|[AMRadio] WW II Army Field Sets|
James M. Walker
chejmw at acsu.buffalo.edu
Sat Jul 10 00:23:14 EDT 2004
I am not sure I understand what is is you are planning to do here. Write
a story is one thing, but why the desire to move a transmitter to 20
If it is just for the pleasure of doing it, for a soldier in WWII, I
there would not be much call for that sort of thing. Assuming a soldier
got hold of the set, and have sufficient time I would have to say
, would it work, again maybe. Take any enterprising young radio operator
and give him enough time to tinker, and he will probably be able to move
just about any transmitter to just about any frequency.
Not enough info though to determine, if it would have been
for that time frame.
As for the "portable" BC-610! I once talked with an NCO who was in his
and talking about how he and about a platoon of guys carried a
set into the jungle for one of the coast watchers. He said, they carried
everything, including a generator, and hid the thing in a cave for the
coast watcher and his helpers. I had to sort of accept his word however
there are some real strange stories down under about the coast watcher
So why the modification to twenty meters by a radio operator in WWII,
was he going to talk to?
Kim Elmore wrote:
> Thanks a *bunch*!
> Given the st-up I've created, the SCR-188 would work FB :) So, do you (or
> anyone else) know what would be involved in tweaking the BC-191/BC-312 (or
> the JT-350A) combination to work on 20 m? Is this something a guy back
> then, with a bit of time, could do, or does the BC-191 design simply
> preclude such a conversion? I ask because the BC-191 has a plethora of
> "tuning units," about whose function I'm not entirely certain. I'm
> guessing these were exciters. If so, could one of these have been re-tuned
> to cover 20 m and, if *that* could be done, would the PA be able to tune 20
> m? And I'm completely clueless about the BC-312 receiver, but I thought I
> saw (somewhere) that it could tune up to 18 MHz, which would do the trick
> for receive.
> At least these things could also do AM!
> Kim Elmore, N5OP
> At 07:48 PM 7/9/2004, you wrote:
> >To add to all the information you've received...
> >The HF equipment that comes closest to your requirement of "a portable set
> >that can be carried in
> >the back of jeep and lifted by a couple of guys," would be the SCR-284.
> >This was a compact (for the time) unit with the transmitter and receiver
> >in one
> >cabinet. Could be mounted in a jeep and run off a dynamotor fed in turn
> >6 or 12 vdc from the vehicle. Or, set up in the weeds and run off of a hand
> >cranked generator. Widely used in all theaters. Low powered, though (5
> >watts phone, 20 watts CW), and only covered 3.8 to 5.8 mHz. The BC-1306
> >(mentioned by someone else) and the GRC-9 radios were successors, the
> >latter radio
> >arriving just at the end of the conflict.
> >The various BC-312/BC-191 combinations (SCR-177, 188, 193, etc.) covered a
> >wider frequency range but were much bigger and heavier. To get 160
> >through 20M
> >coverage would have required the BC-610 based SCR-299, 399 and/or 499 systems
> >for which one would need a truck (or a small room in the case of the 499).
> >There were some other sets that come kinda close to your requirement. The
> >JT-350A covered 1.5 - 12 mHz and put out 75 watts. This was a commercial
> >the Air Corps went around the Signal corps to bootleg into service. Nice
> >rig but hard to find. There were also the SCR-506 and SCR-281, both
> >limited in
> >frequency coverage and somewhat unwieldy.
> >Dennis D. W7QHO
> >Glendale, CA
> >AMRadio mailing list
> >AMRadio at mailman.qth.net
> AMRadio mailing list
> AMRadio at mailman.qth.net
More information about the AMRadio mailing list
This page last updated 21 Feb 2018.