comcast.net (Richard Brunner)
Date: Wed Jun 18 19:21:06 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Code machine?
References: <686957.21574.qm@web38007.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<20080618113731.GB13497@mikea.ath.cx>
Message-ID: <056401c8d199$dc6cabd0$82fbc047@RICHARDB>

Re:
> It's a Hagelin C-36 cipher machine, which was used by the US military
> as a field cipher machine under the name M-209. .........

Don't sell its performance short.  Hagelin is a respected manufacturer of 
cipher machines, the famous German Enigma machine being an interesting 
variant.  Breaking the Enigma code was a major undertaking - the Germans had 
good reason to assume it was unbreakable.  Difficulty appears to be 
exponentially harder with more wheels; the germans started with three, then 
went to four, and I believe five wheels.  Every time they added a wheel 
decryption stopped for a long time...

It could be that the M-209 was simplified for easy use, as low level 
intelligence is more time sensitive - by the time it is deciphered it is 
useless.

Richard, AA1P 

From k3ui at comcast.net  Wed Jun 18 19:27:26 2008
From: k3ui at comcast.net (Richard Spargur)
Date: Wed Jun 18 19:28:35 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] AN/TRD-15/23 Manuals
In-Reply-To: <20080618232112.D0226859BDD@mailman.qth.net>
References: <20080618232112.D0226859BDD@mailman.qth.net>
Message-ID: <988A4DDC9F894AB2B3D735E30A73AC24@unk1>

Does anyone know how to contact Mr. Mort Denison.

Does anyone know where I can find a copy of a manual for an AN/TRD-15 and
23, 

TM 11-5825-231-10
TM 11-5825-231-24
TM 11-5825-231-25
TM 11-5825-231-34P-1
TM 11-5825-231-34P-6 

or any other manual variant for this direction finder system which used the
R-725/TRD Radio Receiver.


Richard Spargur
K3UI

From wh7hg.hi at gmail.com  Wed Jun 18 20:02:02 2008
From: wh7hg.hi at gmail.com (Michael Tauson)
Date: Wed Jun 18 20:03:06 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] History of Ham Mods: Opinions?
In-Reply-To: <4855B23E.9020601@aafradio.org>
References: <552E4E6FAA8D4A2CA804D11A8297038B@boudreaux>
	<E1K7ugF-0005Aq-EH@elasmtp-spurfowl.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
	<4855B23E.9020601@aafradio.org>
Message-ID: <c34299fb0806181702w5af96e06xc952d3437077e759@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Jun 15, 2008 at 2:22 PM, Mike Hanz <AAF-Radio-1@aafradio.org> wrote:

> For example, Michael Tauson's wonderful little booklet "A Users Guide to Aircraft Radio
> Corporation Receivers" has been an active reference for me for years, and one could
> easily ascribe a "Collector's Guide" definition to it.

Awww, isn't he a nice man?  :-)

Seriously, the original "Guide" started off as a set of lists & tables
I created to make my life easier.  They originated in the 60s and grew
on an assortment of pieces of paper until I decided to collect them
all in one place.  George at Fair got interested in the project so I
tacked on the stuff around the tables et al and Fair's been selling it
for the past some 30 years.

The original has shown up on the web as public domain but this isn't a
major concern of mine.  The tabular information came from PD sources
(military manuals) and the rest is out dated now.  Besides, as I'm
sure Mike and others have discovered, there are a few inaccuracies and
the coverage isn't all that broad.  Also, the last section on mating
connectors is completely missing (which is how the original person who
put it on the web got around copyright infringement) and that was a
rather important part of the publication.  I just wish someone had
thought to clean up the spelling and grammar!  :-)

Side thought: Since I wrote the darned thing, maybe I'll put it up on
my own website with spelling & grammar corrections but also with the
original errors and lacking the connector section.  Or maybe I'll fix
them too.  Something to consider anyway.

The new one will have essentially the same tables & lists but vastly
expanded & corrected, and not all from public domain sources.  Part of
my requests to Cessna and Sperry have included permission to include
lists of the later equipment and attendant pinouts.  Granted there
won't be a whole lot of interest in them from the denizens of these
two groups and our ilk, there are other worlds out there including a
few populated by folks interested in newer avionics including the few
bits still flying.

I hope Gordon White will let me use his title for the book.  It seems
appropriate to not only the prewar civilian radios and the military
equipment but to the postwar Type 12 et al systems which had both
military and civilian applications.  Including the Cessna & later eras
appears to go counter to the title but it is a description of the
company's demise.  Every story has a beginning, a middle and an end,
and that's the end of A.R.C.'s story.

Doesn't all this sound like fun?

Best regards,

Michael, WH7HG
From wh7hg.hi at gmail.com  Wed Jun 18 20:14:13 2008
From: wh7hg.hi at gmail.com (Michael Tauson)
Date: Wed Jun 18 20:15:19 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Re: : History of ham mods; opinions?
In-Reply-To: <BAY125-DAV139728F8895835191CDBC5E4AB0@phx.gbl>
References: <10749887.1213633026514.JavaMail.root@elwamui-royal.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
	<9ccb8c510806161325g66b064b7ie30ac11a10f696d8@mail.gmail.com>
	<4856F17E.2060507@sbcglobal.net> <485725A3.2050304@earthlink.net>
	<8CA9F1EE729FA28-BAC-3928@webmail-nc04.sysops.aol.com>
	<BAY125-DAV139728F8895835191CDBC5E4AB0@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <c34299fb0806181714x53265a47g5fd4ca866d88bbac@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 9:26 PM, Hue Miller <kargo_cult@msn.com> wrote:

> I have been thinking a long time of a "guide" or introduction but at my usual progress,
> which will include another job change or two and a major move also, i'm sure, Michael
> will be into his 3rd edition before i even get down to it.

Mine's pretty specialized and focused.  The field of surplus -
electronics and otherwise - is so broad that there's room for everyone
to play.

> I was thinking more of something the size of an old FAIR RADIO catalog; photos
> black&white and larger but not more than 1/5 page size; an odd color photo; ...

I like it!  Unless you've already got a goodly collection of their
catalogs, you might want to talk to Phil about getting some copies
made of pertinent pages.  Adding in the post-war ads for aircraft,
boats et al would be even better.  One thing you might consider would
be to include a note about how much the pieces would cost now and how
likely it would be to find them in the same condition today.

With the amount of material available, you could easily end up with
something with the same 8-1/2x11 sheet size as Fair's catalogs but
significantly thicker - 200-300 pages thicker.

Go for it, brah!

BEst regards,

Michael, WH7HG
From mark.richards at massmicro.com  Thu Jun 19 09:41:10 2008
From: mark.richards at massmicro.com (Mark Richards)
Date: Thu Jun 19 09:42:20 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] old radio
In-Reply-To: <c34299fb0806181702w5af96e06xc952d3437077e759@mail.gmail.com>
References: <552E4E6FAA8D4A2CA804D11A8297038B@boudreaux>	<E1K7ugF-0005Aq-EH@elasmtp-spurfowl.atl.sa.earthlink.net>	<4855B23E.9020601@aafradio.org>
	<c34299fb0806181702w5af96e06xc952d3437077e759@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <485A61F6.3080602@massmicro.com>

I happened upon a treasure trove of articles that perhaps may be of some 
interest.  Looks like these are already published through ARRL, but fwiw...

http://www.eht.com/oldradio/arrl/index-to-12-2007.html


From cosmoline at aa4rm.ba-watch.org  Thu Jun 19 09:52:16 2008
From: cosmoline at aa4rm.ba-watch.org (Marty Reynolds)
Date: Thu Jun 19 09:56:40 2008
Subject: [Fwd: Re: [ARC5] Re: [Milsurplus] History of Ham Mods: Opinions?]
Message-ID: <18958.24.30.81.88.1213883536.squirrel@fracas.netboobie.org>



I never gesssed the need for 4 yagis.  Radar was a Fug something, right?

We used a 200 mhz sperry homebuilt radar I've never seen pictured in '42. 
Put in nose of Loadstars to hunt subs.  Have parts to a nosecone fm
father-in-law

Marty aa4rm

> de WB2CPN
> Those "half folded dipoles" were quarter
> wave, or odd multiple thereof, verticals.
> As you said, they had one reflector element.
> You see a lot of folded verticals on the
> 50 MHz Commercial band.
> The first Yagi arrays I ever saw were on a
> German night fighter.  It had four on the
> plane's nose. All it took was a simple antenna
> switch and a synchronized CRT for the pilot.
> 73  Clete
>
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus@mailman.qth.net
>


-- 
Time flies like an arrow

Fruit flies like a bananna

   Groucho Marx



-- 
Time flies like an arrow

Fruit flies like a bananna

   Groucho Marx
From jfor at quik.com  Thu Jun 19 14:30:39 2008
From: jfor at quik.com (J Forster)
Date: Thu Jun 19 14:29:27 2008
Subject: [Fwd: Re: [ARC5] Re: [Milsurplus] History of Ham Mods: Opinions?]
References: <18958.24.30.81.88.1213883536.squirrel@fracas.netboobie.org>
Message-ID: <485AA5CF.E1269033@quik.com>

The US used switched Yagis to do DFing in the Rebecca system at around 220
MCPS. There was one two element Yagi bore sighted to the left and one to the
right of the flight path. The L-R switch was in the BC-929 display. The
transmit antenna was an omni rod.

In the ASB-5 a pair of Yagis were also used at roughly 515 MCPS, but the same
antennas were used for Tx and Rx, alternately...  first Tx on L, Rx on right,
then swap over the antennas. The T-R switching was done with a transmission
line of precise length, but the L-R was again a motor driven switch.

Best,
-John

============

Marty Reynolds wrote:

> I never gesssed the need for 4 yagis.  Radar was a Fug something, right?
>
> We used a 200 mhz sperry homebuilt radar I've never seen pictured in '42.
> Put in nose of Loadstars to hunt subs.  Have parts to a nosecone fm
> father-in-law
>
> Marty aa4rm
>
> > de WB2CPN
> > Those "half folded dipoles" were quarter
> > wave, or odd multiple thereof, verticals.
> > As you said, they had one reflector element.
> > You see a lot of folded verticals on the
> > 50 MHz Commercial band.
> > The first Yagi arrays I ever saw were on a
> > German night fighter.  It had four on the
> > plane's nose. All it took was a simple antenna
> > switch and a synchronized CRT for the pilot.
> > 73  Clete
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ______________________________________________________________
> > Milsurplus mailing list
> > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> > Post: mailto:Milsurplus@mailman.qth.net
> >
>
> --
> Time flies like an arrow
>
> Fruit flies like a bananna
>
>    Groucho Marx
>
> --
> Time flies like an arrow
>
> Fruit flies like a bananna
>
>    Groucho Marx
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus@mailman.qth.net

From kargo_cult at msn.com  Thu Jun 19 18:33:40 2008
From: kargo_cult at msn.com (Hue Miller)
Date: Thu Jun 19 18:34:49 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Re: : History of ham mods; opinions?
In-Reply-To: <c34299fb0806181714x53265a47g5fd4ca866d88bbac@mail.gmail.com>
References: <10749887.1213633026514.JavaMail.root@elwamui-royal.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
	<9ccb8c510806161325g66b064b7ie30ac11a10f696d8@mail.gmail.com>
	<4856F17E.2060507@sbcglobal.net> <485725A3.2050304@earthlink.net>
	<8CA9F1EE729FA28-BAC-3928@webmail-nc04.sysops.aol.com>
	<BAY125-DAV139728F8895835191CDBC5E4AB0@phx.gbl> 
	<c34299fb0806181714x53265a47g5fd4ca866d88bbac@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BAY125-W9DB77AF26F084CA213034E4AA0@phx.gbl>

Michael, the idea was more like a pseudo-catalog, close enuff to real that a non-oldtimer 
wouldn't immediately guess for sure that it was (partly) a joke. So instead of 200+ pages,
more like about 15. With photos the size of FAIR's ( hi hi ) that would cover a lot of 
equipment.  Mabye an ad or two for gear you never will encounter, too.  However, no ads 
like in the G&G catalog where the wrong equipment photo accompanied a listing.
Maybe the cover photo would be stolen from the Feb. 44 Radio News. I like my idea a lot.
I also really dig the old Columbia Electronics surplus catalog. What a classic. Maybe a 
combination of the best features of both.
 
BTW, i was looking at one of the surplus flyers from around 1947. Who would pay $49.95 for
an ARB back then???? On the other hand, $75 for a BC-474, altho big bucks for the time, 
did include legs, handcrank gen, antenna, whole kit. 
 
Here's something i could use a suggestion on: how best to grab photos from a large book?
I have a couple Japanese books with some terrific radio and aircraft shots. How to 
scan them in? Are there any viable hand-scanners (handheld scanners) still being sold?
-Hue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080619/f47c86e0/attachment.htm
From wh7hg.hi at gmail.com  Thu Jun 19 19:18:42 2008
From: wh7hg.hi at gmail.com (Michael Tauson)
Date: Thu Jun 19 19:19:55 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] R-174 & Antenna Sections
Message-ID: <c34299fb0806191618w6b1a14fcl9a4e976797b647ba@mail.gmail.com>

The R-174/GRR-5 done did arrived and I'm in somewhat a quandry.  On
cursory inspection, it appears intact electrically, even down to the
requisite black beauties (well, one of them so far) everyone loves so
much.  The mechanical integrity is another story.  Some dastardly
heathen split the case so the receiver and power supply sections are
no longer joined.  There are a few other changes (the mount replaced
by a pair of wooden blocks, etc) but that's the big nasty one.  So, do
I reject it outright due to the lack of structural integrity therefore
virginal condition or do I soldier on, bearing the shame of owning -
let alone admitting to owning - such a horribly butchered piece of
exquisite equipment?

I'm going the latter route, only less the guilt.  Splitting the case
in two makes it a bit more convenient to use, or it would had the
previous owner had the foresight to do something with the connecting
cable.  Once I take care of the cable problem I'll be adding handles
on the sides of the sections to make carrying easier.  There is still
the problem of a vehicular shock mount arrangement that allows me to
also have rubber feet under the pieces for non-vehicular use and
possibly to restack them if that's preferred.  But, as always, one
misstep at a time.

Several antenna sections have shown up at my door as well - 28
MS-116s, 22 MS-117s and a stowaway tipless AB-24.  Some of the MS
sections are bent, one MS-117 gave its life to an experiment in
restraightening that went horribly wrong (I just HAD to fine tune it!)
and a few have rust showing but, all in all, they don't look all that
bad.  Some I'm keeping for antennae and some I'll be unleashing on an
unsuspecting public.

The keepers are the bent sections, enough sections to complete the
antennas I want aboard the Jeep (or whatever vehicle I wind up using)
and maybe a separate one for the R-174, one extra of all the sections,
and the AB-24 since it's an orphan.  What I don't have is maybe half a
dozen MS-118s ("maybe" because that depends on how many of the other
sections I can recover), a few AB-652 or -1322 bases (the latter with
the neat adapter ring so they attach to the newer mounts), some AB-21s
and a couple more AB-24s - the latter two for some fine tuning
experiments.  When I know what the available body count is and have a
fair market value for them, I'll post the the info so it can be
ignored uniformly.

Otherwise, life is the usual chaos I've come to expect.

BEst regards,

Michael, WH7HG
From nu4g.radio at gmail.com  Thu Jun 19 20:52:18 2008
From: nu4g.radio at gmail.com (Tom Norris)
Date: Thu Jun 19 20:53:32 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] R-174 & Antenna Sections
In-Reply-To: <c34299fb0806191618w6b1a14fcl9a4e976797b647ba@mail.gmail.com>
References: <c34299fb0806191618w6b1a14fcl9a4e976797b647ba@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <6D1FE5D4-F83E-4EEF-997C-9308CF422E9D@gmail.com>


On Jun 19, 2008, at 6:18 PM, Michael Tauson wrote:

The R-174/GRR-5 done did arrived ... Some dastardly
heathen split the case so the receiver and power supply sections are
no longer joined.


This is *almost* a Mil Approved mod as the manual suggests the thing  
can be
operated without the power supply and cabinet if need be.

As outlined in Chapter 4, (Theory of Operation) section II, (Receiver)
part 68 (Monitoring Operation) paragraph d of TM 11 - 295, August 1952,
(page 56) sez --

"It is possible to use Radio Receiver R-174/URR without Power Supply  
PP-308/URR.
For this purpose, A+, B+, B- and ground connections were brought out  
to J1.
1 - For such operation, the positive terminal of the 1.5 vold d-c (A 
+) source should
connect to pin H and the negative terminal (A_) to pin E (ground)   
The positive
terminal of the 90 v d-c source (B+) should connect to pin K and the  
negative terminal
(B-) should connect to pin J.  Also it is required to connect a 160  
ohm resistor across
pins 8 and 10 of J4.
2 - [suggestions that a suitable cabinet should be used, etc] "

Who knows if was a ham hack?  Probably *was*, though.  ;-)

Tom NU4G


From wh7hg.hi at gmail.com  Thu Jun 19 21:39:34 2008
From: wh7hg.hi at gmail.com (Michael Tauson)
Date: Thu Jun 19 21:40:39 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Re: : History of ham mods; opinions?
In-Reply-To: <BAY125-W9DB77AF26F084CA213034E4AA0@phx.gbl>
References: <10749887.1213633026514.JavaMail.root@elwamui-royal.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
	<9ccb8c510806161325g66b064b7ie30ac11a10f696d8@mail.gmail.com>
	<4856F17E.2060507@sbcglobal.net> <485725A3.2050304@earthlink.net>
	<8CA9F1EE729FA28-BAC-3928@webmail-nc04.sysops.aol.com>
	<BAY125-DAV139728F8895835191CDBC5E4AB0@phx.gbl>
	<c34299fb0806181714x53265a47g5fd4ca866d88bbac@mail.gmail.com>
	<BAY125-W9DB77AF26F084CA213034E4AA0@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <c34299fb0806191839g11207f3ev69ee264b218e1215@mail.gmail.com>

> Michael, the idea was more like a pseudo-catalog, close enuff to real that a
> non-oldtimer wouldn't immediately guess for sure that it was (partly) a joke.

*chuckling* ... That's even better than I originally thought you
meant.  The ironic part is that this is also a piece of history but in
a format that the OTs will recognize and the late comers (hopefully)
will appreciate once they're let in on the format.

> So instead of 200+ pages, more like about 15.

With the amount of information that was (is) available, it could wind
up an irregular series of "catalogs".

> Mabye an ad or two for gear you never will encounter, too.

Allison engines were being sold in the crate for $25 after the war.  A
lot of them went to the bottom of Lake Erie for use as dead anchors.
One of my neighbors was driving a surplus MB around into the 60s that
he'd bought for cheap.  Sadly, it escaped when he died and I didn't
get to buy it from the estate.  Boats, airplanes and everything else
were available from one source or another.  And a lot of oil got
shipped around with T-4 tankers - especially after their keels got
reinforced since they tended to break in half after a while as  built.
 I wonder if the old "Jeeps for $47" ads that used to populate the
backs of magazines would qualify as well.

> Maybe the cover photo would be stolen from the Feb. 44 Radio News.

If it goes into volumes or supplements, it could become a "trademark".  :-)

> I like my idea a lot.

Then go with it!  As one interested in history, I love it and believe
it has a place with a broader audience than just hams.

> I also really dig the old Columbia Electronics surplus catalog. What a classic. Maybe a
> combination of the best features of both.

Sounds like a plan.  What kind of paper did you plan on using?  If I
remember right, Columbia used a glossy paper where Fair used a flat
and more coarse (read as: inexpensive) paper with a light cardstock
cover.  I'd tend toward the paper Fair used since it's more classic in
my mind but that's just me.

> Who would pay $49.95 for an ARB back then???? On the other hand, $75 for a BC-474,
> altho big bucks for the time, did include legs, handcrank gen, antenna, whole kit.

What were a BC-342, a BC-610 and an ART-13 going for?

> Here's something i could use a suggestion on: how best to grab photos from a
> large book?

The only hand scanners I've seen of late are barcode scanners which
certainly are of no help.  On the other hand, flatbed scanners with
decent resolution have become inexpensive which helps a lot.

Best regards,

Michael, WH7HG
From jcoward5452 at aol.com  Thu Jun 19 21:46:36 2008
From: jcoward5452 at aol.com (jcoward5452@aol.com)
Date: Thu Jun 19 21:47:47 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Re: : History of ham mods; opinions?
In-Reply-To: <BAY125-W9DB77AF26F084CA213034E4AA0@phx.gbl>
References: <10749887.1213633026514.JavaMail.root@elwamui-royal.atl.sa.earthlink.net>	<9ccb8c510806161325g66b064b7ie30ac11a10f696d8@mail.gmail.com>	<4856F17E.2060507@sbcglobal.net>
	<485725A3.2050304@earthlink.net>	<8CA9F1EE729FA28-BAC-3928@webmail-nc04.sysops.aol.com>	<BAY125-DAV139728F8895835191CDBC5E4AB0@phx.gbl>
	<c34299fb0806181714x53265a47g5fd4ca866d88bbac@mail.gmail.com>
	<BAY125-W9DB77AF26F084CA213034E4AA0@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <8CAA08E9C0AA308-C28-2ECF@WEBMAIL-NB01.sysops.aol.com>

Hue,
Be sure to use Dymo Tape labels for the items listed and give due 
credit to Fair!BTW,In 1970 (junior in High School) I got all my first 
SCR-274N and ARC-5 gear from G&G.Went there and haggled for it 
all.There was an entire wall of NOS T-20 or T-21 transmitters all 
stacked like bricks.I got a BC-604 tx around the corner in a very dark 
surplus store (I tripped over the thing which brought it to my 
immediate attention!) for $8.00.My buddy and I carried it all the way 
uptown to the Port Authority bus station and it sat on my lap all the 
way out to where I lived in New Jersey.I eventually got all the stuff 
to get it on the air,all stock.I had(and still have) the Fair Radio 28V 
10A kit supply to power it with.I actually built the ARC-5 TX,RX 
portable set as described in "Command Sets".It worked.I even rewired an 
ARC-5 tx to plug into the SCR-274N rack.You had to move the screen or 
plate feed to another pin and carefully bend the pins on the connector 
outward so that they would make passable contact.It worked.
That was then and if I could go back in time and do it all over again,I 
would.This is now and I have a respectable collection that will remain 
stock and eventually become working display sets.I hope to have a 
traveling "road show" of this gear and do the West Coast Air Show 
circuit.
 Jay KE6PPF
P.S. You should have seen me jump the time I first fired up an ART-13! 
I thought all hell was breaking loose!


-----Original Message-----
From: Hue Miller <kargo_cult@msn.com>
To: milsurplus@mailman.qth.net
Sent: Thu, 19 Jun 2008 3:33 pm
Subject: RE: [Milsurplus] Re: : History of ham mods; opinions?



Michael, the idea was more like a pseudo-catalog, close enuff to real 
that a non-oldtimer
wouldn't immediately guess for sure that it was (partly) a joke. So 
instead of 200+ pages,
more like about 15. With photos the size of FAIR's ( hi hi ) that would 
cover a lot of
equipment.? Mabye an ad or two for gear you never will encounter, too.? 
However, no ads
like in the G&G catalog where the wrong equipment photo accompanied a 
listing.
Maybe the cover photo would be stolen from the?Feb. 44 Radio News. I 
like my idea a lot.
I also really dig the old Columbia Electronics surplus catalog. What a 
classic. Maybe a
combination of the best features of both.
?
BTW, i was looking at one of the surplus flyers from around 1947. Who 
would pay $49.95 for
an ARB back then???? On the other hand, $75 for a BC-474, altho big 
bucks for the time,
did include legs, handcrank gen, antenna, whole kit.
?
Here's something i could use a suggestion on: how best to grab photos 
from a large book?
I have a couple Japanese books with some terrific radio and aircraft 
shots. How to
scan them in? Are there any viable hand-scanners (handheld scanners) 
still being sold?
-Hue
=


______________________________________________________________
Milsurplus mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Milsurplus@mailman.qth.net

From ka1kaq at gmail.com  Thu Jun 19 22:27:54 2008
From: ka1kaq at gmail.com (Todd, KA1KAQ)
Date: Thu Jun 19 22:29:07 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] R-174 & Antenna Sections
In-Reply-To: <c34299fb0806191618w6b1a14fcl9a4e976797b647ba@mail.gmail.com>
References: <c34299fb0806191618w6b1a14fcl9a4e976797b647ba@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <9ccb8c510806191927y1b5dabs2cd082157a2b6dcb@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 7:18 PM, Michael Tauson <wh7hg.hi@gmail.com> wrote:
> The R-174/GRR-5 done did arrived and I'm in somewhat a quandry.  On
> cursory inspection, it appears intact electrically, even down to the
> requisite black beauties (well, one of them so far) everyone loves so
> much.  The mechanical integrity is another story.  Some dastardly
> heathen split the case so the receiver and power supply sections are
> no longer joined.  There are a few other changes (the mount replaced
> by a pair of wooden blocks, etc) but that's the big nasty one.

Congrats, Michael -

Sorry to hear of the Frankensurgery, good news is - you have the
radio. They are a heavy chunk to move in one piece anyhow, so getting
familiar will be easier, at least. If and when the time comes for an
original case and mount, they do show up online and at 'fests from
time to time, occasionally with one section (rcvr or ps) missing,
needing paint, fairly cheap. Swapping them around is much easier than
moving them intact.

Originally bought as a garage radio (it was just too cool for that),
mine ended up beside the bed, and it took me a while to realize that
20 feet of antenna wasn't really as cool as it sounded. I did still
drill a hole through the bedroom ceiling to allow about 4-5 feet to
continue into the otherwise-unused attic. Ah, the days as a single
guy. I'll miss them. (o:

Like everything else, the honeymoon is the fun part. It's an
interesting little (!) radio. Enjoy getting familiar, then move
forward with the finishing touches. Mine still needs a few bits too!

73, Todd  KA1KAQ
From prc74b at fuse.net  Fri Jun 20 00:20:41 2008
From: prc74b at fuse.net (Joe Munson)
Date: Fri Jun 20 00:22:25 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] GP-7 TrasmitterI
References: <c34299fb0806191618w6b1a14fcl9a4e976797b647ba@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <007c01c8d28d$00875530$6900a8c0@munsonswl0e4df>

I am in need of any information or a source of such, pertaining to the
Westinghouse GP-7 transmitter as used by the Navy in WWII and maybe later.
Even a schematic would of great help.  I can find very little reference to
this item on the WEB.  I have a NOS unit, never installed or tampered with,
the 350-800 KHZ tuning unit.  Also looking for tuning units to cover 160 and
80 meters.  I am willing to pay  cost of copying, postage, or reasonable
price for original manuals.

Joe Munson
WA4VAG

PS:  Good in QRZ

From kargo_cult at msn.com  Fri Jun 20 00:29:12 2008
From: kargo_cult at msn.com (Hue Miller)
Date: Fri Jun 20 00:31:59 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Re: : History of ham mods; opinions?
References: <10749887.1213633026514.JavaMail.root@elwamui-royal.atl.sa.earthlink.net>	<9ccb8c510806161325g66b064b7ie30ac11a10f696d8@mail.gmail.com>	<4856F17E.2060507@sbcglobal.net><485725A3.2050304@earthlink.net>	<8CA9F1EE729FA28-BAC-3928@webmail-nc04.sysops.aol.com>	<BAY125-DAV139728F8895835191CDBC5E4AB0@phx.gbl><c34299fb0806181714x53265a47g5fd4ca866d88bbac@mail.gmail.com><BAY125-W9DB77AF26F084CA213034E4AA0@phx.gbl>
	<8CAA08E9C0AA308-C28-2ECF@WEBMAIL-NB01.sysops.aol.com>
Message-ID: <BAY125-DAV104AEDEB9D4423A4E533E7E4A50@phx.gbl>

Yes, Jay, the Dymo labels definitely add a touch of class to photo captioning.
The younger set will be puzzled as to what technology i used for those labels.
I was at Staples office supply here a couple years back and their closeout table
had a Dymo machine waiting for me. I took that as a propitious omen.

If i could make some kind of deal with the devil, i would surely think it over sincerely,
just if i could spend a few hours visiting G&G. He had some wild stuff, stuff if not
in FAIR's quantity at least competitive in uncommonness. The NIB ATB's, the
BC-312s imported back from France, the SCR-583 radios complete - ah, yes.
-Hue
From wh7hg.hi at gmail.com  Fri Jun 20 00:31:58 2008
From: wh7hg.hi at gmail.com (Michael Tauson)
Date: Fri Jun 20 00:33:07 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] R-174 & Antenna Sections
In-Reply-To: <6D1FE5D4-F83E-4EEF-997C-9308CF422E9D@gmail.com>
References: <c34299fb0806191618w6b1a14fcl9a4e976797b647ba@mail.gmail.com>
	<6D1FE5D4-F83E-4EEF-997C-9308CF422E9D@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <c34299fb0806192131rbd5b7c4i97541e66b388ff06@mail.gmail.com>

>> The R-174/GRR-5 done did arrived ... Some dastardly heathen split the case so the
>> receiver and power supply sections are no longer joined.

> This is *almost* a Mil Approved mod as the manual suggests the thing can be
> operated without the power supply and cabinet if need be.

I saw that and will probably take advantage of that detail.

The W. German Army used the receive portion of the GRC-9 in a separate
case for a battery powered DF (I think) receiver.  I had one for a
while that I used with a "portable" (It had handles on it.)
transmitter/power supply.  I kept the receiver quite a while after I
allowed my back a bit of relief by giving up that pursuit.

Somewhere in my creaky swiss-cheese memory, I thought there was a
separate case for the R-174 alone for some application or another, but
I don't remember enough to be able to glue it down with any certainty.
 I may be confusing it with the W. German receiver.

It would be pretty cool to find/create a transmitter to go with it.
It would be even more so cool to make one from Type K-derived
equipment.  Let's see ... a T-15 covers 300 KCs which seems a good VFO
to use in a heterodyne rig ... *he says, looking for somewhere sturdy
to hide :-) *

Best regards,

Michael, WH7HG
From kargo_cult at msn.com  Fri Jun 20 00:49:12 2008
From: kargo_cult at msn.com (Hue Miller)
Date: Fri Jun 20 00:52:02 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Re: : History of ham mods; opinions?
References: <10749887.1213633026514.JavaMail.root@elwamui-royal.atl.sa.earthlink.net><9ccb8c510806161325g66b064b7ie30ac11a10f696d8@mail.gmail.com><4856F17E.2060507@sbcglobal.net>
	<485725A3.2050304@earthlink.net><8CA9F1EE729FA28-BAC-3928@webmail-nc04.sysops.aol.com><BAY125-DAV139728F8895835191CDBC5E4AB0@phx.gbl><c34299fb0806181714x53265a47g5fd4ca866d88bbac@mail.gmail.com><BAY125-W9DB77AF26F084CA213034E4AA0@phx.gbl>
	<c34299fb0806191839g11207f3ev69ee264b218e1215@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BAY125-DAV5DF2B876F16B8AF3A69D2E4A50@phx.gbl>

Of course, i'll have to go thru years of milsurplus posts to re-read those posts
about an old manual typewriter font, too. 
The old Columbia catalog had class. Some of the photos were actually pretty
good and i liked how they described, quoted actually, for the BC-348, 
"Sensitive and selective superheterodyne receiver", quoting direct from the manual.
Of course, in the 1970s, that quote was, strictly speaking, not true, altho i thought
it was cool for them to just quote it regardless. Another thing i liked was they had
this grading of Command Sets, like NIB, excellent used, then bashed ones ( not
their word but one i will use ) for $4.95    Another idea i thought of was the package
with a ribbon around it - a "grab box" chock full of radio surplus for $9.95
Of course your parents would have a fit when the REA man showed up and wanted
$200 for shipping.
( Didn't someone here have that story? Some heavy metal thing showed up that they
had ordered, and the freight charge was to be collected on delivery?  Why, that 
TDQ was only $12.95! I didn't know it was metal! )

Michael, that thing that would discourage me about a large book, not that i'm even
thinking of doing it anyway, is that "new" finds are always appearing. Look at some
of the rare unusual things that the Ebay tide has brought in. You would almost have
to publish in a 3-ring binder format. You could publish on DVD but then some Ebay
power seller would add your material to his DVD along with tons of shovelware and
sell it for $19.95   Altho even if you publish in paper someone is likely to scan it in
for their shovelware disk. 
Louis Mulstee seems to have done a superlativework in the completeness regard,
at least in the one book of his i bought, the Clandestine Radio book, which i consider
worth more than the $100 i paid for it.  His  effort must have been superhuman.  -Hue
From wh7hg.hi at gmail.com  Fri Jun 20 02:23:22 2008
From: wh7hg.hi at gmail.com (Michael Tauson)
Date: Fri Jun 20 02:24:32 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] R-174 & Antenna Sections
In-Reply-To: <9ccb8c510806191927y1b5dabs2cd082157a2b6dcb@mail.gmail.com>
References: <c34299fb0806191618w6b1a14fcl9a4e976797b647ba@mail.gmail.com>
	<9ccb8c510806191927y1b5dabs2cd082157a2b6dcb@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <c34299fb0806192323w72d38eddo71b17c5c0704c59@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 4:27 PM, Todd, KA1KAQ <ka1kaq@gmail.com> wrote:

> Sorry to hear of the Frankensurgery, good news is - you have the radio.

I was being a little facitious about the "horrors" of the mods but I
am quite happy to have it.

> They are a heavy chunk to move in one piece anyhow,

53 or so pounds - receiver, power supply & case.  Obviously portable
if it had handles.

> If and when the time comes for an original case and mount, they do show up online and
> at 'fests from time to time,

One source of a case has presented itself though I'd like to find
additional pieces (receiver, power supply, etc.) later on with the
idea of one intact receiver and one two piece receiver especially for
mobile/portable use.

> Originally bought as a garage radio (it was just too cool for that),

I had an intact receiver many years ago and loved it.  Like so much
else, it had to go when I moved (Boats are SO small!) but it went to a
loving home where it likely still lives.

BEst regards,

Michael, WH7HG
From AAF-Radio-1 at aafradio.org  Fri Jun 20 06:30:57 2008
From: AAF-Radio-1 at aafradio.org (Mike Hanz)
Date: Fri Jun 20 06:32:23 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] GP-7 TrasmitterI
In-Reply-To: <007c01c8d28d$00875530$6900a8c0@munsonswl0e4df>
References: <c34299fb0806191618w6b1a14fcl9a4e976797b647ba@mail.gmail.com>
	<007c01c8d28d$00875530$6900a8c0@munsonswl0e4df>
Message-ID: <485B86E1.80203@aafradio.org>

Joe Munson wrote:

>I am in need of any information or a source of such, pertaining to the
>Westinghouse GP-7 transmitter as used by the Navy in WWII and maybe later.
>Even a schematic would of great help.  
>

I have a schematic on my docs page at http://aafradio.org/docs/docs.html 
, Joe

73,
Mike

From stillnormal at verizon.net  Fri Jun 20 08:25:41 2008
From: stillnormal at verizon.net (stillnormal)
Date: Fri Jun 20 08:26:41 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Pin info for black out switch M35 or others.
Message-ID: <001c01c8d2d0$c201fd80$2e01a8c0@normal>

I have a harness and blackout switch (solid state not lever).  I need pin designations and wire number IDs.
Thanks,
Paul McCarthy
Pittsburh
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080620/b178218c/attachment.htm
From kk5f at earthlink.net  Fri Jun 20 10:32:34 2008
From: kk5f at earthlink.net (Mike Morrow)
Date: Fri Jun 20 10:33:42 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] GP-7 Transmitter
Message-ID: <13504838.1213972354872.JavaMail.root@elwamui-hound.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

Joe wrote:

>I am in need of any information or a source of such, pertaining to the
>Westinghouse GP-7 transmitter as used by the Navy in WWII and maybe later.
>Even a schematic would of great help.  

That beast's absolute and irrevocable need for 800 cps AC power is
the biggest impediment to using it without major hacking.  IMHO,
Westinghouse, which made the GP-7 and other "classics" like the GO-9,
created the most bizarre communications equipment of the era.

The Band A tuning unit that you have is the most common.  A GP-7 that
I purchased several years ago as complete NOS turned out to only have
about half the tuning units, most of different serial numbers, and one
of the HF tuning units was gutted!  The non-Band A units are somewhat
hard to come across, though they show up on ebay.  The ham band tuning
units are the hardest to find, which has always seemed odd to me.  I
can't imagine the the post-war ham found the GP-7 of much more use
than as a parts source.

An RU-18 or 19 receiver is the appropriate mate.

The Bendix ATD is slightly larger, but far less challenging (no AC power
requirement, and no stack of tuning units required), if one seeks to put
an oddball unit on the air.

Mike / KK5F


From jfor at quik.com  Fri Jun 20 11:07:29 2008
From: jfor at quik.com (J Forster)
Date: Fri Jun 20 11:06:19 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] GP-7 Transmitter
References: <13504838.1213972354872.JavaMail.root@elwamui-hound.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <485BC7B0.2B6AB6C0@quik.com>

High frequency line voltages are not hard to get these days, with older solid
state static inverters being fairly easy to get. The days of screamers is long
gone. 800 CPS has a very significant weight advantage over 60 CPS (something
like 1/13) so makes sense for aircraft. Lots of other units used it too.

Best,
-John

==========

Mike Morrow wrote:

> Joe wrote:
>
> >I am in need of any information or a source of such, pertaining to the
> >Westinghouse GP-7 transmitter as used by the Navy in WWII and maybe later.
> >Even a schematic would of great help.
>
> That beast's absolute and irrevocable need for 800 cps AC power is
> the biggest impediment to using it without major hacking.  IMHO,
> Westinghouse, which made the GP-7 and other "classics" like the GO-9,
> created the most bizarre communications equipment of the era.

[snip]

From ejones at hiwaay.net  Fri Jun 20 13:23:32 2008
From: ejones at hiwaay.net (Eric A. Jones)
Date: Fri Jun 20 13:29:57 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Ham mods using the scientific method (longish)
Message-ID: <9B0C8F74-3EED-11DD-9D76-0050E420676D@hiwaay.net>

de N4TGC Eric

I'll put this is reverse order so as not to forget: on pp 236 & 259 of 
the Smithsonian book "Flight: 100 Years of Aviation" is picture of a 
Ju88 (twin-engine tail-dragger) bomber with the "Liechtenstein" (aka 
"night fighter variant radar") UHF array mentioned - it was four mounts 
sticking out in a square with "feelers" on the end, two on top and two 
under, about 2' back from the nose.  Box-text on page 242 mentions that 
the Bf 110 was also so equipped with the 2-mile-range interception 
radar.  Pp 102 to 107 of the book "Hitler's Luftwaffe" (catchy, tho 
inaccurate title) shows several views of the VHF array, with "elbows" 
holding the antlers further out, and better captions: "The final 
G-series night-fighter production model of the Messerschmitt Bf 110 was 
the G-4d/R3 with low-drag Liechtenstein SN-2 array seen here ... 
(snip)", and "A veritable forest of radar antennae resulted on the nose 
of the Junkers Ju 88c-6c night fighter when both Liechtenstein BC and 
SN-2 were employed ..."  It has both the "bedspring" antler of 16 UHF 
dipoles in a quad-of-quads array, and the much larger VHF one mounted 
on elbows.

Back to Ham mods:  say you're jolted back from a smoking copy of 
mil-surp with burbly bad audio, fumes assaulting you nose and your 
pliers stuck in the wall.  Something's gone horribly wrong, right?  
Well, no ... there's a bevy of people shouting over your shoulder, "no, 
no, this is the way it's supposed to be!" and they're waving schematics 
around in proof of their claims.  Stupid, no?  But we're stuck with the 
smoldering ruin of America, and the media's screaming "it's all good!  
it's just free market!  it's just an adjustment!"  Who's the stupidest? 
  Them for saying it, when they profit handsomely, or those who believe 
it and get rooked?

Since it ain't working, that means, using scientific methodology, that 
how we got electrocuted by the smoldering ruin of our radio with burbly 
audio must have been wrong.  Back up and try again - but we don't get a 
"do-over" with America, do we?  How do we go back to 1860 and stop the 
Federal gummint from trashing the Constitution by attacking the South?  
Or 1846 and stop the American Imperium from beating Mexico out of their 
holdings?  (And gold was discovered!!  Who knew?!  Well ... the Spanish 
did, they'd been mining it for decades!)

But getting back to mods - much of mil-surp is just too much trouble to 
get running: I have a TCS pair languishing here for lack of suitable 
power supplies, due to the extreme cost of acquiring them.  Like the 
"$4.95" radios of yesteryear, convert that to more modern dollars, and 
this here peon on the global plantation was spending more like $50.  
And the ARB at $49.95 was equivalent to $500.  Not too much for the 
"gainfully employed", but it's a lot for a peon, and it can cause 
immense resentment among the family - ref. the "rock band in the 
basement" story.

About a decade ago, I started a database drawn from the Fair catalogs, 
of which I have a pile.  A daunting task, which I soon dropped ... it 
sure would have made research easier tho ... about 1,000 hours of 
compiling later!  I don't know that I would even buy such a tome now: 
the handbasket is already in hell and the flames are licking around it, 
so it doesn't seem appropriate ... ha.  Reminds me of John Nash's 
"Equilibrium" proof: we need confirmed pacifists to tell us when a war 
is ill-advised.  If all we had were war-hawks, we'd have gotten 
involved in two world wars that didn't concern us (ask yourself: why 
was the Pearl Harbor base EVEN THERE?!), Korea, Vietnam, Iraq (twice), 
Afghanistan, etc.  Oops.  Where were the pacifists when we needed them? 
  They all got shouted down ...

So let's have fun with our war-toys, but don't forget - those quirky, 
hurry-up designs profited the Merchants of Death handsomely, and killed 
a whole lot of people who didn't deserve it, including many, many of 
our own.
	e

From Telegrapher at att.net  Fri Jun 20 18:09:06 2008
From: Telegrapher at att.net (Telegrapher@att.net)
Date: Fri Jun 20 18:10:20 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] BC-610, BC-669 etc.  xtals
Message-ID: <062020082209.2059.485C2A8200022F3D0000080B22228869349B0A02D29B9B0EBF9D0A089F0E9D090A040AAB@att.net>

I have 5 to go and no BC-610 to use them in so why leave them laying in the bottom of my desk drawer?  Who knows why we do these things.

3972.6
2340
2131
3970.2
3520.

These are all in FT-171-B holders.  One is  marked for the BC-610, 2 for the BC-669 and 2 are not marked for anything.

The 3970.2 and 3972.6 xtals are modified types.  In other words the operating frequency was changed.

I also have a CAA Xtal Type CM-1 for 3560 kc.

And i have 4 xtals that came from Western Electric (ohhhhh boy, get your wallets ready).  forget what they came from but they are 703A Crystal units for the following frequencies.
140.580
142.020
142.560
142.740.

they are a 3 pin type holder.  

Then as a last and final offering i have the following in FT-243 cases.

1971.4
1977.5
3940

And crystals for the Gonset Gooney box (G-50), at least i think that's where they came from.
50.658--8467
50.802--8443 kc
51.000--8500 kc

1 ea. xtal in a CR-1C/AR on 8155.71 kc. Probably from an ARC-1


All xtals are $5 each plus postage from 85233.

Larry
W0OGH



-------------- next part --------------
Skipped content of type multipart/related
From WA5CAB at cs.com  Fri Jun 20 18:23:42 2008
From: WA5CAB at cs.com (WA5CAB@cs.com)
Date: Fri Jun 20 18:24:58 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Re: [Boatanchors] BC-610, BC-669 etc.  xtals
Message-ID: <bd6.33ab408d.358d87ee@cs.com>

For AN/ARC-4 (WECo 233A).  

In a message dated 6/20/2008 5:09:37 PM Central Daylight Time, 
Telegrapher@att.net writes: 
> And i have 4 xtals that came from Western Electric (ohhhhh boy, get your 
> wallets ready).  forget what they came from but they are 703A Crystal units for 
> the following frequencies.
> 140.580
> 142.020
> 142.560
> 142.740.
> 

Robert Downs - Houston
<http://www.wa5cab.com> (Web Store)
MVPA 9480
<wa5cab@cs.com> (Primary email)
<wa5cab@comcast.net> (Backup email)
   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080620/20455d09/attachment.htm
From kargo_cult at msn.com  Fri Jun 20 21:34:32 2008
From: kargo_cult at msn.com (Hue Miller)
Date: Fri Jun 20 21:35:48 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Ham mods using the scientific method (longish)
In-Reply-To: <9B0C8F74-3EED-11DD-9D76-0050E420676D@hiwaay.net>
References: <9B0C8F74-3EED-11DD-9D76-0050E420676D@hiwaay.net>
Message-ID: <BAY125-W3091705E1E1020685DA7E7E4A40@phx.gbl>

Eric, what was the database going to be? 
If a general catalog of mil electronics, that would be the hard way to do it.
( But, i'm not sure there is an easy way. Maybe to use some sophisticated OCR software
device and (somehow) automatic databasing? But it seems F. Chesson and maybe others
have pretty well sewn up the database already, although all that exist online seem to have
omissions and errors. 
The 194? flyer with the ARB price at $49.95 - i wonder how they arrived at the price? For an
SWL or even Novice ham, even a lowly S-38 would have been more usable - i think.  Every
surplus catalog of course had its overpriced favorites of the store and then some fair deals
which gave value for money. Even R.E. Goodheart.  This same catalog had ART-13 for $200
even, which maybe means someone other than Joe Ham was in the market.  -Hue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080620/df466730/attachment.htm
From kargo_cult at msn.com  Fri Jun 20 22:03:44 2008
From: kargo_cult at msn.com (Hue Miller)
Date: Fri Jun 20 22:04:57 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Ham mods using the scientific method (longish)
In-Reply-To: <9B0C8F74-3EED-11DD-9D76-0050E420676D@hiwaay.net>
References: <9B0C8F74-3EED-11DD-9D76-0050E420676D@hiwaay.net>
Message-ID: <BAY125-W367A53EF6E8FF6AD8A3CCEE4A40@phx.gbl>

 
e, i don't get this part
 
> I have a TCS pair languishing here for lack of suitable > power supplies, due to the extreme cost of acquiring them.
 
If you MUST have the "correct original", maybe so. But i guessed 
you were not that kind of purist. Otherwise, the TCS is one of the
absolute EASIEST sets to supply power to. I don't see what's 
difficult about scrounging a chassis and a transformer or two.
That would cost you all of $20 max.  When i used a TCS pair as
my Novice rig some decades back, i had an old TV chassis as the 
power supply. ( Called a "suicide supply", but would have been 
safe enuff for practical purposes except for my external oil-cap
add-on. ) This worked, and the old TV cost zero.
 
As for the rest: why not adapt an evolutionary perspective? There
never was any  Golden Age, no Garden of Eden, anything like that,
to look up to or back to. 
That the big dog seizes the meat from the smaller dog and explains
it differently shouldn't surprise or appall you. At least we as a species 
are constantly awakening from the  dreams of our past, and our 
brutalities and errors.
And if we happen to destroy ourselves, our species, totally, so what?
 
This system delivers to me a roof, warm running water, freedom to find
information, and to choose whom i want to associate with. Not all 
Empires are quite so permissive. Are things different there? So why
so dyspeptic, or do i read it wrongly?  -Hue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080620/324c7e6c/attachment-0001.htm
From k2gkk at hotmail.com  Fri Jun 20 22:39:22 2008
From: k2gkk at hotmail.com (D C *Mac* Macdonald)
Date: Fri Jun 20 22:40:34 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Ham mods using the scientific method (longish)
In-Reply-To: <BAY125-W3091705E1E1020685DA7E7E4A40@phx.gbl>
References: <9B0C8F74-3EED-11DD-9D76-0050E420676D@hiwaay.net>
	<BAY125-W3091705E1E1020685DA7E7E4A40@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <BLU129-W12ADB5C969A6E6AC96BCF1F1A40@phx.gbl>


I don't know the ARB, but I found the S-38 to be quite poor.
My Walter Ashe 1-tube (6SN7GT) regen receiver worked
better than an S-38 I borrowed when the 6SN7GT died and
I didn't have the money to buy a replacement tube.

Mac, K2GKK/5
Oklahoma City

p.s.  The National SW-54 was even worse.  The first "real"
receiver I got was a National NC-33, SO much better than
the S-38, even though tube lineup was pretty much the same.



________________________________ 
 
From: kargo_cult@msn.com 
To: milsurplus@mailman.qth.net 
Subject: RE: [Milsurplus] Ham mods using the scientific method (longish) 
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2008 18:34:32 -0700 
 
Eric, what was the database going to be? 

If a general catalog of mil electronics, that would be the hard way to do it. 
( But, i'm not sure there is an easy way. Maybe to use some sophisticated OCR software 
device and (somehow) automatic databasing? But it seems F. Chesson and maybe others 
have pretty well sewn up the database already, although all that exist online seem to have 
omissions and errors. 
 
The 194? flyer with the ARB price at $49.95 - i wonder how they arrived at the price? For an 
SWL or even Novice ham, even a lowly S-38 would have been more usable - i think.  Every 
surplus catalog of course had its overpriced favorites of the store and then some fair deals 
which gave value for money. Even R.E. Goodheart.  This same catalog had ART-13 for $200 
even, which maybe means someone other than Joe Ham was in the market.  -Hue  
From WA5CAB at cs.com  Fri Jun 20 22:55:55 2008
From: WA5CAB at cs.com (WA5CAB@cs.com)
Date: Fri Jun 20 22:57:19 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Ham mods using the scientific method (longish)
Message-ID: <d65.2779a8de.358dc7bb@cs.com>

Mac, 

The ARB is shaped like the AN/ARR-15 which replaced it (similar to the ATR 
form factor).  It's as good as the BC-348 plus was set up for remote control, 
including band switching.  Which none of the BC-348's were.  Outside of those in 
my vehicles and some AM/FM radios in the house, in 46 years as a ham and 39 
years as an engineer I've never owned or borrowed any civilian receivers.  So 
can't comment on those.

In a message dated 6/20/2008 9:39:39 PM Central Daylight Time, 
k2gkk@hotmail.com writes: 
> I don't know the ARB, but I found the S-38 to be quite poor.
> My Walter Ashe 1-tube (6SN7GT) regen receiver worked
> better than an S-38 I borrowed when the 6SN7GT died and
> I didn't have the money to buy a replacement tube.
> 

Robert Downs - Houston
<http://www.wa5cab.com> (Web Store)
MVPA 9480
<wa5cab@cs.com> (Primary email)
<wa5cab@comcast.net> (Backup email)
   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080620/704bc779/attachment.htm
From WA5CAB at cs.com  Sat Jun 21 00:10:48 2008
From: WA5CAB at cs.com (WA5CAB@cs.com)
Date: Sat Jun 21 00:12:02 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] PL-148
Message-ID: <cfc.37c00534.358dd948@cs.com>

Groups,

I know that a few of you follow my eBay listings from time to time in case I 
come up with something new.  So I thought I'd post this here first and give 
list members a first shot, especially as there are only 13 of them and my source 
has no more.  He had apparently been holding them back for some deal that 
fell through.

PL-148  $24.00.  NOS  Plus shipping.

This is the 3-contact power plug for the BC-456 with the shielded jacketed 
cable type backshell.  Same as, except for nomenclature, ARC 6965 used with ATA 
and AN/ARC-5.  If you remove the ferrule from the backshell and glue a black 
disk with two holes there, it would work for the PL-148-A.  To match the other 
-A connectors I have.

Robert Downs - Houston
<http://www.wa5cab.com> (Web Store)
MVPA 9480
<wa5cab@cs.com> (Primary email)
<wa5cab@comcast.net> (Backup email)
   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080621/0b2dce7e/attachment.htm
From kargo_cult at msn.com  Sat Jun 21 00:39:56 2008
From: kargo_cult at msn.com (Hue Miller)
Date: Sat Jun 21 00:42:53 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Ham mods using the scientific method (longish)
References: <9B0C8F74-3EED-11DD-9D76-0050E420676D@hiwaay.net>
	<BAY125-W3091705E1E1020685DA7E7E4A40@phx.gbl>
	<BLU129-W12ADB5C969A6E6AC96BCF1F1A40@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <BAY125-DAV1242116809B77F052D9CAFE4A40@phx.gbl>

Mac, the ARB is more sensitive and stable than the S-38
- and probably cost 10x as much to make. I suspect the
selectivity is about the same: ARB with 2 IF at 915 kHz,
S-38 with 1 IF at 455. 
However - the ARB requires a control box. Even if you 
want to use all the controls right at the receiver, not some
where else in your house, you have to wire up the control
box and its connectors. The ARB has no bandspread tuning,
the local tuning adaptor to tune it from the front instead of
via a flex cable, is not so comfortable to use, and to see the
actual frequency you are near, you have to put your head
down by the little window in the lower left corner. This is not
a comfortable receiver for the beginning ham, or the SWL, to
use. 
I wonder if a Q-5er, BC-453, would have worked well if coupled
to the S-38, or if the S-38 front end was too unstable anyway.
With simple receivers like that, i read that you could just connect
the BC-453 (or other LF receiver) antenna right to the antenna
connection on the s.w. receiver, and get enuff IF voltage for it
to work fine. I should try that.  -Hue
From kargo_cult at msn.com  Sat Jun 21 02:17:52 2008
From: kargo_cult at msn.com (Hue Miller)
Date: Sat Jun 21 02:20:52 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Re: German manuals WW2
References: <9B0C8F74-3EED-11DD-9D76-0050E420676D@hiwaay.net><BAY125-W3091705E1E1020685DA7E7E4A40@phx.gbl><BLU129-W12ADB5C969A6E6AC96BCF1F1A40@phx.gbl>
	<BAY125-DAV1242116809B77F052D9CAFE4A40@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <BAY125-DAV15D0754B95C1F6093629AE4A40@phx.gbl>

I just looked over manuals on about 10 German radio
equipments from WW2. I must say, in comparison with
the typical USA manual or even just service instructions,
they are disappointing. While the descriptions of the circuit
working are thorough, there are NO voltage and NO 
resistance tables. This it seems to me would make it real
inefficient for your repair people to restore these to service.
Who knows, maybe the idea was that the "Funkmeister"
(advanced repair craftsman)  learned the sets by experience
and passed on his secrets to his disciples. I hope their 
vehicle manuals were better! Of about 15 German manuals
i have seen, only ONE approached US standards of quality.
That was the manual for the FuG-10 aircraft radio. The radio
was a pretty modern piece quite comparable, in my estimation,
to the ARC-5, and the FuG-10 manual is approximately 
comparable in size and thoroughness to the Command Equipment's.

Here is an interesting tidbit from the manual  D 1033/5 for the
"T Fu G k"
( = "Pack Radio Set k" ),  1 Nov 1943:

Antenna.............Day Range Approx..(km)........Night Range Approx.
________________CW______AM_____________CW____AM

Short mast w/
small cap. hat............25............15...........................12...........6

Tall mast...................30.............20...........................15..........8

WIre on ground
40m long................... 1-2 points signal strength weaker than with
..................................short mast antenna

End quote. 

Now, if this had been a question on the license test, i would have 
answered, for example, for the taller mast, night range= 100 km+.
Obviously, they were working a different propagation mode. That might
be a good test question. ( I like "tricky" questions. )
I wonder if anyone in the USA besides me is interested in such
minutiae.  -Hue M. 
From wh7hg.hi at gmail.com  Sat Jun 21 20:18:13 2008
From: wh7hg.hi at gmail.com (Michael Tauson)
Date: Sat Jun 21 20:19:34 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Re: : History of ham mods; opinions?
In-Reply-To: <BAY125-DAV5DF2B876F16B8AF3A69D2E4A50@phx.gbl>
References: <10749887.1213633026514.JavaMail.root@elwamui-royal.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
	<9ccb8c510806161325g66b064b7ie30ac11a10f696d8@mail.gmail.com>
	<4856F17E.2060507@sbcglobal.net> <485725A3.2050304@earthlink.net>
	<8CA9F1EE729FA28-BAC-3928@webmail-nc04.sysops.aol.com>
	<BAY125-DAV139728F8895835191CDBC5E4AB0@phx.gbl>
	<c34299fb0806181714x53265a47g5fd4ca866d88bbac@mail.gmail.com>
	<BAY125-W9DB77AF26F084CA213034E4AA0@phx.gbl>
	<c34299fb0806191839g11207f3ev69ee264b218e1215@mail.gmail.com>
	<BAY125-DAV5DF2B876F16B8AF3A69D2E4A50@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <c34299fb0806211718o4938d0bbx1ae7f90dc1734ea5@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 6:49 PM, Hue Miller <kargo_cult@msn.com> wrote:

> Of course your parents would have a fit when the REA man showed up and wanted
> $200 for shipping.

The local REA office was in Mars, PA, and they didn't have a truck.
You had to go pick things up there.  But Mars was an interesting town
so finding a big person to take me there was never all that difficult.

> Michael, that thing that would discourage me about a large book, not that i'm even
> thinking of doing it anyway, is that "new" finds are always appearing.

This would make the idea of irregularly released volumes even better.
16-20 pages (8-10 double-sized sheets stapled in the center and folded
... sound familiar?) of Really Cool Stuff maybe on an annual (more or
less) basis would be simple and could be a lot of fun.

> Altho even if you publish in paper someone is likely to scan it in for their shovelware disk.

Copyright status seems to have gone by the wayside.  I noticed John
Kraus's lovely book "Antennas" is on DVD now from Denmark.  I guess
their copyright laws are different from ours but, if I've read the law
right, a USian buying that disk is in deep doodoo.

> Louis Mulstee seems to have done a superlativework in the completeness regard,
> at least in the one book of his i bought, the Clandestine Radio book, which i consider
> worth more than the $100 i paid for it.  His  effort must have been superhuman.

Dedication, perseverence, and a total lack of concern for one's own
sanity.  Since I have papers to prove that last isn't an issue, my job
is easier.  :-D

BEst regards,

Michael, WH7HG
From eugene at hertzmail.com  Sat Jun 21 21:42:17 2008
From: eugene at hertzmail.com (eugene@hertzmail.com)
Date: Sat Jun 21 21:43:35 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] info on DA-515/U?
Message-ID: <15FF713354AB044F80212306D8035A1002D674E2@mse12be2.mse12.exchange.ms>


I picked up a DA-515/U Dummy Load at a hamfest. I understand it's rated
for 600W continuous, but does anyone know the specs for how long I can
run 1KW? I am looking for the duty cycle (you know, 2 minutes on, 10
minutes off, etc).

Is there a published rating curve for this? I believe it is equivalent
to the Bird 8400 series. I could not find the rating curve on bird's
website. I did find the manual, but it only mentions 600W continuous. I
tried to contact bird a month ago but no luck.

Anyone?
Thanks!
Eugene



From joeconnor53 at yahoo.com  Sat Jun 21 23:09:34 2008
From: joeconnor53 at yahoo.com (Joe Connor)
Date: Sat Jun 21 23:10:53 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] RBC Headphones
Message-ID: <367736.1457.qm@web46308.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>

What kind of headphones should I be using with an RBC receiver and where can I get a set? I'm currently using a speaker connected through the headphone jack and the audio is great. When I hook up the headphones I normally use with communications receivers, the audio is virtually non-existent. I'm assuming its an impedance mismatch.
As always, thank you for your help.
Joe Connor


      

From WA5CAB at cs.com  Sat Jun 21 23:42:20 2008
From: WA5CAB at cs.com (WA5CAB@cs.com)
Date: Sat Jun 21 23:43:41 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] RBC Headphones
Message-ID: <c0f.2cb41f36.358f241c@cs.com>

Joe,

What headset do you have?  And what loudspeaker?  The proper headsets and 
loudspeakers for Navy sets, either aircraft or shipboard, would all be 600 ohm 
impedance, from before WW-II up through at least the 80's.  

In a message dated 6/21/2008 10:09:42 PM Central Daylight Time, 
joeconnor53@yahoo.com writes: 
> What kind of headphones should I be using with an RBC receiver and where 
> can I get a set? I'm currently using a speaker connected through the headphone 
> jack and the audio is great. When I hook up the headphones I normally use 
> with communications receivers, the audio is virtually non-existent. I'm assuming 
> its an impedance mismatch.
> As always, thank you for your help.

Robert & Susan Downs - Houston
<http://www.wa5cab.com> (Web Store)
MVPA 9480
<wa5cab@cs.com> (Primary email)
<wa5cab@comcast.net> (Backup email)
   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080621/18d75d22/attachment.htm
From sdaitch at KUW.IBB.GOV  Sun Jun 22 04:42:03 2008
From: sdaitch at KUW.IBB.GOV (sdaitch@KUW.IBB.GOV)
Date: Sun Jun 22 04:43:36 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] info on DA-515/U?
Message-ID: <4f143036.30364f14@KUW.IBB.GOV>

Eugene,

I just checked the instruction book for
the Bird Series 8000 Termaline Coaxial
Load Resistor, dummyloads, and the only
thing Bird mentions in this 1992 publication
about operation above rated power is:

"Caution - Do not operate these loads continuously 
above their ratd maximum wattage power range.  Load
failure will result"

and

"These units will sustain an input moderately greater than
their maximum rated per for short periods of time.  Such 
loading must be spaced at reasonable intervals to allow 
sufficient time for cooling to a safe temperature.  Apply
the excessive power for a few minutes at most and allow 
at least a half hour for adequate cooling before reapplying 
power.  Because of the excessive heat generated by 
overloading, touch the load with caution to avoid painful
burns."

Sorry, but this isa ll I could easily find.

73
Sheldon

----- Original Message -----
From: eugene@hertzmail.com
Date: Sunday, June 22, 2008 2:42 am
Subject: [Milsurplus] info on DA-515/U?

> 
> I picked up a DA-515/U Dummy Load at a hamfest. I understand it's 
> ratedfor 600W continuous, but does anyone know the specs for how 
> long I can
> run 1KW? I am looking for the duty cycle (you know, 2 minutes on, 10
> minutes off, etc).
> 
> Is there a published rating curve for this? I believe it is equivalent
> to the Bird 8400 series. I could not find the rating curve on bird's
> website. I did find the manual, but it only mentions 600W 
> continuous. I
> tried to contact bird a month ago but no luck.
> 
> Anyone?
> Thanks!
> Eugene
> 
> 
> 
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: Milsurplus@mailman.qth.net
> 

From sdaitch at KUW.IBB.GOV  Sun Jun 22 05:08:21 2008
From: sdaitch at KUW.IBB.GOV (sdaitch@KUW.IBB.GOV)
Date: Sun Jun 22 05:09:51 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Overseas versions of US publications.
Message-ID: <1acc26f3.26f31acc@KUW.IBB.GOV>

I don't know the copyright status of the DVD version of
Kraus' "Antenna," but I have a small number of techical
books I purchased while living in the Philippines, 
probably legally reprinted there.

These are usually newsprint versions of stateside 
texts, apparently authorized by the publishers for RP
distribution.  Two of them I could easily locate were
reprinted by Jemma, Inc, and one is marked:

"EXPORT OF THIS BOOK FROM THE PHILIPPINES PUNISHABLE 
BY LAW"  and

"Reprinted under authority of Presential Decree No. 285, as 
amended by P.D. No. 400 & 1203, by:  Jemma Inc."

The other is marked "This edition is authorized for sale only 
in Philippines"  and

""This edition may be sold only in those countries to which it
is consigned by Prentice-Hall International.  It is not to be
re-exported and is not for sale in the USA, Mexico or Canada."

With all this written, I'd probably agree the DVD might not
be a legal copy.  

73
Sheldon
WA4MZZ




> 
> Copyright status seems to have gone by the wayside.  I noticed John
> Kraus's lovely book "Antennas" is on DVD now from Denmark.  I guess
> their copyright laws are different from ours but, if I've read the law
> right, a USian buying that disk is in deep doodoo.
>

From albert.lafrance at coldwar-c4i.net  Sun Jun 22 08:55:44 2008
From: albert.lafrance at coldwar-c4i.net (Albert LaFrance)
Date: Sun Jun 22 08:57:10 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Overseas versions of US publications.
In-Reply-To: <1acc26f3.26f31acc@KUW.IBB.GOV>
References: <1acc26f3.26f31acc@KUW.IBB.GOV>
Message-ID: <011601c8d467$4891e4e0$0201a8c0@CPQSR2030NX>

It's very common with college textbooks - many come in an "international
edition" which is identical to the US edition except for the artwork on the
cover.  The paper and printing quality are the same.

These books are often much less expensive than the US editions, and are
readily available from online sellers.  I think some of the sellers
re-import the books and ship from stateside stock, while others ship
directly from overseas.  I've gotten quite a few of my textbooks that way,
and saved a lot of money.  For example, last year I bought a brand-new text
online from a Hong Kong merchant - the shipping cost was surprisingly low, I
had the book in less than a week, and the total was about two-thirds of that
the college bookstore charged!

Albert LaFrance

>-----Original Message-----
>From: milsurplus-bounces@mailman.qth.net [mailto:milsurplus-
>bounces@mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of sdaitch@KUW.IBB.GOV
>Sent: Sunday, June 22, 2008 5:08 AM
>Cc: milsurplus@mailman.qth.net
>Subject: [Milsurplus] Overseas versions of US publications.
>
>I don't know the copyright status of the DVD version of
>Kraus' "Antenna," but I have a small number of techical
>books I purchased while living in the Philippines,
>probably legally reprinted there.
>
>These are usually newsprint versions of stateside
>texts, apparently authorized by the publishers for RP
>distribution.  Two of them I could easily locate were
>reprinted by Jemma, Inc, and one is marked:
>
>"EXPORT OF THIS BOOK FROM THE PHILIPPINES PUNISHABLE
>BY LAW"  and
>
>"Reprinted under authority of Presential Decree No. 285, as
>amended by P.D. No. 400 & 1203, by:  Jemma Inc."
>
>The other is marked "This edition is authorized for sale only
>in Philippines"  and
>
>""This edition may be sold only in those countries to which it
>is consigned by Prentice-Hall International.  It is not to be
>re-exported and is not for sale in the USA, Mexico or Canada."
>
>With all this written, I'd probably agree the DVD might not
>be a legal copy.
>
>73
>Sheldon
>WA4MZZ


From jfor at quik.com  Sun Jun 22 12:52:19 2008
From: jfor at quik.com (J Forster)
Date: Sun Jun 22 12:51:14 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] info on DA-515/U?
References: <4f143036.30364f14@KUW.IBB.GOV>
Message-ID: <485E8343.53BB469A@quik.com>

Try CALLING the engineering dept. of Bird. Don't email them. If you get to
the real guy, they are very helpful, including with internal parts.

Best,
-John

============

sdaitch@KUW.IBB.GOV wrote:

> Eugene,
>
> I just checked the instruction book for
> the Bird Series 8000 Termaline Coaxial
> Load Resistor, dummyloads, and the only
> thing Bird mentions in this 1992 publication
> about operation above rated power is:
>
> "Caution - Do not operate these loads continuously
> above their ratd maximum wattage power range.  Load
> failure will result"
>
> and
>
> "These units will sustain an input moderately greater than
> their maximum rated per for short periods of time.  Such
> loading must be spaced at reasonable intervals to allow
> sufficient time for cooling to a safe temperature.  Apply
> the excessive power for a few minutes at most and allow
> at least a half hour for adequate cooling before reapplying
> power.  Because of the excessive heat generated by
> overloading, touch the load with caution to avoid painful
> burns."
>
> Sorry, but this isa ll I could easily find.
>
> 73
> Sheldon
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: eugene@hertzmail.com
> Date: Sunday, June 22, 2008 2:42 am
> Subject: [Milsurplus] info on DA-515/U?
>
> >
> > I picked up a DA-515/U Dummy Load at a hamfest. I understand it's
> > ratedfor 600W continuous, but does anyone know the specs for how
> > long I can
> > run 1KW? I am looking for the duty cycle (you know, 2 minutes on, 10
> > minutes off, etc).
> >
> > Is there a published rating curve for this? I believe it is equivalent
> > to the Bird 8400 series. I could not find the rating curve on bird's
> > website. I did find the manual, but it only mentions 600W
> > continuous. I
> > tried to contact bird a month ago but no luck.
> >
> > Anyone?
> > Thanks!
> > Eugene

From k7dfw at clatskanie.com  Sun Jun 22 16:58:04 2008
From: k7dfw at clatskanie.com (ROLYNN PRECHTL  K7DFW)
Date: Sun Jun 22 16:58:29 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] info on DA-515/U?
References: <4f143036.30364f14@KUW.IBB.GOV>
Message-ID: <004201c8d4aa$ab6968c0$c99ff204@hppav>

If the DA-515/U is equivalent to a Bird 8402.

Bird 8402 Termaline RF Coaxial Termination, 600 Watt, Oil-Cooled. Same
specifications as Bird 8401 except that the factory supplied input connector
was QC Type C female instead of a QC type N female and it is supplied with a
dust cap on a ball chain.

Download the 8400 series manual (around 95K) and learn more.
http://www.bird-electronic.com/products/product.aspx?id=155

There is no derating curve. The only temp spec is ambient which doesn't
help.

I have a similar sized DL, except it is dry, and use a bank of six large
high speed 4 to 5 inch muffin fans arranged 2x3 on a panel that came from
some sort of computer installation. It blows lots of air across the DL to
keep the temp down when it's rating is exceeded.




K7DFW


..._._

From robandpj at earthlink.net  Sun Jun 22 18:21:07 2008
From: robandpj at earthlink.net (Rob Flory)
Date: Sun Jun 22 18:22:30 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] AN/ARC-1
Message-ID: <16452605.1214173267755.JavaMail.root@mswamui-blood.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

Hi,
Does anyone know if this set suffers from BC-1000 syndrome, ie a bazillion paper capacitors disguised as mica (micamold)? 

Rob Flory 
From WA5CAB at cs.com  Sun Jun 22 18:36:39 2008
From: WA5CAB at cs.com (WA5CAB@cs.com)
Date: Sun Jun 22 18:38:10 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] AN/ARC-1
Message-ID: <be7.2d83ee9f.35902df7@cs.com>

Rob,

Not exactly.  Looking through the RT-18 parts list, I counted 19 fixed paper 
types that are probably micamold package.  There are also several (I didn't 
count them) oil filled paper (not usually a problem) and the balance of the 
fixed capacitors appear to be mica, ceramic or silvered versions of those.

In a message dated 6/22/2008 5:21:26 PM Central Daylight Time, 
robandpj@earthlink.net writes: 
> Hi,
> Does anyone know if this set suffers from BC-1000 syndrome, ie a bazillion 
> paper capacitors disguised as mica (micamold)? 
> 
> Rob Flory 
> 

Robert Downs - Houston
<http://www.wa5cab.com> (Web Store)
MVPA 9480
<wa5cab@cs.com> (Primary email)
<wa5cab@comcast.net> (Backup email)
   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080622/cf798aa3/attachment.htm
From kargo_cult at msn.com  Sun Jun 22 23:33:25 2008
From: kargo_cult at msn.com (Hue Miller)
Date: Sun Jun 22 23:36:34 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Aleutian campaign factoids
References: <be7.2d83ee9f.35902df7@cs.com>
Message-ID: <BAY125-DAV45B4733A0D5003C1F9D11E4A60@phx.gbl>

Here are some interesting (anyway, i think so) tidbit factoids
from the Aleutian islands campaign: 

-US had 2 weather / radio stations in Siberia. At end of war,
Navy insisted that stations stay, as they'd assist in occupation
of Japan. However, Russians insisted they leave; stations were
closed Dec. 194 5

-Of the Aleut natives removed by the Japanese from Attu Island,
and interned in Japan, 40% died, result of undernourishment.
( Higher mortality rate than of any allied prisoners in Japan. )

-All US flyers involved in Aleutian Islands campaign who had to
make emergency landings in Siberia were interned along with their
planes. ( USSR was "neutral" toward Japan til last days of war. )
However, the flyers were all allowed to secretly "escape" to Allied
controlled Iran and return home. 

Now a question from me: what would US weather reporting stations
in the Aleutian Islands have used for radio equipment? SCR-284 /
BC-654, i suppose?

/ Hue Miller, from "Alaska's Hidden Wars", O. Hays
From WA5CAB at cs.com  Mon Jun 23 00:03:22 2008
From: WA5CAB at cs.com (WA5CAB@cs.com)
Date: Mon Jun 23 00:04:51 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Aleutian campaign factoids
Message-ID: <cf4.2fcb3eb0.35907a8a@cs.com>

Until 1944, that would have been the best of the available sets.  But other 
possibilities are SCR-178 and SCR-288.  Given that the SCR-284 barely made it 
onto the transports in time for the landings in North Africa, I'd guess that in 
the Summer of 1942, especially given the low priority of operations in the 
Pacific in general and Alaska in particular, the other two are more likely.

In a message dated 6/22/2008 10:35:41 PM Central Daylight Time, 
kargo_cult@msn.com writes: 
> Now a question from me: what would US weather reporting stations
> in the Aleutian Islands have used for radio equipment? SCR-284 /
> BC-654, i suppose?

Robert & Susan Downs - Houston
<http://www.wa5cab.com> (Web Store)
MVPA 9480
<wa5cab@cs.com> (Primary email)
<wa5cab@comcast.net> (Backup email)
   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080623/a669ca84/attachment.htm
From AAF-Radio-1 at aafradio.org  Mon Jun 23 06:20:17 2008
From: AAF-Radio-1 at aafradio.org (Mike Hanz)
Date: Mon Jun 23 06:21:59 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Re: [ARC5] Expert knowledge needed
Message-ID: <485F78E1.6000506@aafradio.org>

One of the least exploited document sources of WWII aircraft equipment 
is the set of maintenance digests for Navy and USAAF radio equipment.  I 
have finally finished OCR-ing one of the USAAF  "Unsatisfactory Report" 
digests (from May-June 1944) and it has a page which mentions the 
BC-706A and SA-3/A crash switches.  See 
http://aafradio.org/docs/docs.html under "Operational Notes" for the 
whole radio section of the document - the crash switch is mentioned on 
page 35R.  Originally set for 10Gs, the springs evidently weakened over 
time to start giving problems with hard landings and turbulence...  :-)  
The UR's (and the Navy equivalent Airborne Radio Maintenance Notes - 
ARMN) provide a fascinating snapshot of problems reported from the field 
on various types of radio equipment.  Please let me know if there are 
errors in the OCR version of the UR - it has cost me countless hours 
correcting format and words, so there are more than likely many mistakes 
in it.  I have sworn off OCR until I find a better software package.

73,
Mike   KC4TOS

David Stinson wrote:

> Is this the impactor switch thing; cylindrical with a flat mounting 
> surface,
> clear window in the top, had a weighted rod you could see that would
> knock around if you shook it?  I always wondered how they kept from
> blowing the destruct during tight turns.
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Redlich Tri-State Warbird 
> Museum" <tristatewarbirdmuseum@fuse.net>
> To: <ARC5@mailman.qth.net>
> Sent: Friday, June 20, 2008 6:13 AM
>
>> Can anyone identify the function of a BC-767? 
>
>

From al at ar88.net  Mon Jun 23 11:04:50 2008
From: al at ar88.net (Al Klase)
Date: Mon Jun 23 11:06:50 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Aleutian campaign factoids
In-Reply-To: <BAY125-DAV45B4733A0D5003C1F9D11E4A60@phx.gbl>
References: <be7.2d83ee9f.35902df7@cs.com>
	<BAY125-DAV45B4733A0D5003C1F9D11E4A60@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <485FBB92.3060500@ar88.net>

I'm betting they had proper long range HF sets.  You're not going to 
camp out, long term, in Siberia or Alaska with a hand-crank generator.  
You're going to arrange proper shelter, i.e. heated buildings and AC 
generators.  Does anyone have solid info on military weather outposts?  
There were guys deployed to the Gobi Desert for the same purpose.

Regards,
Al

Hue Miller wrote:
>
> Now a question from me: what would US weather reporting stations
> in the Aleutian Islands have used for radio equipment? SCR-284 /
> BC-654, i suppose?
>
>
>
>   

-- 
Al Klase - N3FRQ
Flemington, NJ
http://www.skywaves.ar88.net/

From Telegrapher at att.net  Mon Jun 23 12:21:49 2008
From: Telegrapher at att.net (Telegrapher@att.net)
Date: Mon Jun 23 12:23:17 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Lube stuff question
Message-ID: <062320081621.6869.485FCD9D000814F000001AD522230680329B0A02D29B9B0EBF9D0A089F0E9D090A040AAB@att.net>

Reading Brian's posting concerning the bearings got me to thinking, dangerous as it may be.  I have a small sealed can of lubricant that i picked up several years back called : 3110-00-158-8243, BRG, Ball, Annular, DSA 500-76C-3756.  

Any one know what this was used for.  I've not opened it as yet cause there wasn't any need to.  However, that could change or maybe it needs a new place of residence.  It's in a small tin about 2 inches in diameter and   1 1/4 inches high.  Kinda heavy for it's size  but maybe it's what the universe will be like X number of billions of years from now.  No worry!

Larry
W0OGH

-------------- next part --------------
Skipped content of type multipart/related
From etgreeley at earthlink.net  Mon Jun 23 14:03:50 2008
From: etgreeley at earthlink.net (Edward Greeley)
Date: Mon Jun 23 14:05:30 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Lube stuff question
In-Reply-To: <062320081621.6869.485FCD9D000814F000001AD522230680329B0A02D29B9B0EBF9D0A089F0E9D090A040AAB@att.net>
References: <062320081621.6869.485FCD9D000814F000001AD522230680329B0A02D29B9B0EBF9D0A089F0E9D090A040AAB@att.net>
Message-ID: <485FE586.8030706@earthlink.net>

Hello Larry,

I think you are in for a surprise! Your "sealed can" should contain just 
what the markings say: A ball bearing, NOT lubricant. The National Stock 
class for small ball bearings is 3110. The National Stock class for 
bearing lubricants is 9150. That would account for the seemingly heavy 
weight, methinks.

Regards,
Ed


Telegrapher@att.net wrote:
> Reading Brian's posting concerning the bearings got me to thinking, 
> dangerous as it may be.  I have a small sealed can of lubricant that i 
> picked up several years back called : 3110-00-158-8243, BRG, Ball, 
> Annular, DSA 500-76C-3756. 
> 
> Any one know what this was used for.  I've not opened it as yet cause 
> there wasn't any need to.  However, that could change or maybe it needs 
> a new place of residence.  It's in a small tin about 2 inches in 
> diameter and   1 1/4 inches high.  Kinda heavy for it's size  but maybe 
> it's what the universe will be like X number of billions of years from 
> now.  No worry!
> 
> Larry
> W0OGH
From Telegrapher at att.net  Mon Jun 23 14:29:49 2008
From: Telegrapher at att.net (Telegrapher@att.net)
Date: Mon Jun 23 14:31:19 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Lube stuff question
In-Reply-To: <485FE586.8030706@earthlink.net>
References: <062320081621.6869.485FCD9D000814F000001AD522230680329B0A02D29B9B0EBF9D0A089F0E9D090A040AAB@att.net>
	<485FE586.8030706@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <062320081829.13334.485FEB9D0006F5C00000341622230680329B0A02D29B9B0EBF9D0A089F0E9D090A040AAB@att.net>


 Now to figure out what it's for.  Only other markings are : Pres MIL-B-197D and LUB W/MIL-G-18709A Which is the type grease  t use on it i suspect.  To big for dynamotor bearings but could be something for the  15 tty?  Don't know.  just a shot in the dark.

Thanks Ed for that info.

Larry
W0OGH


  -------------- Original message from Edward Greeley <etgreeley@earthlink.net>: --------------


> Hello Larry,
> 
> I think you are in for a surprise! Your "sealed can" should contain just 
> what the markings say: A ball bearing, NOT lubricant. The National Stock 
> class for small ball bearings is 3110. The National Stock class for 
> bearing lubricants is 9150. That would account for the seemingly heavy 
> weight, methinks.
> 
> Regards,
> Ed
> 
> 
> Telegrapher@att.net wrote:
> > Reading Brian's posting concerning the bearings got me to thinking, 
> > dangerous as it may be.  I have a small sealed can of lubricant that i 
> > picked up several years back called : 3110-00-158-8243, BRG, Ball, 
> > Annular, DSA 500-76C-3756. 
> > 
> > Any one know what this was used for.  I've not opened it as yet cause 
> > there wasn't any need to.  However, that could change or maybe it needs 
> > a new place of residence.  It's in a small tin about 2 inches in 
> > diameter and   1 1/4 inches high.  Kinda heavy for it's size  but maybe 
> > it's what the universe will be like X number of billions of years from 
> > now.  No worry!
> > 
> > Larry
> > W0OGH
-------------- next part --------------
Skipped content of type multipart/related
From kargo_cult at msn.com  Mon Jun 23 14:56:14 2008
From: kargo_cult at msn.com (Hue Miller)
Date: Mon Jun 23 14:57:44 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Aleutian campaign factoids
In-Reply-To: <485FBB92.3060500@ar88.net>
References: <be7.2d83ee9f.35902df7@cs.com>
	<BAY125-DAV45B4733A0D5003C1F9D11E4A60@phx.gbl>
	<485FBB92.3060500@ar88.net>
Message-ID: <BAY125-W2112F3C4916F9B5E501A8EE4A60@phx.gbl>

Some of the already existing weather stations no doubt had some kind of hut and gas engine
generator. However after the Japanese bases were built, some more weather stations were
put in place so US air forces planners could plan their air attacks. These weather stations 
must have been more simple and temporary and maybe even hidden.  The Gobi desert stations
unless i'm mistaken still came under the aegis of the US Navy's SACO China effort, and if i'm
correct in this, and i think i am, then they would have used the same set as the other China
stations, the TBX.  Unless maybe a longer range skywave set was needed, and the Navy actually
employed their 4 - 14 Mcs portable radio MBM, which is questionable. The 2 Siberia stations - 
I suspect that due to the long distance to China, maybe would have been TBW. I also wonder
if that gear was simply left for the Soviets when the crews were pulled out. I was told by a 
Russian ham that he had seen a complete TBW setup once being used, apparently, by hams
in USSR. Maybe with the nameplate removed, hi hi ??
 
The Aleutian wx stations were US Army as far as i can see. That means they would have been
using Army equipment. Most likely. I think the Aleutian weather station distances to another 
station would have been not much more than 50 miles. My guess. The book title i mentioned
in a previous post has a chapter on weather stations, decoding operations, and DF stations.
Shows one quonset hut DF station in a valley. Unfortunately, par for the course, no photos
or mention of radio equipment specifics. -H M
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080623/fd10fe0c/attachment.htm
From kk7iz at cox.net  Mon Jun 23 15:21:39 2008
From: kk7iz at cox.net (Lloyd KK7IZ)
Date: Mon Jun 23 15:23:16 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Aleutian campaign factoids
References: <be7.2d83ee9f.35902df7@cs.com><BAY125-DAV45B4733A0D5003C1F9D11E4A60@phx.gbl><485FBB92.3060500@ar88.net>
	<BAY125-W2112F3C4916F9B5E501A8EE4A60@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <00bd01c8d566$5c787dc0$0201a8c0@userlvnwsus9dr>

I was stationed at Cold Bay on 1984 as part of a helicopter support team 
drilling off the Prebilof Islands (sic?) .
There were many "artifacts" still in existence. You could see where 
virtually every quonset hut cluster was or had been. There was also a large 
radar dome or enclosure that had been abandoned. One of the natives had 
filled it up with abandoned equipment. First comes to mind stacks of some 
kind of monitor receivers, 19" rack panel, 4 or 5" high, each covered 
several bands as I recall. Think there were different sets for different 
freq ranges. Part of the old DEW line monitoring system, I guess. Also 
HRO's, Nationals, and others dissolving in the humidity. It was private 
property so did not try to take anything.
I did take a lot of pix, but not of things I should have.
There was also an old B-17 on the tundra marsh that was just left there.
BTW I understand Cold Bay is an emergency alternate landing site for the 
space shuttle. It is also the last ILS airport headed west until you get to 
Korea.
Thanx
Lloyd  KK7IZ
kk7iz@cox.net
Thanx
Lloyd  KK7IZ
kk7iz@cox.net


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Hue Miller" <kargo_cult@msn.com>
To: <milsurplus@mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2008 11:56 AM
Subject: RE: [Milsurplus] Aleutian campaign factoids


Some of the already existing weather stations no doubt had some kind of hut 
and gas engine
generator. However after the Japanese bases were built, some more weather 
stations were
put in place so US air forces planners could plan their air attacks. These 
weather stations
must have been more simple and temporary and maybe even hidden.  The Gobi 
desert stations
unless i'm mistaken still came under the aegis of the US Navy's SACO China 
effort, and if i'm
correct in this, and i think i am, then they would have used the same set as 
the other China
stations, the TBX.  Unless maybe a longer range skywave set was needed, and 
the Navy actually
employed their 4 - 14 Mcs portable radio MBM, which is questionable. The 2 
Siberia stations -
I suspect that due to the long distance to China, maybe would have been TBW. 
I also wonder
if that gear was simply left for the Soviets when the crews were pulled out. 
I was told by a
Russian ham that he had seen a complete TBW setup once being used, 
apparently, by hams
in USSR. Maybe with the nameplate removed, hi hi ??

The Aleutian wx stations were US Army as far as i can see. That means they 
would have been
using Army equipment. Most likely. I think the Aleutian weather station 
distances to another
station would have been not much more than 50 miles. My guess. The book 
title i mentioned
in a previous post has a chapter on weather stations, decoding operations, 
and DF stations.
Shows one quonset hut DF station in a valley. Unfortunately, par for the 
course, no photos
or mention of radio equipment specifics. -H M


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus@mailman.qth.net
> 

From scr287 at sbcglobal.net  Mon Jun 23 16:15:38 2008
From: scr287 at sbcglobal.net (Jack Antonio)
Date: Mon Jun 23 16:17:12 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Aleutian campaign factoids
In-Reply-To: <BAY125-W2112F3C4916F9B5E501A8EE4A60@phx.gbl>
References: <be7.2d83ee9f.35902df7@cs.com>	<BAY125-DAV45B4733A0D5003C1F9D11E4A60@phx.gbl>	<485FBB92.3060500@ar88.net>
	<BAY125-W2112F3C4916F9B5E501A8EE4A60@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <4860046A.7050407@sbcglobal.net>

There was a movie about the Gobi Desert stations,
"Destination Gobi" with Richard Widmark.

Don't know how factual it is, but I think I'll
rent it, to see how good it is, and of course,
check for radio content.  Should be a good way
to spend a lazy Saturday afternoon.

Jack Antonio WA7DIA
scr287@sbcglobal.net




Hue Miller wrote:
  The Gobi desert stations
> unless i'm mistaken still came under the aegis of the US Navy's SACO China effort, and if i'm
> correct in this, and i think i am, then they would have used the same set as the other China
> stations, the TBX.  
From bsugarberg at core.com  Mon Jun 23 19:22:16 2008
From: bsugarberg at core.com (BSugarberg)
Date: Mon Jun 23 18:23:50 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] WW2 Arctic Weather Stations (Long)
In-Reply-To: <00bd01c8d566$5c787dc0$0201a8c0@userlvnwsus9dr>
References: <be7.2d83ee9f.35902df7@cs.com><BAY125-DAV45B4733A0D5003C1F9D11E4A60@phx.gbl><485FBB92.3060500@ar88.net>	<BAY125-W2112F3C4916F9B5E501A8EE4A60@phx.gbl>
	<00bd01c8d566$5c787dc0$0201a8c0@userlvnwsus9dr>
Message-ID: <48603028.1050902@core.com>

Hello,

I thought the following might be of interest:

73, Bruce WA8TNC

----------------------------------------------
World War II In The Aleutians: A Brief History

On the 6th of June, 1942 at 22:27 hrs, the Japanese No. 3 Special Landing 
Party and 500 Marines went ashore at Kiska. The Japanese captured a small 
American Naval Weather Detachment consisting of ten men, including a 
Lieutenant along with their dog. One member of the detachment escaped for 50 
days. Starving, thin, and extremely cold he finally surrendered to the Japanese.

At nearly the same time, 03:00hrs on the 7th of June 1942, Admiral Omori's 
Attu invasion force, the Japanese 301st Independent Infantry Battalion, 
landed on Attu via Holtz Bay, ending up eventually at Massacre Bay and 
Chichagof Harbor. At this time Attu's population consisted of several Blue 
Fox, forty-five native Aleuts, and two Americans: Charles Foster Jones, a 
sixty year old ham radio operator and weather observer, and his 62 year old 
wife Etta Jones, a teacher and trained nurse. They lived in the little 
village of Chicagoff, Attu, consisting of frame houses around Chichagof 
Harbor. They maintained a precarious existence by fishing, trapping the 
foxes, and weaving baskets. Missionaries, as well as government patrol boats 
and small fishing craft, provided the inhabitants with their only direct link 
with the outside world...except for the small radio operated by Mr. Jones. 
Mr. Jones lost his life at the beginning of the invasion, while Mrs. Jones 
along with the remaining Aleut population were held prisoners.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Aleutian World War II Visitor Center

The National Park Service and the Ounalashka Corp., Unalaska's Native village 
corporation, in a public/private partnership, recently opened the Aleutian 
World War II National Historic Area Visitors Center in the restored Naval Air 
Transport Service Aerology Building (weather station).

Location

The Aleutian World War II Visitor Center is located at the Unalaska airport, 
within walking distance of both the cruise ship dock and the Grand Aleutian 
Hotel.

Exhibits

Many of the objects, quotes, and information in the Center came directly from 
Aleutian residents and World War II veterans who have shepherded this project 
along from the beginning. Exhibits on the Aleutian Campaign and the 
evacuation and internment of the Unangan (Aleut) people are on display on the 
lower level of the Aerology Building. The radio room uptairs in the has been 
reconstructed from 1940s photographs to look as it did during World War II. 
The Visitor Center regularly shows World War II-era films in its 1940s-style 
theatre, including ?Report from the Aleutians? and ?Alaska at War.?

Available Facilities

The Aerology Building is one of the most intact and architecturally 
significant World War II buildings in the Aleutian Islands. During the war 
years, the building served as the central station from which to monitor the 
unpredictable and harsh weather of Aleutians. World War II pilots relied on 
the data gathered at the station to complete air missions to and from Dutch 
Harbor.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Weather Station Kurt

Weather Station Kurt, officially Wetter-Funkger?t Land-26, was a weather 
station erected by a German U-boat crew in northern Labrador, Newfoundland in 
1943. The installation of Weather Station Kurt was the only armed German 
military operation on land in North America during the Second World War.

Weather in the Northern Hemisphere predominantly moves from west to east. 
This gave the Allies an important advantage since they could predict the 
weather far more accurately than the Germans. On September 18, 1943 U-537 was 
sent from Kiel, Germany with orders to resolve this problem. The submarine 
was loaded with a mobile weather station, named WFL-26, nicknamed "Kurt." The 
station, manufactured by Siemens, had an array of measuring instruments and a 
powerful transmitter. It was designed to be fully automated. Also on board 
the submarine were meteorologist Professor Kurt Sommermeyer and two assistants.

On October 22 the submarine arrived at Martin Bay in isolated northern 
Labrador. After waiting for fog to obscure them from air patrols, the Germans 
disembarked and spent the next four hours installing the station. The station 
was camouflaged and marked as belonging to the "Canadian Weather Service." 
However, the station only broadcast for a few days before falling silent. A 
second U-Boat was sent to do repairs and replace the batteries, but was sunk 
by the allies in the northern Atlantic.

The station was forgotten for many years until the late 1970s, when a retired 
Siemens engineer named Franz Selinger who was writing a history, went through 
Sommermeyer's papers and learned of the station's existence. He contacted 
Canadian Department of National Defence historian W.A.B. Douglas, who went 
with a team in 1981 and found the station still largely intact. Weather 
Station Kurt was brought to Ottawa and is now on display at the Canadian War 
Museum.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

	
"Yanks in Siberia: U.S. Navy Weather Stations in Soviet East Asia, 1945"
by G. Patrick March

The Pacific Historical Review, Vol. 57, No. 3 (Aug., 1988), pp. 327-342
Published by: University of California Press
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

"War North of 80: The Last German Arctic Weather Station of World War II"
by Wilhelm Dege and William Barr

University of Calgary Press (June 2004)

War North of 80 is the personal story of Wilhelm Dege, the leader of the last 
active German weather station of World War II, code named "Operation 
Haudegen." In an effort to secure weather data vital for military operations 
in northwestern Europe during World War II, the German Navy and Air Force 
secretly established manned weather stations in East Greenland, Svalbard, and 
Franz Josef Land.

Translated from the German by William Barr, War North of 80 describes the 
mission and its participants from its beginning until they were picked up by 
Allied troops on May 9, 1945, the last German troops to surrender. Dege?s 
lively writing describes not just the official weather observation program 
but also the recreational activities, the ambitious series of hikes around 
Nordaustlandet, and the hopes and fears of the group as they followed the 
increasingly dire war situation in Europe. With a detailed introduction, 
Barr?s translation offers English-speaking readers a rare glimpse into the 
Germans? activities in the Arctic during the Second World War. An epilogue by 
Ekart Dege, Wilhelm?s son, offers insight into the various fates of the 
expedition members who worked alongside his father.
From w1eof at hamnutz.com  Mon Jun 23 19:57:03 2008
From: w1eof at hamnutz.com (w1eof@hamnutz.com)
Date: Mon Jun 23 19:58:44 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Greasy Dyno
In-Reply-To: <20080623201722.EF5FE859C50@mailman.qth.net>
References: <20080623201722.EF5FE859C50@mailman.qth.net>
Message-ID: <4860384F.6060606@hamnutz.com>

It must be over a year ago that I asked this same question. Shame on me, 
but I lost the answer. So I'll ask again if you will indulge my 
repetitive nature:

On an old dynamotor I shoudl clean the old caked up grease with 
kerosene. Then repalce it with.... what? I seem to remember the best 
stuff is some Mobil marine lubricant but the number is what? Yes, I'm 
moving like a tortoise toward getting my BC-223 on the air. I don't want 
to rush anything... I got a good deal on thus PE-135. It looks like NOS 
so I sure as heck don't want to ruin the bearings just because I'm in a 
hurry.

Thanks guys

73,

Mark W1EOF

PS: STILL, yet STILL looking for an SO-80 chassis connector. Someone out 
there must have an old dyno unit that's worth nothing but parts. ?????
From AAF-Radio-1 at aafradio.org  Mon Jun 23 20:12:34 2008
From: AAF-Radio-1 at aafradio.org (Mike Hanz)
Date: Mon Jun 23 20:14:52 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Greasy Dyno
In-Reply-To: <4860384F.6060606@hamnutz.com>
References: <20080623201722.EF5FE859C50@mailman.qth.net>
	<4860384F.6060606@hamnutz.com>
Message-ID: <48603BF2.4000605@aafradio.org>

w1eof@hamnutz.com wrote:

> On an old dynamotor I should clean the old caked up grease with 
> kerosene. Then repalce it with.... what? 


Mobilith SHC-100

If you want to go crazy about it, click on 
http://aafradio.org/docs/Dynamotors.html

73,
Mike

> I seem to remember the best stuff is some Mobil marine lubricant but 
> the number is what? Yes, I'm moving like a tortoise toward getting my 
> BC-223 on the air. I don't want to rush anything... I got a good deal 
> on thus PE-135. It looks like NOS so I sure as heck don't want to ruin 
> the bearings just because I'm in a hurry.


From wb3akd at earthlink.net  Mon Jun 23 22:12:28 2008
From: wb3akd at earthlink.net (Tom Dawson)
Date: Mon Jun 23 22:12:21 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Greasy Dyno
References: <20080623201722.EF5FE859C50@mailman.qth.net>
	<4860384F.6060606@hamnutz.com>
Message-ID: <000f01c8d59f$c3dd8490$9001a8c0@ASP>

I use TIMKEN GR218C Electric Motor Grease....Good to 1200 RPM or so..

73

Tom WB3AKD
----- Original Message ----- 
From: <w1eof@hamnutz.com>
To: <milsurplus@mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2008 7:57 PM
Subject: [Milsurplus] Greasy Dyno


> It must be over a year ago that I asked this same question. Shame on me, 
> but I lost the answer. So I'll ask again if you will indulge my repetitive 
> nature:
>
> On an old dynamotor I shoudl clean the old caked up grease with kerosene. 
> Then repalce it with.... what? I seem to remember the best stuff is some 
> Mobil marine lubricant but the number is what? Yes, I'm moving like a 
> tortoise toward getting my BC-223 on the air. I don't want to rush 
> anything... I got a good deal on thus PE-135. It looks like NOS so I sure 
> as heck don't want to ruin the bearings just because I'm in a hurry.
>
> Thanks guys
>
> 73,
>
> Mark W1EOF
>
> PS: STILL, yet STILL looking for an SO-80 chassis connector. Someone out 
> there must have an old dyno unit that's worth nothing but parts. ?????
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus@mailman.qth.net
> 


From kargo_cult at msn.com  Tue Jun 24 03:45:06 2008
From: kargo_cult at msn.com (Hue Miller)
Date: Tue Jun 24 03:48:27 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Aleutian campaign factoids
References: <be7.2d83ee9f.35902df7@cs.com><BAY125-DAV45B4733A0D5003C1F9D11E4A60@phx.gbl><485FBB92.3060500@ar88.net><BAY125-W2112F3C4916F9B5E501A8EE4A60@phx.gbl>
	<00bd01c8d566$5c787dc0$0201a8c0@userlvnwsus9dr>
Message-ID: <BAY125-DAV7327366972E6B241E9A91E4A10@phx.gbl>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Lloyd KK7IZ" <kk7iz@cox.net>

> I was stationed at Cold Bay on 1984 as part of a helicopter support team 
> drilling off the Prebilof Islands (sic?) .
> There were many "artifacts" still in existence. 

When i was working in a surplus store ca. 1977, a fellow came in to 
sell some stuff. I think he worked in construction. One of the things
he had was one of those FFR ( i think) receivers built by the same
company that built the GPR-90, Temco (?). That was the little receiver
with 4 or so tuning units that provided variable tuning altho the dial
resolution was an afterthought for this mainly TTY receiver. Anyway
the guy had scooped it up in the Aleutians, genuine gov't abandoned,
along with other stuff. He wanted to trade it in for something. However,
also present at that moment was a local guy disrepected by all as
a BSer and loser. I noticed him turn the Alaska guy aside and heard
him in a low voice, explaining, "See, I work with the local Boy Scout
group, and we always are needing  radio gear to help teach them, etc.
etc." and then, in a jiffy, there was a change in ownership.
Was this a waste of government money? Less so- your government
didn't spend money to have a bulldozer crush and bury the gear, and
it i'm sure eventually was traded on the civilian market. -Hue M. 
From Military1944 at aol.com  Tue Jun 24 04:39:51 2008
From: Military1944 at aol.com (Military1944@aol.com)
Date: Tue Jun 24 04:41:28 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Mil set battery recell
Message-ID: <bf2.2e431d52.35920cd7@aol.com>

Someone out there must have enough Chemistry knowledge to know what will  
dissolve the foam type stuff around cells in these mil batteries. 
 
There must be something that will turn it into soup so we can pour it out,  
without harming either metal or the high impact plastic case. 
 
Having now to re-cell a 24v Clansman battery, and recently a French  TRC300 
battery, chipping this foam away is very time consuming, and messy. 
 
Where is the technology ??
 
Ben. G4BXD
(free agent, unaffiliated to any club)



   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080624/8a3ce20b/attachment.htm
From al at ar88.net  Tue Jun 24 08:00:28 2008
From: al at ar88.net (Al Klase)
Date: Tue Jun 24 07:59:08 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] WWII German NVIS Antennas
Message-ID: <4860E1DC.4090406@ar88.net>

The Germans used "bed-frame" HF antennas on their reconnaissance 
vehicles.  Does anyone have any specific information on these mobile 
antennas:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:SdKfz232-8rad-ardennes-france-1940.png
http://www.tactical-link.com/WWII_NVIS.htm

I'm not at all sure if these were loops or very short top-loaded 
verticals.  I'd like to model these in NEC, but I need to know how they 
were fed, what's insulated and what's not etc.

Any help appreciated,
Al

-- 
Al Klase - N3FRQ 
Flemington, NJ 
http://www.skywaves.ar88.net/

From whitaker at pa.net  Tue Jun 24 09:28:42 2008
From: whitaker at pa.net (C Whitaker)
Date: Tue Jun 24 09:31:33 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] WWII German NVIS Antennas
In-Reply-To: <4860E1DC.4090406@ar88.net>
References: <4860E1DC.4090406@ar88.net>
Message-ID: <4860F68A.2010103@pa.net>

de WB2CPN
Al, A couple of years or so ago I asked this
question on antennas@mailman.qth.net, and there
were some replies after a while.  These antennas
were popular in the Africa Corps.  There are a
few pictures with General Romell with some of
his command vehicles.  There were open top
vehicles which carried the communication center,
and they had the square antenna.  The picture
you refereed to shows more supports on that
tank than the trucks had.  I think it was a
loop.  It appears that one end is grounded to
the vehicle while the other end goes to the
antenna tuner.  Let us know what you find.
73  Clete




From al at ar88.net  Tue Jun 24 10:13:14 2008
From: al at ar88.net (Al Klase)
Date: Tue Jun 24 10:11:59 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] WWII German NVIS Antennas
In-Reply-To: <4860F68A.2010103@pa.net>
References: <4860E1DC.4090406@ar88.net> <4860F68A.2010103@pa.net>
Message-ID: <486100FA.5080009@ar88.net>

Thanks, Chuck,

K2WI on the MRCA list points out that this link:  
http://www.tactical-link.com/WWII_NVIS.htm says "The entire framework is 
fed at the right-rear corner, via the single-wire feedline that can be 
seen in this and the photos farther below on this page.

I was having a lot of trouble figuring out how it could be a loop.  I 
doubt it's a high-angle radiator.  We'll see.

Al

C Whitaker wrote:
> de WB2CPN
> Al, A couple of years or so ago I asked this
> question on antennas@mailman.qth.net, and there
> were some replies after a while.  These antennas
> were popular in the Africa Corps.  There are a
> few pictures with General Romell with some of
> his command vehicles.  There were open top
> vehicles which carried the communication center,
> and they had the square antenna.  The picture
> you refereed to shows more supports on that
> tank than the trucks had.  I think it was a
> loop.  It appears that one end is grounded to
> the vehicle while the other end goes to the
> antenna tuner.  Let us know what you find.
> 73  Clete
>
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus@mailman.qth.net
>
>

-- 
Al Klase - N3FRQ 
Flemington, NJ 
http://www.skywaves.ar88.net/

From kargo_cult at msn.com  Tue Jun 24 10:42:45 2008
From: kargo_cult at msn.com (Hue Miller)
Date: Tue Jun 24 10:46:12 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] WWII German NVIS Antennas
References: <4860E1DC.4090406@ar88.net>
Message-ID: <BAY125-DAV5B0961E9A9AD06365CCFDE4A10@phx.gbl>

I thought we'd been all thru this issue.
These were not HF antennas, unless you call
1 - 3 MHz HF.
They were nothing complex. Just a big
capacitive hat, nothing more complex.
-Hue M. 
From al at ar88.net  Tue Jun 24 11:40:50 2008
From: al at ar88.net (Al Klase)
Date: Tue Jun 24 11:39:35 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] WWII German NVIS Antennas
In-Reply-To: <BAY125-DAV5B0961E9A9AD06365CCFDE4A10@phx.gbl>
References: <4860E1DC.4090406@ar88.net>
	<BAY125-DAV5B0961E9A9AD06365CCFDE4A10@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <48611582.3040702@ar88.net>

Hi Hue,

I guess I wasn't there that day. :-)
I think I agree with you.  I'm doing a poor job of keeping track of my
references, but one described it as an MF system with a range of
something like 20-30 KM.  Not what I'd expect from NVIS.

Al

Hue Miller wrote:
> I thought we'd been all thru this issue.
> These were not HF antennas, unless you call
> 1 - 3 MHz HF.
> They were nothing complex. Just a big
> capacitive hat, nothing more complex.
> -Hue M. 
>
>
>   

-- 
Al Klase - N3FRQ
Flemington, NJ
http://www.skywaves.ar88.net/


From kargo_cult at msn.com  Tue Jun 24 16:38:39 2008
From: kargo_cult at msn.com (Hue Miller)
Date: Tue Jun 24 16:40:15 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] WWII German NVIS Antennas
In-Reply-To: <4860F68A.2010103@pa.net>
References: <4860E1DC.4090406@ar88.net> <4860F68A.2010103@pa.net>
Message-ID: <BAY125-W145901247D77E24860C2E0E4A10@phx.gbl>

No- it looks like a loop but it's not.A most basic variant of this antenna was simply wires zigzagging across the roof of a truck
between two wooden rails.
I think maybe the last time we went around on this, i said i had read that this frame antenna
was discontinued later in the war, and with replacement going to a "Star Antenna", a thing with 
long downward pointing capacity hat. Kinda like an umbrella skeleton but not totally unfolded.
It might have been harder to repair or replace compared to the star antenna. Maybe also easier
to damage.
If someone still maintains it was a loop antenna, we should look at the output circuit of the
transmitter that loaded the antenna. Which is conventional. 
The German vehicles seem (to me) (not totally unfounded) to have used these mobile frequencies:
1000-3000 kcs.
24-25 Mcs.
27-38 Mcs.
and i think also 38-44 Mcs. for ground-air coordination.
 
I recently bought a bunch of German manual reprints from a DL ham. Don't have time to look
up his address right now, later. There's one manual i got previously, something like "Behilfsmaessige
Kraftwagen..."  which shows a number of vehicle radio setups as well as the "frame antenna", if 
you're interested; i'm sure he has it. 
-Hue M. 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080624/0ba6c5a3/attachment.htm
From bl_6000 at yahoo.com.au  Tue Jun 24 17:01:30 2008
From: bl_6000 at yahoo.com.au (Brad Latta)
Date: Tue Jun 24 17:03:09 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] APN-12
Message-ID: <121480.90791.qm@web38006.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

I have just aquired a BC-929-A display unit from an APN-12 system. What signal inputs do I need to get a realistic display? ie, PRF, voltage etc.
Does anyone have any information on this system?
                                                 Brad 


      Get the name you always wanted with the new y7mail email address.
www.yahoo7.com.au/mail
From jfor at quik.com  Tue Jun 24 17:29:57 2008
From: jfor at quik.com (J Forster)
Date: Tue Jun 24 17:29:04 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] APN-12
References: <121480.90791.qm@web38006.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <48616755.B10F85@quik.com>

Hi,

The BC-929-A is also a part of the APN-2 (Rebecca). The indicator had two parts:

A SPDT RF switch coupled w/ a SPDT Video signal switch
and
essentially a 'scope with vertical amp and triggered sweep.

The system transmits an omnidirectional pulse and listens for a reply from the Eureka beacon on a different frequency, alternately on the left or
right pointing antennas. The single receiver RF input and output is switched is switched between left and right.

The trigger comes from the Tx/Rx unit. So you will need a free running trigger generator, a delayed pulse generator, and a divider to partition the
delayed pulse between the L and R channels. The pulses will need to be at vacuum tube levels and the delayed pulse needs to be band limited (likely
at a couple of MHz or so) to look realistic.

REMEMBER, the BS-929-A BLOWS TRANSFORMERS if run off 60 Hz line. There are NO internal fuses. You will also need 24 VDC for the motor driven switch.

Best,
-John

===============

Brad Latta wrote:

> I have just aquired a BC-929-A display unit from an APN-12 system. What signal inputs do I need to get a realistic display? ie, PRF, voltage etc.
> Does anyone have any information on this system?
>                                                  Brad
>
>       Get the name you always wanted with the new y7mail email address.
> www.yahoo7.com.au/mail
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus@mailman.qth.net

From kargo_cult at msn.com  Tue Jun 24 20:55:28 2008
From: kargo_cult at msn.com (Hue Miller)
Date: Tue Jun 24 20:57:08 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] WWII German NVIS Antennas
In-Reply-To: <486100FA.5080009@ar88.net>
References: <4860E1DC.4090406@ar88.net> <4860F68A.2010103@pa.net>
	<486100FA.5080009@ar88.net>
Message-ID: <BAY125-W3186CD4334D566DA3ACB5DE4A00@phx.gbl>

> K2WI on the MRCA list points out that this link: > http://www.tactical-link.com/WWII_NVIS.htm says "The entire framework is > fed at the right-rear corner, via the single-wire feedline that can be > seen in this and the photos farther below on this page. 
If this site wants to present the German vehicle antennas as NVIS using loop 
antennas, they should present more evidence than just their photo interpretation.
 
Also think about this: a huge metal mass inches, in some cases, from the "loop".
How will that affect the tuning and magnetic field?
You can present any idea on the Internet. Without evidence, or with flakey 
evidence.
-Hue M.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080624/e39fbdb4/attachment.htm
From ersmar at verizon.net  Tue Jun 24 21:28:33 2008
From: ersmar at verizon.net (Gene Smar)
Date: Tue Jun 24 21:30:12 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] WWII German NVIS Antennas
Message-ID: <24698508.4137341214357313888.JavaMail.root@vms076.mailsrvcs.net>

From: Hue Miller <kargo_cult@msn.com>
Date: 2008/06/24 Tue PM 04:38:39 EDT
To: milsurplus <milsurplus@mailman.qth.net>
Subject: RE: [Milsurplus] WWII German NVIS Antennas


.....

The German vehicles seem (to me) (not totally unfounded) to have used these mobile frequencies:
1000-3000 kcs.
24-25 Mcs.
27-38 Mcs.
and i think also 38-44 Mcs. for ground-air coordination.
........?
-Hue M. 


Gents:

     I believe I read in QST back in the 60s that US Hams were able to monitor Rommel's Panzer maneuvers in North Africa in the early days of US involvement (ca 1942-43?) on 28 Mcs or so.  Probably occurred during the runup to the sunspot peak just before the '56-'57 grandaddy. Anyone able to corroborate with appropriate citations, etc.?


73 de
Gene Smar  AD3F


From w1eof at hamnutz.com  Tue Jun 24 21:51:19 2008
From: w1eof at hamnutz.com (w1eof@hamnutz.com)
Date: Tue Jun 24 21:53:19 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Greasy Dyno
In-Reply-To: <20080625013019.59E82859BDD@mailman.qth.net>
References: <20080625013019.59E82859BDD@mailman.qth.net>
Message-ID: <4861A497.1010309@hamnutz.com>

Thanks for the suggestions guys.

73,

Mark W1EOF
From kargo_cult at msn.com  Tue Jun 24 22:44:11 2008
From: kargo_cult at msn.com (Hue Miller)
Date: Tue Jun 24 23:14:48 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] WWII German NVIS Antennas
References: <24698508.4137341214357313888.JavaMail.root@vms076.mailsrvcs.net>
Message-ID: <BAY125-DAV124ED716051AC5983B1DE2E4A00@phx.gbl>


----- Original Message -----
From: "Gene Smar" <ersmar@verizon.net>
     I believe I read in QST back in the 60s that US Hams were able to monitor Rommel's Panzer
maneuvers in North Africa in the early days of US involvement (ca 1942-43?) on 28 Mcs or so.
Probably occurred during the runup to the sunspot peak just before the '56-'57 grandaddy. Anyone
able to corroborate with appropriate citations, etc.?

-There was an article in Popular Communications around 1995, i think. Still have it "somewhere".
It was about Panzer traffic being heard in E Coast USA. Not too much fact, but it wasn't total
fluff. However, with 10m propagation the way it was, i think it would have been more "unusual
episode" rather than anything dependable. And i sincerlely doubt it was anything more than
interesting, as compared to "useful".
-Hue

From jcoward5452 at aol.com  Tue Jun 24 23:45:39 2008
From: jcoward5452 at aol.com (jcoward5452@aol.com)
Date: Tue Jun 24 23:47:24 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Greasy Dyno
In-Reply-To: <4861A497.1010309@hamnutz.com>
References: <20080625013019.59E82859BDD@mailman.qth.net>
	<4861A497.1010309@hamnutz.com>
Message-ID: <8CAA48D1160FBE1-A90-1C0F@webmail-nb11.sysops.aol.com>

2 years ago, at MRCG 2006, I had a dual BC- 454,and BC-455 setup 
running at the campsite.Well, I got a bit of grief from all the guys as 
to the sound of my dynamotors.So,at dawn on Saturday, before anyone 
else was up,I made a cup of coffee,and then I pulled the dyno's and 
removed the end bells.I removed the bearing covers.I then took the 
dipstick out of my 1600 cc aircooled VW motor,recently rebuilt and with 
an oil change just prior to and in preparation for the 150 mile trip to 
San Louis Obispo.I then used the dip stick to apply a drop or two of 30 
Wt to each bearing.I closed up all the bearings and end bells and was 
then lauded as to the nice smooth purring of the two dyno's.(This is 
field expediant and not recomended as maintenance).(But,it works!).
 I love this hobby!
  Jay KE6PPF



-----Original Message-----
From: w1eof@hamnutz.com <w1eof@hamnutz.com>
To: milsurplus@mailman.qth.net
Sent: Tue, 24 Jun 2008 6:51 pm
Subject: [Milsurplus] Greasy Dyno


Thanks for the suggestions guys.?
?
73,?
?
Mark W1EOF?
______________________________________________________________?
Milsurplus mailing list?
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus?
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm?
Post: mailto:Milsurplus@mailman.qth.net?

From WA5CAB at cs.com  Wed Jun 25 00:02:09 2008
From: WA5CAB at cs.com (WA5CAB@cs.com)
Date: Wed Jun 25 00:03:53 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Greasy Dyno
Message-ID: <bce.2c51fadd.35931d41@cs.com>

Do you think that it might have had anything to do with cycling the oil 
through the Wehrmacht engine before using it on the dynamotors?

In a message dated 6/24/2008 10:46:01 PM Central Daylight Time, 
jcoward5452@aol.com writes: 
> 2 years ago, at MRCG 2006, I had a dual BC- 454,and BC-455 setup 
> running at the campsite.Well, I got a bit of grief from all the guys as 
> to the sound of my dynamotors.So,at dawn on Saturday, before anyone 
> else was up,I made a cup of coffee,and then I pulled the dyno's and 
> removed the end bells.I removed the bearing covers.I then took the 
> dipstick out of my 1600 cc aircooled VW motor,recently rebuilt and with 
> an oil change just prior to and in preparation for the 150 mile trip to 
> San Louis Obispo.I then used the dip stick to apply a drop or two of 30 
> Wt to each bearing.I closed up all the bearings and end bells and was 
> then lauded as to the nice smooth purring of the two dyno's.(This is 
> field expediant and not recomended as maintenance).(But,it works!).
> I love this hobby!
> 

Robert & Susan Downs - Houston
<http://www.wa5cab.com> (Web Store)
MVPA 9480
<wa5cab@cs.com> (Primary email)
<wa5cab@comcast.net> (Backup email)
   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080625/4dec874b/attachment.htm
From kargo_cult at msn.com  Wed Jun 25 00:42:52 2008
From: kargo_cult at msn.com (Hue Miller)
Date: Wed Jun 25 00:46:17 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] German Manuals
References: <bce.2c51fadd.35931d41@cs.com>
Message-ID: <BAY125-DAV2205D4B31B015D0CC1CD7E4A00@phx.gbl>

The fellow selling German manual reprints is 
Peter, df3kt and you can mail him with his callsign
at aol dot com.  I do not know if he has a list; i 
requested quotes on specific manuals. The one
i was thinking of is # D963/8  1 Nov. 1941,
"MERKBLATT fuer die behelfsmaessige Herrichtung
von handelsueblichen Kraftwagen als Ersatz-
Funkkraftwagen".
Basically, how to set up available vehicles as expedient
radio vehicles. It does start out with some photos of 
actual standard military radio vehicles before it illustrates
other vehicles.  
Here's a tuff question for the loop - advocates to answer:
If it was a loop antenna, why would this "Roof Antenna"
( "Dachantenne" ) on  page 20 of this book, be constructed
like a large gridwork, with the feed wire coming down from
the middle of the grid??
Page 32 Ilustration 27, "A simple expedient roofantenna for
truck with closed platform" showing WIRE rubber covered
zig zagged from side to side of the roof between 2 wooden
rails.
Prices: most of these reprints are about Eu10 or more. So 
not exactly a steal. Also, once you've seen an SCR-506
manual or some other USA wonder, you will be quite or even
very disappointed with a German manual. So you are warned.

There is a book "Encyclopedia of German Tanks" that lists
the German vehicle radios and if i recall, also which vehicle
carried which. The book retailed for about $50 around 20 
years ago but possibly a pre-owned one would be available
and realisticly priced. This book had lots of interesting photos
including radio setups. 
I have also seen some photos of European reenactors with
absolutely fabulous German vehicles including complete radio
complement.  -Hue M. 
From whitaker at pa.net  Wed Jun 25 07:29:18 2008
From: whitaker at pa.net (C Whitaker)
Date: Wed Jun 25 07:32:06 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] WWII German NVIS Antennas
In-Reply-To: <BAY125-W3186CD4334D566DA3ACB5DE4A00@phx.gbl>
References: <4860E1DC.4090406@ar88.net>
	<4860F68A.2010103@pa.net>	<486100FA.5080009@ar88.net>
	<BAY125-W3186CD4334D566DA3ACB5DE4A00@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <48622C0E.40901@pa.net>

de WB2CPN
When I inquired into the characteristics of these
antennas a few years ago it seems no one ever
heard of them.  The only info I had was just
one picture from the Africa Corps.  I am still
hoping that someone will find a WWII German
manual or something on that radio set.  I don't
know of any other way to actually get the facts.
You'd think the German Army Officers School
would have a library going way back.
73 Clete


From kkibbe at rogers.com  Wed Jun 25 07:48:27 2008
From: kkibbe at rogers.com (KEVIN KIBBE)
Date: Wed Jun 25 07:50:22 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] WWII German NVIS Antennas
Message-ID: <198825.16329.qm@web88304.mail.re4.yahoo.com>


>You'd think the German Army Officers School
>would have a library going way back.
>73 Clete

I'm sure there is a German radio mailing lists where ex WWII German radio guys talk about the good old days of radio. Maybe even on the air.  I'm surprised we haven't heard from some... 

I've known about the "loop" antenna on WWII German armor since I was a teenager. Even plastic models have the antennas. 

For those of you who are not aware of the online U.S. military magazine "Army Communicator, Voice of he Signal Regiment" the 2004 No. 4 issue has a lot of discussion of NVIS and lots of photos and some talk of the "loop" or top loaded monopole. It's well worth looking up. In fact the magazine can be very interesting for many other articles as well.

Anyone can download the "Army Communicator" at:

http://www.gordon.army.mil/ocos/ac/

Kevin
VA3SU

From ersmar at verizon.net  Wed Jun 25 09:40:26 2008
From: ersmar at verizon.net (Gene Smar)
Date: Wed Jun 25 09:42:19 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] WWII German NVIS Antennas
Message-ID: <22712197.5478341214401226294.JavaMail.root@vms074.mailsrvcs.net>

Gents:

>>>>>>>>>>>

From: KEVIN KIBBE <kkibbe@rogers.com>
Date: 2008/06/25 Wed AM 07:48:27 EDT
To: Milsurplus@mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] WWII German NVIS Antennas


For those of you who are not aware of the online U.S. military magazine "Army Communicator, Voice of he Signal Regiment" the 2004 No. 4 issue has a lot of discussion of NVIS and lots of photos and some talk of the "loop" or top loaded monopole. It's well worth looking up. In fact the magazine can be very interesting for many other articles as well.

Anyone can download the "Army Communicator" at:

http://www.gordon.army.mil/ocos/ac/

Kevin
VA3SU
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

     Wouldn't you know it, the 2004 issue #4 is missing from the on-line back issues.  Kevin, can you provide an alternate location for it?  Thanks.

     Otherwise the site has lots of interesting reading especially at the bottom of the back issues list:  WWII commo.


73 de
Gene Smar  AD3F


______________________________________________________________
Milsurplus mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Milsurplus@mailman.qth.net

From Military1944 at aol.com  Wed Jun 25 09:52:55 2008
From: Military1944 at aol.com (Military1944@aol.com)
Date: Wed Jun 25 09:54:42 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] WWII German NVIS Antennas
Message-ID: <c67.37ec76c5.3593a7b7@aol.com>

 
In a message dated 25/06/2008 14:41:27 GMT Daylight Time,  ersmar@verizon.net 
writes:

Wouldn't you know it, the 2004 issue #4 is missing from the  on-line back 
issues.  Kevin, can you provide an alternate location for  it?  Thanks.



--------------------------------
 
Thank God for that, I though I was going crazy, my screen shows 2004, 2004,  
2005, 2004 !
 
pass the Gin.
 



   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080625/5da29dd2/attachment.htm
From kkibbe at rogers.com  Wed Jun 25 10:13:59 2008
From: kkibbe at rogers.com (KEVIN KIBBE)
Date: Wed Jun 25 10:15:39 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] (no subject)
Message-ID: <867623.22574.qm@web88301.mail.re4.yahoo.com>

I just emailed it to Gene and Mil1944 guy. I will put the file on my web site when I get home from work if anyone else wants it.

Kevin
VA3SU


>Thank God for that, I though I was going crazy, my screen shows 2004, 2004, 
2005, 2004 !
>pass the Gin.
From Military1944 at aol.com  Wed Jun 25 10:37:04 2008
From: Military1944 at aol.com (Military1944@aol.com)
Date: Wed Jun 25 10:38:53 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] (no subject)
Message-ID: <d50.2ef414a4.3593b210@aol.com>

 
In a message dated 25/06/2008 15:14:13 GMT Daylight Time, kkibbe@rogers.com  
writes:

I just  emailed it to Gene and Mil1944 guy. I will put the file on my web 
site when I  get home from work if anyone else wants  it.

Kevin
VA3SU




-----------------------------
 
Thanks Kevin. 
To others,  a very interesting read it is. Take a gander. 
 
Ben G4BXD



   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080625/46d5b191/attachment.htm
From ersmar at verizon.net  Wed Jun 25 11:07:14 2008
From: ersmar at verizon.net (Gene Smar)
Date: Wed Jun 25 11:09:54 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] (no subject)
Message-ID: <29274011.5693281214406434668.JavaMail.root@vms171.mailsrvcs.net>

Kevin:

     Thanks for the copy.  (Just what I need - more interesting milrad stuff to read on the Internet!)


73 de
Gene Smar  AD3F



From: KEVIN KIBBE <kkibbe@rogers.com>
Date: 2008/06/25 Wed AM 10:13:59 EDT
To: Milsurplus@mailman.qth.net
Subject: [Milsurplus] (no subject)

I just emailed it to Gene and Mil1944 guy. I will put the file on my web site when I get home from work if anyone else wants it.

Kevin
VA3SU


>Thank God for that, I though I was going crazy, my screen shows 2004, 2004, 
2005, 2004 !
>pass the Gin.
______________________________________________________________
Milsurplus mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Milsurplus@mailman.qth.net

From icra at galaxynet.com  Wed Jun 25 13:15:38 2008
From: icra at galaxynet.com (icra@galaxynet.com)
Date: Wed Jun 25 13:17:25 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] WWII German NVIS Antennas
In-Reply-To: <48622C0E.40901@pa.net>
References: <4860E1DC.4090406@ar88.net>,
	<BAY125-W3186CD4334D566DA3ACB5DE4A00@phx.gbl>,
	<48622C0E.40901@pa.net>
Message-ID: <48621ACA.32632.1697EF@icra.galaxynet.com>


> You'd think the German Army Officers School
> would have a library going way back.

I was not around then (shoot, my folks were still in diapers...), but ....

As I understand, most of the military documents (pretty much anything....including manuals, 
tech drawings, battle plans....pretty much anything found that could remotely be called 
military or technical) was packed up and sent back to the Allies for study.....

Understand there was not much left in Germany after the war.

Think the best sources would be US, UK, and Russian intel warehouses.....as much of the 
stuff in the US has never been un-packed, it is still classified, so good luck getting to look at 
any of it......

Understand the same thing happened with stuff captured from Japan....

Know for a fact the are large warehouses full of crates of stuff from WWII at several locations 
in the US full of captured stuff, as well as projects that were abandoned at the end of the war, 
that have never been looked at since. I help move one from one location to another in the 
80's.

Just my $.02....with the dollar where it is, that makes it about $.002

Mel
N7OKL
From w2obr at comcast.net  Wed Jun 25 13:24:20 2008
From: w2obr at comcast.net (Rich)
Date: Wed Jun 25 13:26:24 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] WANTED:
Message-ID: <000c01c8d6e8$4dc5bb20$5b5f8b45@homecomputer>

I am in need of a CV-2455 FSK Converter for my PRC-47. Does anyone have one 
they would like to sell?
If so contact me off the list please.
w2obr@comcast.net
tnx de Rich ( W2OBR ) 

From kargo_cult at msn.com  Wed Jun 25 15:52:21 2008
From: kargo_cult at msn.com (Hue Miller)
Date: Wed Jun 25 15:54:06 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] WWII German NVIS Antennas
In-Reply-To: <48622C0E.40901@pa.net>
References: <4860E1DC.4090406@ar88.net>	<4860F68A.2010103@pa.net>
	<486100FA.5080009@ar88.net>
	<BAY125-W3186CD4334D566DA3ACB5DE4A00@phx.gbl> 
	<48622C0E.40901@pa.net>
Message-ID: <BAY125-W294C9A97A5839A7BF55B2EE4A00@phx.gbl>



> de WB2CPN> When I inquired into the characteristics of these> antennas a few years ago it seems no one ever> heard of them. The only info I had was just> one picture from the Africa Corps. I am still> hoping that someone will find a WWII German> manual or something on that radio set. I don't> know of any other way to actually get the facts.> You'd think the German Army Officers School> would have a library going way back.> 73 Clete
I thought i told you the way to get the facts. If you want to pursue it, get the manuals for the vehicle transmitters
30WS 80WS and 100WS.  Also get the manual i referred to in my last 
post. Otherwise, go to the Army Communicator site for photo analysis
guesswork (wrong.) -Hue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080625/bc5860e0/attachment.htm
From cwopr at embarqmail.com  Wed Jun 25 20:26:19 2008
From: cwopr at embarqmail.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Wed Jun 25 20:28:05 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] R-138/Boulevard Rcvr Info Ready
In-Reply-To: <1241044321.24599441214438703174.JavaMail.root@md37.embarq.synacor.com>
Message-ID: <1724964120.24605931214439979526.JavaMail.root@md37.embarq.synacor.com>



Through the efforts of Elden Meyer, an excellent compilation of R-138?info (which came mostly from Wayne, N0TE) is ready for distribution. The file is a pdf and is a tad over 7kb. If anyone will have trouble with the size, let me know. I will send you a paper copy. I have the following listed for distribution: 
WA5CAB, Hue?Miller?& Bob (WA9RAN). If there is anyone else, let me know. Since I don't have your individual email addresses, please send me an email and I will reply with the file...that goes for anyone else who may be interested. 

The file contains a cover letter from Boulevard, changes, parts list, schem., align. info, pics (a bit dark but usable) and?misc. info.? 

Hope y'all find the info helpful....73, Bill K4JYS 


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080625/c55c3458/attachment-0001.htm
From wf2u at ws19ops.com  Wed Jun 25 20:27:25 2008
From: wf2u at ws19ops.com (Meir-WF2U)
Date: Wed Jun 25 20:29:08 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] WWII German NVIS Antennas
In-Reply-To: <BAY125-W294C9A97A5839A7BF55B2EE4A00@phx.gbl>
References: <4860E1DC.4090406@ar88.net>	<4860F68A.2010103@pa.net><486100FA.5080009@ar88.net><BAY125-W3186CD4334D566DA3ACB5DE4A00@phx.gbl>
	<48622C0E.40901@pa.net>
	<BAY125-W294C9A97A5839A7BF55B2EE4A00@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <01f201c8d723$6b786a60$0300a8c0@MBDCONSULTING.LOCAL>

I think have references to the antenna in question. The East-German Army
(German Democratic Republic Peoples? Army) or NVA in German still used the
same type antennas on their command APC?s.
I have the book ?Communications Technology in the NVA? written ? in German -
after the reunification of the two Germanies by Guenther? Fietsch DL9WSM.
Guenther was an NVA signals officer and after the demise of the Communist
regime he became a military radio collector/dealer. I personally got
accessories and info for some Russian radios from him, and he autographed
the book I?m referring to.
The antenna is called ?Rahmenantenne? ? ?Frame antenna? when it?s mounted on
the APC and it?s also called a ?Dachantenne? ? ?Roof antenna? when it?s on
top of a Deuce-type (6x6) communication van. The difference between these
two is that the ?frame antenna stands off higher from the metal body of the
APC and it?s close to the roof of ?the van. The HF transmitter used with
these antennas is the R-130M ?40W ?CW/AM/SSB transceiver, covering from 1.5
MHz to 10.99MHz.
When the ?frame? or ?roof? antennas are used, the transceiver output is
routed to a special antenna tuner which provides a balanced output as these
antennas require.
I don?t know whether these antennas are the same as the WW2 vintage ones,
but they certainly look a lot like those.
I can ask Guenther for more info on them.

73, Meir WF2U
Landrum, SC

________________________________________
From: milsurplus-bounces@mailman.qth.net
[mailto:milsurplus-bounces@mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Hue Miller
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 3:52 PM
To: milsurplus
Subject: RE: [Milsurplus] WWII German NVIS Antennas



________________________________________
> de WB2CPN
> When I inquired into the characteristics of these
> antennas a few years ago it seems no one ever
> heard of them. The only info I had was just
> one picture from the Africa Corps. I am still
> hoping that someone will find a WWII German
> manual or something on that radio set. I don't
> know of any other way to actually get the facts.
> You'd think the German Army Officers School
> would have a library going way back.
> 73 Clete

I thought i told you the way to get the facts. 
If you want to pursue it, get the manuals for the vehicle transmitters
30WS 80WS and 100WS.? Also get the manual i referred to in my last 
post. Otherwise, go to the Army Communicator site for photo analysis
guesswork (wrong.) -Hue

From tbryan at nova.org  Wed Jun 25 20:40:06 2008
From: tbryan at nova.org (Tom B)
Date: Wed Jun 25 20:41:24 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] WWII German NVIS Antennas
In-Reply-To: <01f201c8d723$6b786a60$0300a8c0@MBDCONSULTING.LOCAL>
References: <4860E1DC.4090406@ar88.net> <4860F68A.2010103@pa.net>
	<486100FA.5080009@ar88.net>
	<BAY125-W3186CD4334D566DA3ACB5DE4A00@phx.gbl>
	<48622C0E.40901@pa.net>
	<BAY125-W294C9A97A5839A7BF55B2EE4A00@phx.gbl>
	<01f201c8d723$6b786a60$0300a8c0@MBDCONSULTING.LOCAL>
Message-ID: <20080626003942.28025570A@mail.nova.org>


>The antenna is called ?Rahmenantenne? ? ?Frame antenna? when it?s mounted on
>the APC and it?s also called a ?Dachantenne? ? ?Roof antenna? when it?s on
>top of a Deuce-type (6x6) communication van. The difference between these
>two is that the ?frame antenna stands off higher from the metal body of the
>APC and it?s close to the roof of  the van. The HF transmitter used with
>these antennas is the R-130M  40W  CW/AM/SSB transceiver, covering from 1.5
>MHz to 10.99MHz.
>When the ?frame? or ?roof? antennas are used, the transceiver output is
>routed to a special antenna tuner which provides a balanced output as these
>antennas require.
>I don?t know whether these antennas are the same as the WW2 vintage ones,
>but they certainly look a lot like those.
>I can ask Guenther for more info on them.

There are some articles in English on Russian roof antennas here:
http://www.antentop.boom.ru/004/files/oma004.pdf
http://www.antentop.boom.ru/005/files/mma005.pdf


Tom






From cwopr at embarqmail.com  Wed Jun 25 20:49:05 2008
From: cwopr at embarqmail.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Wed Jun 25 20:50:47 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] R-138 Info File Size
Message-ID: <400557386.24613371214441345292.JavaMail.root@md37.embarq.synacor.com>

Sorry, fill size should have been a tad over 7MB...Bill 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080625/d66a070a/attachment.htm
From kkibbe at rogers.com  Thu Jun 26 08:38:07 2008
From: kkibbe at rogers.com (KEVIN KIBBE)
Date: Thu Jun 26 08:40:02 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] WWII German NVIS and the Army Communicator
Message-ID: <349328.5013.qm@web88306.mail.re4.yahoo.com>


To download the Summer issue of the Army Communicator (The German NVIS article) use the link below...

http://www.gordon.army.mil/ocos/ac/Edition,%20Summer/Summer%2004.pdf

It occurred to me that it's the link info that is wrong on the web site not the file...

Kevin
VA3SU
From cwopr at embarqmail.com  Thu Jun 26 08:43:39 2008
From: cwopr at embarqmail.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Thu Jun 26 08:45:29 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] R-138 File Has Been Sent
Message-ID: <446186968.24696061214484219043.JavaMail.root@md37.embarq.synacor.com>



I have sent the file to the following: 

John-ZL1AUB, Bob-WA5CAB, Bob-W9RAN, Perry-W8AU, Richard-AA1P, Hue Miller 

Have I missed anyone? Anyone else? 

Bill 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080626/40dc4053/attachment.htm
From WA5CAB at cs.com  Thu Jun 26 11:48:36 2008
From: WA5CAB at cs.com (WA5CAB@cs.com)
Date: Thu Jun 26 11:50:32 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Wanted: Top Cover for TN-339/GR Antenna Tuner
Message-ID: <bf8.31eee902.35951454@cs.com>

Group,

A friend in Long Beach has a TN-339 Antenna Tuner (used with T-368 
transmitter) that is missing the top cover.  If anyone has a loose one, let me know.  
All I have is a BC-939 one (will fit but it's black wrinkle instead of flat gray 
finish).

Robert Downs - Houston
<http://www.wa5cab.com> (Web Store)
MVPA 9480
<wa5cab@cs.com> (Primary email)
<wa5cab@comcast.net> (Backup email)
   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080626/19d8d0f8/attachment.htm
From cosmoline at aa4rm.ba-watch.org  Fri Jun 27 07:21:43 2008
From: cosmoline at aa4rm.ba-watch.org (Marty Reynolds)
Date: Fri Jun 27 07:26:54 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Aleutian campaign factoids
In-Reply-To: <BAY125-DAV45B4733A0D5003C1F9D11E4A60@phx.gbl>
References: <be7.2d83ee9f.35902df7@cs.com>
	<BAY125-DAV45B4733A0D5003C1F9D11E4A60@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <20224.24.30.81.88.1214565703.squirrel@fracas.netboobie.org>

Someone wondered what 2-way radio used in cold north during early '42.
Prolly sr kargokult.

Ft. Gordon has story on Halli HT7 in use @ Kodiak (1.8-4+ mhz xcvr)

It won war as SCR-543 et BC-669 after disgusting octal plugs
exchanged for mahnly AN-connectors.  Or am I thinking of
atom bomb or something

I believe it mighta been only xcvr around in that freq. range when w2
got going
From smithab11 at comcast.net  Fri Jun 27 10:23:46 2008
From: smithab11 at comcast.net (B. Smith)
Date: Fri Jun 27 10:25:16 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Field Day Frag Order 
Message-ID: <000d01c8d861$6a026bb0$7536c847@HAL1000>

Unclassified
J1791421Z
---------------------------------------------------
Field Day Ops Plan Order  61 modified as per this msg.
Date/Time : 28June 1800Z, 29June 1800-2100Z
Frequencies: 7170-7150 Kcs. 3550-3595, 1850Kcs.
Mode: CW
Equipment: GRC-9, GRC-109, R-104M,RS-6
Power: battery with solar augmentation
Call Sign: K4CHE
OL: DE
WX: CAVOK
Note: Unit is authorized to substitute equipment in 
order to accomplish mission. Unit should be prepared for
NVIS transmission and reception.
--------------------------------------------------
From scr287 at sbcglobal.net  Fri Jun 27 15:44:59 2008
From: scr287 at sbcglobal.net (Jack Antonio)
Date: Fri Jun 27 15:47:02 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Destination Gobi movie
Message-ID: <4865433B.5090608@sbcglobal.net>

Watched "Destination Gobi" last night.  Of course with the idea
of seeing the radio content.

There was only one scene which had somethng recognizable as a radio,
and it looked like the upper right corner of an RBM, with the chart holder.
Which, might even be factual, as the RBM and its companion transmitter
were a transportable system. There were a number of scenes that showed
prop type electronics, but nothing recognizable.

There was one scene, where the transmitter(which we never saw)was
being repaired after the air raid,  the dialogue mentioned that the 807 
was smashed
and there was no replacement.

The movie was supposedly based on a true incident, the requisitioning of
saddles to give to the natives in return for their help. And of course the
whole idea of weather stations in the Gobi was true, but the plot of
the movie did seem stretched a bit thin. Still, enjoyed watching it.

Jack Antonio WA7DIA
scr287@sbcglobal.net


From kargo_cult at msn.com  Fri Jun 27 16:05:14 2008
From: kargo_cult at msn.com (Hue Miller)
Date: Fri Jun 27 16:07:09 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Aleutian campaign factoids
In-Reply-To: <20224.24.30.81.88.1214565703.squirrel@fracas.netboobie.org>
References: <be7.2d83ee9f.35902df7@cs.com>
	<BAY125-DAV45B4733A0D5003C1F9D11E4A60@phx.gbl> 
	<20224.24.30.81.88.1214565703.squirrel@fracas.netboobie.org>
Message-ID: <BAY125-W163A3F4E51F8FC4DAB2B1DE4A20@phx.gbl>

Marty, i was kinda thinking along those lines too. I read that one weather station already
existing when Japanese invaded, had a 10-man crew. That's a lot larger than i'd expect
for a BC-474 or such operation.  "Destination Gobi" - i don't recall how many that 
"authoritative source" portrayed in a weather station crew. The China US Navy weather
stations apparently used the good old TBX, so that would be what, 3 man crew + whatever
weather technicians? -Hue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080627/0ec9a60d/attachment.htm
From cwopr at embarqmail.com  Fri Jun 27 16:14:19 2008
From: cwopr at embarqmail.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Fri Jun 27 16:16:13 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] R-138 File Has Been Sent
In-Reply-To: <759918975.24883821214524040153.JavaMail.root@md37.embarq.synacor.com>
Message-ID: <1106698282.25085321214597659636.JavaMail.root@md37.embarq.synacor.com>







I have now added Michael-WH7HC, Lee-VK5ABC, Dave Merrill,??Jim Whartenby?. I had two that would not go thru: David-W1TDD & Phil. Hopefully we can make other arrangements for them.... 

Hope everyone else got the file ok....Tnx again Elden for your help. 

73 de Bill K4JYS 



Any more?? 
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Bill Stewart" <cwopr@embarqmail.com> 
To: milsurplus@mailman.qth.net 
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2008 8:43:39 AM (GMT-0500) America/New_York 
Subject: [Milsurplus] R-138 File Has Been Sent 




I have sent the file to the following: 

John-ZL1AUB, Bob-WA5CAB, Bob-W9RAN, Perry-W8AU, Richard-AA1P, Hue Miller 

Have I missed anyone? Anyone else? 

Bill
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080627/750c4059/attachment.htm
From kargo_cult at msn.com  Fri Jun 27 16:21:03 2008
From: kargo_cult at msn.com (Hue Miller)
Date: Fri Jun 27 16:22:57 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Destination Gobi movie
In-Reply-To: <4865433B.5090608@sbcglobal.net>
References: <4865433B.5090608@sbcglobal.net>
Message-ID: <BAY125-W37DDA8355E22385568DB2CE4A20@phx.gbl>

Jack, i bought a DVD of the movie a year or so back, but still haven't viewed it.
Waiting til i get a new computer, i guess.
Anyway i'm glad to see that my memory is not mistaken, that when i saw this movie
last, around 1963, that i really did hear "807" mentioned.
I was thinking that with the distance involved, a TBW setup might be appropriate.
That would be quite a large crew. 
The actor should maybe have said, "803".
Or were they using a Pilot V-100 radio set?
-Hue  K7HUE 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080627/72e2e80f/attachment.htm
From WA5CAB at cs.com  Fri Jun 27 16:52:45 2008
From: WA5CAB at cs.com (WA5CAB@cs.com)
Date: Fri Jun 27 16:54:44 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Aleutian campaign factoids
Message-ID: <c4e.3719cb46.3596ad1d@cs.com>

I don't recall the crew being mentioned in the SCR-284, SCR-288, SCR-694-C, 
TBW or TBX manuals.  But the AN/TRC-2 manual says the crew was one officer and 
21 men

In a message dated 6/27/2008 3:05:51 PM Central Daylight Time, 
kargo_cult@msn.com writes: 
> Marty, i was kinda thinking along those lines too. I read that one weather 
> station already
> existing when Japanese invaded, had a 10-man crew. That's a lot larger than 
> i'd expect
> for a BC-474 or such operation.  "Destination Gobi" - i don't recall how 
> many that 
> "authoritative source" portrayed in a weather station crew. The China US 
> Navy weather
> stations apparently used the good old TBX, so that would be what, 3 man crew 
> + whatever
> weather technicians? -Hue

Robert Downs - Houston
<http://www.wa5cab.com> (Web Store)
MVPA 9480
<wa5cab@cs.com> (Primary email)
<wa5cab@comcast.net> (Backup email)
   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080627/c32637f6/attachment.htm
From Telegrapher at att.net  Fri Jun 27 18:02:26 2008
From: Telegrapher at att.net (Telegrapher@att.net)
Date: Fri Jun 27 18:04:20 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] ARC-4 Xtal Frequencies.
Message-ID: <062720082202.1461.486563720000878C000005B522230650029B0A02D29B9B0EBF9D0A089F0E9D090A040AAB@att.net>

Happened to be cleaning out my email in the old Netscape mailbox and ran across an email sent by Dave S. back in November of '05 pertaining to a web page:

http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USN/rep/Leyte/OpPlan/13-44-N.html

I see that the ARC-4 crystal frequencies  in the VHF region (of course) were used as follows, at least in the Pacific.

Air-Sea Rescue (S)	140.58	MCSFighter Direction-Objective Area & during approach (FD-OA)	142.02	MCSFighter Direction-Emergency Objective Area (FD-E-OA)	142.74	MCS
No mention of 142.560 though.


That document as well as the others in the index are indeed great reading.

This posting has no value other than a refresher for those who's memory may have slipped a nothc!

Larry
W0OGH


PS:  Did ship radio calls ever change?  If so, how often and when?

-------------- next part --------------
Skipped content of type multipart/related
From n2lxm at juno.com  Fri Jun 27 19:46:52 2008
From: n2lxm at juno.com (n2lxm@juno.com)
Date: Fri Jun 27 19:50:23 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] K2USA Field Day Operations
Message-ID: <20080627.194652.672.2.n2lxm@juno.com>

K2USA Field Day Ops.

As per this Order Field Day Operations will commence at 18:00 Zulu 28
June, 2008 with operations in the CW, Voice and Digital Sub Bands of the
160, 80/75, 20, 15, and 10 Meter Amateur Radio Bands. All contacts to be
logged and secure copies made for future
Review. All operations will be for a period of Twenty Four Hours, with
all Operations being halted at 18:00 Zulu 29 June, 2008.

Purpose of the exercise:

Main Purpose of the operation is to see just how long these OLD Man can
go before they need to sleep or food.

Equipment to be used: 

Yaseu FT-990, MFJ Balanced Antenna Tuner, Icom 706, 1000 Foot Loop
Antenna, 5KW Gas Generator.

Location:

Dean Field, Fort Monmouth, New Jersey

Call Sign for Exercise:

All Stations Will Call ? K2USA,  1A,  NNJ ?

                                Jeff N2LXM
                  AMATEUR RADIO OPERATOR
                                AMERICAN
                                  PATRIOT
                  Proud Father of two US MARINES
____________________________________________________________
Boost your productivity with new office software. Click now!
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3mEaujj9E2NHAPPM2ddtDWSLH0vRUqXqQmL3kjt6PMtmydKS/
From robandpj at earthlink.net  Sat Jun 28 05:49:34 2008
From: robandpj at earthlink.net (Rob Flory)
Date: Sat Jun 28 05:51:32 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Ship Call Signs and TBX/TBW crew
Message-ID: <29791849.1214646574979.JavaMail.root@elwamui-huard.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

Hi,
Someone asked if ship call signs were ever changed.  CW callsigns were rarely changed.  The only example I know of was NEW JERSEY, which spent the first 30-some years as NEPP and when recommissioned in the 80s was given NJBB.  I think that tactical voice callsigns lasted as long as a task force did, at the least.  

When packed for travel, a TBX is 4 packages.  Radio, battery/accessory box, generator, antenna.  

I thought TBW manual did specify 6-man crew, but I don't have it anymore to check.  They would obviously have to make a couple trips.  Maybe that's why its called semi-portable.

RF
From wh7hg.hi at gmail.com  Sat Jun 28 06:15:15 2008
From: wh7hg.hi at gmail.com (Michael Tauson)
Date: Sat Jun 28 06:17:17 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Many much lots of thanks... and a connector question
Message-ID: <c34299fb0806280315t1843f915i9436d3f9f5e655ba@mail.gmail.com>

As has been the case in the past, quite a few people have been helpful
with equipment and the occasional tidbit of information regarding the
book plus the Noelle-machines.

Taking last first, Jim Whartenby has provided an excellent start on
the wire needed for those machines.

A.R.C. and related bitz 'n pieces have come from Robert, Larry, Brian
(Clarke, since I think there are two), Will, Dave (Stinson, in this
case) and one or two I've likely forgotten but I'm sure will let me
know one way or another.  Add to that list, ePay and a couple pilots I
ran into who needed to empty storage space and were quite happy not to
have to discard at least part of what they had.

Mahalo nui loa to all concerned.  Your assistance is greatly appreciated.

Now, about the connector.  It was definitely made by A.R.C. (says so
right there on the phenolic insert in an arc just inboard of the pins)
and it looks like the same sort as used in the Model D sets but it's
slightly larger (1-1/2") in diameter and has no identification on the
[blackened steel] shell.  Starting at the top right next to the
locking pin, the sockets are numbered 4-3-5-9-7-6 with 8 in the
center.  Between the center socket and the locking pin is a hole that
appears to be for a locking pin.

The source of the connector and I agree that it's likely prewar and
civilian.  Any thoughts regarding specifics would be appreciated.

Again, many thanks for all the help.

Best regards,

Michael, WH7HG
From w2obr at comcast.net  Sat Jun 28 06:41:05 2008
From: w2obr at comcast.net (Rich)
Date: Sat Jun 28 06:43:25 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] GRC-106 Repairs
Message-ID: <000d01c8d90b$7b012780$5b5f8b45@homecomputer>

I am in need of a repair technician for hire for my GRC-106 equipment. 
Anyone interested?
Rich
E-mail me off list.
w2obr@comcast.net 

From WA5CAB at cs.com  Sat Jun 28 10:08:15 2008
From: WA5CAB at cs.com (WA5CAB@cs.com)
Date: Sat Jun 28 10:10:18 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Ship Call Signs and TBX/TBW crew
Message-ID: <cd2.35f704cc.35979fcf@cs.com>

There were sevenor more manuals done and  I only have or have had three and 
don't know which you might have seen.  But much of the text in the three I have 
is identical.  I don't see any specific mention of crew size in the three.  
However, in the section covering erection of the antenna masts it says that one 
man will hold the end of each of the (six) top guys.  And that the remaining 
men will assemble the mast sections.  So that sets the minimum at eight.

In a message dated 6/28/2008 4:49:50 AM Central Daylight Time, 
robandpj@earthlink.net writes: 
> I thought TBW manual did specify 6-man crew, but I don't have it anymore to 
> check.  They would obviously have to make a couple trips.  Maybe that's why 
> its called semi-portable.

Robert Downs - Houston
<http://www.wa5cab.com> (Web Store)
MVPA 9480
<wa5cab@cs.com> (Primary email)
<wa5cab@comcast.net> (Backup email)
   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080628/133cc8b4/attachment.htm
From al at ar88.net  Sat Jun 28 14:20:34 2008
From: al at ar88.net (Al Klase)
Date: Sat Jun 28 14:19:38 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Seeking Info: CN-50085 Loop Coupler
Message-ID: <486680F2.9040808@ar88.net>

Gang,

I'm looking for background information on a Navy Loop Coupler Unit,  
CN-50085,  built by National Electrical Machine Shops on a 7 DEC 42 
contract for Bu. Ships.

Neat little black box with a National vernier dial that seems to tune 
any random loop of wire to the 15-35 KC range.  I'm setting up to take 
one more shot at SAQ on 17.2 at 09:00 UTC tomorrow.

Anyone know anything?
Al

-- 
Al Klase - N3FRQ 
Flemington, NJ 
http://www.skywaves.ar88.net/

From antqradio at sbcglobal.net  Sat Jun 28 16:13:05 2008
From: antqradio at sbcglobal.net (Jim Whartenby)
Date: Sat Jun 28 16:15:15 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Hallicrafter HT-41
Message-ID: <737836.39189.qm@web82704.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Greetings
Picked up the above many years ago at a Hamfest.  All of the RF
components were long gone but the front panel is in good shape.  Chrome
strip looks good, some lamps and switches still attached.

$10.00 plus shipping from 71901.  Otherwise to the dump it goes!
Regards,
Jim
From jfor at quik.com  Sat Jun 28 22:35:46 2008
From: jfor at quik.com (J Forster)
Date: Sat Jun 28 22:35:34 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] ABK IFF Puzzle
References: <be7.2d83ee9f.35902df7@cs.com><BAY125-DAV45B4733A0D5003C1F9D11E4A60@phx.gbl><485FBB92.3060500@ar88.net>	<BAY125-W2112F3C4916F9B5E501A8EE4A60@phx.gbl>
	<00bd01c8d566$5c787dc0$0201a8c0@userlvnwsus9dr>
	<48603028.1050902@core.com>
Message-ID: <4866F502.8E24B46@quik.com>

Hi all,

This item for sale by August Link just closed on eBay:

    MILITARY AIRCRAFT RADIO IFF NAVY RECEIVER ABK WWII  Item number: 380039243576

Sadly, it might have gone to a tube amp guy.  :=(((

What puzzles me is the pics of the guts of the thing. It surely looks like a Tx to
me, but the data plate says Rx. Can anyone shed some light on this puzzle?

Thanks,
-John

From radio at telus.net  Sat Jun 28 23:51:17 2008
From: radio at telus.net (Bruce MacMillan)
Date: Sat Jun 28 22:53:43 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] ABK IFF Puzzle
In-Reply-To: <4866F502.8E24B46@quik.com>
References: <be7.2d83ee9f.35902df7@cs.com><BAY125-DAV45B4733A0D5003C1F9D11E4A60@phx.gbl><485FBB92.3060500@ar88.net>	<BAY125-W2112F3C4916F9B5E501A8EE4A60@phx.gbl>	<00bd01c8d566$5c787dc0$0201a8c0@userlvnwsus9dr>	<48603028.1050902@core.com>
	<4866F502.8E24B46@quik.com>
Message-ID: <486706B5.6040106@telus.net>

This topic was discussed recently on the arc5 mailing list John. I 
believe it was purposely marked as a receiver only to mislead the other 
side.

"The SCR-595-A IFF was simply a US Navy ABK Mark III IFF, without any
Army nomenclature applied to the RT unit.  The SCR-695-A Mark III/G IFF
unit was the BC-966-A.  The nameplates of all of these units bore the
description of "RADIO RECEIVER" to mislead the other side.  But the USN
ABK units also bear USN component numbers starting with "43" which is
the component code for a "receiver-transmitter."  Not too consistent
or deceptive!"

Bruce   ve7mt


J Forster wrote:

>Hi all,
>
>This item for sale by August Link just closed on eBay:
>
>    MILITARY AIRCRAFT RADIO IFF NAVY RECEIVER ABK WWII  Item number: 380039243576
>
>Sadly, it might have gone to a tube amp guy.  :=(((
>
>What puzzles me is the pics of the guts of the thing. It surely looks like a Tx to
>me, but the data plate says Rx. Can anyone shed some light on this puzzle?
>
>Thanks,
>-John
>

From jfor at quik.com  Sat Jun 28 23:09:54 2008
From: jfor at quik.com (J Forster)
Date: Sat Jun 28 23:09:32 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] ABK IFF Puzzle
References: <be7.2d83ee9f.35902df7@cs.com><BAY125-DAV45B4733A0D5003C1F9D11E4A60@phx.gbl><485FBB92.3060500@ar88.net>	<BAY125-W2112F3C4916F9B5E501A8EE4A60@phx.gbl>	<00bd01c8d566$5c787dc0$0201a8c0@userlvnwsus9dr>	<48603028.1050902@core.com>
	<4866F502.8E24B46@quik.com> <486706B5.6040106@telus.net>
Message-ID: <4866FD02.9AF1F7AC@quik.com>

OK. Thanks. Next question.

Why what appears to be an IF transformer or maybe a coil in a Tx? Has anyone got a link
to a schematic I didn't turn up one w/ Google.

Best,
-John

==============

Bruce MacMillan wrote:

> This topic was discussed recently on the arc5 mailing list John. I
> believe it was purposely marked as a receiver only to mislead the other
> side.
>
> "The SCR-595-A IFF was simply a US Navy ABK Mark III IFF, without any
> Army nomenclature applied to the RT unit.  The SCR-695-A Mark III/G IFF
> unit was the BC-966-A.  The nameplates of all of these units bore the
> description of "RADIO RECEIVER" to mislead the other side.  But the USN
> ABK units also bear USN component numbers starting with "43" which is
> the component code for a "receiver-transmitter."  Not too consistent
> or deceptive!"
>
> Bruce   ve7mt
>
> J Forster wrote:
>
> >Hi all,
> >
> >This item for sale by August Link just closed on eBay:
> >
> >    MILITARY AIRCRAFT RADIO IFF NAVY RECEIVER ABK WWII  Item number: 380039243576
> >
> >Sadly, it might have gone to a tube amp guy.  :=(((
> >
> >What puzzles me is the pics of the guts of the thing. It surely looks like a Tx to
> >me, but the data plate says Rx. Can anyone shed some light on this puzzle?
> >
> >Thanks,
> >-John
> >
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus@mailman.qth.net

From robandpj at earthlink.net  Sun Jun 29 05:26:14 2008
From: robandpj at earthlink.net (Rob Flory)
Date: Sun Jun 29 05:28:18 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] ABK IFF puzzle
Message-ID: <4692934.1214731575005.JavaMail.root@elwamui-milano.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

It's a receiver and transmitter in one package.  It receives a query, and transmits a response.

RF
From robandpj at earthlink.net  Sun Jun 29 10:17:15 2008
From: robandpj at earthlink.net (Rob Flory)
Date: Sun Jun 29 10:19:20 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] dynamotor repair
Message-ID: <5443624.1214749036316.JavaMail.root@elwamui-muscovy.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

Hi,

I've got a dynamotor with a brush that bottoms out, which is to say that the spring compresses completely and the brush tightens against the commutator.  The brush holder is noticeably further into the housing than its mate on the other side.  

I've loosened the set screw, but the holder is resisting any motion.  What to do?

Rob
From WA5CAB at cs.com  Sun Jun 29 10:25:03 2008
From: WA5CAB at cs.com (WA5CAB@cs.com)
Date: Sun Jun 29 10:27:11 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] dynamotor repair
Message-ID: <c0d.2e66e78a.3598f53f@cs.com>

Make sure that there isn't a second set screw.  Often, there are two.  If 
that isn't the problem and gentle prying doesn't break it loose, you may have to 
disconnect the leads to the brush holder and remove the casting in order to 
safely put enough force to break the holder loose.

In a message dated 6/29/2008 9:17:25 AM Central Daylight Time, 
robandpj@earthlink.net writes: 
> I've got a dynamotor with a brush that bottoms out, which is to say that 
> the spring compresses completely and the brush tightens against the commutator. 
>  The brush holder is noticeably further into the housing than its mate on 
> the other side.  
> 
> I've loosened the set screw, but the holder is resisting any motion.  What 
> to do?

Robert Downs - Houston
<http://www.wa5cab.com> (Web Store)
MVPA 9480
<wa5cab@cs.com> (Primary email)
<wa5cab@comcast.net> (Backup email)
   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080629/cc9a3074/attachment.htm
From kk5f at earthlink.net  Sun Jun 29 11:19:24 2008
From: kk5f at earthlink.net (Mike Morrow)
Date: Sun Jun 29 11:21:33 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] ABK IFF Puzzle
Message-ID: <8650027.1214752764831.JavaMail.root@elwamui-norfolk.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

Bruce MacMillan <radio@telus.net> wrote:
 
>This topic was discussed recently on the arc5 mailing list John. I 
>believe it was purposely marked as a receiver only to mislead the other 
>side.
>
>"The SCR-595-A IFF was simply a US Navy ABK Mark III IFF, without any
>Army nomenclature applied to the RT unit.  The SCR-695-A Mark III/G IFF
>unit was the BC-966-A.  The nameplates of all of these units bore the
>description of "RADIO RECEIVER" to mislead the other side.  But the USN
>ABK units also bear USN component numbers starting with "43" which is
>the component code for a "receiver-transmitter."  Not too consistent
>or deceptive!"

The quoted text above comes from one of my recent postings.  It's probably
best to attribute any direct quotes to the original writer, just in case
someone wants further information from that source or even wishes to say
that the information is full of crap. :-)

I have a manual for the ABK (and I have an ABK-5 unit), but unfortunately
I'm in the middle of a move and my 40 linear feet of tech manuals are in
moving boxes and won't get properly re-organized for some time to come.
The RF portion of Mark III IFF sets like the ABK was essentially a simple
receiver that was triggered into oscillation (and therefore transmitted a
return) upon receipt of an interrogation signal.  The frequency of operation
swept from 157 to 187 MHz using a capacitor driven by a gear box off of the
integral dynamotor unit.  The dynamotor also drives the response code keyer.
Six different response codes could be selected at the pilot's control box.

Some of the IFF gear from WWII is pretty interesting in concept.  Not all
were receiver-transmitters.  The AN/APX-15 on some B-29s was a signal
processing amplifier that detected fluctuations in the output from the
AN/APG-15 S-band tail-gun laying radar set.  The set would warn the operator
when fluctuations characteristic of reflections from the rotating propellers
of Japanese aircraft were detected.  Clever and very simple, but I've never
read any reports of how effective it was.

Mike / KK5F
From jfor at quik.com  Sun Jun 29 13:50:46 2008
From: jfor at quik.com (J Forster)
Date: Sun Jun 29 13:50:53 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] ABK IFF Puzzle
References: <8650027.1214752764831.JavaMail.root@elwamui-norfolk.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <4867CB75.FCECCA3F@quik.com>

Hi Bruce,

Thanks. If the manual turns up, I'd like to chat w/ you about getting a few
pages copied out. Do you remember if the frequency is swept by a motor driven
capacitor located between the chassis? If so, as a kid I had a British unit of
similar electrical design, but radically different implementation.

Best,
-John

================

Mike Morrow wrote:

> Bruce MacMillan <radio@telus.net> wrote:
>
> >This topic was discussed recently on the arc5 mailing list John. I
> >believe it was purposely marked as a receiver only to mislead the other
> >side.
> >
> >"The SCR-595-A IFF was simply a US Navy ABK Mark III IFF, without any
> >Army nomenclature applied to the RT unit.  The SCR-695-A Mark III/G IFF
> >unit was the BC-966-A.  The nameplates of all of these units bore the
> >description of "RADIO RECEIVER" to mislead the other side.  But the USN
> >ABK units also bear USN component numbers starting with "43" which is
> >the component code for a "receiver-transmitter."  Not too consistent
> >or deceptive!"
>
> The quoted text above comes from one of my recent postings.  It's probably
> best to attribute any direct quotes to the original writer, just in case
> someone wants further information from that source or even wishes to say
> that the information is full of crap. :-)
>
> I have a manual for the ABK (and I have an ABK-5 unit), but unfortunately
> I'm in the middle of a move and my 40 linear feet of tech manuals are in
> moving boxes and won't get properly re-organized for some time to come.
> The RF portion of Mark III IFF sets like the ABK was essentially a simple
> receiver that was triggered into oscillation (and therefore transmitted a
> return) upon receipt of an interrogation signal.  The frequency of operation
> swept from 157 to 187 MHz using a capacitor driven by a gear box off of the
> integral dynamotor unit.  The dynamotor also drives the response code keyer.
> Six different response codes could be selected at the pilot's control box.
>
> Some of the IFF gear from WWII is pretty interesting in concept.  Not all
> were receiver-transmitters.  The AN/APX-15 on some B-29s was a signal
> processing amplifier that detected fluctuations in the output from the
> AN/APG-15 S-band tail-gun laying radar set.  The set would warn the operator
> when fluctuations characteristic of reflections from the rotating propellers
> of Japanese aircraft were detected.  Clever and very simple, but I've never
> read any reports of how effective it was.
>
> Mike / KK5F
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus@mailman.qth.net

From jfor at quik.com  Sun Jun 29 14:08:37 2008
From: jfor at quik.com (J Forster)
Date: Sun Jun 29 14:08:11 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] dynamotor repair
References: <c0d.2e66e78a.3598f53f@cs.com>
Message-ID: <4867CFA5.EF608FA5@quik.com>

You might also check that there are not two set screws, one on top of
the other. Uncommon, but possible. There also might be Glyptal locking
the holder in place.

I'd avoid trying oil unless you are sure you can remove it completely,
as oil sometimes damages plastic in the long term.

Heating it will likely make matters worse because Bakelite expands more
than aluminum or steel. You might try freezing it though.

Good luck,
-John

==============

WA5CAB@cs.com wrote:

> Make sure that there isn't a second set screw.  Often, there are two.
> If that isn't the problem and gentle prying doesn't break it loose,
> you may have to disconnect the leads to the brush holder and remove
> the casting in order to safely put enough force to break the holder
> loose.
>
> In a message dated 6/29/2008 9:17:25 AM Central Daylight Time,
> robandpj@earthlink.net writes:
>
>> I've got a dynamotor with a brush that bottoms out, which is to say
>> that the spring compresses completely and the brush tightens against
>> the commutator.  The brush holder is noticeably further into the
>> housing than its mate on the other side.
>>
>> I've loosened the set screw, but the holder is resisting any
>> motion.  What to do?
>
> Robert Downs - Houston
> <http://www.wa5cab.com> (Web Store)
> MVPA 9480
> <wa5cab@cs.com> (Primary email)
> <wa5cab@comcast.net> (Backup email)
>
>    ----------------------------------------------------------------
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus@mailman.qth.net
>

From wh7hg.hi at gmail.com  Sun Jun 29 15:51:05 2008
From: wh7hg.hi at gmail.com (Michael Tauson)
Date: Sun Jun 29 15:53:11 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Connector and connectors
Message-ID: <c34299fb0806291251x3806819cjf367d71df076478d@mail.gmail.com>

After receiving thousands of requests (Okay, only one but I get so
little personal email I re-read it a lot.), I'll be putting up
pictures of the mystery connector on my blog.  The word will be spread
when that happens.

After staring at the 9585 & 6962 connectors for a while and already
knowing about the fast & easy way to convert a PL-153(-A) to use as
substitutes, it occured to me that inserts for the various Type 12 et
al 19 pin connectors should work as well if put in one of the large
shells as used with the 12 & 18 pin connectors.  The unused position
would have to be plugged since the keying function would be lost
otherwise.  The threads match (1-5/8"-24) and the shells appear to be
the same thickness so I can't see any mechanical issues with this.

Of course, they won't be pure anymore which will upset a few people
but ... well, that's not my problem.  In a choice between keeping the
MD-7 and MT-71 original or swapping the connectors so I can use
PL-153(-A)s - the choice driven by the unobtainium status of the 9585
& 6962 connectors - I went with the former.  If someone wants to cough
up a pair of either connector I'd really prefer using them, otherwise
I'm gonna ham-hack my way to fame and glory.  Or something.

BEst regards,

Michael, WH7HG
From jfor at quik.com  Sun Jun 29 21:08:59 2008
From: jfor at quik.com (J Forster)
Date: Sun Jun 29 21:09:09 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] ABK IFF Puzzle
References: <8650027.1214752764831.JavaMail.root@elwamui-norfolk.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <4868322B.8975DEF8@quik.com>

The internet is full of this kind of IP theft....  and it IS Intellectual
Property THEFT w/o any question.

There is a web site with pictures of my radios on it, and the file names are
"Johns ....", but the pictures have been retitled to make it appear that the
gear, and extensive high quality photos of a repair process, were in fact done
by another.

Since the photos were taken in the late 1990s, they are copyright, as is the
accompanying text, even though I did not explicitly mark them as such.

So much for honor among hams and hobbiests.

Best,
-John

=============

Mike Morrow wrote:

> Bruce MacMillan <radio@telus.net> wrote:
>
> >This topic was discussed recently on the arc5 mailing list John. I
> >believe it was purposely marked as a receiver only to mislead the other
> >side.
> >
> >"The SCR-595-A IFF was simply a US Navy ABK Mark III IFF, without any
> >Army nomenclature applied to the RT unit.  The SCR-695-A Mark III/G IFF
> >unit was the BC-966-A.  The nameplates of all of these units bore the
> >description of "RADIO RECEIVER" to mislead the other side.  But the USN
> >ABK units also bear USN component numbers starting with "43" which is
> >the component code for a "receiver-transmitter."  Not too consistent
> >or deceptive!"
>
> The quoted text above comes from one of my recent postings.  It's probably
> best to attribute any direct quotes to the original writer, just in case
> someone wants further information from that source or even wishes to say
> that the information is full of crap. :-)

[snip]

>
>

From Military1944 at aol.com  Mon Jun 30 04:25:58 2008
From: Military1944 at aol.com (Military1944@aol.com)
Date: Mon Jun 30 04:28:10 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Shakespeare whips
Message-ID: <c6c.28ec9e15.3599f296@aol.com>

 
On the topic of Shakespeare aerials. 
 
I have several of their 8ft white fiber marine whips, I think they are  
either the 10-3 or 4208 types designed for Loran C. I emailed Shakespeare to ask  
if these were internally loaded whips or just single conductors up the centre  
but got no reply. 
 
They have a 3/8 thread on the bottom and screw straight into the PRC74 and  
other manpacks here. It seems to load up ok on 20mtrs so I'm guessing its ok. 
 
I was going to make a small bracket for the portable mast to mount 2 of  them 
as a loaded dipole, just need to figure out loading coils etc.
 
Anyone else played with these ?
 
Ben G4BXD.




   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080630/d2b5f4c2/attachment.htm
From wh7hg.hi at gmail.com  Mon Jun 30 06:37:48 2008
From: wh7hg.hi at gmail.com (Michael Tauson)
Date: Mon Jun 30 06:40:00 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] ABK IFF Puzzle
In-Reply-To: <4868322B.8975DEF8@quik.com>
References: <8650027.1214752764831.JavaMail.root@elwamui-norfolk.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
	<4868322B.8975DEF8@quik.com>
Message-ID: <c34299fb0806300337t2317e029v6650c5da8ee94f94@mail.gmail.com>

Gee whiz, guys.  My heart bleeds.  Yeah, it is IP theft.  It sucks.
Almost all of my first publication is on the web.  Am I irritated?  A
bit.  Do I raise the kind of fuss you two are?  Nope.  What would
happen if I found out who first put it out there?  I'd really rather
not say in a public forum.  Does this mean everyone should quit the
information exchange?  Heck, no!  It means that, while you may
consider posts your intellectual property, they can wind up being used
without attributation.  Or whatever that fancy word is.  It's a hazard
of what is called the "information age".

Pictures and posts on the net are already in the public eye; the book
wasn't.  Someone had to copy and convert it to PDF before posting it.
The difference should be obvious.  I'm sure that elements of the new
book will wind up on the web somewhere as well.  It's the information
age and that's a hazard of the times.


Bottom line, keep on keeping on and don't sweat the little stuff.
(And, in the end, it's all little stuff.)  Have fun, share, tell a
joke and consider being quoted (whether named as the source or not) as
a compliment.

BEst regards,

Michael, WH7HG
From robandpj at earthlink.net  Mon Jun 30 07:29:26 2008
From: robandpj at earthlink.net (Rob Flory)
Date: Mon Jun 30 07:31:36 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] FS:BC-1000 jack seals
Message-ID: <19762439.1214825367269.JavaMail.root@elwamui-huard.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

Hi,
Rubbers seals for your BC-1000/SCR-300 jack covers.
3 flat gaskets, 5 "cup" gaskets, 4 springs.
$10 shipped USA 

73, Rob K2WI
From robandpj at earthlink.net  Mon Jun 30 07:31:09 2008
From: robandpj at earthlink.net (Rob Flory)
Date: Mon Jun 30 07:33:18 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] FS J-47 key
Message-ID: <13103186.1214825469912.JavaMail.root@elwamui-huard.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

New in box.
$50 includes shipping USA

73, Rob K2WI
From robandpj at earthlink.net  Mon Jun 30 07:32:49 2008
From: robandpj at earthlink.net (Rob Flory)
Date: Mon Jun 30 07:35:00 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] FS: BC-610 crystals
Message-ID: <2793526.1214825570239.JavaMail.root@elwamui-huard.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

1 ea, 3520kc
1 ea. 3550kc

$10 shipped USA

73, Rob K2WI
From arc5 at ix.netcom.com  Mon Jun 30 01:16:20 2008
From: arc5 at ix.netcom.com (David Stinson)
Date: Mon Jun 30 08:25:40 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] dynamotor repair
References: <c0d.2e66e78a.3598f53f@cs.com> <4867CFA5.EF608FA5@quik.com>
Message-ID: <A77D3A054F714CE291BA57046DE62203@boudreaux>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "J Forster" <jfor@quik.com>
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] dynamotor repair


> Heating it will likely make matters worse because Bakelite expands more
> than aluminum or steel. You might try freezing it though.

I've had good luck with heat and Bakelite.
Heating drives absorbed water out of Bakelite, 
contracting it.  I've recovered many large PL-xx plugs by heating 
them at about 200 degress for 30-40 mins. YMMV, of course.

From cosmoline at aa4rm.ba-watch.org  Mon Jun 30 08:32:02 2008
From: cosmoline at aa4rm.ba-watch.org (Marty Reynolds)
Date: Mon Jun 30 08:37:40 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] ABK IFF Puzzle
In-Reply-To: <4868322B.8975DEF8@quik.com>
References: <8650027.1214752764831.JavaMail.root@elwamui-norfolk.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
	<4868322B.8975DEF8@quik.com>
Message-ID: <7815.24.30.81.88.1214829122.squirrel@fracas.netboobie.org>

OK - '08 field day's history.  Whew.

Mike... you're a many facitted guy

Those Mk-III (BC-966) & Mk IV (BC-645) 'radio receivers' have fascinated me

Danged if the 167-187mhz freq-sweeping BC-966 might be considered the 1st
spread spectrum employment ever

Party Line is 450 mhz WE368-tubed Mk IV outstripped mfg. abilities of other
allies.  I don't think so, believe Mk III code/sweep system was much harder
to break/fake

Another note is effort to supply 645's dyno (PE-101?) with 20V via 28V
thru a carbon pile regulator.  Nifty thinker(s) @ GE.

Don't think 966 dyno/sweep gearbox system needed such regulation
attention.  Nifty English thinkers.

BTW, the BC-966 is where all those 7193/2C21 tubes went.  The 6J5s
w. plate & grid brought out top caps.
From robandpj at earthlink.net  Mon Jun 30 08:45:46 2008
From: robandpj at earthlink.net (Rob Flory)
Date: Mon Jun 30 08:47:57 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Query re: Navy electronics training kit
Message-ID: <16240626.1214829947380.JavaMail.root@elwamui-huard.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

Hi,
Looking for a book to go with a Navy electronics training kit.  The kit bears "NAVPERS 17604K  Training Aids Division of Verlan Publications, Inc. New York, NY 10010"

Has both mini tube and solid state devices, as well as coils, caps, resistors etc on plastic bases that plug into a perforated board.

Rob
From cosmoline at aa4rm.ba-watch.org  Mon Jun 30 08:45:52 2008
From: cosmoline at aa4rm.ba-watch.org (Marty Reynolds)
Date: Mon Jun 30 08:51:24 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Shakespeare whips
In-Reply-To: <c6c.28ec9e15.3599f296@aol.com>
References: <c6c.28ec9e15.3599f296@aol.com>
Message-ID: <25266.24.30.81.88.1214829952.squirrel@fracas.netboobie.org>

Yo Ben, u asked

>
> Anyone else played with these ?
>

Consider this.  Tie wrap two to a plastic drink crate & put, say, a 3-turn
link in the middle.  Then find resonance w. a grid(fet)-dip meter.  If
it matches the half-wave length then there's no inside coils.

If it doesn't, bring on the wierd science.

Stratford-on-Avon possibilities come to mind too

  Marty

From cosmoline at aa4rm.ba-watch.org  Mon Jun 30 08:57:45 2008
From: cosmoline at aa4rm.ba-watch.org (Marty Reynolds)
Date: Mon Jun 30 09:03:16 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] TDQ availability
In-Reply-To: <16240626.1214829947380.JavaMail.root@elwamui-huard.atl.sa.earthlink.n
	et>
References: <16240626.1214829947380.JavaMail.root@elwamui-huard.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <25460.24.30.81.88.1214830665.squirrel@fracas.netboobie.org>



This is the 35W 110-156 channelized AM rig that probably ran on CVs like
the Yorktown (Mt. Pleasant) or Enterprise (Javitts' Ctr)

It's FOB Atlanta if you're a 501-C3 like above.  Or maybe a whopping $150
if you're not

Add iindustrial-grade table, cable it up, feed in some 115/60 & work
Gonset Communicators next FD

   Marty
From Military1944 at aol.com  Mon Jun 30 15:23:40 2008
From: Military1944 at aol.com (Military1944@aol.com)
Date: Mon Jun 30 17:05:38 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Shakespeare whips
Message-ID: <ce4.36383f3c.359a8cbc@aol.com>

 
 
In a message dated 30/06/2008 13:49:32 GMT Daylight Time,  
cosmoline@aa4rm.ba-watch.org writes:

Yo Ben,  u asked

>
> Anyone else played with these  ?
>

Consider this.  Tie wrap two to a plastic drink crate  & put, say, a 3-turn
link in the middle.  Then find resonance w. a  grid(fet)-dip meter.  If
it matches the half-wave length then there's  no inside coils.
If it doesn't, bring on the wierd  science.
Stratford-on-Avon possibilities come to mind too
Marty




--------------------------------
 
Gosh, why didn't I think of that. Age, its a killer. 
 
Thanks, Ben.




   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080630/526e3703/attachment-0001.htm
From mikea at mikea.ath.cx  Mon Jun 30 11:48:17 2008
From: mikea at mikea.ath.cx (Mike Andrews W5EGO)
Date: Mon Jun 30 17:07:30 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Milsurplus archive available
Message-ID: <20080630154817.GA74895@mikea.ath.cx>

I don't know whether the articles posted to this list are available 
anywhere else, but I just put an archive on line, covering roughly 
July 2002 through today. I'll try in my usual desultory manner to 
keep it roughly up to date, but make no guarantee of it being up to
date or even available. 

If you're interested, do please have a look at 
<http://mikea.ath.cx/milsurplus/>. 

Other archives available are the Glowbugs list, at
<http://mikea.ath.cx/glowbugs/>
and the Six Meter mailing list, at 
<http://mikea.ath.cx/six/>.

I hope you find these useful. 

-- 
Mike Andrews, W5EGO
mikea@mikea.ath.cx
Tired old sysadmin 
From jfor at quik.com  Mon Jun 30 13:20:43 2008
From: jfor at quik.com (J Forster)
Date: Mon Jun 30 18:08:54 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] dynamotor repair
References: <c0d.2e66e78a.3598f53f@cs.com> <4867CFA5.EF608FA5@quik.com>
	<A77D3A054F714CE291BA57046DE62203@boudreaux>
Message-ID: <486915EB.B1E9F161@quik.com>

Hi David,

I meant heating it briefly just to remove the brush holder, which won't work
IMO. You are suggesting a bakeout, which is a different thing. I'd be
reluctant to bake a dyno complete with bearings though. If the brush holder
and casting are separate, go for it.

Best,
-John

==============

David Stinson wrote:

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "J Forster" <jfor@quik.com>
> Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] dynamotor repair
>
> > Heating it will likely make matters worse because Bakelite expands more
> > than aluminum or steel. You might try freezing it though.
>
> I've had good luck with heat and Bakelite.
> Heating drives absorbed water out of Bakelite,
> contracting it.  I've recovered many large PL-xx plugs by heating
> them at about 200 degress for 30-40 mins. YMMV, of course.
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus@mailman.qth.net

From jfor at quik.com  Mon Jun 30 13:27:16 2008
From: jfor at quik.com (J Forster)
Date: Mon Jun 30 18:11:56 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] ABK IFF Puzzle
References: <8650027.1214752764831.JavaMail.root@elwamui-norfolk.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
	<4868322B.8975DEF8@quik.com>
	<7815.24.30.81.88.1214829122.squirrel@fracas.netboobie.org>
Message-ID: <48691774.96E50B7D@quik.com>

The British had a liking for regulating the input to their radios, at least in
the early days.

The T.1154 / R.1155 used something called a "Londex" relay to do exactly that,
dropping the 28 V input to 20 V for the dynos (or 14 V to 10 V). The dynos even
has a LV output for the filaments.

Best,
-John

============

Marty Reynolds wrote:

> [snip]
>
> Another note is effort to supply 645's dyno (PE-101?) with 20V via 28V
> thru a carbon pile regulator.  Nifty thinker(s) @ GE.
>
> Don't think 966 dyno/sweep gearbox system needed such regulation
> attention.  Nifty English thinkers. [snip]

From kargo_cult at msn.com  Mon Jun 30 18:21:54 2008
From: kargo_cult at msn.com (Hue Miller)
Date: Mon Jun 30 18:25:18 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Milsurplus archive available
In-Reply-To: <20080630154817.GA74895@mikea.ath.cx>
References: <20080630154817.GA74895@mikea.ath.cx>
Message-ID: <BAY125-W31F7924E4DF49830B54A1BE49F0@phx.gbl>

Is this potentially spambait for address bots? -Hue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20080630/120db70b/attachment.htm
From ianmwilson73 at gmail.com  Mon Jun 30 11:26:42 2008
From: ianmwilson73 at gmail.com (Ian Wilson)
Date: Mon Jun 30 18:51:55 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] ID an IFF (or possibly radar)
Message-ID: <7de2d65c0806300826y18ee7af8y8187fbb1ecd2bd02@mail.gmail.com>

Every year or so I try to identify a unit that I have, mil-spec
manufacture but no identifying plates:

TX chain is pair of 8025's modulated by an 829B.
RX chain is couple of acorn tubes, presumably RF + regenerative detector.
There are a number of 6SK7, 6SN7, 6V6s and a few IF-type cans.
Perhaps signal forming? No relays or anything that would be indicative
of an IFF (in my limited understanding).

It could perhaps also be an altimeter(?). Operating frequency would
appear to be in the 100-300MHz range.

73, ian K3IMW
From jfor at quik.com  Mon Jun 30 15:10:34 2008
From: jfor at quik.com (J Forster)
Date: Mon Jun 30 18:59:37 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Subminiature Tube Video
References: <16240626.1214829947380.JavaMail.root@elwamui-huard.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <48692FAA.17EC192E@quik.com>

Last spring, there was a discussion of people still making vacuum tubes.

A few years ago, Norm Krim, the pre-WW II developer of the Raytheon line of sub miniature tubes, gave me a copy of a video made, by the MIT Industrial Liaison Office,
just before the last production line for those tubes in Quincy, Massachusetts, closed down.  With many thanks to Debbie Douglas, Curator of Science and Technology at the
MIT Museum,  that video is now available for viewing on MIT's Tech TV:

http://techtv.mit.edu/file/1125/

Note that there are two options that appear below the picture on that page. Windows users might want to select the Flash Video option. I know that works as two friends
have been able to view it successfully. You will likely need a broad band connection. The film is about 16 minutes long.

Norm has told me that the tubes were originally developed for hearing aid use pre-WW II, and were improved for use in the Proximity Fuze during the war. Just imagine, a
vacuum tube that can be fired from a large gun and still operate. One clever trick to help the tubes survive was that the filaments were not powered until the shell was
in free flight, either by addend a small wind turbine generator on the nose of the shell, or by having the battery void of electrolyte until the shock of firing and the
spin of the shell filled the battery.

Shells using the Proximity Fuze were successfully used in the Battle of the Bulge (they caused the shells to air burst, increasing their effective area) and together with
the SCR-584 Radar against the V-1 "Buzz Bombs"

Note that the tubes being produced in the video are not actually for the Proximity Fuze, but were for some US Navy Crypto application.

There is at least one book about the Proximity Fuze ("The Deadly Fuze") and there was also a PBS Nova program of the same name.

I hop you enjoy the film.

Best,
-John

(c)



From robandpj at earthlink.net  Mon Jun 30 20:39:16 2008
From: robandpj at earthlink.net (Rob Flory)
Date: Mon Jun 30 20:41:29 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Real Military Flix
Message-ID: <8604126.1214872757114.JavaMail.root@elwamui-rustique.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

Check out this one, maybe should be titled "Landing Ship Operations" rather than "Supply Ship Operations".  Looks like assembly of SCR-268 RADAR on deck of LST, among other things.

RF
From ersmar at verizon.net  Mon Jun 30 21:58:26 2008
From: ersmar at verizon.net (Gene Smar)
Date: Mon Jun 30 22:00:50 2008
Subject: [Milsurplus] Subminiature Tube Video
Message-ID: <20998092.21991841214877506724.JavaMail.root@vms229.mailsrvcs.net>

John:

     Fascinating film on the history of electronic devices to regulate, control or amplify weak signals.  Thanks for posting it.

     Navy Capt William <Deak> Parsons worked on developing the proximity fuze during the early part of WW II.  Later he was transferred to the Manhatten Project to weaponize the first atomic bomb and to develop delivery mechanisms for it.  (This brave soul actually armed Little Boy in the freezing bomb bay of the Enola Gay during its flight to Hiroshima.)  This, from a book on Capt. Parsons which titles escapes me.  Can anyone help here?


73 de
Gene Smar  AD3F
(Who might not have been alive to write this had his father not survived the Ardenne Offensive (Bulge).)


From: J Forster <jfor@quik.com>
Date: 2008/06/30 Mon PM 03:10:34 EDT
To: armyradios@yahoogroups.com, milsurplus <milsurplus@mailman.qth.net>, 
	Rebecca-Eureka@yahoogroups.com
Cc: TekScopes2@yahoogroups.com, GenRad@yahoogroups.com, AILtech@yahoogroups.com, 
	barc-list <barc-list@mailman.qth.net>, 
	hp_agilent_equipment@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Milsurplus] Subminiature Tube Video

Last spring, there was a discussion of people still making vacuum tubes.

A few years ago, Norm Krim, the pre-WW II developer of the Raytheon line of sub miniature tubes, gave me a copy of a video made, by the MIT Industrial Liaison Office,
just before the last production line for those tubes in Quincy, Massachusetts, closed down.  With many thanks to Debbie Douglas, Curator of Science and Technology at the
MIT Museum,  that video is now available for viewing on MIT's Tech TV:

http://techtv.mit.edu/file/1125/

Note that there are two options that appear below the picture on that page. Windows users might want to select the Flash Video option. I know that works as two friends
have been able to view it successfully. You will likely need a broad band connection. The film is about 16 minutes long.

Norm has told me that the tubes were originally developed for hearing aid use pre-WW II, and were improved for use in the Proximity Fuze during the war. Just imagine, a
vacuum tube that can be fired from a large gun and still operate. One clever trick to help the tubes survive was that the filaments were not powered until the shell was
in free flight, either by addend a small wind turbine generator on the nose of the shell, or by having the battery void of electrolyte until the shock of firing and the
spin of the shell filled the battery.

Shells using the Proximity Fuze were successfully used in the Battle of the Bulge (they caused the shells to air burst, increasing their effective area) and together with
the SCR-584 Radar against the V-1 "Buzz Bombs"

Note that the tubes being produced in the video are not actually for the Proximity Fuze, but were for some US Navy Crypto application.

There is at least one book about the Proximity Fuze ("The Deadly Fuze") and there was also a PBS Nova program of the same name.

I hop you enjoy the film.

Best,
-John

(c)



______________________________________________________________
Milsurplus mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Milsurplus@mailman.qth.net

