Litzendraht wrote:
Chuck Harris wrote:
You make it sound like we (the US) were doing something evil, by lending
you our manufacturing capability, and helping you with the war effort.


Chuck,
I think it might have been more a case of "immitation is the best
form of flattery". I wasn't old enough to remember, but us Yanks were
probably using all HF radio in our fighters and bombers. But once we
got involved in the war effort, the success of the RAF and others with
VHF radio must have told us that we needed similiar equipment. We could
have certainly started from ground zero with our own designs, but
reliable aircraft communications was a vital factor at the time, and
VHF, being still a new form of transmission in those days, would have
taken months and months on the drawing boards and lab and field testing
to come up with a viable, operational unit.

I can see where it could have been quite desireable to take a known
working design, put our Yankee spin on it and get it into production.
We and the Allies had a big job ahead of us over there and time was of
essence. And yes,we were lending and loaning supplies, equipment,
manufacturing, (and fighting men as well), as a part of a team effort
to resolve a terrific world threat.

John

Hi John,

Everything I read says the SCR-522 was a redesign of the British TR-1123,
that was done to make it possible to mass produce it with US tooling.

Certainly the US used the TR-1123 design as a quick way of getting a working
VHF design into the war as quickly as possible. It was several years before
the much more capable ARC-1 came out.

My only objection was the way the OP stated that it was copy. It had the
familiar taste of US bashing. If I read the OP's intentions incorrectly,
and it sounds like I probably did, I am sorry.

-Chuck

Chuck Harris wrote:
Litzendraht wrote:

Chuck Harris wrote:

You make it sound like we (the US) were doing something evil, by lending
you our manufacturing capability, and helping you with the war effort.



Chuck,
I think it might have been more a case of "immitation is the best
form of flattery". I wasn't old enough to remember, but us Yanks were
probably using all HF radio in our fighters and bombers. But once we
got involved in the war effort, the success of the RAF and others with
VHF radio must have told us that we needed similiar equipment. We could
have certainly started from ground zero with our own designs, but
reliable aircraft communications was a vital factor at the time, and
VHF, being still a new form of transmission in those days, would have
taken months and months on the drawing boards and lab and field testing
to come up with a viable, operational unit.

I can see where it could have been quite desireable to take a known
working design, put our Yankee spin on it and get it into production.
We and the Allies had a big job ahead of us over there and time was of
essence. And yes,we were lending and loaning supplies, equipment,
manufacturing, (and fighting men as well), as a part of a team effort
to resolve a terrific world threat.

John


Hi John,

Everything I read says the SCR-522 was a redesign of the British TR-1123,
that was done to make it possible to mass produce it with US tooling.

Certainly the US used the TR-1123 design as a quick way of getting a
working
VHF design into the war as quickly as possible. It was several years
before
the much more capable ARC-1 came out.

My only objection was the way the OP stated that it was copy. It had the
familiar taste of US bashing. If I read the OP's intentions incorrectly,
and it sounds like I probably did, I am sorry.

-Chuck
G'day Chuck.

There was no intention of US bashing or of there being something evil in
my story. John (see above) stated the situation better than I and I
agree with his sentiments.

Lionel L Sharp, VK4NS

Lionel Sharp wrote:
Chuck Harris wrote:
Litzendraht wrote:

Chuck Harris wrote:

You make it sound like we (the US) were doing something evil, by lending
you our manufacturing capability, and helping you with the war effort.



Chuck,
I think it might have been more a case of "immitation is the best
form of flattery". I wasn't old enough to remember, but us Yanks were
probably using all HF radio in our fighters and bombers. But once we
got involved in the war effort, the success of the RAF and others with
VHF radio must have told us that we needed similiar equipment. We could
have certainly started from ground zero with our own designs, but
reliable aircraft communications was a vital factor at the time, and
VHF, being still a new form of transmission in those days, would have
taken months and months on the drawing boards and lab and field testing
to come up with a viable, operational unit.

I can see where it could have been quite desireable to take a known
working design, put our Yankee spin on it and get it into production.
We and the Allies had a big job ahead of us over there and time was of
essence. And yes,we were lending and loaning supplies, equipment,
manufacturing, (and fighting men as well), as a part of a team effort
to resolve a terrific world threat.

John


Hi John,

Everything I read says the SCR-522 was a redesign of the British TR-1123,
that was done to make it possible to mass produce it with US tooling.

Certainly the US used the TR-1123 design as a quick way of getting a
working
VHF design into the war as quickly as possible. It was several years
before
the much more capable ARC-1 came out.

My only objection was the way the OP stated that it was copy. It had the
familiar taste of US bashing. If I read the OP's intentions incorrectly,
and it sounds like I probably did, I am sorry.

-Chuck
G'day Chuck.

There was no intention of US bashing or of there being something evil in
my story. John (see above) stated the situation better than I and I
agree with his sentiments.

Lionel L Sharp, VK4NS

For more details, check out www.aafradio.org - the Americans could not
communicate with t-he British who were using VHF in their aircraft, so
the SCR522 was a "copy" of the British design until the Americans could
do the necessary R & D. No slight on our American friends intended -
stop being so paranoid! - when we do want to insult you, you will be
left in no doubt hi hi

Andrew VK3BFA.

Well,
Chuck, Andrew, and Lionel,
I'm glad we got this topic resolved. And further discussion of the BC
624 and 625 can now begin.

My first two meter rig was a home brewed transceiver using a design
from the old 112mc. WERS (war emergency radio service) band. I used a
6C4 triode as a super-regen detector which reverted to an ultra audion
oscillator on transmit using a multi-section rotary switch. 6AT6 1st
audio/mic amplifier and 6V6 audio output/modulator. I had a buddy
across town that shared interest in two meters and he had a similiar
rig, but with a single 3A5 dual triode tube and it used batteries.

My rig ran on a 150 volt supply and would just light a #47 pilot lamp
as a dummy load. My friends rig on "B" batteries showed no output with
a lamp load. But it worked! We were about 3 or 4 miles apart and made a
solid QSO.

My first real two meter rig was a T23/ARC-5 transmitter that I bought
at a surplus dealer for $12. That prompted me to build a crystal
controlled converter using two 6AK5's and two 6J6's and used that ahead
of a Hammarlund HQ-129X receiver. Built a home made 5 element Yagi made
from old TV antenna hardware. I was on the air on two meter AM in fine
style.

The 522 came along a bit later when someone gave me a bunch old stuff.
I spent many hours replacing all those Micamold paper condensers in the
receiver. I had a lot of fun with the 522 and the T23 and learned a
whole lot about VHF. My present day knowledge has not advanced anything
beyond those days prior to 1960. Ha!

For you chaps down under, talking about old times motivated me to pull
an early log book. My first QSO with VK land was VK2EG on 14.065 mc. in
1957. I was running 100 watts input to a pair of push-pull 807's and a
ground plane antenna. And the HQ-129X receiver, of course.

Been a long day, I'm gonna grab a cold 807. Hi!

73, John

All,
In the late 50's, all of us who wanted to get on 2-meters used the '522
transmitter. I also seem to recall that we could, and did, trade the
finals either the 832A for an 829B, or vice versa, to get a bit more
power. I think there was a mechanical consideration, too.. but that was
a long time ago! That transmitter, plus a Tapetone or Tecraft receiver
converter, and you were on your way. de K3HVG

Andrew VK3BFA wrote:

G'day Chuck.

There was no intention of US bashing or of there being something evil in
my story. John (see above) stated the situation better than I and I
agree with his sentiments.

Lionel L Sharp, VK4NS

For more details, check out www.aafradio.org - the Americans could not
communicate with t-he British who were using VHF in their aircraft, so
the SCR522 was a "copy" of the British design until the Americans could
do the necessary R & D. No slight on our American friends intended -
stop being so paranoid! - when we do want to insult you, you will be
left in no doubt hi hi

Andrew VK3BFA.


Hi Lionel, Andrew, etal,

I am sorry for over reacting.

My first 2M rig was a decidedly breadboard contraption that used a
6J6 as a push-pull oscillator, and had a modified phonograph audio
output stage as the modulator. It had no xtal, and drifted so badly
that I could never be sure where I would end up. I ditched that
mess, and used a borrowed ARC-1 in its original 28V dynamotor condition.
The ARC-1 was pure pleasure to operate. It sounded nice (inspite of
its carbon microphone), and could change channels at a whim.

A lot of folks swapped 829's in for 832's in some of the vhf rigs, but
the ARC-1 was too compact for that treatment. The 829 was a fair bit
taller, and would run into the top of the bakelite socket assembly
the ARC-1 used.

-Chuck

Still have an ARC-1. It one of those that Eastern Airlines (?)
converted to 50 channels. While working for Page Airways at DCA in the
mid-60's, I managed to get the unit and an original book with the ComCo
airline mod included.

Chuck Harris wrote:
My first 2M rig was a decidedly breadboard contraption that used a
6J6 as a push-pull oscillator, and had a modified phonograph audio
output stage as the modulator. It had no xtal, and drifted so badly
that I could never be sure where I would end up. I ditched that
mess, and used a borrowed ARC-1 in its original 28V dynamotor condition.
The ARC-1 was pure pleasure to operate. It sounded nice (inspite of
its carbon microphone), and could change channels at a whim.

A lot of folks swapped 829's in for 832's in some of the vhf rigs, but
the ARC-1 was too compact for that treatment. The 829 was a fair bit
taller, and would run into the top of the bakelite socket assembly
the ARC-1 used.

-Chuck



Chuck,

I feel your pain. My first attempt on 220 mc. was about 1965 and I
used a breadboard contraption with a push-pull 12AT7 and I used the
output section of an Olson reel to reel tape recorder as a modulator
and B+ supply. It worked OK. Maybe a watt if I was lucky.

I remember the ARC 1's and was there an ARC 3 or 4?, but the 522's
were very common. One of my high school buddies had a 522 in the
original equipment case with the contol box. When he changed
frequencies, what a sound! Kind of a clacking, ripping noise as those
shifter slides did there thing. But it worked and sounded good. And my
"S" meter kicked up when he talked. If you recall, the driver was
modulated along with the PA.

I used 829's (or 3E29's) in both my 522 and T23/ARC 5 rigs. In the T23,
I got rid of the PA turret assy and replaced it with a nice 4 turn
center tapped coil and butterfly tuning condenser (from a 522 with a
couple of plates removed).

Those were the days! They'll never return, but I'm glad I was there and
had the experience. Sorta like steam trains and "hot boxes". How many
people today have ever seen a hot box? I'm glad I have the memories,
and no one can take them away.

John