From radio at telus.net  Sat Oct  1 00:23:16 2011
From: radio at telus.net (Bruce MacMillan)
Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2011 21:23:16 -0700
Subject: [Milsurplus] OK Smart People: Mystery Cap
In-Reply-To: <674606E984A448E8B9061927F1588D88@DaddyPC>
References: <674606E984A448E8B9061927F1588D88@DaddyPC>
Message-ID: <4E8695B4.8040908@telus.net>

Being anode modulated it may some extra help to achieve best modulation 
and linearity.
This circuit is similar to the Globe Scout and is very well explained on 
W8JI's website about Heising modulation.

http://www.w8ji.com/Heising%20modulation.htm

The Air Pub doesn't give any more detail other than calling it an audio 
frequency bypass condenser.

Bruce   ve7mt

On 9/30/2011 8:02 PM, David Stinson wrote:
> Here's a functional diagram of the PA of
> the transmitter section of the TR9D rig:
>
> http://home.netcom.com/~arc5/tr9dpa.jpg
>
> Cap 1 is input coupling.
> 2 is screen bypass
> 3 is plate bypass.
>
> Why is the screen dropping resistor bypassed with 4?
> Value is .01 uF.  Resistor is 20K if that matters.
>
>

From w7qho at aol.com  Sat Oct  1 01:26:02 2011
From: w7qho at aol.com (mac)
Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2011 22:26:02 -0700
Subject: [Milsurplus] OK Smart People: Mystery Cap
In-Reply-To: <674606E984A448E8B9061927F1588D88@DaddyPC>
References: <674606E984A448E8B9061927F1588D88@DaddyPC>
Message-ID: <A6388E50-654F-469F-A26A-C3A629490C1B@aol.com>

Improves the frequency response of the modulated PA on the higher  
voice frequencies.  Counteracts the increased attenuation by the  
screen bypass capacitor (2) of the higher audio frequencies  applied  
to the screen grid under modulation.


Dennis D.  W7QHO
Glendale, CA



On Sep 30, 2011, at 8:02 PM, David Stinson wrote:

> Here's a functional diagram of the PA of
> the transmitter section of the TR9D rig:
>
> http://home.netcom.com/~arc5/tr9dpa.jpg
>
> Cap 1 is input coupling.
> 2 is screen bypass
> 3 is plate bypass.
>
> Why is the screen dropping resistor bypassed with 4?
> Value is .01 uF.  Resistor is 20K if that matters.
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html


From douglas10driver at aol.com  Sat Oct  1 07:51:35 2011
From: douglas10driver at aol.com (douglas10driver at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2011 07:51:35 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] APN-9 Need
Message-ID: <8CE4E479AF5328D-1140-272D8@Webmail-m113.sysops.aol.com>


I'm looking for the bezel and lens assembly for the R-65/APN 9 indicator.

Please contact me at douglas10driver at aol.com 

From douglas10driver at aol.com  Sat Oct  1 07:53:06 2011
From: douglas10driver at aol.com (douglas10driver at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2011 07:53:06 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] APN 2 Antenna Need
Message-ID: <8CE4E47D110C123-1140-27301@Webmail-m113.sysops.aol.com>


I am looking for the AT1-A antenna for the APN 2 system.

Please contact me at douglas10driver at aol.com

From boeing377 at aol.com  Sat Oct  1 11:43:58 2011
From: boeing377 at aol.com (boeing377 at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2011 08:43:58 -0700
Subject: [Milsurplus] New York Times mentions SCR 584
Message-ID: <48FEC9C2-9481-4FE4-AF2E-2EDEE61E3333@aol.com>


Obituary of Lee Davenport in Sat Oct 1 issue. Mentions his key role in developing the SCR 584 anti aircraft (gun laying?) radar. 

As I recall SCR stands for Set Complete Radio. The usually careful NYT writes "SCR 584 (for Signal Corps Radio)". Who is right?

73
Mark
AF6IM


From WA5CAB at cs.com  Sat Oct  1 11:53:04 2011
From: WA5CAB at cs.com (WA5CAB at cs.com)
Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2011 11:53:04 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] New York Times mentions SCR 584
Message-ID: <11e85.479cc227.3bb89160@cs.com>

Officially, you are.  The usage as "Signal Corps Radio" is akin to "ARC-5" 
for the other four sets of that family and "Walkie-Talkie" for handheld 
"Handie-Talkie".  Common usage made up by lazy or ill informed people who didn't 
check their sources and happened to be in a position to publish widely 
their disinformation.  Pretty much like today.  :-)

In a message dated 10/01/2011 10:44:15 AM Central Daylight Time, 
boeing377 at aol.com writes: 
> Obituary of Lee Davenport in Sat Oct 1 issue. Mentions his key role in 
> developing the SCR 584 anti aircraft (gun laying?) radar. 
> 
> As I recall SCR stands for Set Complete Radio. The usually careful NYT 
> writes "SCR 584 (for Signal Corps Radio)". Who is right?
> 
> 73
> Mark
> AF6IM

Robert Downs - Houston
wa5cab dot com (Web Store)
MVPA 9480

From jfor at quikus.com  Sat Oct  1 12:40:32 2011
From: jfor at quikus.com (J. Forster)
Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2011 09:40:32 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] New York Times mentions SCR 584
In-Reply-To: <48FEC9C2-9481-4FE4-AF2E-2EDEE61E3333@aol.com>
References: <48FEC9C2-9481-4FE4-AF2E-2EDEE61E3333@aol.com>
Message-ID: <1568.12.6.201.37.1317487232.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>

The Times is not what it used to be.

-John

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


>
> Obituary of Lee Davenport in Sat Oct 1 issue. Mentions his key role in
> developing the SCR 584 anti aircraft (gun laying?) radar.
>
> As I recall SCR stands for Set Complete Radio. The usually careful NYT
> writes "SCR 584 (for Signal Corps Radio)". Who is right?
>
> 73
> Mark
> AF6IM
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>



From ersmar at verizon.net  Sat Oct  1 13:19:38 2011
From: ersmar at verizon.net (Gene Smar)
Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2011 13:19:38 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] New York Times mentions SCR 584
In-Reply-To: <48FEC9C2-9481-4FE4-AF2E-2EDEE61E3333@aol.com>
References: <48FEC9C2-9481-4FE4-AF2E-2EDEE61E3333@aol.com>
Message-ID: <E564BEEDAD6941408F06E636E51E7D61@downstairs>

NOT the Gray Lady.

73 de
Gene Smar  AD3F


----- Original Message ----- 
From: <boeing377 at aol.com>
To: <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Saturday, October 01, 2011 11:43 AM
Subject: [Milsurplus] New York Times mentions SCR 584


>
> Obituary of Lee Davenport in Sat Oct 1 issue. Mentions his key role in 
> developing the SCR 584 anti aircraft (gun laying?) radar.
>
> As I recall SCR stands for Set Complete Radio. The usually careful NYT 
> writes "SCR 584 (for Signal Corps Radio)". Who is right?
>
> 73
> Mark
> AF6IM
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html 


From mstangelo at comcast.net  Sat Oct  1 15:43:47 2011
From: mstangelo at comcast.net (mstangelo at comcast.net)
Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2011 19:43:47 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: [Milsurplus] New York Times mentions SCR 584
In-Reply-To: <1568.12.6.201.37.1317487232.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
Message-ID: <1527612674.301140.1317498227026.JavaMail.root@sz0121a.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net>

Here is a link to the obituary:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/01/science/01davenport.html?_r=1

Mike N2MS

From mstangelo at comcast.net  Sat Oct  1 15:50:57 2011
From: mstangelo at comcast.net (mstangelo at comcast.net)
Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2011 19:50:57 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: [Milsurplus] New York Times mentions SCR 584
In-Reply-To: <1568.12.6.201.37.1317487232.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
Message-ID: <1893549977.301340.1317498657027.JavaMail.root@sz0121a.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net>

The author probably got his information abbout the SCR designation from Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCR-584_radar

Mike N2MS


----- Original Message -----
From: J. Forster <jfor at quikus.com>
To: boeing377 at aol.com
Cc: milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
Sent: Sat, 01 Oct 2011 16:40:32 -0000 (UTC)
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] New York Times mentions SCR 584

The Times is not what it used to be.

-John

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


>
> Obituary of Lee Davenport in Sat Oct 1 issue. Mentions his key role in
> developing the SCR 584 anti aircraft (gun laying?) radar.
>
> As I recall SCR stands for Set Complete Radio. The usually careful NYT
> writes "SCR 584 (for Signal Corps Radio)". Who is right?
>
> 73
> Mark
> AF6IM
>

From dxguy at earthlink.net  Sat Oct  1 16:22:29 2011
From: dxguy at earthlink.net (Don Davis)
Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2011 13:22:29 -0700
Subject: [Milsurplus] New York Times mentions SCR 584
References: <48FEC9C2-9481-4FE4-AF2E-2EDEE61E3333@aol.com>
	<1568.12.6.201.37.1317487232.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
Message-ID: <B079CED51C5247DCBFD0D449D7562D11@hppav>

Or maybe The Times was never what it used to be?


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "J. Forster" <jfor at quikus.com>
To: <boeing377 at aol.com>
Cc: <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Saturday, October 01, 2011 9:40 AM
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] New York Times mentions SCR 584


> The Times is not what it used to be.
>
> -John
>
> ===============
>
>
>>
>> Obituary of Lee Davenport in Sat Oct 1 issue. Mentions his key role 
>> in
>> developing the SCR 584 anti aircraft (gun laying?) radar.
>>
>> As I recall SCR stands for Set Complete Radio. The usually careful 
>> NYT
>> writes "SCR 584 (for Signal Corps Radio)". Who is right?
>>
>> 73
>> Mark
>> AF6IM
>>
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> Milsurplus mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>>
>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>
>>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html 


From mstangelo at comcast.net  Sat Oct  1 16:34:24 2011
From: mstangelo at comcast.net (mstangelo at comcast.net)
Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2011 20:34:24 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: [Milsurplus] New York Times mentions SCR 584
In-Reply-To: <1893549977.301340.1317498657027.JavaMail.root@sz0121a.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net>
Message-ID: <1677293099.302425.1317501264382.JavaMail.root@sz0121a.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net>

Apparently both designations were used for SCR, Set, Complete Radio and Signal Corps Radio

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signal_Corps_Radio

Mike N2MS



----- Original Message -----
From: mstangelo at comcast.net
To: milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
Sent: Sat, 01 Oct 2011 19:50:57 -0000 (UTC)
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] New York Times mentions SCR 584

The author probably got his information abbout the SCR designation from Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCR-584_radar

Mike N2MS


----- Original Message -----
From: J. Forster 
To: boeing377 at aol.com
Cc: milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
Sent: Sat, 01 Oct 2011 16:40:32 -0000 (UTC)
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] New York Times mentions SCR 584

The Times is not what it used to be.

-John

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


>
> Obituary of Lee Davenport in Sat Oct 1 issue. Mentions his key role in
> developing the SCR 584 anti aircraft (gun laying?) radar.
>
> As I recall SCR stands for Set Complete Radio. The usually careful NYT
> writes "SCR 584 (for Signal Corps Radio)". Who is right?
>
> 73
> Mark
> AF6IM
>
______________________________________________________________
Milsurplus mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

From WA5CAB at cs.com  Sat Oct  1 16:36:41 2011
From: WA5CAB at cs.com (WA5CAB at cs.com)
Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2011 16:36:41 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] New York Times mentions SCR 584
Message-ID: <18849.7110fd61.3bb8d3d8@cs.com>

The Green Books, written Post War, mention only Set, Complete, Radio.

In a message dated 10/01/2011 15:34:32 PM Central Daylight Time, 
mstangelo at comcast.net writes: 
> Apparently both designations were used for SCR, Set, Complete Radio and 
> Signal Corps Radio
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signal_Corps_Radio
> 
> Mike N2MS
> 
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: mstangelo at comcast.net
> To: milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
> Sent: Sat, 01 Oct 2011 19:50:57 -0000 (UTC)
> Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] New York Times mentions SCR 584
> 
> The author probably got his information abbout the SCR designation from 
> Wikipedia:
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCR-584_radar
> 
> Mike N2MS
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: J. Forster 
> To: boeing377 at aol.com
> Cc: milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
> Sent: Sat, 01 Oct 2011 16:40:32 -0000 (UTC)
> Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] New York Times mentions SCR 584
> 
> The Times is not what it used to be.
> 
> -John
> 
> ===============
> 
> 
> >
> >Obituary of Lee Davenport in Sat Oct 1 issue. Mentions his key role in
> >developing the SCR 584 anti aircraft (gun laying?) radar.
> >
> >As I recall SCR stands for Set Complete Radio. The usually careful NYT
> >writes "SCR 584 (for Signal Corps Radio)". Who is right?
> >
> >73
> >Mark
> >AF6IM
> >
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
> 
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
> 
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

Robert & Susan Downs - Houston
wa5cab dot com (Web Store)
MVPA 9480

From clare.owens at gmail.com  Sat Oct  1 18:14:34 2011
From: clare.owens at gmail.com (Clare Owens)
Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2011 18:14:34 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] New York Times mentions SCR 584
In-Reply-To: <18849.7110fd61.3bb8d3d8@cs.com>
References: <18849.7110fd61.3bb8d3d8@cs.com>
Message-ID: <CAFdOJ7Nvr6eOovfS4c5Mm4Qn63G4aKYA3VKvb2m2Jzr5V0Lo2g@mail.gmail.com>

Speaking of the Green Books, I just received a copy of "The Signal Corps The
Test" and inside the cover is the inscription:

To Donna & Ken with compliments of the author
       Dixie R, Harris

Cool.  I love it when an old book has something of a personal nature inside,
even though it wasn't meant for me.

Clare

On Sat, Oct 1, 2011 at 4:36 PM, <WA5CAB at cs.com> wrote:

> The Green Books, written Post War, mention only Set, Complete, Radio.
>
> In a message dated 10/01/2011 15:34:32 PM Central Daylight Time,
> mstangelo at comcast.net writes:
> > Apparently both designations were used for SCR, Set, Complete Radio and
> > Signal Corps Radio
> >
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signal_Corps_Radio
> >
> > Mike N2MS
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: mstangelo at comcast.net
> > To: milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
> > Sent: Sat, 01 Oct 2011 19:50:57 -0000 (UTC)
> > Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] New York Times mentions SCR 584
> >
> > The author probably got his information abbout the SCR designation from
> > Wikipedia:
> >
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCR-584_radar
> >
> > Mike N2MS
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: J. Forster
> > To: boeing377 at aol.com
> > Cc: milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
> > Sent: Sat, 01 Oct 2011 16:40:32 -0000 (UTC)
> > Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] New York Times mentions SCR 584
> >
> > The Times is not what it used to be.
> >
> > -John
> >
> > ===============
> >
> >
> > >
> > >Obituary of Lee Davenport in Sat Oct 1 issue. Mentions his key role in
> > >developing the SCR 584 anti aircraft (gun laying?) radar.
> > >
> > >As I recall SCR stands for Set Complete Radio. The usually careful NYT
> > >writes "SCR 584 (for Signal Corps Radio)". Who is right?
> > >
> > >73
> > >Mark
> > >AF6IM
> > >
> > ______________________________________________________________
> > Milsurplus mailing list
> > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> > Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
> >
> > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> > ______________________________________________________________
> > Milsurplus mailing list
> > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> > Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
> >
> > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
> Robert & Susan Downs - Houston
> wa5cab dot com (Web Store)
> MVPA 9480
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>

From arc5 at ix.netcom.com  Sat Oct  1 21:03:58 2011
From: arc5 at ix.netcom.com (David Stinson)
Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2011 20:03:58 -0500
Subject: [Milsurplus] SCR-RC-183 In Action
Message-ID: <6F52DDD4218B4D789CC8C2BC92A5EB53@DaddyPC>

Well you get to see my messy work bench....
I've got the SCR-RC-183 external BFO/Freq Meter,
which was installed when the SCR-183 receiver was used
as a Liaison set, deployed for testing.
Had to find a good type 36 oscillator tube as 
the original had gone low emission.
Here's a 30-second short .WMV video:

http://home.netcom.com/~arc5/SCR-183/SCR-RC-183.wmv

About 7 megs for you dial-up guys, so beware.

Note the "wobble-ation" from gentle tapping.
The tube damping braket is missing in this set.
Also note the very fast tuning (this is 40 meters).
Still- for 1935, probably worked OK.

Aside:  The audio you hear is stock (except for 
bypassed low pass audio filter) to a properly-
matched comm-grade speaker.  Anyone who says
these old warriors don't have enough audio 
ain't doing it right ;-).

73 DE Dave AB5S



From arc5 at ix.netcom.com  Sat Oct  1 21:27:03 2011
From: arc5 at ix.netcom.com (David Stinson)
Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2011 20:27:03 -0500
Subject: [Milsurplus] CORRECTION:  BC-RC-183 In Action
In-Reply-To: <6F52DDD4218B4D789CC8C2BC92A5EB53@DaddyPC>
References: <6F52DDD4218B4D789CC8C2BC92A5EB53@DaddyPC>
Message-ID: <1F78B7A9D2E2439092E235B2081B69E3@DaddyPC>

That should read "BC-RC-183," not SCR etc.
Sorry.  I shouldn't write when I'm tired.



From whitaker at pa.net  Sun Oct  2 08:17:44 2011
From: whitaker at pa.net (C.Whitaker)
Date: Sun, 02 Oct 2011 08:17:44 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] New York Times mentions SCR 584
In-Reply-To: <CAFdOJ7Nvr6eOovfS4c5Mm4Qn63G4aKYA3VKvb2m2Jzr5V0Lo2g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <18849.7110fd61.3bb8d3d8@cs.com>
	<CAFdOJ7Nvr6eOovfS4c5Mm4Qn63G4aKYA3VKvb2m2Jzr5V0Lo2g@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4E885668.5000206@pa.net>

On 10/1/2011 6:14 PM, Clare Owens wrote:
> Speaking of the Green Books, I just received a copy of "The Signal Corps The
> Test" and inside the cover is the inscription:
>
> To Donna&  Ken with compliments of the author
>         Dixie R, Harris
>
> Cool.  I love it when an old book has something of a personal nature inside,
> even though it wasn't meant for me.
>
> Clare
>
> On Sat, Oct 1, 2011 at 4:36 PM,<WA5CAB at cs.com>  wrote:
>
>> The Green Books, written Post War, mention only Set, Complete, Radio.
>>
>> In a message dated 10/01/2011 15:34:32 PM Central Daylight Time,
>> mstangelo at comcast.net writes:
>>> Apparently both designations were used for SCR, Set, Complete Radio and
>>> Signal Corps Radio
>>>
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signal_Corps_Radio
>>>
>>> Mike N2MS
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: mstangelo at comcast.net
>>> To: milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>>> Sent: Sat, 01 Oct 2011 19:50:57 -0000 (UTC)
>>> Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] New York Times mentions SCR 584
>>>
>>> The author probably got his information abbout the SCR designation from
>>> Wikipedia:
>>>
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCR-584_radar
>>>
>>> Mike N2MS
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: J. Forster
>>> To: boeing377 at aol.com
>>> Cc: milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>>> Sent: Sat, 01 Oct 2011 16:40:32 -0000 (UTC)
>>> Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] New York Times mentions SCR 584
>>>
>>> The Times is not what it used to be.
>>>
>>> -John
>>>
>>> ===============
>>>
>>>
>>>> Obituary of Lee Davenport in Sat Oct 1 issue. Mentions his key role in
>>>> developing the SCR 584 anti aircraft (gun laying?) radar.
>>>>
>>>> As I recall SCR stands for Set Complete Radio. The usually careful NYT
>>>> writes "SCR 584 (for Signal Corps Radio)". Who is right?
>>>>
>>>> 73
>>>> Mark
>>>> AF6IM
>>>>
>>> ______________________________________________________________
>>> Milsurplus mailing list
>>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
>>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>>> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>>>
>>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>> ______________________________________________________________
>>> Milsurplus mailing list
>>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
>>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>>> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>>>
>>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>> Robert&  Susan Downs - Houston
>> wa5cab dot com (Web Store)
>> MVPA 9480
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> Milsurplus mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>>
>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>
de WB2CPN
When I got into the Army AF, (and then later the USAF), in 1946, SCR was 
just an
acronym, and didn't mean anything.   Historically it would be Sig Corps 
Radio.
We had SCS-51 ILS, so what do you suppose that was?   I suspect that
the acronyms were assigned first, then later on people started hanging names
on them.   Where did the Navy ever get BB for battleships?  (Big Boat ?)
The whole JAN system as we know it came about long after SCR's etc.
73  Clete




From arc5 at ix.netcom.com  Sun Oct  2 08:36:40 2011
From: arc5 at ix.netcom.com (David Stinson)
Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2011 07:36:40 -0500
Subject: [Milsurplus] "Cable" for Those Big "PL-" Connectors.
Message-ID: <FE0B4414630B4B809E9E3C231FDFE10E@DaddyPC>

Finding the multi-conductor cable with the black
rubber coating for the big "PL-" (or Navy equiv.) style
connectors is tough.  If you do have some old stuff
around the insulation and cover is usually questionable.
So individual wires in some kind of tubing 
seems a better idea.

I was in Home Depot awhile back and, in the plumbing
area, saw some black vinyl hose you can purchase by
the foot.  It came in two sizes and one was the right size 
to fit the backshells of many of these plugs.  
Mike Hanz had kindly put me on to using braid-armored 
plumbing hose to simulate 1930s Army Air Corps 
installations, so the idea of haunting the plumbing isle 
wasn't original with me, but getting vinyl to adhere 
to the connectors was a challenge.
I used the vinyl tubing for the 287 display cables 
at HamCom, but the attempt then ("Shoe Goo" and 
metal inserts into the vinyl to provide a grip for it)
was unsuccessful.  The tubing is just "friction fit;" 
adequate for display if you don't move the set around.  
Since that time I've come up with something 
that works much better.

Here's a photo:
http://home.netcom.com/~arc5/DU1Conn/IMG_0902.JPG

I first clean and roughen the inside of the connector backshell
barrel and the end of the vinyl pipe with some sandpaper.
Next, I coat both surfaces with some black "GC Liquid Tape"
http://www.hmcelectronics.com/product/GC-Electronics/10-1762
and fit the two parts together, rotate them to assure a good coat
and wipe away the excess.  I pulled them apart and allowed
the Liquid Tape to dry for several hours.  I then gave the tubing 
end another coat of Liquid Tape, inserted it into the connector
and wiped away the excess (don't forget the excess on the inside).
Allowed to dry over night.

The result was a fairly good bond, easily adequate for our 
purposes.  I wouldn't try to tow a car with it; I'm sure I could
pull it apart with some effort, but it holds together just fine
for what we're doing.  Now to re-do all my 287 cables :-P

GL OM ES 73 DE Dave AB5S


From sjotrollet at yahoo.com  Sun Oct  2 10:22:56 2011
From: sjotrollet at yahoo.com (Walter Treftz)
Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2011 07:22:56 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] FS: BC-312/BC-342
Message-ID: <1317565376.77462.YahooMailNeo@web125810.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>

Leftovers on an estate sale here are a couple of BC-312's (maybe BC-342's)(don't recall since the
look the same. Anyone interested, full description & pix available from me
73
Walt (N4GL)

From WA5CAB at cs.com  Sun Oct  2 11:44:40 2011
From: WA5CAB at cs.com (WA5CAB at cs.com)
Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2011 11:44:40 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] New York Times mentions SCR 584
Message-ID: <13f43.7b9f7106.3bb9e0e8@cs.com>

The Signal Corps nomenclature system prefixes did all have defined word 
names. 

SCR            Set, Complete, Radio
SCS            Set, Complete, System
BC              Basic Component
RC              Radio Components
AN              Antenna
I                  Instrument
IE                Instrument Equipment
ETC.           Et Cetera...

So did the AN (Later JAN) system.

The Navy system used two or three letter for sets or systems and five 
digits for all components thereof.  The component number, officially the Navy 
Type Number, was prefixed by a two to four letter Contractor Code dating from 
around 1915.  The first letter is always "C".  The second and subsequent 
letters were mostly assigned in alpha sequence but there are numerous cases 
where they relate to the Contractor's name.  For example:

CW             Western Electric
CG              General Electric
CGG            Galvin
COL            Collins Radio

The Signal Corps, for some reason, sometimes used the codes on nameplates 
instead of printing the contractor's name.  

As to the Navy hull numbering system, all that I can do is guess that 
someone decided, perhaps because some other navies used single letter prefixes, 
that the letter prefix would be a minimum of two letters.  But that is just a 
guess.  

BB              Battleship
DD              Destroyer
DL               Destroyer Leader
DM              Destroyer Minesweeper
CL               Light Cruiser
AO              Auxiliary, Oiler
AKA            Auxiliary, Cargo, Amphibious (also Attack)
APA            Auxiliary, Personnel, Amphibious (also Attack)
PT               Patrol Torpedo
...

A Boat is something that you pick up and put on a Ship.

In a message dated 10/02/2011 07:17:59 AM Central Daylight Time, 
whitaker at pa.net writes: 
> de WB2CPN
> When I got into the Army AF, (and then later the USAF), in 1946, SCR was 
> just an
> acronym, and didn't mean anything.   Historically it would be Sig Corps 
> Radio.
> We had SCS-51 ILS, so what do you suppose that was?   I suspect that
> the acronyms were assigned first, then later on people started hanging 
> names
> on them.   Where did the Navy ever get BB for battleships?  (Big Boat ?)
> The whole JAN system as we know it came about long after SCR's etc.
> 73  Clete
> 
> 

Robert Downs - Houston
wa5cab dot com (Web Store)
MVPA 9480

From jfor at quikus.com  Sun Oct  2 11:53:01 2011
From: jfor at quikus.com (J. Forster)
Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2011 08:53:01 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] New York Times mentions SCR 584
In-Reply-To: <13f43.7b9f7106.3bb9e0e8@cs.com>
References: <13f43.7b9f7106.3bb9e0e8@cs.com>
Message-ID: <1270.12.6.201.96.1317570781.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>

Including a sub? That takes a big ship.

-John

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


>
> A Boat is something that you pick up and put on a Ship.
>



From arc5 at ix.netcom.com  Sun Oct  2 11:59:41 2011
From: arc5 at ix.netcom.com (David Stinson)
Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2011 10:59:41 -0500
Subject: [Milsurplus] New York Times mentions SCR 584
In-Reply-To: <1270.12.6.201.96.1317570781.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
References: <13f43.7b9f7106.3bb9e0e8@cs.com>
	<1270.12.6.201.96.1317570781.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
Message-ID: <664E849281864E3A84F3321DF0B847E2@DaddyPC>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "J. Forster" <jfor at quikus.com>
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] New York Times mentions SCR 584


> Including a sub? That takes a big ship.

Don't count.... Anybody who would sink a boat full
of guys on purpose is weird anyway. ;-)


From boeing377 at aol.com  Sun Oct  2 13:05:05 2011
From: boeing377 at aol.com (boeing377 at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2011 10:05:05 -0700
Subject: [Milsurplus] Fallout shelter comm gear
Message-ID: <7FDF34F2-CE31-46BC-802F-EC11F832711E@aol.com>

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/02/us/for-kennedy-a-secret-shelter-was-a-cold-war-camelot.html?ei=5070&emc=eta1

Can anyone ID the comm gear?

73
Mark
AF6IM



From COURYHOUSE at aol.com  Sun Oct  2 13:20:56 2011
From: COURYHOUSE at aol.com (COURYHOUSE at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2011 13:20:56 EDT
Subject: [Milsurplus] Lee Davenport, a physicist developer  scr 584 dies
Message-ID: <1a7.dc4fbe5.3bb9f778@aol.com>

 
Lee Davenport Dies at 95; Developed Battlefront Radar
By RICHARD  GOLDSTEIN
Published: September 30, 2011 

Lee Davenport, a physicist  who developed a radar device that helped bring 
Allied victories on major World  War II battlefronts in Europe and the 
Pacific, died Friday in Greenwich, Conn.  He was 95. 

Enlarge This Image 
MIT Radiation Laboratory
Lee  Davenport, left, leaning against his invention, an SCR-584, in 1942, 
with Ivan  Getting and Lt. Col. Arthur H. Warner. 

RSS Feed

Get Science News  From The New York Times ? 

The cause was cancer, his daughter, Carol  Davenport, said. 
Mr. Davenport was working toward a doctorate in physics at  the University 
of Pittsburgh when he joined the secret Radiation Laboratory at  the 
Massachusetts Institute of Technology in February 1941. Bringing together  leading 
scientists and financed by the federal government, the Rad Lab, as it  came 
to be known, forged technology for America?s anticipated entry into the  
war. 
He oversaw the day-to-day work and the testing that created the SCR-584  
(for Signal Corps Radio), a microwave radar device with a sophisticated 
scanning  technique to track an enemy plane and a computer to adjust automatically 
the  angle of antiaircraft guns to shoot it down...

read the  whole neat article here.....
 
_http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/01/science/01davenport.html?_r=1_ 
(http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/01/science/01davenport.html?_r=1) 
Thanks,

Ed Sharpe, Archivist for SMECC  

See the Museum's Web Site at _www.smecc.org_ (http://www.smecc.org/) 

We are always looking for  items to add to the museum's display and ref. 
library - please advise if you  have anything we can use.

Coury House / SMECC
5802 W. Palmaire Ave.  Phone 623-435-1522
Glendale Az 85301  USA





From jfor at quikus.com  Sun Oct  2 13:31:19 2011
From: jfor at quikus.com (J. Forster)
Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2011 10:31:19 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] Lee Davenport, a physicist developer  scr 584 dies
In-Reply-To: <1a7.dc4fbe5.3bb9f778@aol.com>
References: <1a7.dc4fbe5.3bb9f778@aol.com>
Message-ID: <1537.12.6.201.90.1317576679.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>

Here's a link to the story that doesn't require an "account":

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/01/science/01davenport.html

-Jhn

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




>
> Lee Davenport Dies at 95; Developed Battlefront Radar
> By RICHARD  GOLDSTEIN
> Published: September 30, 2011
>
> Lee Davenport, a physicist  who developed a radar device that helped bring
> Allied victories on major World  War II battlefronts in Europe and the
> Pacific, died Friday in Greenwich, Conn.  He was 95.
>
> Enlarge This Image
> MIT Radiation Laboratory
> Lee  Davenport, left, leaning against his invention, an SCR-584, in 1942,
> with Ivan  Getting and Lt. Col. Arthur H. Warner.
>
> RSS Feed
>
> Get Science News  From The New York Times ??
>
> The cause was cancer, his daughter, Carol  Davenport, said.
> Mr. Davenport was working toward a doctorate in physics at  the University
> of Pittsburgh when he joined the secret Radiation Laboratory at  the
> Massachusetts Institute of Technology in February 1941. Bringing together
> leading
> scientists and financed by the federal government, the Rad Lab, as it
> came
> to be known, forged technology for America???s anticipated entry into the
> war.
> He oversaw the day-to-day work and the testing that created the SCR-584
> (for Signal Corps Radio), a microwave radar device with a sophisticated
> scanning  technique to track an enemy plane and a computer to adjust
> automatically
> the  angle of antiaircraft guns to shoot it down...
>
> read the  whole neat article here.....
>
> _http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/01/science/01davenport.html?_r=1_
> (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/01/science/01davenport.html?_r=1)
> Thanks,
>
> Ed Sharpe, Archivist for SMECC
>
> See the Museum's Web Site at _www.smecc.org_ (http://www.smecc.org/)
>
> We are always looking for  items to add to the museum's display and ref.
> library - please advise if you  have anything we can use.
>
> Coury House / SMECC
> 5802 W. Palmaire Ave.  Phone 623-435-1522
> Glendale Az 85301  USA
>
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>



From COURYHOUSE at aol.com  Sun Oct  2 13:39:33 2011
From: COURYHOUSE at aol.com (COURYHOUSE at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2011 13:39:33 EDT
Subject: [Milsurplus] Lee Davenport, a physicist developer  scr 584 dies
Message-ID: <816.9ad8836.3bb9fbd5@aol.com>

 
 
As an archivist  I posted the  orig. source.  which was the  NYT.  
I know  'some people' do not like to sign up  for accounts   with some of 
the news sources but....   get a NYT times account... it  is  free and a very 
useful source of  information. 
 
 
In a message dated 10/2/2011 10:33:20 A.M. US Mountain Standard Time,  
jfor at quikus.com writes:

Here's a  link to the story that doesn't require an  "account":

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/01/science/01davenport.html

-Jhn

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






Thanks,

Ed Sharpe, Archivist for SMECC  

See the Museum's Web Site at _www.smecc.org_ (http://www.smecc.org/) 

We are always looking for  items to add to the museum's display and ref. 
library - please advise if you  have anything we can use.

Coury House / SMECC
5802 W. Palmaire Ave.  Phone 623-435-1522
Glendale Az 85301 USA




CONFIDENZIALE:  Questo messaggio e gli eventuali allegati sono confidenziali
e riservati. Se  vi ? stato recapitato per errore e non siete fra i
destinatari elencati,  siete pregati di darne immediatamente avviso al
mittente. Le informazioni  contenute non devono essere mostrate ad altri, n?
utilizzate, memorizzate o  copiate in qualsiasi forma.

CONFIDENTIAL: This e-mail and any attachments  are confidential and may
contain reserved information. If you are not one of  the named recipients,
please notify the sender immediately. Moreover, you  should not disclose the
contents to any other persons, nor should the  information contained be used
for any purpose or stored or copied in any  form.

From jfor at quikus.com  Sun Oct  2 13:41:35 2011
From: jfor at quikus.com (J. Forster)
Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2011 10:41:35 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] MS Connector Question
Message-ID: <1568.12.6.201.195.1317577295.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>

Hi,

I'm quite familiar with "MS" connector designations, but have come across
an aardvaark:

Consider the dfference between:

AN-3106-16-4P
and
AN-3106-16S-4P

What does the 16 "S" designate?

Thanks,

-John

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




From n7rk at cox.net  Sun Oct  2 13:46:02 2011
From: n7rk at cox.net (David Hollander)
Date: Sun, 02 Oct 2011 10:46:02 -0700
Subject: [Milsurplus] Fallout shelter comm gear
In-Reply-To: <7FDF34F2-CE31-46BC-802F-EC11F832711E@aol.com>
References: <7FDF34F2-CE31-46BC-802F-EC11F832711E@aol.com>
Message-ID: <4E88A35A.9050907@cox.net>

Hi Mark - It says in the article - A Taylor Transmitter ham radio sits 
on a desk in a corner.

Thanks for sharing this.

Tnx and 73,

Dave N7RK

-- 
***********************************************************
Dave  N7RK          Boatanchors Home Page: http://members.cox.net/n7rk
Phoenix, Arizona         *DXCC Honor Roll*    *WAZ#22 - 75 Meter SSB*

ex-XE2/N7RK, N7RK/ZB2, VK2ERK, ZM0AJN, WB6NRK, WN6IWX

Boatanchor and Antique Radio Collector


From jfor at quikus.com  Sun Oct  2 13:49:35 2011
From: jfor at quikus.com (J. Forster)
Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2011 10:49:35 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] [ARC5] MS Connector Question
In-Reply-To: <16f12.480c7782.3bb9fe20@cs.com>
References: <16f12.480c7782.3bb9fe20@cs.com>
Message-ID: <1592.12.6.201.195.1317577775.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>

Thanks very much. That's news to me.

Best,

-John

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


> The two-digit number in that position is the shell size (just arbitrary
> even numbers in the range 10 to 36).  The "S" following the shell size
> number
> means "Short" or "Small", depending upon what vendor's list you look at.
> The
> original 12, 14 and 16 shells were shortened not too long after the series
> first appeared, and 12S, 14S and 16S became the standard or preferred
> shell
> in that size.
>
> In a message dated 10/02/2011 12:01:31 PM Central Daylight Time,
> jfor at quikus.com writes:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'm quite familiar with "MS" connector designations, but have come
>> across
>> an aardvaark:
>>
>> Consider the dfference between:
>>
>> AN-3106-16-4P
>> and
>> AN-3106-16S-4P
>>
>> What does the 16 "S" designate?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> -John
>>
>
> Robert & Susan Downs - Houston
> wa5cab dot com (Web Store)
> MVPA 9480



From WA5CAB at cs.com  Sun Oct  2 13:56:09 2011
From: WA5CAB at cs.com (WA5CAB at cs.com)
Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2011 13:56:09 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] [ARC5] MS Connector Question
Message-ID: <17194.3e01d91.3bb9ffb8@cs.com>

Fortunately, I guess, only a few inserts were specified before the change 
was made.

Robert Downs - Houston
wa5cab dot com (Web Store)
MVPA 9480

From kyrrin at bluefeathertech.com  Sun Oct  2 13:58:21 2011
From: kyrrin at bluefeathertech.com (Bruce Lane)
Date: Sun, 02 Oct 2011 10:58:21 -0700
Subject: [Milsurplus] MS Connector Question
In-Reply-To: <1568.12.6.201.195.1317577295.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
References: <1568.12.6.201.195.1317577295.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
Message-ID: <201110021058210486.1CF9B104@192.168.42.129>

	Far as I know, it's just another different contact arrangement. I've heard rumor 'S' may indicate 'Small' in this context, but I've never been able to verify it.

	Happy tweaking.

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

On 02-Oct-11 at 10:41 J. Forster wrote:

>Hi,
>
>I'm quite familiar with "MS" connector designations, but have come across
>an aardvaark:
>
>Consider the dfference between:
>
>AN-3106-16-4P
>and
>AN-3106-16S-4P
>
>What does the 16 "S" designate?
>
>Thanks,
>
>-John
>
>================
>
>
>
>______________________________________________________________
>Milsurplus mailing list
>Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
>Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
>This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
>signature database 6511 (20111002) __________
>
>The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
>http://www.eset.com


-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
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 radioman390 at cs.com  Sun Oct  2 14:02:01 2011
From: radioman390 at cs.com (radioman390 at cs.com)
Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2011 14:02:01 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] Fallout shelter comm gear
In-Reply-To: <7FDF34F2-CE31-46BC-802F-EC11F832711E@aol.com>
References: <7FDF34F2-CE31-46BC-802F-EC11F832711E@aol.com>
Message-ID: <8CE4F4484E54877-1A4C-2AFEC@Webmail-d120.sysops.aol.com>

The article says it's by Taylor (?) and ham gear!

-----Original Message-----
From: boeing377 <boeing377 at aol.com>
To: Milsurplus <Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Sun, Oct 2, 2011 1:05 pm
Subject: [Milsurplus] Fallout shelter comm gear

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/02/us/for-kennedy-a-secret-shelter-was-a-cold-war-camelot.html?ei=5070&emc=eta1

Can anyone ID the comm gear?

73
Mark
AF6IM


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

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html




From jfor at quikus.com  Sun Oct  2 14:25:44 2011
From: jfor at quikus.com (J. Forster)
Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2011 11:25:44 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] Mil Manual Site ??
In-Reply-To: <201110021058210486.1CF9B104@192.168.42.129>
References: <1568.12.6.201.195.1317577295.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
	<201110021058210486.1CF9B104@192.168.42.129>
Message-ID: <1694.12.6.201.77.1317579944.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>

Does anybody know anything about this site:

http://electronicsandbooks.tk/eab1/index.htm

Please feel free to respond directly (off-list).

Thanks,

-John

==========


From COURYHOUSE at aol.com  Sun Oct  2 14:35:51 2011
From: COURYHOUSE at aol.com (COURYHOUSE at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2011 14:35:51 EDT
Subject: [Milsurplus] [Vintage-Military-RADAR] Mil Manual Site ??
Message-ID: <1521.1e780bb4.3bba0907@aol.com>

 
Curious.....had never seen it.....
 
Ed#
 
In a message dated 10/2/2011 11:27:39 A.M. US Mountain Standard Time,  
jfor at quikus.com writes:

Does  anybody know anything about this site:

_http://electronicsandbooks.tk/eab1/index.htm_ 
(http://electronicsandbooks.tk/eab1/index.htm) 

Please  feel free to respond directly  (off-list).

Thanks,

-John

==========





From w7qho at aol.com  Sun Oct  2 15:11:50 2011
From: w7qho at aol.com (mac)
Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2011 12:11:50 -0700
Subject: [Milsurplus] Fallout shelter comm gear
In-Reply-To: <7FDF34F2-CE31-46BC-802F-EC11F832711E@aol.com>
References: <7FDF34F2-CE31-46BC-802F-EC11F832711E@aol.com>
Message-ID: <D06B8A6A-00D6-4D0A-8379-960E5567F494@aol.com>

Sure doesn't look like a Presidential level comm setup to me.

Dennis D.  W7QHO
Glendale, CA



On Oct 2, 2011, at 10:05 AM, boeing377 at aol.com wrote:

> http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/02/us/for-kennedy-a-secret-shelter-was-a-cold-war-camelot.html?ei=5070&emc=eta1
>
> Can anyone ID the comm gear?
>
> 73
> Mark
> AF6IM
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html


From albert.lafrance at coldwar-c4i.net  Sun Oct  2 15:18:40 2011
From: albert.lafrance at coldwar-c4i.net (Albert LaFrance)
Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2011 15:18:40 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] Fallout shelter comm gear
In-Reply-To: <D06B8A6A-00D6-4D0A-8379-960E5567F494@aol.com>
References: <7FDF34F2-CE31-46BC-802F-EC11F832711E@aol.com>
	<D06B8A6A-00D6-4D0A-8379-960E5567F494@aol.com>
Message-ID: <014701cc8138$17b71d50$472557f0$@coldwar-c4i.net>

I suspect that the museum staff just gathered up some random equipment for a
display.  For example, the small unit on top looks like some kind of audio
mixer/equalizer.

-----Original Message-----
From: milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net
[mailto:milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of mac
Sent: Sunday, October 02, 2011 3:12 PM
To: boeing377 at aol.com
Cc: Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] Fallout shelter comm gear

Sure doesn't look like a Presidential level comm setup to me.

Dennis D.  W7QHO
Glendale, CA



On Oct 2, 2011, at 10:05 AM, boeing377 at aol.com wrote:

> http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/02/us/for-kennedy-a-secret-shelter-was-
> a-cold-war-camelot.html?ei=5070&emc=eta1
>
> Can anyone ID the comm gear?
>
> 73
> Mark
> AF6IM
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email 
> list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

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

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html


From ranickel at comcast.net  Sun Oct  2 16:50:42 2011
From: ranickel at comcast.net (Robert Nickels)
Date: Sun, 02 Oct 2011 15:50:42 -0500
Subject: [Milsurplus] Fallout shelter comm gear
In-Reply-To: <014701cc8138$17b71d50$472557f0$@coldwar-c4i.net>
References: <7FDF34F2-CE31-46BC-802F-EC11F832711E@aol.com>
	<D06B8A6A-00D6-4D0A-8379-960E5567F494@aol.com>
	<014701cc8138$17b71d50$472557f0$@coldwar-c4i.net>
Message-ID: <4E88CEA2.9070707@comcast.net>

On 10/2/2011 2:18 PM, Albert LaFrance wrote:
> I suspect that the museum staff just gathered up some random equipment for a
> display.  For example, the small unit on top looks like some kind of audio
> mixer/equalizer.
Yep, looks like something from Shure, as is the mic.  But the model 444 
mic didn't come along until the late 60s.   Can't ID the "Taylor 
transmitter" but the middle box looks like a PA amp.

Castor oil and K-rations sounds like a good combination ;-)

73, Bob W9RAN

From military1944 at aol.com  Sun Oct  2 17:16:12 2011
From: military1944 at aol.com (BenG4BXD)
Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2011 17:16:12 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] WS19 items FS, revised
Message-ID: <8CE4F5FA5A2EB80-1770-3D4E1@Webmail-m109.sysops.aol.com>

WS19 Items For sale

Leads:

1  6x6 long 6ft or so  ?35
2  6pin power lead 3ft ?25
3  6pin power lead 2ft ?25
4  12x12 2ft ?35
5  12x12 dogbone ?35
6  12x12 dodbone ?35
7  12x12 long 10inch ?35
8  12x12 long 10inch ?35
9  12x12 long 10inch ?35
10 12x12 long 10 inch ?35

The power leads are black rubber, the others are covered in a yellow
cloth type material.


Aerial Variometer, Green, with original Pye socket  ?45.  Grey/blue one
?45


Ben.









From COURYHOUSE at aol.com  Sun Oct  2 17:57:55 2011
From: COURYHOUSE at aol.com (COURYHOUSE at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2011 17:57:55 EDT
Subject: [Milsurplus] I got  my general... time to Convert an ARC 5!
Message-ID: <5d52b.709c881f.3bba3863@aol.com>

I got  my general... time to Convert an ARC 5!  well...  maybe  not.....
 
Heh...  this is  sad... I have hardware here.... physically  tons of 
hardware at the museum..... but.. now that I have passed the  test  for my ticket 
have nothing   with modern ways and convenience to  use.  Just thought I 
would get a Technician License   so I could  mess  with microwave stuff... and  
 I decided  while I  was  thee and had passed the test  to take the General 
  and  passed that. I have been told I will be in the database    first 
part of the  week....  now I need a radio!  suggestions?  gifts?  trades?
 
Thanks,

Ed Sharpe, Archivist for SMECC 

See the Museum's Web  Site at _www.smecc.org_ (http://www.smecc.org/) 

We are always looking for  items to add to the museum's display and ref. 
library - please advise if you  have anything we can use.

Coury House / SMECC
5802 W. Palmaire Ave.  Phone 623-435-1522
Glendale Az 85301 USA

From rickb at tx.rr.com  Sun Oct  2 18:56:51 2011
From: rickb at tx.rr.com (Rick)
Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2011 17:56:51 -0500
Subject: [Milsurplus] I got  my general... time to Convert an ARC 5!
In-Reply-To: <5d52b.709c881f.3bba3863@aol.com>
Message-ID: <DA.28.05030.B2CE88E4@cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com>


Congratulations, Ed on your upgrade! I'm sure someone will have just the
piece of equipment you want to get you on the HF bands. Welcome!

Rick / K5IAR


4:58 PM
To: milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
Subject: [Milsurplus] I got my general... time to Convert an ARC 5!

I got  my general... time to Convert an ARC 5!  well...  maybe  not.....
 
Heh...  this is  sad... I have hardware here.... physically  tons of 
hardware at the museum..... but.. now that I have passed the  test  for my
ticket 
have nothing   with modern ways and convenience to  use.  Just thought I 
would get a Technician License   so I could  mess  with microwave stuff...
and  
 I decided  while I  was  thee and had passed the test  to take the General 
  and  passed that. I have been told I will be in the database    first 
part of the  week....  now I need a radio!  suggestions?  gifts?  trades?
 
Thanks,

Ed Sharpe, Archivist for SMECC 


From COURYHOUSE at aol.com  Sun Oct  2 19:11:19 2011
From: COURYHOUSE at aol.com (COURYHOUSE at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2011 19:11:19 EDT
Subject: [Milsurplus] I got  my general... time to Convert an ARC 5!
Message-ID: <5f10c.3fec37bf.3bba4997@aol.com>

 
thank you thank you!
 
not upgrade though Rick....    first license!    got tech  and general same 
day!
 
I would have had one in 6th grade   theory  is   great... but I do not 
handle  ode or  other sequences of  sound  well at all.... well I am almost  60  
soooo.....  
 
In a message dated 10/2/2011 3:56:56 P.M. US Mountain Standard Time,  
rickb at tx.rr.com writes:

Congratulations, Ed on your upgrade! I'm sure someone will have  just the
piece of equipment you want to get you on the HF bands.  Welcome!

Rick / K5IAR





From arc5 at ix.netcom.com  Sun Oct  2 19:28:10 2011
From: arc5 at ix.netcom.com (David Stinson)
Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2011 18:28:10 -0500
Subject: [Milsurplus] Any Belton, Texas Hamfest Reports??
Message-ID: <663D516EE0744DF4960408B821603DC0@DaddyPC>

Any Belton, Texas Hamfest Reports??

From richard at richardgrosser.net  Sun Oct  2 19:32:43 2011
From: richard at richardgrosser.net (Richard C. Grosser)
Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2011 16:32:43 -0700
Subject: [Milsurplus] RBM Receiver
Message-ID: <000001cc815b$95ee6f20$c1cb4d60$@net>

Does anyone know where I can get a schematic of a RBM (MF) receiver?

 

Richard C. Grosser

Palm Springs Air Museum

745 N. Gene Autry Trail

Palm Springs, CA 92260

(760) 778-6262 X231

Cell: (760)-898-6888

 


From jfor at quikus.com  Sun Oct  2 20:52:39 2011
From: jfor at quikus.com (J. Forster)
Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2011 17:52:39 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] WTB: ASB-5 Indicator CRT Filament Transformer
Message-ID: <57771.12.6.201.2.1317603159.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>

Hi,

I was just looking at my ASB-5 Indicator and it turns out the CRT filament
transformer has been removed. :((

Does anyone have one they'd be willing to part with? It's a rectangular
metal box about 2" x 2" with 4x mounting #6-32 studs and either 3 or 4
terminals, two with insulation good for a KV or so. I don't have a part
number.

Electrically, it's a simple step down transformer with a primary and
single secondary. Input is probably 80/115 VAC @ 800-2400 Hz.

Thanks,

-John

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


From RAFANTINI at salisbury.edu  Sun Oct  2 21:57:39 2011
From: RAFANTINI at salisbury.edu (Ray Fantini)
Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2011 21:57:39 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] I got  my general... time to Convert an ARC 5!
In-Reply-To: <5d52b.709c881f.3bba3863@aol.com>
References: <5d52b.709c881f.3bba3863@aol.com>
Message-ID: <2DE6F17E951D824AAE8B8D0BF7579D810DF845DFE5@MBX.salisbury.edu>

Ham radio from a historic prospective! See if you can find a copy of the 1966 or there about ?The Radio Amateurs Handbook?  pages 225 to 228, Converting Surplus Transmitters for Novice Use, don?t need to disable the VFO like in the original article but that will give you the guide lines for building a vintage sixties station using a ARC-5 transmitter. Put that together with a BC-348 or other period commercial receiver and you have CW operation in the sixties! Better yet try an ART-13 and BC-348 combination and operate AM on 3.885 or 7.290 although it will aggravate some members of this reflector the modified ARC-5 transmitter is where many of us started and was a common configuration in the fifties and sixties. Maybe you can build up in some corner a display of Ham use of surplus in the post war years.
Ray F KA3EKH


________________________________________
From: milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net [milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of COURYHOUSE at aol.com [COURYHOUSE at aol.com]
Sent: Sunday, October 02, 2011 5:57 PM
To: milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
Subject: [Milsurplus] I got  my general... time to Convert an ARC 5!

I got  my general... time to Convert an ARC 5!  well...  maybe  not.....

Heh...  this is  sad... I have hardware here.... physically  tons of
hardware at the museum..... but.. now that I have passed the  test  for my ticket
have nothing   with modern ways and convenience to  use.  Just thought I
would get a Technician License   so I could  mess  with microwave stuff... and
 I decided  while I  was  thee and had passed the test  to take the General
  and  passed that. I have been told I will be in the database    first
part of the  week....  now I need a radio!  suggestions?  gifts?  trades?

Thanks,

Ed Sharpe, Archivist for SMECC

See the Museum's Web  Site at _www.smecc.org_ (http://www.smecc.org/)

We are always looking for  items to add to the museum's display and ref.
library - please advise if you  have anything we can use.

Coury House / SMECC
5802 W. Palmaire Ave.  Phone 623-435-1522
Glendale Az 85301 USA

From joeconnor53 at yahoo.com  Sun Oct  2 22:35:04 2011
From: joeconnor53 at yahoo.com (Joe Connor)
Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2011 19:35:04 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] RBM Receiver
In-Reply-To: <000001cc815b$95ee6f20$c1cb4d60$@net>
References: <000001cc815b$95ee6f20$c1cb4d60$@net>
Message-ID: <1317609304.53780.YahooMailNeo@web46301.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>

Richard:
?
??? This outfit has the manual:
?
http://www.vintagemanuals.com/
?
?????????????????? Joe Connor


>________________________________
>From: Richard C. Grosser <richard at richardgrosser.net>
>To: Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>Sent: Sunday, October 2, 2011 7:32 PM
>Subject: [Milsurplus] RBM Receiver
>
>Does anyone know where I can get a schematic of a RBM (MF) receiver?
>
>
>
>Richard C. Grosser
>
>Palm Springs Air Museum
>
>745 N. Gene Autry Trail
>
>Palm Springs, CA 92260
>
>(760) 778-6262 X231
>
>Cell: (760)-898-6888
>
>
>
>______________________________________________________________
>Milsurplus mailing list
>Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
>Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
>This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>
>

From COURYHOUSE at aol.com  Sun Oct  2 22:58:45 2011
From: COURYHOUSE at aol.com (COURYHOUSE at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2011 22:58:45 EDT
Subject: [Milsurplus] I got  my general... time to Convert an ARC 5!
Message-ID: <1224e4.59604c89.3bba7ee5@aol.com>

 
Ray - I actually ave a arc5 rx that probably holds the record  for the  
most bastardization.... it was sooooo hacked  I just had to save it!
 
Yes we are  going to  do a display along this line... I very  much consider 
it  a segment of communications history.
 
 But iI also need to sore  something in the next  few days  ready to do to 
test my new call out!
 
Ed
 
In a message dated 10/2/2011 6:59:12 P.M. US Mountain Standard Time,  
RAFANTINI at salisbury.edu writes:

Ham  radio from a historic prospective! See if you can find a copy of the 
1966 or  there about ?The Radio Amateurs Handbook?  pages 225 to 228, 
Converting  Surplus Transmitters for Novice Use, don?t need to disable the VFO 
like in the  original article but that will give you the guide lines for 
building a vintage  sixties station using a ARC-5 transmitter. Put that together 
with a BC-348 or  other period commercial receiver and you have CW operation 
in the sixties!  Better yet try an ART-13 and BC-348 combination and operate 
AM on 3.885 or  7.290 although it will aggravate some members of this 
reflector the modified  ARC-5 transmitter is where many of us started and was a 
common configuration  in the fifties and sixties. Maybe you can build up in 
some corner a display of  Ham use of surplus in the post war years.
Ray F  KA3EKH




From k2ajr at yahoo.com  Sun Oct  2 23:18:00 2011
From: k2ajr at yahoo.com (Alex J Rokowetz)
Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2011 20:18:00 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] FS:   T-22/ARC-5 Transmitter
Message-ID: <1317611880.96568.YahooMailNeo@web31812.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Interested parties:
?
The following item is mine...?
?
eBay Item 260865336035
?
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=260865336035

Alex
K2AJR

From arc5 at ix.netcom.com  Sun Oct  2 23:47:09 2011
From: arc5 at ix.netcom.com (David Stinson)
Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2011 22:47:09 -0500
Subject: [Milsurplus] I got  my general... time to Convert an ARC 5!
In-Reply-To: <1224e4.59604c89.3bba7ee5@aol.com>
References: <1224e4.59604c89.3bba7ee5@aol.com>
Message-ID: <B4635DC349CA42F584A5EF7B2DD95610@DaddyPC>

Congrats! 
Now for some decisions. Amateur Radio is like a big buffet.
Where to start? Concentrate upon your favorite goodies
 or try a little of everything?
There are a great many different "dishes" in this hobby,
from microwaves to space comms to longwave to DXing and more.
First thing to do is decide where you current interests focus,
then we may better advise you on how to proceed.
GL OM ES 73 DE Dave AB5S

From COURYHOUSE at aol.com  Mon Oct  3 00:01:19 2011
From: COURYHOUSE at aol.com (COURYHOUSE at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2011 00:01:19 EDT
Subject: [Milsurplus] I got  my general... time to Convert an ARC 5!
Message-ID: <123605.7efe2256.3bba8d8f@aol.com>

 
Thanks Dave!
 
Microwave definitely as that is what moved me  to the tech   license...   
and  since I got my general license too....   something for the long haul to 
talk to some friends on HF with! It could go  anywhere from there but those 
two areas should keep me out of  trouble. It  would be fin to have a working 
demo station at the museum too from a past  era.... something  within 
spec...   which my  I KW Rotary  spark rig  is NOT!
 
Thanks for the good wishes!
 
Ed!
 
  In a message dated 10/2/2011 8:47:18 P.M. US Mountain Standard  Time, 
arc5 at ix.netcom.com writes:

Congrats! 
Now for some decisions. Amateur Radio is like a big  buffet.
Where to start? Concentrate upon your favorite goodies
or try a  little of everything?
There are a great many different "dishes" in this  hobby,
from microwaves to space comms to longwave to DXing and  more.
First thing to do is decide where you current interests  focus,
then we may better advise you on how to proceed.
GL OM ES 73 DE  Dave  AB5S
______________________________________________________________
Milsurplus  mailing list
Home:  http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
Help:  http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post:  mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by:  http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list:  http://www.qsl.net/donate.html




From kd7jyk at earthlink.net  Mon Oct  3 00:05:14 2011
From: kd7jyk at earthlink.net (KD7JYK DM09)
Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2011 21:05:14 -0700
Subject: [Milsurplus] I got  my general... time to Convert an ARC 5!
References: <123605.7efe2256.3bba8d8f@aol.com>
Message-ID: <003b01cc8181$adae0910$d7a4f604@mainframe>

"something  within spec...   which my  I KW Rotary  spark rig  is NOT!"

Depends on the spec...  I ran my unit up to 42 KW once, very exciting.

Kurt


From wh7hg.hi at gmail.com  Mon Oct  3 05:08:27 2011
From: wh7hg.hi at gmail.com (Kludge)
Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2011 23:08:27 -1000
Subject: [Milsurplus] SCR-A*-183 & Type 12 Progress and other notes of
	amusement
Message-ID: <B8AB3C4120A44EEFAD321903E8462641@Kongo>

Thanks to Emil Dular (another A&P and then some), I?ve got a model for
making the VHF comm and VOR/LOC antennas for the Type 12 systems.  Also the
experimental aircraft folks have been making their own baluns and LOC/GS
splitters for a while so they can use the same antennas for both so between
that and having information on homemade GS antennas, I?m in great shape
there.

 

While looking at NavCom antennas, I also found a nice drawing of a sled
runner type marker beacon antenna.  This will go with the FES-1240 but I?d
like to use a wire antenna with the R-20 single light marker receiver and
can?t remember where I saw details on the end supports etc for them.  That
receiver will go with the early Type 15 which will also get an ARC A-13
VOR/LOC antenna once I find one and will be parked next to but not with the
Type 11 (which probably should get the R-20 instead) but with a Type 18
which is a T-11 Tx & P-12 standalone dynamotor mount

 

Other than the A-13 antenna, for the Types 11, 15 and 18, I need one each
C-16 (R-11) & C-18 (L-10 Loop) and two C-13s (Single Tx) control heads.  I
have a C-22 (R-13) coming so that?s not a problem.  Mounting plates are also
needed, M-18 or similar for all except the C-13s but I?m not sure about the
Tx control box mounts.*  I also need one L-10 loop and one of either of the
VHF antennas to finish the Type 11.  

 

* One of the things I need to do is go to one of my storage units and grab
the manuals so I can do some scanning.  *Sigh* 
 It really is on my list!

 

At the moment, the plan is the aforementioned three systems, an R-19 with
one T-11* or T-13* and a T-21 (basically a ten channel T-11A) as controlled
by a C-49 (or C-44 sans R-11 & loop) which I think makes a Type 19, an R-19
plus two TV-10s (CV-431/AR) and an R-11 with a control head designed to fit
the instrument ?stalk? in a Bell Model 47 (UH-13?), and the FES-1240.
Anything beyond that is gravy although I would like to continue into the
Cessna years a little plus add a Type 17 (R-15 & T-11) and anything else
that I can assemble.  

 

There are a few items I don?t have for this, a second TV-10; schematics (or,
better, manuals) for the T-21 & F-13; the A-13, L-10 and either ARC VHF
antenna (Fair has the UHF one.); ceramic two-piece antenna feed thrus that
can handle 1-8?-3/16? rod; wire for the R-11?s wire antenna and the wire
marker beacon antenna with the needed tension springs & insulators.  

 

At the moment, I have two of the three Push To Test lamps for the marker
beacon Rx for the FES-1240 but the blue one turned out to be red when I
received it and the company?s out of both at the moment.  I forgot to order
another white one for the R-20 single light MB Rx so I?ll wait on that until
they have the blue ones in again.  The red one will be used as a power on
indicator for the 24v supply.  This reminds me that I have to pick up a
bunch of 327 bulbs (or the long life version thereof) to populate these and
replace a few burned out bulbs on some of the control heads.  These will
also fit the eyebrow lights I want to put over the instruments since they?re
not self-lit.  

 

By the way, I?ll be making the instrument panels etc required for the
civilian setups as what need them although I may use some of the formed
plastic covers to make them look better.  That will require a slice ?n dice
to fit the eyebrows but such is life.

 

All except two connectors for the SCR-A*-183 are on the inbound, the missing
ones being a PL-61 (Rx) and PL-63 (Tx control box.)  An eBay dealer Robert
Downs pointed out has the rest ? including the added PL-62 & PL-104 which I
forgot to order for the Rec Only version I?m adding to the mess.  I?ve got
to go back and order them up plus look for a second PL-61 somewhat less
expensive than those Fair has.  (Would William Perry have these and the
PL-63?)  This cuts the necessities down to one each BC-A*-229 & -230, coil
sets for them, two FT-141 control box mounting plates and an FT-100 Tx
mount. The wire and the armor for the cables have been located (I?m going to
wind up with a surplus of the latter after I?m finished if anyone will be
interested then.) and ferrules for the latter to fit the wooden junction
boxes I?ll be making.  This includes the power cables going to yet another
wooden box, this one a power junction box.  While I have two tuning cables,
I only need one cut down to allow a tuning control head to be added to the
command system with the control boxes.  (The liaison set will be locally
tuned per the XB-15 photo.)  

 

The surplus from the SCR-A*-183 tuning cables will donate their inner cables
to some sheathing I?m picking up from an eBay vendor so I have enough tuning
cable for the SCR-274-N and all the Type 12 systems that will use it.
(Again, I expect to have extra when I?m finished.)  While I can machine the
rest of the pieces fairly easily (as I will the ones for the SCR-A*-183), I
need the female spline couplings for 8-9 receivers (A few aren?t mentioned
above.) and 3-4 more right angle adapters.  The former I can possibly
machine but the latter are a bit outside my capabilities.

 

As previously mentioned, the SCR-274-N still needs a triple Rx mounting
plate and at least the frame for an FT-225 modulator mount.  The equipment
proper will be upgraded to make the system as close to Grade A as I can with
what I have on hand although it will be a blend of bare metal and black
wrinkle units.  

 

Both of the command systems need antenna stuff ? feed thrus, masts, springs,
insulators, fish spine beads (which I think I have two sources of) and, of
course, the wire itself.  No decision has been made about the liaison
BC-A*-229?s antenna although if I use it as the CW Rx for the SCR-A*-183 as
I?m thinking of doing, it might also go to the latter?s antenna relay even
though it really should go to something like a very early BC-191.  

 

Unrelated good news follows so anyone not caring about off-topic subjects,
please stop now.  No, really. I mean it.  There?s nothing radio-ish
following.  Go on, scat.  Shoo.  *sigh* 
 Okay, but don?t say I didn?t warn
you.

 

Talking with Noelle on the phone has been absent from my life for the past
few months.  Heck, as a rule, she?s not usually even up to talking on the
computer (IM or email) so I spend a lot of time in worry mode sending
messages etc of encouragement but not hearing back.  So talking with her on
the phone for two hours Thursday afternoon and three Friday night/Saturday
morning was an absolute treat.  She sounds better than she has for a long
time, although her new med load has her a bit loopy.  (Okay, so she was on
occasion a little before meds but so was I and the meds I?m on now don?t
help. :-) )  Anyway, that did a lot for my mood as well in a very positive
way which my state case manager noticed right off after the first call when
she stopped by Friday.  

 

Okay, so I wasn?t completely honest.  There is something radio-ish here,
just nothing having to do with surplus or command sets etc.

 

My local tobacconist (who really isn?t so local but rather is in Honolulu)
sells cigar boxes for $1 for paper covered ones, $3 for wooden ones and $10
for the really big ones.  I picked up two wooden ones of interest but I also
got one of the really big ones.  It is made of unfinished Honduran Mahogany
? I mean *really* unfinished! ? and, along with the lid on top, has a cool
door at the bottom of the front.  In the meantime, the larger of the two
smaller wooden boxes has a slide up piece at the top of the front while the
smaller one is made of heavier than usual wood.  I originally thought to
finish the rough box but decided against it.  There is a certain rugged
individuality to it that I like.  They had more interesting cigar boxes but
they?re cash only and I didn?t have any more cash in hand.  Since I was in
the neighborhood to order my new glasses, I?ll be sure to have many much
more paper folding cash stuff when I go back.  

 

Something I?ve had in the back of my mind for a while is putting rigs inside
cigar boxes.  While I had though I would have to stack boxes then still have
to remove the tubes to close the boxes, I seem to have lucked out in getting
boxes large enough to do these things plus put away things like the key,
phones, antenna wire etc.  The tubes may have to be horizontal but that?s
not a big deal.  They have a number of sliding top boxes which generally I
don?t favor but I may take another look since they have ample depth for a
rig.  They would have to be assembled side by side to work but, on thinking
about it, there?s nothing really wrong with that and I can knock out sides
if I want to have larger boxes.  The first method could be kind of cool
since each box would have a stage which could be isolated from the next by a
layer of foil or something between them plus I could separate them in case I
wanted to create a different stage or something without disturbing the rest.

 

While I?m thinking about it, last time I was at Goodwill I saw a rather nice
small wooden suitcase that would have held a rig rather nicely.  When I went
back (same day, after I kicked myself for not buying it), it was gone.  Oh,
well.  I don?t want to make one of the parasets that are so popular and ?in?
in some circles but rather just a simple suitcase rig with a VFO and uses
subminis where they?d be useful with larger tubes where they?re needed.
They would all be under the panel rather than sticking up where they have to
be removed when the lid?s closed.  If I use a design I?ve used before, the
larger bottom part would be the top and the top would sit on the table as a
desk thingie.  The bottom would move forward as it opens so it sits on the
top (which somehow sounds backwards but is quite clear in my mind) so the
whole thing doesn?t tip over backwards but rather is relatively stable.  

 

Anyway, thought you?d like to know what else is happening 
 

 

Best regards,

 

Michael, WH7HG ex-K3MXO, ex-KN3MXO, WPE3ARS, BL01xh ex-Mensa A&P PP BGI 

I am me.  I?m the only one who?s qualified.

 <http://www.nationalmssociety.org/chapters/NTH/index.aspx>
http://www.nationalmssociety.org/chapters/NTH/index.aspx

 <http://wh7hg.blogspot.com/> http://wh7hg.blogspot.com/

 <http://kludges-other-blog.blogspot.com/>
http://kludges-other-blog.blogspot.com

Hiki N?! 

 


From farmer.rob.flory at gmail.com  Mon Oct  3 08:24:18 2011
From: farmer.rob.flory at gmail.com (Rob Flory)
Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2011 08:24:18 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] Connector for VN-era US helicopter helmet
Message-ID: <CAFcNxxV7-Loo+uzhbxvzYE=20ggnh1QSfUpLze72XPCL25KPEQ@mail.gmail.com>

Hi,
My son's buddy has such a helmet and it would be fun to hook it to something
like an intercom or radio.
It has a short 1/4" plug like the "bailout plug" but with multiple rings to
accommodate both headphone and mic circuits.
What is the nomenclature of the mating jack, and/or does anyone have one?
RF

From arc5 at ix.netcom.com  Mon Oct  3 09:08:41 2011
From: arc5 at ix.netcom.com (David Stinson)
Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2011 08:08:41 -0500
Subject: [Milsurplus] I got  my general... time to Convert an ARC 5!
In-Reply-To: <123605.7efe2256.3bba8d8f@aol.com>
References: <123605.7efe2256.3bba8d8f@aol.com>
Message-ID: <38D0B0DE6F1140D49892E60A4A16BFDE@DaddyPC>

http://www.wa1mba.org/interest.htm

From whitaker at pa.net  Mon Oct  3 10:19:21 2011
From: whitaker at pa.net (C.Whitaker)
Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2011 10:19:21 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] Any Belton, Texas Hamfest Reports??
In-Reply-To: <663D516EE0744DF4960408B821603DC0@DaddyPC>
References: <663D516EE0744DF4960408B821603DC0@DaddyPC>
Message-ID: <4E89C469.6060005@pa.net>

On 10/2/2011 7:28 PM, David Stinson wrote:
> Any Belton, Texas Hamfest Reports??
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home:http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help:http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post:mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by:http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list:http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>
de WB2CPN
Google belton+hamfest and you see that it
was on April 2, 2011.
Nothing on 2012 yet.  I'll let you know if anything
is sent out.
73  Clete



From arc5 at ix.netcom.com  Mon Oct  3 10:26:08 2011
From: arc5 at ix.netcom.com (David Stinson)
Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2011 09:26:08 -0500
Subject: [Milsurplus] Someone was seeking ASB-5 Indicator?
Message-ID: <3A745C68B7E742D4B18293439E8F8288@DaddyPC>

Someone was seeking ASB-5 Indicator?

http://www.ebay.com/itm/330549830159

From jfor at quikus.com  Mon Oct  3 10:34:38 2011
From: jfor at quikus.com (J. Forster)
Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2011 07:34:38 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] Someone was seeking ASB-5 Indicator?
In-Reply-To: <3A745C68B7E742D4B18293439E8F8288@DaddyPC>
References: <3A745C68B7E742D4B18293439E8F8288@DaddyPC>
Message-ID: <56406.12.6.201.2.1317652478.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>

Hi David,

Yes, that's the puppy. Sadly the one on eBay has been much abused.

However, it does have the transformer I posted about. If you look at the
6th pic, it's the square aluminum (?) can, just above the CRT socket.

If anybody is interested in everything but the transformer, please drop me
a note, off-list.

BTW, Tony Waller suggested the transformer mighjt not be a step-down, but
just a 1:1 isolation transformer.

Best,

-John

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



> Someone was seeking ASB-5 Indicator?
>
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/330549830159
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>



From COURYHOUSE at aol.com  Mon Oct  3 10:44:56 2011
From: COURYHOUSE at aol.com (COURYHOUSE at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2011 10:44:56 EDT
Subject: [Milsurplus] I got  my general... time to Convert an ARC 5!
Message-ID: <abf1.1b171da0.3bbb2468@aol.com>

 
 
great list  thanks!!
 
In a message dated 10/3/2011 6:08:40 A.M. US Mountain Standard Time,  
arc5 at ix.netcom.com writes:

_http://www.wa1mba.org/interest.htm_ (http://www.wa1mba.org/interest.htm) 



 
Thanks,

Ed 

From jfor at quikus.com  Mon Oct  3 12:13:21 2011
From: jfor at quikus.com (J. Forster)
Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2011 09:13:21 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] Someone was seeking ASB-5 Indicator? - More
Message-ID: <1522.12.6.201.64.1317658401.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>

I can now confirm the desired teransformer is a 1:1 for 6 VAC @ 800 to
2400 Hz.

Thanks Tony,

-John

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


Hi David,

Yes, that's the puppy. Sadly the one on eBay has been much abused.

However, it does have the transformer I posted about. If you look at the
6th pic, it's the square aluminum (?) can, just above the CRT socket.

If anybody is interested in everything but the transformer, please drop me
a note, off-list.

BTW, Tony Waller suggested the transformer mighjt not be a step-down, but
just a 1:1 isolation transformer.

Best,

-John

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



> Someone was seeking ASB-5 Indicator?
>
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/330549830159
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>





From revcom at wbsnet.org  Mon Oct  3 12:15:54 2011
From: revcom at wbsnet.org (revcom at wbsnet.org)
Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2011 11:15:54 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] Connector for VN-era US helicopter helmet
In-Reply-To: <CAFcNxxV7-Loo+uzhbxvzYE=20ggnh1QSfUpLze72XPCL25KPEQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAFcNxxV7-Loo+uzhbxvzYE=20ggnh1QSfUpLze72XPCL25KPEQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <ec46bbeb951c08761d6a803523f0db0a.squirrel@marconi.wbsnet.net>

Rob,

This has been here before I think.  What he needs is a U-92A/U jack for
that plug.  There is a available a commercial adaptor that has the U-92
and a pigtail with a PJ-055 and PJ-068 type plugs for aircraft hookup. One
we have here now is made by Sigtronics.  We get them from EDMO Dist. That
can be found other places too.  The U-92 is not easy to find very cheap.

Rod
K?EQH



 Hi,
> My son's buddy has such a helmet and it would be fun to hook it to
> something
> like an intercom or radio.
> It has a short 1/4" plug like the "bailout plug" but with multiple rings
> to
> accommodate both headphone and mic circuits.
> What is the nomenclature of the mating jack, and/or does anyone have one?
> RF
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>



From antqradio at sbcglobal.net  Mon Oct  3 14:55:43 2011
From: antqradio at sbcglobal.net (Jim Whartenby)
Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2011 11:55:43 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] Connector for VN-era US helicopter helmet
In-Reply-To: <ec46bbeb951c08761d6a803523f0db0a.squirrel@marconi.wbsnet.net>
References: <CAFcNxxV7-Loo+uzhbxvzYE=20ggnh1QSfUpLze72XPCL25KPEQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<ec46bbeb951c08761d6a803523f0db0a.squirrel@marconi.wbsnet.net>
Message-ID: <1317668143.24083.YahooMailRC@web82706.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

One on eBay as we speak, item 220144279410, only $75.00!


----- Original Message ----
From: "revcom at wbsnet.org" <revcom at wbsnet.org>
To: Rob Flory <farmer.rob.flory at gmail.com>
Cc: milsurplus <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Mon, October 3, 2011 11:15:54 AM
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] Connector for VN-era US helicopter helmet

Rob,

This has been here before I think.  What he needs is a U-92A/U jack for
that plug.  There is a available a commercial adaptor that has the U-92
and a pigtail with a PJ-055 and PJ-068 type plugs for aircraft hookup. One
we have here now is made by Sigtronics.  We get them from EDMO Dist. That
can be found other places too.  The U-92 is not easy to find very cheap.

Rod
K?EQH



Hi,
> My son's buddy has such a helmet and it would be fun to hook it to
> something
> like an intercom or radio.
> It has a short 1/4" plug like the "bailout plug" but with multiple rings
> to
> accommodate both headphone and mic circuits.
> What is the nomenclature of the mating jack, and/or does anyone have one?
> RF
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>


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

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html


From pete at petelancashire.com  Mon Oct  3 17:31:35 2011
From: pete at petelancashire.com (Pete Lancashire)
Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2011 14:31:35 -0700
Subject: [Milsurplus] Can someone ID this connector ?
Message-ID: <CAA-F0u8nyHhNU+B_RrQZcyRxTJJ2hjObU0pghSHijR1HufWqmA@mail.gmail.com>

And I've got a 'few' of them if someone wants one.

https://picasaweb.google.com/111617808980322733757/16305119

-pete

From frledda at att.net  Mon Oct  3 17:52:58 2011
From: frledda at att.net (Francesco Ledda)
Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2011 16:52:58 -0500
Subject: [Milsurplus] Can someone ID this connector ?
In-Reply-To: <CAA-F0u8nyHhNU+B_RrQZcyRxTJJ2hjObU0pghSHijR1HufWqmA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAA-F0u8nyHhNU+B_RrQZcyRxTJJ2hjObU0pghSHijR1HufWqmA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <02351536-64B7-4AA5-8EAC-C00054420168@att.net>

The F-104 avionics used those unusual connectors. Never seen them anywhere else....

Sent from my iPhone


On Oct 3, 2011, at 4:31 PM, Pete Lancashire <pete at petelancashire.com> wrote:

> And I've got a 'few' of them if someone wants one.
> 
> https://picasaweb.google.com/111617808980322733757/16305119
> 
> -pete
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
> 
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

From jfor at quikus.com  Tue Oct  4 22:57:28 2011
From: jfor at quikus.com (J. Forster)
Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2011 19:57:28 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] Testing 1625s
Message-ID: <3004.12.6.201.88.1317783448.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>

Hi,

I have some 1625s and would like to test them. I don't have a tube tester
available, but do have the required filament and plate supplies (0-600 VDC
@ 1A), a good 'scope and an audio generator.

Does anybody have a link for the setup? I'm mostly interested in a simple
Gm test, but leakage/gas would be usefull too.

I don't have many tubes to test, so switching between them is not needed.

Best,

-John

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




From arc5 at ix.netcom.com  Tue Oct  4 23:01:40 2011
From: arc5 at ix.netcom.com (David Stinson)
Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2011 22:01:40 -0500
Subject: [Milsurplus] AN/ARC-1 with Mount, Control Box Available.
Message-ID: <16A79B5014094FAAB61E5F7E71A218EA@DaddyPC>

 I have an AN/ARC-1 transceiver with rack/mount, 
cables and control box plus home-brew junction box.
Last time I checked it, about a year ago,
It powered-up and received but transmitter output was very low.
No hamification. Photos available on request.
Looking for warbird or other mil-vehicle outfit who
needs one. Very reasonable price for a mil-vehicle 
group other than the politcallyCorrect Air Force.
I will deliver in the Dallas area. Heavy- will require 
two boxes to ship, so please consider costs if you 
want to ship it. 
73 DE Dave AB5S


From ianmwilson73 at gmail.com  Tue Oct  4 23:25:00 2011
From: ianmwilson73 at gmail.com (Ian Wilson)
Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2011 20:25:00 -0700
Subject: [Milsurplus] Testing 1625s
In-Reply-To: <3004.12.6.201.88.1317783448.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
References: <3004.12.6.201.88.1317783448.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
Message-ID: <CAEz8jcTqzTE7t6Zvj3gdMCit+GV4p2CtVpE3Q5=dt07dcTKE6g@mail.gmail.com>

Volume 6 Number 3 of GE Ham News:
http://n4trb.com/AmateurRadio/GE_HamNews/ge_ham_news.htm

..has a handy power oscillator circuit that I've found to be a good way to
get a go/no go check
on all sorts of power tubes. You will want a variable supply for this. Start
at 100V or so on the
plate and look for oscillation on a scope loosely coupled to the tank. You
can ramp up the
plate voltage and look for ionization (gas), etc.

A simple Hartley will work with triodes and tetrodes with a dropper resistor
from B+ to the screen in
the latter case. Component values are highly non-critical: you want enough
feedback to get the
thing oscillating. My benchtop lashup (pictures suppressed for the
squeamish) takes off somewhere
around 15MHz.

73, ian K3IMW

From RAFANTINI at salisbury.edu  Wed Oct  5 09:11:01 2011
From: RAFANTINI at salisbury.edu (Ray Fantini)
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2011 09:11:01 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] Testing 1625s
In-Reply-To: <CAEz8jcTqzTE7t6Zvj3gdMCit+GV4p2CtVpE3Q5=dt07dcTKE6g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <3004.12.6.201.88.1317783448.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
	<CAEz8jcTqzTE7t6Zvj3gdMCit+GV4p2CtVpE3Q5=dt07dcTKE6g@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <2DE6F17E951D824AAE8B8D0BF7579D810DF88F448E@MBX.salisbury.edu>

Other than using a power tube in its intended circuit and comparing results between a known good tube and unknown one all other test are questionable at best. Mutual conductance tube testers are better than the Emission types that are almost useless but with power tubes there is no substitute for running it under power. I have used TV-7 that for some reason has the reputation for being the greatest tube tester ever, have a TV-10 in the shop now that I use for checking and matching tubes and had some experience with the TV-2 maybe the most complex and confusing tube tester built but today my favorite tube tester is a archaic Weston OQ-3 or civilian model 788. The question is other than if you just want to check tubes and put them up on the shelf why don't you just go ahead and try them in what you're going to use them in and see if they work or not?

-----Original Message-----
From: milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net [mailto:milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Ian Wilson
Sent: Tuesday, October 04, 2011 11:25 PM
To: jfor at quikus.com
Cc: milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] Testing 1625s

Volume 6 Number 3 of GE Ham News:
http://n4trb.com/AmateurRadio/GE_HamNews/ge_ham_news.htm

..has a handy power oscillator circuit that I've found to be a good way to
get a go/no go check
on all sorts of power tubes. You will want a variable supply for this. Start
at 100V or so on the
plate and look for oscillation on a scope loosely coupled to the tank. You
can ramp up the
plate voltage and look for ionization (gas), etc.

A simple Hartley will work with triodes and tetrodes with a dropper resistor
from B+ to the screen in
the latter case. Component values are highly non-critical: you want enough
feedback to get the
thing oscillating. My benchtop lashup (pictures suppressed for the
squeamish) takes off somewhere
around 15MHz.

73, ian K3IMW

From jfor at quikus.com  Wed Oct  5 10:23:06 2011
From: jfor at quikus.com (J. Forster)
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2011 07:23:06 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] Testing 1625s
In-Reply-To: <2DE6F17E951D824AAE8B8D0BF7579D810DF88F448E@MBX.salisbury.edu>
References: <3004.12.6.201.88.1317783448.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
	<CAEz8jcTqzTE7t6Zvj3gdMCit+GV4p2CtVpE3Q5=dt07dcTKE6g@mail.gmail.com>
	<2DE6F17E951D824AAE8B8D0BF7579D810DF88F448E@MBX.salisbury.edu>
Message-ID: <1127.12.6.201.194.1317824586.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>

Because I'd prefer to avoid collateral damage to the equipment, if the
tubes are bad.

-John

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



> Other than using a power tube in its intended circuit and comparing
> results between a known good tube and unknown one all other test are
> questionable at best. Mutual conductance tube testers are better than the
> Emission types that are almost useless but with power tubes there is no
> substitute for running it under power. I have used TV-7 that for some
> reason has the reputation for being the greatest tube tester ever, have a
> TV-10 in the shop now that I use for checking and matching tubes and had
> some experience with the TV-2 maybe the most complex and confusing tube
> tester built but today my favorite tube tester is a archaic Weston OQ-3 or
> civilian model 788. The question is other than if you just want to check
> tubes and put them up on the shelf why don't you just go ahead and try
> them in what you're going to use them in and see if they work or not?
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net
> [mailto:milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Ian Wilson
> Sent: Tuesday, October 04, 2011 11:25 PM
> To: jfor at quikus.com
> Cc: milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
> Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] Testing 1625s
>
> Volume 6 Number 3 of GE Ham News:
> http://n4trb.com/AmateurRadio/GE_HamNews/ge_ham_news.htm
>
> ..has a handy power oscillator circuit that I've found to be a good way to
> get a go/no go check
> on all sorts of power tubes. You will want a variable supply for this.
> Start
> at 100V or so on the
> plate and look for oscillation on a scope loosely coupled to the tank. You
> can ramp up the
> plate voltage and look for ionization (gas), etc.
>
> A simple Hartley will work with triodes and tetrodes with a dropper
> resistor
> from B+ to the screen in
> the latter case. Component values are highly non-critical: you want enough
> feedback to get the
> thing oscillating. My benchtop lashup (pictures suppressed for the
> squeamish) takes off somewhere
> around 15MHz.
>
> 73, ian K3IMW
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>



From jfor at quikus.com  Wed Oct  5 10:25:09 2011
From: jfor at quikus.com (J. Forster)
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2011 07:25:09 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] Testing 1625s...  Thanks
Message-ID: <1132.12.6.201.194.1317824709.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>

Thanks for all the responses.

-John

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


Hi,

I have some 1625s and would like to test them. I don't have a tube tester
available, but do have the required filament and plate supplies (0-600 VDC
@ 1A), a good 'scope and an audio generator.

Does anybody have a link for the setup? I'm mostly interested in a simple
Gm test, but leakage/gas would be usefull too.

I don't have many tubes to test, so switching between them is not needed.

Best,

-John

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




From jfor at quikus.com  Wed Oct  5 13:15:52 2011
From: jfor at quikus.com (J. Forster)
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2011 10:15:52 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] Boonton
Message-ID: <1636.12.6.201.216.1317834952.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>

Hi All,

Because of some interest in Boonton and RFL test gear, I've started a
Boonton Group on Yahoo that focuses on the test gear manufacturers in and
around Boonton, NJ.

Please note, this is not in competition with the ARC-5 Group on QTH.net,
but is a complement to it.

The URL is:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Boonton/


Best,

-John

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





From arc5 at ix.netcom.com  Wed Oct  5 19:20:13 2011
From: arc5 at ix.netcom.com (David Stinson)
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2011 18:20:13 -0500
Subject: [Milsurplus] Boonton
In-Reply-To: <1636.12.6.201.216.1317834952.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
References: <1636.12.6.201.216.1317834952.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
Message-ID: <5C3E8984C57B487296CBA6523E44B944@DaddyPC>

Here I am "a voice in the wilderness" again... sigh.

I'm sorry, John, but this is just another fragmentation
and splintering of what little is left of our community.
You will get a few people at first.
But there is no "cross-pollination" of ideas or
generation of new interest.
Through attrition, the group will eventually become a ghost-town.
That's because few people discover an interest in the group's subject,
because they aren't exposed to it.
There are several mil-radio splinter groups that now languish
and are good examples
I might have developed an interest over the years if I had seen
several posts about these sets. Since I never see any,  I never think 
of it.
Since I don't think of it, I see no reason to go subscribe to it.
Others do the same and the topic eventually "peters-out."

In the end, this splintering is counterproductive and ultimately
self-destructive.  The "delete" key works just as well in
a large community as it does in a small one, so "high noise"
is not a reason to splinter into yet another small group
destined to die out due to attrition.

I know- No one will listen.  I've wasted my breath for years on
this point but by God I'll just waste it again;
It's like WS-19.  When's the last time you saw a discussion thread
on WS-19 on milsurplus?
You don't, because the same handfull of people are over
on their own splinter-group, hashing and re-hashing with few new
ideas because they've isolated themselves.
Heck- even that splinter has been splintered and re-splintered.
There are people here on Milsurplus reading this
right now who would have developed an interest, added new ideas
and done new work had they seen a few threads.
But they didn't, so they go on to other things.

I don't want to offend, John, but every new "yahoo group" someone
makes to splinter-off members from the more general lists is yet 
another
nail in our hobby's coffin.  One of these days,
someone will write the last post on the
"Hallicrafters Radios That Were Used in March When It Was Raining."
yahoo group and wonder where everyone went.
Clue: The two that are left are on the yahoo group about the radios
that were used with it wasn't raining.

73 Dave AB5S



From jfor at quikus.com  Wed Oct  5 19:47:06 2011
From: jfor at quikus.com (J. Forster)
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2011 16:47:06 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] Boonton
In-Reply-To: <5C3E8984C57B487296CBA6523E44B944@DaddyPC>
References: <1636.12.6.201.216.1317834952.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
	<5C3E8984C57B487296CBA6523E44B944@DaddyPC>
Message-ID: <58076.12.6.201.2.1317858426.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>

Hi David,

As you know, I'm on a lot of lists. As far as I can recall, there has been
little to no discussions of Boonton gear on ARC-5 or any other list.

> Here I am "a voice in the wilderness" again... sigh.
>
> I'm sorry, John, but this is just another fragmentation
> and splintering of what little is left of our community.
> You will get a few people at first.
> But there is no "cross-pollination" of ideas or
> generation of new interest.
> Through attrition, the group will eventually become a ghost-town.
> That's because few people discover an interest in the group's subject,
> because they aren't exposed to it.
> There are several mil-radio splinter groups that now languish
> and are good examples
> I might have developed an interest over the years if I had seen
> several posts about these sets. Since I never see any,  I never think
> of it.
> Since I don't think of it, I see no reason to go subscribe to it.
> Others do the same and the topic eventually "peters-out."
>
> In the end, this splintering is counterproductive and ultimately
> self-destructive.  The "delete" key works just as well in
> a large community as it does in a small one, so "high noise"
> is not a reason to splinter into yet another small group
> destined to die out due to attrition.
> I know- No one will listen.  I've wasted my breath for years on
> this point but by God I'll just waste it again;
> It's like WS-19.  When's the last time you saw a discussion thread
> on WS-19 on milsurplus?

Not lately, but there have been on ArmyRadios w/in the last two weeks.

The WS 19 Groups split for very good reasons:

The "Original" Canadian Group started censoring posts. I split off from
that along with two others who were incensed with that policy. That group
has languished in the decade following the split.

I was co-founder of the UK based WS 19 Group, and conceived the manual
archive, first known as Trackpads and which later became RoyalSignals, as
a honey pot to attract members. However my objections to Keith and
Alister's fetish with longer and evermore complex passwords and other
protection schemes, got me thrown out.

I absolutely believed, and still do, that when a manual was offered "free"
it means free. No strings, no memberships, no physical ISP email
addresses...  no nonsense. And, I do not accept that a person who scans a
manual acquires any proprietary interest in it. That is quite clear from
copyright law.

> You don't, because the same handfull of people are over
> on their own splinter-group, hashing and re-hashing with few new
> ideas because they've isolated themselves.

My various Test Equipment Groups are pockets of intertest in AILtech, EIP
Microwave, General Radio, and others. A question about the repair of an
EIP Counter will likely go unanswered on Tekscopes or HP-Agilent.

Somebody interested in Boonton "Q" meters is probably not interested in
ART-13s or ARC-5s.

> Heck- even that splinter has been splintered and re-splintered.
> There are people here on Milsurplus reading this
> right now who would have developed an interest, added new ideas
> and done new work had they seen a few threads.
> But they didn't, so they go on to other things.
>
> I don't want to offend, John, but every new "yahoo group" someone
> makes to splinter-off members from the more general lists is yet
> another nail in our hobby's coffin.  One of these days,
> someone will write the last post on the
> "Hallicrafters Radios That Were Used in March When It Was Raining."
> yahoo group and wonder where everyone went.
> Clue: The two that are left are on the yahoo group about the radios
> that were used with it wasn't raining.
>
> 73 Dave AB5S

The generalized Test Equipment Groups are really not all that useful for
the less common instruments. Ask a question about HP LASER Interferometers
on almost any Group, save one, and the silence is complete.

YMMV,

-John

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

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


From bcarling at cfl.rr.com  Wed Oct  5 19:50:38 2011
From: bcarling at cfl.rr.com (=?utf-8?B?YmNhcmxpbmdAY2ZsLnJyLmNvbQ==?=)
Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2011 19:50:38 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] =?utf-8?q?Boonton?=
Message-ID: <A2.36.14490.E4DEC8E4@cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com>

Gee, I am glad my experiences are not like that. I get dozens of messages each day from several antique radio and military radio groups.

Cup sounds at least half empty but my in box is full!


Sent from myTouch 4G

----- Reply message -----
From: "David Stinson" <arc5 at ix.netcom.com>
To: <jfor at quikus.com>, <arc5 at mailman.qth.net>, <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
Cc: <Vintage-Military-RADAR at yahoogroups.com>
Subject: [Milsurplus] Boonton
Date: Wed, Oct 5, 2011 7:20 pm


Here I am "a voice in the wilderness" again... sigh.

I'm sorry, John, but this is just another fragmentation
and splintering of what little is left of our community.
You will get a few people at first.
But there is no "cross-pollination" of ideas or
generation of new interest.
Through attrition, the group will eventually become a ghost-town.
That's because few people discover an interest in the group's subject,
because they aren't exposed to it.
There are several mil-radio splinter groups that now languish
and are good examples
I might have developed an interest over the years if I had seen
several posts about these sets. Since I never see any,  I never think 
of it.
Since I don't think of it, I see no reason to go subscribe to it.
Others do the same and the topic eventually "peters-out."

In the end, this splintering is counterproductive and ultimately
self-destructive.  The "delete" key works just as well in
a large community as it does in a small one, so "high noise"
is not a reason to splinter into yet another small group
destined to die out due to attrition.

I know- No one will listen.  I've wasted my breath for years on
this point but by God I'll just waste it again;
It's like WS-19.  When's the last time you saw a discussion thread
on WS-19 on milsurplus?
You don't, because the same handfull of people are over
on their own splinter-group, hashing and re-hashing with few new
ideas because they've isolated themselves.
Heck- even that splinter has been splintered and re-splintered.
There are people here on Milsurplus reading this
right now who would have developed an interest, added new ideas
and done new work had they seen a few threads.
But they didn't, so they go on to other things.

I don't want to offend, John, but every new "yahoo group" someone
makes to splinter-off members from the more general lists is yet 
another
nail in our hobby's coffin.  One of these days,
someone will write the last post on the
"Hallicrafters Radios That Were Used in March When It Was Raining."
yahoo group and wonder where everyone went.
Clue: The two that are left are on the yahoo group about the radios
that were used with it wasn't raining.

73 Dave AB5S


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

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

From arc5 at ix.netcom.com  Wed Oct  5 19:59:33 2011
From: arc5 at ix.netcom.com (David Stinson)
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2011 18:59:33 -0500
Subject: [Milsurplus] Boonton
In-Reply-To: <58076.12.6.201.2.1317858426.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
References: <1636.12.6.201.216.1317834952.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
	<5C3E8984C57B487296CBA6523E44B944@DaddyPC>
	<58076.12.6.201.2.1317858426.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
Message-ID: <5C8383563AEF486A8E79B2DBEC337B79@DaddyPC>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "J. Forster" <jfor at quikus.com>
> As you know, I'm on a lot of lists. As far as I can recall, there 
> has been
> little to no discussions of Boonton gear on ARC-5 or any other list.

Exactly!  That's because ARC-5 is a "splinter" list with very low 
traffic
other than a half-dozen people.
Start a thread on MilSurplus about Boonton.  Give us all a chance
to learn something.


From jfor at quikus.com  Wed Oct  5 20:39:49 2011
From: jfor at quikus.com (J. Forster)
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2011 17:39:49 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] Boonton
In-Reply-To: <5C8383563AEF486A8E79B2DBEC337B79@DaddyPC>
References: <1636.12.6.201.216.1317834952.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
	<5C3E8984C57B487296CBA6523E44B944@DaddyPC>
	<58076.12.6.201.2.1317858426.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
	<5C8383563AEF486A8E79B2DBEC337B79@DaddyPC>
Message-ID: <62913.12.6.201.2.1317861589.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>

>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "J. Forster" <jfor at quikus.com>
>> As you know, I'm on a lot of lists. As far as I can recall, there
>> has been
>> little to no discussions of Boonton gear on ARC-5 or any other list.
>
> Exactly!  That's because ARC-5 is a "splinter" list with very low
> traffic other than a half-dozen people.

Virtually all lists are like that. I moderate a list w/ >3500 members.
Fewer than 25 post regulaerly. Fewer than 200 ever post. And there are
>500 posts per month.

> Start a thread on MilSurplus about Boonton.  Give us all a chance
> to learn something.

Be my guest. It's not a subject I know a lot about...  yet.

Best,

-John

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




From MillerKE6F at aol.com  Wed Oct  5 20:54:23 2011
From: MillerKE6F at aol.com (MillerKE6F at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2011 20:54:23 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] [ARC5]  Boonton
Message-ID: <5207.31507a37.3bbe563f@aol.com>

I think the splintering as noted in this  thread will not helped the 
overall radio hobby community in the long  term.  We who have been at this for 
over 50 years have seen both the ARC 5  and The Boonton 260A and if fact I 
still have and use both items.  That a  260A has nothing in common with Command 
Sets is not quite true and you would  have found the Boonton Q meter  being 
used ad Aircraft Radio Corp. to  develop their products.  
 
    We all have our favorites, but also have knowledge  of or expertise in 
more than one narrow sector of the radio communications  world.  So my own 
preference would be to keep much of the traffic in a more  homogeneous group 
which would broaden the base of interest and maintain a much  healthier 
collection of data, history, and of course opinion.   Unfortunately, many groups 
have "Topic" police who often get rather anal when  their myopia is 
challenged.  tsk tsk
 
 
 
    Fud fer thot
 
    Bob, KE6F
 
    
 
 

From whitaker at pa.net  Thu Oct  6 07:49:24 2011
From: whitaker at pa.net (C.Whitaker)
Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2011 07:49:24 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] Boonton
In-Reply-To: <58076.12.6.201.2.1317858426.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
References: <1636.12.6.201.216.1317834952.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
	<5C3E8984C57B487296CBA6523E44B944@DaddyPC>
	<58076.12.6.201.2.1317858426.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
Message-ID: <4E8D95C4.9020304@pa.net>

On 10/5/2011 7:47 PM, J. Forster wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> As you know, I'm on a lot of lists. As far as I can recall, there has been
> little to no discussions of Boonton gear on ARC-5 or any other list.
>
>> Here I am "a voice in the wilderness" again... sigh.
>>
>> I'm sorry, John, but this is just another fragmentation
>> and splintering of what little is left of our community.
>> You will get a few people at first.
>> But there is no "cross-pollination" of ideas or
>> generation of new interest.
>> Through attrition, the group will eventually become a ghost-town.
>> That's because few people discover an interest in the group's subject,
>> because they aren't exposed to it.
>> There are several mil-radio splinter groups that now languish
>> and are good examples
>> I might have developed an interest over the years if I had seen
>> several posts about these sets. Since I never see any,  I never think
>> of it.
>> Since I don't think of it, I see no reason to go subscribe to it.
>> Others do the same and the topic eventually "peters-out."
>>
>> In the end, this splintering is counterproductive and ultimately
>> self-destructive.  The "delete" key works just as well in
>> a large community as it does in a small one, so "high noise"
>> is not a reason to splinter into yet another small group
>> destined to die out due to attrition.
>> I know- No one will listen.  I've wasted my breath for years on
>> this point but by God I'll just waste it again;
>> It's like WS-19.  When's the last time you saw a discussion thread
>> on WS-19 on milsurplus?
> Not lately, but there have been on ArmyRadios w/in the last two weeks.
>
> The WS 19 Groups split for very good reasons:
>
> The "Original" Canadian Group started censoring posts. I split off from
> that along with two others who were incensed with that policy. That group
> has languished in the decade following the split.
>
> I was co-founder of the UK based WS 19 Group, and conceived the manual
> archive, first known as Trackpads and which later became RoyalSignals, as
> a honey pot to attract members. However my objections to Keith and
> Alister's fetish with longer and evermore complex passwords and other
> protection schemes, got me thrown out.
>
> I absolutely believed, and still do, that when a manual was offered "free"
> it means free. No strings, no memberships, no physical ISP email
> addresses...  no nonsense. And, I do not accept that a person who scans a
> manual acquires any proprietary interest in it. That is quite clear from
> copyright law.
>
>> You don't, because the same handfull of people are over
>> on their own splinter-group, hashing and re-hashing with few new
>> ideas because they've isolated themselves.
> My various Test Equipment Groups are pockets of intertest in AILtech, EIP
> Microwave, General Radio, and others. A question about the repair of an
> EIP Counter will likely go unanswered on Tekscopes or HP-Agilent.
>
> Somebody interested in Boonton "Q" meters is probably not interested in
> ART-13s or ARC-5s.
>
>> Heck- even that splinter has been splintered and re-splintered.
>> There are people here on Milsurplus reading this
>> right now who would have developed an interest, added new ideas
>> and done new work had they seen a few threads.
>> But they didn't, so they go on to other things.
>>
>> I don't want to offend, John, but every new "yahoo group" someone
>> makes to splinter-off members from the more general lists is yet
>> another nail in our hobby's coffin.  One of these days,
>> someone will write the last post on the
>> "Hallicrafters Radios That Were Used in March When It Was Raining."
>> yahoo group and wonder where everyone went.
>> Clue: The two that are left are on the yahoo group about the radios
>> that were used with it wasn't raining.
>>
>> 73 Dave AB5S
> The generalized Test Equipment Groups are really not all that useful for
> the less common instruments. Ask a question about HP LASER Interferometers
> on almost any Group, save one, and the silence is complete.
>
> YMMV,
>
> -John
>
> ================
>
> =======================
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>
de WB2CPN
Wasn't General Radio up there at Boonton?
I've used an AC voltmeter in a previous job that
could be where I learned that.
73  Clete




From raydio862 at verizon.net  Thu Oct  6 11:08:39 2011
From: raydio862 at verizon.net (Ray Chase)
Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2011 11:08:39 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] Boonton
References: <1636.12.6.201.216.1317834952.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
	<5C3E8984C57B487296CBA6523E44B944@DaddyPC>
	<58076.12.6.201.2.1317858426.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
	<4E8D95C4.9020304@pa.net>
Message-ID: <0a4501cc8439$d4ea29e0$0201a8c0@Muttley>

Not General Radio as far as I know but lots of other luminaries, long since 
gone.
Ray
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "C.Whitaker" <whitaker at pa.net>
To: <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2011 7:49 AM
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] Boonton


> On 10/5/2011 7:47 PM, J. Forster wrote:
>> Hi David,
>>
>> As you know, I'm on a lot of lists. As far as I can recall, there has 
>> been
>> little to no discussions of Boonton gear on ARC-5 or any other list.
>>
>>> Here I am "a voice in the wilderness" again... sigh.
>>>
>>> I'm sorry, John, but this is just another fragmentation
>>> and splintering of what little is left of our community.
>>> You will get a few people at first.
>>> But there is no "cross-pollination" of ideas or
>>> generation of new interest.
>>> Through attrition, the group will eventually become a ghost-town.
>>> That's because few people discover an interest in the group's subject,
>>> because they aren't exposed to it.
>>> There are several mil-radio splinter groups that now languish
>>> and are good examples
>>> I might have developed an interest over the years if I had seen
>>> several posts about these sets. Since I never see any,  I never think
>>> of it.
>>> Since I don't think of it, I see no reason to go subscribe to it.
>>> Others do the same and the topic eventually "peters-out."
>>>
>>> In the end, this splintering is counterproductive and ultimately
>>> self-destructive.  The "delete" key works just as well in
>>> a large community as it does in a small one, so "high noise"
>>> is not a reason to splinter into yet another small group
>>> destined to die out due to attrition.
>>> I know- No one will listen.  I've wasted my breath for years on
>>> this point but by God I'll just waste it again;
>>> It's like WS-19.  When's the last time you saw a discussion thread
>>> on WS-19 on milsurplus?
>> Not lately, but there have been on ArmyRadios w/in the last two weeks.
>>
>> The WS 19 Groups split for very good reasons:
>>
>> The "Original" Canadian Group started censoring posts. I split off from
>> that along with two others who were incensed with that policy. That group
>> has languished in the decade following the split.
>>
>> I was co-founder of the UK based WS 19 Group, and conceived the manual
>> archive, first known as Trackpads and which later became RoyalSignals, as
>> a honey pot to attract members. However my objections to Keith and
>> Alister's fetish with longer and evermore complex passwords and other
>> protection schemes, got me thrown out.
>>
>> I absolutely believed, and still do, that when a manual was offered 
>> "free"
>> it means free. No strings, no memberships, no physical ISP email
>> addresses...  no nonsense. And, I do not accept that a person who scans a
>> manual acquires any proprietary interest in it. That is quite clear from
>> copyright law.
>>
>>> You don't, because the same handfull of people are over
>>> on their own splinter-group, hashing and re-hashing with few new
>>> ideas because they've isolated themselves.
>> My various Test Equipment Groups are pockets of intertest in AILtech, EIP
>> Microwave, General Radio, and others. A question about the repair of an
>> EIP Counter will likely go unanswered on Tekscopes or HP-Agilent.
>>
>> Somebody interested in Boonton "Q" meters is probably not interested in
>> ART-13s or ARC-5s.
>>
>>> Heck- even that splinter has been splintered and re-splintered.
>>> There are people here on Milsurplus reading this
>>> right now who would have developed an interest, added new ideas
>>> and done new work had they seen a few threads.
>>> But they didn't, so they go on to other things.
>>>
>>> I don't want to offend, John, but every new "yahoo group" someone
>>> makes to splinter-off members from the more general lists is yet
>>> another nail in our hobby's coffin.  One of these days,
>>> someone will write the last post on the
>>> "Hallicrafters Radios That Were Used in March When It Was Raining."
>>> yahoo group and wonder where everyone went.
>>> Clue: The two that are left are on the yahoo group about the radios
>>> that were used with it wasn't raining.
>>>
>>> 73 Dave AB5S
>> The generalized Test Equipment Groups are really not all that useful for
>> the less common instruments. Ask a question about HP LASER 
>> Interferometers
>> on almost any Group, save one, and the silence is complete.
>>
>> YMMV,
>>
>> -John
>>
>> ================
>>
>> =======================
>>
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> Milsurplus mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>>
>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>
>>
> de WB2CPN
> Wasn't General Radio up there at Boonton?
> I've used an AC voltmeter in a previous job that
> could be where I learned that.
> 73  Clete
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html 


From jfor at quikus.com  Thu Oct  6 11:12:24 2011
From: jfor at quikus.com (J. Forster)
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2011 08:12:24 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] Boonton
In-Reply-To: <4E8D95C4.9020304@pa.net>
References: <1636.12.6.201.216.1317834952.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
	<5C3E8984C57B487296CBA6523E44B944@DaddyPC>
	<58076.12.6.201.2.1317858426.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
	<4E8D95C4.9020304@pa.net>
Message-ID: <1078.12.6.201.119.1317913944.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>

Nope.  GR was in Cambridge, MA then Concord Ma.

Shameless plug -->  There is a list for GR fans:  GenRad on YahooGroups also.

-John

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



> On 10/5/2011 7:47 PM, J. Forster wrote:
>> Hi David,
>>
>> As you know, I'm on a lot of lists. As far as I can recall, there has
>> been
>> little to no discussions of Boonton gear on ARC-5 or any other list.
>>
>>> Here I am "a voice in the wilderness" again... sigh.
>>>
>>> I'm sorry, John, but this is just another fragmentation
>>> and splintering of what little is left of our community.
>>> You will get a few people at first.
>>> But there is no "cross-pollination" of ideas or
>>> generation of new interest.
>>> Through attrition, the group will eventually become a ghost-town.
>>> That's because few people discover an interest in the group's subject,
>>> because they aren't exposed to it.
>>> There are several mil-radio splinter groups that now languish
>>> and are good examples
>>> I might have developed an interest over the years if I had seen
>>> several posts about these sets. Since I never see any,  I never think
>>> of it.
>>> Since I don't think of it, I see no reason to go subscribe to it.
>>> Others do the same and the topic eventually "peters-out."
>>>
>>> In the end, this splintering is counterproductive and ultimately
>>> self-destructive.  The "delete" key works just as well in
>>> a large community as it does in a small one, so "high noise"
>>> is not a reason to splinter into yet another small group
>>> destined to die out due to attrition.
>>> I know- No one will listen.  I've wasted my breath for years on
>>> this point but by God I'll just waste it again;
>>> It's like WS-19.  When's the last time you saw a discussion thread
>>> on WS-19 on milsurplus?
>> Not lately, but there have been on ArmyRadios w/in the last two weeks.
>>
>> The WS 19 Groups split for very good reasons:
>>
>> The "Original" Canadian Group started censoring posts. I split off from
>> that along with two others who were incensed with that policy. That
>> group
>> has languished in the decade following the split.
>>
>> I was co-founder of the UK based WS 19 Group, and conceived the manual
>> archive, first known as Trackpads and which later became RoyalSignals,
>> as
>> a honey pot to attract members. However my objections to Keith and
>> Alister's fetish with longer and evermore complex passwords and other
>> protection schemes, got me thrown out.
>>
>> I absolutely believed, and still do, that when a manual was offered
>> "free"
>> it means free. No strings, no memberships, no physical ISP email
>> addresses...  no nonsense. And, I do not accept that a person who scans
>> a
>> manual acquires any proprietary interest in it. That is quite clear from
>> copyright law.
>>
>>> You don't, because the same handfull of people are over
>>> on their own splinter-group, hashing and re-hashing with few new
>>> ideas because they've isolated themselves.
>> My various Test Equipment Groups are pockets of intertest in AILtech,
>> EIP
>> Microwave, General Radio, and others. A question about the repair of an
>> EIP Counter will likely go unanswered on Tekscopes or HP-Agilent.
>>
>> Somebody interested in Boonton "Q" meters is probably not interested in
>> ART-13s or ARC-5s.
>>
>>> Heck- even that splinter has been splintered and re-splintered.
>>> There are people here on Milsurplus reading this
>>> right now who would have developed an interest, added new ideas
>>> and done new work had they seen a few threads.
>>> But they didn't, so they go on to other things.
>>>
>>> I don't want to offend, John, but every new "yahoo group" someone
>>> makes to splinter-off members from the more general lists is yet
>>> another nail in our hobby's coffin.  One of these days,
>>> someone will write the last post on the
>>> "Hallicrafters Radios That Were Used in March When It Was Raining."
>>> yahoo group and wonder where everyone went.
>>> Clue: The two that are left are on the yahoo group about the radios
>>> that were used with it wasn't raining.
>>>
>>> 73 Dave AB5S
>> The generalized Test Equipment Groups are really not all that useful for
>> the less common instruments. Ask a question about HP LASER
>> Interferometers
>> on almost any Group, save one, and the silence is complete.
>>
>> YMMV,
>>
>> -John
>>
>> ================
>>
>> =======================
>>
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> Milsurplus mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>>
>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>
>>
> de WB2CPN
> Wasn't General Radio up there at Boonton?
> I've used an AC voltmeter in a previous job that
> could be where I learned that.
> 73  Clete
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>



From joeconnor53 at yahoo.com  Thu Oct  6 11:32:19 2011
From: joeconnor53 at yahoo.com (Joe Connor)
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2011 08:32:19 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] BC-314-D Capacitors
In-Reply-To: <0a4501cc8439$d4ea29e0$0201a8c0@Muttley>
References: <1636.12.6.201.216.1317834952.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
	<5C3E8984C57B487296CBA6523E44B944@DaddyPC>
	<58076.12.6.201.2.1317858426.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
	<4E8D95C4.9020304@pa.net> <0a4501cc8439$d4ea29e0$0201a8c0@Muttley>
Message-ID: <1317915139.20004.YahooMailNeo@web46313.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>

I'm fixing up a BC-314-D. What are the options for replacing the capacitors in the three?containers on the rear of the RF deck. Each container contains three 0.1 caps. Some of these caps are leaky so I can't just leave them be.
>?
>It looks like a tight squeeze to fit caps under the deck. I use the smaller yellow caps and it looks to be a little too tight. Orange drops would be impossible.?Maybe radials? Another option would be simply to remove each of the three containers and wire the caps in from the top but that wouldn't look very good.
>?
>Any suggestions?
>?
>As always, thanks for the help.
>?
>?
>????????????????????????????????? Joe Connor

From elespe at lisco.com  Thu Oct  6 12:26:04 2011
From: elespe at lisco.com (Paul Kraemer)
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2011 11:26:04 -0500
Subject: [Milsurplus] BC-314-D Capacitors
References: <1636.12.6.201.216.1317834952.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com><5C3E8984C57B487296CBA6523E44B944@DaddyPC><58076.12.6.201.2.1317858426.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com><4E8D95C4.9020304@pa.net>
	<0a4501cc8439$d4ea29e0$0201a8c0@Muttley>
	<1317915139.20004.YahooMailNeo@web46313.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <6906A25664CE409F982DA7B690C84125@ENGR2>

I have "un-canned" these type and replaced innards with new caps, then 
re-assemble
Takes a big soldering iron though
Paul K0UYA
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Joe Connor" <joeconnor53 at yahoo.com>
To: <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2011 10:32 AM
Subject: [Milsurplus] BC-314-D Capacitors


I'm fixing up a BC-314-D. What are the options for replacing the capacitors 
in the three containers on the rear of the RF deck. Each container contains 
three 0.1 caps. Some of these caps are leaky so I can't just leave them be.
>
>It looks like a tight squeeze to fit caps under the deck. I use the smaller 
>yellow caps and it looks to be a little too tight. Orange drops would be 
>impossible. Maybe radials? Another option would be simply to remove each of 
>the three containers and wire the caps in from the top but that wouldn't 
>look very good.
>
>Any suggestions?
>
>As always, thanks for the help.
>
>
> Joe Connor
______________________________________________________________
Milsurplus mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html 


From WA5CAB at cs.com  Thu Oct  6 12:52:48 2011
From: WA5CAB at cs.com (WA5CAB at cs.com)
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2011 12:52:48 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] BC-314-D Capacitors
Message-ID: <4aa93.3125a584.3bbf36e0@cs.com>

Joe,

The triple rectangular canned capacitors are 0.05uf, not 0.1.  Use 0.047's. 
 And there are five of them, not three.  If most of the ones in the three 
units across the rear are leaky, odds are high that the other two are, as 
well.  The best solution is to remove the five cans and rebuild them.  The 
second best is to remove the five cans and replace with terminal boards whose 
mounting holes more or less match those of the original cans.  If you want 
suggestions on how to rebuild the cans, let me know.  The yellow axial lead 
metalized polyester caps that Fair sells work well (available many places I'm 
sure, but the form factor works pretty well in a number of sets so I bought 
an assortment a while back).

In a message dated 10/06/2011 10:34:25 AM Central Daylight Time, 
joeconnor53 at yahoo.com writes: 
> I'm fixing up a BC-314-D. What are the options for replacing the 
> capacitors in the three containers on the rear of the RF deck. Each container 
> contains three 0.1 caps. Some of these caps are leaky so I can't just leave them 
> be.
> > 
> >It looks like a tight squeeze to fit caps under the deck. I use the 
> smaller yellow caps and it looks to be a little too tight. Orange drops would be 
> impossible. Maybe radials? Another option would be simply to remove each 
> of the three containers and wire the caps in from the top but that wouldn't 
> look very good.
> > 
> >Any suggestions?
> > 
> >As always, thanks for the help.
> > 
> > 
> >                                  Joe Connor

Robert Downs - Houston
wa5cab dot com (Web Store)
MVPA 9480

From dickw1ksz at gmail.com  Thu Oct  6 12:56:04 2011
From: dickw1ksz at gmail.com (Richard Solomon)
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2011 09:56:04 -0700
Subject: [Milsurplus] BC-314-D Capacitors
In-Reply-To: <4aa93.3125a584.3bbf36e0@cs.com>
References: <4aa93.3125a584.3bbf36e0@cs.com>
Message-ID: <CAC5FBO-DUqavxjA96Req7CcMu651=Ty5F_96oY7ZcetCrSk8bg@mail.gmail.com>

Is there any reason why Disc Ceramics would not work as well ??

73, Dick, W1KSZ

On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 9:52 AM, <WA5CAB at cs.com> wrote:

> Joe,
>
> The triple rectangular canned capacitors are 0.05uf, not 0.1.  Use 0.047's.
>  And there are five of them, not three.  If most of the ones in the three
> units across the rear are leaky, odds are high that the other two are, as
> well.  The best solution is to remove the five cans and rebuild them.  The
> second best is to remove the five cans and replace with terminal boards
> whose
> mounting holes more or less match those of the original cans.  If you want
> suggestions on how to rebuild the cans, let me know.  The yellow axial lead
> metalized polyester caps that Fair sells work well (available many places
> I'm
> sure, but the form factor works pretty well in a number of sets so I bought
> an assortment a while back).
>
> In a message dated 10/06/2011 10:34:25 AM Central Daylight Time,
> joeconnor53 at yahoo.com writes:
> > I'm fixing up a BC-314-D. What are the options for replacing the
> > capacitors in the three containers on the rear of the RF deck. Each
> container
> > contains three 0.1 caps. Some of these caps are leaky so I can't just
> leave them
> > be.
> > >
> > >It looks like a tight squeeze to fit caps under the deck. I use the
> > smaller yellow caps and it looks to be a little too tight. Orange drops
> would be
> > impossible. Maybe radials? Another option would be simply to remove each
> > of the three containers and wire the caps in from the top but that
> wouldn't
> > look very good.
> > >
> > >Any suggestions?
> > >
> > >As always, thanks for the help.
> > >
> > >
> > >                                  Joe Connor
>
> Robert Downs - Houston
> wa5cab dot com (Web Store)
> MVPA 9480
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>

From WA5CAB at cs.com  Thu Oct  6 13:05:02 2011
From: WA5CAB at cs.com (WA5CAB at cs.com)
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2011 13:05:02 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] BC-314-D Capacitors
Message-ID: <4b31a.4dd453ca.3bbf39be@cs.com>

Dick,

If you are using the terminal strip method, probably not.  If you are 
rebuilding the cans, yes.  The radial lead types just don't fit well in the can.  
The originals that are in there are axial lead tubulars.  The yellow 630V 
units are about the same case length but smaller diameter and drop in quite 
nicely.  Easier to hold in place while you wrap a lead around the terminal on 
the bottom of the can.  And much easier to neatly parallel the ground side 
leads.  When you're done, they look pretty much like the original.  Of 
course, once you put the cap back on the can, who can tell?  :-)

In a message dated 10/06/2011 11:56:11 AM Central Daylight Time, 
dickw1ksz at gmail.com writes: 
> Is there any reason why Disc Ceramics would not work as well ??
> 
> 73, Dick, W1KSZ
> 
> On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 9:52 AM, <WA5CAB at cs.com> wrote:
> 
> >Joe,
> >
> >The triple rectangular canned capacitors are 0.05uf, not 0.1.  Use 
> 0.047's.
> >  And there are five of them, not three.  If most of the ones in the 
> three
> >units across the rear are leaky, odds are high that the other two are, as
> >well.  The best solution is to remove the five cans and rebuild them.  
> The
> >second best is to remove the five cans and replace with terminal boards
> >whose
> >mounting holes more or less match those of the original cans.  If you 
> want
> >suggestions on how to rebuild the cans, let me know.  The yellow axial 
> lead
> >metalized polyester caps that Fair sells work well (available many places
> >I'm
> >sure, but the form factor works pretty well in a number of sets so I 
> bought
> >an assortment a while back).
> >
> >In a message dated 10/06/2011 10:34:25 AM Central Daylight Time,
> >joeconnor53 at yahoo.com writes:
> >>I'm fixing up a BC-314-D. What are the options for replacing the
> >>capacitors in the three containers on the rear of the RF deck. Each
> >container
> >>contains three 0.1 caps. Some of these caps are leaky so I can't just
> >leave them
> >>be.
> >>>
> >>>It looks like a tight squeeze to fit caps under the deck. I use the
> >>smaller yellow caps and it looks to be a little too tight. Orange drops
> >would be
> >>impossible. Maybe radials? Another option would be simply to remove each
> >>of the three containers and wire the caps in from the top but that
> >wouldn't
> >>look very good.
> >>>
> >>>Any suggestions?
> >>>
> >>>As always, thanks for the help.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>                                  Joe Connor
> >
> 

Robert & Susan Downs - Houston
wa5cab dot com (Web Store)
MVPA 9480

From WA5CAB at cs.com  Thu Oct  6 14:19:56 2011
From: WA5CAB at cs.com (WA5CAB at cs.com)
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2011 14:19:56 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] Correction Re:  BC-314-D Capacitors
Message-ID: <4e4ab.553c9411.3bbf4b4c@cs.com>

In the BC-314-(*) and BC-344-(*), the capacitors in question are in fact 
triple 0.1 uf.  When I went to check facts, I must have moved the mouse 
slightly when I opened the Repair Manual file and opened the wrong one (the two 
manual numbers are one digit apart).

In a message dated 10/06/2011 12:06:41 PM Central Daylight Time, 
joeconnor53 at yahoo.com writes: 
> From: "WA5CAB at cs.com" <WA5CAB at cs.com>
> To: joeconnor53 at yahoo.com; milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
> Sent: Thursday, October 6, 2011 12:52 PM
> Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] BC-314-D Capacitors
> 
> Joe,
> 
> The triple rectangular canned capacitors are 0.05uf, not 0.1.  Use 
> 0.047's.  And there are five of them, not three.  If most of the ones in the three 
> units across the rear are leaky, odds are high that the other two are, as 
> well.  The best solution is to remove the five cans and rebuild them.  The 
> second best is to remove the five cans and replace with terminal boards 
> whose mounting holes more or less match those of the original cans.  If you 
> want suggestions on how to rebuild the cans, let me know.  The yellow axial 
> lead metalized polyester caps that Fair sells work well (available many 
> places I'm sure, but the form factor works pretty well in a number of sets so I 
> bought an assortment a while back).
> 
> In a message dated 10/06/2011 10:34:25 AM Central Daylight Time, 
> joeconnor53 at yahoo.com writes: 
> >> I'm fixing up a BC-314-D. What are the options for replacing the 
>> capacitors in the three containers on the rear of the RF deck. Each container 
>> contains three 0.1 caps. Some of these caps are leaky so I can't just leave 
>> them be.
>> >
>> >It looks like a tight squeeze to fit caps under the deck. I use the 
>> smaller yellow caps and it looks to be a little too tight. Orange drops would 
>> be impossible. Maybe radials? Another option would be simply to remove 
>> each of the three containers and wire the caps in from the top but that 
>> wouldn't look very good.
>> >
>> >Any suggestions?
>> >
>> >As always, thanks for the help.
>> 
> 
> 

Robert Downs - Houston
wa5cab dot com (Web Store)
MVPA 9480

From jfor at quikus.com  Thu Oct  6 14:27:18 2011
From: jfor at quikus.com (J. Forster)
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2011 11:27:18 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] SCR-625-C Mine Detector Manual
In-Reply-To: <4e4ab.553c9411.3bbf4b4c@cs.com>
References: <4e4ab.553c9411.3bbf4b4c@cs.com>
Message-ID: <1740.12.6.201.237.1317925638.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>

A friend is interested in this unit. Does anybody have the manual or just
a schematic?

Best,

-John

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


From WA5CAB at cs.com  Thu Oct  6 16:15:53 2011
From: WA5CAB at cs.com (WA5CAB at cs.com)
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2011 16:15:53 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] SCR-625-C Mine Detector Manual
Message-ID: <533b8.2ccc80de.3bbf6679@cs.com>

I have a reprint of the Repair Manual available, $12.50 plus postage.

In a message dated 10/06/2011 13:29:25 PM Central Daylight Time, 
jfor at quikus.com writes: 
> A friend is interested in this unit. Does anybody have the manual or just
> a schematic?
> 
> Best,
> 
> -John
> 

Robert Downs - Houston
wa5cab dot com (Web Store)
MVPA 9480

From farmer.rob.flory at gmail.com  Thu Oct  6 19:17:30 2011
From: farmer.rob.flory at gmail.com (Rob Flory)
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2011 19:17:30 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] Boonton gear
Message-ID: <CAFcNxxU=Ynsij6xV1_sjhU645+jvVZHvJOuoonY5VDYmQ6HsGA@mail.gmail.com>

My Measurements Model 59 grid dip oscillator is one of my most useful pieces
of WWII-era test equipment.  I would never have been able to tune that TBS
to 50Mc (horrors ! )  without it.

My Measurements Model 80 HF/VHF signal generator is also exceptionally
useful, and bears a USN orange anchor.  Does a great job of testing
sensitivity on ARC-1 and other VHF sets.

NJ, where the electronics industry was born and raised.  Anyone who says
otherwise better be able to back it up with their knuckles.

There, I posted something on milsurplus about Boonton.

RF

From jfor at quikus.com  Thu Oct  6 19:26:46 2011
From: jfor at quikus.com (J. Forster)
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2011 16:26:46 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] Anyone Near Chester, NJ?
In-Reply-To: <CAFcNxxU=Ynsij6xV1_sjhU645+jvVZHvJOuoonY5VDYmQ6HsGA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAFcNxxU=Ynsij6xV1_sjhU645+jvVZHvJOuoonY5VDYmQ6HsGA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <2686.12.6.201.185.1317943606.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>

If anyone is near Chester, NJ, and is driving to the Boston area in the
next few months, or NEAR-fest or MIT Fleas next weekend , please drop me a
note off-list.

There is an instrument there I'd like to have, but shipping would be quite
expensive.

If you are, please drop me a note off-list.

Thanks,

-John

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


From n4qnx at yahoo.com  Thu Oct  6 19:38:40 2011
From: n4qnx at yahoo.com (DeWitt Clay)
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2011 16:38:40 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] Testing 1625s
In-Reply-To: <2DE6F17E951D824AAE8B8D0BF7579D810DF88F448E@MBX.salisbury.edu>
References: <3004.12.6.201.88.1317783448.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
	<CAEz8jcTqzTE7t6Zvj3gdMCit+GV4p2CtVpE3Q5=dt07dcTKE6g@mail.gmail.com>
	<2DE6F17E951D824AAE8B8D0BF7579D810DF88F448E@MBX.salisbury.edu>
Message-ID: <1317944320.91535.YahooMailNeo@web84514.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>

I have found a Heathkit DX-100 transmitter modulator section a good place to test a box of unknown 1625 tubes. Various problems will show up quickly in tubes that can't stand high voltage in the range of 700 volts. I also made an adaptor to test 1625 and 837 tubes in Collins 32V transmitters. Recommend?DX-100s require a (.01uF) cap across the mod xfmr secondary or surges will take out one of the 1625s. 
73, DeWitt? N4QNX

From: Ray Fantini <RAFANTINI at salisbury.edu>
To: Ian Wilson <ianmwilson73 at gmail.com>
Cc: "milsurplus at mailman.qth.net" <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Wednesday, October 5, 2011 9:11 AM
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] Testing 1625s

Other than using a power tube in its intended circuit and comparing results between a known good tube and unknown one all other test are questionable at best. Mutual conductance tube testers are better than the Emission types that are almost useless but with power tubes there is no substitute for running it under power. I have used TV-7 that for some reason has the reputation for being the greatest tube tester ever, have a TV-10 in the shop now that I use for checking and matching tubes and had some experience with the TV-2 maybe the most complex and confusing tube tester built but today my favorite tube tester is a archaic Weston OQ-3 or civilian model 788. The question is other than if you just want to check tubes and put them up on the shelf why don't you just go ahead and try them in what you're going to use them in and see if they work or not?

From smithab11 at comcast.net  Thu Oct  6 21:04:39 2011
From: smithab11 at comcast.net (B Smith)
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2011 21:04:39 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] Boonton gear
In-Reply-To: <CAFcNxxU=Ynsij6xV1_sjhU645+jvVZHvJOuoonY5VDYmQ6HsGA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAFcNxxU=Ynsij6xV1_sjhU645+jvVZHvJOuoonY5VDYmQ6HsGA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <D65D630519F1489280B32B20B9A90F3B@Dell560>

They are still in NJ
http://www.boonton.com/products

Z

--------------------------------------------------
From: "Rob Flory" <farmer.rob.flory at gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2011 7:17 PM
To: "milsurplus" <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
Subject: [Milsurplus] Boonton gear

My Measurements Model 59 grid dip oscillator is one of my most useful 
pieces
of WWII-era test equipment.  I would never have been able to tune that 
TBS
to 50Mc (horrors ! )  without it.

My Measurements Model 80 HF/VHF signal generator is also exceptionally
useful, and bears a USN orange anchor.  Does a great job of testing
sensitivity on ARC-1 and other VHF sets.

NJ, where the electronics industry was born and raised.  Anyone who 
says
otherwise better be able to back it up with their knuckles.

There, I posted something on milsurplus about Boonton.

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

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html 


From robert.h.goff at gmail.com  Thu Oct  6 23:01:26 2011
From: robert.h.goff at gmail.com (Robert Goff)
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2011 20:01:26 -0700
Subject: [Milsurplus] Wanted: PP-308 Power supply p/o GRR-5
Message-ID: <CAF6Vb549CJBZ_XrYEnxLzB5NG7VyayeaK1ROvWMxSmW7C2=H_g@mail.gmail.com>

I picked up a GRR-5 recently with a good RF section but the power
supply has been completely cannibalized- wiring harness and all.

Anybody got a good power supply that you'd be willing to part with?

Thanks and 73,
Robert
W7MKA

From bcarling at cfl.rr.com  Fri Oct  7 05:31:31 2011
From: bcarling at cfl.rr.com (Bry Carling)
Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2011 05:31:31 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] Testing 1625s
In-Reply-To: <1317944320.91535.YahooMailNeo@web84514.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
References: <3004.12.6.201.88.1317783448.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>,
	<2DE6F17E951D824AAE8B8D0BF7579D810DF88F448E@MBX.salisbury.edu>,
	<1317944320.91535.YahooMailNeo@web84514.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <4E8EC6F3.32271.1D842D@bcarling.cfl.rr.com>

Interesting - when you say that they got "taken out" - was that an arc-over that destroyed the 
tube(s) ?

73, de AF4K, Bry

On 6 Oct 2011 at 16:38, DeWitt Clay wrote:

> I have found a Heathkit DX-100 transmitter modulator section a good
> place
> to test a box of unknown 1625 tubes. Various problems will show up
> quickly
> in tubes that can't stand high voltage in the range of 700 volts. I
> also
> made an adaptor to test 1625 and 837 tubes in Collins 32V
> transmitters.
> Recommend?DX-100s require a (.01uF) cap across the mod xfmr
> secondary or
> surges will take out one of the 1625s. 
> 73, DeWitt? N4QNX



From wb8ybf at gmail.com  Fri Oct  7 08:09:57 2011
From: wb8ybf at gmail.com (Patrick Marineau)
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2011 08:09:57 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] f.s. key for No. 48 wireless
Message-ID: <CAPBj24Dk_F9+DTyHU8Cxn_vrMDQW=WD=z-Bm-CaMdvEfzJkRLw@mail.gmail.com>

For Sale:  Key for No. 48 Wireless Set.  Flame proof key - J5 type.
New still in 1945 military sealed packing.  $45 + 10.95 Priority flat
rate shipping.  No PayPal.
Thanks,
Pat K9HF

From jphutch60bj at gmail.com  Fri Oct  7 08:36:57 2011
From: jphutch60bj at gmail.com (John Hutchins)
Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2011 07:36:57 -0500
Subject: [Milsurplus] BC-314-D Capacitors
In-Reply-To: <1317915139.20004.YahooMailNeo@web46313.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
References: <1636.12.6.201.216.1317834952.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
	<5C3E8984C57B487296CBA6523E44B944@DaddyPC>
	<58076.12.6.201.2.1317858426.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
	<4E8D95C4.9020304@pa.net> <0a4501cc8439$d4ea29e0$0201a8c0@Muttley>
	<1317915139.20004.YahooMailNeo@web46313.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <4E8EF269.5040809@gmail.com>

Joe -
new .1 uf will fit into the old cans! unsolder the cans ans stuff with 
smaller replacements.  I used a turkey pan saved from thanksgiving 
coking to catch all the oil and took it to the hazardous materials dump 
site.  In the end Looks good.
I had to drill  2 small holes in the side of a few of the cans to attach 
the new capacitor wires to the can to ground, since the old attachment 
location was to far away on the bottom lid.  You wil screw up the first 
can getting the extraction technique down.
Hutch

On 10/6/2011 10:32 AM, Joe Connor wrote:
> I'm fixing up a BC-314-D. What are the options for replacing the capacitors in the three containers on the rear of the RF deck. Each container contains three 0.1 caps. Some of these caps are leaky so I can't just leave them be.
>>   
>> It looks like a tight squeeze to fit caps under the deck. I use the smaller yellow caps and it looks to be a little too tight. Orange drops would be impossible. Maybe radials? Another option would be simply to remove each of the three containers and wire the caps in from the top but that wouldn't look very good.
>>   
>> Any suggestions?
>>   
>> As always, thanks for the help.
>>   
>>   
>>                                    Joe Connor
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>


From RAFANTINI at salisbury.edu  Fri Oct  7 09:18:47 2011
From: RAFANTINI at salisbury.edu (Ray Fantini)
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2011 09:18:47 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] Boonton gear
In-Reply-To: <CAFcNxxU=Ynsij6xV1_sjhU645+jvVZHvJOuoonY5VDYmQ6HsGA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAFcNxxU=Ynsij6xV1_sjhU645+jvVZHvJOuoonY5VDYmQ6HsGA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <2DE6F17E951D824AAE8B8D0BF7579D810DF88F4AE6@MBX.salisbury.edu>

I always thought of Boonton as kind of a knock off of General Radio and Hewlett Packard, epically in the power meter market. Camden New Jersey and the Philadelphia aria were at one time the "silicon valley" of technology back when companies like RCA ruled the technical world just look at all the radio equipment that was manufactured there during the second world war, but have to wonder what happened in the late fifties and sixties to companies like RCA that were thru by the seventies and eighties, at least in New Jersey. Back in the eighties I worked for Hitachi up in the north east of Philadelphia and remember then that lots of the aria across the river and epically Camden NJ was a "no go " zone and anywhere around the RCA plants was never to be entered. New Jersey has a great technical history going back to Edison's labs at the turn of the twentieth century but what the hell happened to Camden?
Ray F

-----Original Message-----
From: milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net [mailto:milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Rob Flory
Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2011 7:18 PM
To: milsurplus
Subject: [Milsurplus] Boonton gear

My Measurements Model 59 grid dip oscillator is one of my most useful pieces
of WWII-era test equipment.  I would never have been able to tune that TBS
to 50Mc (horrors ! )  without it.

My Measurements Model 80 HF/VHF signal generator is also exceptionally
useful, and bears a USN orange anchor.  Does a great job of testing
sensitivity on ARC-1 and other VHF sets.

NJ, where the electronics industry was born and raised.  Anyone who says
otherwise better be able to back it up with their knuckles.

There, I posted something on milsurplus about Boonton.

RF

From WA5CAB at cs.com  Fri Oct  7 11:44:51 2011
From: WA5CAB at cs.com (WA5CAB at cs.com)
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2011 11:44:51 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] BC-314-D Capacitors
Message-ID: <38f07.71f417dc.3bc07873@cs.com>

All of the ones that I've done had the ground lead folded over the top lip 
of the can.  Some had a small notch (looked like they used something similar 
to an Adele Nibbler).  One or two didn't appear to even have that.

In a message dated 10/07/2011 07:37:06 AM Central Daylight Time, 
jphutch60bj at gmail.com writes: 
> Joe -
> new .1 uf will fit into the old cans! unsolder the cans ans stuff with 
> smaller replacements.  I used a turkey pan saved from thanksgiving 
> coking to catch all the oil and took it to the hazardous materials dump 
> site.  In the end Looks good.
> I had to drill  2 small holes in the side of a few of the cans to attach 
> the new capacitor wires to the can to ground, since the old attachment 
> location was to far away on the bottom lid.  You wil screw up the first 
> can getting the extraction technique down.
> Hutch
> 

Robert Downs - Houston
wa5cab dot com (Web Store)
MVPA 9480

From al at ar88.net  Fri Oct  7 12:24:01 2011
From: al at ar88.net (Al Klase)
Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2011 12:24:01 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] BC-314-D Capacitors
In-Reply-To: <38f07.71f417dc.3bc07873@cs.com>
References: <38f07.71f417dc.3bc07873@cs.com>
Message-ID: <4E8F27A1.3030505@ar88.net>

All of this is great, but the real challenge is the "Micamolds" /INSIDE/ 
the front-end modules.  It's essential they be replaced.

Have fun,
Al

On 10/7/2011 11:44 AM, WA5CAB at cs.com wrote:
> All of the ones that I've done had the ground lead folded over the top lip
> of the can.  Some had a small notch (looked like they used something similar
> to an Adele Nibbler).  One or two didn't appear to even have that.
>
> In a message dated 10/07/2011 07:37:06 AM Central Daylight Time,
> jphutch60bj at gmail.com writes:
>> Joe -
>> new .1 uf will fit into the old cans! unsolder the cans ans stuff with
>> smaller replacements.  I used a turkey pan saved from thanksgiving
>> coking to catch all the oil and took it to the hazardous materials dump
>> site.  In the end Looks good.
>> I had to drill  2 small holes in the side of a few of the cans to attach
>> the new capacitor wires to the can to ground, since the old attachment
>> location was to far away on the bottom lid.  You wil screw up the first
>> can getting the extraction technique down.
>> Hutch
>>
> Robert Downs - Houston
> wa5cab dot com (Web Store)
> MVPA 9480
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

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


From al at ar88.net  Fri Oct  7 12:32:54 2011
From: al at ar88.net (Al Klase)
Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2011 12:32:54 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] Boonton gear
In-Reply-To: <2DE6F17E951D824AAE8B8D0BF7579D810DF88F4AE6@MBX.salisbury.edu>
References: <CAFcNxxU=Ynsij6xV1_sjhU645+jvVZHvJOuoonY5VDYmQ6HsGA@mail.gmail.com>
	<2DE6F17E951D824AAE8B8D0BF7579D810DF88F4AE6@MBX.salisbury.edu>
Message-ID: <4E8F29B6.1000801@ar88.net>

On 10/7/2011 9:18 AM, Ray Fantini wrote:
> .....New Jersey has a great technical history going back to Edison's labs at the turn of the twentieth century....
>
And Boonton is a fascinating part of that story.  Here's a brief 
outline.  Please help fill this in.

    The Boonton Iron Works were founded about 1770 by Samuel Ogden who,
    with others in his family, purchased a 6-acre (24,000 m2) tract
    along the Rockaway
    River.(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boonton,_New_Jersey)

    Loanda Hard Rubber Company (1891)
    -Bakelite moldings (1906)
                 -Boonton Ware dinnerware

      Radio Frequency Laboratories (1922)

      Aircraft Radio Corporation (1927)
    -Wholly-owned subsidiary of RFL (http://scr-274-n.info/history.html)

      Boonton Radio Company (1934) see Wiki

      Ferris Instruments Company

      Measurements Corporation (1939)
    (http://www.componentscorp.com/pdf/jerry-minter.pdf)

      Ballantine Laboratories

      Quan-Tech (?)

Whom did I miss?

This thread started with John Forster announcing the establishment of 
the Yahoo Boonton Group.
Check it out:  http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/Boonton/

Regards,
Al

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


From wh7hg.hi at gmail.com  Fri Oct  7 14:02:20 2011
From: wh7hg.hi at gmail.com (Kludge)
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2011 08:02:20 -1000
Subject: [Milsurplus] Boonton gear
In-Reply-To: <4E8F29B6.1000801@ar88.net>
References: <CAFcNxxU=Ynsij6xV1_sjhU645+jvVZHvJOuoonY5VDYmQ6HsGA@mail.gmail.com><2DE6F17E951D824AAE8B8D0BF7579D810DF88F4AE6@MBX.salisbury.edu>
	<4E8F29B6.1000801@ar88.net>
Message-ID: <3B44648CD87C4C92BC2C29AF63EDFFBF@Kongo>

-----Original Message-----
From: milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net
[mailto:milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Al Klase 
     Radio Frequency Laboratories (1922)
      Aircraft Radio Corporation (1927)
    -Wholly-owned subsidiary of RFL (http://scr-274-n.info/history.html)

RFL was formed by one of the Bakelite makers (Loanda Hard Rubber Company?)
to find uses for it in radio.  They designed the radios, Stromberg-Carlson
built them and ARC installed and maintained them.  Or that's how it started.
ARC took over the design function and eventually manufacturing.  In 1934,
there was a major shakeup and ARC was the top dawg with RFL a wholly owned
subsidiary along with a few others.  They also became independent of the
Bakelite company that originally formed RFL although continued to use it
until the end of WW II.  

RFL instruments were used extensively by ARC throughout the design, testing
and manufacturing phases, a relationship that continued even after RFL
became independent of ARC at least to the Cessna era.  

Trivial side note: One of the major trouble spots with ARC equipment was the
connectors.  The phenolic insulation used in it would absorb moisture and
become a general nuisance as a result.  While nothing was done about this
before or during WW II, the postwar Type 12 equipment used ceramic
insulation in the connectors and gold plated contacts which were significant
improvements.

Best regards,
 
Michael, WH7HG ex-K3MXO, ex-KN3MXO, WPE3ARS, BL01xh ex-Mensa A&P PP BGI 
I am me.  I?m the only one who?s qualified.
http://www.nationalmssociety.org/chapters/NTH/index.aspx
http://wh7hg.blogspot.com/
http://kludges-other-blog.blogspot.com
Hiki N?! 


From whertel at cox.net  Fri Oct  7 14:02:39 2011
From: whertel at cox.net (Wayne Hertel)
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2011 13:02:39 -0500
Subject: [Milsurplus] Boonton gear
References: <CAFcNxxU=Ynsij6xV1_sjhU645+jvVZHvJOuoonY5VDYmQ6HsGA@mail.gmail.com><2DE6F17E951D824AAE8B8D0BF7579D810DF88F4AE6@MBX.salisbury.edu>
	<4E8F29B6.1000801@ar88.net>
Message-ID: <09C12F2D23444E4EB40B6C6C8290EBC1@Gateway22g>

Al (etal),
How about the 159 Series made by Edison Electronics, a Division of 
McGraw-Edison Company Manchester NH. The 159 Series is a slightly more 
modern, physically appearing, and electronically, version of the 59 Series 
by Measurements Corp. There is a definite strong family resemblance.
Wayne
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Al Klase" <al at ar88.net>
To: <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Friday, October 07, 2011 11:32 AM
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] Boonton gear


> On 10/7/2011 9:18 AM, Ray Fantini wrote:
>> .....New Jersey has a great technical history going back to Edison's labs 
>> at the turn of the twentieth century....
>>
> And Boonton is a fascinating part of that story.  Here's a brief
> outline.  Please help fill this in.
>
>    The Boonton Iron Works were founded about 1770 by Samuel Ogden who,
>    with others in his family, purchased a 6-acre (24,000 m2) tract
>    along the Rockaway
>    River.(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boonton,_New_Jersey)
>
>    Loanda Hard Rubber Company (1891)
>    -Bakelite moldings (1906)
>                 -Boonton Ware dinnerware
>
>      Radio Frequency Laboratories (1922)
>
>      Aircraft Radio Corporation (1927)
>    -Wholly-owned subsidiary of RFL (http://scr-274-n.info/history.html)
>
>      Boonton Radio Company (1934) see Wiki
>
>      Ferris Instruments Company
>
>      Measurements Corporation (1939)
>    (http://www.componentscorp.com/pdf/jerry-minter.pdf)
>
>      Ballantine Laboratories
>
>      Quan-Tech (?)
>
> Whom did I miss?
>
> This thread started with John Forster announcing the establishment of
> the Yahoo Boonton Group.
> Check it out:  http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/Boonton/
>
> Regards,
> Al
>
> -- 
> Al Klase - N3FRQ
> Jersey City, NJ
> http://www.skywaves.ar88.net/
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> 



From RAFANTINI at salisbury.edu  Fri Oct  7 14:15:09 2011
From: RAFANTINI at salisbury.edu (Ray Fantini)
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2011 14:15:09 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] Boonton gear
In-Reply-To: <4E8F29B6.1000801@ar88.net>
References: <CAFcNxxU=Ynsij6xV1_sjhU645+jvVZHvJOuoonY5VDYmQ6HsGA@mail.gmail.com>
	<2DE6F17E951D824AAE8B8D0BF7579D810DF88F4AE6@MBX.salisbury.edu>
	<4E8F29B6.1000801@ar88.net>
Message-ID: <2DE6F17E951D824AAE8B8D0BF7579D810DF89D3B26@MBX.salisbury.edu>

Looks like I won't be doing the inaugural email on the Boonton reflector.

Failure on my part to do proper research, according to history on their web site:
http://boonton.com/about
They were started in 1947. Wiki says they were founded in 1934 by William D. Laughlin in Boonton NJ and acquired by Hewlett Packard in 1959. 
Must be two different companies? 
The Most significant development of the company founded in 1934 according to HP was there "Q" meter. Listed on the HP Virtual Museum under "Boonton type 160 Q meter":
http://www.hp.com/hpinfo/abouthp/histnfacts/museum/earlyinstruments/0010/
The description on their web page goes on to say" Boonton added to the HP family an old and well established company with an excellent reputation in a field closely related to many HP products" 
It s purely antidotal and subjective comment by me, looking at the Boonton equipment I have seen at Hamfest and online sales it all appears to be much like General Radio or HP in shape, size and function. Have seen and worked with the HP Q meters but have never owned or used a Boonton instrument, but maybe I have lead a sheltered life?

Ray F

From raydio862 at verizon.net  Fri Oct  7 14:37:02 2011
From: raydio862 at verizon.net (Ray Chase)
Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2011 14:37:02 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] Boonton gear
References: <CAFcNxxU=Ynsij6xV1_sjhU645+jvVZHvJOuoonY5VDYmQ6HsGA@mail.gmail.com>
	<2DE6F17E951D824AAE8B8D0BF7579D810DF88F4AE6@MBX.salisbury.edu>
	<4E8F29B6.1000801@ar88.net>
Message-ID: <0bc601cc8520$1ba64170$0201a8c0@Muttley>

Aircraft Radio split off from RFL when RFL went belly up in the depression. 
Later became Aircraft Radio & Control, when bought by Cessna, (managed to 
keep the ARC logo).
Also there was a Boonton Electronics as well as Boonton Radio.  Also 
Johanson Capacitor and Marotta Scientific and maybe one or two I have 
forgotten, got to check my files.
Ray

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Al Klase" <al at ar88.net>
To: <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Friday, October 07, 2011 12:32 PM
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] Boonton gear


> On 10/7/2011 9:18 AM, Ray Fantini wrote:
>> .....New Jersey has a great technical history going back to Edison's labs 
>> at the turn of the twentieth century....
>>
> And Boonton is a fascinating part of that story.  Here's a brief
> outline.  Please help fill this in.
>
>    The Boonton Iron Works were founded about 1770 by Samuel Ogden who,
>    with others in his family, purchased a 6-acre (24,000 m2) tract
>    along the Rockaway
>    River.(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boonton,_New_Jersey)
>
>    Loanda Hard Rubber Company (1891)
>    -Bakelite moldings (1906)
>                 -Boonton Ware dinnerware
>
>      Radio Frequency Laboratories (1922)
>
>      Aircraft Radio Corporation (1927)
>    -Wholly-owned subsidiary of RFL (http://scr-274-n.info/history.html)
>
>      Boonton Radio Company (1934) see Wiki
>
>      Ferris Instruments Company
>
>      Measurements Corporation (1939)
>    (http://www.componentscorp.com/pdf/jerry-minter.pdf)
>
>      Ballantine Laboratories
>
>      Quan-Tech (?)
>
> Whom did I miss?
>
> This thread started with John Forster announcing the establishment of
> the Yahoo Boonton Group.
> Check it out:  http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/Boonton/
>
> Regards,
> Al
>
> -- 
> Al Klase - N3FRQ
> Jersey City, NJ
> http://www.skywaves.ar88.net/
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html 


From wh7hg.hi at gmail.com  Fri Oct  7 15:38:44 2011
From: wh7hg.hi at gmail.com (Kludge)
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2011 09:38:44 -1000
Subject: [Milsurplus] Boonton gear
In-Reply-To: <0bc601cc8520$1ba64170$0201a8c0@Muttley>
References: <CAFcNxxU=Ynsij6xV1_sjhU645+jvVZHvJOuoonY5VDYmQ6HsGA@mail.gmail.com><2DE6F17E951D824AAE8B8D0BF7579D810DF88F4AE6@MBX.salisbury.edu><4E8F29B6.1000801@ar88.net>
	<0bc601cc8520$1ba64170$0201a8c0@Muttley>
Message-ID: <758B9E56A84E4328A30F4DB830416776@Kongo>

-----Original Message-----
From: milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net
[mailto:milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Ray Chase
> Aircraft Radio split off from RFL when RFL went belly up in the
depression. 

RFL became a subsidiary of ARC so it may be that ARC's financial position
was better at the time.  I have in storage an organizational chart for ARC
and its subsidiaries after the reorganization which I need to get and scan
for the website.  It's rather interesting - or it is to me.

> Later became Aircraft Radio & Control, when bought by Cessna, (managed to 
> keep the ARC logo).

Cessna's interest in ARC started in 1955 when they bought nearly half the
stock in the company which, along with the military contracts for the Type
12 equipment, helped keep the company afloat.  They bought the rest of the
stock in 1959 but didn't change the name until after the Boonton facilities
were closed in 1970.  By that time, the last of the Type 12 equipment had
ceased to be produced and at least the Series 300 & Series 500 equipment was
in production.  (The AN/ARC-39 was also produced during the 60s which was
definitely Cessna era although its Type K heritage is pretty obvious.)  The
quality of the new equipment seems to be somewhat controversial so I'm not
going to go into it here.

There was also a system called the AN/ARN-80 which apparently was Cessna's
sole contribution to military equipment but I have yet to find anything in
depth about it.  

Best regards,
 
Michael, WH7HG ex-K3MXO, ex-KN3MXO, WPE3ARS, BL01xh ex-Mensa A&P PP BGI 
I am me.  I?m the only one who?s qualified.
http://www.nationalmssociety.org/chapters/NTH/index.aspx
http://wh7hg.blogspot.com/
http://kludges-other-blog.blogspot.com
Hiki N?! 


From kk7iz at cox.net  Fri Oct  7 16:55:55 2011
From: kk7iz at cox.net (Lloyd Godsey)
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2011 13:55:55 -0700
Subject: [Milsurplus] Boonton gear
In-Reply-To: <758B9E56A84E4328A30F4DB830416776@Kongo>
References: <CAFcNxxU=Ynsij6xV1_sjhU645+jvVZHvJOuoonY5VDYmQ6HsGA@mail.gmail.com><2DE6F17E951D824AAE8B8D0BF7579D810DF88F4AE6@MBX.salisbury.edu><4E8F29B6.1000801@ar88.net><0bc601cc8520$1ba64170$0201a8c0@Muttley>
	<758B9E56A84E4328A30F4DB830416776@Kongo>
Message-ID: <B3A61370CC184F9A832FA2D3D0F53963@LloydPC>

Check this out

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v618/skyrider28/IMG_7567.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v618/skyrider28/IMG_7569.jpg

Thanx
Lloyd Godsey KK7IZ
kk7iz at cox.net
480-620-7145
http://www.lloydsdipsydumpster.com/
http://antiqueradioarchives.com/
Skype: lloyd.godsey


From n4qnx at yahoo.com  Fri Oct  7 17:16:53 2011
From: n4qnx at yahoo.com (DeWitt Clay)
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2011 14:16:53 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] Testing 1625s
In-Reply-To: <4E8EC6F3.32271.1D842D@bcarling.cfl.rr.com>
References: <3004.12.6.201.88.1317783448.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>,
	<2DE6F17E951D824AAE8B8D0BF7579D810DF88F448E@MBX.salisbury.edu>,
	<1317944320.91535.YahooMailNeo@web84514.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
	<4E8EC6F3.32271.1D842D@bcarling.cfl.rr.com>
Message-ID: <1318022213.67445.YahooMailNeo@web84511.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>

Not exactly. It would happen so fast that usually I?wouldn't?see any flash over. The cathode connection would open up acting like a fuse. I am referring to the thin metal ribbon that connects the actual cathode structure?to the dumet cathode lead wire coming thru the stem press. Sometimes however, a flash over and arc would?start at the?upper mica spacer between the anode plate and beam forming?plates and/or the cathode. Then some real fireworks would get going. 

In my DX-100 it was always the "back" 1625 that would go with out some cap across either the mod xfmr primary or secondary. Suggest .005 uF, .01 uF, or heatkit's original .02 uF value. I've been using .01 UF in a couple of DX-100 FB.
73, DeWitt? N4QNX


________________________________
From: Bry Carling <bcarling at cfl.rr.com>
To: Ray Fantini <RAFANTINI at salisbury.edu>; DeWitt Clay <n4qnx at yahoo.com>
Cc: milsurplus <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Friday, October 7, 2011 5:31 AM
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] Testing 1625s


Interesting - when you say that they got "taken out" - was that an arc-over that destroyed the tube(s) ?

73, de AF4K, Bry

On 6 Oct 2011 at 16:38, DeWitt Clay wrote:

> I have found a Heathkit DX-100 transmitter modulator section a good
> place
> to test a box of unknown 1625 tubes. Various problems will show up
> quickly
> in tubes that can't stand high voltage in the range of 700 volts. I
> also
> made an adaptor to test 1625 and 837 tubes in Collins 32V
> transmitters.
> Recommend?all DX-100s to?require a (.01uF) cap across the mod xfmr
> secondary or
> surges will take out one of the 1625s. 
> 73, DeWitt? N4QNX

From ramcam at magma.ca  Fri Oct  7 17:38:57 2011
From: ramcam at magma.ca (Ralph Cameron)
Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2011 17:38:57 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] RFL
Message-ID: <4E8F7171.5030402@magma.ca>

RFL Industries was still operating in 1969 out of Boonton N.J. and 
sprung from Radio Frequency Laboratories which was formed in 1922. I 
don't know what time period elapsed before RFL Industries was formed. At 
that time ( in 1969) RFL Inds. occupied 55,000 sq.ft. in Boonton and a 
smaller components division in Vermont.

The instrumentation and thermocouple division marketed an equipment 
family in continuous evolution and refinement for over 20 years. what 
did they make?

Magnet chargers and Treaters
Automagnetic test & measurement systems
Gaussmeters
portable magnetometers
meter calibrators
Proportional controllers
Temperature meters
Precision potentiometers

Their literature says, "since 1922: so when did they fold?

I sold many of their meter calibrators to the Can. military and Outboard 
Marine used their magnet chargers to magnetize the magneto for outboard 
motors.  Most chargers required sophisticated jigs .

Ralph
VE3BBM

-- 
Please remove all previous email addresses before forwarding any email. Doing so, decreases the message size,
transmission time, and limits any information that a 'spammer' may glean. Also, please consider using Blind Carbon
Copy (or BCC) to limit email address exposure. ~ Thanks
_____


From holden7471 at msn.com  Fri Oct  7 20:07:44 2011
From: holden7471 at msn.com (howard holden)
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2011 20:07:44 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] RFL
In-Reply-To: <4E8F7171.5030402@magma.ca>
References: <4E8F7171.5030402@magma.ca>
Message-ID: <BLU159-ds14234893C64F582BCE73E9C4FF0@phx.gbl>

RFL is now known as RFL Electronics, on Powerville Rd, Boonton. The no longer make the magnetic processing stuff. They are into more "modern" electronics. When I lived back east the company I worked for had some older large RFL magnet chargers and treaters, and we hadn't been able to get replacement parts from them for about 15 years. I knew a couple of people who worked there more recently, and they both had no idea of their RFL's ealier ventures.

I had applied for a job at ARC many years ago, say, 1973 or so, didn't get the job. At that time they had what could only be called a quaint campus. It looked like a large complex of camp buildings or bungalows tucked away in the woods of Boonton. Never knew what happened to them other than that they were no longer there as ARC.

Howie WB2AWQ
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Ralph Cameron<mailto:ramcam at magma.ca> 
  To: milsurplus at mailman.qth.net<mailto:milsurplus at mailman.qth.net> 
  Sent: Friday, October 07, 2011 5:38 PM
  Subject: [Milsurplus] RFL


  RFL Industries was still operating in 1969 out of Boonton N.J. and 
  sprung from Radio Frequency Laboratories which was formed in 1922. I 
  don't know what time period elapsed before RFL Industries was formed. At 
  that time ( in 1969) RFL Inds. occupied 55,000 sq.ft. in Boonton and a 
  smaller components division in Vermont.

  The instrumentation and thermocouple division marketed an equipment 
  family in continuous evolution and refinement for over 20 years. what 
  did they make?

  Magnet chargers and Treaters
  Automagnetic test & measurement systems
  Gaussmeters
  portable magnetometers
  meter calibrators
  Proportional controllers
  Temperature meters
  Precision potentiometers

  Their literature says, "since 1922: so when did they fold?

  I sold many of their meter calibrators to the Can. military and Outboard 
  Marine used their magnet chargers to magnetize the magneto for outboard 
  motors.  Most chargers required sophisticated jigs .

  Ralph
  VE3BBM

  -- 
  Please remove all previous email addresses before forwarding any email. Doing so, decreases the message size,
  transmission time, and limits any information that a 'spammer' may glean. Also, please consider using Blind Carbon
  Copy (or BCC) to limit email address exposure. ~ Thanks
  _____

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

  This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net<http://www.qsl.net/>
  Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html<http://www.qsl.net/donate.html>

From w7qho at aol.com  Fri Oct  7 21:00:53 2011
From: w7qho at aol.com (mac)
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2011 18:00:53 -0700
Subject: [Milsurplus] BC-314-D Capacitors
In-Reply-To: <4E8F27A1.3030505@ar88.net>
References: <38f07.71f417dc.3bc07873@cs.com> <4E8F27A1.3030505@ar88.net>
Message-ID: <8AB5A471-7684-4115-AA58-2D4DBD649E87@aol.com>

Al & all,

Fun indeed!  :^(    The coil boxes have to be removed and even then in  
a couple of cases I've had to resort to breaking  the hot lead off  
with a long pair of forceps leaving the old unit in place and then  
wiring the replacement into an electrically equivalent but reachable  
location.  Also had to remove the xtal filter assembly from the  
chassis to get at  the Micamold buried inside.  The BC-348 is MUCH  
easier to recap.  Been lucky with those small three-unit cans, though.

Dennis D.  W7QHO
Glendale, CA

*************


On Oct 7, 2011, at 9:24 AM, Al Klase wrote:

> All of this is great, but the real challenge is the "Micamolds" / 
> INSIDE/
> the front-end modules.  It's essential they be replaced.
>
> Have fun,
> Al


From al at ar88.net  Fri Oct  7 21:43:08 2011
From: al at ar88.net (Al Klase)
Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2011 21:43:08 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] RFL
In-Reply-To: <BLU159-ds14234893C64F582BCE73E9C4FF0@phx.gbl>
References: <4E8F7171.5030402@magma.ca>
	<BLU159-ds14234893C64F582BCE73E9C4FF0@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <4E8FAAAC.3080908@ar88.net>

I made sales calls to RFL a few years back.  It appears they are located 
in a former ARC facility.

Google Maps:  
http://maps.google.com/maps?q=353+Powerville+Rd++Boonton,+NJ&hl=en&ll=40.93326,-74.426193&spn=0.008965,0.019698&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=38.41771,80.683594&vpsrc=6&hnear=353+Powerville+Rd,+Boonton,+Morris,+New+Jersey+07005&t=h&z=16

Note Johanson Memorial Fields.  Johanson was the mechanical genius on 
the SCR-274/ARC-5 equipment, and founder of the Johanson capacitor Co.

Also note:  Rockaway Valley Aerodrome Fields, now athletic fields, this 
was Aircraft Radio Corporation Field with grass runways running 
northeast and southwest still visible.

Saga continues,
Al

On 10/7/2011 8:07 PM, howard holden wrote:
> RFL is now known as RFL Electronics, on Powerville Rd, Boonton. The no longer make the magnetic processing stuff. They are into more "modern" electronics. When I lived back east the company I worked for had some older large RFL magnet chargers and treaters, and we hadn't been able to get replacement parts from them for about 15 years. I knew a couple of people who worked there more recently, and they both had no idea of their RFL's ealier ventures.
>
> I had applied for a job at ARC many years ago, say, 1973 or so, didn't get the job. At that time they had what could only be called a quaint campus. It looked like a large complex of camp buildings or bungalows tucked away in the woods of Boonton. Never knew what happened to them other than that they were no longer there as ARC.
>
> Howie WB2AWQ
>    ----- Original Message -----
>    From: Ralph Cameron<mailto:ramcam at magma.ca>
>    To: milsurplus at mailman.qth.net<mailto:milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
>    Sent: Friday, October 07, 2011 5:38 PM
>    Subject: [Milsurplus] RFL
>
>
>    RFL Industries was still operating in 1969 out of Boonton N.J. and
>    sprung from Radio Frequency Laboratories which was formed in 1922. I
>    don't know what time period elapsed before RFL Industries was formed. At
>    that time ( in 1969) RFL Inds. occupied 55,000 sq.ft. in Boonton and a
>    smaller components division in Vermont.
>
>    The instrumentation and thermocouple division marketed an equipment
>    family in continuous evolution and refinement for over 20 years. what
>    did they make?
>
>    Magnet chargers and Treaters
>    Automagnetic test&  measurement systems
>    Gaussmeters
>    portable magnetometers
>    meter calibrators
>    Proportional controllers
>    Temperature meters
>    Precision potentiometers
>
>    Their literature says, "since 1922: so when did they fold?
>
>    I sold many of their meter calibrators to the Can. military and Outboard
>    Marine used their magnet chargers to magnetize the magneto for outboard
>    motors.  Most chargers required sophisticated jigs .
>
>    Ralph
>    VE3BBM
>
>    --
>    Please remove all previous email addresses before forwarding any email. Doing so, decreases the message size,
>    transmission time, and limits any information that a 'spammer' may glean. Also, please consider using Blind Carbon
>    Copy (or BCC) to limit email address exposure. ~ Thanks
>    _____
>
>    ______________________________________________________________
>    Milsurplus mailing list
>    Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus<http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus>
>    Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm<http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm>
>    Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net<mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
>
>    This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net<http://www.qsl.net/>
>    Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html<http://www.qsl.net/donate.html>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

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



From gl4d21a at juno.com  Fri Oct  7 23:33:34 2011
From: gl4d21a at juno.com (gl4d21a at juno.com)
Date: Sat, 8 Oct 2011 03:33:34 GMT
Subject: [Milsurplus] Boonton gear
Message-ID: <20111007.223334.26527.0@webmail51.dca.untd.com>

Fellows:

You may want to do a little real research instead of depending on the opinions on Wikipedia.  Much confusion arises between the Boonton Co., and BRC, the Boonton Radio Corp.  Most casual investigators seem to miss the distinction for some reason.

73,
George
W5VPQ

---------- Original Message ----------
From: Ray Fantini <RAFANTINI at salisbury.edu>
To: Al Klase <al at ar88.net>, "milsurplus at mailman.qth.net" <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] Boonton gear
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2011 14:15:09 -0400

Looks like I won't be doing the inaugural email on the Boonton reflector.

Failure on my part to do proper research, according to history on their web site:
http://boonton.com/about
They were started in 1947. Wiki says they were founded in 1934 by William D. Laughlin in Boonton NJ and acquired by Hewlett Packard in 1959. 
Must be two different companies? 
The Most significant development of the company founded in 1934 according to HP was there "Q" meter. Listed on the HP Virtual Museum under "Boonton type 160 Q meter":
http://www.hp.com/hpinfo/abouthp/histnfacts/museum/earlyinstruments/0010/
The description on their web page goes on to say" Boonton added to the HP family an old and well established company with an excellent reputation in a field closely related to many HP products" 
It s purely antidotal and subjective comment by me, looking at the Boonton equipment I have seen at Hamfest and online sales it all appears to be much like General Radio or HP in shape, size and function. Have seen and worked with the HP Q meters but have never owned or used a Boonton instrument, but maybe I have lead a sheltered life?

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

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html


____________________________________________________________
57-Year-Old Mom Looks 25
Mom Reveals Free Wrinkle Trick That Has Angered Doctors!
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/4e8fc4e2b14fab37d66st04duc

From kk5f at earthlink.net  Sat Oct  8 02:44:08 2011
From: kk5f at earthlink.net (Mike Morrow)
Date: Sat, 8 Oct 2011 01:44:08 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [Milsurplus] RFL
Message-ID: <2067151.1318056248684.JavaMail.root@mswamui-bichon.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

Howie wrote:

> RFL is now known as RFL Electronics, on Powerville Rd, Boonton.

Several years ago I found their website while searching for information
about the mid-1930s aircraft beacon band receiver RFL Type B-3.  The
receiver is shown in the bottom left corner of the company history
brochure at http://www.rflelect.com/pdf_files/Corporate%20Catalogue.pdf .

The B-3 is extremely well made.  What's interesting is that originally
the outer case was sealed to the rear chassis with a small brass rivet,
allowing only RFL access even for tube replacement.  The brass plate
around the seal reads:
 
              WARNING
    DO NOT BREAK THIS SEAL UNDER
           ANY CONDITION
 IF FAILURE SHOULD OCCUR WIRE TYPE AND
 SERIAL NUMBER IMMEDIATELY TO THE MAN-
 UFACTURERS AND RETURN THIS UNIT TO THEM
 AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.  A NEW UNIT WILL BE
 SHIPPED PREPAID ON RECEIPT OF WIRE
 UNDER CONDITIONS OF GUARANTEE.

I guess RFL didn't want anyone but them even seeing the inside of
their equipment!  My B-3 is like new inside, with all original Sylvania
tubes.  It's a joy to look at.

Mike / KK5F

From arc5 at ix.netcom.com  Sat Oct  8 12:30:13 2011
From: arc5 at ix.netcom.com (David Stinson)
Date: Sat, 8 Oct 2011 11:30:13 -0500
Subject: [Milsurplus] Followup:  HV Fuse in BC-375
Message-ID: <7DF59A03D8E144FBB22D3985A5AA4D9F@DaddyPC>

I found a gassy 211 and put it in the PA socket of the -375;
made myself a "fuse assassination" machine.

I built three more test fuses like this:

http://home.netcom.com/~arc5/BC348/375fuse.JPG

(The "real" replacements will have the Picofuse inside the tube,
 both for looks and for SAFETY's sake).

All three opened with no muss, no fuss.
No explosions, arcing or any other problems.
"Good Tube" tests with hours of operation have been entirely normal.

I'm sticking with it ;-)

73 DE Dave AB5S


From WA5CAB at cs.com  Sat Oct  8 12:37:16 2011
From: WA5CAB at cs.com (WA5CAB at cs.com)
Date: Sat, 8 Oct 2011 12:37:16 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] [ARC5] Followup:  HV Fuse in BC-375
Message-ID: <70497.1f22c3c6.3bc1d63c@cs.com>

That's certainly enough testing for me.  How much trouble have you had in 
removing the end caps from the fuse bodies?  I.e., did any of the bodies 
break before the glue let go in one cap or the other?

In a message dated 10/08/2011 11:30:23 AM Central Daylight Time, 
arc5 at ix.netcom.com writes: 
> I found a gassy 211 and put it in the PA socket of the -375;
> made myself a "fuse assassination" machine.
> 
> I built three more test fuses like this:
> 
> http://home.netcom.com/~arc5/BC348/375fuse.JPG
> 
> (The "real" replacements will have the Picofuse inside the tube,
> both for looks and for SAFETY's sake).
> 
> All three opened with no muss, no fuss.
> No explosions, arcing or any other problems.
> "Good Tube" tests with hours of operation have been entirely normal.
> 
> I'm sticking with it ;-)
> 
> 73 DE Dave AB5S

Robert & Susan Downs - Houston
wa5cab dot com (Web Store)
MVPA 9480

From arc5 at ix.netcom.com  Sat Oct  8 12:51:17 2011
From: arc5 at ix.netcom.com (David Stinson)
Date: Sat, 8 Oct 2011 11:51:17 -0500
Subject: [Milsurplus] Fall Project:  160 Mtr AN/ARC-5 Set
Message-ID: <9C1EFDACD02943959D60F24DA71B580B@DaddyPC>

Fall Project: 
160 Mtr AN/ARC-5 Set using the T-17 transmitter
and TN-6 Antenna Tuner, ready for testing:

http://home.netcom.com/~arc5/160ARC5/160ARC5.JPG

Ain't she purrr-deee?  ;-)
Yes- that is the display board I used way back at the first 
MRCG meeting in San Luis Obisbo in 1995, re-worked.

Haven't finished refurbing the R-25, so using an R-26 for tests.
The J-22 jack box is mounted on the vertical post just
behind and to the left of the receiver.  Will be moving that 
under the C-26 once I lace-up a longer cable.  This set
does not use (or need) a C-29 TX control box;
an authentic option.  All the major and most of the minor 
componants match the contract of the T-17 and TN-6, 
NXsa-32848.
All the connectors save one are 9000-series ARC-5 loom type.
I haven't found my "correct" ARR-2 receiver rack- must be here
somewhere- so am temporarily subbing the rare ARA single
rack until I do find it.  The manual says to connect the TN-6
loading coil between the transmitter and the antenna switch,
but this is bad practice as- if using the intended electrically-short
aircraft antenna- it puts a high-voltage node inside the RE-2.
So I elected to insert it after the switch (probably won't need it
anyway, but it just looks so cool ;-).

Winter Project:  90% certain it will be the Australian AT5/AR8.

OK ya'll- your turn.  What's your "winter" project?

73 DE Dave AB5S



From COURYHOUSE at aol.com  Sat Oct  8 12:54:42 2011
From: COURYHOUSE at aol.com (COURYHOUSE at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 8 Oct 2011 12:54:42 EDT
Subject: [Milsurplus] Fall Project:  160 Mtr AN/ARC-5 Set
Message-ID: <9b7a.12d78e09.3bc1da52@aol.com>

 
 
Very Nice Dave!!!!!!!!
 
Ed#
 
 
In a message dated 10/8/2011 9:51:28 A.M. US Mountain Standard Time,  
arc5 at ix.netcom.com writes:

Fall  Project: 
160 Mtr AN/ARC-5 Set using the T-17 transmitter
and TN-6  Antenna Tuner, ready for  testing:

http://home.netcom.com/~arc5/160ARC5/160ARC5.JPG

Ain't  she purrr-deee?  ;-)
Yes- that is the display board I used way back at  the first 
MRCG meeting in San Luis Obisbo in 1995,  re-worked.

Haven't finished refurbing the R-25, so using an R-26 for  tests.
The J-22 jack box is mounted on the vertical post just
behind and  to the left of the receiver.  Will be moving that 
under the C-26 once  I lace-up a longer cable.  This set
does not use (or need) a C-29 TX  control box;
an authentic option.  All the major and most of the minor  
componants match the contract of the T-17 and TN-6, 
NXsa-32848.
All  the connectors save one are 9000-series ARC-5 loom type.
I haven't found my  "correct" ARR-2 receiver rack- must be here
somewhere- so am temporarily  subbing the rare ARA single
rack until I do find it.  The manual says  to connect the TN-6
loading coil between the transmitter and the antenna  switch,
but this is bad practice as- if using the intended  electrically-short
aircraft antenna- it puts a high-voltage node inside the  RE-2.
So I elected to insert it after the switch (probably won't need  it
anyway, but it just looks so cool ;-).

Winter Project:  90%  certain it will be the Australian AT5/AR8.

OK ya'll- your turn.   What's your "winter" project?

73 DE Dave  AB5S






Thanks,

Ed Sharpe, Archivist for SMECC  

See the Museum's Web Site at _www.smecc.org_ (http://www.smecc.org/)  

From arc5 at ix.netcom.com  Sat Oct  8 12:58:05 2011
From: arc5 at ix.netcom.com (David Stinson)
Date: Sat, 8 Oct 2011 11:58:05 -0500
Subject: [Milsurplus] [ARC5] Followup:  HV Fuse in BC-375
In-Reply-To: <70497.1f22c3c6.3bc1d63c@cs.com>
References: <70497.1f22c3c6.3bc1d63c@cs.com>
Message-ID: <B3D2865B01294368944169FB371AF8A5@DaddyPC>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: WA5CAB at cs.com 

>That's certainly enough testing for me. 
>How much trouble have you had in removing the end caps 
>from the fuse bodies?  I.e., did any of the bodies break 
>before the glue let go in one cap or the other?

I tried that a couple of times but found no way 
to remove the end caps  without destroying the fuse body.
So I used a long drill bit, clamped the fuse body
in a vice with a ScotchBrite to prevent messing up the body
and drilled slowly through one end cap and out the other.
Slow but works.  Drill bit must be sharp.
Shook all the crud out.  Soldered an inch of
"pigtail" on the end of the PicoFuse, then inserted it, 
folded-over and tack-soldered the leads to the end-caps.
I'll post a photo later.  
"LookFineLassaLongTime
PaintItGrayandDon'tMessWidIt"

73 Dave AB5S


From kk7iz at cox.net  Sat Oct  8 13:01:43 2011
From: kk7iz at cox.net (Lloyd Godsey)
Date: Sat, 8 Oct 2011 10:01:43 -0700
Subject: [Milsurplus] [ARC5] Followup:  HV Fuse in BC-375
In-Reply-To: <B3D2865B01294368944169FB371AF8A5@DaddyPC>
References: <70497.1f22c3c6.3bc1d63c@cs.com>
	<B3D2865B01294368944169FB371AF8A5@DaddyPC>
Message-ID: <84E86606644446A495A29D194B0FF356@LloydPC>

LookFineLassaLongTime
PaintItGrayandDon'tMessWidIt"

Hammer to fit, paint to match
A coat of paint will hide a multitude of sins

Thanx
Lloyd Godsey KK7IZ
kk7iz at cox.net
480-620-7145
http://www.lloydsdipsydumpster.com/
http://antiqueradioarchives.com/
Skype: lloyd.godsey

"

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

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

From wh7hg.hi at gmail.com  Sat Oct  8 13:35:09 2011
From: wh7hg.hi at gmail.com (Kludge)
Date: Sat, 8 Oct 2011 07:35:09 -1000
Subject: [Milsurplus] [ARC5] Fall Project:  160 Mtr AN/ARC-5 Set
In-Reply-To: <9C1EFDACD02943959D60F24DA71B580B@DaddyPC>
References: <9C1EFDACD02943959D60F24DA71B580B@DaddyPC>
Message-ID: <4A30515B2DA247B59ACC20421B792A0B@Kongo>

First off, let me commend you on yet another fascinating project and a neat
setup for it.  While I'm not fond of wood for these displays (one of the
times I'm strictly a metal head), I do like how you've got that set up so
everything's visible.  

But I have to say that the backdrop is a thing of beauty.  It's colorful,
imaginative and has a comfortably cluttered look that's still not too busy
to detract from the main subject.  ;-)

Best regards,
 
Michael, WH7HG ex-K3MXO, ex-KN3MXO, WPE3ARS, BL01xh ex-Mensa A&P PP BGI 
I am me.  I?m the only one who?s qualified.
http://www.nationalmssociety.org/chapters/NTH/index.aspx
http://wh7hg.blogspot.com/
http://kludges-other-blog.blogspot.com
Hiki N?! 


From arc5 at ix.netcom.com  Sat Oct  8 14:04:25 2011
From: arc5 at ix.netcom.com (David Stinson)
Date: Sat, 8 Oct 2011 13:04:25 -0500
Subject: [Milsurplus] Fall Project:  160 Mtr AN/ARC-5 Set
In-Reply-To: <4A30515B2DA247B59ACC20421B792A0B@Kongo>
References: <9C1EFDACD02943959D60F24DA71B580B@DaddyPC>
	<4A30515B2DA247B59ACC20421B792A0B@Kongo>
Message-ID: <46F9ED540D484FAA9DAD0640CE2D6FD4@DaddyPC>

I envy you "metal" guys a little.
I have neither the skills nor the tools to work metal.
I can do passably with wood.
When using wood, a good grounding network on the base
and supporting beams is required for proper operation.
If you're working with an SCR-183 for instance, you'll
never get it to stop FMing from RF feedback without
a proper ground plane under the rig (thanks to Mike Hanz
for figuring out this problem for me.  I thought simple 
wire straps would be enough, but nope).
Here's a photo of the grounding network for this rig:

http://home.netcom.com/~arc5/160ARC5/grounding.jpgg

The panel at the top was done by Mike Hanz 
and is re-cycled from an earlier project, 
with the extra holes filled in and sanded.
The extra width extending beyond the TN-6
will mount the "RADIO MASTER POWER" switch
and microphone mount on one side and
the rig nomenclature/info panel on the other.

The ground straps are aluminum "duct" tape with 
folded-over strips at each intersection which are 
held down with another piece of the tape, making
electrical connection.  Tested all the areas with an
ohm-meter to make sure there wasn't more then a 
couple of ohms from place to place.  Screws through
the paint and scraping where needed connect the 
ground plane to the equipment and negative power buss.
Yes- the surface of the display board appears "rumpled"
from the tape, but you know what?  Nobody cares!
They're looking at the gear, not the wood.
I must have talked to two hundred people at HamCom
and, while everyone wanted to talk about the gear, 
nobody mentioned the display boards.

I put the USPS boxes in the background to prevent 
the clutter distracting from the rig, and so you 
won't see just what a mess I can make of a work space.

73 Dave AB5S


From arc5 at ix.netcom.com  Sat Oct  8 14:06:11 2011
From: arc5 at ix.netcom.com (David Stinson)
Date: Sat, 8 Oct 2011 13:06:11 -0500
Subject: [Milsurplus] Fall Project:  Corrected Link
In-Reply-To: <46F9ED540D484FAA9DAD0640CE2D6FD4@DaddyPC>
References: <9C1EFDACD02943959D60F24DA71B580B@DaddyPC><4A30515B2DA247B59ACC20421B792A0B@Kongo>
	<46F9ED540D484FAA9DAD0640CE2D6FD4@DaddyPC>
Message-ID: <BABDBB6E349B442A93289D24CDFC7E49@DaddyPC>

Corrected link:

http://home.netcom.com/~arc5/160ARC5/grounding.jpg

From jcoward5452 at aol.com  Sat Oct  8 14:10:40 2011
From: jcoward5452 at aol.com (jcoward5452 at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 8 Oct 2011 14:10:40 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] [ARC5] Fall Project:  160 Mtr AN/ARC-5 Set
In-Reply-To: <9C1EFDACD02943959D60F24DA71B580B@DaddyPC>
References: <9C1EFDACD02943959D60F24DA71B580B@DaddyPC>
Message-ID: <8CE53FCB8F63238-2348-46D1C@Webmail-m120.sysops.aol.com>


Dave and Group,
 I have a TN-6 with virtually no paint left on it.To restore, it will need disassembly, paint, reassembly and some way to to do the lettering. Any body have any ideas or should I leave it as is? Isn't the mount for the TN-6 the same as for the modulator?
 Thanks,
             Jay KE6PPF



-----Original Message-----
From: David Stinson <arc5 at ix.netcom.com>
To: milsurplus <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>; ARC-5 List <arc5 at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Sat, Oct 8, 2011 9:51 am
Subject: [ARC5] Fall Project: 160 Mtr AN/ARC-5 Set


Fall Project: 
60 Mtr AN/ARC-5 Set using the T-17 transmitter
nd TN-6 Antenna Tuner, ready for testing:
http://home.netcom.com/~arc5/160ARC5/160ARC5.JPG
Ain't she purrr-deee?  ;-)
es- that is the display board I used way back at the first 
RCG meeting in San Luis Obisbo in 1995, re-worked.
Haven't finished refurbing the R-25, so using an R-26 for tests.
he J-22 jack box is mounted on the vertical post just
ehind and to the left of the receiver.  Will be moving that 
nder the C-26 once I lace-up a longer cable.  This set
oes not use (or need) a C-29 TX control box;
n authentic option.  All the major and most of the minor 
omponants match the contract of the T-17 and TN-6, 
Xsa-32848.
ll the connectors save one are 9000-series ARC-5 loom type.
 haven't found my "correct" ARR-2 receiver rack- must be here
omewhere- so am temporarily subbing the rare ARA single
ack until I do find it.  The manual says to connect the TN-6
oading coil between the transmitter and the antenna switch,
ut this is bad practice as- if using the intended electrically-short
ircraft antenna- it puts a high-voltage node inside the RE-2.
o I elected to insert it after the switch (probably won't need it
nyway, but it just looks so cool ;-).
Winter Project:  90% certain it will be the Australian AT5/AR8.
OK ya'll- your turn.  What's your "winter" project?
73 DE Dave AB5S

_____________________________________________________________
RC5 mailing list
ome: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/arc5
elp: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
ost: mailto:ARC5 at mailman.qth.net
This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
lease help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html


From arc5 at ix.netcom.com  Sat Oct  8 14:38:36 2011
From: arc5 at ix.netcom.com (David Stinson)
Date: Sat, 8 Oct 2011 13:38:36 -0500
Subject: [Milsurplus] [ARC5] Fall Project:  160 Mtr AN/ARC-5 Set
In-Reply-To: <8CE53FCB8F63238-2348-46D1C@Webmail-m120.sysops.aol.com>
References: <9C1EFDACD02943959D60F24DA71B580B@DaddyPC>
	<8CE53FCB8F63238-2348-46D1C@Webmail-m120.sysops.aol.com>
Message-ID: <66A3FB41352746F79454BF9086BA74AA@DaddyPC>

Mount for the TN-6 is much smaller than that 
for the modulator, Jay.  As for painting and relettering-
I've never been sucessfull at anything more than
"touch-up" when it comes to wrinkle paint,
and I don't have a clue about re-lettering, sorry to say.
If I were you?  Hold on to your hat.... 
Strip it, clean it and give it a quality coat of black enamel.

Don't look so shocked, ya'll ;-).
I confess I've totally given-up on wrinkle paint.
I've decided not to let "the perfect be the enemy of the good"
anymore.  The only piece in this set that had really bad paint
was the cover on the modulator, which was flaking and beyond
fixing.  I knew exactly what would happen with a can 
of wrinkle paint: spray and re-strip twice, followed by throwing
the cover in the parts bin and asking around for a better cover.
Nope- I've had enough of that, thanks.

Some of us have the "gift" of getting wrinkle to work,
and some of us don't.  I'm convinced it's at least 
70% pure supernatural "black magic," and
I ain't got "de wrinkle voodoo mojo, mon...."

I stripped it, cleaned it and gave it three coats of thinned
black enamel, followed by a nice satin clear coat.  
It looks good and I'm happy with it.  The cover of my GF-10
has the same problem and I expect (unless I can find a good
cover and transfer the nomen plates) to do exactly 
the same thing with it.   I don't have enough time left to me 
to keep wringing my hands over runny, uneven wrinkle paint.

As for the lettering- Mike Hanz has some good insights.

GL OM ES 73 DE Dave AB5S

From arc5 at ix.netcom.com  Sat Oct  8 15:07:25 2011
From: arc5 at ix.netcom.com (David Stinson)
Date: Sat, 8 Oct 2011 14:07:25 -0500
Subject: [Milsurplus] UK TR9D Progress Report
Message-ID: <035C2D04F70047D3968C091DBCBA8146@DaddyPC>

The part for the U.K. TR9D set found by Ray Robinson 
in VK-land has come-out well. Ray found a TR9D 
front panel with the scale and knob
I was missing in a large pile of gear tragicly left out
in the weather for a decade.
Here's what it looked like when Ray found it:

 http://home.netcom.com/~arc5/TR9D/TR9B4.jpg

The scale is the round part with the right side clipped under
the knob.  It's a brass piece with 360-degree markings,
used to indicate PA tuning settings. 
I soaked all the screws over-night with penetrating oil.
All but one were recovered OK.  There was extensive
crud between the brass plate and the aluminium panel
below it, but no pitting of the brass, thank Goodness.
There was also a heavy patina on the front.
Using soap, water and a Scotchbrite, I cleaned all
the loose dirt and crud from the plate.  Then wet-sanded
with 60-grit paper until I had clean surfaces and the 
index scale was clear.  After drying, I gave it three coats
of thinned black enamel, carefully and lightly wet-sanding 
with 200-grit sandpaper between each coat
to smooth them and bring-out the raised scale on the dial.
After the third light sanding, I cleaned it and gave it a
coat of clear gloss enamel.  This is the result:

http://home.netcom.com/~arc5/TR9D/tr9after.JPG

Again- I can't thank you enough, Ray.
Never expected to find these parts.

73 DE Dave AB5S

From w7ksg at q.com  Sat Oct  8 17:20:22 2011
From: w7ksg at q.com (w7ksg at q.com)
Date: Sat, 8 Oct 2011 17:20:22 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] [ARC5] Followup:  HV Fuse in BC-375
In-Reply-To: <B3D2865B01294368944169FB371AF8A5@DaddyPC>
Message-ID: <1937246205.810252.1318108822631.JavaMail.root@md21.quartz.synacor.com>


For all of your hard work you have no protection to your circuits.  You might not have had any problems so far but it is going to end up biting  you in the rear end.  Go to the Littlefuse or any other fuse web site and look at their fuse specs.  When you place a 250V fuse in a HV line you have absolutely no protection.  The fuse is designed to MELT the fuse element.  When the fuse
is subjected to a HV the fuse element ionizes and that ionized gas is conductive which means that whatever you are trying to protect is destroyed. You are spending twenty five cents to
protect a several hundred or more piece of equipment. It just doesn't make any sense.

So your anology of

LookFineLassaLongTime
PaintItGrayandDon'tMessWidIt

might mean

What protected me didn't cost a dime
Should have listened to them all but didn't have the time.

J
W7KSG

From jfor at quikus.com  Sat Oct  8 17:34:16 2011
From: jfor at quikus.com (J. Forster)
Date: Sat, 8 Oct 2011 14:34:16 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] [ARC5] Followup:  HV Fuse in BC-375
In-Reply-To: <1937246205.810252.1318108822631.JavaMail.root@md21.quartz.synacor.com
	>
References: <1937246205.810252.1318108822631.JavaMail.root@md21.quartz.synacor.com>
Message-ID: <2053.12.6.201.165.1318109656.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>

I agree. Interrupting HV DC, especially with inductance in the circuit,
causes sustained, destructive arcs.

-John

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


>
> For all of your hard work you have no protection to your circuits.  You
> might not have had any problems so far but it is going to end up biting
> you in the rear end.  Go to the Littlefuse or any other fuse web site and
> look at their fuse specs.  When you place a 250V fuse in a HV line you
> have absolutely no protection.  The fuse is designed to MELT the fuse
> element.  When the fuse
> is subjected to a HV the fuse element ionizes and that ionized gas is
> conductive which means that whatever you are trying to protect is
> destroyed. You are spending twenty five cents to
> protect a several hundred or more piece of equipment. It just doesn't make
> any sense.
>
> So your anology of
>
> LookFineLassaLongTime
> PaintItGrayandDon'tMessWidIt
>
> might mean
>
> What protected me didn't cost a dime
> Should have listened to them all but didn't have the time.
>
> J
> W7KSG
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>



From arc5 at ix.netcom.com  Sat Oct  8 18:03:57 2011
From: arc5 at ix.netcom.com (arc5 at ix.netcom.com)
Date: Sat, 08 Oct 2011 22:03:57 +0000
Subject: [Milsurplus] [ARC5] Followup: HV Fuse in BC-375
Message-ID: <20111008220357.830594C10E@attemconn15.att.oz.com>

I have now opened five fuses in this configuration. All have been uneventful and entirely as expected.  I value my 375 highly and I am comfortable in my results.  it may help to remember that Littlefuse et al are in the business of selling $12 HV fuses....  
D.S.

----------
Sent from AT&T Wireless using Mobile Email

------Original Message------
From: J. Forster <jfor at quikus.com>
To: <w7ksg at q.com>,"J. Forster" <jfor at quikus.com>
Cc: <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
Date: Saturday, October 8, 2011 2:34:16 PM GMT-7
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] [ARC5] Followup: HV Fuse in BC-375

I agree. Interrupting HV DC, especially with inductance in the circuit,
causes sustained, destructive arcs.

-John

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


>
> For all of your hard work you have no protection to your circuits.  You
> might not have had any problems so far but it is going to end up biting
> you in the rear end.  Go to the Littlefuse or any other fuse web site and
> look at their fuse specs.  When you place a 250V fuse in a HV line you
> have absolutely no protection.  The fuse is designed to MELT the fuse
> element.  When the fuse
> is subjected to a HV the fuse element ionizes and that ionized gas is
> conductive which means that whatever you are trying to protect is
> destroyed. You are spending twenty five cents to
> protect a several hundred or more piece of equipment. It just doesn't make
> any sense.
>
> So your anology of
>
> LookFineLassaLongTime
> PaintItGrayandDon'tMessWidIt
>
> might mean
>
> What protected me didn't cost a dime
> Should have listened to them all but didn't have the time.
>
> J
> W7KSG
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>


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

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html


From jcoward5452 at aol.com  Sat Oct  8 18:12:58 2011
From: jcoward5452 at aol.com (jcoward5452 at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 8 Oct 2011 18:12:58 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] [ARC5] Followup:  HV Fuse in BC-375
In-Reply-To: <1937246205.810252.1318108822631.JavaMail.root@md21.quartz.synacor.com>
References: <1937246205.810252.1318108822631.JavaMail.root@md21.quartz.synacor.com>
Message-ID: <8CE541E92669A1E-1F24-737D0@webmail-m150.sysops.aol.com>


I think these "Picofuses" don't have that problem. We use them in our products where I work and have had no adverse problems. Once open they stay open. There is no gas to ionize as these have no glass tube and are a sealed unit from any atmosphere.
 Jay KE6PPF
 



-----Original Message-----
From: w7ksg <w7ksg at q.com>
To: David Stinson <arc5 at ix.netcom.com>
Cc: milsurplus <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Sat, Oct 8, 2011 2:20 pm
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] [ARC5] Followup: HV Fuse in BC-375



or all of your hard work you have no protection to your circuits.  You might 
ot have had any problems so far but it is going to end up biting  you in the 
ear end.  Go to the Littlefuse or any other fuse web site and look at their 
use specs.  When you place a 250V fuse in a HV line you have absolutely no 
rotection.  The fuse is designed to MELT the fuse element.  When the fuse
s subjected to a HV the fuse element ionizes and that ionized gas is conductive 
hich means that whatever you are trying to protect is destroyed. You are 
pending twenty five cents to
rotect a several hundred or more piece of equipment. It just doesn't make any 
ense.
So your anology of
LookFineLassaLongTime
aintItGrayandDon'tMessWidIt
might mean
What protected me didn't cost a dime
hould have listened to them all but didn't have the time.
J
7KSG
_____________________________________________________________
ilsurplus mailing list
ome: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
elp: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
ost: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
lease help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html


From navy.radio at gmail.com  Sat Oct  8 19:05:46 2011
From: navy.radio at gmail.com (Nick England)
Date: Sat, 8 Oct 2011 19:05:46 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] USS Kidd DD-661 Radio Central and puzzlers
Message-ID: <CAB55hNf6NURLpdb1HOfCQxEW76yG8yTum4OvHQtaXD63OEP5_A@mail.gmail.com>

Business landed me in Baton Rouge last week and listmember John
Hensley suggested taking a look at USS Kidd DD-661. Good visit! The
nice folks there let me into Radio Central to take photos (mostly
1950's era gear, but they want to restore it back to 1945 vintage)
http://www.navy-radio.com/ships/dd661.htm

I found a few items I hadn't seen before -
Here's a TCS Adapter - It was made by SF Shipyard, but I can't make
out the model number.
It is not externally the same as the MX-1743/SRC but probably serves
the same function
http://www.navy-radio.com/ships/dd661/DSCN0072.JPG

And a RadioPhone Unit on the bridge - any idea what model? another
shipyard special?
http://www.navy-radio.com/ships/dd661/DSCN0099.JPG

cheers,
Nick K4NYW
www.navy-radio.com

From wh7hg.hi at gmail.com  Sun Oct  9 02:04:01 2011
From: wh7hg.hi at gmail.com (Kludge)
Date: Sat, 8 Oct 2011 20:04:01 -1000
Subject: [Milsurplus] RFL
In-Reply-To: <2067151.1318056248684.JavaMail.root@mswamui-bichon.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
References: <2067151.1318056248684.JavaMail.root@mswamui-bichon.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <5E74E0EBB5B5419790BF4B32B4892740@Kongo>

-----Original Message-----
From: milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net
[mailto:milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Mike Morrow
> The B-3 is extremely well made.  What's interesting is that originally
> the outer case was sealed to the rear chassis with a small brass rivet,
> allowing only RFL access even for tube replacement.  The brass plate
> around the seal reads:

Designed by RFL, built by Stromberg-Carlson and installed & maintained by
ARC.  They were actually sent to ARC from RFL for repair although I guess
the end users didn't have to know about that part.  :-)

Best regards,
 
Michael, WH7HG ex-K3MXO, ex-KN3MXO, WPE3ARS, BL01xh ex-Mensa A&P PP BGI 
I am me.  I?m the only one who?s qualified.
http://www.nationalmssociety.org/chapters/NTH/index.aspx
http://wh7hg.blogspot.com/
http://kludges-other-blog.blogspot.com
Hiki N?! 


From wb8ybf at gmail.com  Sun Oct  9 06:40:11 2011
From: wb8ybf at gmail.com (Patrick Marineau)
Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2011 06:40:11 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] Price reduced: No.48 Wireless key
Message-ID: <CAPBj24Be_WzCduBTGa7MgvKY_b9V_qGaowUm1e1oELTNXJu1Ng@mail.gmail.com>

For Sale:  Key for No. 48 Wireless Set.  Flame proof key - J5 type.
New still in 1945 military sealed packing. Price reduced from $45 to
$35 + 10.95 Priority flat
rate shipping.  No PayPal.
Thanks,
Pat K9HF

From farmer.rob.flory at gmail.com  Sun Oct  9 17:45:14 2011
From: farmer.rob.flory at gmail.com (Rob Flory)
Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2011 17:45:14 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] Radiophone unit on KIDD
Message-ID: <CAFcNxxWV==SkQLs5owAv+CEQnHcsWJgDrhottuGMoA2TctRCxA@mail.gmail.com>

That's for a TBS.  Made by RCA.

RF

From kargo_cult at msn.com  Sun Oct  9 22:29:20 2011
From: kargo_cult at msn.com (Hue Miller)
Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2011 19:29:20 -0700
Subject: [Milsurplus] Last of '46 Smokejumper class
Message-ID: <SNT109-DS146820563B566F213DD6B3E4FD0@phx.gbl>

Pendleton man last of his class of smokejumpers

Sept. 30, 2011, 3:47 p.m. PDT
AP
[ via: Hue Miller. When I read his comment about the BC-611, I just thought, 
"Yeah, that sounds
about right!" ]

PENDLETON, Ore. (AP) ? Richard Courson is the last man standing.

Every two years, the Pendleton man has traveled to a reunion of smokejumpers 
from the now-defunct Cave Junction
Smokejumper Base. The number of jumpers from his original training class of 
46 men dwindled with each reunion.

This summer, Courson found himself the lone jumper from his training group 
from 1946. He mingled with
smokejumpers from later classes, wondering where all the familiar faces had 
gone.
Courson, 89, isn't one to flinch at danger. The Marine paratrooper came home 
from World War II having
survived the fierce Battle of Iwo Jima. He returned to Portland and started 
looking for a job. He had a limited skill
set, he said, that included jumping out of airplanes and killing his enemy.
The retired Umatilla County circuit judge has a wit as sharp as a carbon 
steel knife and a sense of humor dryer
than the Sahara. "I could have gone to Chicago and worked for Capone," 
Courson added, "but that wasn't real practical."

When he noticed a newspaper ad for Forest Service smokejumpers, Courson 
applied and got the job.
The 22-year-old learned to parachute Forest Service-style, wearing a heavy 
canvas jump suit with stand-up
collar and helmet with open-lattice face protector. He parachuted from 
Noorduyn Norseman bush planes onto
mountainous, rocky terrain of northern California and southern Oregon. The 
jumpers aimed for trees close to the flames.
"Smokejumpers inevitably got hung up in the timber," Courson said. "You're 
talking 80 percent slopes with nothing but rocks."

A huge pocket on the right leg of their trousers held 80 feet of coiled 
rope. Using the rope, the firefighters
rappelled from the canopy and started looking for equipment that had 
free-fallen from the aircraft ? cross-cut
saws, shovels and pulaskis, double-edged tools with an axe on one side and 
an adze for digging on the other.
The firefighters communicated with the pilot using surplus World War II 
radios. "The darn things usually wouldn't work,"
he said. "The pilot would have to throw notes out of the plane. There was a 
lot of waving. It was really clumsy."

Radios are better now, but "not much has really changed," said Bill Selby, 
smokejumper program manager at the
Redmond Air Center. Kevlar has replaced canvas, he said, but jumpsuits have 
the same design. Modern jumpers
use GPS units and chainsaws, he said. Ropes are made from tubular nylon, 
instead of natural fibers. Tools have their own chutes.

[ Entire article at: 
http://www.oregonlive.com/newsflash/index.ssf/story/pendleton-man-last-of-his-class-of/d929c69b5bc14215aa9bd33f248f93c8
but there's not much more to it. ]



From jfor at quikus.com  Sun Oct  9 22:27:28 2011
From: jfor at quikus.com (J. Forster)
Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2011 19:27:28 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] OT: Medals
Message-ID: <2307.12.6.201.253.1318213648.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>

I ran across this a couple of days ago:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dickin_Medal

-John

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


From wh7hg.hi at gmail.com  Mon Oct 10 08:12:49 2011
From: wh7hg.hi at gmail.com (Kludge)
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2011 02:12:49 -1000
Subject: [Milsurplus] Boonton gear
In-Reply-To: <B3A61370CC184F9A832FA2D3D0F53963@LloydPC>
References: <CAFcNxxU=Ynsij6xV1_sjhU645+jvVZHvJOuoonY5VDYmQ6HsGA@mail.gmail.com><2DE6F17E951D824AAE8B8D0BF7579D810DF88F4AE6@MBX.salisbury.edu><4E8F29B6.1000801@ar88.net><0bc601cc8520$1ba64170$0201a8c0@Muttley>
	<758B9E56A84E4328A30F4DB830416776@Kongo>
	<B3A61370CC184F9A832FA2D3D0F53963@LloydPC>
Message-ID: <8E93230819CC41B590B50479C1F199C9@Kongo>

-----Original Message-----
From: Lloyd Godsey [mailto:kk7iz at cox.net] 
> Check this out
> http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v618/skyrider28/IMG_7567.jpg
> http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v618/skyrider28/IMG_7569.jpg

This would be the receiver for an AN/ARN-59 which is the military
designation for the Type 21 ADF.  It's one of the pieces of the COTS
equipment the military purchased from ARC along with the Type 12 stuff.
Along with things like the T-25 and the other Series 40 pieces, this could
be considered 2nd generation postwar equipment since, among other
differences, it uses more submini tubes instead of minis and loctals.  

Best regards,
 
Michael, WH7HG ex-K3MXO, ex-KN3MXO, WPE3ARS, BL01xh ex-Mensa A&P PP BGI 
I am me.  I?m the only one who?s qualified.
http://www.nationalmssociety.org/chapters/NTH/index.aspx
http://wh7hg.blogspot.com/
http://kludges-other-blog.blogspot.com
Hiki N?! 


From ka1kaq at gmail.com  Mon Oct 10 16:10:42 2011
From: ka1kaq at gmail.com (Todd, KA1KAQ)
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2011 16:10:42 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] Terminal Box TA-125/GT
Message-ID: <CANCs6AUHZtic5u3F1n-s_PzjWzp0nAYjgjJRhLbz1bEDQUjJqQ@mail.gmail.com>

Been getting things ready to take to NEAR-Fest next weekend and came
across this little gem in a box. Appears to be something used for
telephone field connections or such.

Curious to know if it's worth taking to the 'fest or would I just be
better off stripping the hardware out of it and selling the box? Must
be $100 work of plated hardware in it, including a bunch of nice push
terminals.

Also found a NOS PE-104 converter for the BC-654 complete with
vibrator. At least I can make some sense out of it!

TNX for any info -

~ Todd,  KA1KAQ/4

From N1XBM at amsat.org  Mon Oct 10 16:13:51 2011
From: N1XBM at amsat.org (Robert Newberry)
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2011 16:13:51 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] Near-fest
Message-ID: <CAM09xEY-5PC=xknQmKwT+vmvQ-rcWM7dF1WMwk=2R+BU771u2g@mail.gmail.com>

I plan on being at Near-fest I will have my prc-6 monitoring on 51mc. That I
got going with help from this list.

Hoping to buy some goodies too!

From ka1kaq at gmail.com  Mon Oct 10 16:20:17 2011
From: ka1kaq at gmail.com (Todd, KA1KAQ)
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2011 16:20:17 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] Near-fest
In-Reply-To: <CAM09xEY-5PC=xknQmKwT+vmvQ-rcWM7dF1WMwk=2R+BU771u2g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAM09xEY-5PC=xknQmKwT+vmvQ-rcWM7dF1WMwk=2R+BU771u2g@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CANCs6AVHF5uXiEJc+4G111c_OHQb51au946kkTocjbNekxthwQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 4:13 PM, Robert Newberry <N1XBM at amsat.org> wrote:
> I plan on being at Near-fest I will have my prc-6 monitoring on 51mc. That I
> got going with help from this list.
>
> Hoping to buy some goodies too!

Still uncovering stuff to bring up Robert, so be sure to swing by my
table at some point. I set up with Steve, K4HX right at the entrance
to the AM Corral, behind the grandstand where the roads split. If
you're facing the tables of Dale KW1I and the other milsurplus guys,
I'm directly behind them on the other side of the building and
slightly to the right. Just moved a couple more truckloads down this
past summer and have been finding gear I didn't remember or ever know
I had.

~ Todd,  KA1KAQ/4

From jcoward5452 at aol.com  Mon Oct 10 16:21:20 2011
From: jcoward5452 at aol.com (jcoward5452 at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2011 16:21:20 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] Boonton gear
In-Reply-To: <8E93230819CC41B590B50479C1F199C9@Kongo>
References: <CAFcNxxU=Ynsij6xV1_sjhU645+jvVZHvJOuoonY5VDYmQ6HsGA@mail.gmail.com><2DE6F17E951D824AAE8B8D0BF7579D810DF88F4AE6@MBX.salisbury.edu><4E8F29B6.1000801@ar88.net><0bc601cc8520$1ba64170$0201a8c0@Muttley><758B9E56A84E4328A30F4DB830416776@Kongo><B3A61370CC184F9A832FA2D3D0F53963@LloydPC>
	<8E93230819CC41B590B50479C1F199C9@Kongo>
Message-ID: <8CE55A14E6EC29D-4B4-5D6B2@webmail-m077.sysops.aol.com>


Check out the unobtainium mount!
Jay KE6PPF



-----Original Message-----
From: Kludge <wh7hg.hi at gmail.com>
To: milsurplus <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Mon, Oct 10, 2011 5:13 am
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] Boonton gear


-----Original Message-----
rom: Lloyd Godsey [mailto:kk7iz at cox.net] 
 Check this out
 http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v618/skyrider28/IMG_7567.jpg
 http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v618/skyrider28/IMG_7569.jpg
This would be the receiver for an AN/ARN-59 which is the military
esignation for the Type 21 ADF.  It's one of the pieces of the COTS
quipment the military purchased from ARC along with the Type 12 stuff.
long with things like the T-25 and the other Series 40 pieces, this could
e considered 2nd generation postwar equipment since, among other
ifferences, it uses more submini tubes instead of minis and loctals.  
Best regards,

ichael, WH7HG ex-K3MXO, ex-KN3MXO, WPE3ARS, BL01xh ex-Mensa A&P PP BGI 
 am me.  I?m the only one who?s qualified.
ttp://www.nationalmssociety.org/chapters/NTH/index.aspx
ttp://wh7hg.blogspot.com/
ttp://kludges-other-blog.blogspot.com
iki N?! 
______________________________________________________________
ilsurplus mailing list
ome: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
elp: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
ost: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
lease help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html


From arc5 at ix.netcom.com  Mon Oct 10 16:33:45 2011
From: arc5 at ix.netcom.com (David Stinson)
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2011 15:33:45 -0500
Subject: [Milsurplus] "Spy Radio Fans:"
Message-ID: <2440483B02C940F48AF49004481E749B@DaddyPC>

Man, this is pretty.

Not mine, etc. (wish it was ;-)

http://www.ebay.com/itm/200661364759

From kk7iz at cox.net  Mon Oct 10 17:32:50 2011
From: kk7iz at cox.net (Lloyd Godsey)
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2011 14:32:50 -0700
Subject: [Milsurplus] Boonton gear
In-Reply-To: <8CE55A14E6EC29D-4B4-5D6B2@webmail-m077.sysops.aol.com>
References: <CAFcNxxU=Ynsij6xV1_sjhU645+jvVZHvJOuoonY5VDYmQ6HsGA@mail.gmail.com><2DE6F17E951D824AAE8B8D0BF7579D810DF88F4AE6@MBX.salisbury.edu><4E8F29B6.1000801@ar88.net><0bc601cc8520$1ba64170$0201a8c0@Muttley><758B9E56A84E4328A30F4DB830416776@Kongo><B3A61370CC184F9A832FA2D3D0F53963@LloydPC><8E93230819CC41B590B50479C1F199C9@Kongo>
	<8CE55A14E6EC29D-4B4-5D6B2@webmail-m077.sysops.aol.com>
Message-ID: <96BB5979922C47D799F957F9725718B0@LloydPC>

Check out the unobtainium mount guard

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v618/skyrider28/Dog-2.jpg

Thanx
Lloyd Godsey KK7IZ
kk7iz at cox.net
480-620-7145
http://www.lloydsdipsydumpster.com/
http://antiqueradioarchives.com/
Skype: lloyd.godsey

-----Original Message----- 
From: jcoward5452 at aol.com
Sent: Monday, October 10, 2011 1:21 PM
To: wh7hg.hi at gmail.com ; milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] Boonton gear


Check out the unobtainium mount!
Jay KE6PPF



-----Original Message-----
From: Kludge <wh7hg.hi at gmail.com>
To: milsurplus <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Mon, Oct 10, 2011 5:13 am
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] Boonton gear


-----Original Message-----
rom: Lloyd Godsey [mailto:kk7iz at cox.net]
Check this out
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v618/skyrider28/IMG_7567.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v618/skyrider28/IMG_7569.jpg
This would be the receiver for an AN/ARN-59 which is the military
esignation for the Type 21 ADF.  It's one of the pieces of the COTS
quipment the military purchased from ARC along with the Type 12 stuff.
long with things like the T-25 and the other Series 40 pieces, this could
e considered 2nd generation postwar equipment since, among other
ifferences, it uses more submini tubes instead of minis and loctals.
Best regards,

ichael, WH7HG ex-K3MXO, ex-KN3MXO, WPE3ARS, BL01xh ex-Mensa A&P PP BGI
am me.  I?m the only one who?s qualified.
ttp://www.nationalmssociety.org/chapters/NTH/index.aspx
ttp://wh7hg.blogspot.com/
ttp://kludges-other-blog.blogspot.com
iki N?!
______________________________________________________________
ilsurplus mailing list
ome: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
elp: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
ost: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
lease help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

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

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html 


From radio at telus.net  Mon Oct 10 17:38:22 2011
From: radio at telus.net (Bruce MacMillan)
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2011 14:38:22 -0700
Subject: [Milsurplus] "Spy Radio Fans:"
In-Reply-To: <2440483B02C940F48AF49004481E749B@DaddyPC>
References: <2440483B02C940F48AF49004481E749B@DaddyPC>
Message-ID: <4E9365CE.5040407@telus.net>

No reserve either!

The seller says this is from his uncle, William H. Johnson. Is this the 
same William Howard Johnson with the clandestine website?

Bruce   ve7mt

On 10/10/2011 1:33 PM, David Stinson wrote:
> Man, this is pretty.
>
> Not mine, etc. (wish it was ;-)
>
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/200661364759
>

From jfor at quikus.com  Mon Oct 10 18:11:30 2011
From: jfor at quikus.com (J. Forster)
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2011 15:11:30 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] "Spy Radio Fans:"
In-Reply-To: <4E9365CE.5040407@telus.net>
References: <2440483B02C940F48AF49004481E749B@DaddyPC>
	<4E9365CE.5040407@telus.net>
Message-ID: <1997.12.6.201.180.1318284690.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>

I doubt it.

LtC. William's last neme was Howard. No Johnson AFAIK. Bill was interested
in clandestine, Nam, anf Japanese WW II stuff.

-John

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


> No reserve either!
>
> The seller says this is from his uncle, William H. Johnson. Is this the
> same William Howard Johnson with the clandestine website?
>
> Bruce   ve7mt
>
> On 10/10/2011 1:33 PM, David Stinson wrote:
>> Man, this is pretty.
>>
>> Not mine, etc. (wish it was ;-)
>>
>> http://www.ebay.com/itm/200661364759
>>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>



From jcoward5452 at aol.com  Mon Oct 10 18:49:58 2011
From: jcoward5452 at aol.com (jcoward5452 at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2011 18:49:58 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] Boonton gear
In-Reply-To: <96BB5979922C47D799F957F9725718B0@LloydPC>
References: <CAFcNxxU=Ynsij6xV1_sjhU645+jvVZHvJOuoonY5VDYmQ6HsGA@mail.gmail.com><2DE6F17E951D824AAE8B8D0BF7579D810DF88F4AE6@MBX.salisbury.edu><4E8F29B6.1000801@ar88.net><0bc601cc8520$1ba64170$0201a8c0@Muttley><758B9E56A84E4328A30F4DB830416776@Kongo><B3A61370CC184F9A832FA2D3D0F53963@LloydPC><8E93230819CC41B590B50479C1F199C9@Kongo>
	<8CE55A14E6EC29D-4B4-5D6B2@webmail-m077.sysops.aol.com>
	<96BB5979922C47D799F957F9725718B0@LloydPC>
Message-ID: <8CE55B611CED8E1-1D8C-5F0B6@webmail-m089.sysops.aol.com>


from the movie "Leathal Weapon IV" ?
J








-----Original Message-----
From: Lloyd Godsey <kk7iz at cox.net>
To: wh7hg.hi <wh7hg.hi at gmail.com>; milsurplus <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>; jcoward5452 <jcoward5452 at aol.com>
Sent: Mon, Oct 10, 2011 2:32 pm
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] Boonton gear


Check out the unobtainium mount guard
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v618/skyrider28/Dog-2.jpg
Thanx
loyd Godsey KK7IZ
k7iz at cox.net
80-620-7145
ttp://www.lloydsdipsydumpster.com/
ttp://antiqueradioarchives.com/
kype: lloyd.godsey
-----Original Message----- 
rom: jcoward5452 at aol.com
ent: Monday, October 10, 2011 1:21 PM
o: wh7hg.hi at gmail.com ; milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
ubject: Re: [Milsurplus] Boonton gear

heck out the unobtainium mount!
ay KE6PPF

-----Original Message-----
rom: Kludge <wh7hg.hi at gmail.com>
o: milsurplus <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
ent: Mon, Oct 10, 2011 5:13 am
ubject: Re: [Milsurplus] Boonton gear

----Original Message-----
om: Lloyd Godsey [mailto:kk7iz at cox.net]
heck this out
ttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v618/skyrider28/IMG_7567.jpg
ttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v618/skyrider28/IMG_7569.jpg
his would be the receiver for an AN/ARN-59 which is the military
signation for the Type 21 ADF.  It's one of the pieces of the COTS
uipment the military purchased from ARC along with the Type 12 stuff.
ong with things like the T-25 and the other Series 40 pieces, this could
 considered 2nd generation postwar equipment since, among other
fferences, it uses more submini tubes instead of minis and loctals.
est regards,
ichael, WH7HG ex-K3MXO, ex-KN3MXO, WPE3ARS, BL01xh ex-Mensa A&P PP BGI
m me.  I?m the only one who?s qualified.
tp://www.nationalmssociety.org/chapters/NTH/index.aspx
tp://wh7hg.blogspot.com/
tp://kludges-other-blog.blogspot.com
ki N?!
_____________________________________________________________
lsurplus mailing list
me: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
lp: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
st: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
his list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
ease help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
______________________________________________________________
ilsurplus mailing list
ome: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
elp: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
ost: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
lease help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html 


From jcoward5452 at aol.com  Mon Oct 10 18:54:53 2011
From: jcoward5452 at aol.com (jcoward5452 at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2011 18:54:53 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] "Spy Radio Fans:"
In-Reply-To: <1997.12.6.201.180.1318284690.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
References: <2440483B02C940F48AF49004481E749B@DaddyPC><4E9365CE.5040407@telus.net>
	<1997.12.6.201.180.1318284690.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
Message-ID: <8CE55B6C2032B27-1D8C-5F194@webmail-m089.sysops.aol.com>


He is SK. A good man: he helped me with some of my Japanese radios. His videos are still available on eBay, so someone is careing for his  extensive collection I'm sure.
 Jay KE6PPF



-----Original Message-----
From: J. Forster <jfor at quikus.com>
To: Bruce MacMillan <radio at telus.net>
Cc: milsurplus <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Mon, Oct 10, 2011 3:13 pm
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] "Spy Radio Fans:"


I doubt it.
LtC. William's last neme was Howard. No Johnson AFAIK. Bill was interested
n clandestine, Nam, anf Japanese WW II stuff.
-John
================

 No reserve either!

 The seller says this is from his uncle, William H. Johnson. Is this the
 same William Howard Johnson with the clandestine website?

 Bruce   ve7mt

 On 10/10/2011 1:33 PM, David Stinson wrote:
> Man, this is pretty.
>
> Not mine, etc. (wish it was ;-)
>
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/200661364759
>
 ______________________________________________________________
 Milsurplus mailing list
 Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
 Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
 Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net

 This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
 Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html



_____________________________________________________________
ilsurplus mailing list
ome: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
elp: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
ost: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
lease help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html


From WA5CAB at cs.com  Mon Oct 10 23:08:41 2011
From: WA5CAB at cs.com (WA5CAB at cs.com)
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2011 23:08:41 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] "Spy Radio Fans:"
Message-ID: <113ef.49e4d4e3.3bc50d39@cs.com>

LTC William L. Howard, USA (SK).  Also did WW-II German gear.  I recall 
suppling cordage for restoration of some of it.

In a message dated 10/10/2011 17:13:41 PM Central Daylight Time, 
jfor at quikus.com writes: 
> I doubt it.
> 
> LtC. William's last neme was Howard. No Johnson AFAIK. Bill was interested
> in clandestine, Nam, anf Japanese WW II stuff.
> 
> -John
> 
> ================
> 
> 
> >No reserve either!
> >
> >The seller says this is from his uncle, William H. Johnson. Is this the
> >same William Howard Johnson with the clandestine website?
> >
> >Bruce   ve7mt
> >
> >On 10/10/2011 1:33 PM, David Stinson wrote:
> >>Man, this is pretty.
> >>
> >>Not mine, etc. (wish it was ;-)
> >>
> >>http://www.ebay.com/itm/200661364759
> 

Robert Downs - Houston
wa5cab dot com (Web Store)
MVPA 9480

From arc5 at ix.netcom.com  Tue Oct 11 08:14:57 2011
From: arc5 at ix.netcom.com (David Stinson)
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 07:14:57 -0500
Subject: [Milsurplus] Low B+: The Genius of A.R.C.
Message-ID: <76ADD36120CC4E068518E009F56B99B5@DaddyPC>

Most of you know I've been for years working on ways 
to use our rigs at low B+ to both preserve them and 
to operate them without extensive parts replacement.
Results with receivers have been good.  "ARC-5" receivers 
work well all the way down to 24 volts with external amplifed
speakers.  They have plenty of audio for earphones without the
amplification.  This allows them to be operated with a single
24 volt, 2 amp power supply.  Over the years I've found no 
down-side at all to this mode.  Despite dire warnings of 
"cathode interface," I've had no trouble.

A few years ago, I moved on to working with the transmitters.
I built a milli-watt drive 100 watt amplifier 
and powered an "ARC-5" transmitter from only 24 volts.  
The rig put out a good, stable signal of about 1/4 watt.

Now, since I'm building the 160 mtr AN/ARC-5 rig,
I tried it with the MD-7 modulator.  I jumpered the 
dynamotor connection pins, putting 24 volts B+ on all
the modulator and transmitter stages.  Remarkably,
the scope showed 1/4 watt output of nice, 100% modulated,
good-sounding signal.  
Way more than enough to drive my amplifier.

No way these modulation and transmitter stages continue
to work as intended all the way down to their A+ voltage
levels unless they were thoughtfully, ingeniusly designed 
to do just that.  Try getting a DX-100 to do it ;-).

I think we should find the final resting places of the men
who designed these sets and place a brass placard 
next to their monument stone: "Unsung American Genius."

73 DE Dave AB5S



From bcarling at cfl.rr.com  Tue Oct 11 09:40:33 2011
From: bcarling at cfl.rr.com (Bry Carling)
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 09:40:33 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] Low B+: The Genius of A.R.C.
In-Reply-To: <76ADD36120CC4E068518E009F56B99B5@DaddyPC>
References: <76ADD36120CC4E068518E009F56B99B5@DaddyPC>
Message-ID: <4E944751.29855.CB0734@bcarling.cfl.rr.com>

Great reading David - OTOH I think there may be a marker near the designer of the WS19 
that says Dunce.

On 11 Oct 2011 at 7:14, David Stinson wrote:

> Most of you know I've been for years working on ways 
> to use our rigs at low B+ to both preserve them and 
> to operate them without extensive parts replacement.
> Results with receivers have been good.  "ARC-5" receivers 
> work well all the way down to 24 volts with external amplifed
> speakers.  They have plenty of audio for earphones without the
> amplification.  This allows them to be operated with a single
> 24 volt, 2 amp power supply.  Over the years I've found no 
> down-side at all to this mode.  Despite dire warnings of 
> "cathode interface," I've had no trouble.
> 
> A few years ago, I moved on to working with the transmitters.
> I built a milli-watt drive 100 watt amplifier 
> and powered an "ARC-5" transmitter from only 24 volts.  
> The rig put out a good, stable signal of about 1/4 watt.
> 
> Now, since I'm building the 160 mtr AN/ARC-5 rig,
> I tried it with the MD-7 modulator.  I jumpered the 
> dynamotor connection pins, putting 24 volts B+ on all
> the modulator and transmitter stages.  Remarkably,
> the scope showed 1/4 watt output of nice, 100% modulated,
> good-sounding signal.  
> Way more than enough to drive my amplifier.
> 
> No way these modulation and transmitter stages continue
> to work as intended all the way down to their A+ voltage
> levels unless they were thoughtfully, ingeniusly designed 
> to do just that.  Try getting a DX-100 to do it ;-).
> 
> I think we should find the final resting places of the men
> who designed these sets and place a brass placard 
> next to their monument stone: "Unsung American Genius."
> 
> 73 DE Dave AB5S
> 
> 
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
> 
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list:
> http://www.qsl.net/donate.html



From jfor at quikus.com  Tue Oct 11 12:59:27 2011
From: jfor at quikus.com (J. Forster)
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 09:59:27 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] Low B+: The Genius of A.R.C.
In-Reply-To: <4E944751.29855.CB0734@bcarling.cfl.rr.com>
References: <76ADD36120CC4E068518E009F56B99B5@DaddyPC>
	<4E944751.29855.CB0734@bcarling.cfl.rr.com>
Message-ID: <1277.12.6.201.195.1318352367.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>

Will your marker say clueless?

The WS19 did what it was supposed to do, very well. It was a breakthrough
design.

-John

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


> Great reading David - OTOH I think there may be a marker near the designer
> of the WS19
> that says Dunce.
>
> On 11 Oct 2011 at 7:14, David Stinson wrote:
>
>> Most of you know I've been for years working on ways
>> to use our rigs at low B+ to both preserve them and
>> to operate them without extensive parts replacement.
>> Results with receivers have been good.  "ARC-5" receivers
>> work well all the way down to 24 volts with external amplifed
>> speakers.  They have plenty of audio for earphones without the
>> amplification.  This allows them to be operated with a single
>> 24 volt, 2 amp power supply.  Over the years I've found no
>> down-side at all to this mode.  Despite dire warnings of
>> "cathode interface," I've had no trouble.
>>
>> A few years ago, I moved on to working with the transmitters.
>> I built a milli-watt drive 100 watt amplifier
>> and powered an "ARC-5" transmitter from only 24 volts.
>> The rig put out a good, stable signal of about 1/4 watt.
>>
>> Now, since I'm building the 160 mtr AN/ARC-5 rig,
>> I tried it with the MD-7 modulator.  I jumpered the
>> dynamotor connection pins, putting 24 volts B+ on all
>> the modulator and transmitter stages.  Remarkably,
>> the scope showed 1/4 watt output of nice, 100% modulated,
>> good-sounding signal.
>> Way more than enough to drive my amplifier.
>>
>> No way these modulation and transmitter stages continue
>> to work as intended all the way down to their A+ voltage
>> levels unless they were thoughtfully, ingeniusly designed
>> to do just that.  Try getting a DX-100 to do it ;-).
>>
>> I think we should find the final resting places of the men
>> who designed these sets and place a brass placard
>> next to their monument stone: "Unsung American Genius."
>>
>> 73 DE Dave AB5S
>>
>>
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> Milsurplus mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>>
>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>> Please help support this email list:
>> http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>



From ka2ivy at verizon.net  Tue Oct 11 13:40:00 2011
From: ka2ivy at verizon.net (Bruce Gentry)
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 13:40:00 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] Low B+: The Genius of A.R.C.
In-Reply-To: <76ADD36120CC4E068518E009F56B99B5@DaddyPC>
References: <76ADD36120CC4E068518E009F56B99B5@DaddyPC>
Message-ID: <4E947F70.5010800@verizon.net>



David Stinson wrote:
> Most of you know I've been for years working on ways 
> to use our rigs at low B+ 
>   

There were quite a few sets built from late 1945 until the late 50's 
using low voltage on the tube plates. Most of these were  to be located 
in the unpressurized portions of aircraft where high voltages caused arc 
overs. I can think of at least two marker beacon receivers, the ARN-6 
automatic direction finder, the BC-1206 LF receiver, and some others I 
have not seen yet. There are also the R-392  and R-808 HF receivers, and 
many auto radios from the late 50s to early 60s, although the R-808 and 
auto radios had solid state audio output stages and the R-392 had a 
conversion.

    Bruce Gentry KA2IVY

From bcarling at cfl.rr.com  Tue Oct 11 13:56:32 2011
From: bcarling at cfl.rr.com (=?utf-8?B?YmNhcmxpbmdAY2ZsLnJyLmNvbQ==?=)
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 13:56:32 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] =?utf-8?q?Low_B+=3A_The_Genius_of_A=2ER=2EC=2E?=
Message-ID: <E4.F8.06600.053849E4@cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com>

Why am I so unsurprisrd by that retort? O:-)

Bry Carling

Sent from myTouch 4G, please excuse my brevity.



----- Reply message -----
From: "J. Forster" <jfor at quikus.com>
To: <bcarling at cfl.rr.com>
Cc: <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>, "ARC-5 List" <arc5 at mailman.qth.net>
Subject: [Milsurplus] Low B+: The Genius of A.R.C.
Date: Tue, Oct 11, 2011 12:59 pm


Will your marker say clueless?

The WS19 did what it was supposed to do, very well. It was a breakthrough
design.

-John

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


> Great reading David - OTOH I think there may be a marker near the designer
> of the WS19
> that says Dunce.
>
> On 11 Oct 2011 at 7:14, David Stinson wrote:
>
>> Most of you know I've been for years working on ways
>> to use our rigs at low B+ to both preserve them and
>> to operate them without extensive parts replacement.
>> Results with receivers have been good.  "ARC-5" receivers
>> work well all the way down to 24 volts with external amplifed
>> speakers.  They have plenty of audio for earphones without the
>> amplification.  This allows them to be operated with a single
>> 24 volt, 2 amp power supply.  Over the years I've found no
>> down-side at all to this mode.  Despite dire warnings of
>> "cathode interface," I've had no trouble.
>>
>> A few years ago, I moved on to working with the transmitters.
>> I built a milli-watt drive 100 watt amplifier
>> and powered an "ARC-5" transmitter from only 24 volts.
>> The rig put out a good, stable signal of about 1/4 watt.
>>
>> Now, since I'm building the 160 mtr AN/ARC-5 rig,
>> I tried it with the MD-7 modulator.  I jumpered the
>> dynamotor connection pins, putting 24 volts B+ on all
>> the modulator and transmitter stages.  Remarkably,
>> the scope showed 1/4 watt output of nice, 100% modulated,
>> good-sounding signal.
>> Way more than enough to drive my amplifier.
>>
>> No way these modulation and transmitter stages continue
>> to work as intended all the way down to their A+ voltage
>> levels unless they were thoughtfully, ingeniusly designed
>> to do just that.  Try getting a DX-100 to do it ;-).
>>
>> I think we should find the final resting places of the men
>> who designed these sets and place a brass placard
>> next to their monument stone: "Unsung American Genius."
>>
>> 73 DE Dave AB5S
>>
>>
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> Milsurplus mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>>
>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>> Please help support this email list:
>> http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>



From wh7hg.hi at gmail.com  Tue Oct 11 14:06:25 2011
From: wh7hg.hi at gmail.com (Kludge)
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 08:06:25 -1000
Subject: [Milsurplus] [ARC5] Low B+: The Genius of A.R.C.
In-Reply-To: <E4.F8.06600.053849E4@cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com>
References: <E4.F8.06600.053849E4@cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com>
Message-ID: <C48063F398AB4942A056404E245518B2@Kongo>

Fight nice, kids.  :-D

Best regards,
 
Michael, WH7HG ex-K3MXO, ex-KN3MXO, WPE3ARS, BL01xh ex-Mensa A&P PP BGI 
I am me.  I?m the only one who?s qualified.
http://www.nationalmssociety.org/chapters/NTH/index.aspx
http://wh7hg.blogspot.com/
http://kludges-other-blog.blogspot.com
Hiki N?! 

-----Original Message-----
From: arc5-bounces at mailman.qth.net [mailto:arc5-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On
Behalf Of bcarling at cfl.rr.com
Sent: Tuesday, 11 October, 2011 07:57
To: jfor at quikus.com
Cc: ARC-5 List; milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [ARC5][Milsurplus] Low B+: The Genius of A.R.C.

Why am I so unsurprisrd by that retort? O:-)

Bry Carling

Sent from myTouch 4G, please excuse my brevity.



----- Reply message -----
From: "J. Forster" <jfor at quikus.com>
To: <bcarling at cfl.rr.com>
Cc: <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>, "ARC-5 List" <arc5 at mailman.qth.net>
Subject: [Milsurplus] Low B+: The Genius of A.R.C.
Date: Tue, Oct 11, 2011 12:59 pm


Will your marker say clueless?

The WS19 did what it was supposed to do, very well. It was a breakthrough
design.

-John

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


> Great reading David - OTOH I think there may be a marker near the designer
> of the WS19
> that says Dunce.
>
> On 11 Oct 2011 at 7:14, David Stinson wrote:
>
>> Most of you know I've been for years working on ways
>> to use our rigs at low B+ to both preserve them and
>> to operate them without extensive parts replacement.
>> Results with receivers have been good.  "ARC-5" receivers
>> work well all the way down to 24 volts with external amplifed
>> speakers.  They have plenty of audio for earphones without the
>> amplification.  This allows them to be operated with a single
>> 24 volt, 2 amp power supply.  Over the years I've found no
>> down-side at all to this mode.  Despite dire warnings of
>> "cathode interface," I've had no trouble.
>>
>> A few years ago, I moved on to working with the transmitters.
>> I built a milli-watt drive 100 watt amplifier
>> and powered an "ARC-5" transmitter from only 24 volts.
>> The rig put out a good, stable signal of about 1/4 watt.
>>
>> Now, since I'm building the 160 mtr AN/ARC-5 rig,
>> I tried it with the MD-7 modulator.  I jumpered the
>> dynamotor connection pins, putting 24 volts B+ on all
>> the modulator and transmitter stages.  Remarkably,
>> the scope showed 1/4 watt output of nice, 100% modulated,
>> good-sounding signal.
>> Way more than enough to drive my amplifier.
>>
>> No way these modulation and transmitter stages continue
>> to work as intended all the way down to their A+ voltage
>> levels unless they were thoughtfully, ingeniusly designed
>> to do just that.  Try getting a DX-100 to do it ;-).
>>
>> I think we should find the final resting places of the men
>> who designed these sets and place a brass placard
>> next to their monument stone: "Unsung American Genius."
>>
>> 73 DE Dave AB5S
>>
>>
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> Milsurplus mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>>
>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>> Please help support this email list:
>> http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>


______________________________________________________________
ARC5 mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/arc5
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:ARC5 at mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html


From RAFANTINI at salisbury.edu  Tue Oct 11 16:19:24 2011
From: RAFANTINI at salisbury.edu (Ray Fantini)
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 16:19:24 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] Low B+: The Genius of A.R.C.
In-Reply-To: <76ADD36120CC4E068518E009F56B99B5@DaddyPC>
References: <76ADD36120CC4E068518E009F56B99B5@DaddyPC>
Message-ID: <2DE6F17E951D824AAE8B8D0BF7579D810DF89D4276@MBX.salisbury.edu>

Not being critical because I have not done the work myself and have no experience using octal remote cutoff pentodes at low voltages but have to wonder why other then the convenience of having 24 or 28 volts there why you use such a low voltage?  Looking at the plate characteristics curves of the 12SK7 the tube appears to perform rather poorly below 40 to 50 volts and almost at the point of having no plate current at 20 volts. At 60 volts the tubes plate characteristics appear fairly uniform out to above 250 volts. Not that I have run any radios at that low a percentage of applied voltage I do operate most of the older tube radios I have at 80 to 90 % of design voltage, and looking at plate curves can see where you can get away with operating at 30% or around 75 volts on the plate of a radio designed for 250 but 24 volts would be on the verge of no plate current at all. 
I also wonder about the magnetic fields, being that IF coils are designed and spaced with an assumption of a given plate current and voltage that produced a given magnetic field and you are using only a fraction of the voltage and current wont the field be weaker? Would have thought that this may provide week coupling between stages or an inability to drive the next stage at all. Please understand that I am not questioning your work, if you have done this and it works your word is good enough for me, but what I am questioning are things like the alleged "all solid state" BC-348 where someone takes a hand full of FET and replaces the tubes and says that's all that is needed along with a nine volt battery. I just cannot see low voltages and low currents performing well in circuits designed for use with voltages a factor of ten times higher especially with something like an oscillator developing enough feedback to begin osculation.
Soon, whenever my junk ARR-41 dyno deck shows up I am starting work on a solid state inverter that will take place of the stock dyno in the ARR-41 that I have. The ARR-41 requires 250 and regulated 150 and may try experimenting with running the radio around 175 to 180 volts on the 250 volt buss and see if that makes any difference in the receivers performance. The regulated voltage to the PTO will have to stay the same but figure a 30% reduction in B+ won't be an issue.


From ka2ivy at verizon.net  Tue Oct 11 18:41:21 2011
From: ka2ivy at verizon.net (Bruce Gentry)
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 18:41:21 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] Low B+: The Genius of A.R.C.
In-Reply-To: <2DE6F17E951D824AAE8B8D0BF7579D810DF89D4276@MBX.salisbury.edu>
References: <76ADD36120CC4E068518E009F56B99B5@DaddyPC>
	<2DE6F17E951D824AAE8B8D0BF7579D810DF89D4276@MBX.salisbury.edu>
Message-ID: <4E94C611.9080509@verizon.net>



Ray Fantini wrote:
> Not being critical because I have not done the work myself and have no experience using octal remote cutoff pentodes at low voltages but have to wonder why other then the convenience of having 24 or 28 volts there why you use such a low voltage?  Looking at the plate characteristics curves of the 12SK7 the tube appears to perform rather poorly below 40 to 50 volts and almost at the point of having no plate current at 20 volts. 
>   
   The ARN-6 uses the 12SK7 and other common 12 volt tubes with  24 
volts on the plate. The tube complement and general design are close to 
theARN-7 that uses about 220 volts on the plates. The big difference is 
the audio output, the ARN-6 uses two 26A7s in push pull paralell instead 
of a single 12A6 in the ARN-7.  The ARN-7 has far higher audio output 
and sounds far better to my ears. I also think the 26A6 used in the 
R-392 is just a 6BA6 with a 24 volt filament.  I wonder if the tube 
manuals just didn't bother to plot  operation at what they considered 
foolishly low voltages nobody would ever use.  This is all rather 
fascinating, how tubes were used on transistor voltages at the dawn of 
that technology.

    Bruce Gentry,     KA2IVY

From jydsk at tds.net  Tue Oct 11 19:20:17 2011
From: jydsk at tds.net (Steve Hilsz)
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 16:20:17 -0700
Subject: [Milsurplus] Ceramic Tube Sockets
Message-ID: <B67B8B905C72449BB4E8524FCB7BCD42@StevePC>

Here's a deal on 5 ceramic octal tube sockets on a site different from ePay: http://www.bonanza.com/listings/Ceramic-tube-sockets-8-pin-octal/42050014

Steve Hilsz

From smithab11 at comcast.net  Tue Oct 11 22:32:13 2011
From: smithab11 at comcast.net (B Smith)
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 22:32:13 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] Low B+: The Genius of A.R.C.
In-Reply-To: <2DE6F17E951D824AAE8B8D0BF7579D810DF89D4276@MBX.salisbury.edu>
References: <76ADD36120CC4E068518E009F56B99B5@DaddyPC>
	<2DE6F17E951D824AAE8B8D0BF7579D810DF89D4276@MBX.salisbury.edu>
Message-ID: <9CBB91058189417C8BA6AEEFBE4481DA@Dell560>

Some of us are missing the point about lower voltage operation.  You 
can look at  tube characteristics curves all day long and reach the 
same conclusion.  It is obvious that the equipment is not going to 
perform to  exact published specifications, however the  equipment is 
under less voltage stress and will last longer without extensive 
replacement of caps etc and will perform well enough for amateur use. 
The equipment is not for a "space probe" - - -it is for use in a hobby 
environment and the idea is to preserve, use, and demonstrate  the 
equipment.
It amazes  me  that you can take a 70 year old receiver, power it up 
using lower voltages and it works immediately.


k4che 


From arc5 at ix.netcom.com  Tue Oct 11 22:41:53 2011
From: arc5 at ix.netcom.com (David Stinson)
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 21:41:53 -0500
Subject: [Milsurplus] BC-474 Fans
Message-ID: <302FDFAE5BEF4EEE9623D758884E12EE@DaddyPC>

If you have a BC-474 that needs a case:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/150675291349

Not mine, etc.


From arc5 at ix.netcom.com  Tue Oct 11 22:43:55 2011
From: arc5 at ix.netcom.com (David Stinson)
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 21:43:55 -0500
Subject: [Milsurplus] Low B+: The Genius of A.R.C.
In-Reply-To: <2DE6F17E951D824AAE8B8D0BF7579D810DF89D4276@MBX.salisbury.edu>
References: <76ADD36120CC4E068518E009F56B99B5@DaddyPC>
	<2DE6F17E951D824AAE8B8D0BF7579D810DF89D4276@MBX.salisbury.edu>
Message-ID: <6DBCE57C040A41909097503763E6EF0B@DaddyPC>

Well Ray, I tried to answer your letter but 
the too-tight spam filters are blocking it.
It's pretty long and I'm not going to spend all night trying to guess
what innocent word caused the block..... sigh.


From w7qho at aol.com  Wed Oct 12 00:43:08 2011
From: w7qho at aol.com (mac)
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 21:43:08 -0700
Subject: [Milsurplus] BC-474 Fans
In-Reply-To: <302FDFAE5BEF4EEE9623D758884E12EE@DaddyPC>
References: <302FDFAE5BEF4EEE9623D758884E12EE@DaddyPC>
Message-ID: <35FB72BB-2E4C-4553-BC80-83D497D6A87F@aol.com>

Wonder why he didn't show us the inside?

DD

*************

On Oct 11, 2011, at 7:41 PM, David Stinson wrote:

> If you have a BC-474 that needs a case:
>
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/150675291349
>
> Not mine, etc.
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html


From WA5CAB at cs.com  Wed Oct 12 02:22:55 2011
From: WA5CAB at cs.com (WA5CAB at cs.com)
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 02:22:55 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] BC-474 Fans
Message-ID: <195a5.81fa561.3bc68c3f@cs.com>

Or the front.  And is it gray or green?

In a message dated 10/11/2011 23:43:22 PM Central Daylight Time, 
w7qho at aol.com writes: 
> Wonder why he didn't show us the inside?
> 
> DD
> 
> *************
> 
> On Oct 11, 2011, at 7:41 PM, David Stinson wrote:
> 
> >If you have a BC-474 that needs a case:
> >
> >http://www.ebay.com/itm/150675291349
> >
> >Not mine, etc.
> >
> 

Robert Downs - Houston
wa5cab dot com (Web Store)
MVPA 9480

From arc5 at ix.netcom.com  Wed Oct 12 06:10:31 2011
From: arc5 at ix.netcom.com (David Stinson)
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 05:10:31 -0500
Subject: [Milsurplus] 24V B+
Message-ID: <B22A654C7E1747A1A6088061FE39174D@DaddyPC>

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ray Fantini" <RAFANTINI at salisbury.edu>
To: "David Stinson" <arc5 at ix.netcom.com>; <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] Low B+: The Genius of A.R.C.

> Not being critical because I have not done the work myself and have
> no experience using octal remote cutoff pentodes at low voltages
> but have to wonder why other then the convenience of having
>24 or 28 volts there why you use such a low voltage? ...

Thanks for writing, Ray.
No offense taken at all, good sir!
I'm glad to be invited to discuss it.
There are several issues and I hope our readers will be patient
while I make the case for B+ at this low level.
All that follows is, of course, IMHO and YMMV ;-).

Now, this concerns only certain sets, including the "ARC-5"
types. Some sets do require more than 24 Volts.
The Australian AR8 needs at least 45 volts,
while the DU-1 DFer works fine all the way down to 12.
For this discussion, I'll stick to just the ARC-5 and other
sets that will work at 24 Volts.

I'm a fairly pragmatic person; for me,
this is a "benefit vs. cost" calculation.
Performance is not my first priority.
In fact, it's far down the list.
I can either make some contacts with friends
on 40 or 80 meters or I can't.
"Performance" beyond this personal standard is not an issue.

I believe that, in a word of radios like
the Kenwood TH-F6-AT, even attempting to maximize
"performance" from 80-year-old technology is folly;
it's like bringing a horse and buggy to a NASCAR race.
No matter how "good" the buggy is, or how well
you tweek it- if you came to race, you're already dead.
The wiser course is to crank back on the ambitions
one has for that 80-year-old buggy, relax and go
for an easy, sunny ride in the country that doesn't
strain the horse so much. There are joys in a
nice, slow ride in a buggy you brought back
into service by your own sweat.
Attemping to "race" it will tear it up
and make you look bad.

I leave performance to the "plastic" radios.
If I want to QSO some rare DX or roast birds on the wing,
I'll use one of those Yea-Com-Woodie boxes that look like
they were built out of LEGO blocks.
I work with WWII radios because I honor their history,
I admire their design within the context of their age,
and because it's challenging to get them running
while respecting their integrity as historic artifacts.
I'm not interested in "noise figures" or "efficiency"
or "operating points" or any of that.
All it takes to get all of that stuff you want is money.
If a fella has the dough, he can buy a rig
that will give him "performance."

That being said: here is my "benefit vs. cost" analysis
for using 24-28 volts for B+:

Benefits:
1. Componant and Set preservation.
Many (most) caps that leak awfully at 200 volts
work just fine at 28 volts.
Even if they do leak, it's micro (or pico) amps.
With only 24 volts B+, a leaky grid coupling cap
doesn't leak enough to mung the following stage bias.
Screen dropping resistors that would have
been roasted don't get warm.
Even when resistors have gone way out of tolerance,
the sets usually function. The lower the B+,
the less strain and the less leakage
2. Minimizes "surgery." In most cases, I need only replace
caps that are flat short or nearly so, and only resistors
that have gone totally "off the reservation"
(i.e. a 500K that's at 3 megs, or a 1 meg at 12).
De-Ox-it the switches/pots/rollers, lube where needed,
check the tubes, then put the juice to it.
Nine times out of ten the set comes right up without trouble.
If there is a big problem, the low B+ prevents major damage.
3. Economy and Simplicity. A single power supply is easy.
If I'm going to build a second supply for 60 or 90V B+,
I haven't saved anything. Might as well build a 250V.
4. Encouragement for Newbies. We need to encourage
new people to investigate our sets and build an interest.
The simpler it is for them to actually get some noise out
of a set, the more likely they are to try it. They can get a
24 Volt, two Amp supply out of a wall wart these days.
Building a 200 V+ supply to go with it is more than most
newbies wish to tackle early-on. And it's dangerous for them,
leading to:
5. Safety. I'm not getting younger. I'm getting older, clumsier
and forgetful. Sorry, but so are you. I work on gear powered at
12, 24 and 48 volts all day long. I can prod, finger-poke and
fiddle with that stuff all day and about all that will happen is
an occasional tickle. It gets to be habit to look for intermits
by pushing here and poking there. When it's not 24
but 600 Volts you're poking, that "senior moment"
can kill you worm-chow dead.

I'm sure there are others, but these are enough.

Costs:
1. Reduced, but still acceptable, performance.
2. Need an inexpensive amplified speaker.
I can buy one new at Frys for ten bucks,
or find one at a yard sale for 50-cents.

That's it. I can't think of any other disadvantage of 24 Volts B+
vs. any higher voltage in these sets.

For me, the advantages to 24V B+ are clear
and the argument from "performance" is irrelevant.
Others may feel challenged to get the "best" performance
they can from their horse and buggy, and Godspeed to them.
I think it's a bootless errand, but "whatever floats ya boat" ;-).

Thanks for putting-up with my blow-veation, Ray.

73 OM DE Dave AB5S


From k2cby at optonline.net  Wed Oct 12 08:34:06 2011
From: k2cby at optonline.net (k2cby)
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 08:34:06 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] Low B+: The Genius of A.R.C.
Message-ID: <78BB3FF224E9432F9F134000A529C964@milesdesk>

Just to put in my 2 cents worth.

 

I assume you guys remember that in the early 1960s the folks at Harrison
brought out a whole line of tubes for auto radios that were intended to
operate with 12 volts on the plates.

 

That - along with the nuvistor - was about the last effort to stop the great
tidal wave of silicon.

 

 

Miles B. Anderson, K2CBY
16 Round Pond Lane
Sag Harbor, NY 11963
Tel.: (631) 725-4400

Fax.: (631) 725-2223
e-mail: k2cby at optonline.net 


From RAFANTINI at salisbury.edu  Wed Oct 12 10:02:07 2011
From: RAFANTINI at salisbury.edu (Ray Fantini)
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 10:02:07 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] 24V B+
In-Reply-To: <B22A654C7E1747A1A6088061FE39174D@DaddyPC>
References: <B22A654C7E1747A1A6088061FE39174D@DaddyPC>
Message-ID: <2DE6F17E951D824AAE8B8D0BF7579D810DF89D438A@MBX.salisbury.edu>

All the reasons for operation at lower B+ are good and valid reasons but my point is that by operating the radio at or around 80 to 90 volts still provides most of the benefits and allows the tubes to act as amplifiers. Look at the plate voltage vs. plate current curves.

http://www.nj7p.org/Tube4.php?tube=6sk7

According to the published curve you can see the tube will be an amplifier at maybe 40 or 50 volts but at 20 volts the tube may just be passive at best.  Did not look at the 12K7 or the 12SR7 but the 12SK7 just not a tube designed for low voltage operation.
Myself I am not concerned with the ARC-5 as much as trying to develop guidelines for operating many of the tube items I have and use. Good examples are my BC-348 or HRO-RAS receivers because I use these radios on air at the home QTH for long range QSO, so I would prefer that they work along the lines of original design. If you have the pristine example of a radio that you feel is historically significant that's going to limit what you're willing to risk with it but for me the radios I have are going to be operated. It's like the vintage or antique car thing, many people own cars that are so expensive or unique that they don't dare drive them, but if I own a car you can be cretin that it will be out there on the road. Maybe that's why I prefer to get the radios that have been hacked or modified? But that is the reason for looking into how to get the maximum life from tubes that in many cases are over fifty years old. 
A interesting side note to all this is that I have found of the primary tube radios that I am using in the shack that include the BC-348, HRO/RAS, ARC-38 and although it has no military significance my RCA-BTA1 160 meter transmitter that the military radios are very good on operating the tubes well within their envelope and with my limited use the tubes last forever. The broadcast transmitter if ran at full power will eat 807 and 833 tubes at least once a year and most Ham transmitters with tubes appear to always be in need of output tubes but the military stuff almost never needs new tubes. But for reasons that I cannot explain I become obsessed with obtaining spare tubes, and in many cases spare radios to support the things that I am using. Think I have enough spare tubes to last for at least the next fifty years.


RF

From kb1fqg at yahoo.com  Wed Oct 12 10:41:12 2011
From: kb1fqg at yahoo.com (John Flood)
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 07:41:12 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] Two RX Multicouplers CU-872/U F.S. at Nearfest
Message-ID: <1318430472.95154.YahooMailNeo@web84103.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Greetings,
?
Just a heads up 'cause I love you guys...? well... at least respect you.????Feel free to contact me to?buy these now for delivery at Nearfest Friday.
?
Two each CU-872/U, HF RX Multicouplers.? Eight outputs, Nick's Navy radio sight has good info on them.? These have I think 24 6922's(6DJ8) in each unit all with black tube shields.? (sorry not IERC).? I have resisted the temptation to pull the shields looking for amperex gold pin PQ's, However one shield is missing and it is a Sylvania.? Still desireable to some extent to the audiophools. They are as I got them, untested, one has had the power line filter block removed and a line cord installed.? The other is complete but I do not have the three pin anphenol power plug/cord.? They are $50 each "as is".? Vintage?dust included?at no additional charge!!!? No time for photos before the flea.? Just pulled them out of a small pile close to the washing machine and if they go away I'll eliminate one of the things I get yelled at for!? Heck, the 6922's alone are worth at least that if they are all good!?? To many little kids running around for me
 to have time to?play with these and I have , dare I say it here, two mil. surplus solid state units I use now.? So get 'em quick before I yield to temptation and part these out to audiophools!
?
John Flood
KB1FQG
978-979-2807

From wrcromwell at gmail.com  Wed Oct 12 12:44:54 2011
From: wrcromwell at gmail.com (Bill Cromwell)
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 12:44:54 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] Low B+: The Genius of A.R.C.
In-Reply-To: <mailman.57.1318435262.30642.milsurplus@mailman.qth.net>
References: <mailman.57.1318435262.30642.milsurplus@mailman.qth.net>
Message-ID: <1318437894.3804.30.camel@lancelot>

Hi,

I have operated my command receivers with as little as 40 volts, and not
down to 12 or 24 volts on the plates. I know other hams who routinely
operate radios with plate voltages as low as 12 volts. I'm going to give
it a try now this has come up on the list. 

I tried using three or four 9 volt batteries in series to see if the
radios would resume operation without replacing the leaky caps - and
they did. As to whether or not tubes can 'amplify' with dramatically
reduced plate voltages, well... the incoming signals on my antennas are
in the low microvolts and picowatts. In my earphones the levels are much
higher. The volume has to be turned down a bit. Further..these are
superhets with VFOs and BFOs running for CW/SSB reception. The last I
knew tubes have to amplify in order to oscillate. With new caps and all
I still run at about 90 volts on the plates. I see no need to lay on
full steam of 250 volts.

73,

Bill  KU8H


From kk5f at earthlink.net  Wed Oct 12 16:09:52 2011
From: kk5f at earthlink.net (Mike Morrow)
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 15:09:52 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [Milsurplus] Low B+: The Genius of A.R.C.
Message-ID: <17396933.1318450193272.JavaMail.root@elwamui-hound.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

> The equipment is not for a "space probe"...

But what about "space charge"? :-)

The performance of those low screen/plate voltage tubes, which rely
on the space charge around the cathode, suffer greatly if the
*filament* voltage is low.  I suspect that conventional tubes at low
B+ would likewise see some improved performance if the filament supply
was near the high end of the permissible range.

There's some interesting info about the 12 vdc tubes that saw so much
use in car radios in the late 1950s through the mid-1960s at:

  http://www.junkbox.com/electronics/lowvoltagetubes.shtml

When I was 14, I bought several such radios for a dollar from a local
car junkyard.  They had Conelrad station markings.  All the car radios
had an RF stage ahead of the mixer.  That helped reduce the Morse images
that came in from strong coastal station signals in the 420 to 520 kHz
MF maritime band.  (I used a BC-453-A to copy those stations.)  With a
short wire antenna, they made top-performing AM BCB sets, compared to
almost any in-house AM BCB radio that could be purchased.  Because the
input connection could be shielded, I built single-band converters for
some of the shortwave BC bands to use with the in-house car radio.  (My
Dad's Drake 2-A was ham bands only.)  All this was in 1966.  I've still
got those car radios...but I think I scrapped the SW BCB converters after
I got a R-105/ARR-15 through Navy MARS in 1969.

Mike / KK5F

From arc5 at ix.netcom.com  Wed Oct 12 20:31:05 2011
From: arc5 at ix.netcom.com (David Stinson)
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 19:31:05 -0500
Subject: [Milsurplus] ARC-5 Transmitter at Low B+ (24 volts)
Message-ID: <DE1D6319A4C448819EE8140CAA6FA54B@DaddyPC>

Several folks have asked me about this so here goes.

Everything that you need to do to prepare the old girl 
for 600V B+, you still need to do for 24V B+.
Assuming most have just the transmitter and no accessories:

Be sure you have good tubes that haven't been popped 
with 1000 volts by some doofuss.

Lubrication and De-Ox-It where required.

Check the caps under the chassis to make sure they
still have their stator mounting spheres intact.

You will use the selector relay (under chassis) for keying.
Make sure the OSC. contact makes before the 
PA CATHODE contact, that the points are clean
and that the relay is not "sticky."

Disconnect one wire from the "ANT" relay and rotate
the contact around the contact end to keep it connected.

You'll need to transform the low output imped. to match
the average 50-ohm antenna.  Easiest way to do this is
a good quality capacitor in series with the antenna lead:

50 pFd for 40 meters.
75 pFd for 75 meters.
90 pFd for 80 meters.
240 pFd for 160 meters (1885 KC).
Anything -20%, +50% of these values will work OK.
At these low power levels, a good silver mica
or a quality NP0 ceramic disc will work fine.  
If the rig is in good shape, it's not going to drift around 
on you.  Don't introduce drift by using a cheap cap
that is thermally unstable.
You'll need caps with some "huevos" or a good variable
if you want to run the rig at full power later, 
but quality "babies" will work for 24 Voltin'.

Connect all the power pins and fil pin to 24 volts.
Key with the selector line.
Hook up to a 50-ohm load.
Start with the ANT COUPLING at about 4.
Roll the roller coil until you get max out.
Tweek the ANT COUPLING up and the roller
until you get max out.  If you're worried about it
or have reason to believe the PA tuning has been 
boogered-with, you can pull the side plugs,
loosen the lock screw and tweek the final tuning.

If you're keying the rig and it suddenly seems to de-tune
or take a big freq jump (and it's not the roller coil), 
turn the rig over and take a look at the ends of the 
stators on the three variables.  You'll see a small metal 
strip to which solder connection is made, and these are 
"pressed" onto the end of the stators.  The metal junction
between this strip and the ends of the stators have begun
to oxidize and this will cause intermittant detuning.
You'll need to use a good soldering gun to solder
one of the stator posts to the metal strip.  Be careful
not to use so much heat you warp the stator mounting 
spheres, which is a bigger problem than you want, 
believe me.  A good, well-flowed "tack" is all you need.
This is starting to show-up in the variables of some of 
the receivers and transmitters.

That's about it.  Let us all know how you do.

73 DE Dave AB5S


From arc5 at ix.netcom.com  Wed Oct 12 20:37:09 2011
From: arc5 at ix.netcom.com (David Stinson)
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 19:37:09 -0500
Subject: [Milsurplus] ARC-5 T-17 (1885 KC) Tuning Settings for 50 Ohms
Message-ID: <BF0CB58243334CA6A256FCDEED6F61DA@DaddyPC>

A couple of  folks asked for the 
ARC-5 T-17 (1885 KC) tuning settings for 50 Ohms:

Cap in series with the antenna lead is a variable;
tunes best into 50-ohm load at 230-240 pFd.
Roller coil:  14 on its scale.
Ant. Coupling: 6

Outputs a clean 30-watts in "stock" configuration
and modulates cleanly up from there on the MD-7.

73 Dave AB5S


From arc5 at ix.netcom.com  Wed Oct 12 20:40:29 2011
From: arc5 at ix.netcom.com (David Stinson)
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 19:40:29 -0500
Subject: [Milsurplus] More Later, Ya'll
Message-ID: <5A8CDC67FA674D029C9762A995262701@DaddyPC>

Got several letters to answer about the current project
and thank you all for writing, 
but I just got home from work and I'm whipped.
Will write more in the morning.
73 Dave S.


From mcenfalz at humboldt1.com  Thu Oct 13 00:00:12 2011
From: mcenfalz at humboldt1.com (Laura and Jim)
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 21:00:12 -0700
Subject: [Milsurplus] Low B+: The Genius of A.R.C.
Message-ID: <5CC119DAAF2D40E3887BBC844367E2DC@HomePC>

Not being made of The Stern Stuff and wanting to avoid a total disassembly/rebuild of my BC-342 and 314 to rid them of deeply buried, potentially troublesome bypass caps (BBOD's), I'm going to try this tonight!

El cheapo 12VAC transformer to warm the filaments, 12VDC 10AH battery for starters, Hi-Z 'phones. 

News at eleven!

73 DE JIM K6FWT

From wh7hg.hi at gmail.com  Thu Oct 13 00:15:54 2011
From: wh7hg.hi at gmail.com (Kludge)
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 18:15:54 -1000
Subject: [Milsurplus] Low B+: The Genius of A.R.C.
In-Reply-To: <9CBB91058189417C8BA6AEEFBE4481DA@Dell560>
References: <76ADD36120CC4E068518E009F56B99B5@DaddyPC><2DE6F17E951D824AAE8B8D0BF7579D810DF89D4276@MBX.salisbury.edu>
	<9CBB91058189417C8BA6AEEFBE4481DA@Dell560>
Message-ID: <20F96607ACDC40E4BB9A8AF7E9B445DE@Kongo>

-----Original Message-----
From: milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net
[mailto:milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of B Smith
> Some of us are missing the point about lower voltage operation.  You 
> can look at  tube characteristics curves all day long and reach the 
> same conclusion.

In any situation where theory (in this case, tube manuals) collides with the
real world, the real world invariably wins.  In this case, these receivers
are operating despite what the curves say, perhaps not to spec but well
enough to be useful.  But then, look at the TRF & regen receivers that are
being built that use three 9v batteries in series for B+ and were built with
equally low B+ from other battery combinations.  These tubes are also
operating at the skinny end of the performance curves yet there's no
argument they don't (and didn't) work and do so quite well.  This includes
the tetrodes & pentodes where screen voltage was used to control
regeneration.

If I follow Dave in running a full command Rx & Tx, I'll use the voltage
divider he suggested a year or two go in place of the modulator, wedge the
select and antenna relays closed and key the B+ as was originally done.
Power will come from a couple motorcycle batteries left over from another
project and a couple 45v B batteries I'm assembling for TRF & regen
receivers using stacked 9v batteries.  Yeah, I know, that's recklessly high
for B+ but what can I say.  I'm a wild and crazy sort of guy.  :-)

> It amazes  me  that you can take a 70 year old receiver, power it up 
> using lower voltages and it works immediately.

And, in a few cases, completely unaltered at full power.  

Best regards,
 
Michael, WH7HG ex-K3MXO, ex-KN3MXO, WPE3ARS, BL01xh ex-Mensa A&P PP BGI 
I am me.  I?m the only one who?s qualified.
http://www.nationalmssociety.org/chapters/NTH/index.aspx
http://wh7hg.blogspot.com/
http://kludges-other-blog.blogspot.com
Hiki N?! 


From wh7hg.hi at gmail.com  Thu Oct 13 14:54:11 2011
From: wh7hg.hi at gmail.com (Kludge)
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 08:54:11 -1000
Subject: [Milsurplus] Boonton gear
In-Reply-To: <8CE55A14E6EC29D-4B4-5D6B2@webmail-m077.sysops.aol.com>
References: <CAFcNxxU=Ynsij6xV1_sjhU645+jvVZHvJOuoonY5VDYmQ6HsGA@mail.gmail.com><2DE6F17E951D824AAE8B8D0BF7579D810DF88F4AE6@MBX.salisbury.edu><4E8F29B6.1000801@ar88.net><0bc601cc8520$1ba64170$0201a8c0@Muttley><758B9E56A84E4328A30F4DB830416776@Kongo><B3A61370CC184F9A832FA2D3D0F53963@LloydPC>
	<8E93230819CC41B590B50479C1F199C9@Kongo>
	<8CE55A14E6EC29D-4B4-5D6B2@webmail-m077.sysops.aol.com>
Message-ID: <F288A27D7DCD4E9A8A921CF138E10A95@Kongo>

From: jcoward5452 at aol.com [mailto:jcoward5452 at aol.com] 
Check out the unobtainium mount!

 

Huh?  Two of mine have ?em.  They came with ?em.  The ones that doesn?t is
the parts donor to keep the others alive.  

 

Best regards,

 

Michael, WH7HG ex-K3MXO, ex-KN3MXO, WPE3ARS, BL01xh ex-Mensa A&P PP BGI 

I am me.  I?m the only one who?s qualified.

 <http://www.nationalmssociety.org/chapters/NTH/index.aspx>
http://www.nationalmssociety.org/chapters/NTH/index.aspx

 <http://wh7hg.blogspot.com/> http://wh7hg.blogspot.com/

 <http://kludges-other-blog.blogspot.com/>
http://kludges-other-blog.blogspot.com

Hiki N?! 


From arc5 at ix.netcom.com  Thu Oct 13 20:04:41 2011
From: arc5 at ix.netcom.com (David Stinson)
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 19:04:41 -0500
Subject: [Milsurplus] My "ARC-5" Impressions (long)
In-Reply-To: <5.1.1.5.2.20111012143021.037e3320@exchange.uky.edu>
References: <5.1.1.5.2.20111012143021.037e3320@exchange.uky.edu>
Message-ID: <D727DD6618534C27B55D5318DFF93EF1@DaddyPC>


----- Original Message ----- 
>...  As they say "context is everything"....
>But your original comment about the "genius of the ARC-5" is 
>intriguing
>to me, at least.  As one who has spent a lot of time working with 
>them,
>what in your opinion are the most impressive or noteworthy aspects of
>the ARC-5 series design?....

Thanks for writing, Bob, and for bringing this up.
There's a lot to say, but I'll try to condense it down
to merely "huge."   :-D.

My admirations for the A.R.C Type "K" - derived equipment
are more anthropo-centric than technical,
though the tech certainly counts alot.

When speaking of the merits of the Type-K sets,
we do need to establish some context:
There are roughly three "eras" (chapters?)
to the "Aircraft Command Sets in WWII" story:

Pre-War 1932-1940:
Limited budgets and limited expectations, but great innovation.

Early War 1940-1944:
The era of rapid advancement and politicing for contracts.
Type-K is the climax of HF Command Sets for this era.

Late War 1944-1946:
VHF deployment gets serious,
but HF is still (and remains today) in service.
The great HF Command Set of this time is
unquestionably the ARC-2.

The Type-K story belongs in the "Early War" period.
Contrasting a Type-K set to those from a later period is
an invalid comparison, akin to setting a P-40 Warhawk
against an F-86 Saberjet.

Also, we need to remember the circumstances and missions
for which the sets were intended.
An HF Command Set was intended to provide reliable comm
from a pilot to other aircraft within a flight and to controllers.
Spare parts and logistics were not to be issues.
The set needed to be successfully supported and serviced
by young men with minimal experiance and training.

That said, the roots of my admiration are:

First- The Story.
I won't try to go into great detail here;
it would make a decent "Payton Place" novel.
A.R.C. was a graceful and "pricey" fish swimming
with big, hungry sharks and lumbering crocodiles.
Throughout these three periods there were competeing camps-
generals, admirals, Senators and every other cockeyed "cook"
sticking their stirring-spoon into the great big "pot"
of aircraft HF communication.
Crystal advocates, non-crystal advocates,
preachers singing the "Gospel of UK Radios,"
"prophets of Profit" and of Doom all creating a cacophony
of demands and counter-demands, and most of them with
enough "juice" to have caused any company serious trouble.
Even as late as Iwo Jima, you find after-action reports with
naval comm officers raving for/against VHF/HF crystal/non-crystal.
Out of this chaos, A.R.C. stuck to its chosen task of bringing
quality and surprising innovations in production
and support to their products.
Within their sphere, they were the "Apple" of their era.

Second- C-59 and Engineering Audacity.
If you look in the back of an early ATA or SCR-274N set,
you'll find an odd-looking critter named "C-59."
This little marvel is a hand-made capacitor, formed of sheets of
mica and conductor, stacked on a bolt for with a nut to "tweek"
the compression juuuust so to get the oscillator tracking right.
A.R.C. new it couldn't get the value or quality cap it needed to
make its design work correctly.  They could have whined and
gone for compromise.  Afterall; having to "hand-throw" custom
parts when you're looking at a contract for thousands of units
and with a "rush" deadline- that would be madness.
But that's just what these audacious engineers found a way to do.
And that great, mythical "bug-a-boo" of early MO-PA transmitters:
Drift, was all but eliminated as a real problem by A.R.C.'s
"ahead of its time" understanding of thermal dynamics
within their sets.   That bit of "coolness" needs its own post.
With these and other examples of pragmatic "can do,"
it's no surprise that A.R.C. produced the zenith of aircraft
Command Sets of the Pre- and Early War eras.

Third- Mission Mindfulness and Engineering Elegance.
The Type-K sets were built with the intended mission firmly
fixed in the engineer's minds.  Compared to anything else available
for the mission, they were easy to spare, easy to service
and easy to operate. They were more reliable and better-performing.
What makers like Bendix did with a leather gauntlet and a meat-axe,
A.R.C. did with a silk glove and a stiletto.
Assume you have an ARA receiver and and an ARB receiver on
your work bench.  Both have an open primary coil in the 2nd IF.
How long will it take you to fix them?
Open an ARC-5 transmitter and a TA-12 transmitter.
How many "single source, maker-only" spare parts will
you need to support the ARC?  For the Bendix?
How many mechanical failure modes can you count
in the ARC-5 vs. the TA-12?  How much training
and experiance will a Radio Mechanic need to competently
repair one vs. the other?

Forth:  The History.
>From 1939 to 1946, Mankind had a great and bloody discussion
with itself about just what kind of people we were going to be.
The tools our fathers and mothers used to settle that epic debate
deserve our study and our respect.

Fifth:  Personal Challenge.
It's easy to buy a "plastic radio" and work the world.
DXCC? Posh.... been done hundreds of times. Boooor-ing.
Work yet *another* low-orbit repeater satellite?  Yawn....
It's easy to trade money for a false sense of accomplishment.
I want something few- or no- other people will do.
I want some sweat in the game.   I want to fix on it
until my fingers bleed to make it work.  I want to look
at it and know I've actually DONE something besides
swipe a credit card and open a cardboard box.

And lastly...  Because it's so much FUN :-).

GL OM ES 73 DE Dave AB5S



From jfor at quikus.com  Thu Oct 13 20:28:19 2011
From: jfor at quikus.com (J. Forster)
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 17:28:19 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] My "ARC-5" Impressions (long)
In-Reply-To: <D727DD6618534C27B55D5318DFF93EF1@DaddyPC>
References: <5.1.1.5.2.20111012143021.037e3320@exchange.uky.edu>
	<D727DD6618534C27B55D5318DFF93EF1@DaddyPC>
Message-ID: <2235.12.6.201.169.1318552099.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>

Some time ago, I asked if the ARC-5 coils were pre-aligned, and then put
into the sets and sent to final test w/o further alignment? Does anybody
know wheather it was done this way or not?

Has anybody tried swapping coils between two functional, aligned
receivers? Do they swap without realignment?

Best,

-John

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




From usbssb at hotmail.com  Thu Oct 13 21:32:40 2011
From: usbssb at hotmail.com (greg mijal)
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 21:32:40 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] WYB: Octal triode 6C4 or 6S4
Message-ID: <BLU165-W4014703005AB94C5535B08C9E10@phx.gbl>





Hi: Looking to buy or trade for a decent used 6C4 or 6S4.Please reply with what you have and reuirements.I will get right back to you. Tnx & 73  Greg  WA7LYOKinston, NC 		 	   		  

From kk5f at earthlink.net  Thu Oct 13 22:06:26 2011
From: kk5f at earthlink.net (Mike Morrow)
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 22:06:26 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] [ARC5] My "ARC-5" Impressions (long)
Message-ID: <23940149.1318557986973.JavaMail.root@elwamui-huard.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

It was asked:

>> what in your opinion are the most impressive or noteworthy aspects of
>> the ARC-5 series design?

Hi Dave,

I think we may have some differing opinions on details, but not in our
admiration of these sets.  But...

I think what is impressive about the A.R.C. effort was how quickly the
1938 state-of-the-art Type K designs became woefully obsolete in less
than seven years.  The AN/ARC-5 is arguably the ultimate MF/HF command set,
yet it was arguably obsolete less than a year after introduction, replaced
where possible by the VHF-AM and later UHF-AM command sets that have
dominated since late WWII.  Sure there was a lot of HF command set use,
but it seems hard to justify that use from a performance standpoint.  But
when VHF networks and equipment were in short supply, one used what was
available even if there was better technology coming.

I know I also have an unpopular opinion about A.R.C.'s VHF technology.  I
know of no other way to characterize A.R.C. VHF developments except as an
almost complete and unproductive failure, especially when compared to the
output of Western Electric with the VHF AN/ARC-5 and AN/ARC-1, and Colonial
with the AN/ARC-3.  A.R.C.'s VHF products are very much in a blind alley,
and even their post-WWII VHF gear like the Type 12 was certainly second-string
or worse to what other manufacturers were producing.  (The RT-11A, part of the
A.R.C. Type 210 commercial VHF set, is a neat and no doubt very expensive set
from more than 15 years after WWII's end.)

There was little MF and no HF command set legacy in the post-WWII A.R.C.
designs, except for the oddball AN/ARC-39 and the AN/ARN-59.  There were only
the simplified R-10A BCB and R-11A beacon band receivers, and only R-13, -15,
and -19 modifications of the failed R-112 and R-113 VHF designs.

> The great HF Command Set of this time is unquestionably the ARC-2.

AFAIK, the AN/ARC-2 saw little real use as a command set.  In the aircraft using
it, every instance I've seen also used the AN/ARC-1 VHF command set, or the later
and similar AN/ARC-12 UHF command set, all replaced even later by the AN/ARC-27
UHF command set.  

I think it operated along side these VHF or UHF command sets as a sort of faux
HF liaison set, a role for which it was not suited if only by reason of its
low transmitter power.  But that's about the only reason it was on many
smaller post-WWII Navy and Coast Guard multi-engine aircraft with VHF or UHF 
command sets installed, such as the S2F-series carrier ASW aircraft.

There was also the innovative Bendix set that was about the same size as the
AN/ARC-2 which appeared two or three years earlier...the ten-channel crystal-
controlled 1942 Bendix RTA-1.  The USAAF adopted it unchanged as the AN/ARC-9
with a channel set of ten standard frequencies installed.  I suspect it
outperformed the AN/ARC-2, but it was much harder to put on a non-standard
frequency.

> Within their sphere, they were the "Apple" of their era.

That is likely an insult to A.R.C.  As one who has followed the business
policies of Apple since the Apple II in 1977, I have nothing but disgust
for Apple and the P.T. Barnum-hype associated with its founders and its
products.  If A.R.C. were like Apple, no other corporation, even in the
interest of national defense in time of emergency, would have been licensed
to produce any part of *anything* that A.R.C. claimed as intellectual property.
So forget about Stromberg-Carlson, Western Electric, Colonial, and others!
Forget about anything that could be serviced by anyone but A.R.C.!  Apple
is closed-market all the way.  Thank goodness than A.R.C. was not.

In spite of what I've written above, I admire the beauty and execution of
the engineering shown in the ultimate Type K, the AN/ARC-5.  It's undeniable,
and a real joy to see.  It hurts to see how hams thought they could improve
upon it.

I suppose if I were to identify an operational defect in the design of the
Type K sets, it would be the great difficulty of netting an easily upset
coffee-grinder receiver to the associated transmitter.  It can't be done
without external CFI equipment.  When the transmitter is keyed, the receiver
audio output is disconnected from the audio bus by relay, and the audio bus
is connected to the sidetone output of the modulator.  It would have been simple
to have a MONITOR/NORMAL switch such as was used in many liaison sets that would
drop out the sidtone relays and enable tuning a receiver to the output of the
transmitter during key-down.  That would have been especially valuable for the
ARA/ATA and SCR-274-N sets, for which there are pilot memoirs bemoaning the use
of coffee-grinder command sets, and praising channel-select VHF command sets.
The stabilized and locked-tuned MF/HF AN/ARC-5 receivers would have overcome
this netting problem somewhat.

> And lastly...  Because it's so much FUN :-).

It is amazing what clever people were able to accomplish with the early
technology that was available 75 years ago...with not a microprocessor
to be found for another 35 years!

Mike / KK5F

From ka2ivy at verizon.net  Thu Oct 13 22:09:28 2011
From: ka2ivy at verizon.net (Bruce Gentry)
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 22:09:28 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] My "ARC-5" Impressions (long)
In-Reply-To: <2235.12.6.201.169.1318552099.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
References: <5.1.1.5.2.20111012143021.037e3320@exchange.uky.edu>
	<D727DD6618534C27B55D5318DFF93EF1@DaddyPC>
	<2235.12.6.201.169.1318552099.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
Message-ID: <4E9799D8.6040504@verizon.net>

I have swapped IF  and BFO coils between sets with excellent results, 
the RF coil pack gets more dicey as you go up in frequency. However, 
they have always worked well without re-alignment, and the dial 
calibration was surprisingly close.  Tweaking the oscillator padder and 
trimmer was all that was really needed. The RF amp plate coil usually 
was on peak, and the antenna coil was brought dead on with the front 
panel antenna trimmer.  What fun it was, a couple bushel baskets full 
of  ARC-5s in various stages of disassembly and condition, and a best 
friend to  share it with. Warm winter nights and memories from 1967.   
Bruce Gentry , KA2IVY        

J. Forster wrote:
> Some time ago, I asked if the ARC-5 coils were pre-aligned, and then put
> into the sets and sent to final test w/o further alignment? Does anybody
> know wheather it was done this way or not?
>
> Has anybody tried swapping coils between two functional, aligned
> receivers? Do they swap without realignment?
>
> Best,
>
> -John
>
> ================
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>   

From ka2ivy at verizon.net  Thu Oct 13 22:14:10 2011
From: ka2ivy at verizon.net (Bruce Gentry)
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 22:14:10 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] WYB: Octal triode 6C4 or 6S4
In-Reply-To: <BLU165-W4014703005AB94C5535B08C9E10@phx.gbl>
References: <BLU165-W4014703005AB94C5535B08C9E10@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <4E979AF2.4050501@verizon.net>

The 6C4 is a 7 pin miniature, and the 6S4 is a 9 pin. If you are looking 
for an OCTAL triode,  a 6J5  is likely to be what you need.  Bruce
>
>
> Hi: Looking to buy or trade for a decent used 6C4 or 6S4.Please reply with what you have and reuirements.I will get right back to you. Tnx & 73  Greg  WA7LYOKinston, NC 		 	   		  
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>   

From RAFANTINI at salisbury.edu  Fri Oct 14 10:09:25 2011
From: RAFANTINI at salisbury.edu (Ray Fantini)
Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2011 10:09:25 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] WYB: Octal triode 6C4 or 6S4
In-Reply-To: <BLU165-W4014703005AB94C5535B08C9E10@phx.gbl>
References: <BLU165-W4014703005AB94C5535B08C9E10@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <2DE6F17E951D824AAE8B8D0BF7579D810DF89D4A1B@MBX.salisbury.edu>

6J5 is an octal base signal triode, the 6SN7 is an octal base twin triodes. 6SN7 is like two 6J5 in one envelope and way more common. 6C4 is the same tube but in 7 pin version with the 12AU7 being the 9 pin dual triode version and also common as dirt. Yea, I know that they are different tubes and before someone tells me as usual I have no idea what I am talking about and how they each have a different plate capacitance or power dissipation they are close enough and are all medium Mu triodes and if you just want to experiment with triodes that have good low voltage characteristics you can't go wrong with any of the above. Would find it hard to believe that you would not be able to find any of  the above locally but if you need one let me know off list and I can send you any of the above with a socket for $5 each, also think I have some little 6.3 volt 1.2 amp transformers same price each.
A story about the 6J5 back in the seventies when I was in tech school we had LabVolt electronics trainers that you would build up circuits with all the components mounted on little plastic blocks that you connect together with clip leads and I remember that they had a 6J5 for when you built up the tube circuits. Biggest problem was some people would connect B+ to the filaments so any time you had to do a tube project you had to check the tube and see if it was still good, maybe that was deliberate to teach us how to use tube testers?
RF

-----Original Message-----
From: milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net [mailto:milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of greg mijal
Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2011 9:33 PM
To: boatanchors at mailman.qth.net; milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
Subject: [Milsurplus] WYB: Octal triode 6C4 or 6S4





Hi: Looking to buy or trade for a decent used 6C4 or 6S4.Please reply with what you have and reuirements.I will get right back to you. Tnx & 73  Greg  WA7LYOKinston, NC 		 	   		  

From arc5 at ix.netcom.com  Fri Oct 14 10:38:17 2011
From: arc5 at ix.netcom.com (David Stinson)
Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2011 09:38:17 -0500
Subject: [Milsurplus] [ARC5] My "ARC-5" Impressions (long)
In-Reply-To: <4E982F9C.5030105@crosslink.net>
References: <5.1.1.5.2.20111012143021.037e3320@exchange.uky.edu>
	<D727DD6618534C27B55D5318DFF93EF1@DaddyPC>
	<4E982F9C.5030105@crosslink.net>
Message-ID: <0B5F71869B7B497FA42FA851D64FC363@DaddyPC>

Thanks for that post, Gordon.
For me, at least to a degree, "form over function" when it 
comes to A.R.C.'s radios.  Mike is, of course, right in 
many of his points, but those points concern system 
performance and deployment.  
The question and my post were rather about 
what I, personally, found attractive about the gear:
Story, History, Engineering Elegance & Audacity, and Challenge.

73 Dave AB5S


From jcoward5452 at aol.com  Fri Oct 14 16:55:09 2011
From: jcoward5452 at aol.com (jcoward5452 at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2011 16:55:09 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] Article in Nov. QST
Message-ID: <8CE58CAB14B2AFB-172C-3660D@webmail-m039.sysops.aol.com>


Never thought I'd see another conversion article again, but there is one in the latest QST. And it's a "strip the chassis of just about everything". But the guy is having fun with what he made.
 Jay KE6PPF

From w4ron at carolina.rr.com  Fri Oct 14 21:29:04 2011
From: w4ron at carolina.rr.com (w4ron at carolina.rr.com)
Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2011 21:29:04 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] ARC-2 on ebay
In-Reply-To: <mailman.17882.1318601382.6710.milsurplus@mailman.qth.net>
Message-ID: <20111015012904.Z9RC3.34370.root@cdptpa-web16-z01>

ARC-2 on ebay;
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=280754741342 


--
73, RON w4ron
http://radioheaven.homestead.com/menu.html
2012 Charlotte Antique Radio Conference
http://antiqueradiocharlotte.homestead.com/ 
My YouTUBE channel
http://www.youtube.com/user/w4ron


From usbssb at hotmail.com  Fri Oct 14 21:38:25 2011
From: usbssb at hotmail.com (greg mijal)
Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2011 21:38:25 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] [Boatanchors] WYB: Octal triode 6C4 or 6S4 - I
 meant WTB WTT: 6C4S or 6S4C
In-Reply-To: <4E98382D.5050205@ec.rr.com>
References: <BLU165-W4014703005AB94C5535B08C9E10@phx.gbl>,
	<4E98382D.5050205@ec.rr.com>
Message-ID: <BLU165-W9DB182CE97E470100D381C9E60@phx.gbl>



 Hi Al: Feeling better this week and getting the storage room project done. I meant to say: WTB or WTT: 6C4C or 6S4S That's what I'm looking for. QTY one of whichever one is available. These are octal tubes for sure.  Sorry about the reference to miniture tubes.  I'm catching heck for that!!!Hey, the two missing Lafayette HA 350's I told you about arrived in the post two days ago.  Along with my GF 12 transmitter.Weird huh? 73's GregWA7LYOKinston NC> Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2011 09:25:01 -0400
> From: anchor at ec.rr.com
> To: usbssb at hotmail.com
> Subject: Re: [Boatanchors] WYB: Octal triode 6C4 or 6S4
> 
> Good AM Greg,
> 	I hope you've had a quiet week, and feeling up a bit.
> 	I've got plenty of 6C4's, but I don't think that's what you meant. 
> Triode, but pretty dinky.  6S4's a TV tube, isn't it?  Not the same no. 
> you were wanting for the 500 earlier, is it?  I can't remember what that 
> was, a 6-something, which I don't have, but what were the subs?  I don't 
> think I have anything that size.  Can you rewire & use something like a 
> 6L6 or 6146 as a triode?  I know, that's a stretch.
> 73,
> Al
> 
> 
> On 10/13/2011 9:32 PM, greg mijal wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Hi: Looking to buy or trade for a decent used 6C4 or 6S4.Please reply with what you have and reuirements.I will get right back to you. Tnx&  73  Greg  WA7LYOKinston, NC 		 	   		
> > ________________________________
 		 	   		  

From ka2ivy at verizon.net  Fri Oct 14 22:25:58 2011
From: ka2ivy at verizon.net (Bruce Gentry)
Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2011 22:25:58 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] [Boatanchors] WYB: Octal triode 6C4 or 6S4 - I
 meant WTB WTT: 6C4S or 6S4C
In-Reply-To: <BLU165-W9DB182CE97E470100D381C9E60@phx.gbl>
References: <BLU165-W4014703005AB94C5535B08C9E10@phx.gbl>,
	<4E98382D.5050205@ec.rr.com>
	<BLU165-W9DB182CE97E470100D381C9E60@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <4E98EF36.6090700@verizon.net>



greg mijal wrote:
>  Hi Al: Feeling better this week and getting the storage room project done. I meant to say: WTB or WTT: 6C4C or 6S4S That's what I'm looking for. 
> After looking up the 6C4C, it looks like a directly heated triode 
> version of a 6L6. A 6B4 should directly substitute for it just fine.  
> If you can't find a 6C4C or 6B4, a triode connected 6L6 would probably 
> work. To do this, connect the screen grid pin 4 to plate pin 3, and 
> pin 8 cathode to the center tap of the filament transformer.   Good 
> luck in your search.


> Bruce
> 	 	   		  
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>   

From WA5CAB at cs.com  Fri Oct 14 22:57:53 2011
From: WA5CAB at cs.com (WA5CAB at cs.com)
Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2011 22:57:53 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] [Boatanchors] WYB: Octal triode 6C4 or 6S4 - I
	meant WTB WTT: 6C4S or 6S4C
Message-ID: <1cb20.12d37bc1.3bca50b0@cs.com>

OK.  Someone already said once that a 6C4 is a 7-pin miniature (which is 
true) and that a 6S4 is 9-pin (I don't happen to know the tube and didn't 
check but it probably is).  But even without looking up the tubes in a tube 
manual, neither one could possibly be an octal triode unless it had a directly 
heated cathode.  Which AFAIK were not built with 6.3 volt heaters.  

The nomenclature assignment standard for octal tubes is, by character, as 
follows:

1st or 1st and 2nd      One or two digits indicating heater voltage

Next or next two    Letter(s) assigned more or less sequentially from A to 
ZZ except first letter of "S" is special case,  And the letter or two 
letters is/are unique.  I.e, 6C4 and 6C5 wasn't allowed.

Next                        Single digit indicating the number of 
independent active elements in the tube.  Heater counted as two.  Heater with 
directly heated cathode also counted as two.

Next one to four        Suffix indicating verious things I won't try to 
delineate.

So a 6C4 as an octal tube would be as follows:

6     6.3 volt heater
C    Third one assigned
4     4 elements, 2 for heater, 1 for 1st anode, 1 for 2nd anode.
or
4     4 elements, 2 for heater and directly heated cathode, 1 for grid , 1 
for anode.

However, the only 6Cx octal is the 6C5 triode.


In a message dated 10/14/2011 20:39:12 PM Central Daylight Time, 
usbssb at hotmail.com writes: 
> Hi Al: Feeling better this week and getting the storage room project 
> done. I meant to say: WTB or WTT: 6C4C or 6S4S That's what I'm looking for. QTY 
> one of whichever one is available. These are octal tubes for sure.  Sorry 
> about the reference to miniture tubes.  I'm catching heck for that!!!Hey, 
> the two missing Lafayette HA 350's I told you about arrived in the post two 
> days ago.  Along with my GF 12 transmitter.Weird huh? 73's 
> GregWA7LYOKinston NC> Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2011 09:25:01 -0400
> >From: anchor at ec.rr.com
> >To: usbssb at hotmail.com
> >Subject: Re: [Boatanchors] WYB: Octal triode 6C4 or 6S4
> >
> >Good AM Greg,
> >    I hope you've had a quiet week, and feeling up a bit.
> >    I've got plenty of 6C4's, but I don't think that's what you meant. 
> >Triode, but pretty dinky.  6S4's a TV tube, isn't it?  Not the same no. 
> >you were wanting for the 500 earlier, is it?  I can't remember what that 
> >was, a 6-something, which I don't have, but what were the subs?  I don't 
> >think I have anything that size.  Can you rewire &use something like a 
> >6L6 or 6146 as a triode?  I know, that's a stretch.
> >73,
> >Al
> >
> >
> >On 10/13/2011 9:32 PM, greg mijal wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>Hi: Looking to buy or trade for a decent used 6C4 or 6S4.Please reply 
> with what you have and reuirements.I will get right back to you. Tnx&  73  
> Greg  WA7LYOKinston, NC                        
> 

Robert & Susan Downs - Houston
wa5cab dot com (Web Store)
MVPA 9480

From gl4d21a at juno.com  Fri Oct 14 23:26:47 2011
From: gl4d21a at juno.com (gl4d21a at juno.com)
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2011 03:26:47 GMT
Subject: [Milsurplus] [Boatanchors] WYB: Octal triode 6C4 or 6S4 - I
	meant WTB WTT: 6C4S or 6S4C
Message-ID: <20111014.222647.10242.0@webmail55.dca.untd.com>

It's some of those crazy Soviet designations.

73,
W5VPQ

---------- Original Message ----------
From: WA5CAB at cs.com
To: boatanchors at mailman.qth.net, milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] [Boatanchors] WYB: Octal triode 6C4 or 6S4 - I meant WTB WTT: 6C4S or 6S4C
Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2011 22:57:53 -0400 (EDT)

OK.  Someone already said once that a 6C4 is a 7-pin miniature (which is 
true) and that a 6S4 is 9-pin (I don't happen to know the tube and didn't 
check but it probably is).  But even without looking up the tubes in a tube 
manual, neither one could possibly be an octal triode unless it had a directly 
heated cathode.  Which AFAIK were not built with 6.3 volt heaters.  

The nomenclature assignment standard for octal tubes is, by character, as 
follows:

1st or 1st and 2nd      One or two digits indicating heater voltage

Next or next two    Letter(s) assigned more or less sequentially from A to 
ZZ except first letter of "S" is special case,  And the letter or two 
letters is/are unique.  I.e, 6C4 and 6C5 wasn't allowed.

Next                        Single digit indicating the number of 
independent active elements in the tube.  Heater counted as two.  Heater with 
directly heated cathode also counted as two.

Next one to four        Suffix indicating verious things I won't try to 
delineate.

So a 6C4 as an octal tube would be as follows:

6     6.3 volt heater
C    Third one assigned
4     4 elements, 2 for heater, 1 for 1st anode, 1 for 2nd anode.
or
4     4 elements, 2 for heater and directly heated cathode, 1 for grid , 1 
for anode.

However, the only 6Cx octal is the 6C5 triode.


In a message dated 10/14/2011 20:39:12 PM Central Daylight Time, 
usbssb at hotmail.com writes: 
> Hi Al: Feeling better this week and getting the storage room project 
> done. I meant to say: WTB or WTT: 6C4C or 6S4S That's what I'm looking for. QTY 
> one of whichever one is available. These are octal tubes for sure.  Sorry 
> about the reference to miniture tubes.  I'm catching heck for that!!!Hey, 
> the two missing Lafayette HA 350's I told you about arrived in the post two 
> days ago.  Along with my GF 12 transmitter.Weird huh? 73's 
> GregWA7LYOKinston NC> Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2011 09:25:01 -0400
> >From: anchor at ec.rr.com
> >To: usbssb at hotmail.com
> >Subject: Re: [Boatanchors] WYB: Octal triode 6C4 or 6S4
> >
> >Good AM Greg,
> >    I hope you've had a quiet week, and feeling up a bit.
> >    I've got plenty of 6C4's, but I don't think that's what you meant. 
> >Triode, but pretty dinky.  6S4's a TV tube, isn't it?  Not the same no. 
> >you were wanting for the 500 earlier, is it?  I can't remember what that 
> >was, a 6-something, which I don't have, but what were the subs?  I don't 
> >think I have anything that size.  Can you rewire &use something like a 
> >6L6 or 6146 as a triode?  I know, that's a stretch.
> >73,
> >Al
> >
> >
> >On 10/13/2011 9:32 PM, greg mijal wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>Hi: Looking to buy or trade for a decent used 6C4 or 6S4.Please reply 
> with what you have and reuirements.I will get right back to you. Tnx&  73  
> Greg  WA7LYOKinston, NC                        
> 

Robert & Susan Downs - Houston
wa5cab dot com (Web Store)
MVPA 9480
______________________________________________________________
Milsurplus mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html


____________________________________________________________
57-Year-Old Mom Looks 25
Mom Reveals Free Wrinkle Trick That Has Angered Doctors!
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/4e98fde53f218d7f055st04duc

From WA5CAB at cs.com  Sat Oct 15 00:37:03 2011
From: WA5CAB at cs.com (WA5CAB at cs.com)
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2011 00:37:03 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] [Boatanchors] WYB: Octal triode 6C4 or 6S4 - I
	meant WTB WTT:6C4S or 6S4C
Message-ID: <1e14b.1b374368.3bca67ef@cs.com>

Richard,

There are several octal base rectifiers with directly heated cathodes.  
5R4, 5U4, 5Y3, etc.   (5Y3 violates the nomenclature assignment guidelines),  
However, I didn't intend to imply that there were a lot of them, merely to 
illustrate how the system was supposed to work (but didn't always).

In a message dated 10/14/2011 23:01:46 PM Central Daylight Time, 
1oldlens1 at ix.netcom.com writes: 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: <WA5CAB at cs.com>
> To: <boatanchors at mailman.qth.net>; 
> <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
> Sent: Friday, October 14, 2011 7:57 PM
> Subject: Re: [Boatanchors] WYB: Octal triode 6C4 or 6S4 - I 
> meant WTB WTT:6C4S or 6S4C
> 
> 
> >OK.  Someone already said once that a 6C4 is a 7-pin 
> >miniature (which is
> >true) and that a 6S4 is 9-pin (I don't happen to know the 
> >tube and didn't
> >check but it probably is).  But even without looking up 
> >the tubes in a tube
> >manual, neither one could possibly be an octal triode 
> >unless it had a directly
> >heated cathode.  Which AFAIK were not built with 6.3 volt 
> >heaters.
> 
>      I suspect the 6C4 is actually a 6C5, which is a metal 
> octal triode often used as an oscillator tube. Not sure 
> about the other tube but it might be a 6S7 which is an octal 
> remote cut-off pentode with a grid cap similar to a 6K7 but 
> with a low current heater. But, there is also a 6S6, a 
> semi-remote cut-off pentode, and a 6S5, an octal base 
> magic-eye tube. There may be others my old handbooks don't 
> show. I don't think I have any of either. The 6C5 at least 
> was a fairly common tube and should not be too difficult to 
> find. If the other is, in fact, a 6S7 a 6K7 would probably 
> work provided the heater supply won't be overloaded.
>      FWIW I could find only one tube, the 6B4G, with an 
> octal base and filamentary heater. There may be others but 
> they must be very obscure.
> 
> 
> --
> Richard Knoppow
> Los Angeles
> WB6KBL
> dickburk at ix.netcom.com 
> 

Robert & Susan Downs - Houston
wa5cab dot com (Web Store)
MVPA 9480

From WA5CAB at cs.com  Sat Oct 15 00:38:36 2011
From: WA5CAB at cs.com (WA5CAB at cs.com)
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2011 00:38:36 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] [Boatanchors] WYB: Octal triode 6C4 or 6S4 - I
	meant WTB WTT:6C4S or 6S4C
Message-ID: <1e187.2b7916f3.3bca684c@cs.com>

OK.  I should have read ahead.  :-)

In a message dated 10/14/2011 23:04:04 PM Central Daylight Time, 
1oldlens1 at ix.netcom.com writes: 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: <WA5CAB at cs.com>
> To: <boatanchors at mailman.qth.net>; 
> <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
> Sent: Friday, October 14, 2011 7:57 PM
> Subject: Re: [Boatanchors] WYB: Octal triode 6C4 or 6S4 - I 
> meant WTB WTT:6C4S or 6S4C
> 
>     I meant only one tube with a _6.3V_ filamentary heater 
> and octal base. There are lots with other voltages. My first 
> reaction was that there must be many but I could find only 
> the 6B4G.

Robert Downs - Houston
wa5cab dot com (Web Store)
MVPA 9480

From w7qho at aol.com  Sat Oct 15 01:19:11 2011
From: w7qho at aol.com (mac)
Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2011 22:19:11 -0700
Subject: [Milsurplus] [Boatanchors] WYB: Octal triode 6C4 or 6S4 - I
	meant WTB WTT: 6C4S or 6S4C
In-Reply-To: <1cb20.12d37bc1.3bca50b0@cs.com>
References: <1cb20.12d37bc1.3bca50b0@cs.com>
Message-ID: <D12063F6-145A-4E80-987D-7F8D92FF3951@aol.com>

And the 6C5 contains a set of 6J7 elements internally triode  
connected.  Curious......

Dennis D.  W7QHO
Glendale, CA

*********************

On Oct 14, 2011, at 7:57 PM, WA5CAB at cs.com wrote:

> However, the only 6Cx octal is the 6C5 triode.


From kargo_cult at msn.com  Sat Oct 15 04:47:41 2011
From: kargo_cult at msn.com (Hue Miller)
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2011 01:47:41 -0700
Subject: [Milsurplus] Low B+
In-Reply-To: <mailman.16885.1318287300.6710.milsurplus@mailman.qth.net>
References: <mailman.16885.1318287300.6710.milsurplus@mailman.qth.net>
Message-ID: <SNT109-DS6567DB21E5F6A8452B171E4E60@phx.gbl>

Dave, I suspect other old timey transmitters will operate way below their 
spec'd voltages.
I bought an ATD many years back; the fellow who sold it told me had had 
determined it
worked by applying a B+ of 100 volts. Normal B+ on the final is 1000.   I 
also recall
reading, in a UK QRP magazine I think, about someone who was running a 
T-1154 in
QRP mode at about 5 watts.
And by the way, what about transformer prices these days? I suppose it's 
because
I was price-programmed during the spell this stuff was at its nadir of 
value.
-Hue 


From al at ar88.net  Sat Oct 15 05:18:52 2011
From: al at ar88.net (Al Klase)
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2011 05:18:52 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] [Boatanchors] WYB: Octal triode 6C4 or 6S4 - I
 meant WTB WTT: 6C4S or 6S4C
In-Reply-To: <BLU165-W9DB182CE97E470100D381C9E60@phx.gbl>
References: <BLU165-W4014703005AB94C5535B08C9E10@phx.gbl>,
	<4E98382D.5050205@ec.rr.com>
	<BLU165-W9DB182CE97E470100D381C9E60@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <4E994FFC.30701@ar88.net>

OK,

6C4C is a Russian tube:  
http://www.mif.pg.gda.pl/homepages/frank/sheets/113/6/6S4S.pdf

C is an S in Russian. (Remember the  CCCP?) So 6S4S makes some sense.

US 6B4G might be a reasonable substitutre, same filament current.  
http://www.mif.pg.gda.pl/homepages/frank/sheets/127/6/6B4G.pdf

Al

On 10/14/2011 9:38 PM, greg mijal wrote:
>
>   Hi Al: Feeling better this week and getting the storage room project done. I meant to say: WTB or WTT: 6C4C or 6S4S That's what I'm looking for. QTY one of whichever one is available. These are octal tubes for sure.  Sorry about the reference to miniture tubes.  I'm catching heck for that!!!Hey, the two missing Lafayette HA 350's I told you about arrived in the post two days ago.  Along with my GF 12 transmitter.Weird huh? 73's GregWA7LYOKinston NC>  Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2011 09:25:01 -0400
>> From: anchor at ec.rr.com
>> To: usbssb at hotmail.com
>> Subject: Re: [Boatanchors] WYB: Octal triode 6C4 or 6S4
>>
>> Good AM Greg,
>> 	I hope you've had a quiet week, and feeling up a bit.
>> 	I've got plenty of 6C4's, but I don't think that's what you meant.
>> Triode, but pretty dinky.  6S4's a TV tube, isn't it?  Not the same no.
>> you were wanting for the 500 earlier, is it?  I can't remember what that
>> was, a 6-something, which I don't have, but what were the subs?  I don't
>> think I have anything that size.  Can you rewire&  use something like a
>> 6L6 or 6146 as a triode?  I know, that's a stretch.
>> 73,
>> Al
>>
>>
>> On 10/13/2011 9:32 PM, greg mijal wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi: Looking to buy or trade for a decent used 6C4 or 6S4.Please reply with what you have and reuirements.I will get right back to you. Tnx&   73  Greg  WA7LYOKinston, NC 		 	   		
>>> ________________________________
>   		 	   		
> ______________________________________________________________
> Boatanchors mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/boatanchors
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Boatanchors at mailman.qth.net
>
> List Administrator: Duane Fischer, W8DBF
> ** For Assistance: dfischer at usol.com **
>
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

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



From military1944 at aol.com  Sat Oct 15 07:48:46 2011
From: military1944 at aol.com (BenG4BXD)
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2011 07:48:46 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] German UKwE in Czech or Polish colours FS
Message-ID: <8CE5947882910AD-14B8-3E516@Webmail-m109.sysops.aol.com>

Czech or Polish adption of a German UKwE receiver.
Missing tubes, power socket and outer case otherwise looks intact.
Nice restoration project. ?70 plus post etc.

pictures:  www.qsl.net/g4bxd/qmstores.htm

cheers, Ben. 

From arc5 at ix.netcom.com  Sat Oct 15 11:28:20 2011
From: arc5 at ix.netcom.com (David Stinson)
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2011 10:28:20 -0500
Subject: [Milsurplus] Article in Nov. QST
In-Reply-To: <8CE58CAB14B2AFB-172C-3660D@webmail-m039.sysops.aol.com>
References: <8CE58CAB14B2AFB-172C-3660D@webmail-m039.sysops.aol.com>
Message-ID: <6917C653AC7043578D6F6A091BDC63F2@DaddyPC>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: <jcoward5452 at aol.com>
Subject: [Milsurplus] Article in Nov. QST


> ....But the guy is having fun with what he made.

Yes... Vandals always say they're "having fun." ;-)

From jfor at quikus.com  Sat Oct 15 11:31:54 2011
From: jfor at quikus.com (J. Forster)
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2011 08:31:54 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] Article in Nov. QST
In-Reply-To: <6917C653AC7043578D6F6A091BDC63F2@DaddyPC>
References: <8CE58CAB14B2AFB-172C-3660D@webmail-m039.sysops.aol.com>
	<6917C653AC7043578D6F6A091BDC63F2@DaddyPC>
Message-ID: <1445.12.6.201.35.1318692714.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>

I don't get QST. What butchery does the article tout?

-John

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


>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <jcoward5452 at aol.com>
> Subject: [Milsurplus] Article in Nov. QST
>
>
>> ....But the guy is having fun with what he made.
>
> Yes... Vandals always say they're "having fun." ;-)
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>



From ianmwilson73 at gmail.com  Sat Oct 15 11:44:31 2011
From: ianmwilson73 at gmail.com (Ian Wilson)
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2011 08:44:31 -0700
Subject: [Milsurplus] Article in Nov. QST
In-Reply-To: <1445.12.6.201.35.1318692714.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
References: <8CE58CAB14B2AFB-172C-3660D@webmail-m039.sysops.aol.com>
	<6917C653AC7043578D6F6A091BDC63F2@DaddyPC>
	<1445.12.6.201.35.1318692714.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
Message-ID: <CAEz8jcS8J+UdPguRtu0Xz6CxgMKtR21ea8d=+yeT16qruymRLA@mail.gmail.com>

The QST article shows a BC-221 being used to house - and provide tuning for
-
a SWL-40.

I am considering what to do with my excess of LM (1) and BC-221 (2) that
have
been lightly modified, have no tuning books, and work flawlessly apart from
scratchy
switches and pots. One plan is to build a decent heterodyne VFO. That way
the
very nice but valueless (in both financial and historical terms) units will
be put to
some use.

73, ian K3IMW

From military1944 at aol.com  Sat Oct 15 11:55:28 2011
From: military1944 at aol.com (BenG4BXD)
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2011 11:55:28 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] Article in Nov. QST
In-Reply-To: <CAEz8jcS8J+UdPguRtu0Xz6CxgMKtR21ea8d=+yeT16qruymRLA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <8CE58CAB14B2AFB-172C-3660D@webmail-m039.sysops.aol.com><6917C653AC7043578D6F6A091BDC63F2@DaddyPC><1445.12.6.201.35.1318692714.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
	<CAEz8jcS8J+UdPguRtu0Xz6CxgMKtR21ea8d=+yeT16qruymRLA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <8CE5969FEE8A847-14B8-425E0@Webmail-m109.sysops.aol.com>


I made one BC221 into a receiver. Another into a VFO and I was going to
make one into a QRP rx/tx for field use but have not got around to it
yet.

Too good to throw away and impossible to sell to newbies as they don't
know what they are.

Ben.


==========================================
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] Article in Nov. QST


The QST article shows a BC-221 being used to house - and provide tuning
for-a SWL-40.I am considering what to do with my excess of LM (1) and
BC-221 (2) thathavebeen lightly modified, have no tuning books, and
work flawlessly apart fromscratchyswitches and pots. One plan is to
build a decent heterodyne VFO. That waythevery nice but valueless (in
both financial and historical terms) units willbe put tosome use.73,
ian K3IMW

From WA5CAB at cs.com  Sat Oct 15 12:00:12 2011
From: WA5CAB at cs.com (WA5CAB at cs.com)
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2011 12:00:12 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] [Boatanchors] WYB: Octal triode 6C4 or 6S4 - I
	meant WTB WTT: 6C4S or 6S4C
Message-ID: <81981.44603fa9.3bcb080c@cs.com>

OK.  Now it all makes sense.  I had forgotten about the C/S thingy.  I 
don't have any info on the Russian tube but if looking for a substitute (and if 
the 6S4S is a triode), the later RCA handbooks say only that a 6B4G is 
essentially a 6-volt octal based 2A3.  So specs will be found under 2A3 except 
for heater and basing.

In/ a message dated 10/15/2011 04:18:59 AM Central Daylight Time, 
al at ar88.net writes: 
> OK,
> 
> 6C4C is a Russian tube:  
> http://www.mif.pg.gda.pl/homepages/frank/sheets/113/6/6S4S.pdf
> 
> C is an S in Russian. (Remember the  CCCP?) So 6S4S makes some sense.
> 
> US 6B4G might be a reasonable substitutre, same filament current.  
> http://www.mif.pg.gda.pl/homepages/frank/sheets/127/6/6B4G.pdf
> 
> Al
> 
> On 10/14/2011 9:38 PM, greg mijal wrote:
> >
> >   Hi Al: Feeling better this week and getting the storage room project 
> done. I meant to say: WTB or WTT: 6C4C or 6S4S That's what I'm looking for. 
> QTY one of whichever one is available. These are octal tubes for sure.  
> Sorry about the reference to miniture tubes.  I'm catching heck for 
> that!!!Hey, the two missing Lafayette HA 350's I told you about arrived in the post 
> two days ago.  Along with my GF 12 transmitter.Weird huh? 73's 
> GregWA7LYOKinston NC>  Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2011 09:25:01 -0400
> >>From: anchor at ec.rr.com
> >>To: usbssb at hotmail.com
> >>Subject: Re: [Boatanchors] WYB: Octal triode 6C4 or 6S4
> >>
> >>Good AM Greg,
> >>    I hope you've had a quiet week, and feeling up a bit.
> >>    I've got plenty of 6C4's, but I don't think that's what you meant.
> >>Triode, but pretty dinky.  6S4's a TV tube, isn't it?  Not the same no.
> >>you were wanting for the 500 earlier, is it?  I can't remember what that
> >>was, a 6-something, which I don't have, but what were the subs?  I don't
> >>think I have anything that size.  Can you rewire&  use something like a
> >>6L6 or 6146 as a triode?  I know, that's a stretch.
> >>73,
> >>Al
> >>
> >>
> >>On 10/13/2011 9:32 PM, greg mijal wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>Hi: Looking to buy or trade for a decent used 6C4 or 6S4.Please reply 
> with what you have and reuirements.I will get right back to you. Tnx&   73  
> Greg  WA7LYOKinston, NC                        
> 

Robert Downs - Houston
wa5cab dot com (Web Store)
MVPA 9480

From jfor at quikus.com  Sat Oct 15 12:08:49 2011
From: jfor at quikus.com (J. Forster)
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2011 09:08:49 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] Article in Nov. QST
In-Reply-To: <CAEz8jcS8J+UdPguRtu0Xz6CxgMKtR21ea8d=+yeT16qruymRLA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <8CE58CAB14B2AFB-172C-3660D@webmail-m039.sysops.aol.com>
	<6917C653AC7043578D6F6A091BDC63F2@DaddyPC>
	<1445.12.6.201.35.1318692714.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
	<CAEz8jcS8J+UdPguRtu0Xz6CxgMKtR21ea8d=+yeT16qruymRLA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1506.12.6.201.43.1318694929.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>

Thanks.

I don't care a whit what happens to gear that has already been ham-hacked,
but such articles do lead to the destruction of irreplacable, unhacked
gear, which is a tragedy.

-John

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

> The QST article shows a BC-221 being used to house - and provide tuning
> for
> -
> a SWL-40.
>
> I am considering what to do with my excess of LM (1) and BC-221 (2) that
> have
> been lightly modified, have no tuning books, and work flawlessly apart
> from
> scratchy
> switches and pots. One plan is to build a decent heterodyne VFO. That way
> the
> very nice but valueless (in both financial and historical terms) units
> will
> be put to
> some use.
>
> 73, ian K3IMW
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>



From bcarling at cfl.rr.com  Sat Oct 15 12:33:10 2011
From: bcarling at cfl.rr.com (=?utf-8?B?YmNhcmxpbmdAY2ZsLnJyLmNvbQ==?=)
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2011 12:33:10 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] =?utf-8?q?Article_in_Nov=2E_QST?=
Message-ID: <B0.8F.15901.5C5B99E4@cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com>

But it may be preferable to see Ian's kind of practical miss rather than dumpsterizing the things.

Bry Carling

Sent from myTouch 4G, please excuse my brevity.



----- Reply message -----
From: "J. Forster" <jfor at quikus.com>
To: "Ian Wilson" <ianmwilson73 at gmail.com>
Cc: <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
Subject: [Milsurplus] Article in Nov. QST
Date: Sat, Oct 15, 2011 12:08 pm


Thanks.

I don't care a whit what happens to gear that has already been ham-hacked,
but such articles do lead to the destruction of irreplacable, unhacked
gear, which is a tragedy.

-John

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

> The QST article shows a BC-221 being used to house - and provide tuning
> for
> -
> a SWL-40.
>
> I am considering what to do with my excess of LM (1) and BC-221 (2) that
> have
> been lightly modified, have no tuning books, and work flawlessly apart
> from
> scratchy
> switches and pots. One plan is to build a decent heterodyne VFO. That way
> the
> very nice but valueless (in both financial and historical terms) units
> will
> be put to
> some use.
>
> 73, ian K3IMW
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>


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

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

From bcarling at cfl.rr.com  Sat Oct 15 12:36:24 2011
From: bcarling at cfl.rr.com (=?utf-8?B?YmNhcmxpbmdAY2ZsLnJyLmNvbQ==?=)
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2011 12:36:24 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] =?utf-8?q?Article_in_Nov=2E_QST?=
Message-ID: <ED.33.15901.986B99E4@cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com>

Mods... not "miss" - that was my not-so-smart phone meddling.

Bry Carling

Sent from myTouch 4G, please excuse my brevity.



----- Reply message -----
From: "bcarling at cfl.rr.com" <bcarling at cfl.rr.com>
To: <jfor at quikus.com>, "Ian Wilson" <ianmwilson73 at gmail.com>
Cc: <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
Subject: [Milsurplus] Article in Nov. QST
Date: Sat, Oct 15, 2011 12:33 pm


But it may be preferable to see Ian's kind of practical miss rather than dumpsterizing the things.

Bry Carling

Sent from myTouch 4G, please excuse my brevity.



----- Reply message -----
From: "J. Forster" <jfor at quikus.com>
To: "Ian Wilson" <ianmwilson73 at gmail.com>
Cc: <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
Subject: [Milsurplus] Article in Nov. QST
Date: Sat, Oct 15, 2011 12:08 pm


Thanks.

I don't care a whit what happens to gear that has already been ham-hacked,
but such articles do lead to the destruction of irreplacable, unhacked
gear, which is a tragedy.

-John

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

> The QST article shows a BC-221 being used to house - and provide tuning
> for
> -
> a SWL-40.
>
> I am considering what to do with my excess of LM (1) and BC-221 (2) that
> have
> been lightly modified, have no tuning books, and work flawlessly apart
> from
> scratchy
> switches and pots. One plan is to build a decent heterodyne VFO. That way
> the
> very nice but valueless (in both financial and historical terms) units
> will
> be put to
> some use.
>
> 73, ian K3IMW
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>


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

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
______________________________________________________________
Milsurplus mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

From jfor at quikus.com  Sat Oct 15 13:10:46 2011
From: jfor at quikus.com (J. Forster)
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2011 10:10:46 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] Article in Nov. QST
In-Reply-To: <ED.33.15901.986B99E4@cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com>
References: <ED.33.15901.986B99E4@cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com>
Message-ID: <57317.12.6.201.2.1318698646.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>

No, I don't think so.

Suppose someone does nort want to do the project-->  no impact

or

Suppose someone does want to do the project, and:

 He has a ham hacked unit available--> no impact
 He does not have a pre-hacked unit--> an irreplaceable unhacked unit gets
destroyed.

I don't see how creating a demand for the units helps preserve the
endangered pool of unhacked units.

-John

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




> Mods... not "miss" - that was my not-so-smart phone meddling.
>
> Bry Carling
>
> Sent from myTouch 4G, please excuse my brevity.
>
>
>
> ----- Reply message -----
> From: "bcarling at cfl.rr.com" <bcarling at cfl.rr.com>
> To: <jfor at quikus.com>, "Ian Wilson" <ianmwilson73 at gmail.com>
> Cc: <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
> Subject: [Milsurplus] Article in Nov. QST
> Date: Sat, Oct 15, 2011 12:33 pm
>
>
> But it may be preferable to see Ian's kind of practical miss rather than
> dumpsterizing the things.
>
> Bry Carling
>
> Sent from myTouch 4G, please excuse my brevity.
>
>
>
> ----- Reply message -----
> From: "J. Forster" <jfor at quikus.com>
> To: "Ian Wilson" <ianmwilson73 at gmail.com>
> Cc: <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
> Subject: [Milsurplus] Article in Nov. QST
> Date: Sat, Oct 15, 2011 12:08 pm
>
>
> Thanks.
>
> I don't care a whit what happens to gear that has already been ham-hacked,
> but such articles do lead to the destruction of irreplacable, unhacked
> gear, which is a tragedy.
>
> -John
>
> ================
>
>> The QST article shows a BC-221 being used to house - and provide tuning
>> for
>> -
>> a SWL-40.
>>
>> I am considering what to do with my excess of LM (1) and BC-221 (2) that
>> have
>> been lightly modified, have no tuning books, and work flawlessly apart
>> from
>> scratchy
>> switches and pots. One plan is to build a decent heterodyne VFO. That
>> way
>> the
>> very nice but valueless (in both financial and historical terms) units
>> will
>> be put to
>> some use.
>>
>> 73, ian K3IMW
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> Milsurplus mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>>
>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>
>>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>



From kk5f at earthlink.net  Sat Oct 15 13:38:54 2011
From: kk5f at earthlink.net (Mike Morrow)
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2011 13:38:54 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] Cyrillic Equivalents
Message-ID: <11627090.1318700334965.JavaMail.root@mswamui-andean.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

>  Now it all makes sense.  I had forgotten about the C/S thingy.

There are a few easy-to-remember equivalents between the Russian
Cyrillic and the Roman character set.

Russian    English
Cyrillic   Roman
   B         V
   C         S
   H         N
   P         R
   X         H
Backward N   I
Backward R   (YA sound)

We had a discussion here several weeks ago about a Russian 6X6 tube,
which is equivalent to our 6H6.

Many mysterious Russian words can be decoded by knowing just those
few characters:

1.  PECTOPAH = RESTORAN  (restaurant)
2.  M[backward N]P = MIR (peace)
3.  MOCBA = MOSVA  (Moscow)

are just a few of many thousands of similar cases.  Learn a few more
Cyrillic equivalents for our B, D, F, G, L, P, U, plus the several
Cyrillic characters representing various ch, chch, sh, and shsh sounds,
and there'll be many words on a typical page of Russian Cyrillic text
for which the English equivalent will become apparent.

I regret not having formally studied the Russian language.  Cyrillic makes
it more exotic.  That's what I thought in 1973 when I got a chance to examine
Soviet moored/submerged sonobouy/radio-link gear that had been recovered
from the Baltic by the West German Navy.  Every piece was well-labeled in
Russian...no attempt was made to hide the source of the gear.  I guess there
wouldn't have been any point to that.

Mike / KK5F

From wf2u at ws19ops.com  Sat Oct 15 17:18:14 2011
From: wf2u at ws19ops.com (Meir WF2U)
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2011 17:18:14 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] [ARC5]  Article in Nov. QST
In-Reply-To: <6917C653AC7043578D6F6A091BDC63F2@DaddyPC>
References: <8CE58CAB14B2AFB-172C-3660D@webmail-m039.sysops.aol.com>
	<6917C653AC7043578D6F6A091BDC63F2@DaddyPC>
Message-ID: <31E095CD2B7B431BA038C3F575F43337@MBDCONSULTING.LOCAL>

Did it ever occur to anyone to use the darn thing for what it was designed
for? Like, heaven forbid, a frequency measuring device, or marker generator?

I'm ashamed to admit that I use a couple LM-(*) version of the BC-of them in
WW2 Navy radio setups, per original system requirements. I'll also come out
of the closet by saying that the lowly collection of junk box parts (as some
people see it) does the job of setting receiver and transmitter frequency
exactly on the required net frequency very well.
Wow, now I said it!
I'm running to don my asbestos suit! 

73, Meir WF2U
Landrum, SC

-----Original Message-----
From: arc5-bounces at mailman.qth.net [mailto:arc5-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On
Behalf Of David Stinson
Sent: Saturday, October 15, 2011 11:28 AM
To: milsurplus at mailman.qth.net; arc5 at mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [ARC5] [Milsurplus] Article in Nov. QST


----- Original Message ----- 
From: <jcoward5452 at aol.com>
Subject: [Milsurplus] Article in Nov. QST


> ....But the guy is having fun with what he made.

Yes... Vandals always say they're "having fun." ;-)
______________________________________________________________
ARC5 mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/arc5
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:ARC5 at mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html


From arc5 at ix.netcom.com  Sat Oct 15 18:01:20 2011
From: arc5 at ix.netcom.com (David Stinson)
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2011 17:01:20 -0500
Subject: [Milsurplus] [ARC5]  Article in Nov. QST
In-Reply-To: <A4594BBA17804E8E9203E3E8EE4CDF6D@JessLewisPC>
References: <8CE58CAB14B2AFB-172C-3660D@webmail-m039.sysops.aol.com>
	<6917C653AC7043578D6F6A091BDC63F2@DaddyPC>
	<A4594BBA17804E8E9203E3E8EE4CDF6D@JessLewisPC>
Message-ID: <3CAA5D449D57494294FCB9187AA21A08@DaddyPC>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jess Lewis" <kr4oj at bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: [ARC5] [Milsurplus] Article in Nov. QST


> WOW.... some of you guys are pathetic. Never do anything, just set 
> around & gripe. Get a life !!!
>
> KR4OJ

LOL!!!

Oh my.... I needed some comic relief.... :-D 


From jfor at quikus.com  Sat Oct 15 18:10:00 2011
From: jfor at quikus.com (J. Forster)
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2011 15:10:00 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] [ARC5]  Article in Nov. QST
In-Reply-To: <3CAA5D449D57494294FCB9187AA21A08@DaddyPC>
References: <8CE58CAB14B2AFB-172C-3660D@webmail-m039.sysops.aol.com>
	<6917C653AC7043578D6F6A091BDC63F2@DaddyPC>
	<A4594BBA17804E8E9203E3E8EE4CDF6D@JessLewisPC>
	<3CAA5D449D57494294FCB9187AA21A08@DaddyPC>
Message-ID: <60630.12.6.201.2.1318716600.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>

David Stinson is one of very few real gurus of WW II radios and very
widely respected worldwide.

I can't recall of ever reading of "Jess Lewis" before. Perhaps Mr.(?)
Lewis would be so kind as to enlighten us all about his contributions the
field?

YMMV,

-John

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


>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jess Lewis" <kr4oj at bellsouth.net>
> Subject: Re: [ARC5] [Milsurplus] Article in Nov. QST
>
>
>> WOW.... some of you guys are pathetic. Never do anything, just set
>> around & gripe. Get a life !!!
>>
>> KR4OJ
>
> LOL!!!
>
> Oh my.... I needed some comic relief.... :-D
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>



From wrcromwell at gmail.com  Sat Oct 15 18:10:15 2011
From: wrcromwell at gmail.com (Bill Cromwell)
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2011 18:10:15 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] [ARC5]  Article in Nov. QST
In-Reply-To: <31E095CD2B7B431BA038C3F575F43337@MBDCONSULTING.LOCAL>
References: <8CE58CAB14B2AFB-172C-3660D@webmail-m039.sysops.aol.com>
	<6917C653AC7043578D6F6A091BDC63F2@DaddyPC>
	<31E095CD2B7B431BA038C3F575F43337@MBDCONSULTING.LOCAL>
Message-ID: <1318716615.1970.57.camel@lancelot>

Hey!

I have a BC-221 and an LM. I regard them as being the same thing. I also
use them. Sometimes both of them at the same time as Ken does. I know
one guy who keyed the output into an antenna and logged into the traffic
nets when his pretty radio broke. They are pretty useful tools.

I have heard how wonderful the tuning mechanisms are and good golly miss
Molly that's right. I keep looking for one or two that are "beyond
repair" so I can use some of those fine parts for one of my projects. I
haven't found any that can't be made to work! I'm sure there must be one
or two somewhere.

I am much less about preserving museum pieces than I am about keeping
gear in service. LMs want to be heterodyne frequency meters and they
want to help us net and align our radios. I appreciate that so I help
them keep on doing it. The same for other gear. The SW-3 (1930s regen)
can get me wall to wall signals on 160 meters with a five foot piece of
wire for an antenna!! Why would I want to change THAT? My pretty radios
can't do it. My digital frequency counter cannot do the LM tricks
either.

Climbing in behind that asbestos shield with Meir...

73,

Bill  KU8H


From wrcromwell at gmail.com  Sat Oct 15 18:29:39 2011
From: wrcromwell at gmail.com (Bill Cromwell)
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2011 18:29:39 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] [ARC5]    Article in Nov. QST
In-Reply-To: <60630.12.6.201.2.1318716600.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
References: <8CE58CAB14B2AFB-172C-3660D@webmail-m039.sysops.aol.com>
	<6917C653AC7043578D6F6A091BDC63F2@DaddyPC>
	<A4594BBA17804E8E9203E3E8EE4CDF6D@JessLewisPC>
	<3CAA5D449D57494294FCB9187AA21A08@DaddyPC>
	<60630.12.6.201.2.1318716600.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
Message-ID: <1318717779.1970.59.camel@lancelot>

Hi,

Maybe we should try to get some interesting how-to-use articles
published for gear like that. It might open some eyes and increase
demand for surplus to be used as-designed.

73,

Bill  KU8H



On Sat, 2011-10-15 at 15:10 -0700, J. Forster wrote:
> David Stinson is one of very few real gurus of WW II radios and very
> widely respected worldwide.
> 
> I can't recall of ever reading of "Jess Lewis" before. Perhaps Mr.(?)
> Lewis would be so kind as to enlighten us all about his contributions the
> field?
> 
> YMMV,
> 
> -John
> 
> =============
> 
> 
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Jess Lewis" <kr4oj at bellsouth.net>
> > Subject: Re: [ARC5] [Milsurplus] Article in Nov. QST
> >
> >
> >> WOW.... some of you guys are pathetic. Never do anything, just set
> >> around & gripe. Get a life !!!
> >>
> >> KR4OJ
> >
> > LOL!!!
> >
> > Oh my.... I needed some comic relief.... :-D
> >
> > ______________________________________________________________
> > Milsurplus mailing list
> > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> > Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
> >
> > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> >
> >
> 
> 
> ______________________________________________________________
> ARC5 mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/arc5
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:ARC5 at mailman.qth.net
> 
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html



From wh7hg.hi at gmail.com  Sat Oct 15 20:15:38 2011
From: wh7hg.hi at gmail.com (Kludge)
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2011 14:15:38 -1000
Subject: [Milsurplus] [ARC5]  Article in Nov. QST
In-Reply-To: <31E095CD2B7B431BA038C3F575F43337@MBDCONSULTING.LOCAL>
References: <8CE58CAB14B2AFB-172C-3660D@webmail-m039.sysops.aol.com><6917C653AC7043578D6F6A091BDC63F2@DaddyPC>
	<31E095CD2B7B431BA038C3F575F43337@MBDCONSULTING.LOCAL>
Message-ID: <B6E06BD4EE714E9DB60D8EE2416808AE@Kongo>

From: arc5-bounces at mailman.qth.net [mailto:arc5-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On
Behalf Of Meir WF2U
> Did it ever occur to anyone to use the darn thing for what it was designed
> for? Like, heaven forbid, a frequency measuring device, or marker
generator?

Amongst my collection are six LMs, of which half don't have books.  One and
maybe two of the none book ones are earmarked to become parts donors to get
those of the rest as what need parts running again*.  With them is a
BC-221-something (one with modulation) that's probably not restorable but
would be a good parts donor to make another run.  Its [wooden] case is in
bad shape as well and may not be able to be salvaged.  I'd actually like to
create a TS-164 if I can make it work again but I doubt that'll happen.
There aren't a whole lot of empty cases for them floating around with the
power supply thingie on the back so I can use it with my BC-348.    

* Calibration crystals seem to be a problem but I don't yet know how much of
one.

What to do with the parts donors after they've done their primary task?
Make something else with what's left.  When all the dust settles, one of the
parts LMs will still have an intact case and panel and the other's case will
be intact although the panel won't be which means I'll even have enclosures
for the projects.  Sooo ... "everything's used except the squeal."  :-)

Best regards,
 
Michael, WH7HG ex-K3MXO, ex-KN3MXO, WPE3ARS, BL01xh ex-Mensa A&P PP BGI 
I am me.  I?m the only one who?s qualified.
http://www.nationalmssociety.org/chapters/NTH/index.aspx
http://wh7hg.blogspot.com/
http://kludges-other-blog.blogspot.com
Hiki N?! 


From wh7hg.hi at gmail.com  Sat Oct 15 20:17:39 2011
From: wh7hg.hi at gmail.com (Kludge)
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2011 14:17:39 -1000
Subject: [Milsurplus] [ARC5]  Article in Nov. QST
In-Reply-To: <A4594BBA17804E8E9203E3E8EE4CDF6D@JessLewisPC>
References: <8CE58CAB14B2AFB-172C-3660D@webmail-m039.sysops.aol.com><6917C653AC7043578D6F6A091BDC63F2@DaddyPC>
	<A4594BBA17804E8E9203E3E8EE4CDF6D@JessLewisPC>
Message-ID: <59CDE666E1CA4B0BB4B23E62F72CA2EA@Kongo>

-----Original Message-----
From: arc5-bounces at mailman.qth.net [mailto:arc5-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On
Behalf Of Jess Lewis
> WOW.... some of you guys are pathetic. Never do anything, just set around
& 
> gripe. Get a life !!!

And you are who again?

Best regards,
 
Michael, WH7HG ex-K3MXO, ex-KN3MXO, WPE3ARS, BL01xh ex-Mensa A&P PP BGI 
I am me.  I?m the only one who?s qualified.
http://www.nationalmssociety.org/chapters/NTH/index.aspx
http://wh7hg.blogspot.com/
http://kludges-other-blog.blogspot.com
Hiki N?! 


From wh7hg.hi at gmail.com  Sat Oct 15 20:19:00 2011
From: wh7hg.hi at gmail.com (Kludge)
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2011 14:19:00 -1000
Subject: [Milsurplus] [ARC5]  Article in Nov. QST
In-Reply-To: <3CAA5D449D57494294FCB9187AA21A08@DaddyPC>
References: <8CE58CAB14B2AFB-172C-3660D@webmail-m039.sysops.aol.com><6917C653AC7043578D6F6A091BDC63F2@DaddyPC><A4594BBA17804E8E9203E3E8EE4CDF6D@JessLewisPC>
	<3CAA5D449D57494294FCB9187AA21A08@DaddyPC>
Message-ID: <CEAB3B3A5CD44E46A523DFC4A191549B@Kongo>

-----Original Message-----
From: arc5-bounces at mailman.qth.net [mailto:arc5-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On
Behalf Of David Stinson
>> WOW.... some of you guys are pathetic. Never do anything, just set 
>> around & gripe. Get a life !!!
> LOL!!!
> Oh my.... I needed some comic relief.... :-D

What, you didn't like my comment about the Vandals?  :-D

Best regards,
 
Michael, WH7HG ex-K3MXO, ex-KN3MXO, WPE3ARS, BL01xh ex-Mensa A&P PP BGI 
I am me.  I?m the only one who?s qualified.
http://www.nationalmssociety.org/chapters/NTH/index.aspx
http://wh7hg.blogspot.com/
http://kludges-other-blog.blogspot.com
Hiki N?! 


From WA5CAB at cs.com  Sat Oct 15 22:25:15 2011
From: WA5CAB at cs.com (WA5CAB at cs.com)
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2011 22:25:15 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] BC-348-JNQ Audio Pack Question.
Message-ID: <8f16f.7ff69d8d.3bcb9a8b@cs.com>

Group,

I failed to check this back when I had several of the audio packs.  I need 
to know the DC resistance of the choke coil in the audio pack of a BC-348-J, 
N or Q (most people think of it as the audio output transformer, but it 
also has a filter choke in it and was officially called the audio pack).  If 
anyof you have one of the three modelsand can measure it and tell me, I would 
appreciate it.  I am trying to determine whether it could be possible to use 
the audio pack out of any of the other models in the JNQ.  Note that to 
measure the coil resistance accurately, you will have to disconnect the B- lead 
from the dynamotor.  What will have to be disconnected if the receiver has 
been converted to AC operation, I can't say.  There were too many ways of 
doing that.

Robert Downs - Houston
wa5cab dot com (Web Store)
MVPA 9480

From kargo_cult at msn.com  Sun Oct 16 03:33:11 2011
From: kargo_cult at msn.com (Hue Miller)
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2011 00:33:11 -0700
Subject: [Milsurplus] Robert Galvin, longtime Motorola president, obituary
Message-ID: <SNT109-DS147762CCCD037D44AF1A6FE4E70@phx.gbl>

Oct. 9, 1922 - Oct. 11, 2011

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/13/technology/robert-w-galvin-who-led-motorola-dies-at-89.html

Small excerpt:

"The company had begun by making ?battery eliminators,? devices to plug 
radios into electrical systems
in homes and cars. (Radios were originally battery-operated.) By 1940, 
Galvin Manufacturing had evolved
into America?s premier maker of car radios and two-way radios, called 
Handie-Talkies. After World War II
broke out they became walkie-talkies, and the Army bought $10 million worth. 
Galvin also prospered in
government contracts for radar systems.

During the war, Robert served in the Army Signal Corps. In 1942, his mother 
was killed by robbers who had
invaded the Galvin home in Evanston. With her death, inheritance taxes 
forced the family to take the company
public in 1943 with the sale of 40,000 shares. Joseph Galvin, in charge of 
labor relations and production, died
in 1944, leaving Robert as sole heir. The same year, Robert married Mary 
Barnes. "

via: Hue Miller.




From ka2ivy at verizon.net  Sun Oct 16 08:17:20 2011
From: ka2ivy at verizon.net (Bruce Gentry)
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2011 08:17:20 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] Need schematic or manual for IRET PRC-247B
In-Reply-To: <31E095CD2B7B431BA038C3F575F43337@MBDCONSULTING.LOCAL>
References: <8CE58CAB14B2AFB-172C-3660D@webmail-m039.sysops.aol.com>
	<6917C653AC7043578D6F6A091BDC63F2@DaddyPC>
	<31E095CD2B7B431BA038C3F575F43337@MBDCONSULTING.LOCAL>
Message-ID: <4E9ACB50.60707@verizon.net>

Looking for schematic or manual for the IRET PRC-247B backpack set. Hard 
copy, PDF or download are all fine.

Thanks, Bruce Gentry KA2IVY

>   

From boeing377 at aol.com  Sun Oct 16 10:25:35 2011
From: boeing377 at aol.com (boeing377 at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2011 07:25:35 -0700
Subject: [Milsurplus] MRT 9.
Message-ID: <D4C1318C-341F-41DF-93B3-55C21DF81540@aol.com>


MILITARY AN/MRT-9 RADIO COMMUNIACTION SHED TRANSMITTER RECIVER SHELTER HAM RADIO


From boeing377 at aol.com  Sun Oct 16 12:14:08 2011
From: boeing377 at aol.com (Boeing377)
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2011 12:14:08 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] MILITARY AN/MRT-9 RADIO COMMUNIACTION SHED TRANSMITTER
 RECIVER SHELTER HAM RADIO
Message-ID: <8CE5A35C47A570A-15C8-60B19@webmail-d154.sysops.aol.com>

Sorry, link didn't post. It's on eBay. Search using the words above and you'll find it. Has what looks like T 368 stuff. I'm not affiliated with the seller, just passing on the info.

73
Mark
AF6IM

From w7qho at aol.com  Sun Oct 16 12:21:13 2011
From: w7qho at aol.com (mac)
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2011 09:21:13 -0700
Subject: [Milsurplus] MILITARY AN/MRT-9 RADIO COMMUNIACTION SHED
	TRANSMITTER RECIVER SHELTER HAM RADIO
In-Reply-To: <8CE5A35C47A570A-15C8-60B19@webmail-d154.sysops.aol.com>
References: <8CE5A35C47A570A-15C8-60B19@webmail-d154.sysops.aol.com>
Message-ID: <88064A84-12D8-413D-9325-E8A5AB1C7FBA@aol.com>

220874493229

Pair of T-368s and some other stuff but don't see any receivers.  An  
external view would have been nice.....

Dennis D.  W7QHO
Glendale, CA

********************
On Oct 16, 2011, at 9:14 AM, Boeing377 wrote:

> Sorry, link didn't post. It's on eBay. Search using the words above  
> and you'll find it. Has what looks like T 368 stuff. I'm not  
> affiliated with the seller, just passing on the info.
>
> 73
> Mark
> AF6IM
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html


From jhhaynes at earthlink.net  Sun Oct 16 14:12:28 2011
From: jhhaynes at earthlink.net (Jim Haynes)
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2011 13:12:28 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] MILITARY AN/MRT-9 RADIO COMMUNIACTION SHED
 TRANSMITTER RECIVER SHELTER HAM RADIO
In-Reply-To: <88064A84-12D8-413D-9325-E8A5AB1C7FBA@aol.com>
References: <8CE5A35C47A570A-15C8-60B19@webmail-d154.sysops.aol.com>
	<88064A84-12D8-413D-9325-E8A5AB1C7FBA@aol.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.02.1110161312100.2864@Frances>

Since the nomenclature is MRT I would expect it to contain only 
transmitters.


From larrys at teamlarry.com  Sun Oct 16 14:16:16 2011
From: larrys at teamlarry.com (Larry Snyder)
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2011 14:16:16 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] MILITARY AN/MRT-9 RADIO COMMUNIACTION
	SHEDTRANSMITTER RECIVER SHELTER HAM RADIO
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.2.02.1110161312100.2864@Frances>
Message-ID: <20111016181617.1FDA22ADC6@ufie.teamlarry.com>

Jim Haynes <jhhaynes at earthlink.net> wrote:
> Since the nomenclature is MRT I would expect it to contain only 
> transmitters.

There's an SP600 to the left of the TTY.
-ls-


From w7qho at aol.com  Sun Oct 16 14:18:51 2011
From: w7qho at aol.com (mac)
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2011 11:18:51 -0700
Subject: [Milsurplus] MILITARY AN/MRT-9 RADIO COMMUNIACTION SHED
	TRANSMITTER RECIVER SHELTER HAM RADIO
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.2.02.1110161312100.2864@Frances>
References: <8CE5A35C47A570A-15C8-60B19@webmail-d154.sysops.aol.com>
	<88064A84-12D8-413D-9325-E8A5AB1C7FBA@aol.com>
	<alpine.LFD.2.02.1110161312100.2864@Frances>
Message-ID: <730BDDF4-49E4-4945-9D75-90F75055F0CF@aol.com>

The visual evidence would indicate that your expectation is viable.

On Oct 16, 2011, at 11:12 AM, Jim Haynes wrote:

> Since the nomenclature is MRT I would expect it to contain only  
> transmitters.
>


From w7qho at aol.com  Sun Oct 16 14:46:04 2011
From: w7qho at aol.com (mac)
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2011 11:46:04 -0700
Subject: [Milsurplus] MILITARY AN/MRT-9 RADIO COMMUNIACTION
	SHEDTRANSMITTER RECIVER SHELTER HAM RADIO
In-Reply-To: <20111016181617.1FDA22ADC6@ufie.teamlarry.com>
References: <20111016181617.1FDA22ADC6@ufie.teamlarry.com>
Message-ID: <63AFDCFB-65A0-4AC6-9C2F-8AF360A7B29D@aol.com>

He lists it, sure enough, but I don't see it in the pictures.
DD

On Oct 16, 2011, at 11:16 AM, Larry Snyder wrote:

> Jim Haynes <jhhaynes at earthlink.net> wrote:
>> Since the nomenclature is MRT I would expect it to contain only
>> transmitters.
>
> There's an SP600 to the left of the TTY.
> -ls-
>


From larrys at teamlarry.com  Sun Oct 16 14:49:07 2011
From: larrys at teamlarry.com (Larry Snyder)
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2011 14:49:07 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] MILITARY AN/MRT-9 RADIO COMMUNIACTION
	SHEDTRANSMITTER RECIVER SHELTER HAM RADIO
In-Reply-To: <63AFDCFB-65A0-4AC6-9C2F-8AF360A7B29D@aol.com>
Message-ID: <20111016184907.B22E52ADC6@ufie.teamlarry.com>

7th pic (beginning of 2nd row), bottom of rack.

mac <w7qho at aol.com> wrote:
> He lists it, sure enough, but I don't see it in the pictures.
> DD
> 
> On Oct 16, 2011, at 11:16 AM, Larry Snyder wrote:
> 
> > Jim Haynes <jhhaynes at earthlink.net> wrote:
> >> Since the nomenclature is MRT I would expect it to contain only
> >> transmitters.
> >
> > There's an SP600 to the left of the TTY.
> > -ls-
> >


From jvendely at cfl.rr.com  Sun Oct 16 14:58:26 2011
From: jvendely at cfl.rr.com (John Vendely)
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2011 14:58:26 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] MILITARY AN/MRT-9 RADIO COMMUNIACTION
 SHEDTRANSMITTER RECIVER SHELTER HAM RADIO
In-Reply-To: <20111016184907.B22E52ADC6@ufie.teamlarry.com>
References: <20111016184907.B22E52ADC6@ufie.teamlarry.com>
Message-ID: <4E9B2952.1030001@cfl.rr.com>

I'm pretty sure this system originally contained an R-390/URR, not the 
SP-600.  Perhaps someone can verify this.  I believe MRT-9 was a 
radio/wire interface system...


On 10/16/2011 2:49 PM, Larry Snyder wrote:
> 7th pic (beginning of 2nd row), bottom of rack.
>
> mac<w7qho at aol.com>  wrote:
>> He lists it, sure enough, but I don't see it in the pictures.
>> DD
>>
>> On Oct 16, 2011, at 11:16 AM, Larry Snyder wrote:
>>
>>> Jim Haynes<jhhaynes at earthlink.net>  wrote:
>>>> Since the nomenclature is MRT I would expect it to contain only
>>>> transmitters.
>>> There's an SP600 to the left of the TTY.
>>> -ls-
>>>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>



From w7qho at aol.com  Sun Oct 16 14:59:05 2011
From: w7qho at aol.com (mac)
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2011 11:59:05 -0700
Subject: [Milsurplus] MILITARY AN/MRT-9 RADIO COMMUNIACTION
	SHEDTRANSMITTER RECIVER SHELTER HAM RADIO
In-Reply-To: <20111016184907.B22E52ADC6@ufie.teamlarry.com>
References: <20111016184907.B22E52ADC6@ufie.teamlarry.com>
Message-ID: <E91BA801-2855-46CA-99E2-A394F2A3DE3A@aol.com>

OK,  missed the second row of pix...   :^(

DD

On Oct 16, 2011, at 11:49 AM, Larry Snyder wrote:

> 7th pic (beginning of 2nd row), bottom of rack.
>
> mac <w7qho at aol.com> wrote:
>> He lists it, sure enough, but I don't see it in the pictures.
>> DD
>>
>> On Oct 16, 2011, at 11:16 AM, Larry Snyder wrote:
>>
>>> Jim Haynes <jhhaynes at earthlink.net> wrote:
>>>> Since the nomenclature is MRT I would expect it to contain only
>>>> transmitters.
>>>
>>> There's an SP600 to the left of the TTY.
>>> -ls-
>>>
>


From navy.radio at gmail.com  Sun Oct 16 15:03:28 2011
From: navy.radio at gmail.com (Nick England)
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2011 15:03:28 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] MILITARY AN/MRT-9 RADIO COMMUNIACTION
 SHEDTRANSMITTER RECIVER SHELTER HAM RADIO
In-Reply-To: <20111016184907.B22E52ADC6@ufie.teamlarry.com>
References: <63AFDCFB-65A0-4AC6-9C2F-8AF360A7B29D@aol.com>
	<20111016184907.B22E52ADC6@ufie.teamlarry.com>
Message-ID: <CAB55hNdKY3rbji+6gkA5PsVTD1TyfWTCjLQ9B8BsNe7DDN1+kw@mail.gmail.com>

This one has a civilian SP-600 instead of the equivalent R-274/URR.
FWIW, the book says the MRT-9 should have 3 ea. T-368 and 1 ea. R-390()
Pretty cool box nevertheless...
Nick K4NYW


>> > Jim Haynes <jhhaynes at earthlink.net> wrote:
>> >> Since the nomenclature is MRT I would expect it to contain only
>> >> transmitters.
>> >

From WA5CAB at cs.com  Sun Oct 16 15:23:51 2011
From: WA5CAB at cs.com (WA5CAB at cs.com)
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2011 15:23:51 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] MILITARY AN/MRT-9 RADIO COMMUNIACTION
	SHEDTRANSMITTER RECIVE...
Message-ID: <10163.1cf02f9d.3bcc8946@cs.com>

It would be used in conjuction with (and operated from) a receiving shelter 
(possibly AN/MRR-8) and a TTY shelter.  

What book did you find it in, Nick?  The final edition of TM 11-487 only 
goes up to MRT-7.

In a message dated 10/16/2011 14:03:35 PM Central Daylight Time, 
navy.radio at gmail.com writes: 
> This one has a civilian SP-600 instead of the equivalent R-274/URR.
> FWIW, the book says the MRT-9 should have 3 ea. T-368 and 1 ea. R-390()
> Pretty cool box nevertheless...
> Nick K4NYW
> 
> 
> >>>Jim Haynes <jhhaynes at earthlink.net> wrote:
> >>>>Since the nomenclature is MRT I would expect it to contain only
> >>>>transmitters.
> >>>
> 

Robert Downs - Houston
wa5cab dot com (Web Store)
MVPA 9480

From kargo_cult at msn.com  Sun Oct 16 17:13:47 2011
From: kargo_cult at msn.com (Hue Miller)
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2011 14:13:47 -0700
Subject: [Milsurplus] QST article
In-Reply-To: <mailman.37.1318780849.27546.milsurplus@mailman.qth.net>
References: <mailman.37.1318780849.27546.milsurplus@mailman.qth.net>
Message-ID: <SNT109-DS10F8CADC054A2D2007142AE4E70@phx.gbl>

I wouldn't get too upset about the article.
It *does* seem kind of downscale from the usual ARRL standard, but that's 
the
times. Anyway if 7 people worldwide actually do this, it just won't diminish 
the
numbers of BC-221s and LM's that much.

I was thinking, Dave should write them an article about "Low B+ Operating 
the
Classics". If you can show how to operate classic radios using easier to 
build
low voltage supplies, that might interest more folk who are put off by 
serious
B+ joltage.

Kludge, if you can be patient, I have a TS-164 case. It has a the ant. 
connector
gone and an additional 1/8" hole added to the top. It's on a TS-164 and I 
have
a better cabinet I was going to put on it instead, so the present one will 
be
surplus.
And yes, I still plan to gather RUGF components for people, but my good
intentions get derailed....
-Hue 


From MillerKE6F at aol.com  Sun Oct 16 18:55:50 2011
From: MillerKE6F at aol.com (MillerKE6F at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2011 18:55:50 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] [ARC5]  Article in Nov. QST
Message-ID: <262ac.62f6f3a5.3bccbaf5@aol.com>

I've been buying and rescuing these critters for over 50 years and during  
the past 10 years or so I kind of set my max price at around 10 bux or so if 
 they look like they might work.  Oddly, I've see very few of the LM or  
BC221s that have been modified or taken apart or repurposed to use the new  
touchy feely verb.  
 
    BUT it's a shame to see these unit just sitting on  the shelves 
gathering dust.  As one who actually used the BC 221 in the  active Army I must say 
that while they worked quite well,  they pretty  much fell out of favor 
when we got the AN/GRC-19s to replace our  AN/GRC-9s.  And as an Army operator 
I didn't miss the BC-221 or the  AN/GRC-9 with all the fiddle farting one 
had to do to get on frequency. (This  was in 1958-58 by the way).  
 
    So what's a good use for the things since so many  were made over the 
years and seem to be everywhere based on swap meets and other  ham radio 
venues?   I think it's quite a good thing to convert (notice I  don't say 
hacked) these unit into something that's useful and fun to play  with.  Those 
without calibration books are great candidates for conversions  since not  many 
folks are going to take the time to build a new book (I've  done that and 
while it's not technically difficult, it's sure tedious).   Why not make a 
nice HF vfo or a Regen Receiver or small transmitter in the nifty  enclosure 
and use that cool variable cap and dial system that's soooo  smooooothe.  
 
    What I'd really like to know is how  many in  these august  groups 
actually have an LM or BC-221  in their shop or shack and do they actually use 
them for anything?  I do  use a few of mine just to stay on top of the clever 
if not tedious interpolation  process.  So how about it folks.  Lets get a 
tally on those who both  love 'em and use 'em
 
 
    73  Bob, KE6F

From jfor at quikus.com  Sun Oct 16 19:08:09 2011
From: jfor at quikus.com (J. Forster)
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2011 16:08:09 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] [ARC5]  Article in Nov. QST
In-Reply-To: <262ac.62f6f3a5.3bccbaf5@aol.com>
References: <262ac.62f6f3a5.3bccbaf5@aol.com>
Message-ID: <1573.12.6.201.188.1318806489.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>

> I've been buying and rescuing these critters for over 50 years and during
> the past 10 years or so I kind of set my max price at around 10 bux or so
> if
>  they look like they might work.  Oddly, I've see very few of the LM or
> BC221s that have been modified or taken apart or repurposed to use the
> new touchy feely verb.

Have you checked the "crystal radio" folks? They love the tuning
capacitors for their sets. They are a world unto themselves.

-John

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




From WA5CAB at cs.com  Sun Oct 16 19:11:01 2011
From: WA5CAB at cs.com (WA5CAB at cs.com)
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2011 19:11:01 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] [ARC5]  Article in Nov. QST
Message-ID: <15ed1.330e96be.3bccbe85@cs.com>

I have 66 of them that I can account for.  About a third incomplete or 
hacked or both, and classified as parts units (which includes any missing the 
matching cal book).  I use a pair of -AK's with RA-133-B's installed as Ken 
mentioned earlier (receiver front end tracking/alignment).

I have a pre-production model (BC-221-T1) but never did find a complete 
BC-221-A.  Otherwise, I have at least one of the remaining 25 models.

In a message dated 10/16/2011 17:55:58 PM Central Daylight Time, 
MillerKE6F at aol.com writes: 
>     What I'd really like to know is how  many in  these august  groups 
> actually have an LM or BC-221  in their shop or shack and do they actually 
> use 
> them for anything?  I do  use a few of mine just to stay on top of the 
> clever 
> if not tedious interpolation  process.  So how about it folks.  Lets get a 
> 
> tally on those who both  love 'em and use 'em
> 
> 
>     73  Bob, KE6F
> 

Robert Downs - Houston
wa5cab dot com (Web Store)
MVPA 9480

From ianmwilson73 at gmail.com  Mon Oct 17 00:16:04 2011
From: ianmwilson73 at gmail.com (Ian Wilson)
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2011 21:16:04 -0700
Subject: [Milsurplus] HF Transmitter ID
Message-ID: <CAEz8jcQA7uT38TwAvJu-7Fw6Quj+bGKhTZYnt1Lc8JPh6oDWHw@mail.gmail.com>

Saw this at the Chino Hills swap meet, forgot to write down nomenclature.
813 final. Most of front panel is a replaceable tuning unit - the unit I saw
in
place was 3000-4520kc/s if I recall correctly.

Distinctive ceramic hemispheric insulator on left side, with a 'spark plug'
type connector.

73, ian K3IMW

From ianmwilson73 at gmail.com  Mon Oct 17 00:21:24 2011
From: ianmwilson73 at gmail.com (Ian Wilson)
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2011 21:21:24 -0700
Subject: [Milsurplus] QST article
In-Reply-To: <SNT109-DS10F8CADC054A2D2007142AE4E70@phx.gbl>
References: <mailman.37.1318780849.27546.milsurplus@mailman.qth.net>
	<SNT109-DS10F8CADC054A2D2007142AE4E70@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <CAEz8jcR65NT_fjJp3sZfk9dTEYf38D+KU67LOzWapeEn4+45_w@mail.gmail.com>

I think Hue's idea of writing an article about putting unmodified mil gear
on
the air using LV power supplies is a great one. Apart from anything else,
we are much more likely to get people to use unmodified equipment by
showing them how to do something useful with it than by preaching.
And once you learn to appreciate unmodified equipment, the more likely
you are to take an interest in restoring, preserving, etc.

If anyone is interested in cooperating on writing such an article - for a
useful destination - I would be happy to donate some time, etc.

73, ian K3IMW

From holden7471 at msn.com  Mon Oct 17 00:44:22 2011
From: holden7471 at msn.com (howard holden)
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 00:44:22 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] HF Transmitter ID
In-Reply-To: <CAEz8jcQA7uT38TwAvJu-7Fw6Quj+bGKhTZYnt1Lc8JPh6oDWHw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAEz8jcQA7uT38TwAvJu-7Fw6Quj+bGKhTZYnt1Lc8JPh6oDWHw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BLU159-ds1059114E648C858A9B7361C4E40@phx.gbl>

No idea on the nomenclature, but isn't that "spark plug" type connector called a Rajah clip?

Howie WB2AWQ
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Ian Wilson<mailto:ianmwilson73 at gmail.com> 
  To: milsurplus at mailman.qth.net<mailto:milsurplus at mailman.qth.net> 
  Sent: Monday, October 17, 2011 12:16 AM
  Subject: [Milsurplus] HF Transmitter ID


  Saw this at the Chino Hills swap meet, forgot to write down nomenclature.
  813 final. Most of front panel is a replaceable tuning unit - the unit I saw
  in
  place was 3000-4520kc/s if I recall correctly.

  Distinctive ceramic hemispheric insulator on left side, with a 'spark plug'
  type connector.

  73, ian K3IMW
  ______________________________________________________________
  Milsurplus mailing list
  Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus<http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus>
  Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm<http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm>
  Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net<mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>

  This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net<http://www.qsl.net/>
  Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html<http://www.qsl.net/donate.html>

From w7qho at aol.com  Mon Oct 17 00:56:37 2011
From: w7qho at aol.com (mac)
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2011 21:56:37 -0700
Subject: [Milsurplus] HF Transmitter ID
In-Reply-To: <CAEz8jcQA7uT38TwAvJu-7Fw6Quj+bGKhTZYnt1Lc8JPh6oDWHw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAEz8jcQA7uT38TwAvJu-7Fw6Quj+bGKhTZYnt1Lc8JPh6oDWHw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <612D1CCF-3E0C-4FB3-8F7A-ADAE06363B14@aol.com>

Ian,

Sounds like a Navy GP-7.  Unless it's been modified the PA tube is an  
803, not an 813.  Both tubes are similar in appearance.

Dennis D.  W7QHO
Glendale, CA

*****************
On Oct 16, 2011, at 9:16 PM, Ian Wilson wrote:

> Saw this at the Chino Hills swap meet, forgot to write down  
> nomenclature.
> 813 final. Most of front panel is a replaceable tuning unit - the  
> unit I saw
> in
> place was 3000-4520kc/s if I recall correctly.
>
> Distinctive ceramic hemispheric insulator on left side, with a  
> 'spark plug'
> type connector.
>
> 73, ian K3IMW
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html


From WA5CAB at cs.com  Mon Oct 17 01:54:22 2011
From: WA5CAB at cs.com (WA5CAB at cs.com)
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 01:54:22 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] HF Transmitter ID
Message-ID: <1e57e.1df08dc0.3bcd1d0e@cs.com>

Correction - I took the figures I quoted off of the Typical Tuning Chart 
for the Range D Tuning Unit in the GP-6a, GP-6, GP-7 manual.  I didn't have an 
actual Range D unit to look at but I've just been informed that it says 
3000-4525 KC.

In a message dated 10/17/2011 00:27:33 AM Central Daylight Time, 
w7qho at aol.com writes: 
> 
> >> That was my initial thought as well.  Except that the GP-7 doesn't have 
>> a tuning unit covering 3000-4520.  It's (and the GP-6's) Range D covers 
>> 2800-4575 KC.  I don't have any information on anything earlier than a 
>> GP-6.  It's possible that earlier models had slightly different tuning units.  
>> 
>> 
>> In a message dated 10/16/2011 23:56:47 PM Central Daylight Time, 
>> w7qho at aol.com writes: 
>> >>> Ian,
>>> 
>>> Sounds like a Navy GP-7.  Unless it's been modified the PA tube is an  
>>> 803, not an 813.  Both tubes are similar in appearance.
>>> 
>>> Dennis D.  W7QHO
>>> Glendale, CA
>>> 
>>> *****************
>>> On Oct 16, 2011, at 9:16 PM, Ian Wilson wrote:
>>> 
>>> >Saw this at the Chino Hills swap meet, forgot to write down  
>>> >nomenclature.
>>> >813 final. Most of front panel is a replaceable tuning unit - the  
>>> >unit I saw
>>> >in
>>> >place was 3000-4520kc/s if I recall correctly.
>>> >
>>> >Distinctive ceramic hemispheric insulator on left side, with a  
>>> >'spark plug'
>>> >type connector.
>>> >
>>> >73, ian K3IMW
>> 
> 

Robert & Susan Downs - Houston
wa5cab dot com (Web Store)
MVPA 9480

From aaf-radio-1 at aafradio.org  Mon Oct 17 07:38:13 2011
From: aaf-radio-1 at aafradio.org (Mike Hanz)
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 07:38:13 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] HF Transmitter ID - GP-7
In-Reply-To: <CAEz8jcQA7uT38TwAvJu-7Fw6Quj+bGKhTZYnt1Lc8JPh6oDWHw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAEz8jcQA7uT38TwAvJu-7Fw6Quj+bGKhTZYnt1Lc8JPh6oDWHw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4E9C13A5.7010606@aafradio.org>

Dennis and Robert nailed it.  I have some photos and brief discussion of 
the set at http://aafradio.org/docs/GP-7.html and 
http://aafradio.org/flightdeck/go9.htm

It seems to me that the Rajah terminal approach was a more elegant way 
of providing antenna connections than push pin terminals, especially 
where a patching capability was required.  In larger aircraft, the Navy 
used Plexiglas panels with the spark plug terminals mounted on them to 
provide rapid patching of a given antenna to a given receiver or 
transmitter.  The photo of the radio operator's position at the very 
bottom of http://aafradio.org/flightdeck/RAX-1.htm has two of these 
patch panels in it, fit into space between the fuselage and equipment.

73,
Mike  KC4TOS

On 10/17/2011 12:16 AM, Ian Wilson wrote:
> Saw this at the Chino Hills swap meet, forgot to write down nomenclature.
> 813 final. Most of front panel is a replaceable tuning unit - the unit I saw
> in
> place was 3000-4520kc/s if I recall correctly.
>
> Distinctive ceramic hemispheric insulator on left side, with a 'spark plug'
> type connector.


From jphutch60bj at gmail.com  Mon Oct 17 07:52:11 2011
From: jphutch60bj at gmail.com (John Hutchins)
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 06:52:11 -0500
Subject: [Milsurplus] MILITARY AN/MRT-9 RADIO COMMUNIACTION
 SHEDTRANSMITTER RECIVER SHELTER HAM RADIO
In-Reply-To: <63AFDCFB-65A0-4AC6-9C2F-8AF360A7B29D@aol.com>
References: <20111016181617.1FDA22ADC6@ufie.teamlarry.com>
	<63AFDCFB-65A0-4AC6-9C2F-8AF360A7B29D@aol.com>
Message-ID: <4E9C16EB.5080004@gmail.com>

All -
Picture second, bottom,  first one on the left, or Picture #7.
looks like a SP 600 to me?
Hutch
On 10/16/2011 1:46 PM, mac wrote:
> He lists it, sure enough, but I don't see it in the pictures.
> DD
>
> On Oct 16, 2011, at 11:16 AM, Larry Snyder wrote:
>
>> Jim Haynes<jhhaynes at earthlink.net>  wrote:
>>> Since the nomenclature is MRT I would expect it to contain only
>>> transmitters.
>> There's an SP600 to the left of the TTY.
>> -ls-
>>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>


From ianmwilson73 at gmail.com  Mon Oct 17 10:13:08 2011
From: ianmwilson73 at gmail.com (Ian Wilson)
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 07:13:08 -0700
Subject: [Milsurplus] HF Transmitter ID - GP-7
In-Reply-To: <4E9C13A5.7010606@aafradio.org>
References: <CAEz8jcQA7uT38TwAvJu-7Fw6Quj+bGKhTZYnt1Lc8JPh6oDWHw@mail.gmail.com>
	<4E9C13A5.7010606@aafradio.org>
Message-ID: <CAEz8jcR52Eby2idD-x+JfmAYXPrMKEdU1D+QnOCrtw7FMvuAEQ@mail.gmail.com>

Thanks all - definitely was the GP-7. Remarkably compact piece of gear;
I imagine that's largely due to the use of plug-in tuning units.

73, ian K3IMW

From aaf-radio-1 at aafradio.org  Mon Oct 17 10:15:17 2011
From: aaf-radio-1 at aafradio.org (Mike Hanz)
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 10:15:17 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] Homebrew ART-13 mounts
Message-ID: <4E9C3875.80702@aafradio.org>

As most of us know, these mounts don't grow on trees (anymore).  To help 
an old friend who had been looking for quite a while without success, I 
decided to see what I could do to make a mount for him that would look 
halfway decent, even if it wasn't a perfect reproduction of the 
original.  The intent is to encourage others to realize that this is not 
rocket science, and some relatively standard shop tools can be the basis 
of a good looking mount.  The rundown is at 
http://aafradio.org/garajmahal/ART-13_mounts.html for those who are into 
similar exercises in futility...:-)

73,
Mike

From rickb at tx.rr.com  Mon Oct 17 10:23:18 2011
From: rickb at tx.rr.com (Rick)
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 09:23:18 -0500
Subject: [Milsurplus] Homebrew ART-13 mounts
In-Reply-To: <4E9C3875.80702@aafradio.org>
Message-ID: <9E.AA.15901.E4A3C9E4@cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com>

Excellent workmanship!

Rick/K5IAR


-----Original Message-----
From: milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net
[mailto:milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Mike Hanz
Sent: Monday, October 17, 2011 9:15 AM
To: ART-13_Transmitters at yahoogroups.com; Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
Subject: [Milsurplus] Homebrew ART-13 mounts

As most of us know, these mounts don't grow on trees (anymore).  To help 
an old friend who had been looking for quite a while without success, I 
decided to see what I could do to make a mount for him that would look 
halfway decent, even if it wasn't a perfect reproduction of the 
original.  The intent is to encourage others to realize that this is not 
rocket science, and some relatively standard shop tools can be the basis 
of a good looking mount.  The rundown is at 
http://aafradio.org/garajmahal/ART-13_mounts.html for those who are into 
similar exercises in futility...:-)

73,
Mike


From jfor at quikus.com  Mon Oct 17 10:37:09 2011
From: jfor at quikus.com (J. Forster)
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 07:37:09 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] Homebrew ART-13 mounts
In-Reply-To: <9E.AA.15901.E4A3C9E4@cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com>
References: <9E.AA.15901.E4A3C9E4@cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com>
Message-ID: <1174.12.6.201.78.1318862229.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>

WOW!!

-John

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


> Excellent workmanship!
>
> Rick/K5IAR
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net
> [mailto:milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Mike Hanz
> Sent: Monday, October 17, 2011 9:15 AM
> To: ART-13_Transmitters at yahoogroups.com; Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
> Subject: [Milsurplus] Homebrew ART-13 mounts
>
> As most of us know, these mounts don't grow on trees (anymore).  To help
> an old friend who had been looking for quite a while without success, I
> decided to see what I could do to make a mount for him that would look
> halfway decent, even if it wasn't a perfect reproduction of the
> original.  The intent is to encourage others to realize that this is not
> rocket science, and some relatively standard shop tools can be the basis
> of a good looking mount.  The rundown is at
> http://aafradio.org/garajmahal/ART-13_mounts.html for those who are into
> similar exercises in futility...:-)
>
> 73,
> Mike
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>



From WA5CAB at cs.com  Mon Oct 17 11:07:27 2011
From: WA5CAB at cs.com (WA5CAB at cs.com)
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 11:07:27 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] HF Transmitter ID - GP-7
Message-ID: <7945.5a0358.3bcd9eaf@cs.com>

And also to running on 120 Volts 600/800 CPS AC with 12-14 or 24-28 VDC 
relay supply from the aircraft's buss.

In a message dated 10/17/2011 09:13:14 AM Central Daylight Time, 
ianmwilson73 at gmail.com writes: 
> Thanks all - definitely was the GP-7. Remarkably compact piece of gear;
> I imagine that's largely due to the use of plug-in tuning units.

Robert Downs - Houston
wa5cab dot com (Web Store)
MVPA 9480

From RAFANTINI at salisbury.edu  Mon Oct 17 11:37:01 2011
From: RAFANTINI at salisbury.edu (Ray Fantini)
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 11:37:01 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] Thought on the BC-221 and QST
Message-ID: <2DE6F17E951D824AAE8B8D0BF7579D810DF8AA663C@MBX.salisbury.edu>

The history of Ham radio is all about building and modifying equipment and in today's world operators who increasingly only buy prebuilt equipment anything that talks about construction or building is a good thing. I recall that QST did a article about the ARC-5 series receivers a year or so back and that did not go over well because the author did not live up to the expectations of this group, but like it or not QST represents the main stream view of armature radio today. The majorities of ham operators want to operate the radio and make contacts and are not interested in building museum displays. Everyone is carrying on as if the BC-221 is a rare and valuable item but what was the total amount produced? They were used with everything for over a decade so I would assume they had a production run of over tens of thousands. I can understand that if you want to have your all original ARC/SCR setup you need to have one with it to complete the system but I cannot imagine that somewhere out there is a collector who can't find one. Over the years I have owned at least a dozen or so if not more. They are a common item at larger Hamfest and rarely sell for more than $10 to $25 complete with book and sometimes internal power supplies.
The QST article is not that impressive and I think the author would have been better off using a smaller case but like it or not due to the low value attached to the BC-221 it leads itself open for a cheap box to be used for modification.  The original function of the BC-221/LM series frequency meters is almost useless today with most radios exceeding the design accuracy with ease of the old heterodyne frequency meters. The only use I can imagine for a BC-221 is with other period radios or older sets as an external reference. The day of the heterodyne frequency meter are thru, don't see anyone getting worked up over preserving the Lampkin 105. As long as the value of an item is less than a Bud box this is what's going to happen.
Ray F.


From jfor at quikus.com  Mon Oct 17 11:51:26 2011
From: jfor at quikus.com (J. Forster)
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 08:51:26 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] Thought on the BC-221 and QST
In-Reply-To: <2DE6F17E951D824AAE8B8D0BF7579D810DF8AA663C@MBX.salisbury.edu>
References: <2DE6F17E951D824AAE8B8D0BF7579D810DF8AA663C@MBX.salisbury.edu>
Message-ID: <65214.12.6.201.2.1318866686.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>

Hacked, modified, and partly stripped ones are easy enough and often go
begging for homes. They have had home brew AC supplies cobbled in, and
worse.

Just try and find a really clean, complete, unhacked -AK, with the
original book, canvass, and battery retaining post and plate intact.

I don't care a whit about "the history of ham hacking mil radios".

-John

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





> The history of Ham radio is all about building and modifying equipment and
> in today's world operators who increasingly only buy prebuilt equipment
> anything that talks about construction or building is a good thing. I
> recall that QST did a article about the ARC-5 series receivers a year or
> so back and that did not go over well because the author did not live up
> to the expectations of this group, but like it or not QST represents the
> main stream view of armature radio today. The majorities of ham operators
> want to operate the radio and make contacts and are not interested in
> building museum displays. Everyone is carrying on as if the BC-221 is a
> rare and valuable item but what was the total amount produced? They were
> used with everything for over a decade so I would assume they had a
> production run of over tens of thousands. I can understand that if you
> want to have your all original ARC/SCR setup you need to have one with it
> to complete the system but I cannot imagine that som
>  ewhere out there is a collector who can't find one. Over the years I have
> owned at least a dozen or so if not more. They are a common item at
> larger Hamfest and rarely sell for more than $10 to $25 complete with
> book and sometimes internal power supplies.
> The QST article is not that impressive and I think the author would have
> been better off using a smaller case but like it or not due to the low
> value attached to the BC-221 it leads itself open for a cheap box to be
> used for modification.  The original function of the BC-221/LM series
> frequency meters is almost useless today with most radios exceeding the
> design accuracy with ease of the old heterodyne frequency meters. The only
> use I can imagine for a BC-221 is with other period radios or older sets
> as an external reference. The day of the heterodyne frequency meter are
> thru, don't see anyone getting worked up over preserving the Lampkin 105.
> As long as the value of an item is less than a Bud box this is what's
> going to happen.
> Ray F.
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>



From farmer.rob.flory at gmail.com  Mon Oct 17 13:04:58 2011
From: farmer.rob.flory at gmail.com (Rob Flory)
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 13:04:58 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] How I Use an LM
Message-ID: <CAFcNxxWrLNKHurdt00HFBBQWOtw832N2A-QaCYVnZ_WVHnzxtA@mail.gmail.com>

I find it to be an essential accessory to CW operations with my TBX, when
trying to work people with modern, selective receivers.  Not so much a
problem when working other old military radios, but if you call someone
using a modern radio with a 500 cycle CW filter, you have to be right on
frequency.

The TBX receiver pulls like mad when exposed to the transmitter's strong
signal, so netting the TX to the RX within 500 cycles is near impossible.

However,you can beat the LM to the station you want to work, then tune the
transmitter while listening to the beat in the LM headphone, and bang, you
are dead on.

You don't need the book to do this.  I have, however, noted the settings for
OMRN and a few other nets on my LM so I can pre-tune to the nets.

I have also mentioned before how I used the LM as a BFO in an ARC-1, just by
coupling it loosely to the IF side of the mixer.  This allowed me to hear CW
beacons on the ARC-1.

RF

K

From douglas10driver at aol.com  Mon Oct 17 13:36:55 2011
From: douglas10driver at aol.com (douglas10driver at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 13:36:55 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] Homebrew ART-13 mounts
Message-ID: <8CE5B0A7F8D7F09-1434-761F7@webmail-d163.sysops.aol.com>


For anyone needing the front retaining clamps, I have some available for $12/pair shipping included. Also have a supply of the rubber blocks for the triple rail mounts if you need those. Many types of Lord and Barry mounts as well.  Douglas10driver at aol.com.

Grant



From holden7471 at msn.com  Mon Oct 17 13:46:05 2011
From: holden7471 at msn.com (howard holden)
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 13:46:05 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] How I Use an LM
In-Reply-To: <CAFcNxxWrLNKHurdt00HFBBQWOtw832N2A-QaCYVnZ_WVHnzxtA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAFcNxxWrLNKHurdt00HFBBQWOtw832N2A-QaCYVnZ_WVHnzxtA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BLU159-ds19139A315A519C3892A45DC4E40@phx.gbl>


I've used both a BC-221 and my LM in the ARRL frequency measuring tests, and twice hit under 50 cps off the mark. It's not real easy, but it is a testament to how well things were done back then. Still use my LM to keep the BC-348 and HRO on the mark.

Howie WB2AWQ 
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Rob Flory<mailto:farmer.rob.flory at gmail.com> 
  To: milsurplus<mailto:milsurplus at mailman.qth.net> 
  Sent: Monday, October 17, 2011 1:04 PM
  Subject: [Milsurplus] How I Use an LM


  I find it to be an essential accessory to CW operations with my TBX, when
  trying to work people with modern, selective receivers.  Not so much a
  problem when working other old military radios, but if you call someone
  using a modern radio with a 500 cycle CW filter, you have to be right on
  frequency.

  The TBX receiver pulls like mad when exposed to the transmitter's strong
  signal, so netting the TX to the RX within 500 cycles is near impossible.

  However,you can beat the LM to the station you want to work, then tune the
  transmitter while listening to the beat in the LM headphone, and bang, you
  are dead on.

  You don't need the book to do this.  I have, however, noted the settings for
  OMRN and a few other nets on my LM so I can pre-tune to the nets.

  I have also mentioned before how I used the LM as a BFO in an ARC-1, just by
  coupling it loosely to the IF side of the mixer.  This allowed me to hear CW
  beacons on the ARC-1.

  RF

  K
  ______________________________________________________________
  Milsurplus mailing list
  Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus<http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus>
  Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm<http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm>
  Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net<mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>

  This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net<http://www.qsl.net/>
  Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html<http://www.qsl.net/donate.html>

From MillerKE6F at aol.com  Mon Oct 17 14:15:00 2011
From: MillerKE6F at aol.com (MillerKE6F at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 14:15:00 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] Thought on the BC-221 and QST
Message-ID: <7ad51.4106be59.3bcdcaa4@aol.com>

Amen !  
    Well put and I'm sure your comments harmonize with  most of us who love 
to putter with the old stuff, yet recognize the utility this  old stuff 
offers us who still like to build stuff and make use of the nifty  parts in 
these gadgets.  The LMs are especially attractive containers for  all kinds of 
variable RF things.  The front panel layout of the LM and BC  221 alone can 
inspire one to build all kinds of things without doing much if any  metal 
work.  And of course those wonderful caps and gears will never lose  their 
usefulness no matter how much the state of the art diminishes the need for  L/C 
oscillators.  
 
   Bob, KE6F

From smithab11 at comcast.net  Mon Oct 17 14:17:31 2011
From: smithab11 at comcast.net (B Smith)
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 14:17:31 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] Thought on the BC-221 and QST
In-Reply-To: <7ad51.4106be59.3bcdcaa4@aol.com>
References: <7ad51.4106be59.3bcdcaa4@aol.com>
Message-ID: <54B7098132F546A3A84C025877D8B36C@Dell560>

The set makes an excellent VFO and no modifications are required.
See March 1947 QST.

breck k4che
Dover, Delaware, ain't  nutten   in Dover except
A NASCAR track, chickens,  and hams that can't solder.

--------------------------------------------------
From: <MillerKE6F at aol.com>
Sent: Monday, October 17, 2011 2:15 PM
To: <RAFANTINI at salisbury.edu>; <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] Thought on the BC-221 and QST

Amen !
    Well put and I'm sure your comments harmonize with  most of us who 
love
to putter with the old stuff, yet recognize the utility this  old 
stuff
offers us who still like to build stuff and make use of the nifty 
parts in
these gadgets.  The LMs are especially attractive containers for  all 
kinds of
variable RF things.  The front panel layout of the LM and BC  221 
alone can
inspire one to build all kinds of things without doing much if any 
metal
work.  And of course those wonderful caps and gears will never lose 
their
usefulness no matter how much the state of the art diminishes the need 
for  L/C
oscillators.

   Bob, KE6F
______________________________________________________________
Milsurplus mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html 


From jcoward5452 at aol.com  Mon Oct 17 14:49:06 2011
From: jcoward5452 at aol.com (jcoward5452 at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 14:49:06 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] Thought on the BC-221 and QST
In-Reply-To: <54B7098132F546A3A84C025877D8B36C@Dell560>
References: <7ad51.4106be59.3bcdcaa4@aol.com>
	<54B7098132F546A3A84C025877D8B36C@Dell560>
Message-ID: <8CE5B1494BBCBCA-17B8-5DBCE@webmail-m081.sysops.aol.com>


Also makes an excellent external BFO for the BC-348.
Jay KE6PPF



-----Original Message-----
From: B Smith <smithab11 at comcast.net>
To: milsurplus <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Mon, Oct 17, 2011 11:18 am
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] Thought on the BC-221 and QST


The set makes an excellent VFO and no modifications are required.
ee March 1947 QST.
breck k4che
over, Delaware, ain't  nutten   in Dover except
 NASCAR track, chickens,  and hams that can't solder.
--------------------------------------------------
rom: <MillerKE6F at aol.com>
ent: Monday, October 17, 2011 2:15 PM
o: <RAFANTINI at salisbury.edu>; <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
ubject: Re: [Milsurplus] Thought on the BC-221 and QST
Amen !
   Well put and I'm sure your comments harmonize with  most of us who 
ove
o putter with the old stuff, yet recognize the utility this  old 
tuff
ffers us who still like to build stuff and make use of the nifty 
arts in
hese gadgets.  The LMs are especially attractive containers for  all 
inds of
ariable RF things.  The front panel layout of the LM and BC  221 
lone can
nspire one to build all kinds of things without doing much if any 
etal
ork.  And of course those wonderful caps and gears will never lose 
heir
sefulness no matter how much the state of the art diminishes the need 
or  L/C
scillators.
   Bob, KE6F
_____________________________________________________________
ilsurplus mailing list
ome: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
elp: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
ost: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
lease help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html 
______________________________________________________________
ilsurplus mailing list
ome: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
elp: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
ost: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
lease help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html


From ianmwilson73 at gmail.com  Mon Oct 17 14:51:18 2011
From: ianmwilson73 at gmail.com (Ian Wilson)
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 11:51:18 -0700
Subject: [Milsurplus] Thought on the BC-221 and QST
In-Reply-To: <54B7098132F546A3A84C025877D8B36C@Dell560>
References: <7ad51.4106be59.3bcdcaa4@aol.com>
	<54B7098132F546A3A84C025877D8B36C@Dell560>
Message-ID: <CAEz8jcRR3q9YuGgfrzixYNiHjxzEw1aFOJgFHu7ojaPKHvwc_w@mail.gmail.com>

Nice article, thanks Breck.

73, ian K3IMW

On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 11:17 AM, B Smith <smithab11 at comcast.net> wrote:

> The set makes an excellent VFO and no modifications are required.
> See March 1947 QST.
>
> breck k4che
> Dover, Delaware, ain't  nutten   in Dover except
> A NASCAR track, chickens,  and hams that can't solder.
>
> --------------------------------------------------
> From: <MillerKE6F at aol.com>
> Sent: Monday, October 17, 2011 2:15 PM
> To: <RAFANTINI at salisbury.edu>; <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
> Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] Thought on the BC-221 and QST
>
> Amen !
>    Well put and I'm sure your comments harmonize with  most of us who
> love
> to putter with the old stuff, yet recognize the utility this  old
> stuff
> offers us who still like to build stuff and make use of the nifty
> parts in
> these gadgets.  The LMs are especially attractive containers for  all
> kinds of
> variable RF things.  The front panel layout of the LM and BC  221
> alone can
> inspire one to build all kinds of things without doing much if any
> metal
> work.  And of course those wonderful caps and gears will never lose
> their
> usefulness no matter how much the state of the art diminishes the need
> for  L/C
> oscillators.
>
>   Bob, KE6F
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>

From jmfranke at cox.net  Mon Oct 17 14:53:50 2011
From: jmfranke at cox.net (jmfranke)
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 14:53:50 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] Thought on the BC-221 and QST
References: <7ad51.4106be59.3bcdcaa4@aol.com><54B7098132F546A3A84C025877D8B36C@Dell560>
	<8CE5B1494BBCBCA-17B8-5DBCE@webmail-m081.sysops.aol.com>
Message-ID: <8B548656EB6947F5BA49EC6E99ADFD92@Franke>

I have been thinking of using one as an external BFO for a BC-229/429 
receiver.

John  WA4WDL

--------------------------------------------------
From: <jcoward5452 at aol.com>
Sent: Monday, October 17, 2011 2:49 PM
To: <smithab11 at comcast.net>; <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] Thought on the BC-221 and QST

>
> Also makes an excellent external BFO for the BC-348.
> Jay KE6PPF
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: B Smith <smithab11 at comcast.net>
> To: milsurplus <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
> Sent: Mon, Oct 17, 2011 11:18 am
> Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] Thought on the BC-221 and QST
>
>
> The set makes an excellent VFO and no modifications are required.
> ee March 1947 QST.
> breck k4che
> over, Delaware, ain't  nutten   in Dover except
> NASCAR track, chickens,  and hams that can't solder.
> --------------------------------------------------
> rom: <MillerKE6F at aol.com>
> ent: Monday, October 17, 2011 2:15 PM
> o: <RAFANTINI at salisbury.edu>; <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
> ubject: Re: [Milsurplus] Thought on the BC-221 and QST
> Amen !
>   Well put and I'm sure your comments harmonize with  most of us who
> ove
> o putter with the old stuff, yet recognize the utility this  old
> tuff
> ffers us who still like to build stuff and make use of the nifty
> arts in
> hese gadgets.  The LMs are especially attractive containers for  all
> inds of
> ariable RF things.  The front panel layout of the LM and BC  221
> lone can
> nspire one to build all kinds of things without doing much if any
> etal
> ork.  And of course those wonderful caps and gears will never lose
> heir
> sefulness no matter how much the state of the art diminishes the need
> or  L/C
> scillators.
>   Bob, KE6F
> _____________________________________________________________
> ilsurplus mailing list
> ome: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> elp: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> ost: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> lease help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> ______________________________________________________________
> ilsurplus mailing list
> ome: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> elp: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> ost: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> lease help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> 


From jfor at quikus.com  Mon Oct 17 15:21:00 2011
From: jfor at quikus.com (J. Forster)
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 12:21:00 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] [ART-13_Transmitters] Re: Homebrew ART-13 mounts
In-Reply-To: <4E9C7B94.3040805@aafradio.org>
References: <j7hqfn+jqfl@eGroups.com> <4E9C7B94.3040805@aafradio.org>
Message-ID: <57904.12.6.201.2.1318879260.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>

Some thoughts:

There is certainly some market for a few mounts and other things,
especially for the more popular sets like the ARC-5 & SCR-274-N. Things
like control box mounts come to mind. Original ones are nearly impossible
to find, and when they do show go for a lot of money. I recall one C mount
going for well over $125 in the last year or so on eBay. (I didn't get
it).

Years ago, I did some sheet metal work, and have watched A&P masters who
worked for me making spacecraft bits, like electronics boxes. These guys
could make perfect welds on 0.025" thick Aluminum!

FWIW: It seems for most pieces, it would take little additional effort to
make a few dozen, if you have to make one. The reason is that setting
stops on sheers and brakes- the setup work- has to be done for one or a
score parts. Once a machine is set up, you can crank out parts all day, if
you have the patience.  That's certainly what was done in WW II. Each
manufacturing station did only one thing, like make a bend.

Now, there are additional options. With CAD, one could easily draw these
things up and have a few hundred cranked out by a sheet metal shop w/ NC
presses. All identical, all just like the original.

Also, manufacturing is nopt exactly booming right now. Maybe some shops
could use some "fill-in" work?

Opinions?

-John

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





> Well, these only took me eight years to finish, Chuck... Other things
> kept getting in the way.  I'm not really psyched up for multiples of
> anything these days - old age ADHD, I suppose...heh.   BTW, I received a
> note on the milsurplus list from Grant Schwartz that may be of interest
> to those on this reflector.  Grant is an accomplished aircraft restorer
> at the Yankee Air Museum out in Michigan.
>
> For anyone needing the front retaining clamps, I have some available for
> $12/pair shipping included. Also have a supply of the rubber blocks for
> the triple rail mounts if you need those. Many types of Lord and Barry
> mounts as well.Douglas10driver at aol.com.
>
>
> 73,
> Mike KC4TOS
>
> On 10/17/2011 2:00 PM, W5API CHUCK wrote:
>>
>> If you decide to make a batch of the ART-13 mounts I would like to
>> purchase one or two sets.
>> HINT...HINT
>>
>
>



From wh7hg.hi at gmail.com  Mon Oct 17 15:35:57 2011
From: wh7hg.hi at gmail.com (Kludge)
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 09:35:57 -1000
Subject: [Milsurplus] [ARC5] My "ARC-5" Impressions (long)
In-Reply-To: <23940149.1318557986973.JavaMail.root@elwamui-huard.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
References: <23940149.1318557986973.JavaMail.root@elwamui-huard.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <36875069833A48198916428034E8FA5F@Kongo>

-----Original Message-----
From: milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net
[mailto:milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Mike Morrow
> I think we may have some differing opinions on details, but not in our
> admiration of these sets.  But...

That magic word ... 

> I think what is impressive about the A.R.C. effort was how quickly the
> 1938 state-of-the-art Type K designs became woefully obsolete in less
> than seven years.  

Huh?  The war ended seven years later and, as you mentioned, the shift to
VHF and later UHF had begun by that time.  Pretty much everything we went
into the war with, including the SCR-522, was "woefully obsolete" by war's
end.  So why single out ARC unless that "admiration" is rather tainted by
personal prejudices?

> The AN/ARC-5 is arguably the ultimate MF/HF command set,
> yet it was arguably obsolete less than a year after introduction, replaced
> where possible by the VHF-AM and later UHF-AM command sets that have
> dominated since late WWII.  

The HF AN/ARC-5 went on to serve in Viet Nam.  My Dzus fastened copy of a
C-40 was designed to control one each (tunable) R-26, T-19 or -20 and T-23
along with one each Type 12 R-11 and R-19.  (One could hope that the T-23
had been replaced with a T-126 but who knows.)  There is also provisions for
an FM rig which would have been a BC-1335 with the original installations
but with this later edition may well have been an AN/ARC-44/-45 combination
FM and UHF AM setup.  In any case, it's a rather unique 2 Tx, 3 Rx
arrangement.

> Sure there was a lot of HF command set use,
> but it seems hard to justify that use from a performance standpoint.  

Why?  We went into the war with it so there was an established base and,
while the AAF in the ETO was forced into using VHF due to operating out of
fields in England which were already so equipped, that was not the case
elsewhere.  It's interesting to note that many of the heavies (bombers)
there also carried HF command equipment which dilutes that whole VHF Was
King concept.  Even better, some of the English airfields had HF command
equipment in the towers along side the VHF equipment.  

> I know I also have an unpopular opinion about A.R.C.'s VHF technology.  

Very.  Oh, and a wrong one too.

> I know of no other way to characterize A.R.C. VHF developments except as
an
> almost complete and unproductive failure, especially when compared to the
> output of Western Electric with the VHF AN/ARC-5 and AN/ARC-1, and
Colonial
> with the AN/ARC-3.  

The BC-950 and later T-23/ARC-5 along with their companion receivers were
trash designed as replacements for the SCR-522 that would fit existing
SCR-274-N mounts.  It failed miserably and the AAF kept the SCR-522 instead.
The Navy had use for some, among other things as a replacement for the even
worse WE 233, so had WE convert them to fit the AN/ARC-5 system.  I agree
that the AN/ARC-1 and -12 were superior equipment but after WE had gotten
spanked twice already they had to do something.  However, the AN/ARC-1 and
-12 were 1.) later products, and 2.) designed *after* crystals became
available in quantity again.  (Interestingly enough, the AN/ARC-3 family was
vastly superior to the WE products and was designed & built by a company far
smaller with far less VHF design experience.)  

The ARC VHF equipment wasn't a failure so much as being designed at the
wrong time.  Had crystals not become available again in quantity, the
situation would have been quite different and it would have been the VHF
radio of choice for the AN/ARC-5 racks.  As in so many things, timing is
everything.

> A.R.C.'s VHF products are very much in a blind alley,
> and even their post-WWII VHF gear like the Type 12 was certainly
second-string
> or worse to what other manufacturers were producing.  

Let's see ... The Type 11 (T-11, R-11) was released 1 July 1946.  Type 17
(T-11, R-15) came about a year later in mid 1947 and the Type 15 (R-13 which
was essentially a repurposed R-15) came out at roughly the same time along
with the Type 18, a stand alone T-11 intended to be used with a receiver
other than an R-11 or R-15.  It went well with the Type 15 which covered up
to 135 MC at the time.  The R-19 and T-13 appeared for military use in place
of the T-11 and R-15 roughly the same time or shortly after along with the
R-10.  (The R-22 followed along as a replacement for the R-10 although I've
never seen one.)  

We'll ignore the rest of the line and stick with this core for the moment.
The postwar private aviation boom ARC and others expected never happened but
those who were flying got their airplanes' radios upgraded or kick started
with this equipment since it was pretty much "first out the door".  The
military liked it and bought it as COTS equipment to put in their lighter
aircraft where they continued using it through the Viet Nam war.  Through,
not up to.  It remained in civilian use as well although sales to civilians
was restricted in or slightly before 1960 for most of the transmitters.  Of
them, most weren't available to civilians anyway, specifically the T-13,
T-20 and T-23 which covered 125-148 MC and TV-10 UHF transverter.  The T-11
and T-21 (a 10 channel version of the T-11) were dropped from civilian sales
by 1960 but continued to be available for military purchase.  The T-22
(essentially a 20 channel T-11) remained available as did the "second
generation"* T-25.  The R-15 had disappeared by 1960 but the R-19 and R-20
(single light marker beacon Rx) were still being sold.

* The "second generation" equipment is generally anything that goes in the
ARINC racks like the T-25, the Type 21 ADF and the Type 210 (RT-11) with the
later Type 15 with the R-34 receiver a half step since it's basically the
older version modified.  This equipment is typified by using more submini
tubes and/or crystal synthesis for frequency control.  While it is
definitely newer designs, its Type 12 heritage is pretty clear when one digs
into the innards.  Anyway, this isn't any kind of official designation, jut
a method I use to help keep the original Type 12 equipment separate from the
later equipment in my mind.

With all that fancy new equipment that was available (The Narco Mk 12 hit
the market in the 1960s, for example), why did the military prefer the ARC
equipment over the "better" stuff for as long as they did?  Why did
civilians continue to use it at least into the late 1960s when I saw it in
use in various aircraft I worked on?  This is original Type 12, not the
later equipment although there was plenty of it as well.  For that matter,
why did the 2nd generation FES-1240 I have that was installed in a privately
owned 1960 Cessna 310 not get removed until 1996 in anticipation of the 1
January, 1997, cutoff due to a change in FAA regulations regarding frequency
stability due to the new 25 KC channel spacing?  (The list of radios that
lost their type certificates on that date is long with ARC & Cessna
equipment only a small part of it.)  

> (The RT-11A, part of the
> A.R.C. Type 210 commercial VHF set, is a neat and no doubt very expensive
set
> from more than 15 years after WW II's end.)

The RT-11 was the Type 210, not just part of it.  It also made its first
appearance inside that 15 year span, not over it.  And finally, it wasn't
commercial equipment any more than the Type 12 was.  It was quality
equipment that commanded a price to match but ARC had an established
reputation for building quality radios.  Ask anyone who worked on them, one
of whom is on this and other lists.  

> There was little MF and no HF command set legacy in the post-WWII A.R.C.
> designs, except for the oddball AN/ARC-39 and the AN/ARN-59.  There were
only
> the simplified R-10A BCB and R-11A beacon band receivers, and only R-13,
-15,
> and -19 modifications of the failed R-112 and R-113 VHF designs.

I have to admit the AN/ARC-39 is a curious piece but even with the small
quantities in which they were built (sloppy sentence structure but I'm still
on my 1st liter of coffee.) they are evidence HF command equipment still had
a place in military planning.  The AN/ARN-59 (ARC Type 21) was a top quality
ADF and had nothing to do with any command structure.  The R-13, -15, and
-19 weren't extensions of anything "failed", just not utilized due to
changing circumstances.  Again, your prejudices are showing.  As a note, the
R-13 was replaced with the R-34 which, even though it's range was reduced,
was still able to be mated to a T-11 et al for comm use as well as nav and
the R-15 was dropped due to being redundant.  

> In spite of what I've written above, I admire the beauty and execution of
> the engineering shown in the ultimate Type K, the AN/ARC-5.  It's
undeniable,
> and a real joy to see.  

Could have fooled me.

> I suppose if I were to identify an operational defect in the design of the
> Type K sets, it would be the great difficulty of netting an easily upset
> coffee-grinder receiver to the associated transmitter.  

This is a carry over from previous equipment like the SCR-A*-183/-283.  To
me, the ideal solution would have been a dial lock or at least a brake to
discourage dial twiddling etc.  Having flown with coffee grinder radios (ARC
and others), I can say from personal experience that simple vibration is
enough to cause some of them to slip off frequency.  One of the worst was
the Narco Superhomer while the ARC radios were the least prone to do so.

> That would have been especially valuable for the
> ARA/ATA and SCR-274-N sets, for which there are pilot memoirs bemoaning
the use
> of coffee-grinder command sets, 

If they hadn't twisted the cranks so much, they wouldn't have had such a
problem.  Not getting an immediate response to a call lead them to figure
the radios had drifted so they started twisting away not taking into account
the idea that the other folks had problems of their own (Getting shot at
comes to mind.) and weren't in any position to respond.  Sooo ... it was the
radio's fault.  

> The stabilized and locked-tuned MF/HF AN/ARC-5 receivers would have
overcome
> this netting problem somewhat.

It took the crank away from the guys in the cockpit is what it did.  A
signal source was required to set up the radios just like before but the
pilots couldn't do anything to "detune" the receivers anymore.  

In talking with an ex-list member a couple years ago, one major flaw in the
Type K design was pointed out to me, that being the ergonomics of the
control boxes.  The Model D boxes were designed with the idea that a pilot
wearing flying gloves would be using them and had nice "man-sized" switch
handles.  The Type K boxes, by comparison, had dinky little ones that were
not designed with the idea of flight gloves being worn.  In an effort to
cram more great tomatoes in that little bitty can, they messed up that part.


Best regards,
 
Michael, WH7HG ex-K3MXO, ex-KN3MXO, WPE3ARS, BL01xh ex-Mensa A&P PP BGI 
I am me.  I?m the only one who?s qualified.
http://www.nationalmssociety.org/chapters/NTH/index.aspx
http://wh7hg.blogspot.com/
http://kludges-other-blog.blogspot.com
Hiki N?! 


From boeing377 at aol.com  Mon Oct 17 16:21:15 2011
From: boeing377 at aol.com (Boeing377)
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 16:21:15 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] LMs BC 221s and ART 13 Franken-mounts
Message-ID: <8CE5B2174A6528B-179C-60986@webmail-d053.sysops.aol.com>


The late Doug Lacey, who was killed in the crash of his restored USN PV2 Harpoon, made a very respectable looking ART 13 Franken-mount out of parts from easy to obtain mounts for other gear. Doug was a genius at finding obscure surplus parts and even he couldn't find a reasonably priced ART 13 mount. He showed me a stash of ARR 15 mounts and plugs at an aircraft parts dealer and I bought only one of each unaware of their rarity. 

I have an unmodified LM with an ACPS that was surplus from Douglas Aircraft and was used in their avionics lab into the late 60s. I paid $20 years ago. It is still spot on to the calibration book numbers. I've never had to repair or tune anything inside the case. It is obsolete but I still enjoy using it.

BC 221s are still numerous and considered useless by many. I still see them for $10-$20 at swap meets and most go unsold. I don't lose much sleep if a BC 221 is hacked.

In the early 1970s I attended a preview of a DOD surplus auction at Alameda NAS in CA. A huge qty of ART 13s and LMs were up for bid. They were listed as overhauled. The LMs (must have many hundreds of them) were beautiful, literally indistinguishable from brand new. The ART 13s were wood boxed and foil wrapped. Obviously some hams had been there before me and had ripped open a few ART 13s. They were really awful cosmetically, no exceptions. Dirt and grime had been painted over with spray paint, crude lettering had been painted on the front panel indicating some mod, etc. The OH contractor obviously had no pride or care. Dreams of pristine OH'd ART 13s were shattered. They also numbered in the hundreds. My recollection is that the lot of ART 13s went for about $34 apiece (only offered as one lot) and the LMs went for about $6 each all in one lot. They were likely all scrapped. 

73,
AF6IM
www.parachutemobile.org





From RAFANTINI at salisbury.edu  Mon Oct 17 16:55:34 2011
From: RAFANTINI at salisbury.edu (Ray Fantini)
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 16:55:34 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] How I Use an LM
In-Reply-To: <CAFcNxxWrLNKHurdt00HFBBQWOtw832N2A-QaCYVnZ_WVHnzxtA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAFcNxxWrLNKHurdt00HFBBQWOtw832N2A-QaCYVnZ_WVHnzxtA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <2DE6F17E951D824AAE8B8D0BF7579D810DF8AA6846@MBX.salisbury.edu>

Like I said "The only use I can imagine for a BC-221 is with other period radios or older sets as an external reference." I used a LM for setting the frequency on a 1939 HRO RAS for years. the HRO printed charts are useless except to get you close. ARC-5, TBW, TBX any of the transmitters built before the sixties needed an external source to set the frequency correctly and if you want a period test instrument heterodyne frequency meters are great, but to the modern or any Ham who is using anything built after nineteen seventy the LM is pointless when compared to a digital frequency counter or a calibrated signal generator.
But that's not what I want to talk about; I want to talk about history. The history of any item is not just the history of what occurred at just one point of time in an items existence, history is everything that occurs over the entire period of time from beginning to today. The only exception to this are items that are entered directly into a museum's collection where change stops or items that had somehow enter into a state where they were not used from that point in history until today. Much of what still exist today only exist because it was seen as useful in the ham radio community, perhaps a smaller amount exist due to the SWL and electronics community and a very small part due to conversion for commercial operation but Ham radio is primary reason that most BC-221 exist today. In the forties, fifties and sixties until the development of cheap frequency counters Hams were the primary users for the BC-221 and most were purchased and used by Hams.  Lampkin manufactured heterodyne frequency meters for the commercial and land mobile market and by the early sixties no one outside of Ham radio would have considered using some old BC-221 or LM for anything except maybe the old AM HF marine radio work so many of the BC-221 and LM sets that are out there were purchased by Hams for Ham use. If that never occurred how many would exist today?  I can think of at least four or five times I have read articles in past issues of QST dealing with the BC-221, articles on how to build power supplies, use them for a external VFO and how to convert them to all FET and run from a nine volt battery and finally what may be the last mention on how to gut it and use its case, and this is not including CQ magazine and the CQ Surplus conversion guides that have a section on both the BC-211 and the LM series frequency meters. This has all happened and now is a historical fact.
Everyone is free to do and think what they want, but for me to ignore the fact that these frequency meters had a longer period of time in "Ham"  service and were adapted and used in way the original designers never imagined is to ignore everything that happened after 1945.
My own views on this subject may be contrary to many but much of my opinion is based on what's happening with some of the museum ships. Many of the projects that are occurring today are centered on restoring a ship to its 1944 or so appearance when that vessel may have served well into the seventies. I have been told that everyone wants to see the world war two versions but once you remove everything that was installed afterwards you are in fact revising and changing the history of the vessel? Is it ok to say that only the history before that point matters? What about the service during Korea, the cold war or Vietnam? Once you start making things historically correct are you not in effect trying to erasing other history? Or is it more important to return something to what is was at an exact point in time?
Ray F


From aaf-radio-1 at aafradio.org  Mon Oct 17 17:55:06 2011
From: aaf-radio-1 at aafradio.org (Mike Hanz)
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 17:55:06 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] [ART-13_Transmitters] Re: Homebrew ART-13 mounts
In-Reply-To: <57904.12.6.201.2.1318879260.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
References: <j7hqfn+jqfl@eGroups.com> <4E9C7B94.3040805@aafradio.org>
	<57904.12.6.201.2.1318879260.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
Message-ID: <4E9CA43A.3060206@aafradio.org>

On 10/17/2011 3:21 PM, J. Forster wrote:
>
> There is certainly some market for a few mounts and other things,
> especially for the more popular sets like the ARC-5 & SCR-274-N. Things
> like control box mounts come to mind. Original ones are nearly impossible
> to find, and when they do show go for a lot of money. I recall one C mount
> going for well over $125 in the last year or so on eBay. (I didn't get
> it).
>

The only person that I know of who has set up for the ATA/274N/ARC-5 
mounts was kb4dmf.  His replications were flawless, and immensely 
reasonable...I have a couple of them myself!  He has a lot on his plate, 
so I don't know if he's produced a run of control box mounts or the 
shock mounts lately.

> Years ago, I did some sheet metal work, and have watched A&P masters who
> worked for me making spacecraft bits, like electronics boxes. These guys
> could make perfect welds on 0.025" thick Aluminum!
>

Yeh, I watch them work and am always impressed.  It is an art form that 
must be practiced frequently to maintain proficiency.  It's certainly 
not a gift that I possess.  The ones that *really* amaze me are the guys 
that do it with gas welding!  They make it look so simple, and my 
fumbling attempts always reflect the difficulty level of what they are 
doing so easily.

> FWIW: It seems for most pieces, it would take little additional effort to
> make a few dozen, if you have to make one. The reason is that setting
> stops on shears and brakes- the setup work- has to be done for one or a
> score parts. Once a machine is set up, you can crank out parts all day, if
> you have the patience. That's certainly what was done in WW II. Each
> manufacturing station did only one thing, like make a bend.
>

No question about it, John.  I personally don't have the patience to 
make more than one or two - that's the reason I try to describe the 
"gotchas" for those who might want to try just a single reproduction.

> Now, there are additional options. With CAD, one could easily draw these
> things up and have a few hundred cranked out by a sheet metal shop w/ NC
> presses. All identical, all just like the original.
>

Absolutely!  The catch is always the setup fee!

> Also, manufacturing is nopt exactly booming right now. Maybe some shops
> could use some "fill-in" work?
>

It would take someone with the drawings to get quotes.  Taking the part 
into the shop is an option, but one will pay for the translation into 
CAD.  In the final analysis, it's all about the economics.

Just my random thoughts,
Mike


From jphutch60bj at gmail.com  Mon Oct 17 19:49:39 2011
From: jphutch60bj at gmail.com (John Hutchins)
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 18:49:39 -0500
Subject: [Milsurplus] Homebrew ART-13 mounts
In-Reply-To: <4E9C3875.80702@aafradio.org>
References: <4E9C3875.80702@aafradio.org>
Message-ID: <4E9CBF13.6020501@gmail.com>

Mike -
WOW! and made in the USA.
Hutch


On 10/17/2011 9:15 AM, Mike Hanz wrote:
> As most of us know, these mounts don't grow on trees (anymore).  To help
> an old friend who had been looking for quite a while without success, I
> decided to see what I could do to make a mount for him that would look
> halfway decent, even if it wasn't a perfect reproduction of the
> original.  The intent is to encourage others to realize that this is not
> rocket science, and some relatively standard shop tools can be the basis
> of a good looking mount.  The rundown is at
> http://aafradio.org/garajmahal/ART-13_mounts.html for those who are into
> similar exercises in futility...:-)
>
> 73,
> Mike
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>


From MillerKE6F at aol.com  Mon Oct 17 21:52:10 2011
From: MillerKE6F at aol.com (MillerKE6F at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 21:52:10 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] How I Use an LM
Message-ID: <12b19.786e8f8b.3bce35ca@aol.com>

Ray echoes my feelings on this matter.  If not for hams, this stuff  would 
be filling the local tips or would literally be living out their atomic  
existence as beer and soda cans or the siding on a house.  Especially the  LMs 
and 221s which as Ray points out served the ham population quite well for  
decades until cheap digital counters made them mostly useless or at least  
redundant.  I too, like many others still make use of these old gadgets  from 
time to time and they were and still are quite impressive little  machines.  
But as a historian, you have to look at the context of the units  and the 
era in which they served and as Ray noted, the larger portion of these  
unit's lifetime has been spent in he shacks or on the shelves of hams and surely  
not the Army or Navy or Marine Corps.  
 
    I know there are a few people on the list who don't  give a rat's ass 
about the part ham radio's contribution to the history of this  stuff and the 
contribution the stuff has made to the ham radio art over the  decades, but 
buck up and look at the statistics.  A lot of fellows, like  myself and Ray 
still keep them around and one bloke claims to have 60 or more of  them rat 
packed away and in use.  How many non-hams would have done  this?  
 
    thank you for the read
 
    Bob, KE6F

From prc74b at fuse.net  Mon Oct 17 23:25:11 2011
From: prc74b at fuse.net (Joe Munson)
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 23:25:11 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] How I Use the  BC-221-AL  and  TS 174/U
References: <12b19.786e8f8b.3bce35ca@aol.com>
Message-ID: <89ACBB13ECC34C02AF119CE686C7BC5F@your3bf9182263>

I have three operating positioins, and sometimes 4 when out on the deck. 
The 221 contains the offical military 110 volt powersupply.  I have the TS 
174 sitting next to the 221, and the battery cable from the TS 174 will 
reach the power supply terminal strip in the BC 221.  The BC 221 power 
supply is able to power either unit.  Both are modulated.  I have about 4 
feet of wire hanging on each sets antenna terminal.  They are placed on the 
corner of a desk in the corner of the main shack. The BC 221 is usually sest 
to 3885, and the TX 174 to 50.4. I can pick up the modulated signal from 
either set to zero beat a receiver, then the transmitter.  I use them on 75, 
40, 20, 10, and 6 meters.  This keeps me from hauling around the freq 
counter.  It also a source to check the alignment of receivers, etc.  I 
ocassional check the calibration with WWV.  Some of the sets the above are 
used on are T 368/R 390, SCR 274N, BC 229/BC230, GF 11/RU 16, BC 223/BC 312, 
BC 191/BC 312, AVT 112/AVR 20, ART 13/BC348, TCS, Gonset Communicator III on 
6 meters, Heath Kit DX 60, HR 10 receiver and HG 10 VFO on 10 Meters and 
others such as  GRC 9, BC 1306, BC 654, TBX, and BC 454.

Joe Munson
WA4VAG 



From kk5f at earthlink.net  Tue Oct 18 01:11:59 2011
From: kk5f at earthlink.net (Mike Morrow)
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2011 01:11:59 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] How I Use an LM
Message-ID: <30106607.1318914720325.JavaMail.root@mswamui-cedar.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

> I want to talk about history. The history of any item is not just the
> history of what occurred at just one point of time in an items existence...

Very true.  One must differentiate between the historically significant history
of an item, versus its subsequent insignificant history by the use of hobbyists.
This applies not only to radios, but to weapons, vehicles, and other military
items whose honorable halcyon days are behind them after the military releases
surplus gear to civilian users, unless those later users preserve the item for
use EXACTLY as the military used it. 

Generally speaking, no one wants a sporterized M1903 Springfield rifle or a GPW
jeep that someone has hot-rodded (even just adding modern running lights).  Works
addressing the history of such items will never waste words on what civilian
hobbyists did to the gear.  Likewise, why should radio gear in civilian hobbyist
use be accorded any reverence or relevance?  I would discard any work about US
military gear that wasted space describing what hams did with it.  Total nonsense.

Many hams accord their own selves some great achievement when they use military
gear, and they seek acknowledgement of their personal technical achievement and
importance.

This ex-military ham of 44 years sees nothing there.  For at least fifty years
there's been no justification for actual use of this old military gear.

Do what you want with your property, but don't expect accords of glory from it.

Mike / KK5F

From usbssb at hotmail.com  Tue Oct 18 01:14:59 2011
From: usbssb at hotmail.com (greg mijal)
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2011 01:14:59 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] For Sale: GP !@ TRANSMITTER = WITH THE COIL SET THAT
 COVERS 40 METER BAND OS 8 MILITARY O SCOPE
Message-ID: <BLU165-W11E428C58DDB280862D73AC9E50@phx.gbl>





FOR SALE:  GP 12 TRANSMITTER:  ALL ORIGINAL, NO DENTS OR RUST.  GOOD PAINT EXCEPT PLUG IN BAND SET ASSEMBLY, ALL  ALUMINUM SHOWING. WITH CORRECT ORIGINAL TUBES.  BEEN IN DRY STORAGE IN ARIZONA THEN IN HOUSE STORAGE, NEVER OUTSIDE. ON A SCALE OF 1 - 10. IT'S AN EASY 9.WITH 1 SHEET SCHEMATIC FOR MIC - KEY POWER HOOKUP - PTT T-16 MIC ETC PRICE IS FIRM AT $125 PAY PAL OR USPO MO.FOR A GOOD T-16 MIC  WITH PJ - 058 ADD $15SHIPPING TO  THE 48 STATES IS $15 FOR PRIORITY FLATE RATE. NO PPOTHER ADDRESS ARE ACTUAL POSTAGE ONLY. FREE PACKING ASK FOR DETAILED PICTURE SET  RE: GP 12DON'T WANT TO PUT IT ON EBAY!  OS 8MILITARY OSCILLOSCOPE.ALL ORIGINAL, NO MODS,  DENTS, SLIGHT RUST REMOVEABLE AT INSIDE FRAME IN PLACES, POWERS UP WITH STRONG GREEN TRACEN THE FADES OUT.PRICE: $ 35SAME TERMS AS ABOVE 73s GREG MIJALWA7LYOKINSTON, NC            		 	   		  

From wh7hg.hi at gmail.com  Tue Oct 18 01:17:53 2011
From: wh7hg.hi at gmail.com (Kludge)
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 19:17:53 -1000
Subject: [Milsurplus] How I Use an LM
In-Reply-To: <30106607.1318914720325.JavaMail.root@mswamui-cedar.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
References: <30106607.1318914720325.JavaMail.root@mswamui-cedar.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <2E6A431C0BAB421DAC6A09BFB8D8844F@Kongo>

-----Original Message-----
From: milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net
[mailto:milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Mike Morrow
> I would discard any work about US
> military gear that wasted space describing what hams did with it.  Total
nonsense.

Then please don't even look at the pending website I'm putting together.  

Best regards,
 
Michael, WH7HG ex-K3MXO, ex-KN3MXO, WPE3ARS, BL01xh ex-Mensa A&P PP BGI 
I am me.  I?m the only one who?s qualified.
http://www.nationalmssociety.org/chapters/NTH/index.aspx
http://wh7hg.blogspot.com/
http://kludges-other-blog.blogspot.com
Hiki N?! 


From usbssb at hotmail.com  Tue Oct 18 01:19:20 2011
From: usbssb at hotmail.com (greg mijal)
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2011 01:19:20 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] MILITARY AN/MRT-9 RADIO COMMUNIACTION
 SHEDTRANSMITTER RECIVER SHELTER HAM RADIO
In-Reply-To: <CAB55hNdKY3rbji+6gkA5PsVTD1TyfWTCjLQ9B8BsNe7DDN1+kw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <63AFDCFB-65A0-4AC6-9C2F-8AF360A7B29D@aol.com>,
	<20111016184907.B22E52ADC6@ufie.teamlarry.com>,
	<CAB55hNdKY3rbji+6gkA5PsVTD1TyfWTCjLQ9B8BsNe7DDN1+kw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BLU165-W48AD457D03E58BA029C174C9E50@phx.gbl>


I JUST GOT AN EMAIL BACK FROM THE MRT SELLER ON EBAY.$10,000 IS HIS RESERVE.GREGWA7LYO
 > Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2011 15:03:28 -0400
> From: navy.radio at gmail.com
> To: milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
> Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] MILITARY AN/MRT-9 RADIO COMMUNIACTION SHEDTRANSMITTER RECIVER SHELTER HAM RADIO
> 
> This one has a civilian SP-600 instead of the equivalent R-274/URR.
> FWIW, the book says the MRT-9 should have 3 ea. T-368 and 1 ea. R-390()
> Pretty cool box nevertheless...
> Nick K4NYW
> 
> 
> >> > Jim Haynes <jhhaynes at earthlink.net> wrote:
> >> >> Since the nomenclature is MRT I would expect it to contain only
> >> >> transmitters.
> >> >
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
> 
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
 		 	   		  

From kk5f at earthlink.net  Tue Oct 18 01:42:17 2011
From: kk5f at earthlink.net (Mike Morrow)
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2011 00:42:17 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [Milsurplus] Unusual AN/URC-4 Found
Message-ID: <28567164.1318916538016.JavaMail.root@mswamui-cedar.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

At a recent gunshow, I purchased an RT-159B/URC-4 that was permanently
marked for the unusual frequencies of 121.46 and 292.93 MHz.  Every one
I've seen in the past 30 years have been set for 121.5 and 243.0 MHz.

The frequency notation was part of the original printed front instruction
plate as applied at the time of manufacture.

The crystal frequency is actually 6748 kHz, so the actual frequencies are
121.464 and 242.928 MHz.

Usually when such odd frequencies are used for survival sets, it is for
training use.  If that's what these frequencies were for, then it could
only have been between URC-4-to-URC-4 sets.  UHF aircraft sets of the 1950s
era tuned in 100 kHz intervals, so no channel would have matched these
oddballs.

The set was complete with crystal, eight tubes, and all the proper 
tube-restraint rubber bands.  I've got a bucket full of AN/URC-4 units,
but this cost me only $20.  I couldn't resist.

Mike / KK5F

From kk5f at earthlink.net  Tue Oct 18 01:50:48 2011
From: kk5f at earthlink.net (Mike Morrow)
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2011 00:50:48 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [Milsurplus] For Sale: GP !@ TRANSMITTER = WITH THE COIL SET
 THAT COVERS 40 METER BAND OS 8 MILITARY O SCOPE
Message-ID: <29952322.1318917048875.JavaMail.root@mswamui-cedar.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

>FOR SALE:  GP 12 TRANSMITTER...

There is no such thing as a GP-12.

There's a GP-7, and a GF-12.  No GP-12...ever, nor GP-!@ either.

Mike / KK5F

From wh7hg.hi at gmail.com  Tue Oct 18 02:11:52 2011
From: wh7hg.hi at gmail.com (Kludge)
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 20:11:52 -1000
Subject: [Milsurplus] Homebrew ART-13 mounts
In-Reply-To: <4E9C3875.80702@aafradio.org>
References: <4E9C3875.80702@aafradio.org>
Message-ID: <7B38D12331794855985FB83C770AC567@Kongo>

You know, you are making things very difficult for me, Mike.  Not only did
you convince me I can make a BC-348 mount complete with the thingies for the
Jones plug (which would probably be homemade as well), now you've got me
going with a mount for the matching transmitter.  (Of course, I'd use rubber
mounts but you already know that part. :-) )  *sigh* ... One more project to
add to the list of things after the current projects are complete.  ;-)

Best regards,
 
Michael, WH7HG ex-K3MXO, ex-KN3MXO, WPE3ARS, BL01xh ex-Mensa A&P PP BGI 
I am me.  I?m the only one who?s qualified.
http://www.nationalmssociety.org/chapters/NTH/index.aspx
http://wh7hg.blogspot.com/
http://kludges-other-blog.blogspot.com
Hiki N?! 


From whitaker at pa.net  Tue Oct 18 07:45:36 2011
From: whitaker at pa.net (C.Whitaker)
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2011 07:45:36 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] How I Use an LM
In-Reply-To: <2DE6F17E951D824AAE8B8D0BF7579D810DF8AA6846@MBX.salisbury.edu>
References: <CAFcNxxWrLNKHurdt00HFBBQWOtw832N2A-QaCYVnZ_WVHnzxtA@mail.gmail.com>
	<2DE6F17E951D824AAE8B8D0BF7579D810DF8AA6846@MBX.salisbury.edu>
Message-ID: <4E9D66E0.8010509@pa.net>

de WB2CPN
Look, guys. it appears that this all shakes out to this:  There are two, 
(or more) kinds
of people that have ex-military electronic equipment, or knows what it 
is, and these
two groups are the Collectors on one hand, and the Hams on the other.  A 
Collector
gathers things for the pleasure of having it, which includes the 
knowledge that items
will be held for posterity.  That's good.  I myself like to have a look 
at equipment in
its original state that I used years and years ago.  And I can relate to 
my kids and
others what the neutralizing link in a BC-640 is for.
Hams don't necessarily see it that way.  Every piece of equipment they 
cast their eyes
on becomes a "Possibility".  And that began when there was so much 
available after
the wars, and before DOD began giving everything to their "friends" via 
the DRMO.
Hams hack.  That's what ham radio is all about.  Adapt something to make 
it do what
ham radio wants it to do.  This is not desecration as long as there are 
Collectors who
get their hands on a fair share.   I put a coax connector and a 
home-built AC power
supply into my receiver, and I had no urge to ask for heavenly 
forgiveness for having
done so.   But then, there's a SP-600-JX  here that nobody better lay a 
finger on.
I used them in 'the '50's in AACS and a few places after.  Nobody messes 
with
my memories.
Trivia Question:  What was that receiver that was an upgrade from the 
BC-779, and
before the SP-600?  I recall running some on RTTY with a CV-31 in 
diversity.
We had some stand alone 51J's about that time.
73 Clete
========================================


On 10/17/2011 4:55 PM, Ray Fantini wrote:
> Like I said "The only use I can imagine for a BC-221 is with other period radios or older sets as an external reference." I used a LM for setting the frequency on a 1939 HRO RAS for years. the HRO printed charts are useless except to get you close. ARC-5, TBW, TBX any of the transmitters built before the sixties needed an external source to set the frequency correctly and if you want a period test instrument heterodyne frequency meters are great, but to the modern or any Ham who is using anything built after nineteen seventy the LM is pointless when compared to a digital frequency counter or a calibrated signal generator.
> But that's not what I want to talk about; I want to talk about history. The history of any item is not just the history of what occurred at just one point of time in an items existence, history is everything that occurs over the entire period of time from beginning to today. The only exception to this are items that are entered directly into a museum's collection where change stops or items that had somehow enter into a state where they were not used from that point in history until today. Much of what still exist today only exist because it was seen as useful in the ham radio community, perhaps a smaller amount exist due to the SWL and electronics community and a very small part due to conversion for commercial operation but Ham radio is primary reason that most BC-221 exist today. In the forties, fifties and sixties until the development of cheap frequency counters Hams were the primary users for the BC-221 and most were purchased and used by Hams.  Lampkin manufactured het
>   erodyne frequency meters for the commercial and land mobile market and by the early sixties no one outside of Ham radio would have considered using some old BC-221 or LM for anything except maybe the old AM HF marine radio work so many of the BC-221 and LM sets that are out there were purchased by Hams for Ham use. If that never occurred how many would exist today?  I can think of at least four or five times I have read articles in past issues of QST dealing with the BC-221, articles on how to build power supplies, use them for a external VFO and how to convert them to all FET and run from a nine volt battery and finally what may be the last mention on how to gut it and use its case, and this is not including CQ magazine and the CQ Surplus conversion guides that have a section on both the BC-211 and the LM series frequency meters. This has all happened and now is a historical fact.
> Everyone is free to do and think what they want, but for me to ignore the fact that these frequency meters had a longer period of time in "Ham"  service and were adapted and used in way the original designers never imagined is to ignore everything that happened after 1945.
> My own views on this subject may be contrary to many but much of my opinion is based on what's happening with some of the museum ships. Many of the projects that are occurring today are centered on restoring a ship to its 1944 or so appearance when that vessel may have served well into the seventies. I have been told that everyone wants to see the world war two versions but once you remove everything that was installed afterwards you are in fact revising and changing the history of the vessel? Is it ok to say that only the history before that point matters? What about the service during Korea, the cold war or Vietnam? Once you start making things historically correct are you not in effect trying to erasing other history? Or is it more important to return something to what is was at an exact point in time?
> Ray F
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>



From arc5 at ix.netcom.com  Tue Oct 18 10:02:21 2011
From: arc5 at ix.netcom.com (David Stinson)
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2011 09:02:21 -0500
Subject: [Milsurplus] The Golden What?
In-Reply-To: <4E9D66E0.8010509@pa.net>
References: <CAFcNxxWrLNKHurdt00HFBBQWOtw832N2A-QaCYVnZ_WVHnzxtA@mail.gmail.com><2DE6F17E951D824AAE8B8D0BF7579D810DF8AA6846@MBX.salisbury.edu>
	<4E9D66E0.8010509@pa.net>
Message-ID: <5FD0CD4892DF42DA8B8EF4BC86F78FA9@DaddyPC>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "C.Whitaker" <whitaker at pa.net>
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] How I Use an LM


>...  But then, there's a SP-600-JX  here that nobody 
>better lay a  finger on.  I used them in 'the '50's in AACS 
>and a few places after.  Nobody messes with my memories...

That's the rub, isn't it?
It's OK if I mess with your "memories," 
but don't you dare mess with mine...

And you know what's really sad?
In this decayed world, 
not one person in ten will understand my point.....



From arc5 at ix.netcom.com  Tue Oct 18 10:17:12 2011
From: arc5 at ix.netcom.com (David Stinson)
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2011 09:17:12 -0500
Subject: [Milsurplus] Homebrew ART-13 mounts
In-Reply-To: <4E9C3875.80702@aafradio.org>
References: <4E9C3875.80702@aafradio.org>
Message-ID: <3F209D0C66CC404A9BBBB1AF9D194EB2@DaddyPC>

Don't let Mike's modesty fool ya.
He's a "Wunderkind" when it comes to metal.



From RAFANTINI at salisbury.edu  Tue Oct 18 10:22:24 2011
From: RAFANTINI at salisbury.edu (Ray Fantini)
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2011 10:22:24 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] How I Use an LM
In-Reply-To: <30106607.1318914720325.JavaMail.root@mswamui-cedar.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
References: <30106607.1318914720325.JavaMail.root@mswamui-cedar.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <2DE6F17E951D824AAE8B8D0BF7579D810DF8AA6951@MBX.salisbury.edu>

It is important to understand that any comments are not to be interpreted as an attack or attempt to flame or start some sort of conflict. All of my comments are posted with the idea of an exchange of viewpoints and with the greatest respect for all the members of this list. If it is felt that this is an inappropriate use or wastes of bandwidth notify me directly and we will see no more of this thread.
Ray Fantini

Interpretation of what is historically significant and what is not is up to the individual studying it, no organization, governing body or individual can determine what is and what is not relevant.  Every point you make I can counter, with regards to significant history of military radios and the civilian market the dumping of ARC-5 transmitters on the surplus market directly leads to the current agreed selection of USB and LSB on the ham bands today. A fact that has nothing to do with the military use of the ARC-5 and everything to do with Ham radio use of the ARC-5 components in developing many of the first generation SSB transceivers well  before the military. With weapons there are countless Enfield's and Mauser's  rifles that are in civilian hands, some are still in the military condition but many have new stocks and are fine guns, not just the hack job where someone cuts the front off a Enfield but newly manufactured sport stocks that produced a entire class of hunting guns. The Schultz & Larsen remanufactured 98K bears little resemblance to the original WW2 98K it was built from but is still one of the best target rifles around. The entire class of SUV is a direct descendant of the WW2 military jeep.
People purchased surplus jeeps and modified them for use on and off road not as museum displays but as functional transportation. This modification of surplus government equipment leads to an entire new class of vehicles, the SUV.
All three examples demonstrate that equipment lives on and can achieve new forms that are significant improvements beyond their limited intended purpose.
In regards to an overinflated sense of technical achievement or self importance due to some hack finding ways of modifying or changing things, that's me. Have been doing this stuff for a while now, almost forty years and have no plans for stopping any time soon. Hacking and Ham radio has brought about a lifestyle that when I was twenty would not have imagined, house, cars, job at a university and more consulting work then I can do, so hacking been good to me.
The justification for use of the equipment for me goes without saying, I can easily operate a Flex SDR that outperforms everything before it, but derive more satisfaction from using my fifty and sixty year old technology to make QSO in the past several years have completed over a hundred AM contacts between the old ARC-38, TBW and lately spending a lot of time on 160 running a 1954 RCA BTA-1 AM transmitter. Justification for use of a technology is where you find it.  And in regards to the "Accords of Glory", just like I said, satisfaction is where you find it. I have the greatest respect for the work you and many others have accomplished, dam look at the ART-13 mounts! Those are a thing of beauty but please understand that this is the "Milsurplus" reflector a site for the use of people involved in all aspects of military radio use and not a limited site like the "ARC-5" reflector where I would assume they only talk about the preservation and limited use of that radio, A site I have never posted too.

-----Original Message-----
From: milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net [mailto:milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Mike Morrow
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2011 1:12 AM
To: milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] How I Use an LM

> I want to talk about history. The history of any item is not just the
> history of what occurred at just one point of time in an items existence...

Very true.  One must differentiate between the historically significant history
of an item, versus its subsequent insignificant history by the use of hobbyists.
This applies not only to radios, but to weapons, vehicles, and other military
items whose honorable halcyon days are behind them after the military releases
surplus gear to civilian users, unless those later users preserve the item for
use EXACTLY as the military used it. 

Generally speaking, no one wants a sporterized M1903 Springfield rifle or a GPW
jeep that someone has hot-rodded (even just adding modern running lights).  Works
addressing the history of such items will never waste words on what civilian
hobbyists did to the gear.  Likewise, why should radio gear in civilian hobbyist
use be accorded any reverence or relevance?  I would discard any work about US
military gear that wasted space describing what hams did with it.  Total nonsense.

Many hams accord their own selves some great achievement when they use military
gear, and they seek acknowledgement of their personal technical achievement and
importance.

This ex-military ham of 44 years sees nothing there.  For at least fifty years
there's been no justification for actual use of this old military gear.

Do what you want with your property, but don't expect accords of glory from it.

Mike / KK5F

From ka1kaq at gmail.com  Tue Oct 18 10:52:16 2011
From: ka1kaq at gmail.com (Todd, KA1KAQ)
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2011 10:52:16 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] Low B+: The Genius of A.R.C.
In-Reply-To: <20F96607ACDC40E4BB9A8AF7E9B445DE@Kongo>
References: <76ADD36120CC4E068518E009F56B99B5@DaddyPC>
	<2DE6F17E951D824AAE8B8D0BF7579D810DF89D4276@MBX.salisbury.edu>
	<9CBB91058189417C8BA6AEEFBE4481DA@Dell560>
	<20F96607ACDC40E4BB9A8AF7E9B445DE@Kongo>
Message-ID: <CANCs6AVuWEBxT7n2WEoOGf19EHyEGAGhTPPbYY1hTX3mmT7z-A@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 12:15 AM, Kludge <wh7hg.hi at gmail.com> wrote:
> -----Original Message-----
> On Behalf Of B Smith
>> Some of us are missing the point about lower voltage operation. ?You
>> can look at ?tube characteristics curves all day long and reach the
>> same conclusion.
>
> In any situation where theory (in this case, tube manuals) collides with the
> real world, the real world invariably wins. ?In this case, these receivers
> are operating despite what the curves say, perhaps not to spec but well
> enough to be useful.

I don't know that I'd call tube manuals 'theory', Mike, but I agree
with your point. (o:  It's more a case of folks getting confused or
otherwise wrapped around the axle over what's "proper" (design) and
what will actually work (real world). In this case, both really do
work. One approach is just more sensible in the present day. As Dave
eluded to in another post about it being FUN, we're not concerned with
getting top-of-the-line, cutting edge performance out of this
equipment. We're enjoying the experience of a piece of living history
in our midst. The questions isn't whether running the equipment to
spec will give a better result(briefly, before detonation), but rather
if running it at a substantially reduced level presents a similar
experience. From Dave's results and others, it sounds like the answer
is 'close enough for our purposes' or as you say, "useful".

Not unlike the discussion of how useful tube testers are: they can
reveal problems within a tube, but excellent emission is no guarantee
the tube will perform. Have experienced this myself. Also picked up a
post war RCA SC-88 some years ago that performed well at the seller's
location (he provided a video of it in action) but was numb at mine.
It did work, but barely. Turns out he had one of those 50 gigawatt
bible thumper stations nearby. Testing the tubes showed absolutely
*no* emission from most, and only very slight deflection for a couple.
So the tester showed the deficiency, yet the receiver still performed
to some level with flat tubes. In this case, it was an easy solution,
but it remains a lesson for me on what actually will "work". Amazing,
really.

Kudos to Dave, the Mikes, and all those who actually seek out and
share solutions to the challenges of keeping this old history actively
functioning beyond paperweight mode, for us to enjoy and, hopefully,
future generations to experience.

~ Todd,  KA1KAQ/4

From arc5 at ix.netcom.com  Tue Oct 18 10:56:25 2011
From: arc5 at ix.netcom.com (David Stinson)
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2011 09:56:25 -0500
Subject: [Milsurplus] How I Use an LM
In-Reply-To: <2E6A431C0BAB421DAC6A09BFB8D8844F@Kongo>
References: <30106607.1318914720325.JavaMail.root@mswamui-cedar.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
	<2E6A431C0BAB421DAC6A09BFB8D8844F@Kongo>
Message-ID: <3E4CDEE2DD0547CEABB5387F5F321A49@DaddyPC>

The neatest use I ever had for an "LM" 
(Actually it was a BC-221, but who's counting?):

Back in the 1980s, I was very seriously involved in the 
1750 meter band (160-190 KCs).   I actually accomplished 
some "firsts" on that band, with a lot of help and encouragement
from some awesome people. 
My first transmitter, beacon "MRC" in Mercury, Nevada
on 181.84 KC, used a BC-221 as a VFO.  
It had a hammed-up AC supply in it (not built by me)
so it drifted a little, which is poison to a 1750 mtr rig,
but it still managed to garner my first reception reports
from California and Utah.  
When/If I ever manage to build the shack I want for 
my actual operating postion, my best 221 will be with
the USAAC rigs and my LM will be with the Navy sets.

73 DE Dave AB5S



From usbssb at hotmail.com  Tue Oct 18 11:19:26 2011
From: usbssb at hotmail.com (greg mijal)
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2011 11:19:26 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] TYPO IN TRA?NSMITTER AD
Message-ID: <BLU165-W25C47D8AE148E51F6637F1C9E50@phx.gbl>





Hi: The radio offered is a GF 12, not  a GP 12sorry about the mix up.Greg   WA7LYO Kinston, NC  		 	   		  

From ka1kaq at gmail.com  Tue Oct 18 11:23:42 2011
From: ka1kaq at gmail.com (Todd, KA1KAQ)
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2011 11:23:42 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] The Golden What?
In-Reply-To: <5FD0CD4892DF42DA8B8EF4BC86F78FA9@DaddyPC>
References: <CAFcNxxWrLNKHurdt00HFBBQWOtw832N2A-QaCYVnZ_WVHnzxtA@mail.gmail.com>
	<2DE6F17E951D824AAE8B8D0BF7579D810DF8AA6846@MBX.salisbury.edu>
	<4E9D66E0.8010509@pa.net>
	<5FD0CD4892DF42DA8B8EF4BC86F78FA9@DaddyPC>
Message-ID: <CANCs6AW-NbN5Lcv63V5SpKbn9SgP6JwCHSgwTsmfdauc=LQ8CQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 10:02 AM, David Stinson <arc5 at ix.netcom.com> wrote:

> That's the rub, isn't it?
> It's OK if I mess with your "memories,"
> but don't you dare mess with mine...
>
> And you know what's really sad?
> In this decayed world,
> not one person in ten will understand my point.....

Been that way forever, Dave. If you didn't live it or otherwise
identify with it, it doesn't mean as much, if anything. Today's
protestors are a perfect example. If they understood the price behind
their 'right' to protest, or had an appreciation of the cost of
developing the technologies they use to coordinate their activities,
perhaps they'd think differently. Perhaps. I had little appreciation
for what my mom went through feeding 4 kids and a husband as well as
keeping house and working a job until I was on my own and became a
homeowner. At least my wife appreciates my limited cooking abilities.
(o:

Fortunately in the world of radio, there's still room for everyone's
preferences and memories. Enjoying them without slamming someone's
different view is the key. Best we can do to insure their future is to
enjoy and share our love of the stuff with others.

~ Todd,  KA1KAQ/4

From military1944 at aol.com  Tue Oct 18 11:25:51 2011
From: military1944 at aol.com (BenG4BXD)
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2011 11:25:51 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] WS19 PSU No1 Mk3 FS
Message-ID: <8CE5BC15AEEE391-14B8-7A573@Webmail-m109.sysops.aol.com>

Nice example, looks unmolested. Twin dynos, with power plug. Untested. 
?100

pictures at    www.qsl.net/g4bxd/qmstores.htm

cheers, Ben. 

From n1udi at att.net  Tue Oct 18 11:33:36 2011
From: n1udi at att.net (Ronnie)
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2011 11:33:36 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] F. S. TA-43/PT Field Phone  Price reduced
Message-ID: <F150CC20155043D6A4BCBB67C1AA86B6@military68207d>

F/S;  QTY (1) TA-43/PT Field Phone By Western Electric Company. Order # 26573-PH-52. Comes with CY-1277 Drab canvas bag. Excellent condition. $30 + Shipping.  

Rock / N1UDI

From ka2ivy at verizon.net  Tue Oct 18 12:15:36 2011
From: ka2ivy at verizon.net (Bruce Gentry)
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2011 12:15:36 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] How I Use an LM
In-Reply-To: <4E9D66E0.8010509@pa.net>
References: <CAFcNxxWrLNKHurdt00HFBBQWOtw832N2A-QaCYVnZ_WVHnzxtA@mail.gmail.com>
	<2DE6F17E951D824AAE8B8D0BF7579D810DF8AA6846@MBX.salisbury.edu>
	<4E9D66E0.8010509@pa.net>
Message-ID: <4E9DA628.6070804@verizon.net>



C.Whitaker wrote:
> my memories.
> Trivia Question:  What was that receiver that was an upgrade from the 
> BC-779, and
> before the SP-600?  I recall running some on RTTY with a CV-31 in 
> diversity.
> We had some stand alone 51J's about that time.
> 73 Clete
> ========================================
>   
Hammarlund made the SP-400 immediately after WWII. It was a sort of 
warmed over pre-war Super Pro, but worked fine and kept the push-pull 
audio output, so it  sounded  good. In 1945-46, I'm sure a lot of 
companies were struggling to convert back to civilian production, and 
get something to offer the consumer as quickly as they could. I think it 
used miniature tubes in the front end, it's performance on 10 meters was 
better than most others of the time.  I don't know if it had a military 
version, but would be surprised if it didn't.

   Bruce Gentry, KA2IVY

From WA5CAB at cs.com  Tue Oct 18 12:29:22 2011
From: WA5CAB at cs.com (WA5CAB at cs.com)
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2011 12:29:22 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] How I Use an LM
Message-ID: <113c1.6929acd0.3bcf0362@cs.com>

R-129/U.  But it had a slightly different coverage not matching BC-779, 794 
or 1004.  Actually it was closer to the SP-400.  I had an SP-400 years ago 
and don't recall it having any miniature tubes.  When I get time, I'll check 
the manual I still have.

There was also a mod to BC-794 called MC-531.  It added crystal control to 
HFO and BFO and was nomenclatured R-270/FRR (TM 11-896 covers it).  I once 
had one of those, too.

In a message dated 10/18/2011 11:16:59 AM Central Daylight Time, 
ka2ivy at verizon.net writes: 
> C.Whitaker wrote:
> >my memories.
> >Trivia Question:  What was that receiver that was an upgrade from the 
> >BC-779, and
> >before the SP-600?  I recall running some on RTTY with a CV-31 in 
> >diversity.
> >We had some stand alone 51J's about that time.
> >73 Clete
> >========================================
> >   
> Hammarlund made the SP-400 immediately after WWII. It was a sort of 
> warmed over pre-war Super Pro, but worked fine and kept the push-pull 
> audio output, so it  sounded  good. In 1945-46, I'm sure a lot of 
> companies were struggling to convert back to civilian production, and 
> get something to offer the consumer as quickly as they could. I think it 
> used miniature tubes in the front end, it's performance on 10 meters was 
> better than most others of the time.  I don't know if it had a military 
> version, but would be surprised if it didn't.
> 
>    Bruce Gentry, KA2IVY

Robert Downs - Houston
wa5cab dot com (Web Store)
MVPA 9480

From jfor at quikus.com  Tue Oct 18 12:27:57 2011
From: jfor at quikus.com (J. Forster)
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2011 09:27:57 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] How I Use an LM
In-Reply-To: <30106607.1318914720325.JavaMail.root@mswamui-cedar.atl.sa.earthlink.n
	et>
References: <30106607.1318914720325.JavaMail.root@mswamui-cedar.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <60028.12.6.201.2.1318955277.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>

Well said.

-John

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


>> I want to talk about history. The history of any item is not just the
>> history of what occurred at just one point of time in an items
>> existence...
>
> Very true.  One must differentiate between the historically significant
> history
> of an item, versus its subsequent insignificant history by the use of
> hobbyists.
> This applies not only to radios, but to weapons, vehicles, and other
> military
> items whose honorable halcyon days are behind them after the military
> releases
> surplus gear to civilian users, unless those later users preserve the item
> for
> use EXACTLY as the military used it.
>
> Generally speaking, no one wants a sporterized M1903 Springfield rifle or
> a GPW
> jeep that someone has hot-rodded (even just adding modern running lights).
>  Works
> addressing the history of such items will never waste words on what
> civilian
> hobbyists did to the gear.  Likewise, why should radio gear in civilian
> hobbyist
> use be accorded any reverence or relevance?  I would discard any work
> about US
> military gear that wasted space describing what hams did with it.  Total
> nonsense.
>
> Many hams accord their own selves some great achievement when they use
> military
> gear, and they seek acknowledgement of their personal technical
> achievement and
> importance.
>
> This ex-military ham of 44 years sees nothing there.  For at least fifty
> years
> there's been no justification for actual use of this old military gear.
>
> Do what you want with your property, but don't expect accords of glory
> from it.
>
> Mike / KK5F
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>



From bcarling at cfl.rr.com  Tue Oct 18 13:16:00 2011
From: bcarling at cfl.rr.com (=?utf-8?B?YmNhcmxpbmdAY2ZsLnJyLmNvbQ==?=)
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2011 13:16:00 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] =?utf-8?q?How_I_Use_an_LM?=
Message-ID: <44.71.02308.154BD9E4@cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com>

Is there another military radio group that is more friendly toward those who enjoying modifying and using military radio equipment?

Bry Carling

Sent from myTouch 4G, please excuse my brevity.



----- Reply message -----
From: "J. Forster" <jfor at quikus.com>
To: "Mike Morrow" <kk5f at arrl.net>
Cc: <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
Subject: [Milsurplus] How I Use an LM
Date: Tue, Oct 18, 2011 12:27 pm


Well said.

-John

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


>> I want to talk about history. The history of any item is not just the
>> history of what occurred at just one point of time in an items
>> existence...
>
> Very true.  One must differentiate between the historically significant
> history
> of an item, versus its subsequent insignificant history by the use of
> hobbyists.
> This applies not only to radios, but to weapons, vehicles, and other
> military
> items whose honorable halcyon days are behind them after the military
> releases
> surplus gear to civilian users, unless those later users preserve the item
> for
> use EXACTLY as the military used it.
>
> Generally speaking, no one wants a sporterized M1903 Springfield rifle or
> a GPW
> jeep that someone has hot-rodded (even just adding modern running lights).
>  Works
> addressing the history of such items will never waste words on what
> civilian
> hobbyists did to the gear.  Likewise, why should radio gear in civilian
> hobbyist
> use be accorded any reverence or relevance?  I would discard any work
> about US
> military gear that wasted space describing what hams did with it.  Total
> nonsense.
>
> Many hams accord their own selves some great achievement when they use
> military
> gear, and they seek acknowledgement of their personal technical
> achievement and
> importance.
>
> This ex-military ham of 44 years sees nothing there.  For at least fifty
> years
> there's been no justification for actual use of this old military gear.
>
> Do what you want with your property, but don't expect accords of glory
> from it.
>
> Mike / KK5F
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>


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

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

From arc5 at ix.netcom.com  Tue Oct 18 13:22:30 2011
From: arc5 at ix.netcom.com (David Stinson)
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2011 12:22:30 -0500
Subject: [Milsurplus] List of Lists... Splinter Group Compilation
Message-ID: <B9DF8099506C4EB1BFD2897AFAE6B595@DaddyPC>


Could we please compile a list of all 
the splinter-groups in the MilRadio community?
I guess the only way to get a broader perspective is to 
give-in and subscribe..... If we only knew what all was out there.

So I'll start.  Please add yours:

milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
ARC5 at mailman.qth.net


From wh7hg.hi at gmail.com  Tue Oct 18 13:25:44 2011
From: wh7hg.hi at gmail.com (Kludge)
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2011 07:25:44 -1000
Subject: [Milsurplus] How I Use an LM
In-Reply-To: <2DE6F17E951D824AAE8B8D0BF7579D810DF8AA6951@MBX.salisbury.edu>
References: <30106607.1318914720325.JavaMail.root@mswamui-cedar.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
	<2DE6F17E951D824AAE8B8D0BF7579D810DF8AA6951@MBX.salisbury.edu>
Message-ID: <A73F9856EAB948CAA16C6B1537143A83@Kongo>

-----Original Message-----
From: milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net
[mailto:milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Ray Fantini
> Interpretation of what is historically significant and what is not is up
to the individual 
> studying it, no organization, governing body or individual can determine
what is and what is 
> not relevant.  

*sigh* ... a freakin' voice of reason at last!

> Every point you make I can counter, with regards to significant history of
military radios 
> and the civilian market the dumping of ARC-5 transmitters on the surplus
market directly 
> leads to the current agreed selection of USB and LSB on the ham bands
today. A fact that 
> has nothing to do with the military use of the ARC-5 and everything to do
with Ham radio 
> use of the ARC-5 components in developing many of the first generation SSB
transceivers 
> well  before the military.

One can expand that to just about everything that showed up on the postwar
surplus market, including spare parts.  A large number of hams were getting
back on the air and saw surplus as a path to do so using much better
equipment than they'd had prior to the war so snapped it up and made it do
what they needed it to as opposed to what the military needed.  While the
technology existed in the mid to late 30s to make crystal filter SSB rigs,
it wasn't until after the war when crystals were available for cheap that
filter type SSB became viable for amateur experimentation along with phasing
type.  These same crystals wound up in receivers to make them more amenable
to both SSB and CW which was a boon to me in the early 60s when I was
producing those filters for local sale.  

> People purchased surplus jeeps and modified them for use on and off road
not as museum 
> displays but as functional transportation. 

At least two were in use at farms where I grew up.  The tubs had been
stripped down so the only thing left was the pan and the front seats.  These
weren't the postwar Willis farm vehicles but war surplus Jeeps that had been
converted to their needs.  So let's shoot the farmers for destroying
perfectly good Jeeps in order to make them into something they needed.

> please understand that this is the "Milsurplus" reflector a site for the
use of people involved 
> in all aspects of military radio use and not a limited site like the
"ARC-5" reflector where I 
> would assume they only talk about the preservation and limited use of that
radio, 

Pretty much although, oddly enough, the subject of using FETs in place of
tubes was discussed without flames as well.  Isn't that ironic.

Best regards,
 
Michael, WH7HG ex-K3MXO, ex-KN3MXO, WPE3ARS, BL01xh ex-Mensa A&P PP BGI 
I am me.  I?m the only one who?s qualified.
http://www.nationalmssociety.org/chapters/NTH/index.aspx
http://wh7hg.blogspot.com/
http://kludges-other-blog.blogspot.com
Hiki N?! 


From ka1kaq at gmail.com  Tue Oct 18 13:26:06 2011
From: ka1kaq at gmail.com (Todd, KA1KAQ)
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2011 13:26:06 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] List of Lists... Splinter Group Compilation
In-Reply-To: <B9DF8099506C4EB1BFD2897AFAE6B595@DaddyPC>
References: <B9DF8099506C4EB1BFD2897AFAE6B595@DaddyPC>
Message-ID: <CANCs6AVj9_irPj1x+RXTPZNB6MrmA3SW0PwbnwU4w=KJJ9LNzg@mail.gmail.com>

The T-368/BC-610 list: T-368_BC-610 at yahoogroups.com

The R-390 list:  r-390 at mailman.qth.net

A couple others that escape me at the moment because I'm not a member,
like the WS 19 list.


On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 1:22 PM, David Stinson <arc5 at ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
> Could we please compile a list of all
> the splinter-groups in the MilRadio community?
> I guess the only way to get a broader perspective is to
> give-in and subscribe..... If we only knew what all was out there.
>
> So I'll start. ?Please add yours:
>
> milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
> ARC5 at mailman.qth.net
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>

From wh7hg.hi at gmail.com  Tue Oct 18 13:37:25 2011
From: wh7hg.hi at gmail.com (Kludge)
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2011 07:37:25 -1000
Subject: [Milsurplus] How I Use an LM
In-Reply-To: <44.71.02308.154BD9E4@cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com>
References: <44.71.02308.154BD9E4@cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com>
Message-ID: <CC4C0C9008364E15BA64FBBE96540C37@Kongo>

-----Original Message-----
From: milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net
[mailto:milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of bcarling at cfl.rr.com
> Is there another military radio group that is more friendly toward those
who enjoying 
> modifying and using military radio equipment?

I don't know but the narrow mindedness here is getting to the point that one
would be worth my moving to one if it does.  I think there may be one or two
general hollow state lists/groups on Google & Yahoo that would be far more
amenable.  

Preservation and restoration are important but not to the exclusion of
everything else.  The *equipment's* history didn't end with the end of the
military application.  Instead it branched into a different service, in this
case amateur service.  If this is strictly a military history list (along
with arc5) then it should be stated as such otherwise accept that there is
more to what the equipment was used for than mil applications.  

If this and arc5 are, in fact, strictly military history lists please let me
know so I can unsubscribe.

Best regards,
 
Michael, WH7HG ex-K3MXO, ex-KN3MXO, WPE3ARS, BL01xh ex-Mensa A&P PP BGI 
I am me.  I?m the only one who?s qualified.
http://www.nationalmssociety.org/chapters/NTH/index.aspx
http://wh7hg.blogspot.com/
http://kludges-other-blog.blogspot.com
Hiki N?! 


From w7qho at aol.com  Tue Oct 18 13:39:37 2011
From: w7qho at aol.com (mac)
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2011 10:39:37 -0700
Subject: [Milsurplus] How I Use an LM
In-Reply-To: <44.71.02308.154BD9E4@cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com>
References: <44.71.02308.154BD9E4@cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com>
Message-ID: <9D3F3E52-3D13-428E-B6A4-6CEC548EA390@aol.com>

Maybe we should start one.  Didn't know I had a garage full of Sacred  
Relics.

Dennis D. w7qho
Glendale, CA

*********************

On Oct 18, 2011, at 10:16 AM, bcarling at cfl.rr.com wrote:

> Is there another military radio group that is more friendly toward  
> those who enjoying modifying and using military radio equipment?
>
> Bry Carling
>
> Sent from myTouch 4G, please excuse my brevity.
>
>
>
> ----- Reply message -----
> From: "J. Forster" <jfor at quikus.com>
> To: "Mike Morrow" <kk5f at arrl.net>
> Cc: <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
> Subject: [Milsurplus] How I Use an LM
> Date: Tue, Oct 18, 2011 12:27 pm
>
>
> Well said.
>
> -John
>
> ============
>
>
>>> I want to talk about history. The history of any item is not just  
>>> the
>>> history of what occurred at just one point of time in an items
>>> existence...
>>
>> Very true.  One must differentiate between the historically  
>> significant
>> history
>> of an item, versus its subsequent insignificant history by the use of
>> hobbyists.
>> This applies not only to radios, but to weapons, vehicles, and other
>> military
>> items whose honorable halcyon days are behind them after the military
>> releases
>> surplus gear to civilian users, unless those later users preserve  
>> the item
>> for
>> use EXACTLY as the military used it.
>>
>> Generally speaking, no one wants a sporterized M1903 Springfield  
>> rifle or
>> a GPW
>> jeep that someone has hot-rodded (even just adding modern running  
>> lights).
>> Works
>> addressing the history of such items will never waste words on what
>> civilian
>> hobbyists did to the gear.  Likewise, why should radio gear in  
>> civilian
>> hobbyist
>> use be accorded any reverence or relevance?  I would discard any work
>> about US
>> military gear that wasted space describing what hams did with it.   
>> Total
>> nonsense.
>>
>> Many hams accord their own selves some great achievement when they  
>> use
>> military
>> gear, and they seek acknowledgement of their personal technical
>> achievement and
>> importance.
>>
>> This ex-military ham of 44 years sees nothing there.  For at least  
>> fifty
>> years
>> there's been no justification for actual use of this old military  
>> gear.
>>
>> Do what you want with your property, but don't expect accords of  
>> glory
>> from it.
>>
>> Mike / KK5F
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> Milsurplus mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>>
>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>
>>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html


From aaf-radio-1 at aafradio.org  Tue Oct 18 13:39:59 2011
From: aaf-radio-1 at aafradio.org (Mike Hanz)
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2011 13:39:59 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] [ARC5] List of Lists... Splinter Group Compilation
In-Reply-To: <B9DF8099506C4EB1BFD2897AFAE6B595@DaddyPC>
References: <B9DF8099506C4EB1BFD2897AFAE6B595@DaddyPC>
Message-ID: <4E9DB9EF.20901@aafradio.org>

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ARC-5radio/

It isn't as busy, but at least you can post a photo or schematic on it 
to explain something (though the attachment is distributed to the 
members, not shown in the message archive.)

On 10/18/2011 1:22 PM, David Stinson wrote:
> Could we please compile a list of all
> the splinter-groups in the MilRadio community?
> I guess the only way to get a broader perspective is to
> give-in and subscribe..... If we only knew what all was out there.
>
> So I'll start.  Please add yours:
>
> milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
> ARC5 at mailman.qth.net


From frledda at att.net  Tue Oct 18 13:40:47 2011
From: frledda at att.net (Francesco Ledda)
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2011 12:40:47 -0500
Subject: [Milsurplus] MILITARY AN/MRT-9 RADIO COMMUNIACTION
	SHEDTRANSMITTER RECIVER SHELTER HAM RADIO
In-Reply-To: <BLU165-W48AD457D03E58BA029C174C9E50@phx.gbl>
References: <63AFDCFB-65A0-4AC6-9C2F-8AF360A7B29D@aol.com>,
	<20111016184907.B22E52ADC6@ufie.teamlarry.com>,
	<CAB55hNdKY3rbji+6gkA5PsVTD1TyfWTCjLQ9B8BsNe7DDN1+kw@mail.gmail.com>
	<BLU165-W48AD457D03E58BA029C174C9E50@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <000001cc8dbd$25063180$6f129480$@net>

I don't think that it is worth that much. First, we don't know what kind of
shape those transmitters are. Second, trucking that beast will be expensive.
I think that $5k would be a fair price.

Any opinions?

FL

-----Original Message-----
From: milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net
[mailto:milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of greg mijal
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2011 12:19 AM
To: navy.radio at gmail.com; milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] MILITARY AN/MRT-9 RADIO COMMUNIACTION
SHEDTRANSMITTER RECIVER SHELTER HAM RADIO


I JUST GOT AN EMAIL BACK FROM THE MRT SELLER ON EBAY.$10,000 IS HIS
RESERVE.GREGWA7LYO
 > Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2011 15:03:28 -0400
> From: navy.radio at gmail.com
> To: milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
> Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] MILITARY AN/MRT-9 RADIO COMMUNIACTION
SHEDTRANSMITTER RECIVER SHELTER HAM RADIO
> 
> This one has a civilian SP-600 instead of the equivalent R-274/URR.
> FWIW, the book says the MRT-9 should have 3 ea. T-368 and 1 ea. R-390()
> Pretty cool box nevertheless...
> Nick K4NYW
> 
> 
> >> > Jim Haynes <jhhaynes at earthlink.net> wrote:
> >> >> Since the nomenclature is MRT I would expect it to contain only
> >> >> transmitters.
> >> >
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
> 
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
 		 	   		  
______________________________________________________________
Milsurplus mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html


From arc5 at ix.netcom.com  Tue Oct 18 13:43:21 2011
From: arc5 at ix.netcom.com (David Stinson)
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2011 12:43:21 -0500
Subject: [Milsurplus] How I Use an LM
In-Reply-To: <CC4C0C9008364E15BA64FBBE96540C37@Kongo>
References: <44.71.02308.154BD9E4@cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com>
	<CC4C0C9008364E15BA64FBBE96540C37@Kongo>
Message-ID: <1F7131AA9698477CBA51978B87AE2E55@DaddyPC>

Good grief, guys.....

You're passionate about your "innovations."
Some of us are passionate about our "preservations."

If you want me to tolerate your differing opinions,
then tolerate mine.  It's not like I'm going to come
to your place and confiscate your stuff for "abuse."  :-D

Chill.......

From jfor at quikus.com  Tue Oct 18 13:42:03 2011
From: jfor at quikus.com (J. Forster)
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2011 10:42:03 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] [ARC5] List of Lists... Splinter Group Compilation
Message-ID: <60837.12.6.201.2.1318959723.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>

I'd not call them splinter Groups, but:

Radio/RADAR:

ArmyRadios
ArmyRadioManuals (extra space for manuals)
ART-13_Transmitter
MIT-Rad-Lab-Books
Rebecca-Eureka
Vintage-Military-RADAR
VMARS
Watkins-Johnson

And for Test Equipment:

AILtech
Boonton
EIP_Microwave
GenRad
HP_8505A_Network_Analyzer
HP_Laser_Interferometers
NIM and CAMAC
TestEquipTrader
Tekscopes2
HP_Agilent_Equipment
WavetekTestEquipment
Wiltron_Instruments

All are on YahooGroups.

-John

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


>
> Could we please compile a list of all
> the splinter-groups in the MilRadio community?
> I guess the only way to get a broader perspective is to
> give-in and subscribe..... If we only knew what all was out there.
>
> So I'll start.  Please add yours:
>
> milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
> ARC5 at mailman.qth.net
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> ARC5 mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/arc5
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:ARC5 at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>





From navy.radio at gmail.com  Tue Oct 18 13:45:01 2011
From: navy.radio at gmail.com (Nick England)
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2011 13:45:01 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] [ARC5] List of Lists... Splinter Group Compilation
In-Reply-To: <4E9DB9EF.20901@aafradio.org>
References: <B9DF8099506C4EB1BFD2897AFAE6B595@DaddyPC>
	<4E9DB9EF.20901@aafradio.org>
Message-ID: <CAB55hNePOCF+XkYhsBQRe4f1GNAzWpNczbWDzDhSJPri4SYwqg@mail.gmail.com>

http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/frr59users/


> On 10/18/2011 1:22 PM, David Stinson wrote:
>> Could we please compile a list of all
>> the splinter-groups in the MilRadio community?
>> I guess the only way to get a broader perspective is to
>> give-in and subscribe..... If we only knew what all was out there.
>>
>> So I'll start. ?Please add yours:
>>
>> milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>> ARC5 at mailman.qth.net
>

From jfor at quikus.com  Tue Oct 18 13:45:26 2011
From: jfor at quikus.com (J. Forster)
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2011 10:45:26 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] [ARC5] List of Lists... Splinter Group Compilation
In-Reply-To: <CANCs6AVj9_irPj1x+RXTPZNB6MrmA3SW0PwbnwU4w=KJJ9LNzg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <B9DF8099506C4EB1BFD2897AFAE6B595@DaddyPC>
	<CANCs6AVj9_irPj1x+RXTPZNB6MrmA3SW0PwbnwU4w=KJJ9LNzg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <58634.12.6.201.2.1318959926.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>

There are TWO WS19 lists, one Canadian, one UK. They keep pretty much to
themselves.

-John

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


> The T-368/BC-610 list: T-368_BC-610 at yahoogroups.com
>
> The R-390 list:  r-390 at mailman.qth.net
>
> A couple others that escape me at the moment because I'm not a member,
> like the WS 19 list.
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 1:22 PM, David Stinson <arc5 at ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>>
>> Could we please compile a list of all
>> the splinter-groups in the MilRadio community?
>> I guess the only way to get a broader perspective is to
>> give-in and subscribe..... If we only knew what all was out there.
>>
>> So I'll start. ?Please add yours:
>>
>> milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>> ARC5 at mailman.qth.net
>>
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> Milsurplus mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>>
>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>
> ______________________________________________________________
> ARC5 mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/arc5
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:ARC5 at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>



From ka1kaq at gmail.com  Tue Oct 18 13:50:53 2011
From: ka1kaq at gmail.com (Todd, KA1KAQ)
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2011 13:50:53 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] MILITARY AN/MRT-9 RADIO COMMUNIACTION
 SHEDTRANSMITTER RECIVER SHELTER HAM RADIO
In-Reply-To: <000001cc8dbd$25063180$6f129480$@net>
References: <63AFDCFB-65A0-4AC6-9C2F-8AF360A7B29D@aol.com>
	<20111016184907.B22E52ADC6@ufie.teamlarry.com>
	<CAB55hNdKY3rbji+6gkA5PsVTD1TyfWTCjLQ9B8BsNe7DDN1+kw@mail.gmail.com>
	<BLU165-W48AD457D03E58BA029C174C9E50@phx.gbl>
	<000001cc8dbd$25063180$6f129480$@net>
Message-ID: <CANCs6AUE1P7KWYC2jyuCUa7uoSnE_dFDqY0GWiawrBX2iwsvOQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 1:40 PM, Francesco Ledda <frledda at att.net> wrote:
> I don't think that it is worth that much. First, we don't know what kind of
> shape those transmitters are. Second, trucking that beast will be expensive.
> I think that $5k would be a fair price.
>
> Any opinions?

My guess would also be $5K, perhaps a bit more. Was a time a few years
back folks were paying $3K for a decent T-368, today $1K seems more
average. I've seen shelters from $500 to $2K. Add in the other
accessories and the convenience of getting it all at once. My buddy
brought a clean, re-capped SP-600 receiver to NEAR-Fest last weekend
with a price of $350 or BO on it. All it needed was a meter, $50 on
ebay, less if you shop around. He didn't even get so much as one offer
despite telling folks he'd take less to avoid bringing it back home.

And yes - unless you live in the neighborhood, transportation costs
will be high. Even if you have a truck and can move it for yourself.

It's possible he had one of those 'experts' give him a price based on
what they think it should be worth, not what they'd be willing to pay.
It's hard to take those values seriously.

~ Todd,  KA1KAQ/4

From ka1kaq at gmail.com  Tue Oct 18 13:53:11 2011
From: ka1kaq at gmail.com (Todd, KA1KAQ)
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2011 13:53:11 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] [ARC5] List of Lists... Splinter Group Compilation
In-Reply-To: <58634.12.6.201.2.1318959926.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
References: <B9DF8099506C4EB1BFD2897AFAE6B595@DaddyPC>
	<CANCs6AVj9_irPj1x+RXTPZNB6MrmA3SW0PwbnwU4w=KJJ9LNzg@mail.gmail.com>
	<58634.12.6.201.2.1318959926.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
Message-ID: <CANCs6AU15FmE2d-EGcVvyqMbXM_RNcGeh3UzcFO8XDcHdocXxw@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 1:45 PM, J. Forster <jfor at quikus.com> wrote:
> There are TWO WS19 lists, one Canadian, one UK. They keep pretty much to
> themselves.

That sounds productive.

From frledda at att.net  Tue Oct 18 14:00:51 2011
From: frledda at att.net (Francesco Ledda)
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2011 13:00:51 -0500
Subject: [Milsurplus] MILITARY AN/MRT-9 RADIO COMMUNIACTION
	SHEDTRANSMITTER RECIVER SHELTER HAM RADIO
In-Reply-To: <CANCs6AUE1P7KWYC2jyuCUa7uoSnE_dFDqY0GWiawrBX2iwsvOQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <63AFDCFB-65A0-4AC6-9C2F-8AF360A7B29D@aol.com>	<20111016184907.B22E52ADC6@ufie.teamlarry.com>	<CAB55hNdKY3rbji+6gkA5PsVTD1TyfWTCjLQ9B8BsNe7DDN1+kw@mail.gmail.com>	<BLU165-W48AD457D03E58BA029C174C9E50@phx.gbl>	<000001cc8dbd$25063180$6f129480$@net>
	<CANCs6AUE1P7KWYC2jyuCUa7uoSnE_dFDqY0GWiawrBX2iwsvOQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <000101cc8dbf$fd9b8700$f8d29500$@net>

If he can get $10k, good for him. I doubt it!

-----Original Message-----
From: milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net
[mailto:milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Todd, KA1KAQ
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2011 12:51 PM
To: Francesco Ledda
Cc: milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] MILITARY AN/MRT-9 RADIO COMMUNIACTION
SHEDTRANSMITTER RECIVER SHELTER HAM RADIO

On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 1:40 PM, Francesco Ledda <frledda at att.net> wrote:
> I don't think that it is worth that much. First, we don't know what kind
of
> shape those transmitters are. Second, trucking that beast will be
expensive.
> I think that $5k would be a fair price.
>
> Any opinions?

My guess would also be $5K, perhaps a bit more. Was a time a few years
back folks were paying $3K for a decent T-368, today $1K seems more
average. I've seen shelters from $500 to $2K. Add in the other
accessories and the convenience of getting it all at once. My buddy
brought a clean, re-capped SP-600 receiver to NEAR-Fest last weekend
with a price of $350 or BO on it. All it needed was a meter, $50 on
ebay, less if you shop around. He didn't even get so much as one offer
despite telling folks he'd take less to avoid bringing it back home.

And yes - unless you live in the neighborhood, transportation costs
will be high. Even if you have a truck and can move it for yourself.

It's possible he had one of those 'experts' give him a price based on
what they think it should be worth, not what they'd be willing to pay.
It's hard to take those values seriously.

~ Todd,  KA1KAQ/4
______________________________________________________________
Milsurplus mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html


From jfor at quikus.com  Tue Oct 18 14:01:40 2011
From: jfor at quikus.com (J. Forster)
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2011 11:01:40 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] [ARC5] List of Lists... Splinter Group Compilation
In-Reply-To: <CANCs6AU15FmE2d-EGcVvyqMbXM_RNcGeh3UzcFO8XDcHdocXxw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <B9DF8099506C4EB1BFD2897AFAE6B595@DaddyPC>
	<CANCs6AVj9_irPj1x+RXTPZNB6MrmA3SW0PwbnwU4w=KJJ9LNzg@mail.gmail.com>
	<58634.12.6.201.2.1318959926.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
	<CANCs6AU15FmE2d-EGcVvyqMbXM_RNcGeh3UzcFO8XDcHdocXxw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <56586.12.6.201.2.1318960900.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>

There are very good historical reasons for it. The Owners of both those
Groups.

I was there and saw it all.

-John

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


> On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 1:45 PM, J. Forster <jfor at quikus.com> wrote:
>> There are TWO WS19 lists, one Canadian, one UK. They keep pretty much to
>> themselves.
>
> That sounds productive.
>
>



From MillerKE6F at aol.com  Tue Oct 18 14:05:53 2011
From: MillerKE6F at aol.com (MillerKE6F at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2011 14:05:53 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] How I Use an LM
Message-ID: <47036.244ccb56.3bcf1a00@aol.com>

It would appear that this on going argument or rift between the folks who  
only see military surplus through a sort of "Keep It Original" myopia and 
the  folks who see military surplus as a functional materiel and material 
resource  these many years since WWII will never end or see any closure.  But I, 
like  a number of other folks on the milsurplus list do enjoy chatting 
about the  plowshares side of the topic.  It would be nice if those who liked to 
adapt  this junk to good amateur radio use could discuss that topic without 
the rancor  of a few pouncing on the discussion ranting about the "Hacking" 
of the  equipment.  In fact I can't think of a more noble end to this  
materiel.  Most military materiel is not suited to any form of civilian use  
unless it's shredded or melted down into fundamental materials.  A limited  
number of wheeled vehicles, some rifles,  and a LOT of radio and  electronics 
made their way into the marketplace after WWII.  Tanks, ships,  howitzers, 
machine guns, cannons, grenade launchers, while having significant  histories 
from a combat perspective, did not have the same impact on the  civilian 
population as did military surplus electronics in general.  
 
    Let's face it.  There was so much over  production of communications 
electronics towards the end of WWII that we will  never fully know or 
appreciate the magnitude of that adventure.  And with  folks like myself hoarding a 
lot of the junk for reasons I can't fathom myself,  there is a good chance 
that it will continue to enthrall hams and other folks  who admire the units 
both for what they were and what they became thanks mostly  to the hams who 
bought, converted or adapted , and used them in their pursuit of  the art of 
ham radio.  
 
    And to that end I'd like to see more discussions  about how we hams 
made use of this equipment, how they converted it, how they  adapted it, how 
they used it, where they got their inspiration from and the  periodicals of 
the day that gave them guidance whether it was well informed or a  stab in the 
dark.   I see no need to create  yet another sub  group that addresses the 
"Adapt and Use It" side of the interest group.  If  the few folks who find 
this use of the military surplus list distasteful,  perhaps they should form 
a subgroup for their views.
 
    Cheers
 
    Bob, KE6F

From jfor at quikus.com  Tue Oct 18 14:16:41 2011
From: jfor at quikus.com (J. Forster)
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2011 11:16:41 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] How I Use an LM
In-Reply-To: <47036.244ccb56.3bcf1a00@aol.com>
References: <47036.244ccb56.3bcf1a00@aol.com>
Message-ID: <53882.12.6.201.2.1318961801.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>


[snip]
In fact I can't think of a more noble end to this
> materiel.  Most military materiel is not suited to any form of civilian
> use
> unless it's shredded or melted down into fundamental materials.
[snip]

And Adolph Hitler and Ossama bin Laden should have been tried in a Federal
Court (in NYC), I suppose, by "a jury of their peers".

No thank you.

-John

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


From navy.radio at gmail.com  Tue Oct 18 14:21:23 2011
From: navy.radio at gmail.com (Nick England)
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2011 14:21:23 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] [ARC5] List of Lists... Splinter Group Compilation
In-Reply-To: <346FD51E9020448FBFBB4CB38472E06D@DaddyPC>
References: <B9DF8099506C4EB1BFD2897AFAE6B595@DaddyPC>
	<CANCs6AVj9_irPj1x+RXTPZNB6MrmA3SW0PwbnwU4w=KJJ9LNzg@mail.gmail.com>
	<58634.12.6.201.2.1318959926.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
	<CANCs6AU15FmE2d-EGcVvyqMbXM_RNcGeh3UzcFO8XDcHdocXxw@mail.gmail.com>
	<56586.12.6.201.2.1318960900.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
	<346FD51E9020448FBFBB4CB38472E06D@DaddyPC>
Message-ID: <CAB55hNf+RhReG6qUEVTMC+5-qPTTeshWeYfZn17Bss1N0Qs8=A@mail.gmail.com>

Assuming this isn't restricted to pre-1945 military surplus
Two more for Dave's list
R-388/URR
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/R-388/
and arguably TMC since most of their gear was militarized
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/tmc

From bcarling at cfl.rr.com  Tue Oct 18 16:17:49 2011
From: bcarling at cfl.rr.com (Bry Carling)
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2011 16:17:49 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] How I Use an LM
In-Reply-To: <53882.12.6.201.2.1318961801.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
References: <47036.244ccb56.3bcf1a00@aol.com>,
	<53882.12.6.201.2.1318961801.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
Message-ID: <4E9DDEED.6316.72BA1@bcarling.cfl.rr.com>

Oh, Hitler analogies now? Why the intensity? Please recognize and respect that there 
can be more than one vewpoint.

On 18 Oct 2011 at 11:16, J. Forster wrote:
 
> [snip]
> In fact I can't think of a more noble end to this
> > materiel.  Most military materiel is not suited to any form of
> civilian
> > use
> > unless it's shredded or melted down into fundamental materials.
> [snip]
> 
> And Adolph Hitler and Ossama bin Laden should have been tried in a
> Federal
> Court (in NYC), I suppose, by "a jury of their peers".
> 
> No thank you.
> 
> -John
> 
> ==============
> 



From RAFANTINI at salisbury.edu  Tue Oct 18 16:40:10 2011
From: RAFANTINI at salisbury.edu (Ray Fantini)
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2011 16:40:10 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] Ongoing rant and other list,
	all for the sake of the BC-221
In-Reply-To: <9D3F3E52-3D13-428E-B6A4-6CEC548EA390@aol.com>
References: <44.71.02308.154BD9E4@cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com>
	<9D3F3E52-3D13-428E-B6A4-6CEC548EA390@aol.com>
Message-ID: <2DE6F17E951D824AAE8B8D0BF7579D810DF8AA6BA9@MBX.salisbury.edu>

I do not only tolerate diversity of opinions but respect anyone who will stand up for their opinion and be willing to discuss it in this an open forum. The last thing I will be doing is going off to join another list. What a screwed up world it would be if everyone agreed with me.  And I do have the greatest respect for the people who have carefully studied and  worked on producing flawless copies of original equipment and installations. It is an absolute fact that no one can appreciate where we are today without seeing where we came from and if perfect examples are not preserved that knowledge is lost. I have been on the list for a while now and find the people here to be the best of the best, and believe that the resources on this reflector exceed anything out there; all the others are second rate compared to this list. And no matter how it appears there is no bias against any member, or their practices. There may be different views of what each member thinks but in the end that diversity only serves to make us as a group stronger. At the beginning of my last rant I asked if there was anyone who takes offence to my beating the drum on what I perceive to be the discounting of Ham History and if I should take my drum and go home but no one objected, so with that in mind I would think that this is the list to be on if you want to talk about all aspects of military radio, preservation, history, use and modification. The reader is free to take away whatever they want. But as for me I will be here until asked to leave, and then I will take my drum and go somewhere else.
Ray F

-----Original Message-----
From: milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net [mailto:milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of mac
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2011 1:40 PM
To: bcarling at cfl.rr.com
Cc: Mike Morrow; milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] How I Use an LM

Maybe we should start one.  Didn't know I had a garage full of Sacred  
Relics.

Dennis D. w7qho
Glendale, CA

*********************

On Oct 18, 2011, at 10:16 AM, bcarling at cfl.rr.com wrote:

> Is there another military radio group that is more friendly toward  
> those who enjoying modifying and using military radio equipment?
>
> Bry Carling
>
> ----- Reply message -----
> From: "J. Forster" <jfor at quikus.com>
> To: "Mike Morrow" <kk5f at arrl.net>
> Cc: <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
> Subject: [Milsurplus] How I Use an LM
> Date: Tue, Oct 18, 2011 12:27 pm
>
>
> Well said.
>
> -John

From alokken at gmail.com  Tue Oct 18 18:29:24 2011
From: alokken at gmail.com (Andy Lokken)
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2011 17:29:24 -0500
Subject: [Milsurplus] How I Use an LM
In-Reply-To: <4E9DDEED.6316.72BA1@bcarling.cfl.rr.com>
References: <47036.244ccb56.3bcf1a00@aol.com>
	<53882.12.6.201.2.1318961801.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
	<4E9DDEED.6316.72BA1@bcarling.cfl.rr.com>
Message-ID: <CAAzRQfDgX-6iZWJMOeJyGvsVd=Wm0gj9z88ya1zs_3HEUgqbyQ@mail.gmail.com>

That is called Godwin's Law.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law

I've bitten my tongue through the several arguments like this that I have
witnessed in my time on this reflector. I can't see how this furthers
anything, regardless of what side of the argument you are on. It only
damages relationships... and that's what this reflector is for. Who would we
think we are to judge what another person does with what is his?

So... how about more info about mil radios and less of this?

Best regards,

Andy K0AJL





On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 3:17 PM, Bry Carling <bcarling at cfl.rr.com> wrote:

> Oh, Hitler analogies now? Why the intensity? Please recognize and respect
> that there
> can be more than one vewpoint.
>
> On 18 Oct 2011 at 11:16, J. Forster wrote:
>
> > [snip]
> > In fact I can't think of a more noble end to this
> > > materiel.  Most military materiel is not suited to any form of
> > civilian
> > > use
> > > unless it's shredded or melted down into fundamental materials.
> > [snip]
> >
> > And Adolph Hitler and Ossama bin Laden should have been tried in a
> > Federal
> > Court (in NYC), I suppose, by "a jury of their peers".
> >
> > No thank you.
> >
> > -John
> >
> > ==============
> >
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>



-- 
_______________________________________
Andy Lokken

From jfor at quikus.com  Tue Oct 18 19:17:41 2011
From: jfor at quikus.com (J. Forster)
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2011 16:17:41 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] How I Use an LM
In-Reply-To: <CAAzRQfDgX-6iZWJMOeJyGvsVd=Wm0gj9z88ya1zs_3HEUgqbyQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <47036.244ccb56.3bcf1a00@aol.com>
	<53882.12.6.201.2.1318961801.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
	<4E9DDEED.6316.72BA1@bcarling.cfl.rr.com>
	<CAAzRQfDgX-6iZWJMOeJyGvsVd=Wm0gj9z88ya1zs_3HEUgqbyQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <63144.12.6.201.2.1318979861.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>

My point was that the poster was injecting left wing radicalism,
advocating alternate uses for anything to do with legitimate war is
preferable to any war use. Asserting that terrorism is a crime, not an act
of military aggression. This is utter nonsense.

Maybe NYC should have sent the NYPD to Pakistan to arrest OBL? Ya think?

That is the view of the current administration, an idiotic view in the
eyes of many, and Carteresque in its simplicity.

What has extending the hand of friendship to Iran gotten us? An
assassination attempt just the other day in the DC by Iranian sponsored
terrorists.

In dealing with those who are dead set on killing us, there is only one
answer. Strength.

-John

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



> That is called Godwin's Law.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law
>
> I've bitten my tongue through the several arguments like this that I have
> witnessed in my time on this reflector. I can't see how this furthers
> anything, regardless of what side of the argument you are on. It only
> damages relationships... and that's what this reflector is for. Who would
> we
> think we are to judge what another person does with what is his?
>
> So... how about more info about mil radios and less of this?
>
> Best regards,
>
> Andy K0AJL
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 3:17 PM, Bry Carling <bcarling at cfl.rr.com> wrote:
>
>> Oh, Hitler analogies now? Why the intensity? Please recognize and
>> respect
>> that there
>> can be more than one vewpoint.
>>
>> On 18 Oct 2011 at 11:16, J. Forster wrote:
>>
>> > [snip]
>> > In fact I can't think of a more noble end to this
>> > > materiel.  Most military materiel is not suited to any form of
>> > civilian
>> > > use
>> > > unless it's shredded or melted down into fundamental materials.
>> > [snip]
>> >
>> > And Adolph Hitler and Ossama bin Laden should have been tried in a
>> > Federal
>> > Court (in NYC), I suppose, by "a jury of their peers".
>> >
>> > No thank you.
>> >
>> > -John
>> >
>> > ==============
>> >
>>
>>
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> Milsurplus mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>>
>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>
>
>
>
> --
> _______________________________________
> Andy Lokken
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>



From nerd at verizon.net  Tue Oct 18 20:04:39 2011
From: nerd at verizon.net (Peter Gottlieb)
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2011 20:04:39 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] How I Use an LM
In-Reply-To: <63144.12.6.201.2.1318979861.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
References: <47036.244ccb56.3bcf1a00@aol.com>
	<53882.12.6.201.2.1318961801.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
	<4E9DDEED.6316.72BA1@bcarling.cfl.rr.com>
	<CAAzRQfDgX-6iZWJMOeJyGvsVd=Wm0gj9z88ya1zs_3HEUgqbyQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<63144.12.6.201.2.1318979861.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
Message-ID: <4E9E1417.1050805@verizon.net>

Amazing.  I've not been reading this thread, and it looks like that decision was 
justified.

Here's another viewpoint, John:  Extend the hand of friendship while being 
ruthless behind the scenes.  Fight the war while waging a massive PR campaign to 
reduce support for the other side.  This is not a new technique and from an 
objective viewpoint, at least on the behind-the-scenes front, we have been 
pretty effective lately in chopping off the many heads of that snake-like 
creature we are fighting.  And we have been using one of our strongest cards, 
technology, to our advantage.  Ownership of the skies and ownership of 
communications have served us well... money well spent.

My only wish is that they wouldn't go destroying so much radio gear nowadays.  
While a lot of gear is pretty useless for general civilian uses, there is still 
a huge amount which we would all love to get our hands on.  And getting some of 
it real cheap would certainly take a little sting off the taxes I've paid 
towards it all!

Fire away, this will be my only post on the subject, and I'm likely to not even 
read more of the thread.  Carry on.

Peter


On 10/18/2011 7:17 PM, J. Forster wrote:
> My point was that the poster was injecting left wing radicalism,
> advocating alternate uses for anything to do with legitimate war is
> preferable to any war use. Asserting that terrorism is a crime, not an act
> of military aggression. This is utter nonsense.
>
> Maybe NYC should have sent the NYPD to Pakistan to arrest OBL? Ya think?
>
> That is the view of the current administration, an idiotic view in the
> eyes of many, and Carteresque in its simplicity.
>
> What has extending the hand of friendship to Iran gotten us? An
> assassination attempt just the other day in the DC by Iranian sponsored
> terrorists.
>
> In dealing with those who are dead set on killing us, there is only one
> answer. Strength.
>
> -John
>
> =================
>
>
>
>> That is called Godwin's Law.
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law
>>
>> I've bitten my tongue through the several arguments like this that I have
>> witnessed in my time on this reflector. I can't see how this furthers
>> anything, regardless of what side of the argument you are on. It only
>> damages relationships... and that's what this reflector is for. Who would
>> we
>> think we are to judge what another person does with what is his?
>>
>> So... how about more info about mil radios and less of this?
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Andy K0AJL
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 3:17 PM, Bry Carling<bcarling at cfl.rr.com>  wrote:
>>
>>> Oh, Hitler analogies now? Why the intensity? Please recognize and
>>> respect
>>> that there
>>> can be more than one vewpoint.
>>>
>>> On 18 Oct 2011 at 11:16, J. Forster wrote:
>>>
>>>> [snip]
>>>> In fact I can't think of a more noble end to this
>>>>> materiel.  Most military materiel is not suited to any form of
>>>> civilian
>>>>> use
>>>>> unless it's shredded or melted down into fundamental materials.
>>>> [snip]
>>>>
>>>> And Adolph Hitler and Ossama bin Laden should have been tried in a
>>>> Federal
>>>> Court (in NYC), I suppose, by "a jury of their peers".
>>>>
>>>> No thank you.
>>>>
>>>> -John
>>>>
>>>> ==============
>>>>
>>>
>>> ______________________________________________________________
>>> Milsurplus mailing list
>>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
>>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>>> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>>>
>>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> _______________________________________
>> Andy Lokken
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> Milsurplus mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>>
>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>
>>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 10.0.1411 / Virus Database: 1522/3960 - Release Date: 10/18/11
>
>

From jfor at quikus.com  Tue Oct 18 20:31:38 2011
From: jfor at quikus.com (J. Forster)
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2011 17:31:38 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] How I Use an LM
In-Reply-To: <4E9E1417.1050805@verizon.net>
References: <47036.244ccb56.3bcf1a00@aol.com>
	<53882.12.6.201.2.1318961801.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
	<4E9DDEED.6316.72BA1@bcarling.cfl.rr.com>
	<CAAzRQfDgX-6iZWJMOeJyGvsVd=Wm0gj9z88ya1zs_3HEUgqbyQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<63144.12.6.201.2.1318979861.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
	<4E9E1417.1050805@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <51851.12.6.201.2.1318984298.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>

Here's a more likely scenario:

Lead from behind, withdraw troops putting the remainder at increased risk,
ignore the reccomendations of your generals, all to please your livid
radical left base.

Make some nomiunal drone strikes, to avoid the risks of a manned air
campaign, and keep your skirts clean. But do it just so you can show "you
are tough on terrorism".

Defy the law of the land by figguring ways around immigration laws, to buy
the Hispanic vote. Never mind that an A-Bomb or CW or BW weapons can come
in, just as easily as a bale of drugs. Oh, and sell them heavy weapoins
too!

On the "Arab Spring", yes, let the dictators be overthrown, and let the
Muslim Brotherhood take over. The peace treaty with Israel is in danger.

Ask yourself, if you were living in Israel, would you have a fuzzy, warm,
peacefull feeling right about now, or would you and your neighbors be even
more worried than before about becoming a short-lived isotope someday
soon?

-John

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


> Here's another viewpoint, John:  Extend the hand of friendship while being
> ruthless behind the scenes.  Fight the war while waging a massive PR
> campaign to
> reduce support for the other side.  This is not a new technique and from
> an
> objective viewpoint, at least on the behind-the-scenes front, we have been
> pretty effective lately in chopping off the many heads of that snake-like
> creature we are fighting.  And we have been using one of our strongest
> cards,
> technology, to our advantage.  Ownership of the skies and ownership of
> communications have served us well... money well spent.
>
> My only wish is that they wouldn't go destroying so much radio gear
> nowadays.
> While a lot of gear is pretty useless for general civilian uses, there is
> still
> a huge amount which we would all love to get our hands on.  And getting
> some of
> it real cheap would certainly take a little sting off the taxes I've paid
> towards it all!
>
> Fire away, this will be my only post on the subject, and I'm likely to not
> even
> read more of the thread.  Carry on.
>
> Peter
>
>
> On 10/18/2011 7:17 PM, J. Forster wrote:
>> My point was that the poster was injecting left wing radicalism,
>> advocating alternate uses for anything to do with legitimate war is
>> preferable to any war use. Asserting that terrorism is a crime, not an
>> act
>> of military aggression. This is utter nonsense.
>>
>> Maybe NYC should have sent the NYPD to Pakistan to arrest OBL? Ya think?
>>
>> That is the view of the current administration, an idiotic view in the
>> eyes of many, and Carteresque in its simplicity.
>>
>> What has extending the hand of friendship to Iran gotten us? An
>> assassination attempt just the other day in the DC by Iranian sponsored
>> terrorists.
>>
>> In dealing with those who are dead set on killing us, there is only one
>> answer. Strength.
>>
>> -John
>>
>> =================
>>
>>
>>
>>> That is called Godwin's Law.
>>>
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law
>>>
>>> I've bitten my tongue through the several arguments like this that I
>>> have
>>> witnessed in my time on this reflector. I can't see how this furthers
>>> anything, regardless of what side of the argument you are on. It only
>>> damages relationships... and that's what this reflector is for. Who
>>> would
>>> we
>>> think we are to judge what another person does with what is his?
>>>
>>> So... how about more info about mil radios and less of this?
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>> Andy K0AJL
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 3:17 PM, Bry Carling<bcarling at cfl.rr.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Oh, Hitler analogies now? Why the intensity? Please recognize and
>>>> respect
>>>> that there
>>>> can be more than one vewpoint.
>>>>
>>>> On 18 Oct 2011 at 11:16, J. Forster wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> [snip]
>>>>> In fact I can't think of a more noble end to this
>>>>>> materiel.  Most military materiel is not suited to any form of
>>>>> civilian
>>>>>> use
>>>>>> unless it's shredded or melted down into fundamental materials.
>>>>> [snip]
>>>>>
>>>>> And Adolph Hitler and Ossama bin Laden should have been tried in a
>>>>> Federal
>>>>> Court (in NYC), I suppose, by "a jury of their peers".
>>>>>
>>>>> No thank you.
>>>>>
>>>>> -John
>>>>>
>>>>> ==============
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ______________________________________________________________
>>>> Milsurplus mailing list
>>>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
>>>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>>>> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>>>>
>>>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>>>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> _______________________________________
>>> Andy Lokken
>>> ______________________________________________________________
>>> Milsurplus mailing list
>>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
>>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>>> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>>>
>>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>>
>>>
>>
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> Milsurplus mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>>
>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>
>>
>> -----
>> No virus found in this message.
>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>> Version: 10.0.1411 / Virus Database: 1522/3960 - Release Date: 10/18/11
>>
>>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>



From wh7hg.hi at gmail.com  Tue Oct 18 20:41:40 2011
From: wh7hg.hi at gmail.com (Kludge)
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2011 14:41:40 -1000
Subject: [Milsurplus] How I Use an LM
In-Reply-To: <4E9D66E0.8010509@pa.net>
References: <CAFcNxxWrLNKHurdt00HFBBQWOtw832N2A-QaCYVnZ_WVHnzxtA@mail.gmail.com><2DE6F17E951D824AAE8B8D0BF7579D810DF8AA6846@MBX.salisbury.edu>
	<4E9D66E0.8010509@pa.net>
Message-ID: <5D7E70C48AE444349FC40336572E995E@Kongo>

-----Original Message-----
From: milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net
[mailto:milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of C.Whitaker
> Look, guys. it appears that this all shakes out to this:  There are two, 
> (or more) kinds of people that have ex-military electronic equipment, or
knows what it 
> is, and these two groups are the Collectors on one hand, and the Hams on
the other.  A 
> Collector gathers things for the pleasure of having it, which includes the
knowledge that 
> items will be held for posterity.  That's good.  Hams don't necessarily
see it that way.  Every 
> piece of equipment they cast their eyes on becomes a "Possibility".

And some are both.  I'm one and I know others here are as well.  

My display pieces will be as close to perfect as possible, as per a
discussion a while back regarding the cable armor for the SCR-A*-183 and the
acquisition thereof.  Even the correct wire will be used as will the
terminal strips inside the plywood "manufacturer supplied" junction boxes.
Both of them.  Actually three since the power junction box will be included.
The SCR-274-N will be upgraded as much as possible to take it from Grade B
to Grade A and also wired according to spec although with open wiring
instead.  If I can find or find enough information to make the transmitter
adapter cable, even the test installation using my two 5-meter test boxes
will be right and will allow me to use my ATA transmitters and modulator
along with an ARA Rx (1.5-3 MC) for something other than dust collectors.
(A dummy load will also be needed but I think there was something in one of
the manuals about shop made ones.)  

On the other talon, I have equipment that's not restorable or, as in the
case of the two LMs mentioned previously, will be used for parts to make
other equipment whole and happy again.  This goes to the ham side of the
house for use in ways not in accordance with its original intent once it has
satisfied its original purpose.  Of course, I should pitch it out according
to a certain select few since it's obviously of no value but that "certain
select few" are getting closer and closer to my ignore list so, in the end,
they don't count.  For anything.  Do I feel particularly upset about this as
a collector/restorer?  Not in the slightest.  It's the history of the
*equipment* that matters, not some short span during which it was used in
its originally intended service.  

Let me make something else clear here.  Someone said he won't visit any site
that has conversion material on it (not the exact wording but that was the
intent.)  Cool.  Fantastic.  Wonderful even.  This is not a problem because
my site won't be for list members but for interested parties who aren't
residents here or on arc5.  

When I take time out from my primary project, I am trying to outline,
realign, malign, arrange, rearrange, derange (er, no, that's me) and
generally bring the chaos I have down to mere confusion to, among other
things, reduce discrepancies and redundancies, fill in most of the holes and
generally try to make sense of things that, at present, don't entirely make
a lot of sense.  (I'm not talking about the GF/RU or SCR-A*-183/-283 systems
but the narrative although they're in the running.)  Within a comparatively
large amount of company and equipment historic coverage will be one or two
chapter-equivalents on postwar ham usage some of which lead to, as Ray
pointed out, SSB development prior to its use by the military.*  Several
conversions that I happen to like will be presented in the process assuming
I have the chasses to make them after everything that can be made
operational and intact with parts on hand is operational and intact.  

* Let's see, forbidden conversions lead to a mode of communication later
utilized by the same people whose equipment was converted in the first
place.  Somehow that puts ham usage in line with postwar military
development so it is part of the continuing military history.  Funny how
that works.

In the meantime, I have a rather massive project on my hands and don't need
myopic self-righteous ego-driven crusaders on either side of the discussion
to make my day more complete.  There is either room for both camps without
setting off "discussions" or there isn't.  If the latter is true then I
don't want to be here (which includes arc5), especially since this is one
reason I left the first time.  The cool part is that there are at least
three people here who'd love to see that happen.  

In the meantime, I've got this really pretty T-16 that needs a doubler to
get on 160m ... 

Best regards,
 
Michael, WH7HG ex-K3MXO, ex-KN3MXO, WPE3ARS, BL01xh ex-Mensa A&P PP BGI 
I am me.  I?m the only one who?s qualified.
http://www.nationalmssociety.org/chapters/NTH/index.aspx
http://wh7hg.blogspot.com/
http://kludges-other-blog.blogspot.com
Hiki N?! 


From RAFANTINI at salisbury.edu  Tue Oct 18 21:45:16 2011
From: RAFANTINI at salisbury.edu (Ray Fantini)
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2011 21:45:16 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] MILITARY AN/MRT-9 RADIO
	COMMUNIACTION	SHEDTRANSMITTER RECIVER SHELTER HAM RADIO
In-Reply-To: <000001cc8dbd$25063180$6f129480$@net>
References: <63AFDCFB-65A0-4AC6-9C2F-8AF360A7B29D@aol.com>,
	<20111016184907.B22E52ADC6@ufie.teamlarry.com>,
	<CAB55hNdKY3rbji+6gkA5PsVTD1TyfWTCjLQ9B8BsNe7DDN1+kw@mail.gmail.com>
	<BLU165-W48AD457D03E58BA029C174C9E50@phx.gbl>,
	<000001cc8dbd$25063180$6f129480$@net>
Message-ID: <2DE6F17E951D824AAE8B8D0BF7579D810DF845DFF1@MBX.salisbury.edu>

Somewhat like the AN/GRC-26 shelter with its diversity dual R-390 receivers, TU, teletype units and T-368 transmitter, and recall there was a larger version of this that was in three shelters, the one shelter with two T-368 transmitters, a shelter with at least four R-390 receivers and two TU and a third shelter that was a message center with teletype printers and reperferators and maybe security equipment and wondering if this shelter on EBay is part of that system? Thought the MRR stuff had at least three transmitters in one shelter and a receiver shelter with a flock of R-390 stuffed in it. But from what I recall all the transmitter shelter only had one R-390 and no TU or TTY equipment? Perhaps the thing on EBay is a construct that someone built? When was the last GRC-26 systems fielded by the Army? I saw them in use in the seventies in National Guard units but would assume most were replaced by GRC-122 units being they were smaller, carried sideband and modern security equipment. Not cretin but thinks all security for the old 26 rat circuits was done before transmission and after reception or perhaps the old KW-7 ? Looks like 10 K may be a bit much for that shelter; two or three years ago can see that happening but not today. I am not to far away over in Md, but would only go 5 or 6 myself that is if I wanted to run mutable rat circuits. Maybe he can get more just selling the transmitters separately?
Ray F


________________________________________
From: milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net [milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Francesco Ledda [frledda at att.net]
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2011 1:40 PM
To: 'greg mijal'; navy.radio at gmail.com; milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] MILITARY AN/MRT-9 RADIO COMMUNIACTION SHEDTRANSMITTER RECIVER SHELTER HAM RADIO

I don't think that it is worth that much. First, we don't know what kind of
shape those transmitters are. Second, trucking that beast will be expensive.
I think that $5k would be a fair price.

Any opinions?

FL

-----Original Message-----
From: milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net
[mailto:milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of greg mijal
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2011 12:19 AM
To: navy.radio at gmail.com; milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] MILITARY AN/MRT-9 RADIO COMMUNIACTION
SHEDTRANSMITTER RECIVER SHELTER HAM RADIO


I JUST GOT AN EMAIL BACK FROM THE MRT SELLER ON EBAY.$10,000 IS HIS
RESERVE.GREGWA7LYO
 > Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2011 15:03:28 -0400
> From: navy.radio at gmail.com
> To: milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
> Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] MILITARY AN/MRT-9 RADIO COMMUNIACTION
SHEDTRANSMITTER RECIVER SHELTER HAM RADIO
>
> This one has a civilian SP-600 instead of the equivalent R-274/URR.
> FWIW, the book says the MRT-9 should have 3 ea. T-368 and 1 ea. R-390()
> Pretty cool box nevertheless...
> Nick K4NYW
>
>
> >> > Jim Haynes <jhhaynes at earthlink.net> wrote:
> >> >> Since the nomenclature is MRT I would expect it to contain only
> >> >> transmitters.
> >> >
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

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

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

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

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

From MillerKE6F at aol.com  Tue Oct 18 22:41:03 2011
From: MillerKE6F at aol.com (MillerKE6F at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2011 22:41:03 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] Fresh topic on military surplus I HOPE !!??
Message-ID: <2c10c.1cd99a69.3bcf92bf@aol.com>

Some years back I found out that Uncle Sam was shredding perfectly good  
AN/GRC-102 HF rigs.  Since I've been a big fan of surplus radio stuff for  
well over 50 years and the owner of a complete AN/GRC-142 Ratt Van bought  
through the now  privatized DMRS system, I was somewhat taken back by this  
decision.  Many tons of crunched units from the Viet Nam era were turning  up at 
a local metal scrap yard.  And I mean demilled to the point that  there was 
nothing left to use.
 
    I wrote a letter to my Senator (Bob Matsui at that  time) who punched 
my ticket by passing the letter to some minion in the  government.  That 
person referred me to a CFR number saying that the  GRC-102 and allied equipment 
had been newly categorized as part of a weapons  system and therefore could 
not be sold to the civilian market.  In other  words these 30 year old 
relics were too valuable to a foreign power to be sold  off to we hams who would 
love to put them to good use.  I corresponded with  the fellow hoping to 
see if there was some way a ham could get some kind of  waiver, but no chance 
even though less than a year before they were selling  these radios in 
complete tty systems at public auction for under 300  dollars,  GRC-142 systems 
complete with everything but the KW7 Crypto Box.  They even had the three 
GRA-50 antenna pole systems and an office chair.
 
    A year after the first Gulf War  the now  defunct Sacramento Army Depot 
sold in excess of 500 GRC-142 Ratt vans with  everything in the hootch but 
the radios.  I would hope the RF stuff  was transplanted to Humvvees or 
APCs.  The driving force to get rid of the  RATT vans was point to point TTY 
comm was no longer a vital part of  the Army communications picture (too big an 
RF target in a combat zone and too  slow for modern record traffic I was 
told).  As a retired Commo  Chief in an Army National Guard Engineering Bn, I 
missed the convenience our  RATT vans afforded our National Guard units 
during peace time training.   Even the MOSs for the TTY stuff fell out of the 
equation.  Go  figure.  The gist of this missive is to see how folks on the 
list are  acquiring their more current military surplus radio gear.  I know 
the  military vehicle nuts love this stuff for their MUTTS and other wheeled 
military  toys. 
 
    73
 
    Bob, KE6F
    

From frledda at att.net  Tue Oct 18 23:50:04 2011
From: frledda at att.net (Francesco Ledda)
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2011 22:50:04 -0500
Subject: [Milsurplus] How I Use an LM
In-Reply-To: <44.71.02308.154BD9E4@cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com>
References: <44.71.02308.154BD9E4@cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com>
Message-ID: <918C22BC-0774-4753-AD00-CBC09A07720D@att.net>

There are friendly people here. You own the equipment, and you can do whatever you want with it. This is America!

I know few here think that they know best, but they don't. They yell about their opinions, but no matter how loud they yell, they are just their opinions.

I don't like modifying surplus radios myself, but I understand that others may have a different approach.

FL



Sent from my iPad

On Oct 18, 2011, at 12:16 PM, "bcarling at cfl.rr.com" <bcarling at cfl.rr.com> wrote:

> Is there another military radio group that is more friendly toward those who enjoying modifying and using military radio equipment?
> 
> Bry Carling
> 
> Sent from myTouch 4G, please excuse my brevity.
> 
> 
> 
> ----- Reply message -----
> From: "J. Forster" <jfor at quikus.com>
> To: "Mike Morrow" <kk5f at arrl.net>
> Cc: <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
> Subject: [Milsurplus] How I Use an LM
> Date: Tue, Oct 18, 2011 12:27 pm
> 
> 
> Well said.
> 
> -John
> 
> ============
> 
> 
>>> I want to talk about history. The history of any item is not just the
>>> history of what occurred at just one point of time in an items
>>> existence...
>> 
>> Very true.  One must differentiate between the historically significant
>> history
>> of an item, versus its subsequent insignificant history by the use of
>> hobbyists.
>> This applies not only to radios, but to weapons, vehicles, and other
>> military
>> items whose honorable halcyon days are behind them after the military
>> releases
>> surplus gear to civilian users, unless those later users preserve the item
>> for
>> use EXACTLY as the military used it.
>> 
>> Generally speaking, no one wants a sporterized M1903 Springfield rifle or
>> a GPW
>> jeep that someone has hot-rodded (even just adding modern running lights).
>> Works
>> addressing the history of such items will never waste words on what
>> civilian
>> hobbyists did to the gear.  Likewise, why should radio gear in civilian
>> hobbyist
>> use be accorded any reverence or relevance?  I would discard any work
>> about US
>> military gear that wasted space describing what hams did with it.  Total
>> nonsense.
>> 
>> Many hams accord their own selves some great achievement when they use
>> military
>> gear, and they seek acknowledgement of their personal technical
>> achievement and
>> importance.
>> 
>> This ex-military ham of 44 years sees nothing there.  For at least fifty
>> years
>> there's been no justification for actual use of this old military gear.
>> 
>> Do what you want with your property, but don't expect accords of glory
>> from it.
>> 
>> Mike / KK5F
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> Milsurplus mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>> 
>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
> 
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
> 
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

From kargo_cult at msn.com  Wed Oct 19 00:48:02 2011
From: kargo_cult at msn.com (Hue Miller)
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2011 21:48:02 -0700
Subject: [Milsurplus] mods
In-Reply-To: <mailman.18807.1318982699.6710.milsurplus@mailman.qth.net>
References: <mailman.18807.1318982699.6710.milsurplus@mailman.qth.net>
Message-ID: <SNT109-DS76D2D231CEF6594FFD6C2E4EA0@phx.gbl>

Military equipment modifiers are just exercising rational judgment of value 
against fun.
Obviously, the supply hasn't tightened up quite enuff. Maybe give it a few 
years.
I have a Japanese HRO with some "additions", including several modern era 
transistor
scale, toggle switches added to the front.  Or a Japanese trans-receiver; a 
ham disassembled
the receiver part because he only wanted the transmitter section. In 
militaria sales I not
infrequently saw German troop entertainment radios, emptied out so the 
hillbilly owner could
place a cassette player inside and play authentic German marches. Now you 
see such empty
radios sold as "cabinet only". You'd have to be truly deranged to be doing 
that now. I think in
those worlds the attitudes have changed over the  last half century.  So 
maybe give it a few
years.

One thing that interests me a lot is the whole "conversion" idea. It was a 
larger idea, I think,
than just adding an  S-meter or additional controls. As I seem to recall, 
"conversion" actually
kind of referred to converting it from the military and war world to 
civilian use and could even
be as innocuous as just connecting up an external AC supply. Thus you see 
such odd things
as a nameplate removed, and not much if anything else. As silly as that 
seems now.
Of course, in those days there really was no distinction made of different 
grades of "conversions"
from the simple conversion of use to the major hack jobs.

I sure regret a couple sets I disassembled or otherwise lost. But who knew 
better? It's a
process, and experience, and learning.

And I DON'T mind this kind of discussion. But leave bumper-sticker political 
statements out.
-Hue 


From kd7jyk at earthlink.net  Wed Oct 19 00:51:49 2011
From: kd7jyk at earthlink.net (KD7JYK DM09)
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2011 21:51:49 -0700
Subject: [Milsurplus] mods
References: <mailman.18807.1318982699.6710.milsurplus@mailman.qth.net>
	<SNT109-DS76D2D231CEF6594FFD6C2E4EA0@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <003d01cc8e1a$f609e800$c3a1f604@mainframe>

"In militaria sales I not infrequently saw German troop entertainment 
radios, emptied out so the
 hillbilly owner could place a cassette player inside and play authentic 
German marches."

'Cause it was WAAAAAAAY to hard to just leave the receiver alone and play 
the tape through the speaker...

Kurt 


From navy.radio at gmail.com  Wed Oct 19 05:52:18 2011
From: navy.radio at gmail.com (Nick England)
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 05:52:18 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] MILITARY AN/MRT-9 RADIO COMMUNIACTION
 SHEDTRANSMITTER RECIVER SHELTER HAM RADIO
In-Reply-To: <2DE6F17E951D824AAE8B8D0BF7579D810DF845DFF1@MBX.salisbury.edu>
References: <63AFDCFB-65A0-4AC6-9C2F-8AF360A7B29D@aol.com>
	<20111016184907.B22E52ADC6@ufie.teamlarry.com>
	<CAB55hNdKY3rbji+6gkA5PsVTD1TyfWTCjLQ9B8BsNe7DDN1+kw@mail.gmail.com>
	<BLU165-W48AD457D03E58BA029C174C9E50@phx.gbl>
	<000001cc8dbd$25063180$6f129480$@net>
	<2DE6F17E951D824AAE8B8D0BF7579D810DF845DFF1@MBX.salisbury.edu>
Message-ID: <CAB55hNfhWCakwaHpTRR8anuRUEDYNSt6MXseksgs-pyXNUXfYw@mail.gmail.com>

Looks like interesting info on the complete multi-van system in FM 11-95
http://www.survivalebooks.com/free%20manuals/1960%20US%20Army%20Vietnam%20War%20Arm%20Signal%20Battalion%2075p.pdf

Equipment specs are in FM 24-24 Radio & Radar Reference Data ( 20 May 1977);
I don't have one (no Army gear here!), just found the reference at
http://www.nj7p.org/cgi-bin/millist2?mode=normal&name=AN/MRT-9

FWIW, the 1994 version of FM 24-24 can be downloaded here
http://www.enlisted.info/field-manuals/fm-24-24-signal-data-references-signal-equipment.shtml

cheers,
Nick

On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 9:45 PM, Ray Fantini <RAFANTINI at salisbury.edu> wrote:
> Somewhat like the AN/GRC-26 shelter with its diversity dual R-390 receivers, TU, teletype units and T-368 transmitter, and recall there was a larger version of this that was in three shelters, the one shelter with two T-368 transmitters, a shelter with at least four R-390 receivers and two TU and a third shelter that was a message center with teletype printers and reperferators and maybe security equipment and wondering if this shelter on EBay is part of that system? Thought the MRR stuff had at least three transmitters in one shelter and a receiver shelter with a flock of R-390 stuffed in it. But from what I recall all the transmitter shelter only had one R-390 and no TU or TTY equipment? Perhaps the thing on EBay is a construct that someone built? When was the last GRC-26 systems fielded by the Army? I saw them in use in the seventies in National Guard units but would assume most were replaced by GRC-122 units being they were smaller, carried sideband and modern security eq
> ?uipment. Not cretin but thinks all security for the old 26 rat circuits was done before transmission and after reception or perhaps the old KW-7 ? Looks like 10 K may be a bit much for that shelter; two or three years ago can see that happening but not today. I am not to far away over in Md, but would only go 5 or 6 myself that is if I wanted to run mutable rat circuits. Maybe he can get more just selling the transmitters separately?
> Ray F
>

From RAFANTINI at salisbury.edu  Wed Oct 19 09:37:10 2011
From: RAFANTINI at salisbury.edu (Ray Fantini)
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 09:37:10 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] Fresh topic on military surplus I HOPE !!??
In-Reply-To: <2c10c.1cd99a69.3bcf92bf@aol.com>
References: <2c10c.1cd99a69.3bcf92bf@aol.com>
Message-ID: <2DE6F17E951D824AAE8B8D0BF7579D810DF8AA6C8D@MBX.salisbury.edu>

Yea, the nineties are gone and have to wonder if any of us will ever see that again.  I remember the local sales at Dover where they not only sold off local surplus but lots of what was being brought back from overseas, but that all came to a end. Then for a while was buying lots from NASA local auctions at Wallops and Goddard but now that's thru being they are all selling on line only and for reasons that I cannot explain everything sells on line for three or four times what I would have been able to sell it for. Still review there auctions along with the Government Liquidators online sales but no bargains anywhere. Best deals still at Hamfest, Aberdeen or Gilbert, have seen the prices keep falling on the GRC-106 and saw a pair that I could have picked up for $250 at Gilbert and can buy them all day long in the $400 to $500 range. Dayton also a good source for equipment but you have to be willing to pay and as much as I hate to say it EBay is where I have done the bulk of my purchases in the last ten years. Just bought an AM-7239 dual mount with the AM-7238 amplifier on EBay for my RT-1439 (PRC-119) for $100 and that's about half of what they were selling for at Gilbert. Surplus dealers like Fair Radio and Murphy Surplus that have everything are always there but they are businesses and expect to be paying a market price, although I have noticed that Fair appears to be moving more in more into parts and less complete radios. Recall overhearing something about biggest source for equipment for them today is estate sales.  But then again myself always have to think that no matter what always got to keep looking for new sources or new deals, for so many projects it's not having the completed system but all the work that's involved in collecting all the parts, fabricating what not available and getting everything to work that's more fun than using the completed radio itself. I am currently at the gathering stage of my ARC-94 (618T2), have the radio, head, connector for the head and most of the parts I need to fabricate the rack and start on connecting it together.
RF

-----Original Message-----
From: milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net [mailto:milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of MillerKE6F at aol.com
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2011 10:41 PM
To: milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
Subject: [Milsurplus] Fresh topic on military surplus I HOPE !!??

Some years back I found out that Uncle Sam was shredding perfectly good  
AN/GRC-102 HF rigs.  Since I've been a big fan of surplus radio stuff for  
well over 50 years and the owner of a complete AN/GRC-142 Ratt Van bought  
through the now  privatized DMRS system, I was somewhat taken back by this  
decision.  Many tons of crunched units from the Viet Nam era were turning  up at 
a local metal scrap yard.  And I mean demilled to the point that  there was 
nothing left to use.
 
    I wrote a letter to my Senator (Bob Matsui at that  time) who punched 
my ticket by passing the letter to some minion in the  government.  That 
person referred me to a CFR number saying that the  GRC-102 and allied equipment 
had been newly categorized as part of a weapons  system and therefore could 
not be sold to the civilian market.  In other  words these 30 year old 
relics were too valuable to a foreign power to be sold  off to we hams who would 
love to put them to good use.  I corresponded with  the fellow hoping to 
see if there was some way a ham could get some kind of  waiver, but no chance 
even though less than a year before they were selling  these radios in 
complete tty systems at public auction for under 300  dollars,  GRC-142 systems 
complete with everything but the KW7 Crypto Box.  They even had the three 
GRA-50 antenna pole systems and an office chair.
 
    A year after the first Gulf War  the now  defunct Sacramento Army Depot 
sold in excess of 500 GRC-142 Ratt vans with  everything in the hootch but 
the radios.  I would hope the RF stuff  was transplanted to Humvvees or 
APCs.  The driving force to get rid of the  RATT vans was point to point TTY 
comm was no longer a vital part of  the Army communications picture (too big an 
RF target in a combat zone and too  slow for modern record traffic I was 
told).  As a retired Commo  Chief in an Army National Guard Engineering Bn, I 
missed the convenience our  RATT vans afforded our National Guard units 
during peace time training.   Even the MOSs for the TTY stuff fell out of the 
equation.  Go  figure.  The gist of this missive is to see how folks on the 
list are  acquiring their more current military surplus radio gear.  I know 
the  military vehicle nuts love this stuff for their MUTTS and other wheeled 
military  toys. 
 
    73
 
    Bob, KE6F
    

From jfor at quikus.com  Wed Oct 19 10:11:04 2011
From: jfor at quikus.com (J. Forster)
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 07:11:04 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] How I Use an LM
In-Reply-To: <918C22BC-0774-4753-AD00-CBC09A07720D@att.net>
References: <44.71.02308.154BD9E4@cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com>
	<918C22BC-0774-4753-AD00-CBC09A07720D@att.net>
Message-ID: <56396.12.6.201.2.1319033464.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>

There are people out there that hunt Bald Eagals, Tigers, and White Rhinos
too.

That does not mean that they should be encouraged or theit activites lauded.

-John

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


> There are friendly people here. You own the equipment, and you can do
> whatever you want with it. This is America!
>
> I know few here think that they know best, but they don't. They yell about
> their opinions, but no matter how loud they yell, they are just their
> opinions.
>
> I don't like modifying surplus radios myself, but I understand that others
> may have a different approach.
>
> FL
>
>
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On Oct 18, 2011, at 12:16 PM, "bcarling at cfl.rr.com" <bcarling at cfl.rr.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Is there another military radio group that is more friendly toward those
>> who enjoying modifying and using military radio equipment?
>>
>> Bry Carling
>>
>> Sent from myTouch 4G, please excuse my brevity.
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Reply message -----
>> From: "J. Forster" <jfor at quikus.com>
>> To: "Mike Morrow" <kk5f at arrl.net>
>> Cc: <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
>> Subject: [Milsurplus] How I Use an LM
>> Date: Tue, Oct 18, 2011 12:27 pm
>>
>>
>> Well said.
>>
>> -John
>>
>> ============
>>
>>
>>>> I want to talk about history. The history of any item is not just the
>>>> history of what occurred at just one point of time in an items
>>>> existence...
>>>
>>> Very true.  One must differentiate between the historically significant
>>> history
>>> of an item, versus its subsequent insignificant history by the use of
>>> hobbyists.
>>> This applies not only to radios, but to weapons, vehicles, and other
>>> military
>>> items whose honorable halcyon days are behind them after the military
>>> releases
>>> surplus gear to civilian users, unless those later users preserve the
>>> item
>>> for
>>> use EXACTLY as the military used it.
>>>
>>> Generally speaking, no one wants a sporterized M1903 Springfield rifle
>>> or
>>> a GPW
>>> jeep that someone has hot-rodded (even just adding modern running
>>> lights).
>>> Works
>>> addressing the history of such items will never waste words on what
>>> civilian
>>> hobbyists did to the gear.  Likewise, why should radio gear in civilian
>>> hobbyist
>>> use be accorded any reverence or relevance?  I would discard any work
>>> about US
>>> military gear that wasted space describing what hams did with it.
>>> Total
>>> nonsense.
>>>
>>> Many hams accord their own selves some great achievement when they use
>>> military
>>> gear, and they seek acknowledgement of their personal technical
>>> achievement and
>>> importance.
>>>
>>> This ex-military ham of 44 years sees nothing there.  For at least
>>> fifty
>>> years
>>> there's been no justification for actual use of this old military gear.
>>>
>>> Do what you want with your property, but don't expect accords of glory
>>> from it.
>>>
>>> Mike / KK5F
>>> ______________________________________________________________
>>> Milsurplus mailing list
>>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
>>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>>> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>>>
>>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> Milsurplus mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>>
>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> Milsurplus mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>>
>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>



From jydsk at tds.net  Wed Oct 19 10:53:38 2011
From: jydsk at tds.net (Steve Hilsz)
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 07:53:38 -0700
Subject: [Milsurplus] PRC-47 Radio on e-Place
Message-ID: <96097E303C214FC4B0EA4C3F59215337@4a861c714f1f4a7>

A PRC-47 radio in the carry case on e-Place: http://tinyurl.com/5sfzewv

Belongs to a friend of mine.

Steve Hilsz

From wa3bzt at verizon.net  Wed Oct 19 12:04:23 2011
From: wa3bzt at verizon.net (Ed White)
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 12:04:23 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] Inside the 6L6
In-Reply-To: <1319000243.85667.YahooMailNeo@web114715.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
References: <1319000243.85667.YahooMailNeo@web114715.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <4E9EF507.5070901@verizon.net>





Sure beats breaking into a 6L6 with a hammer and pliers.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WnZRJjmOZb8&feature=related 
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WnZRJjmOZb8&feature=related>

-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: Attached Message Part
Url: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20111019/dbf70c89/attachment.pl 

From joeconnor53 at yahoo.com  Wed Oct 19 15:43:45 2011
From: joeconnor53 at yahoo.com (Joe Connor)
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 12:43:45 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] BC-314-D 1st IF Can
In-Reply-To: <8f16f.7ff69d8d.3bcb9a8b@cs.com>
References: <8f16f.7ff69d8d.3bcb9a8b@cs.com>
Message-ID: <1319053425.39341.YahooMailNeo@web46315.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>

???? I was working on this set today and?found two Micramolds (0.1/400V) inside C-293, the 1st IF transformer. This surprised me because nothing in the articles I had read or videos I had viewed on this series of receivers had mentioned caps inside an IF can. (I had heard about the one hidden in the RF Oscillator compartment and the one hidden in front of the 6F6). ?I had seen caps inside IF cans?in the BC-779/SP-200 receivers but was not aware it had also been done in the BC-342 series, too. I figured I would share this with the group.
?
???? By the way, when I got to these caps, they were in exactly the condition you would expect 70-year-old Micramolds to be in! 'Nuff said. 
?
?????????????????????????? Joe Connor


>

From farmer.rob.flory at gmail.com  Wed Oct 19 16:02:10 2011
From: farmer.rob.flory at gmail.com (Rob Flory)
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 16:02:10 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] Not all ships going WWII
Message-ID: <CAFcNxxXjRLSjo6EwMyciyjeG28qSL22s3mxcDWpoR69cFxtrzw@mail.gmail.com>

Ray and all,
If you want to see a museum ship in all her Cold War glory, visit NEW
JERSEY.
RF

From arc5 at ix.netcom.com  Wed Oct 19 16:04:36 2011
From: arc5 at ix.netcom.com (David Stinson)
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 15:04:36 -0500
Subject: [Milsurplus] More Moron-ities.  This Will Turn Your Stomach
Message-ID: <DE86764DDB1F4DC58FCF55F5C932BA16@DaddyPC>

180740366169
Two clean Brit liasion sets destroyed for some half-a**ed
make-believe "radio room" in what is now a half-a**ed,
make-believe WWII aircraft.
Read the description.
I thought these clowns had learned their lessons about stripping-
out the WWII gear to "save weight" (in an aircraft meant to haul
thousands!)  a couple of decades ago when the event 
judges stopped awarding "make believe" restorations like this.
Makes me sick.
D.S.


From wh7hg.hi at gmail.com  Wed Oct 19 16:10:49 2011
From: wh7hg.hi at gmail.com (Kludge)
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 10:10:49 -1000
Subject: [Milsurplus] How I Use an LM
In-Reply-To: <56396.12.6.201.2.1319033464.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
References: <44.71.02308.154BD9E4@cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com><918C22BC-0774-4753-AD00-CBC09A07720D@att.net>
	<56396.12.6.201.2.1319033464.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
Message-ID: <4E0F5FC6F41E4F8F90C4429FF52E3513@Kongo>

-----Original Message-----
From: milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net
[mailto:milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of J. Forster
> There are people out there that hunt Bald Eagals, Tigers, and White Rhinos
> too.
> That does not mean that they should be encouraged or theit activites
lauded.

Oh, my freakin' God!  Yet another in a long string of nonsequitors comparing
ham activities to illegal ones.  You've already stated your hatred for hams
several times over but this is typical of how idiotic you can and do get
about the subject.  (You're also losing it since you usually spell much
better than that.)

John, you, Mike M, Meir and a few others have such a myopic view of the
world it's surprising you're not considered legally blind.  Further, not a
one of you has the intestinal fortitude to put up websites showing the prize
possessions you so love bragging about.  This leads me to believe you
[plural] are all wind and nothing else.  Look at Mike H, for example.  He
doesn't have to brag.  He *has* the equipment and is more than willing to
show how it's done.  Dave posts photos of his efforts as they happen and
also doesn't mind sharing his knowledge about how it's done so also doesn't
have to brag.  So do others.  You [again, plural] do nothing but whine,
whimper, moan and generally carry on like it's the end of the world if
someone so much as restuffs a cap to get a piece running again that wasn't
running before but do nothing to contribute in a positive manner when it
comes to restoration on milsurplus or arc5.  Nothing.  Nada.  Zip.  You
[once more plural] remind me of a Shakespeare quote, "It is a tale told by
an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing." (Macbeth Act 5, scene
5)  

Ham radio, which includes surplus conversions, is part of the real world.
Deal with it.  Get over it.  Or go create yet another splinter group that
disallows any such discussion so you can pat each other on the back about
how wonderful you are and how terrible everyone else is.

Best regards,
 
Michael, WH7HG ex-K3MXO, ex-KN3MXO, WPE3ARS, BL01xh ex-Mensa A&P PP BGI 
I am me.  I?m the only one who?s qualified.
http://www.nationalmssociety.org/chapters/NTH/index.aspx
http://wh7hg.blogspot.com/
http://kludges-other-blog.blogspot.com
Hiki N?! 
-----Original Message-----
From: milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net
[mailto:milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of J. Forster
Sent: Wednesday, 19 October, 2011 04:11
To: Francesco Ledda
Cc: Mike Morrow; milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] How I Use an LM

There are people out there that hunt Bald Eagals, Tigers, and White Rhinos
too.

That does not mean that they should be encouraged or theit activites lauded.

-John

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


> There are friendly people here. You own the equipment, and you can do
> whatever you want with it. This is America!
>
> I know few here think that they know best, but they don't. They yell about
> their opinions, but no matter how loud they yell, they are just their
> opinions.
>
> I don't like modifying surplus radios myself, but I understand that others
> may have a different approach.
>
> FL
>
>
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On Oct 18, 2011, at 12:16 PM, "bcarling at cfl.rr.com" <bcarling at cfl.rr.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Is there another military radio group that is more friendly toward those
>> who enjoying modifying and using military radio equipment?
>>
>> Bry Carling
>>
>> Sent from myTouch 4G, please excuse my brevity.
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Reply message -----
>> From: "J. Forster" <jfor at quikus.com>
>> To: "Mike Morrow" <kk5f at arrl.net>
>> Cc: <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
>> Subject: [Milsurplus] How I Use an LM
>> Date: Tue, Oct 18, 2011 12:27 pm
>>
>>
>> Well said.
>>
>> -John
>>
>> ============
>>
>>
>>>> I want to talk about history. The history of any item is not just the
>>>> history of what occurred at just one point of time in an items
>>>> existence...
>>>
>>> Very true.  One must differentiate between the historically significant
>>> history
>>> of an item, versus its subsequent insignificant history by the use of
>>> hobbyists.
>>> This applies not only to radios, but to weapons, vehicles, and other
>>> military
>>> items whose honorable halcyon days are behind them after the military
>>> releases
>>> surplus gear to civilian users, unless those later users preserve the
>>> item
>>> for
>>> use EXACTLY as the military used it.
>>>
>>> Generally speaking, no one wants a sporterized M1903 Springfield rifle
>>> or
>>> a GPW
>>> jeep that someone has hot-rodded (even just adding modern running
>>> lights).
>>> Works
>>> addressing the history of such items will never waste words on what
>>> civilian
>>> hobbyists did to the gear.  Likewise, why should radio gear in civilian
>>> hobbyist
>>> use be accorded any reverence or relevance?  I would discard any work
>>> about US
>>> military gear that wasted space describing what hams did with it.
>>> Total
>>> nonsense.
>>>
>>> Many hams accord their own selves some great achievement when they use
>>> military
>>> gear, and they seek acknowledgement of their personal technical
>>> achievement and
>>> importance.
>>>
>>> This ex-military ham of 44 years sees nothing there.  For at least
>>> fifty
>>> years
>>> there's been no justification for actual use of this old military gear.
>>>
>>> Do what you want with your property, but don't expect accords of glory
>>> from it.
>>>
>>> Mike / KK5F
>>> ______________________________________________________________
>>> Milsurplus mailing list
>>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
>>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>>> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>>>
>>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> Milsurplus mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>>
>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> Milsurplus mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>>
>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>


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

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html


From ianmwilson73 at gmail.com  Wed Oct 19 16:19:32 2011
From: ianmwilson73 at gmail.com (Ian Wilson)
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 13:19:32 -0700
Subject: [Milsurplus] [ARC5] More Moron-ities. This Will Turn Your
	Stomach
In-Reply-To: <DE86764DDB1F4DC58FCF55F5C932BA16@DaddyPC>
References: <DE86764DDB1F4DC58FCF55F5C932BA16@DaddyPC>
Message-ID: <CAEz8jcSO5GKUcmYi5wWY762HSK_ETqN8f0O3pQmXyKMMFqFEWA@mail.gmail.com>

Good grief. Words fail me.

73, ian K3IMW

On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 1:04 PM, David Stinson <arc5 at ix.netcom.com> wrote:

> 180740366169
> Two clean Brit liasion sets destroyed for some half-a**ed
> make-believe "radio room" in what is now a half-a**ed,
> make-believe WWII aircraft.
> Read the description.
> I thought these clowns had learned their lessons about stripping-
> out the WWII gear to "save weight" (in an aircraft meant to haul
> thousands!)  a couple of decades ago when the event
> judges stopped awarding "make believe" restorations like this.
> Makes me sick.
> D.S.
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> ARC5 mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/arc5
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:ARC5 at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>

From RAFANTINI at salisbury.edu  Wed Oct 19 16:23:52 2011
From: RAFANTINI at salisbury.edu (Ray Fantini)
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 16:23:52 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] More Moron-ities.  This Will Turn Your Stomach
In-Reply-To: <DE86764DDB1F4DC58FCF55F5C932BA16@DaddyPC>
References: <DE86764DDB1F4DC58FCF55F5C932BA16@DaddyPC>
Message-ID: <2DE6F17E951D824AAE8B8D0BF7579D810DF8AA6EFF@MBX.salisbury.edu>

Have to agree with you on this, to save five pounds of weight they gut what are getting almost imposable radios to find in unmodified condition. These people are morons. I did a R-1155 about five years ago but it was striped and hacked before I got it. But something like this should be criminal, furthermore any list members who pay the $200 or whatever it cost to go on the flight around the flagpole at some air show with these clowns should be thrown off the list.
Ray F

-----Original Message-----
From: milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net [mailto:milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of David Stinson
Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2011 4:05 PM
To: milsurplus at mailman.qth.net; ARC-5 List
Subject: [Milsurplus] More Moron-ities. This Will Turn Your Stomach

180740366169
Two clean Brit liasion sets destroyed for some half-a**ed
make-believe "radio room" in what is now a half-a**ed,
make-believe WWII aircraft.
Read the description.
I thought these clowns had learned their lessons about stripping-
out the WWII gear to "save weight" (in an aircraft meant to haul
thousands!)  a couple of decades ago when the event 
judges stopped awarding "make believe" restorations like this.
Makes me sick.
D.S.

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

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

From wh7hg.hi at gmail.com  Wed Oct 19 16:29:25 2011
From: wh7hg.hi at gmail.com (Kludge)
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 10:29:25 -1000
Subject: [Milsurplus] [ARC5] More Moron-ities. This Will Turn Your
	Stomach
In-Reply-To: <DE86764DDB1F4DC58FCF55F5C932BA16@DaddyPC>
References: <DE86764DDB1F4DC58FCF55F5C932BA16@DaddyPC>
Message-ID: <6AD4766C0B4D41189C60CCBFFEB50896@Kongo>

-----Original Message-----
From: arc5-bounces at mailman.qth.net [mailto:arc5-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On
Behalf Of David Stinson
> Two clean Brit liaison sets destroyed for some half-a**ed make-believe
"radio room" in 
> what is now a half-a**ed, make-believe WWII aircraft.

On the positive side, if someone is trying to make examples of these sets
work again, this is a marvelous set of parts with which to do it.

Best regards,
 
Michael, WH7HG ex-K3MXO, ex-KN3MXO, WPE3ARS, BL01xh ex-Mensa A&P PP BGI 
I am me.  I?m the only one who?s qualified.
http://www.nationalmssociety.org/chapters/NTH/index.aspx
http://wh7hg.blogspot.com/
http://kludges-other-blog.blogspot.com
Hiki N?! 


From wh7hg.hi at gmail.com  Wed Oct 19 16:41:16 2011
From: wh7hg.hi at gmail.com (Kludge)
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 10:41:16 -1000
Subject: [Milsurplus] Inside the 6L6
In-Reply-To: <4E9EF507.5070901@verizon.net>
References: <1319000243.85667.YahooMailNeo@web114715.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
	<4E9EF507.5070901@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <0AAA1CDCBEBA4A89BD76F1C7D2B2B702@Kongo>

Okay, this is just too cool.  And it's not even a direct heated triode.  :-D

Best regards,
 
Michael, WH7HG ex-K3MXO, ex-KN3MXO, WPE3ARS, BL01xh ex-Mensa A&P PP BGI 
I am me.  I?m the only one who?s qualified.
http://www.nationalmssociety.org/chapters/NTH/index.aspx
http://wh7hg.blogspot.com/
http://kludges-other-blog.blogspot.com
Hiki N?! 



From kb1fqg at yahoo.com  Wed Oct 19 16:43:54 2011
From: kb1fqg at yahoo.com (John Flood)
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 13:43:54 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] More Moron-ities.  This Will Turn Your Stomach
In-Reply-To: <DE86764DDB1F4DC58FCF55F5C932BA16@DaddyPC>
References: <DE86764DDB1F4DC58FCF55F5C932BA16@DaddyPC>
Message-ID: <1319057034.71430.YahooMailNeo@web84107.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Dave,
?
Reminds me of many years ago when I went out to the Collings foundation in Stow, MA when they were restoring a B-24.? I offered to get the vintage com gear in the radiomans postion up and running. I was even willing to give them a BC-348 and the BC-453, 454, and 455 if needed.? They had no interest, stating the weight was to much to justify extra fuel cost and it might allow them to fit in an extra paying passenger.? Is a running BC-375 needed????? probably not but what a thrill it would have been to strap on a pair of bakelite earcrushers and listen to the BC-348 over the drone of the P&W radials while in the radiomans position!? They asked me to clean some metal parts for repainting if I recall.? As much as I wanted to stay, and be involved, they had?just popped my ballon! I just said no thanks and went home.
?
John Flood
KB1FQG?


>________________________________
>From: David Stinson <arc5 at ix.netcom.com>
>To: milsurplus at mailman.qth.net; ARC-5 List <arc5 at mailman.qth.net>
>Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2011 4:04 PM
>Subject: [Milsurplus] More Moron-ities. This Will Turn Your Stomach
>
>180740366169
>Two clean Brit liasion sets destroyed for some half-a**ed
>make-believe "radio room" in what is now a half-a**ed,
>make-believe WWII aircraft.
>Read the description.
>I thought these clowns had learned their lessons about stripping-
>out the WWII gear to "save weight" (in an aircraft meant to haul
>thousands!)? a couple of decades ago when the event 
>judges stopped awarding "make believe" restorations like this.
>Makes me sick.
>D.S.
>
>______________________________________________________________
>Milsurplus mailing list
>Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
>Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
>This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>
>

From w7qho at aol.com  Wed Oct 19 16:46:48 2011
From: w7qho at aol.com (mac)
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 13:46:48 -0700
Subject: [Milsurplus] More Moron-ities.  This Will Turn Your Stomach
In-Reply-To: <2DE6F17E951D824AAE8B8D0BF7579D810DF8AA6EFF@MBX.salisbury.edu>
References: <DE86764DDB1F4DC58FCF55F5C932BA16@DaddyPC>
	<2DE6F17E951D824AAE8B8D0BF7579D810DF8AA6EFF@MBX.salisbury.edu>
Message-ID: <D576AC86-A057-4747-9D1B-1BBECB266B41@aol.com>

Looks like an outfit called "Legend of Aces Aviation" are the  
culprits, see <http://legendofaces.com/projects.htm>

Dennis D.  W7QHO
Glendale, CA

*******************
On Oct 19, 2011, at 1:23 PM, Ray Fantini wrote:

> Have to agree with you on this, to save five pounds of weight they  
> gut what are getting almost imposable radios to find in unmodified  
> condition. These people are morons. I did a R-1155 about five years  
> ago but it was striped and hacked before I got it. But something  
> like this should be criminal, furthermore any list members who pay  
> the $200 or whatever it cost to go on the flight around the flagpole  
> at some air show with these clowns should be thrown off the list.
> Ray F
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net [mailto:milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net 
> ] On Behalf Of David Stinson
> Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2011 4:05 PM
> To: milsurplus at mailman.qth.net; ARC-5 List
> Subject: [Milsurplus] More Moron-ities. This Will Turn Your Stomach
>
> 180740366169
> Two clean Brit liasion sets destroyed for some half-a**ed
> make-believe "radio room" in what is now a half-a**ed,
> make-believe WWII aircraft.
> Read the description.
> I thought these clowns had learned their lessons about stripping-
> out the WWII gear to "save weight" (in an aircraft meant to haul
> thousands!)  a couple of decades ago when the event
> judges stopped awarding "make believe" restorations like this.
> Makes me sick.
> D.S.
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html


From RAFANTINI at salisbury.edu  Wed Oct 19 16:58:12 2011
From: RAFANTINI at salisbury.edu (Ray Fantini)
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 16:58:12 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] More Moron-ities.  This Will Turn Your Stomach
In-Reply-To: <D576AC86-A057-4747-9D1B-1BBECB266B41@aol.com>
References: <DE86764DDB1F4DC58FCF55F5C932BA16@DaddyPC>
	<2DE6F17E951D824AAE8B8D0BF7579D810DF8AA6EFF@MBX.salisbury.edu>
	<D576AC86-A057-4747-9D1B-1BBECB266B41@aol.com>
Message-ID: <2DE6F17E951D824AAE8B8D0BF7579D810DF8AA6F22@MBX.salisbury.edu>

Wow, looked at their web page and see that restoration of a link trainer is one of their projects. Wonder how that will do that? Rip out all the original control systems and install a PC to run Microsoft Flight Simulator?
Ray F

-----Original Message-----
From: mac [mailto:w7qho at aol.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2011 4:47 PM
To: Ray Fantini
Cc: David Stinson; milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] More Moron-ities. This Will Turn Your Stomach

Looks like an outfit called "Legend of Aces Aviation" are the  
culprits, see <http://legendofaces.com/projects.htm>

Dennis D.  W7QHO
Glendale, CA

*******************
On Oct 19, 2011, at 1:23 PM, Ray Fantini wrote:

> Have to agree with you on this, to save five pounds of weight they  
> gut what are getting almost imposable radios to find in unmodified  
> condition. These people are morons. I did a R-1155 about five years  
> ago but it was striped and hacked before I got it. But something  
> like this should be criminal, furthermore any list members who pay  
> the $200 or whatever it cost to go on the flight around the flagpole  
> at some air show with these clowns should be thrown off the list.
> Ray F
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net [mailto:milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net 
> ] On Behalf Of David Stinson
> Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2011 4:05 PM
> To: milsurplus at mailman.qth.net; ARC-5 List
> Subject: [Milsurplus] More Moron-ities. This Will Turn Your Stomach
>
> 180740366169
> Two clean Brit liasion sets destroyed for some half-a**ed
> make-believe "radio room" in what is now a half-a**ed,
> make-believe WWII aircraft.
> Read the description.
> I thought these clowns had learned their lessons about stripping-
> out the WWII gear to "save weight" (in an aircraft meant to haul
> thousands!)  a couple of decades ago when the event
> judges stopped awarding "make believe" restorations like this.
> Makes me sick.
> D.S.
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html


From aaf-radio-1 at aafradio.org  Wed Oct 19 16:58:00 2011
From: aaf-radio-1 at aafradio.org (Mike Hanz)
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 16:58:00 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] How I Use an LM
In-Reply-To: <4E0F5FC6F41E4F8F90C4429FF52E3513@Kongo>
References: <44.71.02308.154BD9E4@cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com><918C22BC-0774-4753-AD00-CBC09A07720D@att.net><56396.12.6.201.2.1319033464.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
	<4E0F5FC6F41E4F8F90C4429FF52E3513@Kongo>
Message-ID: <4E9F39D8.3060004@aafradio.org>

May I suggest that folks consider the use of e-mail filters to strip off 
the mail of posters with different views for a while and then get back 
to our usual high level of civility and tolerance?  It saddens me to see 
normally rational people devolve into criticism and irritation over 
beliefs that don't affect anyone's health, wealth or essential living 
conditions.  Every e-mail client that I know of has such filters as an 
option - they are very useful for more than uninteresting threads or 
spammers.  I often filter out someone's posts with whom I disagree for a 
while, then delete the filter after a period of consideration.  No one 
is the wiser.  It's amazing how something so simple can lower your blood 
pressure and make life much more pleasant for everyone...:-)

73,
Mike  KC4TOS

From w7qho at aol.com  Wed Oct 19 16:58:27 2011
From: w7qho at aol.com (mac)
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 13:58:27 -0700
Subject: [Milsurplus] BC-314-D 1st IF Can
In-Reply-To: <1319053425.39341.YahooMailNeo@web46315.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
References: <8f16f.7ff69d8d.3bcb9a8b@cs.com>
	<1319053425.39341.YahooMailNeo@web46315.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <E545B0F7-0812-4988-BC4E-F24FBF1B405A@aol.com>

Not sure about the BC-314 but on the BC-312/342s there's one in each  
of the other IF cans too,  Ditto the BFO enclosure.

Dennis D.  W7QHO
Glendale, CA

***************
On Oct 19, 2011, at 12:43 PM, Joe Connor wrote:

>      I was working on this set today and found two Micramolds  
> (0.1/400V) inside C-293, the 1st IF transformer. This surprised me  
> because nothing in the articles I had read or videos I had viewed on  
> this series of receivers had mentioned caps inside an IF can. (I had  
> heard about the one hidden in the RF Oscillator compartment and the  
> one hidden in front of the 6F6).  I had seen caps inside IF cans in  
> the BC-779/SP-200 receivers but was not aware it had also been done  
> in the BC-342 series, too. I figured I would share this with the  
> group.
>
>      By the way, when I got to these caps, they were in exactly the  
> condition you would expect 70-year-old Micramolds to be in! 'Nuff  
> said.
>
>                            Joe Connor
>
>
>>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html


From Paul.Thekan at cpii.com  Wed Oct 19 17:26:01 2011
From: Paul.Thekan at cpii.com (Thekan, Paul)
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 14:26:01 -0700
Subject: [Milsurplus] More Moron-ities.  This Will Turn Your Stomach
In-Reply-To: <1319057034.71430.YahooMailNeo@web84107.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <DE86764DDB1F4DC58FCF55F5C932BA16@DaddyPC>
	<1319057034.71430.YahooMailNeo@web84107.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <7EC59351BB5C644E80AB7A434394DFF0503C0E95@Torreypines.cpii.com>

John

 I had a similar experience with the Collings foundation when they where out here in the early 90's with their B-17 at the Halfmoon Bay airport. They had at the time a ratty BC 375 , may still have for all I know, and I spoke to the pilot and some crew members about me donating a complete NIB BC 375 system AND all the S/N's matched........I could not believe it...they said they do not use those radios for their communications ( well duh!) and people come to see the plane not the radios and were not interested at all and in fact they seemed pretty perturbed by me even making them the offer.  

 The Collings group has been back here in the SF Bay Area many times since and I admire and appreciate their efforts in keeping those planes on tour but it still pains me to remember what they said to me and how they said it.

Paul
N6FEG

-----Original Message-----
From: milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net [mailto:milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of John Flood
Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2011 1:44 PM
To: David Stinson; milsurplus at mailman.qth.net; ARC-5 List
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] More Moron-ities. This Will Turn Your Stomach

Dave,
?
Reminds me of many years ago when I went out to the Collings foundation in Stow, MA when they were restoring a B-24.? I offered to get the vintage com gear in the radiomans postion up and running. I was even willing to give them a BC-348 and the BC-453, 454, and 455 if needed.? They had no interest, stating the weight was to much to justify extra fuel cost and it might allow them to fit in an extra paying passenger.? Is a running BC-375 needed????? probably not but what a thrill it would have been to strap on a pair of bakelite earcrushers and listen to the BC-348 over the drone of the P&W radials while in the radiomans position!? They asked me to clean some metal parts for repainting if I recall.? As much as I wanted to stay, and be involved, they had?just popped my ballon! I just said no thanks and went home.
?
John Flood
KB1FQG?


>________________________________
>From: David Stinson <arc5 at ix.netcom.com>
>To: milsurplus at mailman.qth.net; ARC-5 List <arc5 at mailman.qth.net>
>Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2011 4:04 PM
>Subject: [Milsurplus] More Moron-ities. This Will Turn Your Stomach
>
>180740366169
>Two clean Brit liasion sets destroyed for some half-a**ed
>make-believe "radio room" in what is now a half-a**ed,
>make-believe WWII aircraft.
>Read the description.
>I thought these clowns had learned their lessons about stripping-
>out the WWII gear to "save weight" (in an aircraft meant to haul
>thousands!)? a couple of decades ago when the event 
>judges stopped awarding "make believe" restorations like this.
>Makes me sick.
>D.S.
>
>______________________________________________________________
>Milsurplus mailing list
>Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
>Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
>This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>
>
______________________________________________________________
Milsurplus mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
_____________________________



This message, including any attachments, may include privileged,
confidential and/or inside information. Any distribution or use of this
communication by anyone other than the intended recipient(s) is strictly
prohibited and may be unlawful.  If you are not the intended recipient,
please notify the sender by replying to this message and then delete it from
your system.



From arc5 at ix.netcom.com  Wed Oct 19 17:31:29 2011
From: arc5 at ix.netcom.com (David Stinson)
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 16:31:29 -0500
Subject: [Milsurplus] More Moron-ities.  This Will Turn Your Stomach
In-Reply-To: <7EC59351BB5C644E80AB7A434394DFF0503C0E95@Torreypines.cpii.com>
References: <DE86764DDB1F4DC58FCF55F5C932BA16@DaddyPC><1319057034.71430.YahooMailNeo@web84107.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<7EC59351BB5C644E80AB7A434394DFF0503C0E95@Torreypines.cpii.com>
Message-ID: <CA882CA5812B49A1A6F557F77559B484@DaddyPC>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Thekan, Paul" <Paul.Thekan at cpii.com>
To: "'John Flood'" <kb1fqg at yahoo.com>
Cc: <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2011 4:26 PM
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] More Moron-ities. This Will Turn Your 
Stomach


John

 I had a similar experience with the Collings foundation when they 
where out here in the early 90's with their B-17 at the Halfmoon Bay 
airport. They had at the time a ratty BC 375 , may still have for all 
I know, and I spoke to the pilot and some crew members about me 
donating a complete NIB BC 375 system AND all the S/N's 
matched........I could not believe it...they said they do not use 
those radios for their communications ( well duh!) and people come to 
see the plane not the radios and were not interested at all and in 
fact they seemed pretty perturbed by me even making them the offer.

 The Collings group has been back here in the SF Bay Area many times 
since and I admire and appreciate their efforts in keeping those 
planes on tour but it still pains me to remember what they said to me 
and how they said it.

Paul
N6FEG

-----Original Message-----
From: milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net 
[mailto:milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of John Flood
Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2011 1:44 PM
To: David Stinson; milsurplus at mailman.qth.net; ARC-5 List
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] More Moron-ities. This Will Turn Your 
Stomach

Dave,

Reminds me of many years ago when I went out to the Collings 
foundation in Stow, MA when they were restoring a B-24. I offered to 
get the vintage com gear in the radiomans postion up and running. I 
was even willing to give them a BC-348 and the BC-453, 454, and 455 if 
needed. They had no interest, stating the weight was to much to 
justify extra fuel cost and it might allow them to fit in an extra 
paying passenger. Is a running BC-375 needed???? probably not but what 
a thrill it would have been to strap on a pair of bakelite earcrushers 
and listen to the BC-348 over the drone of the P&W radials while in 
the radiomans position! They asked me to clean some metal parts for 
repainting if I recall. As much as I wanted to stay, and be involved, 
they had just popped my ballon! I just said no thanks and went home.

John Flood
KB1FQG


>________________________________
>From: David Stinson <arc5 at ix.netcom.com>
>To: milsurplus at mailman.qth.net; ARC-5 List <arc5 at mailman.qth.net>
>Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2011 4:04 PM
>Subject: [Milsurplus] More Moron-ities. This Will Turn Your Stomach
>
>180740366169
>Two clean Brit liasion sets destroyed for some half-a**ed
>make-believe "radio room" in what is now a half-a**ed,
>make-believe WWII aircraft.
>Read the description.
>I thought these clowns had learned their lessons about stripping-
>out the WWII gear to "save weight" (in an aircraft meant to haul
>thousands!) a couple of decades ago when the event
>judges stopped awarding "make believe" restorations like this.
>Makes me sick.
>D.S.
>
>______________________________________________________________
>Milsurplus mailing list
>Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
>Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
>This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>
>
______________________________________________________________
Milsurplus mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
_____________________________



This message, including any attachments, may include privileged,
confidential and/or inside information. Any distribution or use of 
this
communication by anyone other than the intended recipient(s) is 
strictly
prohibited and may be unlawful.  If you are not the intended 
recipient,
please notify the sender by replying to this message and then delete 
it from
your system.


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

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html 


From w7qho at aol.com  Wed Oct 19 17:38:28 2011
From: w7qho at aol.com (mac)
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 14:38:28 -0700
Subject: [Milsurplus] More Moron-ities.  This Will Turn Your Stomach
In-Reply-To: <7EC59351BB5C644E80AB7A434394DFF0503C0E95@Torreypines.cpii.com>
References: <DE86764DDB1F4DC58FCF55F5C932BA16@DaddyPC>
	<1319057034.71430.YahooMailNeo@web84107.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<7EC59351BB5C644E80AB7A434394DFF0503C0E95@Torreypines.cpii.com>
Message-ID: <8465959E-F5EF-4A08-B4B3-CD2A0493CEAD@aol.com>

Welcome to show biz folks!

DD

***************

On Oct 19, 2011, at 2:26 PM, Thekan, Paul wrote:

> John
>
> I had a similar experience with the Collings foundation when they  
> where out here in the early 90's with their B-17 at the Halfmoon Bay  
> airport. They had at the time a ratty BC 375 , may still have for  
> all I know, and I spoke to the pilot and some crew members about me  
> donating a complete NIB BC 375 system AND all the S/N's  
> matched........I could not believe it...they said they do not use  
> those radios for their communications ( well duh!) and people come  
> to see the plane not the radios and were not interested at all and  
> in fact they seemed pretty perturbed by me even making them the offer.
>
> The Collings group has been back here in the SF Bay Area many times  
> since and I admire and appreciate their efforts in keeping those  
> planes on tour but it still pains me to remember what they said to  
> me and how they said it.
>
> Paul
> N6FEG
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net [mailto:milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net 
> ] On Behalf Of John Flood
> Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2011 1:44 PM
> To: David Stinson; milsurplus at mailman.qth.net; ARC-5 List
> Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] More Moron-ities. This Will Turn Your  
> Stomach
>
> Dave,
>
> Reminds me of many years ago when I went out to the Collings  
> foundation in Stow, MA when they were restoring a B-24.  I offered  
> to get the vintage com gear in the radiomans postion up and running.  
> I was even willing to give them a BC-348 and the BC-453, 454, and  
> 455 if needed.  They had no interest, stating the weight was to much  
> to justify extra fuel cost and it might allow them to fit in an  
> extra paying passenger.  Is a running BC-375 needed????  probably  
> not but what a thrill it would have been to strap on a pair of  
> bakelite earcrushers and listen to the BC-348 over the drone of the  
> P&W radials while in the radiomans position!  They asked me to clean  
> some metal parts for repainting if I recall.  As much as I wanted to  
> stay, and be involved, they had just popped my ballon! I just said  
> no thanks and went home.
>
> John Flood
> KB1FQG
>
>
>> ________________________________
>> From: David Stinson <arc5 at ix.netcom.com>
>> To: milsurplus at mailman.qth.net; ARC-5 List <arc5 at mailman.qth.net>
>> Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2011 4:04 PM
>> Subject: [Milsurplus] More Moron-ities. This Will Turn Your Stomach
>>
>> 180740366169
>> Two clean Brit liasion sets destroyed for some half-a**ed
>> make-believe "radio room" in what is now a half-a**ed,
>> make-believe WWII aircraft.
>> Read the description.
>> I thought these clowns had learned their lessons about stripping-
>> out the WWII gear to "save weight" (in an aircraft meant to haul
>> thousands!)  a couple of decades ago when the event
>> judges stopped awarding "make believe" restorations like this.
>> Makes me sick.
>> D.S.
>>
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> Milsurplus mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>>
>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>
>>
>>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> _____________________________
>
>
>
> This message, including any attachments, may include privileged,
> confidential and/or inside information. Any distribution or use of  
> this
> communication by anyone other than the intended recipient(s) is  
> strictly
> prohibited and may be unlawful.  If you are not the intended  
> recipient,
> please notify the sender by replying to this message and then delete  
> it from
> your system.
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html


From arc5 at ix.netcom.com  Wed Oct 19 17:56:47 2011
From: arc5 at ix.netcom.com (David Stinson)
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 16:56:47 -0500
Subject: [Milsurplus] More Moron-ities.
In-Reply-To: <8465959E-F5EF-4A08-B4B3-CD2A0493CEAD@aol.com>
References: <DE86764DDB1F4DC58FCF55F5C932BA16@DaddyPC><1319057034.71430.YahooMailNeo@web84107.mail.mud.yahoo.com><7EC59351BB5C644E80AB7A434394DFF0503C0E95@Torreypines.cpii.com>
	<8465959E-F5EF-4A08-B4B3-CD2A0493CEAD@aol.com>
Message-ID: <FC892BCCE7DB4CBDA8613CA3016E6E03@DaddyPC>

I had a similar encounter with the (politically)Correct Air Farce.
Their attitude was:
"Boy, we don't care about that old junk.
We throw it away fast as it gets donated. 
If you don't have the money to buy a P-51D and restore it, 
you're wasting my time.  
Get back over there with the paying Rubes 
and gawk at how awesome I am"
(just before he climbed into "his" irreplaceable warbird
and showed us how "awesome" he was by screwing it
and himself into the ground at 220 knots).

Years later, I got emails from them.
Seems the times have changed.... 
You can't win airshow awards any longer 
by stripping-out a warbird and making it look all neat outside 
while turning the insides into a Cessna.
They'd heard of me and came begging 
please oh please won't you help us
get the radio gear back in working shape?
I reminded them of their previous attitude, 
of the fact that there are other groups who respected
the tools our fathers and mothers used to win that war, 
and that those groups needed my help.  
No, I don't think I can help you Mr. CAF.  
Not one bit.  In fact, I don't think I have so
much as a blown fuse for you or anyone like you.

Besides- they hacked me off when they rolled-over
like a bunch of whipped dogs and changed their name.

D.S.



From WA5CAB at cs.com  Wed Oct 19 18:02:44 2011
From: WA5CAB at cs.com (WA5CAB at cs.com)
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 18:02:44 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] More Moron-ities.  This Will Turn Your Stomach
Message-ID: <2651.3a870ee2.3bd0a304@cs.com>

Yep.  That about sums up my one experience with the CAF.

In a message dated 10/19/2011 15:44:06 PM Central Daylight Time, 
kb1fqg at yahoo.com writes: 
> Dave,
>  
> Reminds me of many years ago when I went out to the Collings foundation in 
> Stow, MA when they were restoring a B-24.  I offered to get the vintage 
> com gear in the radiomans postion up and running. I was even willing to give 
> them a BC-348 and the BC-453, 454, and 455 if needed.  They had no 
> interest, stating the weight was to much to justify extra fuel cost and it might 
> allow them to fit in an extra paying passenger.  Is a running BC-375 
> needed????  probably not but what a thrill it would have been to strap on a pair of 
> bakelite earcrushers and listen to the BC-348 over the drone of the P&W 
> radials while in the radiomans position!  They asked me to clean some metal 
> parts for repainting if I recall.  As much as I wanted to stay, and be 
> involved, they had just popped my ballon! I just said no thanks and went home.
>  
> John Flood
> KB1FQG 
> 
> 
> >________________________________
> >From: David Stinson <arc5 at ix.netcom.com>
> >To: milsurplus at mailman.qth.net; ARC-5 List <arc5 at mailman.qth.net>
> >Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2011 4:04 PM
> >Subject: [Milsurplus] More Moron-ities. This Will Turn Your Stomach
> >
> >180740366169
> >Two clean Brit liasion sets destroyed for some half-a**ed
> >make-believe "radio room" in what is now a half-a**ed,
> >make-believe WWII aircraft.
> >Read the description.
> >I thought these clowns had learned their lessons about stripping-
> >out the WWII gear to "save weight" (in an aircraft meant to haul
> >thousands!)  a couple of decades ago when the event 
> >judges stopped awarding "make believe" restorations like this.
> >Makes me sick.
> >D.S.

Robert & Susan Downs - Houston
wa5cab dot com (Web Store)
MVPA 9480

From jfor at quikus.com  Wed Oct 19 18:20:36 2011
From: jfor at quikus.com (J. Forster)
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 15:20:36 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] More Moron-ities.  This Will Turn Your Stomach
In-Reply-To: <2651.3a870ee2.3bd0a304@cs.com>
References: <2651.3a870ee2.3bd0a304@cs.com>
Message-ID: <50612.12.6.201.2.1319062836.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>

The Collins Foundation had no interest in radio or RADAR gear a decade ago.

It was all about the 'planes and pilots, ignoring the reality that without
electronics they could never have found their intended targets or gotten
back home, or gotten rescued at sea. Glorified truck and bus drivers, IMO.

Having completely poisoned the well, they may find a drink hard to get now.

-John

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


> Yep.  That about sums up my one experience with the CAF.
>
> In a message dated 10/19/2011 15:44:06 PM Central Daylight Time,
> kb1fqg at yahoo.com writes:
>> Dave,
>>
>> Reminds me of many years ago when I went out to the Collings foundation
>> in
>> Stow, MA when they were restoring a B-24.  I offered to get the vintage
>> com gear in the radiomans postion up and running. I was even willing to
>> give
>> them a BC-348 and the BC-453, 454, and 455 if needed.  They had no
>> interest, stating the weight was to much to justify extra fuel cost and
>> it might
>> allow them to fit in an extra paying passenger.  Is a running BC-375
>> needed????  probably not but what a thrill it would have been to strap
>> on a pair of
>> bakelite earcrushers and listen to the BC-348 over the drone of the P&W
>> radials while in the radiomans position!  They asked me to clean some
>> metal
>> parts for repainting if I recall.  As much as I wanted to stay, and be
>> involved, they had just popped my ballon! I just said no thanks and went
>> home.
>>
>> John Flood
>> KB1FQG
>>
>>
>> >________________________________
>> >From: David Stinson <arc5 at ix.netcom.com>
>> >To: milsurplus at mailman.qth.net; ARC-5 List <arc5 at mailman.qth.net>
>> >Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2011 4:04 PM
>> >Subject: [Milsurplus] More Moron-ities. This Will Turn Your Stomach
>> >
>> >180740366169
>> >Two clean Brit liasion sets destroyed for some half-a**ed
>> >make-believe "radio room" in what is now a half-a**ed,
>> >make-believe WWII aircraft.
>> >Read the description.
>> >I thought these clowns had learned their lessons about stripping-
>> >out the WWII gear to "save weight" (in an aircraft meant to haul
>> >thousands!)  a couple of decades ago when the event
>> >judges stopped awarding "make believe" restorations like this.
>> >Makes me sick.
>> >D.S.
>
> Robert & Susan Downs - Houston
> wa5cab dot com (Web Store)
> MVPA 9480
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>



From jfor at quikus.com  Wed Oct 19 18:46:53 2011
From: jfor at quikus.com (J. Forster)
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 15:46:53 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] How I Use an LM
In-Reply-To: <4E0F5FC6F41E4F8F90C4429FF52E3513@Kongo>
References: <44.71.02308.154BD9E4@cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com><918C22BC-0774-4753-AD00-CBC09A07720D@att.net>
	<56396.12.6.201.2.1319033464.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
	<4E0F5FC6F41E4F8F90C4429FF52E3513@Kongo>
Message-ID: <52920.12.6.201.2.1319064413.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>

Apparently, you are unaware of metaphores.

The point, which you choose to ignore, is that the supply of unhacked mil
gear is limited. Endangered species reproduce, so there is some
replenishment. The same is not true for antique radios.

I don't "hate hams". I do believe the overwhelming majority of mods
reflect a complete lack of understanding of the gear and/or electronics.
Every ARFC-5 or SCR-274 transmitter with a SO-259 is eloquent proof of
that. Few if any "conversions" make any sense whatsoever, and many degrade
equipment performance.

The kind of thing that does impress me is a transatlantic QSO between
absolutely unmodified WW II gear.

Furthermore, I believe that the vast majority of hams have made absolutely
no contribution to the practice or theory of electronics. They are simply
hackers. There are a few exceptions, but they are exceptions, not the
rule.

As to grandiose plans, we have certainly heard a lot about them, but not
from me.

-John

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


> -----Original Message-----
> From: milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net
> [mailto:milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of J. Forster
>> There are people out there that hunt Bald Eagals, Tigers, and White
>> Rhinos
>> too.
>> That does not mean that they should be encouraged or theit activites
> lauded.
>
> Oh, my freakin' God!  Yet another in a long string of nonsequitors
> comparing
> ham activities to illegal ones.  You've already stated your hatred for
> hams
> several times over but this is typical of how idiotic you can and do get
> about the subject.  (You're also losing it since you usually spell much
> better than that.)
>
> John, you, Mike M, Meir and a few others have such a myopic view of the
> world it's surprising you're not considered legally blind.  Further, not a
> one of you has the intestinal fortitude to put up websites showing the
> prize
> possessions you so love bragging about.  This leads me to believe you
> [plural] are all wind and nothing else.  Look at Mike H, for example.  He
> doesn't have to brag.  He *has* the equipment and is more than willing to
> show how it's done.  Dave posts photos of his efforts as they happen and
> also doesn't mind sharing his knowledge about how it's done so also
> doesn't
> have to brag.  So do others.  You [again, plural] do nothing but whine,
> whimper, moan and generally carry on like it's the end of the world if
> someone so much as restuffs a cap to get a piece running again that wasn't
> running before but do nothing to contribute in a positive manner when it
> comes to restoration on milsurplus or arc5.  Nothing.  Nada.  Zip.  You
> [once more plural] remind me of a Shakespeare quote, "It is a tale told by
> an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing." (Macbeth Act 5,
> scene
> 5)
>
> Ham radio, which includes surplus conversions, is part of the real world.
> Deal with it.  Get over it.  Or go create yet another splinter group that
> disallows any such discussion so you can pat each other on the back about
> how wonderful you are and how terrible everyone else is.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Michael, WH7HG ex-K3MXO, ex-KN3MXO, WPE3ARS, BL01xh ex-Mensa A&P PP BGI
> I am me.  I?m the only one who?s qualified.
> http://www.nationalmssociety.org/chapters/NTH/index.aspx
> http://wh7hg.blogspot.com/
> http://kludges-other-blog.blogspot.com
> Hiki N?!
> -----Original Message-----
> From: milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net
> [mailto:milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of J. Forster
> Sent: Wednesday, 19 October, 2011 04:11
> To: Francesco Ledda
> Cc: Mike Morrow; milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
> Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] How I Use an LM
>
> There are people out there that hunt Bald Eagals, Tigers, and White Rhinos
> too.
>
> That does not mean that they should be encouraged or theit activites
> lauded.
>
> -John
>
> =============
>
>
>> There are friendly people here. You own the equipment, and you can do
>> whatever you want with it. This is America!
>>
>> I know few here think that they know best, but they don't. They yell
>> about
>> their opinions, but no matter how loud they yell, they are just their
>> opinions.
>>
>> I don't like modifying surplus radios myself, but I understand that
>> others
>> may have a different approach.
>>
>> FL
>>
>>
>>
>> Sent from my iPad
>>
>> On Oct 18, 2011, at 12:16 PM, "bcarling at cfl.rr.com"
>> <bcarling at cfl.rr.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Is there another military radio group that is more friendly toward
>>> those
>>> who enjoying modifying and using military radio equipment?
>>>
>>> Bry Carling
>>>
>>> Sent from myTouch 4G, please excuse my brevity.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Reply message -----
>>> From: "J. Forster" <jfor at quikus.com>
>>> To: "Mike Morrow" <kk5f at arrl.net>
>>> Cc: <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
>>> Subject: [Milsurplus] How I Use an LM
>>> Date: Tue, Oct 18, 2011 12:27 pm
>>>
>>>
>>> Well said.
>>>
>>> -John
>>>
>>> ============
>>>
>>>
>>>>> I want to talk about history. The history of any item is not just the
>>>>> history of what occurred at just one point of time in an items
>>>>> existence...
>>>>
>>>> Very true.  One must differentiate between the historically
>>>> significant
>>>> history
>>>> of an item, versus its subsequent insignificant history by the use of
>>>> hobbyists.
>>>> This applies not only to radios, but to weapons, vehicles, and other
>>>> military
>>>> items whose honorable halcyon days are behind them after the military
>>>> releases
>>>> surplus gear to civilian users, unless those later users preserve the
>>>> item
>>>> for
>>>> use EXACTLY as the military used it.
>>>>
>>>> Generally speaking, no one wants a sporterized M1903 Springfield rifle
>>>> or
>>>> a GPW
>>>> jeep that someone has hot-rodded (even just adding modern running
>>>> lights).
>>>> Works
>>>> addressing the history of such items will never waste words on what
>>>> civilian
>>>> hobbyists did to the gear.  Likewise, why should radio gear in
>>>> civilian
>>>> hobbyist
>>>> use be accorded any reverence or relevance?  I would discard any work
>>>> about US
>>>> military gear that wasted space describing what hams did with it.
>>>> Total
>>>> nonsense.
>>>>
>>>> Many hams accord their own selves some great achievement when they use
>>>> military
>>>> gear, and they seek acknowledgement of their personal technical
>>>> achievement and
>>>> importance.
>>>>
>>>> This ex-military ham of 44 years sees nothing there.  For at least
>>>> fifty
>>>> years
>>>> there's been no justification for actual use of this old military
>>>> gear.
>>>>
>>>> Do what you want with your property, but don't expect accords of glory
>>>> from it.
>>>>
>>>> Mike / KK5F
>>>> ______________________________________________________________
>>>> Milsurplus mailing list
>>>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
>>>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>>>> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>>>>
>>>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>>>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ______________________________________________________________
>>> Milsurplus mailing list
>>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
>>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>>> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>>>
>>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>> ______________________________________________________________
>>> Milsurplus mailing list
>>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
>>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>>> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>>>
>>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>
>>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>



From arc5 at ix.netcom.com  Wed Oct 19 19:13:32 2011
From: arc5 at ix.netcom.com (David Stinson)
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 18:13:32 -0500
Subject: [Milsurplus] More Moron-ities.
In-Reply-To: <FC892BCCE7DB4CBDA8613CA3016E6E03@DaddyPC>
References: <DE86764DDB1F4DC58FCF55F5C932BA16@DaddyPC><1319057034.71430.YahooMailNeo@web84107.mail.mud.yahoo.com><7EC59351BB5C644E80AB7A434394DFF0503C0E95@Torreypines.cpii.com><8465959E-F5EF-4A08-B4B3-CD2A0493CEAD@aol.com>
	<FC892BCCE7DB4CBDA8613CA3016E6E03@DaddyPC>
Message-ID: <48776B5450D94E9FAB41286961B0A4EC@DaddyPC>

The sad part is,  if they had said something like:
"Thanks for your desire to help.  Our funds and time
are limited right now, and so is our storage space.  
We're concentrating on other areas.  
Perhaps in the future we'll be able to work on 
the period electronics."
I'd have been A-OK with that.  Totally understand.
I'd have been willing to wait years and come running 
when they asked.   
But no; they cop a sunglasses-glemming-teeth-
ain't-I-hot-stuff-and-you're-a-wannabe" atttitude.
What do they expect our community would think of them?


From ewinde at sc.rr.com  Wed Oct 19 20:32:10 2011
From: ewinde at sc.rr.com (Eric Winder)
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 20:32:10 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] More Moron-ities.
Message-ID: <CMECKDACGDLDNDMMAADNOEPBCCAA.ewinde@sc.rr.com>

Exactly, they have that "OMG, I wuz just dumped out of the military and
'NOW' I gotta actually "PLAY" the role of the pilot "attitude"
(yeah, baby, big $$$)!
THEY don't give a crap what was actually ON the aircraft they were flying,
they just want to look 'COOL' flying it!!
HOLLYWOOOOOD!! (bling, bling)



Message: 6
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 18:13:32 -0500
From: "David Stinson" <arc5 at ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] More Moron-ities.
To: <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>,	"ARC-5 List" <arc5 at mailman.qth.net>
Message-ID: <48776B5450D94E9FAB41286961B0A4EC at DaddyPC>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
	reply-type=original

The sad part is,  if they had said something like:
"Thanks for your desire to help.  Our funds and time
are limited right now, and so is our storage space.
We're concentrating on other areas.
Perhaps in the future we'll be able to work on
the period electronics."
I'd have been A-OK with that.  Totally understand.
I'd have been willing to wait years and come running
when they asked.
But no; they cop a sunglasses-glemming-teeth-
ain't-I-hot-stuff-and-you're-a-wannabe" atttitude.
What do they expect our community would think of them?



From wrcromwell at gmail.com  Wed Oct 19 20:30:40 2011
From: wrcromwell at gmail.com (Bill Cromwell)
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 20:30:40 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] please end the vituperation
Message-ID: <1319070640.1924.2.camel@lancelot>

Hi,

I'm a latecomer to the list..not brand new but far far from a charter
member. My surplus acquisitions are modest and few, especially compared
to what many members have. I can't tell you how disappointed I am with
the flames that have been flying everywhere on a couple of the lists. I
had come to expect much more from everybody and especially from the "old
timers".

I learned just from reading *intelligent* posts on these lists that the
ARC-5 command sets that interest me most do not have to be modified at
all to get the desired signals in and out of my ham shack. I canceled
any plans I had to "hack" the gear I have beyond any changes that have
already been made to any of it. Replacement caps and such are just part
of maintenance but replacing each dead part with equal value..not
something intended to change the original operation. Sure enough, the
gear can work just fine without hack saws, boring bars, blow torches,
fire axes or anything else. I can add circuits that connect to the pins
on both ends and do some additional processing that way if I want to. A
homebrew power supply can connect to the same pins that a dynamotor
connected. I can build some "other" circuits that plug into the already
present, working tube sockets and route cables out through a replacement
top cover that does not punch a hole in the original (or just leave the
top cover off). Modifications like that are easy to undo by the next
owner. Just unplug them. I'll be all done with them...feel free to toss
them in the trash can. Meanwhile I am amazed that some of the oldest
gear I have works the best and is the most fun to operate. I wonder
where my "pretty" radios will when they are that old. Proprietary parts.
Top secret firmware. Long gone I expect.

Please, lets get back to the *intelligent* posts.

73,

Bill  KU8H




From prc74b at fuse.net  Wed Oct 19 21:38:56 2011
From: prc74b at fuse.net (Joe Munson)
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 21:38:56 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] More Moron-ities.  This Will Turn Your Stomach
References: <DE86764DDB1F4DC58FCF55F5C932BA16@DaddyPC><1319057034.71430.YahooMailNeo@web84107.mail.mud.yahoo.com><7EC59351BB5C644E80AB7A434394DFF0503C0E95@Torreypines.cpii.com>
	<CA882CA5812B49A1A6F557F77559B484@DaddyPC>
Message-ID: <B012D8EBB9A14070B16ACD735745280E@your3bf9182263>

I just helped finish putting back all the orginal commo equipment into a P 
40 Kitrtyhawk.  BC 453, 454, and 455 recevers, BC 456 Modulator, BC 457, 458 
transmitters, BC 442 Ant Relay, along all associated mounts, racks, cables, 
splined tuning cables, and control heads.  All equipment is tuned and 
working FB.  Even put in the Pip Squeak System..including relay box and 
control in the insturment panel.  Plane is equiped to the spec's in the 
aircraft manual.  This is for the Tri State Warbirds Museum, Batavia, Ohio. 
I also have a BC 969 80 meter transmitter tuned and ready to drop into the 
rack, for air shows, etc, so i can utilize the set up with other hams using 
BC 611, the PogoStick, BC 1306, GRC 9, or the BC 654.  I am working on the 
driver to get his ticket so we can talk from the air.

Joe Munson
WA4VAG 



From WA5CAB at cs.com  Wed Oct 19 22:11:24 2011
From: WA5CAB at cs.com (WA5CAB at cs.com)
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 22:11:24 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] Things to avoid (was Re: please end the vituperation
Message-ID: <acff.199a4235.3bd0dd4b@cs.com>

Bill,

I'll mention one thing that seldom gets said here, possibly because most 
already know and don't think to mention it.  Plus most here don't discuss 
modifications, especially not unreversible ones, other than undoing them.  When 
"adding circuits that connect to the pins on both ends", or connecting an 
external power supply to the dynamotor connector pins, or whatever, never 
solder to the banana pins.  And if at all possible, don't solder to the mating 
sockets.  The sockets can be reclaimed so that they will work again, although 
it takes better equipment than most people have.  But once soldered to, a 
banana pin is history.

In a message dated 10/19/2011 19:36:08 PM Central Daylight Time, 
wrcromwell at gmail.com writes: 
> Hi,
> 
> I'm a latecomer to the list..not brand new but far far from a charter
> member. My surplus acquisitions are modest and few, especially compared
> to what many members have. I can't tell you how disappointed I am with
> the flames that have been flying everywhere on a couple of the lists. I
> had come to expect much more from everybody and especially from the "old
> timers".
> 
> I learned just from reading *intelligent* posts on these lists that the
> ARC-5 command sets that interest me most do not have to be modified at
> all to get the desired signals in and out of my ham shack. I canceled
> any plans I had to "hack" the gear I have beyond any changes that have
> already been made to any of it. Replacement caps and such are just part
> of maintenance but replacing each dead part with equal value..not
> something intended to change the original operation. Sure enough, the
> gear can work just fine without hack saws, boring bars, blow torches,
> fire axes or anything else. I can add circuits that connect to the pins
> on both ends and do some additional processing that way if I want to. A
> homebrew power supply can connect to the same pins that a dynamotor
> connected. I can build some "other" circuits that plug into the already
> present, working tube sockets and route cables out through a replacement
> top cover that does not punch a hole in the original (or just leave the
> top cover off). Modifications like that are easy to undo by the next
> owner. Just unplug them. I'll be all done with them...feel free to toss
> them in the trash can. Meanwhile I am amazed that some of the oldest
> gear I have works the best and is the most fun to operate. I wonder
> where my "pretty" radios will when they are that old. Proprietary parts.
> Top secret firmware. Long gone I expect.
> 
> Please, lets get back to the *intelligent* posts.
> 
> 73,
> 
> Bill  KU8H

Robert Downs - Houston
wa5cab dot com (Web Store)
MVPA 9480

From mcenfalz at humboldt1.com  Wed Oct 19 22:35:54 2011
From: mcenfalz at humboldt1.com (Laura and Jim)
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 19:35:54 -0700
Subject: [Milsurplus] More Moron-ities
Message-ID: <9DBAE6A6B2DE4AB7A03A924F4AEE5FBD@HomePC>

"pay the $200 or whatever it cost to go on the flight around the flagpole " - Pushing $500 last year out here on the Coast. 

Y'all ruint it fer me. They're coming next year, and I was all afired up to git out my credit card.........

73 DE JIM K6FWT

From mcenfalz at humboldt1.com  Wed Oct 19 22:38:57 2011
From: mcenfalz at humboldt1.com (Laura and Jim)
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 19:38:57 -0700
Subject: [Milsurplus] More Moron-ities.
Message-ID: <53B6F0AC107247BEAE4F2E420D4BCC49@HomePC>

Scroll down to Galloping Ghost #177, recently very publicly SK along w/the pilot at Reno.............

Jim K6FWT

From MillerKE6F at aol.com  Thu Oct 20 00:31:51 2011
From: MillerKE6F at aol.com (MillerKE6F at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 00:31:51 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] How I Use an LM
Message-ID: <5b279.48ea3f4e.3bd0fe36@aol.com>

John, 
 
Enough is enough.  I think WH7HG is right on target.  You ask  what hams 
have contributed and I ask what have you done for the  art?  What have you 
ppublished?  What have you contributed  to an upcoming ham radio operator?  
Continued carping on a topic that  has seen enough introspection, inspection, 
and gawd only knows how much  discussion serves no purpose other than to make 
folks turn to off their  computers and take up a good book.   No one's 
harming any of this  old junk out of spite and to continue this vitriol every 
time the subject  of some ham making something useful to him or her is just 
bad manners and lacks  civility.
  If a fellow or gal came up to me with a converted Command Set  
transmitter full of pride and excitement about the accomplishment of making it  work, 
I'd certainly be excited too and show that excitement by complementing the  
person for a job well done. And in addition to complementing the person, I'd 
 offer assistance in the way of parts and materials and  technical 
suggestions for future ham endeavors like my mentor, K6CXB (SK)  did for me over 50 
years ago.  To quote Thumper (Bambi), "If you can't say  something nice, 
then don't say anything at all"
 
    Bob, KE6F

From ka1kaq at gmail.com  Thu Oct 20 01:35:18 2011
From: ka1kaq at gmail.com (Todd, KA1KAQ)
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 01:35:18 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] [ARC5] More Moron-ities. This Will Turn Your
	Stomach
In-Reply-To: <10063DE2-5194-45F5-AC95-7023FF5F8E00@earthlink.net>
References: <2651.3a870ee2.3bd0a304@cs.com>
	<50612.12.6.201.2.1319062836.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
	<10063DE2-5194-45F5-AC95-7023FF5F8E00@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <CANCs6AXesC=2K+3KEz6csT6TOTd4S7Z4U=UugO4Pw49oQjM97Q@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 7:34 PM, Roy Morgan <k1lky at earthlink.net> wrote:

> The Collings folks are not all bad all the time.

They're actually a damned good group of folks, Roy. They've done more
for preserving WWII history than any of the elitists who whine about
them for not embracing their favorite piece of equipment in the
aircraft. It gets regurgitated once or twice a year, along with the
'Hollywood sucks because they don't use the right radio equipment'
line, as if our particular interest is so much more important than the
overall story. The 'hams are a bunch of stupid hacks' subject has
almost become bi-monthly. Reminds me a lot of a daycare I once
delivered flowers to back in my college years.

Ho hum.

From kb1fqg at yahoo.com  Thu Oct 20 11:19:52 2011
From: kb1fqg at yahoo.com (John Flood)
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 08:19:52 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] [ARC5] More Moron-ities. This Will Turn Your
	Stomach
In-Reply-To: <10063DE2-5194-45F5-AC95-7023FF5F8E00@earthlink.net>
References: <2651.3a870ee2.3bd0a304@cs.com>
	<50612.12.6.201.2.1319062836.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
	<10063DE2-5194-45F5-AC95-7023FF5F8E00@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <1319123992.76167.YahooMailNeo@web84101.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Hi Roy and everyone else,
?
Roy is correct, they do quite a lot and i'm sure keeping these warbirds airworthy in no simple task.? I was just relating my "popped baloon" story.? In the grand sceme of things our love?for the radio stuff is a tiny concern.? I'd like, in a museam setting, to see the "real deal" as much as possible?but?at my house it could be painted pink with purple lace, as long as it works I'm happy!? True they could have done a much better explanation?of work priorites and as far as the?"better than thou" additude, it's entirely possible that I came across that way about radio gear.? Such is often the way when you are dealing with voluenteer groups.? The last thing I?wanted to do is to drag up?the mod no mod, this is how it must be done, deadhorse threads.? I am however all in favor of the good auld balast tube thread now and again!!!
?
John Flood
KB1FQG


>________________________________
>From: Roy Morgan <k1lky at earthlink.net>
>To: ARC-5 List <arc5 at mailman.qth.net>
>Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2011 7:34 PM
>Subject: Re: [ARC5] [Milsurplus] More Moron-ities. This Will Turn Your Stomach
>
>
>On Oct 19, 2011, at 6:20 PM, J. Forster wrote:
>
>> The Collins Foundation had no interest in radio or RADAR gear a? 
>> decade ago.... Glorified truck and bus drivers, IMO.
>
>I was on one of their airport to airport trips a few years ago.? When? 
>we landed, there was an old tottery gentleman peering around the fence? 
>at the gate. Turned out he'd flown the B-17's in theater as a "kid"? 
>and was thrilled nearly to tears to get an impromptu tour of the thing.
>
>The Collings folks are not all bad all the time.
>
>Roy
>
>Roy Morgan
>k1lky at earthlink.net
>K1LKY Since 1958 - Keep 'em Glowing!
>
>
>
>______________________________________________________________
>ARC5 mailing list
>Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/arc5
>Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>Post: mailto:ARC5 at mailman.qth.net
>
>This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>
>

From arc5 at ix.netcom.com  Thu Oct 20 11:47:44 2011
From: arc5 at ix.netcom.com (David Stinson)
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 10:47:44 -0500
Subject: [Milsurplus] CF vs. CAF
In-Reply-To: <1319123992.76167.YahooMailNeo@web84101.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <2651.3a870ee2.3bd0a304@cs.com><50612.12.6.201.2.1319062836.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com><10063DE2-5194-45F5-AC95-7023FF5F8E00@earthlink.net>
	<1319123992.76167.YahooMailNeo@web84101.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <42D6B16665734A26BE80F6BAA5F93AED@DaddyPC>

There seems to be a misunderstanding, born of my 
inadequate communication skills, about which group is what:

I can't say anything negative about Collings Foundation.
The few contacts I have had with them have been cordial.
I talked with some of their people once about exchanging,
straight across, some of their mis-matched equipment 
for some of mine.  They seemed enthusiastic and took my 
contact information.  That was several years ago and they
never got back to me.  I understand that; life interferes with
my plans all the time.  I have less to swap these days, 
but I'd still help them as best I can if they asked.

The people who gave me, personally, a load of condescension
not once but a few times was the so-called 
"Commemorative Air Force."

I don't care if the group walks on water and raises the dead;
if any group's members treat those who are earnestly trying,
at their own expense of money and time, to help them
in a dismissive, arrogant and RUDE way,
that group has serious negative issues that need to be addressed.

73 DE Dave AB5S


From frledda at att.net  Thu Oct 20 12:38:19 2011
From: frledda at att.net (Francesco Ledda)
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 11:38:19 -0500
Subject: [Milsurplus] More Moron-ities.  This Will Turn Your Stomach
In-Reply-To: <50612.12.6.201.2.1319062836.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
References: <2651.3a870ee2.3bd0a304@cs.com>
	<50612.12.6.201.2.1319062836.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
Message-ID: <001201cc8f46$c6121be0$523653a0$@net>

John,

I am one of those "glorified bus driver", but let's forget that title for a
minute.

Now, the pilot job is safety of flight.  The WW2 airplanes are old, spare
parts are becoming rare, engines are very expensive and 130 octane gasoline
is no longer available (inform yourself about the difference in performance
between 130 and 100 octane gasoline).  Organizations like the CAF are
focused on showing flying WW2 airplanes. 

Now, airplane performance is tied their weight. Engine life is pretty much
determined by how they are used; the least amount of time the engine is on
takeoff power, the longer for the engine. Therefore, the sooner the airplane
reaches safe altitude, the sooner the engine can be throttle back.
Furthermore, single engine performance is very dependent on weight (Climbing
with a failed engine).  This is the reason why non flight critical items are
removed.

No pilot with a working brain will load the aircraft with extra useless
weight. In certain circumstances, that extra weight may kill him.  

So, before you start talking, with such arrogance, about a topic that you
don't understand, inform yourself or politely ask questions.

Now, I take offence in being called a Glorified Bus Driver, especially when
said in a degrading way.  I worked my butt off to get my licenses, and I am
very proud of them. 

I don't find writing this email very fun. Please, stop insulting people no
matter if Hams doing radio conversions, bus driver or trash haulers.
Please, grow some social skills, if it is not too late.

Sincerely,

Francesco Ledda 



-----Original Message-----
From: milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net
[mailto:milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of J. Forster
Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2011 5:21 PM
To: WA5CAB at cs.com
Cc: arc5 at mailman.qth.net; milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] More Moron-ities. This Will Turn Your Stomach

The Collins Foundation had no interest in radio or RADAR gear a decade ago.

It was all about the 'planes and pilots, ignoring the reality that without
electronics they could never have found their intended targets or gotten
back home, or gotten rescued at sea. Glorified truck and bus drivers, IMO.

Having completely poisoned the well, they may find a drink hard to get now.

-John

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


> Yep.  That about sums up my one experience with the CAF.
>
> In a message dated 10/19/2011 15:44:06 PM Central Daylight Time,
> kb1fqg at yahoo.com writes:
>> Dave,
>>
>> Reminds me of many years ago when I went out to the Collings foundation
>> in
>> Stow, MA when they were restoring a B-24.  I offered to get the vintage
>> com gear in the radiomans postion up and running. I was even willing to
>> give
>> them a BC-348 and the BC-453, 454, and 455 if needed.  They had no
>> interest, stating the weight was to much to justify extra fuel cost and
>> it might
>> allow them to fit in an extra paying passenger.  Is a running BC-375
>> needed????  probably not but what a thrill it would have been to strap
>> on a pair of
>> bakelite earcrushers and listen to the BC-348 over the drone of the P&W
>> radials while in the radiomans position!  They asked me to clean some
>> metal
>> parts for repainting if I recall.  As much as I wanted to stay, and be
>> involved, they had just popped my ballon! I just said no thanks and went
>> home.
>>
>> John Flood
>> KB1FQG
>>
>>
>> >________________________________
>> >From: David Stinson <arc5 at ix.netcom.com>
>> >To: milsurplus at mailman.qth.net; ARC-5 List <arc5 at mailman.qth.net>
>> >Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2011 4:04 PM
>> >Subject: [Milsurplus] More Moron-ities. This Will Turn Your Stomach
>> >
>> >180740366169
>> >Two clean Brit liasion sets destroyed for some half-a**ed
>> >make-believe "radio room" in what is now a half-a**ed,
>> >make-believe WWII aircraft.
>> >Read the description.
>> >I thought these clowns had learned their lessons about stripping-
>> >out the WWII gear to "save weight" (in an aircraft meant to haul
>> >thousands!)  a couple of decades ago when the event
>> >judges stopped awarding "make believe" restorations like this.
>> >Makes me sick.
>> >D.S.
>
> Robert & Susan Downs - Houston
> wa5cab dot com (Web Store)
> MVPA 9480
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>


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

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html


From arc5 at ix.netcom.com  Thu Oct 20 12:55:52 2011
From: arc5 at ix.netcom.com (David Stinson)
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 11:55:52 -0500
Subject: [Milsurplus] [ARC5] More Moron-ities. This Will Turn YourStomach
In-Reply-To: <001201cc8f46$c6121be0$523653a0$@net>
References: <2651.3a870ee2.3bd0a304@cs.com><50612.12.6.201.2.1319062836.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
	<001201cc8f46$c6121be0$523653a0$@net>
Message-ID: <3767B044A5FB45CAB98CA4AE405A5125@DaddyPC>

Well Francesco,
It looks like all us pots have been calling all us kettles "black,"
because your group feels our group has been rude to you
and we feel yours has been rude to us.

And we're both somewhat right about that...

So tell ya what.... Let's all try to step down off our toes
and see if we can't find some common ground here.
Afterall... what happened to me with the CAF was 
years ago, so maybe attitudes have changed.

I will do my part to be more understanding and tolerant 
of your group and "peacemake" were I can , if you will 
extend to me the same courtesy.  That way at least
two of us will put down our brickbats and take a breath.

Deal?



From frledda at att.net  Thu Oct 20 13:00:15 2011
From: frledda at att.net (Francesco Ledda)
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 12:00:15 -0500
Subject: [Milsurplus] [ARC5] More Moron-ities. This Will Turn YourStomach
In-Reply-To: <3767B044A5FB45CAB98CA4AE405A5125@DaddyPC>
References: <2651.3a870ee2.3bd0a304@cs.com><50612.12.6.201.2.1319062836.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>	<001201cc8f46$c6121be0$523653a0$@net>
	<3767B044A5FB45CAB98CA4AE405A5125@DaddyPC>
Message-ID: <001b01cc8f49$c9e9f780$5dbde680$@net>

I am fine with it. We need to live in peace and enjoy our hobbies. This is
the radio brotherhood.... 

Francesco

-----Original Message-----
From: milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net
[mailto:milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of David Stinson
Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2011 11:56 AM
To: milsurplus at mailman.qth.net; ARC-5 List
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] [ARC5] More Moron-ities. This Will Turn
YourStomach

Well Francesco,
It looks like all us pots have been calling all us kettles "black,"
because your group feels our group has been rude to you
and we feel yours has been rude to us.

And we're both somewhat right about that...

So tell ya what.... Let's all try to step down off our toes
and see if we can't find some common ground here.
Afterall... what happened to me with the CAF was 
years ago, so maybe attitudes have changed.

I will do my part to be more understanding and tolerant 
of your group and "peacemake" were I can , if you will 
extend to me the same courtesy.  That way at least
two of us will put down our brickbats and take a breath.

Deal?


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

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html


From jfor at quikus.com  Thu Oct 20 13:01:59 2011
From: jfor at quikus.com (J. Forster)
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 10:01:59 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] More Moron-ities.  This Will Turn Your Stomach
In-Reply-To: <001201cc8f46$c6121be0$523653a0$@net>
References: <2651.3a870ee2.3bd0a304@cs.com>
	<50612.12.6.201.2.1319062836.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
	<001201cc8f46$c6121be0$523653a0$@net>
Message-ID: <1699.12.6.201.37.1319130119.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>

> John,
>
> I am one of those "glorified bus driver", but let's forget that title for
> a minute.
>
> Now, the pilot job is safety of flight.  The WW2 airplanes are old, spare
> parts are becoming rare, engines are very expensive and 130 octane
> gasoline is no longer available (inform yourself about the difference in
> performance between 130 and 100 octane gasoline).

The only difference with Octane rating is the amount of compression the
gasoline will withstand, before self-igniting. 130 Octane is no more
"powerful" than 90 Octane.

Organizations like the CAF are
> focused on showing flying WW2 airplanes.
>
> Now, airplane performance is tied their weight. Engine life is pretty much
> determined by how they are used; the least amount of time the engine is on
> takeoff power, the longer for the engine. Therefore, the sooner the
> airplane
> reaches safe altitude, the sooner the engine can be throttle back.
> Furthermore, single engine performance is very dependent on weight
> (Climbing
> with a failed engine).  This is the reason why non flight critical items
> are
> removed.

The current show planes carry neither weapons or bomb load, so are
considerably underweight at takeoff, compared to their design loads. A
complete WW II avionics setup weighs less than a single 500 pound bomb.

> No pilot with a working brain will load the aircraft with extra useless
> weight. In certain circumstances, that extra weight may kill him.

Doing silly things, like shortening wings and stunts are a far more likely
cause of disaster.

> So, before you start talking, with such arrogance, about a topic that you
> don't understand, inform yourself or politely ask questions.

OK. What use would the planes have been in WW II w/o electronics?

You forget the primary mission of bombers was to deliver ordinance on
target. That would have been difficult, at best, w/o RADAR and radio aids
to navigation.

Look at the current Preditors and Reapers. Is a pilot necessary?

> Now, I take offence in being called a Glorified Bus Driver, especially
> when
> said in a degrading way.  I worked my butt off to get my licenses, and I
> am very proud of them.

And the original designers, the engineers, that designed and buiilt the
ARC-5s or whatever had no clue as to their profession? And their stuff has
to be "converted" to be useful? A graduate engineer has far more training
that a pilot. Years, not months.

> I don't find writing this email very fun. Please, stop insulting people no
> matter if Hams doing radio conversions, bus driver or trash haulers.
> Please, grow some social skills, if it is not too late.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Francesco Ledda

What made WW II different from previous wars was the advances in
electronics, from RADAR to the Prozimity Fuze to Nav Aids.

What makes current weapons different from WW II stuff is the electronics,
from GPS to 'puters, to multi-spectral imaging.

YMOV,

-John

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




From frledda at att.net  Thu Oct 20 13:14:34 2011
From: frledda at att.net (Francesco Ledda)
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 12:14:34 -0500
Subject: [Milsurplus] More Moron-ities.  This Will Turn Your Stomach
In-Reply-To: <1699.12.6.201.37.1319130119.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
References: <2651.3a870ee2.3bd0a304@cs.com>	<50612.12.6.201.2.1319062836.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>	<001201cc8f46$c6121be0$523653a0$@net>
	<1699.12.6.201.37.1319130119.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
Message-ID: <002601cc8f4b$be4b8040$3ae280c0$@net>

The only difference with Octane rating is the amount of compression the
gasoline will withstand, before self-igniting. 130 Octane is no more
"powerful" than 90 Octane.

Yes, but this means that the pilot cannot boost the supercharger like if he
had 130 octanes and get full takeoff power!!!!!!!!!!!!!  

You just don't know what you don't know!

-----Original Message-----
From: milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net
[mailto:milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of J. Forster
Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2011 12:02 PM
To: Francesco Ledda
Cc: arc5 at mailman.qth.net; milsurplus at mailman.qth.net; wa5cab at cs.com
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] More Moron-ities. This Will Turn Your Stomach

> John,
>
> I am one of those "glorified bus driver", but let's forget that title for
> a minute.
>
> Now, the pilot job is safety of flight.  The WW2 airplanes are old, spare
> parts are becoming rare, engines are very expensive and 130 octane
> gasoline is no longer available (inform yourself about the difference in
> performance between 130 and 100 octane gasoline).

The only difference with Octane rating is the amount of compression the
gasoline will withstand, before self-igniting. 130 Octane is no more
"powerful" than 90 Octane.

Organizations like the CAF are
> focused on showing flying WW2 airplanes.
>
> Now, airplane performance is tied their weight. Engine life is pretty much
> determined by how they are used; the least amount of time the engine is on
> takeoff power, the longer for the engine. Therefore, the sooner the
> airplane
> reaches safe altitude, the sooner the engine can be throttle back.
> Furthermore, single engine performance is very dependent on weight
> (Climbing
> with a failed engine).  This is the reason why non flight critical items
> are
> removed.

The current show planes carry neither weapons or bomb load, so are
considerably underweight at takeoff, compared to their design loads. A
complete WW II avionics setup weighs less than a single 500 pound bomb.

> No pilot with a working brain will load the aircraft with extra useless
> weight. In certain circumstances, that extra weight may kill him.

Doing silly things, like shortening wings and stunts are a far more likely
cause of disaster.

> So, before you start talking, with such arrogance, about a topic that you
> don't understand, inform yourself or politely ask questions.

OK. What use would the planes have been in WW II w/o electronics?

You forget the primary mission of bombers was to deliver ordinance on
target. That would have been difficult, at best, w/o RADAR and radio aids
to navigation.

Look at the current Preditors and Reapers. Is a pilot necessary?

> Now, I take offence in being called a Glorified Bus Driver, especially
> when
> said in a degrading way.  I worked my butt off to get my licenses, and I
> am very proud of them.

And the original designers, the engineers, that designed and buiilt the
ARC-5s or whatever had no clue as to their profession? And their stuff has
to be "converted" to be useful? A graduate engineer has far more training
that a pilot. Years, not months.

> I don't find writing this email very fun. Please, stop insulting people no
> matter if Hams doing radio conversions, bus driver or trash haulers.
> Please, grow some social skills, if it is not too late.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Francesco Ledda

What made WW II different from previous wars was the advances in
electronics, from RADAR to the Prozimity Fuze to Nav Aids.

What makes current weapons different from WW II stuff is the electronics,
from GPS to 'puters, to multi-spectral imaging.

YMOV,

-John

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



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

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html


From ka1kaq at gmail.com  Thu Oct 20 13:15:05 2011
From: ka1kaq at gmail.com (Todd, KA1KAQ)
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 13:15:05 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] More Moron-ities. This Will Turn Your Stomach
In-Reply-To: <001201cc8f46$c6121be0$523653a0$@net>
References: <2651.3a870ee2.3bd0a304@cs.com>
	<50612.12.6.201.2.1319062836.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
	<001201cc8f46$c6121be0$523653a0$@net>
Message-ID: <CANCs6AVvSmGM2UqacwE0WVNqsdGA3JpTr+etrZLk=mWhsvFKtQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 12:38 PM, Francesco Ledda <frledda at att.net> wrote:

> Now, airplane performance is tied their weight. Engine life is pretty much
> determined by how they are used; the least amount of time the engine is on
> takeoff power, the longer for the engine. Therefore, the sooner the airplane
> reaches safe altitude, the sooner the engine can be throttle back.
> Furthermore, single engine performance is very dependent on weight (Climbing
> with a failed engine). ?This is the reason why non flight critical items are
> removed.

The odd thing about the radio side with the Collings Foundation is
that, at least in their B-24 and B-17, the intact radios are indeed
installed, just no cabling the last time I checked. I was a member for
a few years and seem to recall being told that it was just low on
their list of priorities compared to things like maintenance and
airframe repairs.

In the case of the B-24, they actually sent a group to a mountain in
VT where a B-24 cartwheeled into the mountain on a training mission in
WWII, searching for parts. One of the things they found was the armor
plating for one of the pilot's seats, that I had uncovered and dragged
part way down the mountain during a Scout hike in the 70s. The fellow
told me they had cleaned and restored it, then displayed it at their
facility since the added weight was pointless. True enough, we have
plenty of complete, restored warbirds in museums, very few still
flying in comparison.

They also seemed agreeable and interested in having operating examples
of radio installations available for display during their special
events, perhaps full time. My life changed and I moved south, but I'd
bet there's still an opportunity there.

When I flew with them back in the early 90s, it was $300 for a flight.
I'd be surprised if it hadn't gone up considerably since then. As you
say, parts are scarce, fuel is expensive and keeping the planes flying
is the goal of these aircraft organizations. The majority of viewers
see the aircraft flying overhead or sitting on the tarmac. Those who
tour the planes view them, they don't operate the equipment. In the
argument about authenticity, why would having working WWII era radios
rate any higher than functioning .50 cal Brownings?

And the list goes on, from accurate clothing to maps, charts, and so on.

I'll leave it to the airplane folks to present their side as they see
fit, and the radio folks to show their side. I'm just thankful for
anyone still flying them. Anyone who is deeply bothered is free to buy
their own aircraft and outfit it as they see fit. The more, the
merrier. (o:

~ Todd,  KA1KAQ/4

From arc5 at ix.netcom.com  Thu Oct 20 13:26:41 2011
From: arc5 at ix.netcom.com (David Stinson)
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 12:26:41 -0500
Subject: [Milsurplus] [ARC5] More Moron-ities. This Will Turn YourStomach
In-Reply-To: <CANCs6AVvSmGM2UqacwE0WVNqsdGA3JpTr+etrZLk=mWhsvFKtQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <2651.3a870ee2.3bd0a304@cs.com><50612.12.6.201.2.1319062836.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com><001201cc8f46$c6121be0$523653a0$@net>
	<CANCs6AVvSmGM2UqacwE0WVNqsdGA3JpTr+etrZLk=mWhsvFKtQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <68AAD404B511425CAB822DE7154C0862@DaddyPC>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Todd, KA1KAQ" <ka1kaq at gmail.com>

>I'll leave it to the airplane folks to present their side as they see
>fit, and the radio folks to show their side......

As long as we all (including me) stop showing our *back* side ;-)

OK!  I quit.  LOL


From ka1kaq at gmail.com  Thu Oct 20 13:35:35 2011
From: ka1kaq at gmail.com (Todd, KA1KAQ)
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 13:35:35 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] CF vs. CAF
In-Reply-To: <42D6B16665734A26BE80F6BAA5F93AED@DaddyPC>
References: <2651.3a870ee2.3bd0a304@cs.com>
	<50612.12.6.201.2.1319062836.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
	<10063DE2-5194-45F5-AC95-7023FF5F8E00@earthlink.net>
	<1319123992.76167.YahooMailNeo@web84101.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<42D6B16665734A26BE80F6BAA5F93AED@DaddyPC>
Message-ID: <CANCs6AVU6hJDLu7WaLHSKTXjVwqMXVEWWfDwzOxeaWMDmqYVLA@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 11:47 AM, David Stinson <arc5 at ix.netcom.com> wrote:

> The people who gave me, personally, a load of condescension
> not once but a few times was the so-called
> "Commemorative Air Force."

And I can verify the reports of radio gear being dumped because I
heard a couple guys from Harlingen discussing it on the air years ago,
in great detail.

But last I knew, the CAF had several different groups or 'wings' in
different areas. I'd bet they aren't all the same,
personality-or-otherwise.

No one would begrudge you the right to feel as you do from past
experience, Dave. I've been known to hold a grudge myself. It just
seems the better approach moving forward would be to seek out the
newer groups and/or members with more open minds and better attitudes.
Not unlike dealing with the ARRL. Focusing on the ones who don't care
or the hacked up radios serves no useful purpose, and runs the risk of
alienating new blood who would see it as just another cranky old fart
who resents the world. I base this on my own previous attitudes, and
the 'more with honey than vinegar' approach. The folks on these lists
made their minds up long ago.

~ Todd/KAQ

From kk7iz at cox.net  Thu Oct 20 13:43:04 2011
From: kk7iz at cox.net (Lloyd Godsey)
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 10:43:04 -0700
Subject: [Milsurplus] Tubes F/S
Message-ID: <9AA1A6DBC44742118CB4316054138BE3@LloydPC>

Found a pair of NOS NIB RCA 809's.
Pair of tubes, 2 used sockets and 2 used ceramic plate caps
$60.00 for the lot plus shipping.

Thanx
Lloyd Godsey KK7IZ
kk7iz at cox.net
480-620-7145
http://www.lloydsdipsydumpster.com/
http://antiqueradioarchives.com/
Skype: lloyd.godsey


From boeing377 at aol.com  Thu Oct 20 15:46:40 2011
From: boeing377 at aol.com (Boeing377)
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 15:46:40 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] Collings Foundation, my experience was good
Message-ID: <8CE5D781F3E321D-116C-13BE9@webmail-d056.sysops.aol.com>


My experience with the Collings folks was good. They brought their B 17 and B 24 to the World Free Fall Convention at Quincy Illinois about 11 years ago. I paid $350 to jump from the B 17, a favorite WW 2 plane. Right before boarding one of the Collings folks said the FAA was in the process of shutting down B 24 jumps and if I wanted to jump a B 24 this next load was probably my last chance ever. I switched and jumped from the B 24, making sure I was the last man out, exiting through the bomb bay. I may have been the last person to parachute from a B 24. As far as I know they never dropped parachutists from the B 24 again although they do still haul jumpers in the B 17. The B 24 and B 17 flew in formation for the skydiver drops and as I exited the B 24,  I flipped over on my back to watch the last of the human bombs dropping from the B 17. It was an unforgettable sight.

After we boarded the B 24, I was all over the radio gear which included a nice looking BC 375 and BC 348, but they were just inoperative display items, nothing was plugged into them. Our co-pilot was a lot more visually appealing than the wrinkle finish mil surplus boxes. She was a gorgeous blonde Swedish model dressed in tight shorts and a T-shirt who later married the B 24 skipper (a Collings kid). I don't think you'll find many pilots like her flying four engine recip arcraft.

I talked to one of the maintenance crew about plans for getting the radios operating and they said there weren't any immediate plans to do that. They wanted the plane's interior to look authentic but that was about as far as it went. I'd have liked to see operational original radio gear but it's their plane and they get to set their restoration priorities. At least they had some authentic radios installed and thats a lot better than having nothing. They went to great pains to craft good looking dummy machine guns, ammo belts, ammo boxes, etc etc. They were friendly and cordial, without exception. 

It was loud inside during our climb to jump altitude. It made me wonder how WW2 radio ops heard weak sigs using chamois cushioned headphones that really didn't have a great ear seal to shut out engine and wind noise. 

73 
Mark
AFsixIM




On Oct 19, 2011, at 6:20 PM, J. Forster wrote:
>
>> The Collins Foundation had no interest in radio or RADAR gear a? 
>> decade ago.... Glorified truck and bus drivers, IMO.
>
>I was on one of their airport to airport trips a few years ago.? When? 
>we landed, there was an old tottery gentleman peering around the fence? 
>at the gate. Turned out he'd flown the B-17's in theater as a "kid"? 
>and was thrilled nearly to tears to get an impromptu tour of the thing.
>
>The Collings folks are not all bad all the time.
>
>Roy
>
>Roy Morgan
>k1lky at earthlink.net
>K1LKY Since 1958 - Keep 'em Glowing

From bcarling at cfl.rr.com  Thu Oct 20 18:13:10 2011
From: bcarling at cfl.rr.com (Bry Carling)
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 18:13:10 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] [ARC5] More Moron-ities. This Will Turn YourStomach
In-Reply-To: <3767B044A5FB45CAB98CA4AE405A5125@DaddyPC>
References: <2651.3a870ee2.3bd0a304@cs.com>,
	<001201cc8f46$c6121be0$523653a0$@net>,
	<3767B044A5FB45CAB98CA4AE405A5125@DaddyPC>
Message-ID: <4EA09CF6.3424.AD58FB@bcarling.cfl.rr.com>

David - 

I don't see any groups here. I see some peope trying to keep things civil and others 
needing to stop making rude remarks that are uncalled-for.

Defending that by saying it is a matter of groups being rude covers up the fact that it has
only been one, or at most two individuals here who have been carelessly offending the vast 
majority of subscribers; folks who are likely not adherents to the idea that they only belong to 
some sub-group. We're just here to chat about military surplus radios, not to engage in a 
sophomoric pissing contest.

On 20 Oct 2011 at 11:55, David Stinson wrote:

> Well Francesco,
> It looks like all us pots have been calling all us kettles
> "black,"
> because your group feels our group has been rude to you
> and we feel yours has been rude to us.



From arc5 at ix.netcom.com  Thu Oct 20 20:09:06 2011
From: arc5 at ix.netcom.com (David Stinson)
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 19:09:06 -0500
Subject: [Milsurplus] BC-230 / BC-430 Tube Substitutions
Message-ID: <D3D7562456284CB69940BF051ACF594B@DaddyPC>

The BC-230 transmitter (part of SCR-183) 
and the BC-430 transmitter (part of SCR-283)
uses some expensive tubes, so a lot of them sit 
on the "get 'round 'tuit some day" shelf.

Awhile back, I tried substituting cheaper 6AQ5s.

http://home.netcom.com/~arc5/IMG_0934.JPG

Connections:
Triode Pin to 6AQ5 Pin
2 to 5,6  (Plate/Screen)
3 to 7  (Grid)
1 to  2,3  (Heater/Cathode)
4 to 4  (Heater)

The BC-230's four tube fils are wired in series/parrallel,
one RF tube and one MOD tube in each string.
The BC-430's fils are all in series.

I had a BC-430 on the bench.  I wired-up two 
Tungsol 6AQ5s in the RF sockets and jumpered-out
the two modulator sockets, then fed 12 volts to 
the fils.  and 300 volts B+.  The RF stages neutralized
fine and performed well with no problems at all.

Tonight, I put the two substitute 6AQ5 tubes
in the BC-230.  You can't sub just the modulation 
stages or just the RF stages because the fil. currents
for the original tubes vs. 6AQ5 don't balance.  
However,  you can sub one on each side, 
so the VT-52/VT-25 is on one fil. buss 
and the two 6AQ5s are on the other.
I subbed them onto each buss and tested.
The transmitter worked and modulated just fine.
In fact, the 6AQ5 as PA delivered 
a half-watt more power out.
This is pushing a 6AQ5 a little.  
I'm going to try tougher 5763s later.
When I get a chance, I'll build-up two more subs
and go with all four tubes as 6AQ5.

73 DE Dave AB5S.


From arc5 at ix.netcom.com  Thu Oct 20 20:20:57 2011
From: arc5 at ix.netcom.com (David Stinson)
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 19:20:57 -0500
Subject: [Milsurplus] Redux:  BC-375 HV Fuses
Message-ID: <E96512EDF2124BF3A4DC6BD741043735@DaddyPC>

Robert asked about the drill size for the ends of the fuses.
For the late tests, I just tacked the PicoFuses on the outside
of the fuse bodies.  Years ago when I first messed with it,
I drilled the ends out, tacked a pigtail on the Picofuse
and inserted it down the barrel, re-soldering the ends.

Well I finally found the one's I've drilled.
Some of the fuses have powder in them 
which I just tapped out,  but I neglected to mention
(or forgot over the years more likely) others
have a star-shaped ceramic insert in the fuse barrel
with a hole in the center to keep the fuse wire
off the surface of the barrel.  You have to 
tack the pigtail on neatly so it will fit through
the hole.  Here's a photo.  

http://home.netcom.com/~arc5/IMG_0936.JPG

Oh ... Robert:  The drill size is 5/32, 
but anything close works.  

Or you could just tack them on the outside, 
but I don't recommend it.  
Forget yourself one second around 
that exposed 1000V wire and ZZZZZZZZAP!

73 Dave AB5S





From aaf-radio-1 at aafradio.org  Fri Oct 21 09:57:07 2011
From: aaf-radio-1 at aafradio.org (Mike Hanz)
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 09:57:07 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] SCR-625C mine detector help needed
Message-ID: <4EA17A33.2050603@aafradio.org>

Forwarded for an aircraft friend.  He's in White Hall MD.  Is there 
anyone up in that area who could help him?  It's a bit too far for me.

73,
Mike

On 10/20/2011 8:53 AM, John Seidts (sentinelpilot at yahoo.com) wrote:

 > I have an SCR-625C mine detector I am looking to get repaired to 
working condition for field training.  Any ideas on who could do that 
for me?

From RAFANTINI at salisbury.edu  Fri Oct 21 10:43:49 2011
From: RAFANTINI at salisbury.edu (Ray Fantini)
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 10:43:49 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] ARC-73
Message-ID: <2DE6F17E951D824AAE8B8D0BF7579D810DF8B5C0CF@MBX.salisbury.edu>

Anyone have a parts ARC-51 or ARC-73 transmitter? I am looking for the DC to DC converter section from one of those radios for a project I am working on.
Ray Fantini
KA3EKH


From kk5f at earthlink.net  Fri Oct 21 12:39:04 2011
From: kk5f at earthlink.net (Mike Morrow)
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 11:39:04 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [Milsurplus] [ARC5] BC-230 / BC-430 Tube Substitutions
Message-ID: <33205101.1319215144613.JavaMail.root@mswamui-cedar.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

Dave wrote:

> I'm going to try tougher 5763s later.

I was wondering if you had experimented with the 5763.  I made several simple
CW transmitters 40 years ago using the 5763 and it has been one of my favorite
tubes ever since.  And it is often found NIB, dirt cheap.

I would have loved to see a version of the 5763 with a plate cap connection.
Transmitting tubes just don't look right (post-1937) without that cap.

Mike / KK5F 


From ianmwilson73 at gmail.com  Fri Oct 21 13:04:19 2011
From: ianmwilson73 at gmail.com (Ian Wilson)
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 10:04:19 -0700
Subject: [Milsurplus] [ARC5] BC-230 / BC-430 Tube Substitutions
In-Reply-To: <33205101.1319215144613.JavaMail.root@mswamui-cedar.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
References: <33205101.1319215144613.JavaMail.root@mswamui-cedar.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <CAEz8jcT6mn47oa7b7NH=_FspH=GyO25hjrqcAWVA-t0pG7O=Rw@mail.gmail.com>

There are some Compactron mobile transmitter tubes
that have the top cap. 8950 and friends, I think.

73, ian K3IMW

On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 9:39 AM, Mike Morrow <kk5f at earthlink.net> wrote:

> Dave wrote:
>
> > I'm going to try tougher 5763s later.
>
> I was wondering if you had experimented with the 5763.  I made several
> simple
> CW transmitters 40 years ago using the 5763 and it has been one of my
> favorite
> tubes ever since.  And it is often found NIB, dirt cheap.
>
> I would have loved to see a version of the 5763 with a plate cap
> connection.
> Transmitting tubes just don't look right (post-1937) without that cap.
>
> Mike / KK5F
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> ARC5 mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/arc5
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:ARC5 at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>

From bcarling at cfl.rr.com  Fri Oct 21 13:23:37 2011
From: bcarling at cfl.rr.com (=?utf-8?B?YmNhcmxpbmdAY2ZsLnJyLmNvbQ==?=)
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 13:23:37 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus]
	=?utf-8?q?=5BARC5=5D_BC-230_/_BC-430_Tube_Substituti?=
	=?utf-8?q?ons?=
Message-ID: <21.02.15901.99AA1AE4@cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com>

Think 2E26

Bry Carling

Sent from myTouch 4G, please excuse my brevity.



----- Reply message -----
From: "Ian Wilson" <ianmwilson73 at gmail.com>
To: "Mike Morrow" <kk5f at arrl.net>
Cc: "ARC-5 List" <arc5 at mailman.qth.net>, <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
Subject: [Milsurplus] [ARC5] BC-230 / BC-430 Tube Substitutions
Date: Fri, Oct 21, 2011 1:04 pm


There are some Compactron mobile transmitter tubes
that have the top cap. 8950 and friends, I think.

73, ian K3IMW

On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 9:39 AM, Mike Morrow <kk5f at earthlink.net> wrote:

> Dave wrote:
>
> > I'm going to try tougher 5763s later.
>
> I was wondering if you had experimented with the 5763.  I made several
> simple
> CW transmitters 40 years ago using the 5763 and it has been one of my
> favorite
> tubes ever since.  And it is often found NIB, dirt cheap.
>
> I would have loved to see a version of the 5763 with a plate cap
> connection.
> Transmitting tubes just don't look right (post-1937) without that cap.
>
> Mike / KK5F
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> ARC5 mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/arc5
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:ARC5 at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
______________________________________________________________
Milsurplus mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

From kk5f at earthlink.net  Fri Oct 21 17:11:53 2011
From: kk5f at earthlink.net (Mike Morrow)
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 17:11:53 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] More Moron-ities.
Message-ID: <20642834.1319231513639.JavaMail.root@mswamui-andean.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

> ...they do quite a lot and i'm sure keeping these warbirds airworthy in no
> simple task.

The ideal *goal* of military aircraft restoration would be represented by the
following:

"A resurrected original flight crew and maintenance crew coming on board the
restored aircraft should see no significant configuration differences from what
they experienced during wartime service (outside the obviously required simulation
of the weapons load, plus whatever is needed to meet FAA requirements)."

If the aircraft won't be flying, of course the FAA part doesn't exist.

Only that philosophy does service to the history of that type of aircraft.

Today it would be simple to configure a small and portable civil air avionics
package that could be completely removed (or at least covered) for aircraft
ground display.

This would require heroic effort, but most (not all) of the vintage aircraft
organizations seem to have little interest other than making only the *outside*
of an aircraft look "kinda-like" what old pictures show.  Not making the effort
now only means that it will never be done, because it won't get easier in the 
future.

I do not believe there is much value to making the original avionics *operable* in
these aircraft.  It is impossible to operate old aircraft electronics without
experiencing episodic component failure.  That happened even when equipment was new.
I doubt even the most conscientious of vintage aircraft restorers and operators have
a process that monitors the "display" equipment for failure (while a shorted bypass
capacitor slows the dynamotor and cooks a voltage drop resistor inside), immediately
removes it from service for repairs, and then uses exact replacements of failed
components so that the equipment doesn't become a mix of 2011 components next to 1944
components.  Lacking a program to, at minimum, monitor and quickly shutdown failed
display equipment ensures that the usage period of any operating installation will
be short.  It might as well be zero to preserve the originality of the equipment. 

Mike / KK5F

From arc5 at ix.netcom.com  Fri Oct 21 17:18:47 2011
From: arc5 at ix.netcom.com (David Stinson)
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 16:18:47 -0500
Subject: [Milsurplus] [ARC5]  BC-230 / BC-430 Tube Substitutions
In-Reply-To: <21.02.15901.99AA1AE4@cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com>
References: <21.02.15901.99AA1AE4@cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com>
Message-ID: <EE39DA5650EA4ABEAE5DAB4590A6156D@DaddyPC>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: <bcarling at cfl.rr.com>
Subject: Re: [ARC5][Milsurplus] BC-230 / BC-430 Tube Substitutions


> Think 2E26

Intriguing thought, Bry.
Don't think I have four of them, though.
Will do some digging.


From military1944 at aol.com  Fri Oct 21 17:37:10 2011
From: military1944 at aol.com (BenG4BXD)
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 17:37:10 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] More Moron-ities.
In-Reply-To: <20642834.1319231513639.JavaMail.root@mswamui-andean.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
References: <20642834.1319231513639.JavaMail.root@mswamui-andean.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <8CE5E50B907B3F7-18B4-33E18@webmail-d130.sysops.aol.com>

.The ideal *goal* of military aircraft restoration would be represented 
by thefollowing:"A resurrected original flight crew and maintenance 
crew coming on board therestored aircraft should see no significant 
configuration differences from whatthey experienced during wartime 
service (outside the obviously required simulationof the weapons load, 
plus whatever is needed to meet FAA requirements)."If the aircraft 
won't be flying, of course the FAA part doesn't exist
-----------------------------------------------


Great but.................. across the pond......

Big local aircraft museum here. Main man asked by ex volunteer if a 
coming visitor from Oz, also museum manager down under, could look 
inside one of the a/c as he was building replica.

Told by main man that 'no', we could not, they didn't want the foot 
fall, or wear and tear of visitors inside the a/c, as they were

'preserving the a/c for posterity and future generations'. !

Not sure how these future generations are ever going to see the inside 
of the a/c though as they don't let people inside.  Still, nice to know 
how our donation money is being spent.

Ben. 

From n4fs at eozinc.com  Fri Oct 21 18:10:29 2011
From: n4fs at eozinc.com (Mike Feher)
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 18:10:29 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] [ARC5]  BC-230 / BC-430 Tube Substitutions
In-Reply-To: <EE39DA5650EA4ABEAE5DAB4590A6156D@DaddyPC>
References: <21.02.15901.99AA1AE4@cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com>
	<EE39DA5650EA4ABEAE5DAB4590A6156D@DaddyPC>
Message-ID: <0a5a01cc903e$410265b0$c3073110$@eozinc.com>

I will gladly send you a bunch if you send me your address off list. 73 -
Mike

Mike B. Feher, N4FS
89 Arnold Blvd.
Howell, NJ, 07731
732-886-5960 


-----Original Message-----
From: milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net
[mailto:milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of David Stinson
Sent: Friday, October 21, 2011 5:19 PM
To: milsurplus at mailman.qth.net; ARC-5 List
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] [ARC5] BC-230 / BC-430 Tube Substitutions


----- Original Message ----- 
From: <bcarling at cfl.rr.com>
Subject: Re: [ARC5][Milsurplus] BC-230 / BC-430 Tube Substitutions


> Think 2E26

Intriguing thought, Bry.
Don't think I have four of them, though.
Will do some digging.

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

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html


From kk5f at earthlink.net  Fri Oct 21 21:07:01 2011
From: kk5f at earthlink.net (Mike Morrow)
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 21:07:01 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] How I Use an LM - Final Comment
Message-ID: <7709041.1319245621571.JavaMail.root@elwamui-huard.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

> John, you, Mike M, Meir and a few others have such a myopic view of the
> world it's surprising you're not considered legally blind.

Thank you.  But I haven't been part of this conversation since it transmogrified.  

With respect to vision problems, read my posting again.  My posting made several
days ago discussed ONLY the HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE of HAM USE of military gear,
versus that of the MILITARY'S USE.  Let me clarify that point: 

(1) If one is assembling a history of ham radio in the post-WWII era, then certainly
the ham use is most important.  Previous development and military use are irrelevant
except only to the extent that it could reveal characteristics that the ham may
encounter.

(2) If one is assembling a history of military radio in the WWII era, then certainly
the development and military use are most important.  Subsequent ham use is irrelevant
because that had not been part of the original equipment design basis.

Item (1) and (2) are two VERY different topics.  Many who are greatly interested in
one will be much less so in the other.  So, does one write one book or two?  If one
pretends these subjects are the same or related, then ham use is being equated with
military use by association.  I suggest that assumes a little too much heroism and
achievement for ham use.  Am I unreasonable?

I appreciate those who have assembled and operated vintage equipment in accurate
configuration, as it was employed in the military environment.  IMHO, that is the only
good reason for operating this gear *today*...any cheap used solid-state ham rig
made in the last 35 years outperforms by orders of magnitude.  I haven't operated my
WWII gear since the last time I fired up one of my AN/ARC-2 sets (33 years ago),
because I haven't had access to exact replacements save by cannibalization for parts
that frequently fail.  I do operate, for example, a 13-tube 55-year-old AN/PRC-6, and
I am working on a BC-611-F, because I can get exact replacements for anything *likely*
to fail.  That's what makes ALL the difference to me, but I do not expect others to
share that outlook.

I appreciate even more those including yourself and the several other well-recognized
names who have researched and published by book, magazine, web, or list posting their
technical and historical findings to the great benefit of myself in particular.  That
sort of information has always been much more costly in terms of expense, effort,
difficulty, and technical expertise than is often required of usuage of the equipment
itself. 

Owners of any equipment have the right to do whatever is desired, even if that involves
putting a SO-239 on a T-17/ARC-5, gutting a T1154/R1155 for a fake aircraft "restoration",
or installing a 5763 transmitter on the dynamotor skirt of a RAV/CBY-46107 so it can be
a 30m transceiver.  I have the right only to an opinion. :-)

Mike / KK5F

From jcoward5452 at aol.com  Fri Oct 21 22:27:00 2011
From: jcoward5452 at aol.com (jcoward5452 at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 22:27:00 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] [ARC5] Redux:  BC-375 HV Fuses
In-Reply-To: <E96512EDF2124BF3A4DC6BD741043735@DaddyPC>
References: <E96512EDF2124BF3A4DC6BD741043735@DaddyPC>
Message-ID: <8CE5E793694FCAA-1D54-369F8@webmail-m169.sysops.aol.com>


Dave and Groups,
 Just a word here on Picofuse fuses.
 I use Picofuse fuses on the VXI instruments I build for the folks I work for.They are not in high voltage circuits; max is 24V DC and the fuse current rating is 5 amps. However, occasionally I'll have a fuse open at initial turn on of a new production unit. I then unplug all modules and components from the VXI p/s - interface pcb, replace the fuse and power up. It work. Then, one by one I plug back in all the modules and pcb's cycling the power each time. It works each time. In the end I have a working unit with no cause of fuse failure determined.
 So, be aware that Picofuse fuses can and do on occasion fail prematurely.
 My $.02
             Jay KE6PPF



-----Original Message-----
From: David Stinson <arc5 at ix.netcom.com>
To: milsurplus <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>; ARC-5 List <arc5 at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Thu, Oct 20, 2011 5:21 pm
Subject: [ARC5] Redux: BC-375 HV Fuses


Robert asked about the drill size for the ends of the fuses.
or the late tests, I just tacked the PicoFuses on the outside
f the fuse bodies.  Years ago when I first messed with it,
 drilled the ends out, tacked a pigtail on the Picofuse
nd inserted it down the barrel, re-soldering the ends.
Well I finally found the one's I've drilled.
ome of the fuses have powder in them 
hich I just tapped out,  but I neglected to mention
or forgot over the years more likely) others
ave a star-shaped ceramic insert in the fuse barrel
ith a hole in the center to keep the fuse wire
ff the surface of the barrel.  You have to 
ack the pigtail on neatly so it will fit through
he hole.  Here's a photo.  
http://home.netcom.com/~arc5/IMG_0936.JPG
Oh ... Robert:  The drill size is 5/32, 
ut anything close works.  
Or you could just tack them on the outside, 
ut I don't recommend it.  
orget yourself one second around 
hat exposed 1000V wire and ZZZZZZZZAP!
73 Dave AB5S


_____________________________________________________________
RC5 mailing list
ome: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/arc5
elp: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
ost: mailto:ARC5 at mailman.qth.net
This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
lease help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html


From WA5CAB at cs.com  Sat Oct 22 00:42:17 2011
From: WA5CAB at cs.com (WA5CAB at cs.com)
Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2011 00:42:17 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] New leather handles for BC-620, 659,
	et al again available.
Message-ID: <1353e.26f2064d.3bd3a3a9@cs.com>

I finally got our contractor to answer up and do another run of the leather 
handles for the BC-620, BC-659, PE-97, PE-117, PE-120, CS-79, RA-120 and 
BC-1306.  Price is $24.00 each plus shipping.  They are just like the 
originals except in two cases.  The originals by now are all medium to dark brown.  
The new ones are very light tan which in 60 years will turn medium to dark 
brown.  The screw posts are the proper length so that the screw threads are 
masked by the post and will not cut the leather.

Robert Downs - Houston
wa5cab dot com (Web Store)
MVPA 9480

From whitaker at pa.net  Sat Oct 22 10:04:45 2011
From: whitaker at pa.net (C.Whitaker)
Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2011 10:04:45 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] [ARC5] BC-230 / BC-430 Tube Substitutions
In-Reply-To: <21.02.15901.99AA1AE4@cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com>
References: <21.02.15901.99AA1AE4@cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com>
Message-ID: <4EA2CD7D.9080006@pa.net>

de WB2CPN
My Stancor 203A 10-Mtr mobile transmitter used
a 2E26 in it.  That was 1950.  We had a good sized
mobile net around Wash DC.
73  Clete


On 10/21/2011 1:23 PM, bcarling at cfl.rr.com wrote:
> Think 2E26
>
> Bry Carling
>
> Sent from myTouch 4G, please excuse my brevity.
>
>
>
> ----- Reply message -----
> From: "Ian Wilson"<ianmwilson73 at gmail.com>
> To: "Mike Morrow"<kk5f at arrl.net>
> Cc: "ARC-5 List"<arc5 at mailman.qth.net>,<milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
> Subject: [Milsurplus] [ARC5] BC-230 / BC-430 Tube Substitutions
> Date: Fri, Oct 21, 2011 1:04 pm
>
>
> There are some Compactron mobile transmitter tubes
> that have the top cap. 8950 and friends, I think.
>
> 73, ian K3IMW
>
> On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 9:39 AM, Mike Morrow<kk5f at earthlink.net>  wrote:
>
>> Dave wrote:
>>
>>> I'm going to try tougher 5763s later.
>> I was wondering if you had experimented with the 5763.  I made several
>> simple
>> CW transmitters 40 years ago using the 5763 and it has been one of my
>> favorite
>> tubes ever since.  And it is often found NIB, dirt cheap.
>>
>> I would have loved to see a version of the 5763 with a plate cap
>> connection.
>> Transmitting tubes just don't look right (post-1937) without that cap.
>>
>> Mike / KK5F
>>
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> ARC5 mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/arc5
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:ARC5 at mailman.qth.net
>>
>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>


From robert.h.goff at gmail.com  Sun Oct 23 00:04:24 2011
From: robert.h.goff at gmail.com (Robert Goff)
Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2011 21:04:24 -0700
Subject: [Milsurplus] FS: R-392, T-195 et al.
Message-ID: <CAF6Vb55qR7zDqqAfweB4zUqyKw_cMKZDb27JBsQDmBp54YtYdQ@mail.gmail.com>

I have a GRC-19 that is surplus to my needs.  Both receiver and
transmitter work well.  The R-392 is a Philco unit, transmitter is a
T-195B with the solid-state power supplies.

I can supply the 4-pin power connector for the T-195 as well as the
TX-RX interconnect cable.

$400 for everything-if interested I can also throw in the MD-203,
junction box and CV-278 to make most of a GRC-46. (Can't help with the
TT machines-I'd like to find a pair of those myself.)

Shipping for the transmitter would be expensive, but I can probably
deliver or meet anywhere in WA-OR-No. Cal.

Thanks,
Robert
W7MKA

From w4ron at carolina.rr.com  Sun Oct 23 05:29:54 2011
From: w4ron at carolina.rr.com (w4ron at carolina.rr.com)
Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2011 5:29:54 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] new addition to the Charlotte Symposium
Message-ID: <20111023092955.KJLMI.81705.root@cdptpa-web16-z01>

Check out the latest updates to the Speakers list for
the 2012 Charlotte International Cryptologic Symposium;

Dates March 22, 23, 24 - 2012

Ron Lawrence will open the Crypto Symposium with a short talk about all the events going on in the hotel and about radio collecting and how this came about.

The line up of speakers continues: New additions :

Dr. Nicholas Gessler Ph.D., Research Associate, Information Science & Information Studies, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina. Link to Nick's Website: ..cryptology.htm

Nick will be bringing the following cryptologic items:
Swiss: NEMA
Soviet: Fialka
Seimens "Cypher Scrambling Machine" M-190 with T-100Z
Kryha
Joseph Grassi's "CryptoCode" machine

Swedish: Kryapp 101, Kryapp 301

Hebern Single Rotor machine
M-209, CSP-1500
Cook Cryptograph
Hagelin C-52, CX-52, BC-543, CD-57
Various burst encoders
British SYKO strip cipher
US Navy CSP-845 strip cipher
US Army M-138-A strip cipher

M-94s
Kripto System Beyer
Variety of rotors: Enigma, Fialka, various other Soviet models.
Variety of disks: Nicolas Bion, Cosovo, Heliograph, GRA-71
Variety of slide rules: US Navy CSP-1756,
West German pseudo-random key generator
Variety of Soviet key guns.
Rowlett papers...
Various codebooks
"Green 33" key-word-in-context printout
Grille: German "Rasterschlussel Bild"

Abstract: We will begin with some of the earliest cryptologic devices known, the disk ciphers. You are probably familiar with them as the Radio Orphan Annie, Captain Midnight and Dick Tracy decoders or the paper disks that once adorned the backs of cereal boxes.
The ancient books on secret messages, dating from the 15th Century, carried simmilar illustrations, some even with working cipher disks, paper circles pivoting on silk threads.
We will look at some of the early writings of Trimethius, Alberti, Bellaso and Vigenere to understand not just the basics of cryptology, but also the complications that evolved that led to the highly sophisticated mechanical, electromechanical and electronic methods that other speakers will elaborate upon.
We will look at what might be the earliest known (non-paper) cipher device: a silver disk made by Nicolas Bion, instrument-maker for King Louis XIV of France, whose chief cryptographer was Antoine Rossignol, the founder of the famous cabinet noir at Versailles. Old technologies never quite die, and so we'll conclude with some examples as recent as Kosovo.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 Bio: Debbie Anderson, daughter of Joe Desch the man who designed the US Navy Cryptanalytic Bombe, is speaking and showing the documentary :
"The Dayton Codebreakers"

A documentary film, Dayton Codebreakers began airing on public television stations throughout the country April 2, 2006.

The film tells the story of Joseph Desch, NCR engineer, and a top secret codebreaking operations in Dayton during WWII. By Debbie Anderson, (Desch) 

Debbie recounted that this photo of her father was taken 15 July 1943, the day we know Alan Turing was at NCR.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 	

Bio: John Alexander a collector from the UK:

Will be speaking and offering some views of his Crypto equipment.

For 16 years I was a local police officer with Leicestershire Constabulary. After that I went back to University and trained as a school teacher.

About 18 years ago I began collecting Cipher Systems. These are fascinating in their engineering and use. To open up some rare old machine and get a blast of oil, grease and metal is wonderful. However, at no time in my working life have I ever had access to / use of such systems.

>From 2003 to 2011 I had an exhibition at Bletchley Park as 'Enigma and Friends' where I set out to put Enigma into context alongside other systems from the 20th Century.

As a rule of thumb, I consider Enigma models (there are so many) as being in use circa 1920 to 1980 - so there are plenty of contemporary systems to find. Some I will never be permitted access to and this is quite correct. I do what I can.

Regards,

John Alexander
Llb Hons. BSc Hons .......

John Alexander was a major organizer of the Enigma Reunion at Bletchley Park England in 2009. 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Bio: Richard Brisson: Canada,

Richard Brisson is a graduate from the University of Ottawa
(B.Sc. Math-Physics in 1978 and M.Sc Systems Science in 1980.
Upon graduation, he was hired by the Communications Security Establishment Canada (CSEC) from which he recently retired. His career at CSEC largely involved duties that encompassed various fields of Mathematics and Computer Science - he is also a graduate of NSA's 3-year Cryptologic Mathematics Program. Over the last 20 years, he has been collecting vintage cryptographic and clandestine artifacts dating up to and including the Cold War.

His career at CSEC largely involved duties that encompassed various fields of Mathematics and Computer Science - he is also a graduate of NSA's 3-year Cryptologic Mathematics Program. Over the last 20 years, he has been collecting vintage cryptographic and clandestine artifacts dating up to and including the Cold War.
He has had a number of partnerships in the display of artifacts including the Diefenbunker (Cold War Bunker in Ottawa), National Museum of Science and Technology (in Ottawa), and the National Cryptologic Museum at Fort Meade.

Richard will be offering these talks during the symposium:

a) Developing a Proof-of-Concept Small-Scale Museum on Cryptology and Espionage

b) A Snapshot of Canada and the Cryptologic History - Yardley, Gouzenko, Tutte.

c) Cryptologic Museology in Canada - War Museum, Military Communications and Electronics Museum - RCMP, CSIS, CSEC

d) Cryptologic Toys Exhibit at the National Cryptologic Museum

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 	

Bio: Jim Oram of enigma-replica.com will be speaking on:
" Restoration techniques of the Enigma"

Jim will present the "Bletchley Park 70th Enigma Reunion" video made on his 2009 trip the Bletchley.
* 	Inside Bletchley Park itself, with the historical features. 	 
* 	The Turing Bombe in operation, with inside views. 	 
* 	The Colossus Mark II, in operation, with all inside views of 2500 tubes and     special cooling system. 	 
* 	The Turing Memorial . 	 
* 	Views of the 'HUTS' . 	 
* 	The Lancaster Bomber flyover . 	 

This 35 minute video is all about Bletchley Park and the return of Codebreaking Veterans including Mavis Lever - the young girl who broke the Italian Enigma cipher which led to the battle of Cape MataPan in March 1941. 
The session includes showing of a presentation on restoration process.

Jim, photo taken at NCM

BletchleyBletchley Park Video by.... Jim Oram : 35 min

Video includes Tony Sale and Colossus operating
A01806/bac/44E A1214 ~Italian Navy ~1932  

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 	

Bio: Jerry McCarthy - United Kingdom

Jerry's day job is to write software, in areas such as cryptography and internationalization, for a global computing company.
Jerry is not rich enough to be a full-time cryptocollector, but is interested in crypto simulation techniques, which allow virtual acquisition of crypto hardware without needing to find the space to store it. Jerry's house is definitely not big enough for a Colossus!

Computerized simulation techniques of various Crypto systems.

He will discuss Zygalski sheets, an early Polish method of cracking the Enigma, a simulator for the 3-rotor Enigma, and a simulator for the SZ42/Tunny machine. It must be emphasized that these simulators are by no means the only ones available; in particular, there are many fine simulators for Enigma machines which can be found on line.

The simulators to be discussed, and demonstrated later on during the symposium, have been written to be somewhat educational; they show such things as how the wiring changes as the rotors of an Enigma rotate, and how the math of the SZ42/Tunny machine works.

Also to be discussed and demonstrated will be a simulator for the Fialka (a very interesting Russian Enigma-like) machine, which was written by Mr V.V. Chernov of Ukraine; the discussion and demonstration of this simulator take place with Mr Chernov's permission. 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

NEW ADDITION FROM THE NSA/CSS

Dr. David Hatch Senior Historian of NSA's Center for Cryptologic History and Bill Williams have confirmed and all the arrangements are in place for the display of a SIGABA Machine at the Charlotte International Cryptologic Symposium.

See the SIGABA machine at the Symposium!

SIGABA, a US cipher machine based on the rotor principle was developed in the late 1930s as a combined effort of the US Army and Navy.

At the time it was considered a superior cryptomachine, intended to keep high-level communications absolutely secure. It was so reliable that it was used throughout the 1950s, the KL7 replaced it.

As far as it is known, SIGABA was never broken

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 	

Bio: Ron Lawrence welcome and introductions.

Ron Lawrence w4ron is President of the Carolinas Chapter of the
Antique Wireless Association and also Chairman of their annual
conference "Antique Radio Charlotte" for more than 25 years.
He has been a antique radio collector for more than 40 years
having bought his first old radio while still in high school.
He was trained in US Air Force Crypto maintenance in the
early 70s.
He's been a Ham Radio operator for just over 20 years.
He got interested in Enigma machines after meeting Jim Oram
when they both worked for the same company.
He assisted Jim in the restoration of A17105 for the National
Cryptologic Museum.
He got the idea for hosting a meeting of crypto collectors
and historians during "Antique Radio Charlotte" after the
subject of having a U.S. Crypto conference was discussed on the Crypto Collectors YahooGroup email reflector.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Start making your plans NOW, the conference registration page
has all the information you'll need to get your pre-registrations
in and save a few bucks over the at the door price.
http://www.cc-awa.org/Registration-2012.html 

Th Symposium will be a "conference within a conference"
It will be part of Antique Radio Charlotte, one registration
will give you admission to all parts of both events.
This will truly be a historic event. DON'T MISS IT!!!





--
73, RON w4ron
http://radioheaven.homestead.com/menu.html
2012 Charlotte Antique Radio Conference
http://antiqueradiocharlotte.homestead.com/ 
My YouTUBE channel
http://www.youtube.com/user/w4ron


From COURYHOUSE at aol.com  Sun Oct 23 06:26:52 2011
From: COURYHOUSE at aol.com (COURYHOUSE at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2011 06:26:52 EDT
Subject: [Milsurplus] The Ed Shape KF7RWW ATV gathering project for the
	communication museum!
Message-ID: <3866e.2fa7c0ce.3bd545ec@aol.com>

 
A moth ago I got my General class  Amateur Radio License as a  few of you 
know.
 
As A kid could have passed the theory portion in 6th  grade  but was 
totally  Morse code dyslectic... so  I spent my  time  helping other people build 
and fix things...  Time passed and    eons later  well   the  code  
requirement went away  so... I finally got my license. Next month I may take a stab 
at the Extra test  as well.
 
We have always had a display of Amateur  Radio equipment here  at the 
museum ... 1kw  spark transmitter,  Collins KWS1   and  lots of  other  Ham and 
SWL gear and the library is pretty  full too!
 
 
There was one big gap,  with is the ATV display  we are  now building.  
Some of it was already  on  the shelf like CONAR  Cameras and  some of the 
older  CCTV stuff Hams   adapted..
 
Even some nice photo of converted surplus gear such as this one we  bought 
the negatives of.
if anyone has this  rig  we want it!  ( or a  similar  rework)
(PLEASE FORWARD THIS TO OTHER LISTS YOU MIGHT BELONG  TO)
 

W6UZO Amateur Radio Television 
 (http://www.smecc.org/video/am-television1.jpg)  
(http://www.smecc.org/video/w6uzo.jpg)  

Please can you tell us more about this fellow and  his camera? 
Note the 'creative' use of military surplus parts and  cabinetry to build 
this camera..  Kudos to this pioneer! 
WAS MENTIONED THAT THEY WERE TAKEN IN THE WENTSWORTH STORE IN  THE 
WESTCHESTER DISTRICT OF LOS ANGELES 
 (http://www.smecc.org/video/wpe3gm5i8fm5f.gif)  

so... there you have it!  
Looking to  amass a groups of  equipment  that   does a good timeline.... 
looking to add more to the   museum's library... 
BUT!  Also  would be  fin to put  some  of it on the air!  

The  idea has been suggested to me about a museum  active  amateur  
station.... this  might be   fun! 
Any.. read on... drop me a note off list.
 
Ed#
 
 here is  what we are looking  for the  ATV display.
both the physical one in the building and the  online  pages...
-----------------------------------------------
 
we need photos, early catalog issues and magazines.
 
Also:
Posters
coil kits
 
First complete ATV cameras and  tx /rx  equipment.
 
other suggestions welcome!
 
These were be  for a physical display plus an added  section  to the 
reference library we have and also add  material to  the SMECC website.
 
 
Please feel free to forward this  letter to  others with  interest in the 
history of  ATV
 
Thanks,

Ed Sharpe, Archivist for  SMECC 
KF7RWW

See the Museum's Web Site at _www.smecc.org_ (http://www.smecc.org/) 

We  are always looking for items to add to the museum's display and ref. 
library -  please advise if you have anything we can use.

Coury House /  SMECC
5802 W. Palmaire Ave. Phone 623-435-1522
Glendale Az 85301  USA
=================================================================



From wrcromwell at gmail.com  Sun Oct 23 19:06:48 2011
From: wrcromwell at gmail.com (Bill Cromwell)
Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2011 19:06:48 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] frequency meter FR-114 A/U available
Message-ID: <1319411208.1935.1.camel@lancelot>

Hi,

I have a Frequency Meter FR-114 A/U here that I am never, ever going to
use again. I am hoping this unit can find a good home somewhere. I am
not going to bother myself about an eBay listing or any of that
foolishness. If I can't find somebody who wants it enough to pay for the
shipping (or come and get it) I'll use it as a parts mule even though
most of the parts (vacuum tube numeric displays, etc) won't really be of
any use. If I can't find a home for the unit as-is soon I will part it
out and maybe some people will need parts to keep their own meter
running.

It's a big, heavy frequency counter (about 1 mc) with triggers, one
shots, and period measurements that is all vacuum tube technology (for
those who didn't know). If you know anybody who is not on the list and
might be interested by all means hook us up. Anybody who IS interested
please email me off list and state your case (what are you gonna do with
it?). I can part it out without any packing/shipping hassles at all. If
you want to trade something for it think small, think QRP, think home
brewing materials both vacuum and solid state. But even without trade
fodder I will still send it away.

I have tried a more conventional sale effort in the past but getting to
the shipping had interested people getting shy and kicking some sand
with their toe, etc. So I'm listing it here and if nothing happens this
time it will disappear into the parts bins and the scrap yard. To sum
up...it's free to a good home for the cost of getting it there. It
doesn't have any real value any more as a bench instrument. Any little
parts n stuff you wanna send me is just icing on the cake.

73,

Bill  KU8H


From arc5 at ix.netcom.com  Sun Oct 23 19:35:58 2011
From: arc5 at ix.netcom.com (David Stinson)
Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2011 18:35:58 -0500
Subject: [Milsurplus] Ten Mtr FM Calling Freq?
Message-ID: <8B79104E0FB6452AB62710C62F323494@DaddyPC>

Is 29.6 still the 10 mtr FM calling freq?
Know of anyone regularly using mil equipment there?


From al at ar88.net  Sun Oct 23 20:10:55 2011
From: al at ar88.net (Al Klase)
Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2011 20:10:55 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] Ten Mtr FM Calling Freq?
In-Reply-To: <8B79104E0FB6452AB62710C62F323494@DaddyPC>
References: <8B79104E0FB6452AB62710C62F323494@DaddyPC>
Message-ID: <4EA4AD0F.80807@ar88.net>

Dave,

That is my understanding.

We used 29.6 for military (wide band) FM at the recent MRCA meet in 
Pennsylvania.  I don't know if any of the guys are trying to work skip, 
but it seems like a reasonable place to start.

Got your RT-524 on the "RED FLAG" channels?

Al

On 10/23/2011 7:35 PM, David Stinson wrote:
> Is 29.6 still the 10 mtr FM calling freq?
> Know of anyone regularly using mil equipment there?
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

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



From kd7jyk at earthlink.net  Sun Oct 23 20:29:52 2011
From: kd7jyk at earthlink.net (KD7JYK DM09)
Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2011 17:29:52 -0700
Subject: [Milsurplus] Ten Mtr FM Calling Freq?
References: <8B79104E0FB6452AB62710C62F323494@DaddyPC>
	<4EA4AD0F.80807@ar88.net>
Message-ID: <008101cc91e4$2b329cd0$42a1f604@mainframe>

: We used 29.6 for military (wide band) FM at the recent MRCA meet in 
: Pennsylvania.  I don't know if any of the guys are trying to work skip, 
: but it seems like a reasonable place to start.

I hear a lot on that freq.

Kurt

From w7qho at aol.com  Sun Oct 23 20:44:36 2011
From: w7qho at aol.com (mac)
Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2011 17:44:36 -0700
Subject: [Milsurplus] Ten Mtr FM Calling Freq?
In-Reply-To: <4EA4AD0F.80807@ar88.net>
References: <8B79104E0FB6452AB62710C62F323494@DaddyPC>
	<4EA4AD0F.80807@ar88.net>
Message-ID: <50E8CD4E-B761-4EE5-BF86-8E989F0B317F@aol.com>

We use 29.4 and 29.6 here on the West Coast during our MRCG meets.  Up  
to now we've pretty much had that end of 10M to ourselves but now with  
the band open I'm hearing all sorts of stuff including repeaters  
especially around 29.6.  Don't know if running our wide deviation mil  
stuff is now going to cause problems or not.  For our upcoming event  
on Nov. 5 plan to stick to 29.4.  Not running much power, BC-659,  
BC-1335, PRC-9, R-108, RT-67 on low power setting.

Dennis D.  W7QHO
Glendale, CA

*****************
On Oct 23, 2011, at 5:10 PM, Al Klase wrote:

> Dave,
>
> That is my understanding.
>
> We used 29.6 for military (wide band) FM at the recent MRCA meet in
> Pennsylvania.  I don't know if any of the guys are trying to work  
> skip,
> but it seems like a reasonable place to start.
>
> Got your RT-524 on the "RED FLAG" channels?
>
> Al
>
> On 10/23/2011 7:35 PM, David Stinson wrote:
>> Is 29.6 still the 10 mtr FM calling freq?
>> Know of anyone regularly using mil equipment there?
>>
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> Milsurplus mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>>
>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
> -- 
> Al Klase - N3FRQ
> Jersey City, NJ
> http://www.skywaves.ar88.net/
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html


From arc5 at ix.netcom.com  Sun Oct 23 21:33:39 2011
From: arc5 at ix.netcom.com (David Stinson)
Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2011 20:33:39 -0500
Subject: [Milsurplus] BC-659 Folks
Message-ID: <A13DDA38D5F2458F9F6C3E4DC2C5F833@DaddyPC>

Those of you who've worked with BC-659:
Did you solid-state the vibrator in the suppy? 
(I have PE-120).
Have you tried providing 12 VDC on that buss
and 12 VAC to the input of the vibrator transformer?
Have any trouble with the C5-R3 transformer de-spiker?
Can you align the set without the external alignment jig?
Have you attempted to limit the deviation to 5 KC?

In short- All you 659 folks, please post your experiances.

Thanks!


From JJan-3 at cox.net  Sun Oct 23 21:46:46 2011
From: JJan-3 at cox.net (Jim Hill)
Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2011 18:46:46 -0700
Subject: [Milsurplus] PE-103A Available
Message-ID: <20111024014645.XSGB3756.fed1rmfepo203.cox.net@fed1rmimpo210.cox.net>

I posted the following on Glowbugs, but this reflector probably is a 
better choice.

While attempting to clean up the garage again, I came across a 
PE-103A dynamotor, It's been in garages for over 50 years, and it's 
amazing (depressing?) what happens to the exterior during that 
time.  I removed the "base" and it's in A1 shape.  I tried to remove 
an end bell to check the commutator, but the bell didn't budge.  I 
think the rubber gasket is sticking to the bell.  I didn't want to 
add more dings and scratches while attempting to remove it, so stopped.

I put the PE-103A on ebay,   280758812314  .  I hesitate to post my 
ebay offerings on Glowbugs, but it's something you don't see every 
day and possibly someone needs one.  So far,  bidding is at 
$1.00.   To avoid impressive shipping charges, local pickup in the 
Los Angeles area is an excellent choice.  See the ebay post for more details.

I also put an old Ampex reel to reel portable tape recorder on eBay, 
but that's another story.  It's more an audioanchor than a boatanchor.

Jim  w6ivw



From gl4d21a at juno.com  Mon Oct 24 10:59:31 2011
From: gl4d21a at juno.com (gl4d21a at juno.com)
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2011 14:59:31 GMT
Subject: [Milsurplus] FM, Mil vs. Commercial
Message-ID: <20111024.095931.7885.0@webmail51.dca.untd.com>

I'll try to make this as simple as possible.  Mil gear of the vintage being considered was true Armstrong FM.  No limiters, no post-limiter filters, etc.  This means that there will always be signal content outside whatever deviation setting you choose.  About 1948, commercial receiver designs began to be sensitive to "squelch clipping" (Motorola's patented noise balanced squelch)which is what happens when signal peaks get outside the communications passband and into the squelch noise passband.  So, plan to be disappointed in trying to talk to commercial receivers, unless you want to go to all the trouble of installing deviation limiting and post-limiter filters.  If you turn the deviation down far enough to not clip, it is almost inaudible, if you turn it up, it clips.  Especially with really late receiving equipment including ham gear, as the channelization gets narrower and narrower, and rejection of adjacent channel signal content gets more critical.  Stick with Mil to Mil and you'll be OK.

HTH,
George
W5VPQ

____________________________________________________________
57-Year-Old Mom Looks 25
United Online Special: Mom Reveals $5 Wrinkle Trick Angering Doctors!
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/4ea57d88421e3119a61cst02duc

From kk5f at earthlink.net  Mon Oct 24 11:22:24 2011
From: kk5f at earthlink.net (Mike Morrow)
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2011 10:22:24 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [Milsurplus] FM, Mil vs. Commercial
Message-ID: <33235659.1319469744692.JavaMail.root@elwamui-hound.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

> Stick with Mil to Mil and you'll be OK.

I had pretty good results using a 1995 Cherokee AH-50 ham 6m HT with my
AN/PRC-25, -68, and -77.  I was even able to activate the "new squelch"
requirement for 150 Hz sub-audible tone on the -25 and -77 by setting the
AH-50 to transmit the standard 151.4 Hz PL tone.  (However, the 150 Hz tone
transmitted by the -25, -68, and -77 would not break the squelch of the
AH-50 if it had been set for tone rather than carrier squelch.)

Mike / KK5F

From RAFANTINI at salisbury.edu  Mon Oct 24 11:24:26 2011
From: RAFANTINI at salisbury.edu (Ray Fantini)
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2011 11:24:26 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] The Ed Shape KF7RWW ATV gathering project for
	the	communication museum!
In-Reply-To: <3866e.2fa7c0ce.3bd545ec@aol.com>
References: <3866e.2fa7c0ce.3bd545ec@aol.com>
Message-ID: <2DE6F17E951D824AAE8B8D0BF7579D810DF9BA3A06@MBX.salisbury.edu>

There was a lot of the early ATA, ATH, AFG and later AXT ( Block 1 and 3) television equipment that was surpluses in the fifties and sixties, all of this was equipment that was designed in the early forties for remote pilot weapons like the GB-4 Glide Bomb, operation Aphrodite the remote piloted B-17 flying bombs and TDR assault drones. The CRV-59 image orthicon television camera appears to be the most common of them and the one in the picture. I have owned two at one time or another and still have one of the very unusual tubes in my office. They were ok by nineteen forties standards but by the early fifties not equal to the development that had taken place in the commercial television world. Better tubes like plumblicons and vidicon, improved amplifier response and improvements in sweep systems all had the effect of making those cameras almost useless. The transmitter were never useful for Ham television being that they were all far outside the Armature ATV allocation. Would think that by the sixties B&W surveillance cameras would have been available and far outperform any of that old stuff from back then so that any use of such equipment would have to have been in the fifties and not much after that time. Back in the seventies as a kid I played around with video cameras and ATV and at that time had access to newer and better equipment that was produced commercially and surpluses from the late sixties that preformed way better then the CRV-59 that I had so cannot imagine anyone using one. A good web page for this stuff is at:
http://www.qsl.net/w2vtm/mil_television_history.html
A good resource for this would be the seventies vintage ARRL Specialized Communications Handbook, whole chapter on ATV with how to build a camera, modifying the RCA CMU-15 UHF transmitter for ATV and a lot of other neat stuff from back then. I wore out at least two copies back then. Can't remember what I did with the CMU-15 but still have a couple spare 5894 tubes incase Analog Television comes back. 
RF


-----Original Message-----
From: milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net [mailto:milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of COURYHOUSE at aol.com
Sent: Sunday, October 23, 2011 6:27 AM
To: milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
Subject: [Milsurplus] The Ed Shape KF7RWW ATV gathering project for the communication museum!

 
A moth ago I got my General class  Amateur Radio License as a  few of you 
know.
 
As A kid could have passed the theory portion in 6th  grade  but was 
totally  Morse code dyslectic... so  I spent my  time  helping other people build 
and fix things...  Time passed and    eons later  well   the  code  
requirement went away  so... I finally got my license. Next month I may take a stab 
at the Extra test  as well.
 
We have always had a display of Amateur  Radio equipment here  at the 
museum ... 1kw  spark transmitter,  Collins KWS1   and  lots of  other  Ham and 
SWL gear and the library is pretty  full too!
 
 
There was one big gap,  with is the ATV display  we are  now building.  
Some of it was already  on  the shelf like CONAR  Cameras and  some of the 
older  CCTV stuff Hams   adapted..
 
Even some nice photo of converted surplus gear such as this one we  bought 
the negatives of.
if anyone has this  rig  we want it!  ( or a  similar  rework)
(PLEASE FORWARD THIS TO OTHER LISTS YOU MIGHT BELONG  TO)
 

W6UZO Amateur Radio Television 
 (http://www.smecc.org/video/am-television1.jpg)  
(http://www.smecc.org/video/w6uzo.jpg)  

Please can you tell us more about this fellow and  his camera? 
Note the 'creative' use of military surplus parts and  cabinetry to build 
this camera..  Kudos to this pioneer! 
WAS MENTIONED THAT THEY WERE TAKEN IN THE WENTSWORTH STORE IN  THE 
WESTCHESTER DISTRICT OF LOS ANGELES 
 (http://www.smecc.org/video/wpe3gm5i8fm5f.gif)  

so... there you have it!  
Looking to  amass a groups of  equipment  that   does a good timeline.... 
looking to add more to the   museum's library... 
BUT!  Also  would be  fin to put  some  of it on the air!  

The  idea has been suggested to me about a museum  active  amateur  
station.... this  might be   fun! 
Any.. read on... drop me a note off list.
 
Ed#
 
 here is  what we are looking  for the  ATV display.
both the physical one in the building and the  online  pages...
-----------------------------------------------
 
we need photos, early catalog issues and magazines.
 
Also:
Posters
coil kits
 
First complete ATV cameras and  tx /rx  equipment.
 
other suggestions welcome!
 
These were be  for a physical display plus an added  section  to the 
reference library we have and also add  material to  the SMECC website.
 
 
Please feel free to forward this  letter to  others with  interest in the 
history of  ATV
 
Thanks,

Ed Sharpe, Archivist for  SMECC 
KF7RWW

See the Museum's Web Site at _www.smecc.org_ (http://www.smecc.org/) 

We  are always looking for items to add to the museum's display and ref. 
library -  please advise if you have anything we can use.

Coury House /  SMECC
5802 W. Palmaire Ave. Phone 623-435-1522
Glendale Az 85301  USA

From kk5f at earthlink.net  Mon Oct 24 11:56:16 2011
From: kk5f at earthlink.net (Mike Morrow)
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2011 10:56:16 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [Milsurplus] The Ed Shape KF7RWW ATV gathering project for	the
 communication museum!
Message-ID: <18688674.1319471776957.JavaMail.root@elwamui-hound.atl.sa.earthlink.net>


> There was a lot of the early ATA, ATH, AFG and later AXT ( Block 1 and 3)
> television equipment that was surpluses in the fifties and sixties...

A good short summary of WWII and post-WWII military TV systems, with photos of the
equipment, can be found at:

      http://www.qsl.net/w2vtm/mil_television_history.html

It mentions the USN-nomenclatured ARE/ATE, ARF/ATF, ARG/ATG, ARH/ATH, ARJ/ATJ,
and ARK/ATK television systems, and the JAN-nomenclatured AN/AXR-1 (equivalent
to ARK) and associated AN/AXT-2 (equivalent to ATK), plus the improved AN/AXT-3.

The TV camera units USN CRV-59AAA to CRV-59AAE, and JAN PH-522/AXT-2 are also
listed.

It appears that the USN had the initial interest in this type of equipment.

Mike / KK5F

From smithab11 at comcast.net  Mon Oct 24 12:06:29 2011
From: smithab11 at comcast.net (B Smith)
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2011 12:06:29 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] 150 cycle tone for older radios
Message-ID: <4017D169D9A74FDC96AC0CA275173E66@Dell560>

Some notes on adding tone can be found on my pages at:
http://home.comcast.net/~smithab11/FSE%2038%20PL%20page1.htm

73

breck k4che 

From jedifox at optusnet.com.au  Tue Oct 25 02:16:28 2011
From: jedifox at optusnet.com.au (jedifox)
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2011 16:16:28 +1000
Subject: [Milsurplus] grant tank fitted with ws-19 set
Message-ID: <4EA6543C.7020903@optusnet.com.au>

hi all,
        does anybody have information as to which intercom/control boxes
went where in a grant tank fitted for for the WS-19 set?
info required to help finish a grant tank restoration.
thanks for any information,in advance

highest regards
leigh

From jfor at quikus.com  Tue Oct 25 22:51:51 2011
From: jfor at quikus.com (J. Forster)
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2011 19:51:51 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] OT. Telephone Repair
Message-ID: <2699.12.6.201.137.1319597511.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>

Lawrence , Kansas, December 12, 2008

A Kansas farm wife called the local phone company to report her telephone
failed to ring when her friends called - and that on the few occasions,
when it did ring, her dog always moaned right before the phone rang.

The telephone repairman proceeded to the scene, curious to see this
psychic dog or senile lady. He climbed a telephone pole, hooked in his
test set, and dialed the subscriber's house.

The phone didn't ring right away, but then the dog moaned and the
telephone began to ring.

Climbing down from the pole, the telephone repairman found:

1 . The dog was tied to the telephone system's ground wire with a steel
chain and collar.

2. The wire connection to the ground rod was loose.

3. The dog was receiving 90 volts of signaling current when the number was
called.

4.. After a couple of jolts, the dog would start moaning and then urinate.

5. The wet ground would complete the circuit, thus causing the phone to ring.

Which demonstrates that some problems CAN be fixed by pissing and moaning.


>From a friend. Sorry, it was just too funny not to pass on.

-John

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


From military1944 at aol.com  Wed Oct 26 08:20:27 2011
From: military1944 at aol.com (BenG4BXD)
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2011 08:20:27 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] R1155L receiver FS
Message-ID: <8CE61F0C77E7BD0-2460-9B4D8@webmail-m152.sysops.aol.com>

R1155L, this is the version covering 160Mtrs. Quite nice condition, 
dial clear, scale fully readable, unfortunately the DF section has been 
removed otherwise looks ok. Certainly a good basis for a restoration or 
just using as is without the DF option. Was certainly working but sold 
as untested, not that difficult to repair though. ?200.

pictures at:  www.qsl.net/g4bxd/qmstores.htm

cheers, Ben. 

From kb1fqg at yahoo.com  Wed Oct 26 11:35:40 2011
From: kb1fqg at yahoo.com (John Flood)
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2011 08:35:40 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] Tektronix 213 DMM Scope Serv. Man. FS
Message-ID: <1319643340.91980.YahooMailNeo@web84106.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Almost off topic but would rather see if find a home here if someone needs it before it goes to?epay. $20 shipped to USA paypal fine.? Pretty good shape.? Corners of covers a little bent up, but internal pages and foldouts good.
?
John Flood KB1FQG
978-979-2807

From maxtaz at shaw.ca  Thu Oct 27 12:30:45 2011
From: maxtaz at shaw.ca (David)
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2011 09:30:45 -0700
Subject: [Milsurplus] Rubber Shock Mounts for Sale
Message-ID: <686C3C81C53F4142AC3B5F90177FA654@RadioRoom>

Greetings. While cleaning out the garage I found a box of rubber shock 
mounts I forgot I had.
I have the following.

12.      3" square metal base,  1&5/8" high with a 3/8" bolt hole

8.         3" square metal base   2&5/8" high with a 3/8" bolt hole

6.         2&1/2" square metal base  1&1/8" high with a 1/4" bolt hole

4.         2&1/4" square metal mount  1" high with a 3/8" bolt hole

These are in good shape, but a little dirty. They clear up very nicely with 
a shot of spray 9 and a tooth brush.
If interested drop me a note and I can send a picture and you can let me 
know if you are interested.

Thanks.

Dave     VA7DG 


From JJan-3 at cox.net  Thu Oct 27 16:56:07 2011
From: JJan-3 at cox.net (Jim Hill)
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2011 13:56:07 -0700
Subject: [Milsurplus] RBW Spectrum Analyzer Available
Message-ID: <20111027205623.LZWD3806.fed1rmfepo101.cox.net@fed1rmimpo03.cox.net>

This is a Navy RBW "Panoramic Radio Adapter", which has a 5.25MHz 
center frequency, and an adjustable +/- 500kHz sweep.  It has an 
internal  115/220V 60Hz internal power supply.  It's complete, but 
has been sitting around my garage for maybe 50 years, so assume it is 
no longer working.  $10.00 OBO, local pickup.

I live in Palos Verdes Estates, which is in the Los Angeles area, 
adjacent to Torrance.   I can take it to the TRW (w6trw) Swap Meet 
this coming Saturday morning  10/29/11.  I also frequently go to the 
Westminster, Whittier, and West Hollywood cities in the evening and 
can arrange a pickup there.  For swap meet info, see 
<http://w6trw.com/swapmeet/swapmeet.htm>http://w6trw.com/swapmeet/swapmeet.htm 
Check the TRW swap meet map and Visitors map links for location details

Check the following links for pictures
Front Panel: 
<http://www.adrive.com/public/7678bd320468a72914e2327f02f199ff7ec1358d10a2e9ca09f73bc3c5ccf597.html>http://www.adrive.com/public/7678bd320468a72914e2327f02f199ff7ec1358d10a2e9ca09f73bc3c5ccf597.html

Top View:
<http://www.adrive.com/public/57797848b881ab6c754cbdc600c356dae1de4be03b9697a150c33d9d7b32b74f.html>http://www.adrive.com/public/57797848b881ab6c754cbdc600c356dae1de4be03b9697a150c33d9d7b32b74f.html

Bottom View
<http://www.adrive.com/public/1c3611bdb756123a3df966a24245c50d39781dfbda1f6443f84b01f492985128.html>http://www.adrive.com/public/1c3611bdb756123a3df966a24245c50d39781dfbda1f6443f84b01f492985128.html

Nameplate
<http://www.adrive.com/public/61c4d2a9a9bff86497b2bb5f392d82990a37f8e6afbd2d6a4fe1669eff05dc1b.html>http://www.adrive.com/public/61c4d2a9a9bff86497b2bb5f392d82990a37f8e6afbd2d6a4fe1669eff05dc1b.html

eMail me, and we can arrange pickup details

Jim, w6ivw


From jphutch60bj at gmail.com  Thu Oct 27 19:41:47 2011
From: jphutch60bj at gmail.com (John Hutchins)
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2011 18:41:47 -0500
Subject: [Milsurplus] N/MRT-9 RADIO COMMUNIACTION SHED TRANSMITTER RECIVER
	SHELTER
In-Reply-To: <1319411208.1935.1.camel@lancelot>
References: <1319411208.1935.1.camel@lancelot>
Message-ID: <4EA9EC3B.5010704@gmail.com>

Group -
Looks like the MRT shelter sold
http://www.ebay.com/itm/220874493229?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1423.l2649
Item  220874493229
$3,006.00

Some one got a happy wife he can go play radio in his own room!
Hutch





From bsugarberg at core.com  Thu Oct 27 20:20:26 2011
From: bsugarberg at core.com (Bruce)
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2011 20:20:26 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] N/MRT-9 RADIO COMMUNIACTION SHED TRANSMITTER
 RECIVER SHELTER
In-Reply-To: <4EA9EC3B.5010704@gmail.com>
References: <1319411208.1935.1.camel@lancelot> <4EA9EC3B.5010704@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4EA9F54A.6060907@core.com>

Hello,

The eBay listing says: "Reserve Not Met".  Looks like no sale.

73, Bruce WA8TNC
================
John Hutchins wrote:
> Group -
> Looks like the MRT shelter sold
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/220874493229?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1423.l2649
> Item  220874493229
> $3,006.00
>
> Some one got a happy wife he can go play radio in his own room!
> Hutch
>
>
>
>
>

From jphutch60bj at gmail.com  Thu Oct 27 21:47:47 2011
From: jphutch60bj at gmail.com (John Hutchins)
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2011 20:47:47 -0500
Subject: [Milsurplus] N/MRT-9 RADIO COMMUNIACTION SHED TRANSMITTER
 RECIVER SHELTER
In-Reply-To: <4EA9F54A.6060907@core.com>
References: <1319411208.1935.1.camel@lancelot> <4EA9EC3B.5010704@gmail.com>
	<4EA9F54A.6060907@core.com>
Message-ID: <4EAA09C3.9010706@gmail.com>

ALL-
My understanding is that it the reserve was not met it was at the 
discretion of the seller whether the sale went through or not;   I did 
not see a relisting?

How about  this item? 310354461349 or should I say items }

Hutch


On 10/27/2011 7:20 PM, Bruce wrote:
> Hello,
>
> The eBay listing says: "Reserve Not Met".  Looks like no sale.
>
> 73, Bruce WA8TNC
> ================
> John Hutchins wrote:
>> Group -
>> Looks like the MRT shelter sold
>> http://www.ebay.com/itm/220874493229?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1423.l2649
>> Item  220874493229
>> $3,006.00
>>
>> Some one got a happy wife he can go play radio in his own room!
>> Hutch
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>


From WA5CAB at cs.com  Thu Oct 27 22:47:49 2011
From: WA5CAB at cs.com (WA5CAB at cs.com)
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2011 22:47:49 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] N/MRT-9 RADIO COMMUNIACTION SHED TRANSMITTER
	RECIVER SHELTER
Message-ID: <1d928.1e66109f.3bdb71d5@cs.com>

That's been around for a while.  I think it's the third time I've seen it.

In a message dated 10/27/2011 20:48:08 PM Central Daylight Time, 
jphutch60bj at gmail.com writes: 
> ALL-
> My understanding is that it the reserve was not met it was at the 
> discretion of the seller whether the sale went through or not;   I did 
> not see a relisting?
> 
> How about  this item? 310354461349 or should I say items }
> 
> Hutch
> 

Robert & Susan Downs - Houston
wa5cab dot com (Web Store)
MVPA 9480

From subs at w1rc.net  Fri Oct 28 06:42:35 2011
From: subs at w1rc.net (Michael, W1RC)
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2011 06:42:35 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] FS: CS-137 US Army Signal Corps Crystal Case with
 Original Crystals
Message-ID: <0MFcXl-1RGlDH45Pp-00EjVc@mrelay.perfora.net>


From bcarling at cfl.rr.com  Fri Oct 28 07:31:17 2011
From: bcarling at cfl.rr.com (Bry Carling)
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2011 07:31:17 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] Ten Mtr FM Calling Freq?
In-Reply-To: <4EA4AD0F.80807@ar88.net>
References: <8B79104E0FB6452AB62710C62F323494@DaddyPC>,
	<4EA4AD0F.80807@ar88.net>
Message-ID: <4EAA9285.22000.4DC1E9@bcarling.cfl.rr.com>

Hi Dave and Al,

29.6 MHz is still very popular for the 10m FM usage.

Not sure about military radios, but it would seem an ideal starting point for any radio, and 
perhaps have an alternate nearby frequency nearby that you can move to when there is a 
heavy band opening.

I made MANY happy contacts on 29.6 FM using an old Comco police motorcycle radio that 
had TWO 6146 RF final tubes in it. It was QUITE a large beast!

Bry Carling

> Dave,
> 
> That is my understanding.
> 
> We used 29.6 for military (wide band) FM at the recent MRCA meet in
> Pennsylvania.  I don't know if any of the guys are trying to work
> skip, 
> but it seems like a reasonable place to start.
> 
> Got your RT-524 on the "RED FLAG" channels?
> 
> Al
> 
> On 10/23/2011 7:35 PM, David Stinson wrote:
> > Is 29.6 still the 10 mtr FM calling freq?
> > Know of anyone regularly using mil equipment there?
> >
> > ______________________________________________________________
> > Milsurplus mailing list
> > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> > Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
> >
> > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> > Please help support this email list:
> http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> 
> -- 
> Al Klase - N3FRQ
> Jersey City, NJ
> http://www.skywaves.ar88.net/
> 
> 
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
> 
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list:
> http://www.qsl.net/donate.html



From subs at w1rc.net  Fri Oct 28 08:20:01 2011
From: subs at w1rc.net (Michael, W1RC)
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2011 08:20:01 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] FS: CS-137 US Army Signal Corps Crystal Case with
 Original Crystals
Message-ID: <0MIurB-1RHrB00DO5-002enB@mrelay.perfora.net>

This is an accessory of the SCR-509/510 and 609/610 "Jeep" radios. It 
has two compartments for 120 crystals that are lined with heavy grey 
felt cushioning.  CS-137 ws made by Radio Wire Television, Inc Order 
Number 24124-PH-51-14.  This box contains crystal numbers 270 (5675 
Kcs) through 389 (8650 Kcs).

I am asking $150.00 for the lot plus shipping.  If interested please 
reply by e-mail.

73,

Michael, W1RC


From RAFANTINI at salisbury.edu  Fri Oct 28 09:06:09 2011
From: RAFANTINI at salisbury.edu (Ray Fantini)
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2011 09:06:09 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] N/MRT-9 RADIO COMMUNIACTION SHED TRANSMITTER
 RECIVER SHELTER
In-Reply-To: <4EAA09C3.9010706@gmail.com>
References: <1319411208.1935.1.camel@lancelot> <4EA9EC3B.5010704@gmail.com>
	<4EA9F54A.6060907@core.com> <4EAA09C3.9010706@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <2DE6F17E951D824AAE8B8D0BF7579D810DF9BA46C3@MBX.salisbury.edu>

The MRT-9 is listed back on EBay with a "Buy it Now" price of $8,500, looked at the other lot out in CA and with the exception of the BC-610 that looks like it's been stored outside for some time don't see anything worth more than $20 if that. Like the description about how the person who owned it was the seventh Ham in California in 1947, looks like Ham radio started late out on the other coast.
On another site there has been a discussion on what's the current value of a BC-610, I would assume a working 610 is worth around $1,000 with a non complete transmitter being around $250 to $500 keeping in mind that most non working 610 these days are missing tuning units and have been hacked or modified for years. Something like the T-368 transmitters where working good condition units may be worth $2,000 but most I have seen for sale used non working are so screwed up that they require a complete teardown and overhaul, no easy process with all that weight! But still people think they are worth big money. There is a T-368 transmitter that's been floating around the northeast that's touted as being working for only $500 that someone brought me a year or so ago to see what it would cost to get "right" the original fan had been removed and replaced with non working muffin fans, the wiring harness in the back of the case was cut in several places and spliced with zip cord along with all the interlock safety switches being bypassed with zip cord. All the rectifier tubes were replaced with diodes, all different types being soldered directly to the tube socket pins, usually if I do this I install a small diode board and remove the tube sockets along with also installing a series current limiter resistor or just use commercial SS replacements in the tube sockets. The modulator deck had been hacked and had all the posted Ham modifications for "Hi-Fi" audio that includes bypassing the bandwidth filter and limiter and installing different capacitors in the preamp, along with the removal of the wires to the audio gain pot and splicing them with wire nuts and dragging the audio out between the first and second audio preamplifier and running that to the audio control and  if all this was done correctly or neatly that would be one thing but this looked like someone used a 500 watt gun and water pump pliers to do the work, the screen control system had been taken apart and all the resistors involved with the screen keying control were burnt open and last but not least the output connections had been removed and replaced with cheap plastic radio shack connectors that had the same quality of work as the rest of the hack job on that transmitter. The owner was insulted when I told him that I thought all this unit was good for was as a parts set for other radios and that I thought that maybe for more than it was worth it can become operational but would never be reliable, so needless to say did not get that job.
RF



From sjotrollet at yahoo.com  Fri Oct 28 10:01:14 2011
From: sjotrollet at yahoo.com (Walter Treftz)
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2011 07:01:14 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] FS:  "Gunnery Talkers Mike
Message-ID: <1319810474.18847.YahooMailNeo@web125812.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>

T-26 Microphone
Telephone talkers type. Military. MFP date 8/52. Used. W/neck straps. 
Good condx. Untested, Best offer plus postage.
73
Walt (N4GL)

From RAFANTINI at salisbury.edu  Fri Oct 28 10:23:02 2011
From: RAFANTINI at salisbury.edu (Ray Fantini)
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2011 10:23:02 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] Convoy radios and the MBF
Message-ID: <2DE6F17E951D824AAE8B8D0BF7579D810DF9BA4734@MBX.salisbury.edu>

Short of use on a museum ship why would anyone want a Collins MBF? Have seen them before and always wondered if this was the radio that would have been supplied to merchant vessels for use in convoys? Have read descriptions of TBY set being used for short range ship to ship communications but considering what a dog the TBY is and that it used batteries cannot see that being a good set for that and the Collins MBF appears to be a better set for talk between ships  functions. And before everyone gets insulted and tells me there is plenty of evidence to prove the TBY was used in this role I do understand that it was used but maybe only up to the point where better radios like the Collins were installed on merchant vessels and assuming or full size TBS where installed on the naval vessels. There is a MBF currently listed on that place, item # 140625412601

RF


From WA5CAB at cs.com  Fri Oct 28 11:18:19 2011
From: WA5CAB at cs.com (WA5CAB at cs.com)
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2011 11:18:19 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] Convoy radios and the MBF
Message-ID: <9aba.41c37b17.3bdc21bb@cs.com>

The 115 VAC/VDC power supply for the TBY was built to allow usage of the 
TBY on merchant shipping equipped only with MF and HF CW rigs.  Much of the 
pre-war merchant shipping had 115 VDC systems.  It could talk to the TBS on 
the escorts.  The little MBF was built to replace it.

In a message dated 10/28/2011 09:23:12 AM Central Daylight Time, 
RAFANTINI at salisbury.edu writes: 
> Short of use on a museum ship why would anyone want a Collins MBF? Have 
> seen them before and always wondered if this was the radio that would have 
> been supplied to merchant vessels for use in convoys? Have read descriptions 
> of TBY set being used for short range ship to ship communications but 
> considering what a dog the TBY is and that it used batteries cannot see that 
> being a good set for that and the Collins MBF appears to be a better set for 
> talk between ships  functions. And before everyone gets insulted and tells 
> me there is plenty of evidence to prove the TBY was used in this role I do 
> understand that it was used but maybe only up to the point where better 
> radios like the Collins were installed on merchant vessels and assuming or 
> full size TBS where installed on the naval vessels. There is a MBF currently 
> listed on that place, item # 140625412601
> 
> RF

Robert & Susan Downs - Houston
wa5cab dot com (Web Store)
MVPA 9480

From gzook at yahoo.com  Fri Oct 28 12:19:28 2011
From: gzook at yahoo.com (Glen Zook)
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2011 09:19:28 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] Ten Mtr FM Calling Freq?
In-Reply-To: <4EAA9285.22000.4DC1E9@bcarling.cfl.rr.com>
References: <8B79104E0FB6452AB62710C62F323494@DaddyPC>,
	<4EA4AD0F.80807@ar88.net>
	<4EAA9285.22000.4DC1E9@bcarling.cfl.rr.com>
Message-ID: <1319818768.71624.YahooMailNeo@web121702.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>

29.300 MHz is the FM calling frequency for Asia, Europe, and Africa. ?You can work a lot of JA stations on 29.300 MHz when the band is open.
?
Glen, K9STH


Website:  http://k9sth.com


________________________________
From: Bry Carling <bcarling at cfl.rr.com>
To: milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
Sent: Friday, October 28, 2011 6:31 AM
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] Ten Mtr FM Calling Freq?

Hi Dave and Al,

29.6 MHz is still very popular for the 10m FM usage.

Not sure about military radios, but it would seem an ideal starting point for any radio, and 
perhaps have an alternate nearby frequency nearby that you can move to when there is a 
heavy band opening.

I made MANY happy contacts on 29.6 FM using an old Comco police motorcycle radio that 
had TWO 6146 RF final tubes in it. It was QUITE a large beast!

Bry Carling

> Dave,
> 
> That is my understanding.
> 
> We used 29.6 for military (wide band) FM at the recent MRCA meet in
> Pennsylvania.? I don't know if any of the guys are trying to work
> skip, 
> but it seems like a reasonable place to start.
> 
> Got your RT-524 on the "RED FLAG" channels?
> 
> Al
> 
> On 10/23/2011 7:35 PM, David Stinson wrote:
> > Is 29.6 still the 10 mtr FM calling freq?
> > Know of anyone regularly using mil equipment there?
> >
> > ______________________________________________________________
> > Milsurplus mailing list
> > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> > Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
> >
> > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> > Please help support this email list:
> http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> 
> -- 
> Al Klase - N3FRQ
> Jersey City, NJ
> http://www.skywaves.ar88.net/
> 
> 
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
> 
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list:
> http://www.qsl.net/donate.html


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

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

From farmer.rob.flory at gmail.com  Fri Oct 28 12:25:33 2011
From: farmer.rob.flory at gmail.com (Rob Flory)
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2011 11:25:33 -0500
Subject: [Milsurplus] MBF
Message-ID: <CAFcNxxXabR0EcdjVW8e2pHQMWzZR0Rj9uK3qwT-2yHFKkLQTGQ@mail.gmail.com>

I have seen pix of MBF installed in a PT boat.  Nice space-saving
installation with interoperability with TBS on larger vessels.

I've got one almost good to go on 6m.

RF

From kk5f at earthlink.net  Fri Oct 28 13:24:27 2011
From: kk5f at earthlink.net (Mike Morrow)
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2011 12:24:27 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [Milsurplus] Convoy radios and the MBF
Message-ID: <12000795.1319822667699.JavaMail.root@mswamui-billy.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

Robert wrote:

> The 115 VAC/VDC power supply for the TBY was built to allow usage of the 
> TBY on merchant shipping equipped only with MF and HF CW rigs.  Much of the 
> pre-war merchant shipping had 115 VDC systems.  It could talk to the TBS on 
> the escorts.  The little MBF was built to replace it.

The other issue that rules out the possibility of MBF use by anyone in WWII
except possibly in the very last days of WWII is its date of introduction.

The MBF is not even listed in the January 1945 SHIPS 242A (List of Naval Radio,
Radar, and Sonar Equipment).  The only date I find on the *preliminary* instruction
manual for the MBF is 13 June 1945 on an addendum sheet at the front.  It appears
to me that the earliest at-sea use of the MBF could not have been much earlier than
mid-1945.

BTW, both of the above cited manuals are excellent products that I got from from
Robert's catalog.  SHIP 242A is possibly the most useful historical document in
my library.

Ray wrote:

> Short of use on a museum ship why would anyone want a Collins MBF?

Well, it's a lot easier to put on 6m than is the BC-1000-A.  It's an
interesting design both electrically and mechanically.  It is "Collins"
after all, and prominently marked as such on the front.  But more generally
that raises questions like this:

Why would anyone want a ARA receiver that doesn't cover a ham band, or a
AN/APN-1 radio altimeter, or an ABK or SCR-695 IFF set, or a AN/ARW-17
guided bomb receiver, or a AN/APN-9 LORAN A set, or a ZB VHF homing set,
or even that BC-1000-A FM set?  Ask Jack Antonio why he went to the effort
of firing up his RT-45/ARQ-1 "Sandy" HF/VHF jamming set.  The whole subject
of radio equipment design and use by the military in wartime is fascinating
and much more educational from a historical and technical standpoint than
only that of the common gear that has or had direct ham-use capability.   

> Have seen them before and always wondered if this was the radio that would
> have been supplied to merchant vessels for use in convoys?

I think that is a very reasonable application, but only if the MBF had come out
a couple of years earlier.  Obviously the large multi-unit TBS sets would *not*
have been convenient to install on merchant shipping, or even smaller naval
vessels for which the MBF is ideal.  The MBF operates from 115 VAC or VDC.
Its power supply automatically configures itself...it doesn't even matter
what polarity is presented to two AC/DC power connector terminals.

> There is a MBF currently listed on that place, item # 140625412601

(Link http://www.ebay.com/itm/140625412601 )

It's quite remarkable for condition, but unfortunately it is missing the
unobtainable control covers (which the seller commendably makes very clear).
Also, the shock mounts have been removed and small pads of rubber substituted.
Otherwise it looks like NOS condition.  Hams almost always discarded the covers
on the MBF.  I have one MBF COL-43065 that is complete with all covers and shock
mount plate COL-10479, but it is the only one that complete that I've ever come
across.  I've never seen the COL-10406 accessory case that would have been mounted
above the RT unit.

Mike / KK5F

From RAFANTINI at salisbury.edu  Fri Oct 28 14:21:01 2011
From: RAFANTINI at salisbury.edu (Ray Fantini)
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2011 14:21:01 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] More MBF bashing
In-Reply-To: <12000795.1319822667699.JavaMail.root@mswamui-billy.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
References: <12000795.1319822667699.JavaMail.root@mswamui-billy.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <2DE6F17E951D824AAE8B8D0BF7579D810DF9F9713F@MBX.salisbury.edu>

Your response brings up more questions than it answers. Ok, the MBF is a late war or post war design but what's the point of a radio that operates in the VHF low band television allocation? 
Everyone knew that television was going to be low band VHF and that's the future, that along with the section next to that being the old FM broadcast allocation so what a terrible place to operate a radio. Prior to that installation of VHF FM for all local maritime communications in the sixties and seventies most ship to ship short range was HF AM not low band VHF AM, can see where the MBF may be a nice little radio for harbor, service and patrol craft but thought that was the role of the TCS and later URC family of radios. URC-7 has to be a late forties design, cannot imagine that being designed any later then 1950 and the URC-35 replaced that by the sixties. Think given the choice between a URC-7 and a TCS would take the TCS!  All of the URT/URR and the TDQ stuff operated just above the MBF or old TBS and would not net with any of that low band VHF stuff so the MBF, TBS and TBY all appear to be a line that dies with the MBF, cannot imagine anyone using a TBY by 45 considering the newer and far superior VHF low band FM sets that were available, so was it that the MBF design was in the pipeline and produced regardless of need? 
RF

-----Original Message-----
From: milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net [mailto:milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Mike Morrow
Sent: Friday, October 28, 2011 1:24 PM
To: milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] Convoy radios and the MBF

Robert wrote:

> The 115 VAC/VDC power supply for the TBY was built to allow usage of 
> the TBY on merchant shipping equipped only with MF and HF CW rigs.  
> Much of the pre-war merchant shipping had 115 VDC systems.  It could 
> talk to the TBS on the escorts.  The little MBF was built to replace it.

The other issue that rules out the possibility of MBF use by anyone in WWII except possibly in the very last days of WWII is its date of introduction.

The MBF is not even listed in the January 1945 SHIPS 242A (List of Naval Radio, Radar, and Sonar Equipment).  The only date I find on the *preliminary* instruction manual for the MBF is 13 June 1945 on an addendum sheet at the front.  It appears to me that the earliest at-sea use of the MBF could not have been much earlier than mid-1945.

BTW, both of the above cited manuals are excellent products that I got from from Robert's catalog.  SHIP 242A is possibly the most useful historical document in my library.

Ray wrote:

> Short of use on a museum ship why would anyone want a Collins MBF?

Well, it's a lot easier to put on 6m than is the BC-1000-A.  It's an interesting design both electrically and mechanically.  It is "Collins"
after all, and prominently marked as such on the front.  But more generally that raises questions like this:

Why would anyone want a ARA receiver that doesn't cover a ham band, or a
AN/APN-1 radio altimeter, or an ABK or SCR-695 IFF set, or a AN/ARW-17 guided bomb receiver, or a AN/APN-9 LORAN A set, or a ZB VHF homing set, or even that BC-1000-A FM set?  Ask Jack Antonio why he went to the effort of firing up his RT-45/ARQ-1 "Sandy" HF/VHF jamming set.  The whole subject of radio equipment design and use by the military in wartime is fascinating and much more educational from a historical and technical standpoint than
only that of the common gear that has or had direct ham-use capability.   

> Have seen them before and always wondered if this was the radio that 
> would have been supplied to merchant vessels for use in convoys?

I think that is a very reasonable application, but only if the MBF had come out a couple of years earlier.  Obviously the large multi-unit TBS sets would *not* have been convenient to install on merchant shipping, or even smaller naval vessels for which the MBF is ideal.  The MBF operates from 115 VAC or VDC.
Its power supply automatically configures itself...it doesn't even matter what polarity is presented to two AC/DC power connector terminals.

> There is a MBF currently listed on that place, item # 140625412601

(Link http://www.ebay.com/itm/140625412601 )

It's quite remarkable for condition, but unfortunately it is missing the unobtainable control covers (which the seller commendably makes very clear).
Also, the shock mounts have been removed and small pads of rubber substituted.
Otherwise it looks like NOS condition.  Hams almost always discarded the covers on the MBF.  I have one MBF COL-43065 that is complete with all covers and shock mount plate COL-10479, but it is the only one that complete that I've ever come across.  I've never seen the COL-10406 accessory case that would have been mounted above the RT unit.

Mike / KK5F

From kk5f at earthlink.net  Fri Oct 28 15:15:43 2011
From: kk5f at earthlink.net (Mike Morrow)
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2011 15:15:43 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] More MBF bashing
Message-ID: <31484805.1319829343939.JavaMail.root@elwamui-milano.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

Ray wrote:

> Your response brings up more questions than it answers. Ok, the MBF is a
> late war or post war design but what's the point of a radio that operates
> in the VHF low band television allocation?

Robert answered the question very simply when he said that the MBF was to
replace the TBY for small-craft and some merchant vessel communications with
the great installed-base of the TBS on most naval vessels.  The MBF frequency
range of 60 to 80 MHz matches exactly that of the TBS.

Nothing needs be considered with respect to civilian uses of this or any other
band.  Military use of VHF tactical frequencies from 20 through 76 MHz today all
the way back to WWII has never been conditioned or limited by the fact that civil
use of that same spectrum is also taking place.  When I operated a AN/PRC-25 net for
military training at Little Creek Virginia in 1972, I just listened for any strong
interference and then otherwise arbitrarily selected a frequency from its 30 to
76 MHz coverage, regardless of it being maybe in the middle of TV channel 2 or
on some low-band VHF public service channel!  That didn't matter in the least.
The same applies for TBS and MBF frequency useage.

The MBF, although later than the TBS, became obsolete when the TBS became
obsolete.

Mike / KK5F

From kk5f at earthlink.net  Fri Oct 28 15:16:58 2011
From: kk5f at earthlink.net (Mike Morrow)
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2011 14:16:58 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [Milsurplus] More MBF bashing
Message-ID: <15869655.1319829418985.JavaMail.root@elwamui-milano.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

Ray wrote:

> Your response brings up more questions than it answers. Ok, the MBF is a
> late war or post war design but what's the point of a radio that operates
> in the VHF low band television allocation?

Robert answered the question very simply when he said that the MBF was to
replace the TBY for small-craft and some merchant vessel communications with
the great installed-base of the TBS on most naval vessels.  The MBF frequency
range of 60 to 80 MHz matches exactly that of the TBS.

Nothing needs be considered with respect to civilian uses of this or any other
band.  Military use of VHF tactical frequencies from 20 through 76 MHz today all
the way back to WWII has never been conditioned or limited by the fact that civil
use of that same spectrum is also taking place.  When I operated a AN/PRC-25 net for
military training at Little Creek Virginia in 1972, I just listened for any strong
interference and then otherwise arbitrarily selected a frequency from its 30 to
76 MHz coverage, regardless of it being maybe in the middle of TV channel 2 or
on some low-band VHF public service channel!  That didn't matter in the least.
The same applies for TBS and MBF frequency useage.

The MBF, although later than the TBS, became obsolete when the TBS became
obsolete.

Mike / KK5F

From jfor at quikus.com  Fri Oct 28 15:32:41 2011
From: jfor at quikus.com (J. Forster)
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2011 12:32:41 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] TG-5-B Usage ?
Message-ID: <2125.12.6.201.93.1319830361.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>

Hi,

The TG-5-A & -B are cute little telegraph sets.

Does anybody know what they were used for in WW II? There were >10,000
built, so they must have been used for something.

Best,

-John

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


From whitaker at pa.net  Fri Oct 28 21:08:30 2011
From: whitaker at pa.net (C.Whitaker)
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2011 21:08:30 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] TG-5-B Usage ?
In-Reply-To: <2125.12.6.201.93.1319830361.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
References: <2125.12.6.201.93.1319830361.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
Message-ID: <4EAB520E.80206@pa.net>

de WB2CPN
Did someone say they were for Coast Artillery or the
Forest Service?
73  Clete


On 10/28/2011 3:32 PM, J. Forster wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The TG-5-A&  -B are cute little telegraph sets.
>
> Does anybody know what they were used for in WW II? There were>10,000
> built, so they must have been used for something.
>
> Best,
>
> -John
>
> ===============
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>


From w7qho at aol.com  Sat Oct 29 03:18:28 2011
From: w7qho at aol.com (mac)
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2011 00:18:28 -0700
Subject: [Milsurplus] MBF Xtals
Message-ID: <66024DDE-892B-44EC-8883-22881C8062DB@aol.com>



I have an MBF xtal set in its original box, transmit and receive pairs  
for 72.1, 72.9, 73.9 & 75.7 MC.  Anyone want/need this for an exhibit  
or other use?

Dennis D.  W7QHO
Glendale, CA

From signetics at netzero.com  Sat Oct 29 11:04:22 2011
From: signetics at netzero.com (phil)
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2011 10:04:22 -0500
Subject: [Milsurplus] bc375
Message-ID: <80B046C887F14BF9A70D77F9730A1C7F@philPC>

When the BC-375 and BC-191 were used in aircraft, were they
operated in telegraph mode or voice mode
Phil
____________________________________________________________
60-Year-Old Mom Looks 27
Mom Reveals Free Wrinkle Trick That Has Angered Doctors!
http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL3241/4eac07fa356cb38215dst01duc

From arc5 at ix.netcom.com  Sat Oct 29 10:44:06 2011
From: arc5 at ix.netcom.com (arc5 at ix.netcom.com)
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2011 14:44:06 +0000
Subject: [Milsurplus] bc375
Message-ID: <20111029144406.C22314C05E@attemconn12.att.oz.com>

Almost exclusively telegraph, although it was the first transmitter used to broadcast from an aircraft, transmitting FDR's 1933 inaugural.   ( posting from a cell is such a pain ;-)

------Original Message------
From: phil <signetics at netzero.com>
To: <Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>,"phil" <signetics at netzero.com>
Date: Saturday, October 29, 2011 10:04:22 AM GMT-5
Subject: [Milsurplus] bc375

When the BC-375 and BC-191 were used in aircraft, were they
operated in telegraph mode or voice mode
Phil
____________________________________________________________
60-Year-Old Mom Looks 27
Mom Reveals Free Wrinkle Trick That Has Angered Doctors!
http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL3241/4eac07fa356cb38215dst01duc
______________________________________________________________
Milsurplus mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html


From military1944 at aol.com  Sat Oct 29 12:05:53 2011
From: military1944 at aol.com (BenG4BXD)
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2011 12:05:53 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] SEM35 3 pin battery box plug anyone?
Message-ID: <8CE646BC4F6240D-20C0-F2F77@webmail-d151.sysops.aol.com>

Looking for the 3 pin plug to connect external supply to SEM35 battery 
box.

If anyone has one spare please let me know.

cheers, Ben. G4BXD
Military Wireless Museum
www.qsl.net/g4bxd

From w7qho at aol.com  Sat Oct 29 23:11:17 2011
From: w7qho at aol.com (mac)
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2011 20:11:17 -0700
Subject: [Milsurplus] Test,
Message-ID: <55125682-F496-4CCB-88EA-D250CB90C2E1@aol.com>

Test

Dennis D.  W7QHO
Glendale, CA




From ramcam at magma.ca  Sun Oct 30 12:46:24 2011
From: ramcam at magma.ca (Ralph Cameron)
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2011 12:46:24 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] KPH
Message-ID: <4EAD7F60.4020703@magma.ca>

Worked K6KPH from the site of KPH last night on 21.050Mhz. Big signal 
for those interested.
73
Ralph
VE3BBM

-- 
Please remove all previous email addresses before forwarding any email. Doing so, decreases the message size,
transmission time, and limits any information that a 'spammer' may glean. Also, please consider using Blind Carbon
Copy (or BCC) to limit email address exposure. ~ Thanks
_____


From kk7iz at cox.net  Sun Oct 30 15:35:20 2011
From: kk7iz at cox.net (Lloyd Godsey)
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2011 12:35:20 -0700
Subject: [Milsurplus] Stuff F/S
Message-ID: <CBD927111FC94FF98F3FE979CA3F7998@LloydPC>

Found this pair of Collins 337A-2 indicators removed from an old RMI 
converter, I think.
$10.00 for the pair plus shipping.
See at
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v618/skyrider28/IMG_7676.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v618/skyrider28/IMG_7678.jpg


Thanx
Lloyd Godsey KK7IZ
kk7iz at cox.net
480-620-7145
http://www.lloydsdipsydumpster.com/
http://antiqueradioarchives.com/
Skype: lloyd.godsey


From lewton_eng at clear.net.nz  Sun Oct 30 20:57:03 2011
From: lewton_eng at clear.net.nz (Phil Lewton)
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2011 13:57:03 +1300
Subject: [Milsurplus] an/art13 mounting
Message-ID: <409383D3C7DC45B2B90F1A28AFDAA55D@lewton>

The gentle man that posted detail on the AN/ART13 mount / base plate can I
get more detail please

Please contact me of list    may have been the AAF RADIO group?

ZL2HF Phil.


From kargo_cult at msn.com  Sun Oct 30 16:28:56 2011
From: kargo_cult at msn.com (Hue Miller)
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2011 13:28:56 -0700
Subject: [Milsurplus] [armyradios] OT. Telephone Repair
In-Reply-To: <2699.12.6.201.137.1319597511.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
References: <2699.12.6.201.137.1319597511.squirrel@popaccts.quikus.com>
Message-ID: <SNT109-DS6FCB21D8A2FA49FF13936E4D60@phx.gbl>

Not that this isn't funny, but it seems to be a variation of a well known 
story.
If you worked in the telephone industry, you learned that this story has 
been around
since about 1935.
-Hue

From: J. Forster
Sent: Tuesday, October 25, 2011 7:51 PM
To: armyradios at yahoogroups.com ; milsurplus at mailman.qth.net ; 
arc5 at mailman.qthy.net
Cc: Vintage-Mi9litary-RADAR at yahoogroups.com
Subject: [armyradios] OT. Telephone Repair




Lawrence , Kansas, December 12, 2008

A Kansas farm wife called the local phone company to report her telephone
failed to ring when her friends called - and that on the few occasions,
when it did ring, her dog always moaned right before the phone rang.

The telephone repairman proceeded to the scene, curious to see this
psychic dog or senile lady. He climbed a telephone pole, hooked in his
test set, and dialed the subscriber's house.

The phone didn't ring right away, but then the dog moaned and the
telephone began to ring.

Climbing down from the pole, the telephone repairman found:

1 . The dog was tied to the telephone system's ground wire with a steel
chain and collar.

2. The wire connection to the ground rod was loose.

3. The dog was receiving 90 volts of signaling current when the number was
called.

4.. After a couple of jolts, the dog would start moaning and then urinate.

5. The wet ground would complete the circuit, thus causing the phone to 
ring.

Which demonstrates that some problems CAN be fixed by pissing and moaning.

>From a friend. Sorry, it was just too funny not to pass on.

-John

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




__._,_.___
Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post | Start a New Topic
Messages in this topic (1)

Recent Activity:

New Members 3
New Files 1

Visit Your Group
For current radio net info, see the bi-weekly net
announcement which is sent to you via e-mail.

The net schedule can also viewed at any time,
by going to:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/armyradios/files/armynets.txt

The URL for the armyradios group at Yahoo is: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/armyradios

Community email addresses:
Post message: armyradios at yahoogroups.com
   Subscribe: armyradios-subscribe at yahoogroups.com
Unsubscribe: armyradios-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
  List owner: armyradios-owner at yahoogroups.com


MARKETPLACE

Stay on top of your group activity without leaving the page you're on - Get 
the Yahoo! Toolbar now.



Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest ? Unsubscribe ? Terms of Use






.


__,_._,___


From aaf-radio-1 at aafradio.org  Sun Oct 30 23:03:27 2011
From: aaf-radio-1 at aafradio.org (Mike Hanz)
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2011 23:03:27 -0400
Subject: [Milsurplus] an/art13 mounting
In-Reply-To: <409383D3C7DC45B2B90F1A28AFDAA55D@lewton>
References: <409383D3C7DC45B2B90F1A28AFDAA55D@lewton>
Message-ID: <4EAE0FFF.7090804@aafradio.org>

On 10/30/2011 8:57 PM, Phil Lewton wrote:
> The gentle man that posted detail on the AN/ART13 mount / base plate can I
> get more detail please

First time I ever got labeled as a gentle man, but I may be the one you 
want.

> Please contact me off list  may have been the AAF RADIO group?

There is no 'group' to aafradio.  Despite my unintentional portrayal of 
a "Wizard of Oz" persona and perhaps the illusion of an incredibly vast 
organization behind him, I am regrettably the only one behind the 
curtain.  What do you want to know?

  - Mike  KC4TOS

From AllanStern at aol.com  Mon Oct 31 01:30:03 2011
From: AllanStern at aol.com (AllanStern at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2011 01:30:03 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Milsurplus] [ARC5] List of Lists...Splinter Group Compilation
Message-ID: <298f8.32969332.3bdf8c5b@aol.com>

Add the YahooGroups I own and operate, listed below:
 
AL STERN  Satellite Beach  FL
AllanStern at aol.com
http://www.facebook.com/AlSternFlorida
http://twitter.com/AllanStern
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MilRadioComms
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CivilAirComms
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HFmonitors
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FloridaMilcom
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SpaceCoastComms
****************************************************

From subs at w1rc.net  Mon Oct 31 08:48:28 2011
From: subs at w1rc.net (Michael, W1RC)
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2011 07:48:28 -0500
Subject: [Milsurplus] FS: DOW-KEY ANTENNA RELAYS
Message-ID: <0LnPWQ-1Qm4Md0HQE-00hkFG@mrelay.perfora.net>

Good Morning Gang:

I have a couple DOW-KEY antenna relays that are surplus to my 
needs.  Both are black wrinkle finish.  One does not have the contact 
set and the other does.

I am asking $25.00 for the one without the contact set and $35.00 for 
the one that does.  Both prices are plus shipping.

If interested please reply by e-mail.

73,

Michael, W1RC


From arc5 at ix.netcom.com  Mon Oct 31 20:05:28 2011
From: arc5 at ix.netcom.com (arc5 at ix.netcom.com)
Date: Tue, 01 Nov 2011 00:05:28 +0000
Subject: [Milsurplus] Need Parts ARC-5 VHF Receiver.
Message-ID: <20111101000528.251CBD0109@attemconn14.att.oz.com>

Need the motor and gears or entire selector from ARC-5 VHF RX.  Thanks, Dave AB5S

----------
Sent from AT&T Wireless using Mobile Email

------Original Message------
From: <AllanStern at aol.com>
To: <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>,<AllanStern at aol.com>
Date: Monday, October 31, 2011 1:30:03 AM GMT-4
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] [ARC5] List of Lists...Splinter Group Compilation

Add the YahooGroups I own and operate, listed below:
 
AL STERN  Satellite Beach  FL
AllanStern at aol.com
http://www.facebook.com/AlSternFlorida
http://twitter.com/AllanStern
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MilRadioComms
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CivilAirComms
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HFmonitors
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FloridaMilcom
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SpaceCoastComms
****************************************************
______________________________________________________________
Milsurplus mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html


