| |
Military
Collector Group Post
Backmail #44:
(9 pages) PPS-4??? GRC-164?? SOLID STATE PRC-6's? AND SOLID STATING IN
GENERAL; From Hue Miller & Dennis Starks TONKIN HEATHKIT? PRC-33! from
Ed Zeranski, & Dennis Starks MORE TONKIN HEATHKIT? from Ed Zeranski VC
& Heathkits; from Bill Howard
PPS-4??? Dennis, Have a question for you or for the
group: Anyone have any idea what a AN/PPS-4 is worth? I got one sometime
back and may donate/trade to the local mil museum or trade elseware if
not wanted there. 73 Joseph W Pinner Lafayette, LA KC5IJD EMail: kc5ijd@net-connect.net
FOR THOSE THAT DON'T KNOW,A PPS-4 IS AN EARLY MANPACK RADAR SET PRIMARILY
DESIGNED TO DETECT MOVING GROUND VEHICLES & PERSONNEL. IT & IT'S SUCCESSORS
THE PPS-5,6 WERE ALSO FOUND USEFUL IN VIETNAM LOCATING THE ORIGIN OF INCOMMING
MORTAR FIRE. DON'T NOW KNOW JUST WHAT ONE OF THOSE THINGS WOULD BE WORTH.
i PURCHASED A PPS-6 FROM A TEXAS DEALER AT A KANSAS CITY HAMFEST A COUPLE
YEARS AGO FOR $75.00. THE ONLY ONE HE HAD LEFT WITH HIM WAS HIS DISPLAY
ONE. SO HE PROMISED TO SHIP ME ANOTHER SOON AS HE GONE HOME,NEVER GOT
IT! MILCOM HAD THEM A YEAR OR TOO AGO FOR AROUND $150.00,SO I'D GUESS
THIS RANGE. IF YOUR TAX MAN & A DEDUCTION ARE INVOLVED THEN A LITTLE MORE!
I'D LIKE TO WORK SOMETHING OUT WITH YOU ON IT,IF I GOT ANYTHING YOU WANT.
WOULD LIKE TO SET IT UP IN THE WINDOW (NEXT TO ALL THE OTHER GREEN GOODIES)
TURNED ON. DRIVES THE TRUCK DRIVERS NUTS! ALSO MAKES IT A LITTLE EASIER
TO GET OUT ONTO THE HIGHWAY. IT'S A 45 MPH SPEED ZONE HERE BUT THE AVERAGE
SPEED IS 70. DENNIS ****************************************************************
GRC-164?? Dear mil. radio answer man- Dennis, your
batting 100 percent, let's see what you got on this one! GRC-164 aka "Crash
radio:. Putty gray and the exact same size as a PRC-25. 3 channel crystal
controlled and works on 12 D cells. 2 of the 3 channels on my radio are
marked 121.5 and 243.0 Is it true that this radio was used on larger naval
aircraft as a survival radio. It is stickered from North Island NAS. Can't
find anything in my Army LOAPS communications manual for GRC-164. It uses
a HS 250 handset and also has built in speaker. No antenna for it but
has a screw thread antenna mount for some type of whip antenna. This is
a mystery? Can you fill in any blanks. Got a TM or Navair manual #. Waiting
to hear what the answer man can give me. Danny Cahn --------------------------------------------------------------
Can't somebody come up with some easy questions? Like
Dennis,how many teeth you got? Or what's you favorite color? Or how long
s your %$#)? These are nice easy questions! Answers None,None(I'm color
blind), None of your damn business! Don't know shit about the GRC-164.
Did a little checkin. Fedlog 95 list the US Navy as the only user, with
an original cost of $5390.00, with a differed cost of $1900(I think this
is a value they place on things when they become dated equipment). The
manufacture was MESC of Ft Wayne Ind. As for it's use as a Naval large
aircraft survival radio? I don't think so. Look at the thing! #1)the use
of "D" cell batteries. Sets of that type need batteries capable of operation
at full power even after extremely long periods of storage, & environmental
conditions. No "D" cell ever made, or in any form could produce these
required goals. In addition the military has traditionally shy'd away
from the use of discreet cells in it's front line equipment. Even in the
very few cases they were used,it short order "packaged types" replaced
them. This for several reasons, those listed above plus the fact that
they are not dummy proof I/E + & - are not included in our 26 character
alphabet,& when we are hard pressed to find operators that even know these,the
problems are evident. Second, the friction contacts between each individual
cell are a constant source of trouble. These in a radio where human life
is at stake? Again, I don't think so. #2)The radio has a built in loud
speaker! For many reasons this would disqualify the radio for it's supposed
purpose. How many military radios do you know of with built in speakers?
Damn few. For good reason, here are only a couple. A) we need not broadcast
to a football field our presents. B) In all types of military radio equipment,
power supply conservation is of utmost importance. This is especially
true of emergency or any other battery operated equipment. The circuits
to drive a loud speaker would require nearly as much power from the batteries
as the radio would use during transmit. The US military is in fact so
concerned about battery conservation that they use 2 watt FM back radios
when other countries use 5 & up. !0 watt class SSB radios where elsewhere
20 watt plus sets are in use. They buy 2 watt commercial radios for general
use, while the commercial equivalent radio is a 5 watt model. There are
other reasons for RF power limitations but I best stop before this book
gets to many pages. C)The added weight of the speaker & it's asso circuits.
#3)The GRC designation would indicate the radio was intended to serve
a ground role. Though this is indeed not a etched in stone rule, when
combined with the above the prognoses looks even worse for our supposed
purpose. The radio probably used an H-189 handset & not a H-250(these
are a late enovation of the last ten years). The only thing that makes
sense about the radio is it's screw mount antenna. I could speculate as
to what the radio might have been used for, but my fingers are gettin
tired, & I think I'm gonna take a nap. Maybe somebody else can shed some
light on it for you. Hint! Dennis Starks; MILITARY RADIO COLLECTOR/HISTORIAN
military-radio-guy@juno.com *******************************************
SOLID STATE PRC-6's? AND SOLID STATING IN GENERAL;
From Hue Miller & Dennis Starks Dennis, has this topic already come up,
the transistorized PRC-6's that were seen offered in SGN some years back?
Who did this work? have you ever seen one? Also, how about your comment
on this, altho it's so far not been achieved: direct plug in replacements
for tubes in sets such as BC-611, only difference set would operate off
lower voltage. i have been thinking of the BC-222-322 in this way. uses
too many different voltages for me to probably ever get it going. but
if i ran it with 2 FETs, built on tube bases, then operate the whole thing
off the one relay battery, it would have much less transmitter power,
but the receiver would still superregenerate and could still be demonstrated
as a portable. Hue ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hue, Actually solid stating the PRC-6 has been done
(see below). At least two of these conversions were of US origins with
a short lived Californian company being named. The first used a standard
PRC-6 chassis, and had the solid state skunk works contained in two modules(potted
in epoxy) and permanently affixed in the place of the tubes. It was not
serviceable in any way. It had only a single resistor replaced on the
bottom side of the chassis. A third module directly replaced the output
tube. There is absolutely no outward indication on this radio that it
is anything other than a standard PRC-6. Those inspected by me were housed
in standard Raytheon produced cabinets, and had standard PRC-6 data plates.
There are no markings inside, or out that would give a clue as to the
abnormal origin of this radio. The second used removable modules that
plugged directly into space left by the vacated tubes. Very little is
known of this variant. It is possible that both these originated from
the same source. As the story goes, a small company in California was
founded by a Russian emigrant in the early-mid 70's. The radios produced
are reported to have been purchased by the US government, then supplied
to Quantra Rebel's in Central America. But you all know how to take such
reports! The story concludes with this small company going bankrupt due
to insufficient government purchases. At least three heavily modified
versions of the PRC-6 are also known to have been produced in Germany.
The first was the PRC-6/6, a six channel version of our own, it was not
however solid state, and only the cabinet bares any resemblance to the
original US design, not even the crystals are interchangeable. A second
version produced was solid state, it was a single channel radio and used
the same crystal as a standard PRC-6. As there is several conflicting
accounts of this radio, and it's model number, I can't comment on how
it was constructed, or what it's model number was. But two things do stand
out, the model of PRC-6T(also connected to a radio of US origin), and
the fact that retro-fit kits were available to convert existing standard
PRC-6's. The third variant was the PRC-6/180. This was a solid state synthesized
radio with a capacity of 180 channels. Like the earlier version, retro-fit
kits were also offered to convert existing standard PRC-6's. It should
be noted, that both these later German variants used standard PRC-6 cabinets.
The PRC-6/6 used the standard PRC-6 front cabinet half, but had a modified
back half being supplied with a channel indicator window. The subject
of solid-stating tube type equipment has come up several times over the
last 15 years in various publications, and personal conversations. For
the most part, most the printed mater on the subject deals with very simple
equipment types. Such as the BC-221, T-195 VFO's etc. And includes only
some very general(and sometimes vague) information. Some magazine articles
dealt with the total destruction of a fine radio(Collins 75A4), leaving
almost nothing of the original electronics. The later of course is totally
unacceptable. I personally think that solid-stating a radio would allow
us to play with them far more handily, preserve some sometimes very rare
tubes, and as such a very worth while project provided one law be observed.
Any such conversion should be a completely "Plug-N-Play" affair, allowing
absolutely no physical modification to the subject radio. Producing solid
state plug in tube replacements for simple radios such as the BC-222,-322,-611should
present no problem to the Design Engineer with some time on his hands,
or even a gifted tinkerer(I place myself in the latter category). Followed
by slightly more complicated types like the PRC-6, GRC-9, GRR-5, GRC-109,
etc. The PRC-10 family present a unique challenge as they are already
a modular design. We have more than just a couple Electronic Design Engineers
as members of our group, maybe some prodding is in order. The following
has been extracted from Military Radio Data Vol. , PRC Designated Radio
Equipment, by Dennis Starks: PRC-6(solid state variants);Though not adopted
by the US government,it is known that small quantities of each have been
acquired.Their use is subject to rumor & speculation.One possible source
for these radios is a California company,owned by a Russian immigrant,that
went out of business do to insufficient government sales.No further information.
#1.Is a direct conversion of the normally tube type circuit to solid state.It
uses the standard PRC-6 chassis with only very minor changes to the underside
components.The tubes have been replaced with Potted solid state boards
that cannot be removed.This radio must be considered disposable as servicing
is impossible.There is no outward indication that the radio is anything
other than a standard PRC-6. Ref.#26,#31 #2.This variant is similar to
#1 except the tubes have been replaced with modules that can be removed
& serviced.This radio may have a Data plate that indicates it's solid
state nature.It is also rumored to have been CIA supplied to a Central
American organization in the early 80's. Ref.#31 #3.A last variant,possibly
of German origin similar to their PRC-6T &,/180.However this version is
not synthesized,& it uses standard PRC-6 xtals. PRC-6T;This may be the
same radio as the PRC-6/180.Built by Telemit of Germany,it interred service
with DDR forces in 1978. Additionaly a PRC-6(T) is listed in Ref.#10,as
a fully solid state replacement for the PRC-6.Built by AN/COMM Electronics
North Hollywood Ca.Reported features were the use of standard PRC-6 xtals,11-15vdc
(12vdc nominal) operation with a drain of 20ma(rec) & 120ma(trans).& an
RF power output of 500mw. Ref.#10,#11,#28 PRC-6/180;This is a German produced(Telemit)
version of the US PRC-6 that provides 180 synthesized channels & a 100%
solid state circuit design. The external appearance is identical to a
standard PRC-6,& retrofit kits are available to convert existing radios
to PRC-6/180 configuration by replacing the original chassis. It is unknown
whether any US Government organization has acquired these sets,but several
have been encountered in this country. Ops 47-55.95mc with either 50 or
25kc channel spacing.RF output is rated 500mw.Requires 8ea standard BA-30
type,1.5v batteries. Ref.#10,#11 K-PRC-6;Handheld VHF,FM transceiver.The
K-PRC-6 is domestically produced in South Korean & is in service with
their Armed Forces.Though it bears no similarity with other versions of
the PRC-6,it is intended to fulfil the same role.It is of solid state
design,but fairly old technology considering it's late introduction into
service(approx early 1980's).Cosmeticaly it resembles a space age,WW-II
vintage BC- 611 & is very nearly as simple. Ops 45-57mc,with one(apparently)
Xtal control channel.(A) models work 27.25-30mc with two channels.No further
information. Ref.#12 Dennis Starks; MILITARY RADIO COLLECTOR/HISTORIAN
military-radio-guy@juno.com ***********************************************
TONKIN HEATHKIT?? Last April the oneth I got involved
in a post about a $1200 HeathKit "Tonkin Gulf lunchbox" used in Vietnam.
Well.....we did have something similar.... but I didn't realize the post
was an April fools joke. Hell, every damn deployment was a mean joke.
Recently during work in a nasty, dirty, hot and sandy place I met a guy
who was in country at approx the the same time but flying in P5 Marlin
seaplanes over us water types. He remembered the set too! PRC-33! Anyone
else recall the set?? Ed Zeranski This is a private opinion or statement.
home email: ezeran@cris.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ed, Bill Howard is in a better possition to comment,
as this is his area of expertize. But the Vietcong were known to assemble
Heathkits into 50 caliber ammo cans, as well as a number of home brew
rigs. There were several radios you could have seen that might at a distance
be taken for a heathkit, & some were nerely as simple. The PRC-39 or PRC-40
would fall right into this category. The PRC-33 however was quite large
& was never entended to be operated while in motion. It would have made
about 4 lunchboxes. If indeed the set was any of those mentioned here,
I'd like to know in what capacity they were being used. Below is a complete
description of the PRC-33. Dennis --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PRC-33/RT-339;Handcarried VHF,FM portable transceiver.Adoption
of a militarized commercial radio set Type PS-40 Model HC by Industrial
Radio. System designed as a complete portable station.It can be used as
a hand carried or pack set,& as a semifixed ground station.Provided with
a weatherproof canvas bag for protection under extreme weather conditions.It
was widely sold for Civil Defence use and even military examples may display
the CD emblem. Ops on any one xtal control channel between 30-42mc,with
an RF output power of 750mw.Requires 1.5v(Burgess 8F),45v,& 135v(both
B voltages supplied by multiple Burgess M-39 batteries),a 110vac and various
DC vibrator supplies are also known to have been made. Accessories include
AT-673(antenna),CY-1916(case),& microphone.Size 4.5 x 10 x 11.5",15lbs.US
Navy order date 14 Sept.1955. Ref.#3 *************************************************************
MORE TONKIN HEATHKIT?? Dennis & all, here is the April
1st post that I was too slow to realize was a joke. The set I used was
definately a PRC-33 but I never knew who made the damn things, we had
6 of them. It is 'lunchbox' looking(construction worker lunchbox not HeathKit)
grey with side hung motorola mike, base loaded whip antenna, top handle,
top half radio-bottom batteries and neon TX indicator. They were used
on crash boats and seaplanes at Camran Bay and in some other places as
fill in radios. If I remember right the plane handling freq was 40.58mc.
A common prob was salt water and fuel getting into the unsealed battery
box, the ant. was easily damaged too. Dennis' post on the set is the first
I've heard of the canvas cover or other accessories. The PRC-33 would
probably be OK for the CD duty but banging around in a boat with a bunch
of armed Boatswains mates was a bit too much. (NOTE;keep in mind, the
below was a hoax, in fact during this period some of the most rushed &
extensive radio development in our history was going on. We were progressing
from tubes to solid state & AM to SSB. Thanks Ed for the historical input
on the use of the PRC-33. 40.50mc was the guard freq use mainly for helicopters,
it was most likely this one you were useing, also note that it's third
harmonic is 121.5mc, & the second of that is 243mc. Dennis) The April
1 post that got me started: About two years ago, while attending a meeting
at nearby Fort Monmouth, NJ, home of US Army CECOM (Communications and
Electronics Command), I met an old timer engineer (now retired) who told
me the following story: Early on in the Vietnam war, the Army was already
pursuing cost reduction programs for many systems, including manpack radios.
One radio was a lowband VHF unit which was a militarized 6'er, produced
by Heathkit in Benton Harbor, MI. The circuit was identical to the ham
version, except for frequency coverage. Construction was with milspec
components in a ruggedized enclosure which included spares (tubes). An
initial production of 4,000 units was procured, at total contract cost
of approximately $ 5 million. Units were put through operational testing
and evaluation at Army test labs and in the field in Southeast Asia. As
can be imagined, the field trials were less than spectacular. When word
got up the chain of command that the soldiers had begun to call the radios
"Tonkin Gulf Lunchboxes", SOA (Secretary of the Army) killed the program
overnight, in spite of the bargain-basement cost per manpack unit, for
fear of negative publicity should that moniker ever reach the ears of
the public, who would never have tolerated another debacle like the Korean
conflict. As a side point, note that even today, 50+ years after Korea,
the motto used by the Army as it draws down in size while supposedly maintaining
it's readiness is, "No more Task Force Smiths!". Has anyone ever seen
or heard of one of these "cost reduced" 6'ers? If anyone has one, I'd
like to buy it! 73, Kalman W2ES klaudon@pica.army.mil Not having seen
a set for 30 years I thought....Well..maybe?????? Ed Zeranski This is
a private opinion or statement. home email: ezeran@cris.com *******************************************************
VC & Heathkits; Dennis, In reference to the VC building
Heathkits in the October 10th Group posting, I was not certain if they
actually meant radio/electronic kits supplied by the Heath Company of
Benton Harbor or the sarcastic "HeathKit" for anything cobbled together
from spare parts. The July 1967 Technical Intelligence bulletin shows
a transmitter and receiver built into a 50 cal ammo can. Used 1.5 volt
filament tubes, about 90 volts on receiver plate and 150 volts on transmitter
plate. I put together a copy which works, both receiver and transmitter.
The Ordnance Museum has on display a radio built into a 30 cal (7.62mm)
ammo can. It had two sections, one was wired and the other was not wired.
Assume it was going to be a transmtter when finished, I also built a copy
of this set and finally got it working but had to modify the circuit extensivly
to make it operate. The assumption I made is that this set never actually
got into service but got captured before it was completed. I also assume
it was captured after 1968 as I did not see it when I was over there.
The NVA radio research units primary intercept set was the captured PRC
25 or 77. They monitored most allied radio freq and in many cases were
able to use the same set to countermand orders for Air Strikes as we were
sloppy about aunthentication. The primary command radio that these intercept
units had was the Chinese 102 E or latter XD6 sets. These are almost a
copy of the SCR 684 of WW II vintage (AN/GRC 9 of post war fame) Probably
just re-packaged. They would use the PRC 25s to learn of our plans and
when they found out about an attack or air strike, they got the word out
on the 102 E set and warned the higher headquarters. Higher Hq then put
the word out on other nets and the VC/NVA left the target area long before
we got there. In many cases they used commercial broadcast stations, A
VC agent could be sitting in his office listening to music and receive
a "news broadcast" and decide to make a sudden trip home or to the next
town or what ever and nobody was any the wiser. Remember the "EAST WIND
RAIN" message in Nov 1940 just before Pearl Harbor. Same idea. The only
bonafied Heath kit I saw was one being built by the Lt in our Signal Section.
I think it was a stereo amplifier. It gave him something to do during
the day, in between flaps and museum tours. Bill Howard LTC Armor USAR(Retd)
THE WILLIAM L. HOWARD ORDNANCE TECHNICAL INTELLIGENCE MUSEUM e-mail wlhoward@gte.net
Telephone AC 813 585-7756 ed) Test For Technology, the official history
of all signal activities in Vietnam mensions "commercial radios" assembled
in 50 cal. ammo cans, though does not mension Heathkit or any other company
by name. ***********************************************
(The preceding was a product of the"Military Collector
Group Post", an international email magazine dedicated to the preservation
of history and the equipment that made it. Unlimited circulation of this
material is authorized so long as the proper credits to the original authors,
and publisher are included. For more information conserning this group
contact Dennis Starks at, military-radio-guy@juno.com)
|
|