Uncle Peter wrote:

I just picked one up a few months ago. Are they worth restoring,
and how does their performance stack up?

In my opinion - they are a quite worth-while receiver - not quite in the
R-39Xx class - but not all that far from it. Definitely in the upper end
of the scale for that era and technology - being built more like a
military radio (using ceramic wafer switches, and sealed transformers,
etc.) Like some of the National and other "upper end" commercial units -
the AR-88 was used by the military quite a bit - some receiving formal
ID plates, etc. some of the later ones receiving Signal Corps
designation R-320 (though these were actually labeled by RCA as SC-88
receivers).

The FAA used them for many, many years - there was even a "triple
receiver" diversity rack having three stacked with supporting equipment...

best regards...
--
randy guttery

A Tender Tale - a page dedicated to those Ships and Crews
so vital to the United States Silent Service:
http://tendertale.com

Randy or Sherry Guttery wrote:
Uncle Peter wrote:

I just picked one up a few months ago. Are they worth restoring,
and how does their performance stack up?

In my opinion - they are a quite worth-while receiver - not quite in the
R-39Xx class - but not all that far from it. Definitely in the upper end
of the scale for that era and technology - being built more like a
military radio (using ceramic wafer switches, and sealed transformers,
etc.) Like some of the National and other "upper end" commercial units -
the AR-88 was used by the military quite a bit - some receiving formal
ID plates, etc. some of the later ones receiving Signal Corps
designation R-320 (though these were actually labeled by RCA as SC-88
receivers).

It's wide as hell. Consequently the audio quality on shortwave broadcasts
is excellent. It's not a DX machine, though.

I remember seeing an RCA Globecomm facility when I was a kid which was
equipped with three AR-88 sets and two Collins R-388 sets, and all of the
operators preferred working on the R-388 positions.

Still, saying "not as good as an R-388" is decent praise.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message
...
It's wide as hell. Consequently the audio quality on shortwave
broadcasts
is excellent. It's not a DX machine, though.

I remember seeing an RCA Globecomm facility when I was a kid which was
equipped with three AR-88 sets and two Collins R-388 sets, and all of the
operators preferred working on the R-388 positions.

Still, saying "not as good as an R-388" is decent praise.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

I'm surprised that it is that "wide." The selectivity curves are very
impressive;
and RCA put a lot of effort into the IF transformer design. I suspect
aligning
the IF and filter will be a bear to do.

This receiver is from an RCA Global Communications facility, it still has
the
RCA sticker and inventory number on the front panel. There's also a
custom calibrated BFO plate that wasn't on the orignal RX either.

Pete

Uncle Peter wrote:

I'm surprised that it is that "wide." The selectivity curves are very
impressive;
and RCA put a lot of effort into the IF transformer design. I suspect
aligning
the IF and filter will be a bear to do.

To align the IF correctly - one needs a sweep generator. And yes - not
aligned correctly - they would imitate the nearest "barn door" for
bandwidth.

Best regards...
--
randy guttery

A Tender Tale - a page dedicated to those Ships and Crews
so vital to the United States Silent Service:
http://tendertale.com

"Randy or Sherry Guttery" wrote in message

To align the IF correctly - one needs a sweep generator. And yes - not
aligned correctly - they would imitate the nearest "barn door" for
bandwidth.

Best regards...
--
randy guttery

A Tender Tale - a page dedicated to those Ships and Crews
so vital to the United States Silent Service:
http://tendertale.com


Yes a sweep gen and oscilloscope are nice in this regard but the job can be
done correctly using a accurate sig gen or at least close enough for this
type of rig.

--
Regards
B.H.
Hill Amplification
http://hillamplification.com

Brian's Radio Universe
http://webpages.charter.net/brianhill/500.htm

In article , Brian Hill wrote:
"Randy or Sherry Guttery" wrote in message

To align the IF correctly - one needs a sweep generator. And yes - not
aligned correctly - they would imitate the nearest "barn door" for
bandwidth.

Yes a sweep gen and oscilloscope are nice in this regard but the job can be
done correctly using a accurate sig gen or at least close enough for this
type of rig.

I believe that the IF on the AR-88 is peaked and not staggered, which
means you can indeed get away with just a signal generator and a scope.

Again, the IF on the AR-88 may be pretty tight for something with only
LCR networks, but it's not anywhere near as tight as crystal or mechanical
filters will allow. This is either a substantial advantage or disadvantage
depending on your application.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Scott Dorsey wrote:

I believe that the IF on the AR-88 is peaked and not staggered, which
means you can indeed get away with just a signal generator and a scope.

They are indeed (or are supposed to be) stagger tuned - with two
transformers over-coupled and two under-coupled --- that's why the RCA
manual has such a lengthy procedure - using a sweep gen.

best regards...
--
randy guttery

A Tender Tale - a page dedicated to those Ships and Crews
so vital to the United States Silent Service:
http://tendertale.com

"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message
...
In article , Brian Hill
wrote:
"Randy or Sherry Guttery" wrote
in message

To align the IF correctly - one needs a sweep generator.
And yes - not
aligned correctly - they would imitate the nearest "barn
door" for
bandwidth.

Yes a sweep gen and oscilloscope are nice in this regard
but the job can be
done correctly using a accurate sig gen or at least close
enough for this
type of rig.

I believe that the IF on the AR-88 is peaked and not
staggered, which
means you can indeed get away with just a signal generator
and a scope.

Again, the IF on the AR-88 may be pretty tight for
something with only
LCR networks, but it's not anywhere near as tight as
crystal or mechanical
filters will allow. This is either a substantial
advantage or disadvantage
depending on your application.
--scott

--

I just rechecked the instruction book for the AR-88, the
IF is indeed peaked, not stagger tuned. What may confuse the
issue is that two of the transformers have variable coupling
and two also are double stages, that is, there are four
coils and what amounts to a filter in the transformer. The
stages should be peaked when at the minimum bandwidth
setting without the crystal filter. In that setting the
transformers are all slightly undercoupled so should have
single peaks. The complex transformers result in better
skirt selectivity than simple transformers would give with
the same number of IF stages. The selectivity will not be as
good as the 6 or pole mechanical or crystal lattice filters
found in many newer receivers but should still be very good
in comparison to most receivers. This IF is unique in having
both double IF transformers _and_ variable coupling. A
similar transformer, but without the variable bandwidth, is
found in the National HRO-60 (and I think also the HRO-50).
While "visual" tuning using a sweep oscillator and scope
will probably result in more accurate tuning, or at least
easier tuning, conventional methods should work fine with
some care. A similar condition is met in other receivers
with variable bandwidth IFs such as the Super Pro series,
the SP-600 and some others. The coupling method used by RCA
and Hammarlund results in a symmetrical pass band at all
settings, some others, notebly the system in the
Hallicrafters SX-28, do not.
Note that there is no external phasing control for the
crystal filter on the AR-88, it has an internal trimmer.
Some other versions of the receiver (like the CR-88) do have
an external phasing control with some re-arrangements of the
controls on the front panel.
RCA used hundreds of these receivers in triple diversity
combinations at RCA Communications facilities and singly at
Radiomarine shore stations. They are not a match for the
better, later designed, double or triple conversion
receivers such as the Collins 51J or R-390 series, for one
thing no single conversion receiver can match the very high
image rejection of the double conversion types at
frequencies above about 10mhz.
The 6SG7 tubes used in the AR-88 RF and IF stages are
about equivalent to the 6BA6 with somewhat higher
capacitance due to the octal base.
A great many of these receivers, particularly the ones
used in diversity set-ups were not equipped with signal
strength meters but they can be added (if you can find them)
to any of them.
There are operating and maintenance handbooks at several
sources on the web.


--
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA

Brian Hill wrote:

Yes a sweep gen and oscilloscope are nice in this regard but the job can be
done correctly using a accurate sig gen or at least close enough for this
type of rig.

Yes, someone with a mile of patience might get all sections tuned right
with a stable gen - I'm just not that patient, and "close enough"
probably depends on how good of performance someone is willing to settle
for.

best regards...
--
randy guttery

A Tender Tale - a page dedicated to those Ships and Crews
so vital to the United States Silent Service:
http://tendertale.com

"Randy or Sherry Guttery" wrote in message
...
Brian Hill wrote:

Yes a sweep gen and oscilloscope are nice in this regard but the job can
be done correctly using a accurate sig gen or at least close enough for
this type of rig.

Yes, someone with a mile of patience might get all sections tuned right
with a stable gen - I'm just not that patient, and "close enough" probably
depends on how good of performance someone is willing to settle for.

best regards...
--
randy guttery

A Tender Tale - a page dedicated to those Ships and Crews
so vital to the United States Silent Service:
http://tendertale.com

I suppose but I've done well using just Sig Gen. I guess being bald and not
having any hair to pull out helps. I guess if a AR-88 was the only radio I
owned and my shack wasn't plum full of vintage and modern gear I'd probably
fire up the sweep and scope to align one. But I've gotten pretty good
results with the old HP 8640. It's spot on and I keep it in good shape. But
yes your right, a sweep and scope to peek the IF on freq is optimum.

PS, I still use a matchbook cover to set the points on my model T.


--
Regards
B.H.
Hill Amplification
http://hillamplification.com

Brian's Radio Universe
http://webpages.charter.net/brianhill/500.htm