Date   
Re: WS A510 range? - First post

Wedgwood
 



On 13 Nov 2019, at 10:45, Sean_Kelly <Captain.Kelly@...> wrote:


This reminds me of an American set I own, the TRC-77A. CW only, 14 watts RF out, a hybrid design on six separately selectable crystal controlled RX and TX channels. We don't know much about it, except it is from the Vietnam War era, but I've heard it was later contracted by the Dutch, issued with a dipole antenna, and used by their Special Forces in support of NATO. That's the extent of what I know abouthe matter, I'm afraid.



Yes, the TRC 77 is very much of the same genre and has an impressive RF output power. You can also change the crystals fairly easily. The only drawback, I think, is the use of an alkaline secondary battery - which has a terrible effect on the battery box.

Without going too much off topic, I would also put in a good word for the slightly later UK PRC-316 (aka A16), fully transistorised and also a ‘jungle set’. You can change the crystals, but it means opening up the set and although I’ve done it once, I wouldn’t want to do it again!

73

Antony G0TJD

Re: WS A510 range? - First post

Tony
 

Good morning Sean and everyone with similar interests.

 

You are absolutely correct Sean. The TRC77 was modified slightly for Dutch Special Forces, in that the antenna connection is BNC, whereas the US version is, to use their terminology, a “Binding post”. I have owned one for many years, with its ancillaries, although the battery charger is held in the vehicle/military radio battery maintenance department for use there. The radio was used by the US Army for recce patrols where The Dutch Army saw it and decided to use it with dipoles to vastly increase its range as an LRRP set with the Dutch Army Commandos.

 

The ancillaries are not difficult to make up into a complete set, the headphones are a standard 5 connector US Army type, (I use mine with my TAR224 headset), and the CW Key connector is a std. ¼” jack plug.

 

The radio can receive AM signals using the AM/CW switch, but can send CW at a maximum speed of 300 w/p/m. It can be coupled by a special cable to the AN/GRA-71 fast code sender. There is a TRC77A model, which is what I have, the obvious difference being the 5 connector twist-lock plug, which is the type that I have. The TRC77 uses a jack-socket  for the phones. Also the battery plugs at the rear are different. 7-pin connectors for the TRC77, and 2-pin for the TRC77A.

 

I hope that you enjoy the radio if you can find one.

 

73/MFG Tony, G4BCX

Re: WS A510 range? - First post

Sean_Kelly
 

> The Australian A510 is a very interesting set, which helped to fill the gap in the UK HF manpack range in the late 1950s/early 1960s when attention had come to be focused on VHF.

This reminds me of an American set I own, the TRC-77A. CW only, 14 watts RF out, a hybrid design on six separately selectable crystal controlled RX and TX channels. We don't know much about it, except it is from the Vietnam War era, but I've heard it was later contracted by the Dutch, issued with a dipole antenna, and used by their Special Forces in support of NATO. That's the extent of what I know abouthe matter, I'm afraid.

Sean Kelly

--
Sean Kelly,
USA

Re: WS A510 range? - First post

Wedgwood
 

The Australian A510 is a very interesting set, which helped to fill the gap in the UK HF manpack range in the late 1950s/early 1960s when attention had come to be focused on VHF.

It became known as the ‘Jungle set’ because it was suitable for NVIS (Near Vertical Incidence Skywave) propagation: HF groundwaves and VHF got you nowhere in the dense vegetation of Malaya etc. 

It could be used both on Voice (AM) and Morse (CW). 

The transmitter had four crystal controlled channels: the one in use could be netted to the receiver, which had continuous tuning.

73

Antony G0TJD

PS In normal conditions (i.e. not in a jungle, and assuming that ground conductivity - or interference - isn’t a problem) it has quite a good groundwave range. I have managed something like 8 or 9 miles with my own set in the UK.



On 13 Nov 2019, at 09:14, Sean_Kelly <Captain.Kelly@...> wrote:

Dear Group,

I read the A510 set was found during trials to have a range in hilly, jungle terrain of 8 miles (13 klicks). Must have been using CW although I read this a long time ago and took notes from the book/manual. the test might have been at a lower latitude and I'm just wondering, basically: "really"? Seems pretty optimistic for one wattransmitted from a ten-foot aeriel or short wire antenna.

this seems to be a good pointo mention I am looking forwards to months of adding terms to my browser's dictionary. When I make mistakes, please let me know as I am American and therefore cannot properly spell by definition.

I once heard that fire direction (calling for indirect fires) was better done using voice. I don't know the operational history of this A510 set and wonder if anyone knows if artillery missions were requestedwith it's CW capability? Also, does the receiver have a spotting function - the ability to tune the receiver to the transmitter's frequency? My AN/GRC-9 has this facility.

this is my first post to the group and below is the information I put in my profile on groups.io. I'm here to learn.

Sean_Kelly 

Re: WS A510 range? - First post

Sean_Kelly
 

A table showing loss in decibels per 0.1 mile (166 meters) for radio waves of different frequencies in dense jungle foliage:

2 MC       12.6 dB
3 MC       15.4 dB
5 MC       20 dB
10 MC     28 dB
30 MC     48 dB
50 MC     63 dB
100 MC   86 dB



Sean Kelly

--
Sean Kelly,
USA

WS A510 range? - First post

Sean_Kelly
 

Dear Group,

I read the A510 set was found during trials to have a range in hilly, jungle terrain of 8 miles (13 klicks). Must have been using CW although I read this a long time ago and took notes from the book/manual. the test might have been at a lower latitude and I'm just wondering, basically: "really"? Seems pretty optimistic for one wattransmitted from a ten-foot aeriel or short wire antenna.

this seems to be a good pointo mention I am looking forwards to months of adding terms to my browser's dictionary. When I make mistakes, please let me know as I am American and therefore cannot properly spell by definition.

I once heard that fire direction (calling for indirect fires) was better done using voice. I don't know the operational history of this A510 set and wonder if anyone knows if artillery missions were requested with it's CW capability? Also, does the receiver have a spotting function - the ability to tune the receiver to the transmitter's frequency? My AN/GRC-9 has this facility.

this is my first post to the group and below is the information I put in my profile on groups.io. I'm here to learn.

Sean_Kelly
 Joined on Nov 12
 Seattle, Washington, USA  

Lives in the USA. Service in Air Force and Army, truck driver during Operation Desert Storm - part of US 3rd Army. Ham radio operator since 1987. Got my first military radio, a Canadian CPRC-510 then. Collecting since around 1999. I forget things, since the war. Collection includes:

CPRC-26
PRC-6
Greek PRC-6/E
PRC-21
Greek PRC-25T
PRC-77
GRC-9
TRC-77
PRT-4A & PRR-9s

Ham radio has less activity in the West, less-populated half of the USA.

My o
ther hobby is Star Trek. I like to listen to BBC.

Sean Kelly

--
Sean Kelly,
USA

Re: aerial id please

 

Chris,
I loocked in WftW and checked the W.S. 53.  It is part of the horizontal dipole aerial and feeder assembly.  The dipole aerial is made to length depending on which frequency is used.  The No. 9 is the 92 foot aerial.
Thanks again.
Ian (VA6SSV)

Midway - last comment.

Hue Miller
 

I missed one item of avionics. In the SBD close shots, you can see the type DU radio direction finding loop directly to the fore of the rear gunner.

 

I did not want to give a negative impression of the film, despite my comments on occasional technical inaccuracies. I thoroughly enjoyed the

carrier deck scenes. The starting up of the bombers and the coughing of their engines, a distinctive wonderful sound. I was impressed with how

difficult it was for the rear gunner to defend against fast, jinking fighter planes. The scene with the line of 'sweepers' checking the carrier deck

for loose detritus after – action is spot on. Clearly the producers did homework. The pilots' ready room was also very realistic, I thought, and

included the status board up front. And so on.

 

Years ago, in the 1990s when I lived in Seattle, I met a gentleman, Donald R. Blaney ( SK ), who had flown as rear gunner in a TBF off the carrier

Gambier Bay. This carrier was sunk in the 'Battle off Samar', part of the 'Sea Battle of Leyte Gulf'. He told me about diving on Japanese ships,

even after bombs and ammunition was expended,  to try to distract the enemy from pounding our own ships. He said they were firing every

caliber of weapon at the diving planes. Without a carrier to return to, the planes flew on and landed in the Philippines. He also described once,

feeling bored and depressed, he went out and crawled into his plane and tuned the plane's ARB receiver to listen to the Tokyo Rose broadcast.

Now of course, I wish I had interviewed him in greater length. There has been a precipitous drop in the number of those witnesses in the years since,

and now they are very few.

-Hue Miller

Re: Midway conclusion

Bruce_Parker
 

Good points and observations Hue. I’m now re-thinking taking the wife out to see it (oh, I will anyway...)

 

I’ve dealt with movie kit suppliers in the past and generally have a poor opinion of them. Expediency over authenticity every time. That’s fair if the originals are not available but if they are, and they go the easy route anyway, there’s no excuse. The other ‘concession’ seems to be the computer generated aircraft that resemble Star Wars X wings zooming around at twice their real speed like some kind of amped up video game. They completely ruined a remake of Peal Harbour using this technique a few years ago and apparently did the same for Midway. Have these guys never seen a real WW2 aircraft fly at an air show? Or do they have to do this nonsense to appeal to game addicted youngsters?  I recall the time here in Canada a wardrobe group ‘cleaned up’ dozens of sets of original WW1 ’08 Pattern web gear by blanco-ing them 1950’s green. Because, like, what’s the difference and who cares, right?

 

Bruce Parker

Midway conclusion

Hue Miller
 

So I saw this movie Sunday last. I myself would rate it 2 out of 4 stars. Mostly I downrate it for some amateurish dialog and ( what I felt was ) some

inauthentic character types. But I mostly went to get the "feeling" of the time and place anyway, and I do not at all feel my time was not spent well.

One member of our groups commented "too many rapid scene changes". Yes, probably so. Maybe people have shorter attention spans now and

expect that, are used to that? I don't know.

 

I noticed right up front there was a credit to some Shanghai film studio or company. I read that 25% of the $100M production cost was provided by

Chinese investment. For me this maybe explains some scenes where Doolittle's men after bailing out over China, are guided by Chinese guerrilla forces.

After a village is bombed by Japanese planes, one of the Chinese comments something like "the Japanese are making war on the Chinese people". I

mean the implication was that it was not only a war for territory. Of course we know that there lives on, and understandably so, a great deal of anti-

Japanese resentment in Japan's former colonial projects.

 

The episode of the execution of the American pilots I thought not quite accurate, not supportable. Certainly American pilots were routinely executed,

but whether captivity or execution varied by time and place. My argument with these scenes is that the method shown in the film was unlikely.  

 

Now back on – topic. As Brian Harrison has commented, the producers were offered the correct Navy radios for the radio room scenes, but replied

that production was too far along to change plans now. The British air forces R-1155 does light up very nicely, and the Hallicrafters SX-25 also has nicely

lighted dials. Of course, both sets are "wrong" for such actual U.S.. Navy station. I note that also there is no reason for the radioman's typewriter to have

the typewriter carrying case behind it on the desk. No reason to have a portable typewriter at your radio desk.

 

We are "picky", aren't we? But – that's our job, right ?

 

There was also the Zenith Trans-Oceanic, first model, "bomber style", radio shown playing 'Radio Tokyo'. Yamamoto's home is also shown, with the

family listening to some multiband table radio, one with the typical tuning dial city markings as you maybe are familiar with on German tables radios

and such. ( I am pretty sure Yamamoto family did have a multiband home radio and I seem to recall a 1930s U.S. radio magazine photo showing the

children at home listening. ) ( Yes, I was surprised  to see that photo, too !! )

 

I thought in another scene I saw a VERY short glimpse of an AN/URR-35  VHF receiver, but it went by too fast to be sure. At some time in the future,

I may or may not freeze the movie and do some screen shots of particular scenes of interest.

 

I saw one item I suspect very few viewers picked up on. The flight suits of the Japanese aviators seemed to me quite realistic. BUT I was very surprised

indeed so see in one front – on view, the Japanese pilot had a particular microphone on. This was a short cylinder type thing that fastened over the

flyer's mouth. Of course, such device precluded any use of oxygen, so this limited the maximum operational altitude. The particular model of this

microphone attachment seemed to have a 'voice tube' exiting from the front of it. This 'microphone' is correct for the time but a single pilot fighter

plane of course has no use for a voice tube. I think there was also a similar model microphone attachment but equipped with electrical element. I

believe I have one of those. It truly is a mystery why those particular things are so very rare now ! There had to be a big supply just lying around, at one

time. In the same scene, which also passes by very fast, it looked like the pilot reaches down to flip a switch on what looks to me like a Type 99-3 voice

radio transmitter. You only see the corner of the radio, and very momentarily, but I thought I recognized the radio package and control markings.

Again, right equipment for the time, but wrong place – not used in 'Zero' fighter.

-Hue Miller

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Re: FW: FT-241 LF Crystals as a Long - Term Investment Instrument

jan
 

Hello Michael

FT-241 crystals can be opened with  two screws .
then you will see the small crystal plate that is welded to a wire at each flat side.
the two wires are welded to the connecting pins.
This is a somewhat fragile construction and the the crystal plate could be disconnected from one or both wires after 70 years or so.
The FT-243 crystals are far more rugged and their crystal plates can be cleaned.
Best regards,
Jan PA3FYZ

Re: aerial id please

Chris_Suslowicz
 

Michael (G8MOB) wrote:

Hi Chris

I may be able to help.

I Googled Niphan sockets and they seem to resemble old fashioned bright metal power sockets found on caravans and trailers. I may have the wrong Niphan!
No, those are the right ones, as used on Signals batteries during WW2 and afterwards, but with a single central pin instead of two dissimilar ones for LT supplies.


Inside the D11 wagons, the antenna connections from the transmitter to the dummy load and VSWR meter were the coarse thread Plessey type coaxial connectors.
I thought they were the fine thread aluminium alloy type? Certainly I found a couple at Beltring for someone and they were well pleased with the purchase.

The external socket(s) on the side of the vehicle for connecting the coax for a dipole was the standard Burndept type. The dipole centre piece was also a Burndept.

The antenna wire was normal R4 copper.

Marconi provided TX and RX baluns for a 75 coax to 600ohm open wire feeder using R4 for use with Vs and rhombics for long haul links but we had no use for them. Besides, the huge real estate needed for a rhombic was strictly for a home station or specialist units with lots of infantry for protection.

I have in storage a TX balun - a massive thing the size and shape of a chamber pot with two long feed through insulator "horns" for the open feeder. I cannot recall the coax socket but it was bigger than a Burndept.
That may be for the "Antenna Group, Sloping Vee", or possibly for something considerably more potent than a "D" series transmitter. (Marconi SWB or T E10, etc.)

Best regards,
Chris. (G8KGS)

Re: aerial id please

Michael O'Beirne
 

Hi Chris

I may be able to help.

I Googled Niphan sockets and they seem to resemble old fashioned bright metal power sockets found on caravans and trailers. I may have the wrong Niphan!

Inside the D11 wagons, the antenna connections from the transmitter to the dummy load and VSWR meter were the coarse thread Plessey type coaxial connectors. The external socket(s) on the side of the vehicle for connecting the coax for a dipole was the standard Burndept type. The dipole centre piece was also a Burndept.

The antenna wire was normal R4 copper.

Marconi provided TX and RX baluns for a 75 coax to 600ohm open wire feeder using R4 for use with Vs and rhombics for long haul links but we had no use for them. Besides, the huge real estate needed for a rhombic was strictly for a home station or specialist units with lots of infantry for protection.

I have in storage a TX balun - a massive thing the size and shape of a chamber pot with two long feed through insulator "horns" for the open feeder. I cannot recall the coax socket but it was bigger than a Burndept.

73s
Michael
G8MOB

-----Original Message-----
From: Chris_Suslowicz
Sent: Monday, November 11, 2019 12:09 AM
To: wireless-set-no19@groups.io
Subject: Re: [wireless-set-no19] aerial id please

Ian Cooper wrote:

Thanks Chris. The antenna was in with a load of Larkspur era equipment and though I thought it may belong to the era, I couldn't relate it to any sets that I have.
I don't think it was used with the D11 or D13, but could be wrong - they were using the Burndept sockets rather than Niphan (or Pattern 104 fine thread for some of the aerial connections - set to ATU, etc.), and Niphans are just Too Bloody Heavy. The "Wire, Electric, R4" was still used though, probably with the specialised transformers and terminating resistors for making up rhombic and sloping vee aerials, not sure about dipoles.

People who actually used the kit in anger will be able to fill in the details. (Waves at G8MOB and others.) :-)>

Best regards,
Chris. (G8KGS)
Junior Password Gnome.

Re: Ve1nu qso

 

Let me know where on 40 you would like to try.


7 3
Reed - VE1NU


Re: Ve1nu qso

Martin Benoit
 

17:30 z. Not really good on 80. Maybe 40

Re: Ve1nu qso

 

Right now at 16:57 ZULU time on 3.600 Mhz


7 3
VE1NU

Ve1nu qso

Martin Benoit
 

where and. Time
Martin 
VA2ZO

Re: aerial id please

Chris_Suslowicz
 

Ian Cooper wrote:

Thanks Chris. The antenna was in with a load of Larkspur era equipment and though I thought it may belong to the era, I couldn't relate it to any sets that I have.
I don't think it was used with the D11 or D13, but could be wrong - they were using the Burndept sockets rather than Niphan (or Pattern 104 fine thread for some of the aerial connections - set to ATU, etc.), and Niphans are just Too Bloody Heavy. The "Wire, Electric, R4" was still used though, probably with the specialised transformers and terminating resistors for making up rhombic and sloping vee aerials, not sure about dipoles.

People who actually used the kit in anger will be able to fill in the details. (Waves at G8MOB and others.) :-)>

Best regards,
Chris. (G8KGS)
Junior Password Gnome.

Re: aerial id please

 

Thanks Chris.  The antenna was in with a load of Larkspur era equipment and though I thought it may belong to the era, I couldn't relate it to any sets that I have.
Regards,
Ian Cooper

Re: WTB a 19 set 12pin dogbone and Genset

Rustyrod
 

12 pin dogbone in Toowoomba