|
Military Collector Group
Post
Backmail #50
Index: US MILITARY PORTABLE RADIOS; PART I, By Alan
D. Tasker WA1NYR US MILITARY PORTABLE RADIOS; PART II, By Alan D. Tasker
WA1NYR US MILITARY PORTABLE RADIOS; PART III, By Alan D. Tasker WA1NYR
US MILITARY PORTABLE RADIOS; PART IV, Conclusion By Dennis Starks US MILITARY
PORTABLE RADIOS; Discussion US MILITARY PORTABLE RADIOS; More Discussion
BURNING QUESTIONS; *********************************************** US
MILITARY PORTABLE RADIOS; PART I, By Alan D. Tasker WA1NYR
This is the story, as best I can tell it, of the progress that the U.S.
Military has made over the past sixty years in mainstream portable voice
communications radios. A "Portable" is defined as a unit capable of being
operated while a person is in motion. Mainstream is defined as having
reached some fair production level. Not included in this discussion are
code sending units/beacons or satellite communication units (these are
datacom only, i.e. e-mail, maps, etc.). Also included here is some information
on non-mainstream products. In any work such as this, there is a tendency
to pigeonhole items in an attempt to organize and simplify. This, plus
the fact that one is always working with incomplete information, may lead
to some inaccuracies. If you find something with which you do not agree
or if you have something to add, please contact me. If you are unfamiliar
with military nomenclature, you might want to visit references 6 and 12
first. Pictures for many of these radios appear in various web sites,
and these are so indicated in the "Sources" section. General Goals In
general, the goals in the development of new radios were, for many years,
as follows (some of which are interdependent with, and some of which are
contrary to, some of the others). Lower Power Consumption Smaller Size
Wider Frequency Coverage Closer Channel Spacing Synthesized Frequency
Operation Higher Reliability In more recent years, additional goals have
been imposed. Internal Comsec (ICOM) Data send/receive capability along
with voice In addition, there has sometimes been at least a perceived
need to develop radios that operate within more than one band (i.e. the
AN/PRC-70, 113, 117D, 128, 138, 139, and the AN/URC-100 series). These
radios help "interoperability" with other fighting force elements, as
well as communications with local elements when they exist. The Simple
Six One can group the types of portable radios the Military buys into
the following six categories, four of which are tactical and two of which
are non-tactical. Not every service purchases all types, nor are all types
procured in the same quantities. Tactical 1. The Squad Radio, VHF FM (wide
band), a small hand held unit for very local communications within ground
forces. 2. The main ground force communications device, a VHF FM (wide
band) backpack, for longer distance communications than the squad radio
can provide. 3. An FAC (Forward Air Controller) radio, generally a backpack,
UHF, AM, for communications with aircraft. 4. A Special Forces radio,
HF, SSB, backpack/manpack, for very long distance communications. Non-Tactical
5. SAR (Search and Rescue) radios, originally on 140.58 MHz, then 121.5/243
MHz, then 243 MHz only, and then multi channel, all AM, for downed airmen
or other rescue duties. 6. Guard Duty/Fire Rescue/Other Use types, generally
Low band (30-50 MHz) or High Band (152-174 MHz), or UHF (450-470 or 512
MHz), and/or the closely associated Government frequencies, narrow band
FM. The Charts The following seven charts along with the introductory
paragraphs for each summarize these six types of portable radio sets from
the beginning (just before World War II) to the present. Your comments
are welcome and are encouraged. Trends Over the years, certain trends
have been evident. For instance, the Air Force and Army have tended to
collaborate and use the same hardware when both services needed the same
function. This can be seen in the charts, especially in SAR and non-tactical
radio usage. Other trends are as follows. The Army has traditionally been
the Lead in the Squad radio, although th e Marines started the development
of the PRC-68. The Army is also the Lead in the VHF backpack area. The
Air Force has traditionally been the Lead in the UHF FAC area with the
Navy and Army tending to use what was developed. The notable exception
is the PRC-75, which was developed for the Marines only. Additionally,
there is little evidence to suggest that the Army has had a need for a
UHF FAC radio later in time than the PRC-41 era. The Army generally Leads
the effort in HF radio development. The Air force is currently the Lead
in SAR system development. The Air Force is the Lead in the Scope Shield
program, which is essentially non-tactical. The Beginning Steps in Ground
Force Portable Radios, Pre WWII-Charts 1 and 7 The style developed in
the beginning (battery on the bottom, rigid antenna on the top, front
panel controls) was employed for the SCR-194 and SCR-195 for the Army
and the TBY for the Navy. These were not really hand held devices, nor
were they built like the backpacks with which we are familiar today. It
is a tossup where to put these early units, so I simply put them in the
charts with the most room. The VHF Squad Radio, WWII to Present-Charts
1 and 7 The first unit, the SCR-511, was designed to be used while riding
a horse. However, the cavalry was abolished before WW II, so it would
seem it was a bit awkward to use on foot. Therefore, the honor must go
to the SCR-536 for being the first true handheld radio. (Both units were
made, in the beginning, by Galvin Mfg. Co, which is now Motorola.) Packing
a walloping 36 mW of Tx power, and subject to all the interference the
HF AM band musters, it was none the less a success. The Navy's MAB and
DAV were also fairly small units, but not quite handheld. The Korean War
vintage PRC-6 (although there is some debate as to whether it made it
through development in time to actually see wartime service), making use
of the relatively new sub-miniature (pencil sized) tubes, improved greatly
on the SCR-536. A VHF unit with 250-mW output, the FM mode of this unit
reduced the interfering noise level greatly. After a long and drawn out
research effort (basically waiting for transistor and integrated circuit
technology to develop), the PRC-68 was produced, a very neat little package
indeed. There had been an interim stop at the PRR-9/PRT-4, the first all
solid state implementation, but they never really saw much use. The PRC-68
was to prove to be the father of 6 additional designs, the 68A, 68B(V),
68B(V)2, 126, 128, and 136. The 1" longer PRC-68A followed, which was
one of the first microprocessor-controlled units. It allowed random frequency
programming, but you had to stay within one of the four sub-bands. The
present unit, the PRC-68B(V) (Marines)/PRC-126 (Army) is basically a PRC-68A
with a frequency display. In addition, the PRC-126 has external frequency
setability. They are microprocessor controlled and allow more latitude
in channel placement than even the PRC-68A because they have an external
antenna tuning control. The VHF Backpack Radio, WWII to Present-Charts
2 and 7 By all accounts, the first true backpack, the SCR-300, was a very
successful design. It was followed by the Korean War vintage (although
they may have just missed actual war service) PRC-8, 9, and 10 (Armor,
Artillery, and Infantry respectively). Using sub-miniature tubes, these
offered wider frequency coverage than before. The PRC-25 was the first
synthesized unit, offered wider yet frequency coverage, and had just one
tube (RF power output stage). Over 125,000 were produced. The all solid
state but otherwise identical PRC-77 followed. The current unit is the
PRC-119 SINCGARS (SINgle Channel Ground and Air Radio System). It has
an ability to FH (Frequency Hop) in order to avoid jamming. In addition,
the "A" model is called ICOM (Internal COMsec). Comsec stands for COMmunications
SECurity, i.e. voice scrambling in order to prevent intelligent interception
of message content by the opposition. This model also sports a much longer
battery life. Meanwhile, there is an improvement program underway that
has developed and purchased a small number of trial radios. The following
was taken from the WWW (reference 18). "The Single Channel Ground and
Airborne Radio System (SINCGARS) SIP (SINCGARS Improvement Program) Compatible
Portable Radio, the RT-1753(C)/U, is a compact portable version of the
SINCGARS SIP radio. This portable radio will be used along with the Lightweight
Internet Controller (LINC) and Dismounted Soldier Unit (DSSU) in TF XXI
(Task Force XXI) to support dismounted soldier operations and is designed
to operate from a dismounted soldier's vest pouch. The radio replaces
the current manpack version of the SINCGARS radio. The portable radio
includes all SIP performance enhancements to include additional data mode
features, embedded COMSEC, an external RS-232 Data Interface and packet
switching for access into the tactical Internet. The radio weighs no more
than 5 pounds (with battery and antenna), is approximately 1.9 inches
by 10.6 inches in size (with battery) and provides selectable output RF
transmit power up to two (2) watts and communication range of 3 to 4 kilometers.
The portable radio uses a rechargeable NiCad battery pack. Battery life
is approximately 6 hours. The portable radio shall consist of a portable
radio, an antenna, and battery pack." ***********************************************
US MILITARY PORTABLE RADIOS; PART II, By Alan D. Tasker WA1NYR
There are a number of instances where the portable RT (Receiver/Transmitter)
unit forms the basis of a number of nomenclatured systems (i.e. AN/PRC,
AN/VRC, AN/GRC, etc.). The RT unit can, for instance, be attached to a
vehicular mount that allows it to run on vehicle supplied power. Usually
there is also an associated vehicular mounted amplifier that boosts the
transmitter power, and boosts audio power as well in order to drive a
speaker. Some of these systems even have a "jerk-and-run" capability,
i.e. a quick way to disconnect and turn the RT into a portable again.
In a similar vein, there is an older concept where communication devices
that have a primary application (mounted in a vehicle perhaps) have also
a "Secondary Application" as a manpack (larger than a backpack) portable.
These devices, when attached to the correct backpack frame, and when connected
to the correct battery box with the correct cables, became portable. The
following is a list of these types. There may be others. TBX, 2-5.8 MHz
SCR-284/BC-654, tunable, 3.8-5.8 MHz AM, replaced by SCR-694/BC-1306,
tunable, 3.8-6.5 MHz, replaced by AN/GRC-9, tunable, 2-12 MHz. SCR-510/BC-629,
two channel, 20-27.9 MHz FM. SCR-610/BC-659, two channel, 27-38.9 MHz
FM. SCR-619/BC-1335, two channel, 27-38.9 MHz FM. RT-70/PRC-16, tunable,
47-58.4 MHz FM. The UHF Backpack for FAC (Forward Air Control)-Chart 3
Before the Military Aircraft Band changed to UHF, it was located in mid
VHF, 100-156 MHz. The Navy had a 10 channel portable called the MAW. The
Army had a two channel unit called the AN/TRC-7 which, apparently, in
some applications, was portable (secondary application). With the growth
of civilian aviation and other services following WW II, there were some
revisions made to the frequency band allocations. The Military Aircraft
Band changed to high VHF/low UHF, 225-400 MHz. The first portables to
cover this new band were the MAY (Navy) and the AN/PRC-14 (Air Force/Army);
both four-channel crystal controlled units. The MAY was a manpack unit,
while the PRC-14 consisted of two main parts, a transceiver worn in the
front, and a power supply with internal battery worn on the back. They
were connected with a cable, and the antenna was mounted on top of the
helmet. The synthesized (full band coverage) and partially transistorized
PRC-41, another manpack unit, followed the PRC-14. There was an effort
by the Air Force during the mid 60s to develop prototype FAC units that
would operate on all three tactical bands plus VHF Air. Rather than being
a single radio with four bands inside, they were actually four separate
radios, each with its own battery, fastened together on a frame, but arranged
so they could be separated and operated independently if desired. Sylvania
developed the PRC-71, while Bendix developed the PRC-72. Some number of
units were produced (my guess is about a hundred or so) and tested in
Vietnam. They hit the surplus market in the very early 70s, so their short
life indicates to me a certain lack of success (too big, too heavy???).
Later, there was a definition of a better system, the PRC-82, with the
four bands designated PRC-83 through 86. All four radios were to be synthesized
(the PRC-72 HF section was the only synthesized unit in the previous efforts,
all the others were channelized with 2 to 6 channels). It appears that
the PRC-82 venture never proceeded too far either. Next, the Air Force
developed the AN/PRC-66; a conventional backpack mounted unit. The Marines
evidently did not want a backpack (perhaps because they envisioned an
FAC with a PRC-70 (HF/VHF) or 77 (VHF only) on his back), so they went
for a two piece design called the PRC-75. The radio and battery box fit
into a two pocket front (belly) mounted canvas harness, and were connected
with a cable. Both the 66 and the 75 were all solid state Collins Radio
(USA for the 66, Toronto for the 75) designed units employing transistors,
ICs and hybrid circuits to effect as small a size as possible. Today we
have the two-band Navy/Air Force PRC-113(V)3, which covers both aircraft
bands. It allows for Air-band interoperability wherever you are, and whomever
you are working with. HF Backpacks for the Special Forces-Chart 4 There
is not a lot of information on early HF units, such as the crystal controlled
PRC-52, 62 and 64. There is some evidence to suggest that some or most
of the PRC-64 units (Delco)(a Special Forces replacement for the GRC-109)
were converted to the PRC-64A variant that had an improved interface to
the GRA-71 burst keyer (300 WPM)(see references 6 and 17). It would appear
that the first unit to reach widespread use was the partially transistorized
(four tubes) synthesized AN/PRC-47. It is actually a two man portable
(the second man carried the separate Silver battery in its case, amongst
other things) with quite an antenna system for the occasions when a temporary
fixed station is called for. The all-solid state PRC-74 with its variants
74A, 74B and 74C backpack units followed this. The dual band PRC-70, born
out of the PRC-42 research effort, appeared next. It does not appear that
it ever completely replaced the PRC-74. It also appears there are still
PRC-47 and 74 units in the field. The current HF unit is the IHFR (Improved
High Frequency Radio) AN/PRC-104, with variants "A" (changed to LCD readout)
and "B" (which added provisions for STAJ, Short Term Anti Jam). Rumored
to be on the horizon is the "Joint Tactical Radio." SAR-Rescue Radios-Chart
5, PRC, URC, UCMe The Search and Rescue function has produced at least
eighteen different radio designs over the years, very prolific indeed.
Intended to be packed with life rafts/boats, ejection seats, or, if small
enough, with the airman himself, these units were generally powered by
Mercury batteries because of the long shelf life of this particular chemistry.
However, environmental concerns related to spent battery disposal have
led the government to recently ban the further use of Mercury batteries
in military systems. It looks like Lithium batteries will inherit this
role. The Navy's AN/CRC-7 was the first two-way voice radio. Intended
for life raft use, it may have been used by the Air Force as well. While
in the midst of the aircraft frequency band plan change (see discussion
in FAC section above), there was a need to have the SAR radios cover both
121.5 and 243 MHz. This made the radio rather large and heavy. The Air
Force/Army went with the AN/URC-4 while the Navy went with the AN/PRC-17.
In a personal interview with a SAC Airman during this time frame, he stated
that the mass of the radio was so large, and the jerk of the parachute
opening so great, that "the radio and its battery ripped through the vest
and kept on going upon chute deployment." When the switch in frequencies
was completed, the Air Force/Army went with the URC-11, while the Navy
used the PRC-32. Both of these operated on 243 MHz only and were much
smaller than their two frequency predecessors. Since they still employed
sub-miniature tubes, the battery was still big and heavy, however. The
push for a solid state unit resulted in the URC-10 (just one of many derivatives
of the ACR designed RT-10) and the PRC-49. The Navy continued on and developed
the ultimate in small size85the PRC-63, the cutest little thing you ever
did see. However, the age of single frequency SAR radios had come to an
end. The number of ELT (Emergency Locator Transmitter, sometimes automatically
activated upon chute deployment) beacon transmissions crowding the 243
MHz frequency during battle in Vietnam proved the need for a second voice
frequency, ultimately chosen to be 282.8 MHz. (In addition, at least some
of the ELTs were eventually moved to 240.1 ??? MHz.) The Air Force developed
the URC-64 four-channel device. The Army opted instead for the URC-68,
a four channel two-band (VHF/UHF) radio that allowed downed airmen to
communicate directly with ground troops as well as aircraft. Both of these
were ultimately replaced by the Navy developed and improved PRC-90-2 two-channel
unit (243 and 282.8 MHz), the first tri-service SAR radio. This was followed
by a COTS (Commercial Off The Shelf) device from Motorola, the PRC-112.
Sporting five different frequencies, circuitry was included which allowed
equipment in the SAR aircraft to develop range and bearing information
(DME), certainly a great help in aiding rescue efforts. The big news today
in SAR is CSEL (Combat Survivor Evader Locator); a new Air Force managed
tri-service program being run through Boeing. Racal has the contract for
the new radio, which carries the nomenclature AN/PRQ-7. It will be capable
of transmitting on at least 121.5, 243, and 406.025 MHz (the COPAS-SARSAT
satellite tracking SAR system). It will also receive GPS information.
Meanwhile, Motorola produced 1000 pieces of an interim solution for use
in the hot spots around the globe. It is called the HOOK-112, and it is
a PRC-112 with an internal GPS (Global Positioning System) receiver that
encrypts location data and transmits it upon demand to the SAR aircraft.
Non Tactical Portables-Chart 6 There have been a number of non-tactical
portables used over the years. For the most part, these have been commercially
available units (i.e. Motorola, Comco, Repco, Bendix, etc.) provisioned
by the services for use all over the globe, and operating generally in
the NBFM mode within some part of or all of one of the following bands8530-50
MHz, or 132-174 MHz, or 406-470 MHz. Additional numbers known to fall
in this category are the PRC-23 and 24 (Army), 29 (Navy), and 59 (Coast
Guard). Unfortunately, except for the PRC-127, information on this class
of portables is scarce. The Scope Shield program (AF run tri-service)
is an exception. The second effort at providing a radio that would be
interoperable with standard commercial frequencies made use of the AN/PRC-126
but changed the circuitry so that either 30-88 or 130-174 MHz could be
covered by exchanging modules. This unit is the AN/PRC-128, and is an
outgrowth of the early Scope Shield efforts with the PRC-68B(V) low band
(the Marines also bought this one for tactical purposes) and PRC-68B(V)2
high band separate radios. (The PRC-136 fire rescue set appears to be
another derivative of the PRC-68/126 programs.) The Scope Shield II Program
then developed the AN/PRC-139 with Racal. This radio can cover all three
bands with module exchange, VHF low, VHF high, and UHF, all NBFM. ***********************************************
US MILITARY PORTABLE RADIOS; PART III, By Alan D. Tasker WA1NYR
Multi Band Portables There has been a trend to develop, for some applications,
tactical portable radios that cover more than one tactical band. The list
is as follows. 1. The first was the AN/PRC-70, chart 4. It covers the
HF spectrum as well as the Tactical VHF frequencies. Harris' PRC-138,
chart 4 also, is a more modern type covering these same two bands. It
is in use by U.N. Land Force Elements. 2. The already mentioned AN/PRC-113,
chart 3, covers both the VHF and UHF aircraft bands. 3. The Scope Shield
Program developed PRC-128 and PRC-139, chart 6. 4. Harris developed the
PRC-117D, which covers the Tactical VHF (low) band, VHF high band (aircraft
and mobile) as well as Tactical UHF (including SATCOM), chart 2. Note:
SATCOM is effected using FM within the 225-400 MHz military aircraft (generally
AM) band. The Marines and the Seals are apparently using some number of
these radios. 5. The Motorola developed AN/URC-1xx series, chart 7. These
are two band radios, all of which include the tactical UHF (AM) frequencies,
including SATCOM (FM) as the first band. The second band can be tactical
VHF, or high VHF, or ??? The Army is apparently using some number of the
URC-100 for voice and the URC-110 for data. The Navy Seals apparently
have some number of URC-110 sets also. Unknowns There are a lot of AN/PRC-XYZ
numbers unaccounted for. Some of these were concepts that never made it
further, while other programs may have made it to the prototype stage.
Still others may have been limited fielding trials of a particular device
to test it out. The following numbers have appeared on real hardware,
but the story behind why remains a mystery to me. Surely, somebody out
there knows the story. Although the PRC-117 and URC-1xx units are described
above, this is only the "what". The "why'" remains elusive. PRC-116, the
Racal Jaguar V, 30-88 MHz ECCM unit, Racal #BC-66H PRC-124, a Collins
MP-83 TRC-77 HF rig Battery Technology Where there's a portable, there's
a battery. They come in two classes, Primary (use it once and throw it
away)(nomenclatured BA-xxx), and Secondary (rechargeable)(nomenclatured
BB-xxx). The bottom line is that primary batteries offer longer life per
use, but of course, they can't be recharged. During WWII, there were only
three types of batteries used in portables, Lead Acid rechargeable (for
units with vibrator power supplies), Carbon Zinc for most of the rest,
or Mercury (rescue radios only). Today, there are a bewildering number
of chemistries out there, including but not limited to the following.
Primary Alkaline, certainly low cost. Magnesium, on the scene until Lithium
came along. Lithium/Sulfur Dioxide, the king of the hill for now. Secondary
Lead Acid, liquid, gel, or starved electrolyte types, old venerable but
heavy and has a tendency to sulfate. Silver, stayed for a short time.
Nickel-Cadmium, lighter weight but has memory effect, usage is fading.
Nickel Metal Hydride, twice the energy density of the NiCad, and with
no memory effect, but expensive. Lithium Ion may be coming soon. The goal
is to obtain the highest energy density (watt-hours per unit volume (cubic
inches)) at the lowest possible cost. Unfortunately, some of the highest
performers are also the most expensive. However, some work over the past
few years in Lead Acid technology has shown that proper charging techniques
(pulse) can forestall sulfation, the chief cause of failure in this cell
chemistry. Apparently, the increase in life can be up to 10 times. For
a cash starved Military, this could be a Godsend. One of the unfortunate
characteristics of secondary batteries, however, is that most if not all
of them have a self discharge rate of 1-3% per day at 25 degrees C, worse
as it gets hotter. References and Other Sources of Information (in no
particular order) 1. The Technical Manuals of the Individual Radios Listed,
and other general Military documents. 2. "History of the Squad Radio",
Marvin W. Curtis, US Army Electronics Command, Report # ECOM-4451. 3.
"The Army in World War II", "The Signal Corps", a three volume set. 4.
Various news articles published by the Armed Services over the years.
5. Richard Lacroix (PRC-25, 77, 66, 68,126, 70,104, and Canadian types
PRC-515, 521) (http://web.globalserve.net/~rlacroix/radspec/radspec.htm
) 6. Tom Norris (The Mil Commo Equip List) (http://www.telalink.net/~badger/millist/mi.html
) 7. David Ross (TBY, PRC-14, 38) ( http://www.hypertools.com ) 8. MRCG
(SCR-536/BC-611) (http://www.calpoly.edu/~doragsda/mrcg.htm ) 9. Joseph
W. Pinner, KC5IJD 10. Dan Foglton 11. Kurt Lesser 12. The U.S. Army Signal
Corps Museum (SCR/BC info) (http://www.gordon.army.mil/museum/) 13. Information
on "The Web", such as battery data, Signal Corps info on the AN/PRC-104,
126, 127 (drawings), AN/URC-100, 110, and SINCGARS, Marine Corps info
on the AN/PRC-113 and 136, Navy Seal info on the AN/PRC-117, AN/URC-110,
Air Force info on the Hook-112 and CSEL SAR programs and the Scope Shield
Program, UN info on the AN/PRC-138, the COPAS-SARSAT satellite tracking
SAR system, the web sites for Motorola, Harris, Racal, Fair Radio Sales,
Toronto Surplus, and Mike Murphy Surplus listings. 14. "U.S. Military
Combat Aircrew Individual Survival Equipment, WWII to present, a reference
guide for the collector", Michael S. Breuninger 15. ECOM reports #0319-1
and 0319-4, first and fourth quarterly reports on the development of Radio
Set AN/PRC-70. 17. Steve's Green Pages (PRC-64A) ( http://www.users.bigpond.com/SHILL/
18. SIP (SINCGARS Improvement Program) Portable information; see the following
URLs and some of their links. (http://jointventure.monroe.army.mil/dbpages/INIBATT335.htm#topics
), (http://www.gordon.army.mil/dcd/tfxxi/htmlgta/gta-toc.htm ), (http://www.monmouth.army.mil/cecom/lrc/forcexxi/comm/sigsipgd.html
). 19. Pete McCollum (See the link to his write-up on the GRC-109, etc
in reference 6.). 20. http://www.discworld.net/surplus/radio/PRC47.htm
Charts listed in the text are available from the author via email. ***********************************************
US MILITARY PORTABLE RADIOS; PART IV, Conclusion By Dennis Starks Forward:
I realize that the author's intent in the first parts of this series was
to give a casual account of the development of selected portable radios
beginning in WW-II and progressing to the present. However things being
as they are, and me being the ass hole I am, I just couldn't leave it
at that. I felt that several things should be covered in more detail,
and a couple half-truths dispelled. It is my sincere hope that further,
more detail discussion may be the result of publishing this material.
Comments from everybody, regardless of content are most emphatically sought.
In The Beginning, The SCR-511 was not developed before the SCR-536, in
fact, the SCR-536 was undergoing field trials before the SCR-511. As has
been covered in great detail via this forum, the two radios were designed
with two completely different intended purposes, it was fate that joined
them as companions in the field. And the Navy had fielded the MU(early
MAB) before the advent of either. Surely, it can be shown that the Navy
has traditionally been far in advance of Army development all throughout
radio communications history. Some examples, the Navy had in hand by 1939
the ART-13(ATC), TCS, TBY, TBX, TBW, MU and the famous Command Sets to
name just a few. All far and away more advanced than their Signal Corps
counterparts BC-375, BC-223, BC-222, BC-654, BC-191, BC-611, BC-229/230.
It would not be until near wars end that the Signal Corps would catch
up to the Navy and in some cases adopt Naval equipment. Similar examples
can be shown to the present day. Perhaps a future series of articles entitled
"Army Versus Navy" might be in order. These facts however have been neglected
in history, and overshadowed by Army variants for several reasons. First
is the secretive nature of the Navy which prevented the commercial propagandizing
enjoyed by the Army and it's equipment. Second is shear numbers, while
the Marine Corps had by mid WW-II a large selection of excellent equipment
to choose from, their operational proximity to Army units by this time,
combined by with the greater numbers of Army units and a difference in
operational doctrines mandated that they(the Marine Corps) adopt and use
those items of Signal Corps equipment most often needed to both enhance
compatibility, and simplify the horrendous logistics problems associated
with the support of such contingents in the field. Third was the support
by manufactures at home. Manufacturing facilities at home were stretched
to near limits. Every item needed to support the war effort had to compete
for these facilities. The extent of this competition is very difficult
to convey, but suffice to say it created extreme tension between ALL the
services. It should also be noted that Army Signal Corps, and Air force
development were one in the same thing until the split of the Air force
with the Army well after WW-II. Until then the only development or procurement
effected by the "Army Air Corps" on it's own and without Signal Corps
consent or collaboration was met with later disaster. A case in point
was the Air Corps Jefferson Travis field radio sets that were ordered
out of defiance without Signal Corps consent. The Jefferson Travis was
much like a larger, more powerful SCR-284(BC-654). Later during the North
African Campaign, the Air Corps complained to the Signal Corps about the
extreme weight of the radio set, and their difficulties in obtaining support
and maintenance items. The Signal Corps replied in effect, this isn't
one of our radio's, we did not order, nor approve them, therefore the
logistic support channels do no exist in our system, I/E you shit your
own nest now lay in it! The Jefferson Travis was then replaced in the
field with Signal Corps types which had been designed for that same purpose
rather than further clog up the logistic channels trying to support it.
The same story can be re-told with several other examples. FAC Radios,
The Air force lead in the development and use of an FAC radios can be
debated in depth. Considering the WW-II developmental practices outlined
above, the first true FAC radio was the TRC-7 of mid WW-II vintage, developed
for Military intelligence, and Airborne troops(not the Air Corps) as both
a liaison radio for air support, and later as a means of fighter control
for extreme forward area ground troops. It was indeed a backpack radio
operating from the same battery as a BC-1000, and provided with a very
large array of accessaries that allowed it's use as a simi-fixed station,
even a hand crank generator was available. There is also evidence to show
that the CRC-7 (the first hand -held VHF AM downed airman's radio) had
been used as an expedient by Airborne troops even before the advent of
the TRC-7(more on the CRC-7 later). The mid-late 50's saw a re-emergence
of the TRC-7 in the hands of the Air force. This as a result of the realization
that our move to UHF AM for tactical air communications had left the rest
of the world behind, thus American FAC teams had no means of communications
with allied aircraft. This condition persisted until the end of US involvement
in Vietnam, and a steady succession of radios were either developed or
purchased Off-The-Shelf and used as expedients to relieve some of the
problem. Long before the Army/Air force's fumbling along with the TRC-7,
and PRC-14(late 50's). The Navy had realized a need and solved it by late
WW-II. This with the MAY(UHF AM) and the MAW(VHF AM), both these radios
were basically backpack types that could also be set for simi-fixed operation
with an elevated antenna. Though grossly obsolete they would still be
in the hands of Marine FAC/Pathfinder units until the late 60's. In the
same light, the development of the PRC-41, and PRC-47 can be more closely
credited to the Marine Corps who was by far the largest purchaser, rather
than the Army or Air force. It should be noted that FAC operations have
the peculiar need to be able to operate on all bands, I/E HF/AM(later
SSB), VHF/FM, VHF/AM, and UHF/AM. This led to the Air force's development
of the PRC-71, 72, 83 etc. None were built in very significant quantity.
The Army, and Navy on the other hand chose to stick with an assemblage
of the more common tactical sets PRC-25/77, 74, 47(Marines), and 41. In
addition, history will show that virtually all the common radios originally
developed as Downed Airman's, or survival radios, also saw secondary duty
in use as a front line means of fighter control often in the hands of
Special Forces Teams, and other Irregular Forces. These include the URC-4,
11, 10, 10A, PRC-63, 90, ACR-RT-10 and a long list of others. It is true
that very little is known of the Pre-SSB days of the front line foot FAC
units. We do know that the GRC-9 was used in this capacity while vehicular,
and was most probably desmounted for close-in use. The possiblity also
exist that the GRC-13 might have been used in this same role, and if so,
might account for it's extreme rarity today. While the Marine Corps did
have access to GRC-9's their TBX series remained in service at least until
the end of the Korean War, and evendence exist that place it in use even
later. It is very doughtfull that either the GRC-109, or the PRC-64 ever
saw service in use by FAC units. This because the primary mode for both
of these radio sets was CW, and voice communications were needed for spontaneous
aircraft tactical coordination. Also the history of the GRC-109/RS-1 in
military hands has been well documented via this forum and precludes any
such usage. Another contributing factor in the development of FAC equipment
is that Air force FAC units, unlike Army FAC's and Marine Pathfinders
seldom advanced into the extreme forward areas that would require the
use of backpack equipment. Thus most of the equipment used by them were
vehicular in nature. Beginning in WW-II a tradition of retro-fitting aircraft
radio equipment into ground vehicles started with the SCR-522 being installed
in tanks as the SCR-524. This practice mushroomed after WW-II with 24vdc(compatible
with 28vdc aircraft) becoming our military's standard vehicle voltage,
and still lives on today, the variations of equipment used would fill
several volumes, and include HF, VHF, and UHF examples of every type and
vintage. PRT-4/PRR-9/PRC-68, It is true that there was a long drawn out
research effort that resulted in the Marine Corps PRC-68. But this was
preceded by an even longer effort to develop the PRT-4/PRR-9, beginning
in 1950 and ending in 1964. This effort produced the experimental PRC-15,
30, 34, 35, & 36. While it is true the PRT-4/PRR-9 saw little actual service
in the field, it remained the only official squad radio of record until
at least 1977, when only experimental versions of the PRC-68 were yet
available. The PRT-4/PRR-9 combination remains extremely significant to
history for several reasons. First and foremost was the technology they
represented including the first in an all solid state radio set, and second
the use of a 10.7mc IF frequency which is now standard, and lastly the
first use of an Integrated circuit(IC), this is the 150cps tone generator
on "A" models. The story told in the development of these radios is an
un-equaled example of Government Bull Shit, and non-cooperation. The PRC-68
was the direct result of the adoption of the PRT-4/PRR-9 and not because
of any obvious reasoning. But out of the disgust felt by the Marine Corps
having been totally ignored during the entire developmental process even
though this was a joint services project. Their grievance was not with
the basic design of the radio set, or it's performance, rather it was
the dual radio packaging and limited channel capacity. I/E the Marine
Corps had all along pressed for a channel capacity of at least four, and
a radio housed in a single cabinet. Had their wishes been headed during
the Development of the PRT-4/PRR-9, we might not ever have received the
PRC-68's, or at least not until a much later date. In the interum years
between the PRT-4/PRR-9 and the PRC-68, another long list of radios were
developed, and or purchased as emergency expediants in very limited quantities.
Some of the later include some international joint development units such
as the PRC-601, and 602 a joint Isreali/US, Tadiran/GTE venture. At least
four solid state versions of the PRC-6 are also known to have been purchased
by the US government, two types of German origin, and two of US. Downed
Airman's/Survival Radios(SAR), While their was a succession of survival
type radios used before during and after WW-II, the first such radio adopted
as a Standard Item was the legendary Gibson Girl of WW-II fame. A direct
copy of a German set that had been captured in the North Sea by the British,
then remanded by them to the US for development and production. It remained
in service aboard large aircraft and all sea going vessels with very little
change until the late 80's and the demise of the 500kc marine distress
band, combined with the negating of Mores Code proficiency of licensed
marine radio operators.. Second to emerge was the CRC-7. While it is true
that the radio was used in life raft during the war. It's greatest claim
to fame was it's use aboard fighter aircraft where the available space
for such equipment was at a premium (the CRC-7 was a transceiver shaped
like a large cigar tube, approx 2" in diameter, & 14" long). In postwar
years it would receive expanded use in light bombers, and with commercial
airlines. The Army/Air force/URC-4 use combined with the Navy/PRC-17 use
can be debated to some extent as numerous examples of the URC-4 survive
to show Navy use. In addition, most surviving examples of the PRC-17 show
use by commercial airlines. Further, the URC-11/Army/Air force, and PRC-32/Navy
associations can also be debated. It would appear that the Naval purchase
of the PRC-32 was a simple expedient to augment supplies of their URC-11's
at a time when technology was awaiting the advent of an all solid state
radio. I/E, a limbo period existed between the URC-11(all tubes) and the
first solid state SAR radio. During this period a long list of Make-Do
radios were purchased, tested, or used. Some of these were even commercial
Off-the-Shelf types including many ACR built variants. It should be noted
that all these early SAR radios(except the CRC-7), even the first and
second generation ACR types, used and external, metal incased, battery
that was connected to the radio via an umbilical cable, making for a very
cumbersome arrangement. The first solid state SAR radio was not the ACR-RT-10,
or the URC-10(both being the same radio). The first model RT-10 was in
fact a tube type radio and used a separate battery just as previous designs.
The second version "A" model, though physically identical to it's older
brother was indeed all solid state. It was adopted by all US services
with various markings including ACR-RT-10A, URC-10A, and PRC-93. Apparently
due to it's high production cost it did not fair well in military service.
The Army's URC-68 was never intended as a one size fits all SAR radio.
It was expressly intended for use by helicopter flight crews and with
their close operational proximity to ground troops, the lowband VHF/FM
band was included. At one time it was briefly considered by the Army Rangers
as a "Stop Gap" radio to fill the void they felt for lack of a suitable
squad radio. It was however quickly dismissed as too fragile for this
type use. The Navy PRC-63, though it did enjoy some popularity and use,
was a hermetically sealed Throw-Away radio. Built completely from synthetics
it was very light weight, compact, and possibly for the first time in
large scale, used a "Rubber Duckie" type antenna. But it's synthetic materials
rendered it fragile, and it's being permanently seal prevented any attempt
at servicing. It gave way in short order to the PRC-90. The Navy's improved
PRC-90-2. The only difference between the PRC-90's used by the Navy/Marine
Corps, and those in use by the Army/Air Force was in the process used
to manufacture their cabinets. Both radio variants were built in the same
factories at the same time, on the same production lines. the deference
is in the type aluminum used in the cabinets on each variant. Those used
by the Army/Air Force have an aluminum cabinet that began life as an investment
casting. On the other hand, Navy/Marine Corps cabinets are completely
milled from a solid block of aluminum. the end result of the Navy/Marine
manufacturing process was a radio that would survive being submerged in
water to a greater depth. Even by the late 50's-early 60's, the military
had not completely weaned itself from some dependance on the VHF(Civil)
aircraft band. The URC-14 is identical in every respect to a URC-11 except
for one, it operates on 121.5 vice 243mc. This can be seen again with
the current PRC-106, a radio which is physically identical to the PRC-90,
except that this one is dual band and operates on both 121.5, and 243mc.
Has anyone ever noticed the harmonic relationship between all the aircraft
Guard frequencies? We have 40.5mc FM used in helicopters, times three
equals 121.5 for the civil aircraft band, time two equals 243mc military
guard. Coincidence? Back-Pack Radios, The BC-222/322(SCR-194/195) along
with the TBY were indeed Backpack radios, and as such designed to be operable
while in motion on the operator's back(though admittedly a very precarious
operation for these particular radios). Followed by the SCR-300(BC-1000)
which would set the stage for ALL front line tactical radios to follow,
even to this day. The PRC-8, 9, 10, not only offered much greater frequency
coverage with less signal bandwidth, and a smaller size and weight. But
also introduced the first examples of modular design into a military radio.
This greatly simplifying field service and logistics, and provided some
measure if interchangeability between radio parts and accessories. The
Canadians, Dutch, and Australians would ingeniously expand on this system
in their same generation of equipment to include their Squad Radio, the
CPRC-26. Which used common components, and accessories with not only their
own versions of the PRC-8, 9, & 10, but also US radios. The US would not
follow their own lead with our PRC-6 which included none of this interchangeability.
Another "First" for the PRC-10 family of radios, and possibly most significant,
was their Steel Tape antenna that would become an international standard
to this day. The PRC-25 is the single most significant contribution to
military tactical communication of it's type since the advent of the SCR-300(BC-1000).
It and it's immediate successor the PRC-77 would become the most proliferate
radio in military history spanning almost 30 years, 40 countries, and
countless manufactures foreign and domestic. It would remain the standard
for comparison long after it's obsolescence, and still remains in widespread
use today. Besides being the first solid state FM backpack radio, it also
introduced the now standard 150cps tone squelch system which effectively
"Grunt Proofed" it not only simplifying operation by untrained personnel
but also reducing front panel controls to a minimum. The PRC-119 is by
ALL accounts, especially those taxed with it's operation, a horribly over
complicated, and temperamental radio set. I personally cannot perceive
it's longevity as a replacement for the PRC-77 excepted in higher echelons
where communications security is of utmost importance and the personnel
that are highly trained for it's operation, and support are available.
Multi Role Radio Equipment, While the concept of a multi role vehicular/manpack
radio system is indeed an old one, it still enjoys great popularity today
world wide. And too, while it is true that such radios as the BC-654,
620, 659, 1306, GRC-9, TBX and a host of others, were adapted for use
in a vehicular mode. Their primary design intent and purpose in life was
as a Field Portable/Man-Pack radio set and not a vehicular one. In the
case of the TBX, though power supplies existed which allowed vehicular
use, no mounting hardware for either the radio or it's ancillary equipment
were ever produced. Vehicular installation instructions for this particular
family of radios amounted to templates by which plywood mounts could be
cut. The reverse is true of such radios as the BC-1335, and RT-70 who's
portability was secondary to their primary mission as a vehicular radio.
Special Forces Portables, It is true that early equipment specifically
designed for use by various Special Forces groups are hard to document,
however much information has been gathered on both the earliest and latest
sets to see their use, with only an interim gap between the GRC-109/RS-1,
RS-6, GRC-9, and the WW-II PRC-5. The first and second radios to be developed
for use by any US Elite Force were the PRC-1, and PRC-5. Both Classic
Suite Case type radios, the PRC-1 arrived early in WW-II and is responsible
for being the backbone of both tactical, and clandestine communication
in the China Burma theater, not only by groups such as "Galahad, and "Merill's
Marauders", but also the OSS Special Operations Group 101. Not the SSTR-1
which has received the credit for this activity. The PRC-5 arrived about
mid-war, and while it's exploits are not documented at all, evidenced
does exist to place it too in the China/Burma Theater. The BC-611(SCR-536)
was also originally designed expressly for use by Airborne troops. But
as we know, it was later used by virtually every service, and every Allied
country, in every theater of WW-II.. The third known radio to have been
designed expressely for Special(Elite) Forces was the BC-1306(SCR-694C).
Being originally designed for use by Airborne and Mountain troops, it
was later pressed into service with all branches of service due to the
major shortcommings of the BC-654(SCR-284). The SCR-284 shortcomming were
indeed so great, that simi-experimental versions of the SCR-694 were placed
into early service, the BC-1136(SCR-694AW). At the same time SCR-694 became
available, so too did the TRC-2. Originally intended for service with
Military Intelligence, this was a combination of the a standard BC-1306
with it's lower frequency twin, the RT-12/TRC-2. Next came the already
described TRC-7 also intended for use by Airborne troops, followed closely
my the TRC-10. The later was a re-packaged version of the PRC-1 which
allowed for a far more versatile operational package. At a glance, it
was similar in appearance to the SCR-284 but boasted a much wider frequency
coverage, and CW only operation. This radio today remains one of the rarest,
and most difficult to document of all military radios. Somewhere in this
mess came the PRC-4, about this radio we know nothing excepting that it
was a discized version of the SCR-536/BC-611, also intended for use by
Military Intelligence. The Army was not the only military organization
to employ specialized radio equipment for it's Elite forces, the Navy
too had such equipment even in the early days. However due to the typical
secrecy vail that shrouded all Naval equipment, documentation of these
types is the most difficult of all. Only two radios are known to have
seen service with these type forces. The first was the common TBX who's
exploits are only now beginning to surface. The second, also of WW-II
vintage was the MBM. A suitcase-like radio set design for use by forward
raiding parties. It should be noted that the Navy maintained clandestine
operations in all Pacific theaters that were rivaled by no other organization
foreign or domestic. And lest we forget the vulnerable MAB, or as it is
called in it's own manual "the Para-Talkie", being pictured in used by
a Para-Marine(though it is unkown whether the radio saw any use with this
short lived branch of the Marine Corps). Post-War years saw the Army Special
Forces using the CIA's RS-1, and the GRC-9. It was not until late 1962
that the RS-1 would be officially adopted as the GRC-109 and a regular
Army Standard Issue item. And then only because of the transfer of operational
control of the Army Special Forces from CIA hands back to regular Army.
Contrary to popular belief, the GRC-109"A" model was not an adaptation
for code burst operation. It was in fact the same radio supplied with
a different "Armor" cabinet that was more than twice as thick as the previous
model, with a corresponding increase in weight. By the time of the demise
of the RS-1/GRC-109 they had nearly all been either supplied from the
factory with code burst capabilities, or this feature was added by way
of an MWO. Following closely the adoption of the GRC-109 came the PRC-64
in 1965. Again a radio of CIA origin via the Delco 5300. While the widespread
use of the PRC-64 in US hands may or may not have been short lived, and
is open for debate, it did enjoy extreme popularity in the hands of one
of our few Vietnam Conflict Allies, the Australians and their Special
Operations Group. With the introduction of the "A" model with enhanced
code burst operation, it would appear that all or most previous, models
where modified to comply to the newer radio's specs in the same is respect
as it's predecessors the RS-1, and GRC-109. But before this, with it's
beginnings in question(approx early 60's/late 50's) came the simi-experimental
TRC-77. Receiving it's TRC designation via WW-II tradition, it too was
originally intend for use by Military Intelligence, and Special Forces.
However by this time, it's intended US constituency had become highly
disillusioned with any high tech/new fangled contraptions. It was then
relegated to use by South Vietnamese commandos who were extremely active
against North Vietnamese coastal installations. We have also recently
learned, via this group, of possible Australian use. The PRC-62, while
for some years it was in question whether this radio actually existed,
and the few surviving references to it were simple type errors or just
wishful thinking. Recent events, again via this forum and our Aussie members
have proven not only the existence of this radio, but also it's use by
both the US and Australian militaries. The author makes mention of the
PRC-52, and PRC-42. Both of these are new ones to me, and I'm most interested
to learn more about them. In the mid 60's to early 70's, a long list of
SSB radios were acquired for testing in South East Asia(over 200). Tracing
them down has been close to impossible. Every day somebody comes up with
another possible candidate. Suffice to say that their were many radios
acquired and used by every involved service. Some to the extent they received
almost Standard type acceptance. Some familiar names include AVCO, Huges,
Southcom, Halicrafters, Harris(RF), Motorola, Collins any others. It should
be noted that the use of HF communications equipment by Special Forces
tactical units was primarily NOT to provide "very long distance communications",
as the layman might understand it. While radios of this type were capable
of long range communications when in competent hands, the primary mission
of an HF portable in the hands of any front line tactical unit was to
provide communications at ranges not possible with VHF FM equipment of
the same type. I/E 1-5 miles for VHF/FM types, 5-10 miles for the HF types.
These distances generally represent those that the unit in question might
be separated from either it's next higher echelon, or companion units.
Typical extremely long rang communications with this type equipment in
Vietnam were on the order of 20 miles max. Off-The-Shelf-Security-Radios,
Unfortunately, the author at the time of his writing the first three parts
article, was not privy to this group or it's archives. The story of these
"Off the Shelf PRC's" was told in an in depth multi part series by that
title, again via this forum, and is still available from our back issues.
There are also numerous other articles related to the topics in this series
available from our archives. Dennis Starks; MILITARY RADIO COLLECTOR/HISTORIAN
military-radio-guy@juno.com ***********************************************
US MILITARY PORTABLE RADIOS; Discussion -Dennis, Thank you for your comments.
I hope to hear from others as well. I've changed the write up to incorporate
your major points and to make other parts clearer. As other info drifts
in, I will change again. I do have to correct one statement you made,
however...The RT-10, RT-278/URC-10, and RT-278A/URC-10 are all solid state
units. The following is from TM 11-5820-640-15 which covers all three
sets. "Battery power is provided via an external battery [ed) -16 Volts]
connected to the radio set by a waterproof cable (RT-278/URC-10 and RT-278A/URC-10)
or by an integral battery pack (ACR RT-10)." There were two types of integral
packs described...one where the back cover (K308) had to be removed and
tossed and a new cover put on in order to replace the battery, and another
where just the battery (K308A) was tossed (this is the type I have). It
also says there are RT-10's in the field (Navy) that have a 1/4 wave antenna,
and other units (Air Force) with 1/2 wave antennas. The manual goes on
to say there were some circuit changes that differentiate the RT-278 from
the RT-278A and RT-10. There is a schematic for the RT-278, and a second
schematic for the RT-278A and RT-10 serial numbers below 6773, and a third
schematic for RT-278A and the RT-10 serial 6773 and up. There's at least
two versions of the RT-10 out there that are not crystaled on 243 MHz,
The PRC-93 version of the ACR RT-10 had the mechanical volume control,
and the RT-20. It's a USMC set and labeled 'Code 1'. The RT-20A was on
251.9 MHz, which is channel B of the training version of the URC-64 (URC-64(T)),
is the only frequency in the single frequency training version of the
PRC-90 (which is called PRC-90(T), and is one of the frequencies in the
two frequency version of the PRC-90(T), 236 MHz being the other. An Air
Force Equipment Specialist said it was for training. I would guess he
was right. Alan ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have several URC-10s (demiled). They do use a seperate battery like
the URC-4 but they are all solid state. I have both the RT-278 and RT-278A.
The radios look identical to me, inside and out. The sets I have were
made by Bendix Radio and not ACR. Were there competing models for the
URC-10? I also have a radio made by Chromalloy Electronics Division that
is marked ACR/RT-60B? Ever heard of Chromalloy? This is a dual band unit
that looks just like the URC-10 the battery slides on the back. On the
PRC-68, I have a prototype that was made by Motorola about 1968. It is
sort of sythesised. It is a single channel crystal controlled but all
the crystals are included in the package. It uses a crystal oscillator/mixing
scheme to cut down on the number of crystals required to cover the 30-76
MHz band. My radio is marked AN/PRC-68 Ser. No. 021, Naval Electronic
Systems Command, Motorola Inc. Contract No. N0024-67-C-1427. Do you have
any other information on the early development of the PRC-68. Tom Bryan
ed) The variants of the ACR family of radios are indeed mind boggling.
It would appear to me that the Government model "URC-10" was a spin-off
of the manufacture's model number as it would not otherwise fit properly
into the chronology of this type equipment, and this would not be the
first instance of the practice. I stand corrected on the solid state nature
of the early ACR-RT-10, however I do believe that the credit for the first
solid state "SAR" radio should really go to the PRC-49(and it's several
versions, another NAVY FIRST!) as I believe it pre-dates the ACR's. Another
candidate for Oddball SAR radio is the KEL Corp. ASR-100, it used a side
folding chrome plated telescoping antenna (ala portable TV set), was all
solid state , used the same back-mounted battery as the ACR's, was dual
band, had a volume control, & "squelch". The first Squelch control I've
ever seen on such a radio. The one in my collection apparently came from
Airforce service in a bomber, and It's last inspection was in 1982. Something
that I'm at a total loss to understand is this lack of the before mentioned
squelch control on all main line radios of this type, even some of those
intended for FAC service on the ground. It would seem to me, not even
considering operator comfort, that the incorporation of a simple squelch
circuit would have at least increased battery life. Your experimental
PRC-68 is the first surviving example that I have heard of. I would think
that the PRC-68 designation would have been followed by either an (XC-#),
or (XE-#) suffix to give us an indication of which generation experimental
it was. I wonder if it resembles the pictures presented in FM24-24 1977,
and the early Jane's manuals which are also in fact prototypes, though
Magnovox was then noted as the supplier? I can tell you from experience
that messing around with experimentals is only for the most masochistic
of collectors! Chromalloy Electronics Division is a new one on me, and
I would not be too concerned about your Bendix marked URC-10. They were
most likely just a sub-contractor, or second source supplier(as required
in most government contracts). I recently read a so-so article from Electric
Radio about the URC-35(R-1051 family) where the author gave credit to
Scientific Radio for the design of the set. Credit of course should have
gone to General Dynamics. SI was simply a sub-contracted second source.
The author's act was like giving Stewart Warner credit for the TCS vice
Collins. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dennis, Finally getting around to back email etc after several weeks gone.
The US Mil Radio series you posted was a nice piece of work, lots of neat
bits of info. A few comments.... While looking for other stuff I found
something that maybe related to the early WWII vehicular sets. Its a picture
of an SCR-284 mounted in a jeep. The set is fore and aft on the curbside
with power coming from a handcranked generator in front of the passenger
seat. The radio is clear enough but its impossible to see if the genny
is permanently mounted or just stuck in front of the GI doing the cranking.
GRC-9s were the primary radio for the Marines during the Lebanon expedition
back in '56 or '58. I had a conversation with one of the ex radio ops
who served during that time. Those little PRT4/PRT9 sets got cannibalized
back in the early '80s as the radios on an early RPV comm relay used in
some interesting places, mostly sand covered. A friend gave me a new test/channel
set up box for the sets which was passed on to list member Jay Coward.
So..if you ever turn up what appears to be a model plane on steroids with
PRR/PRTs in it you'll know where it came from. I'm still looking for past
notes to find which of the bailout radios we used to build some "primary
initial termination devices", low backscatter beacons to call the helo
when the bad guys are coming. The model we gutted was Navy with 121.5
and 243Mc beacon tone and voice comm. I think the other source was AN/URT-33A
junkers. This will show up as a small folding yagi with the electronics
in the 'boom' Do you use the 2259 ant? Believe that I still have a set
of related Collins ap notes. If y'all want a copy let me know, will find
them. Ed Zeranski This is a private opinion or statement. home email:
ezeran@cris.com ed) The SCR-284/Jeep/Hand-crank gen is a real puzzler,
and first I've ever heard of such a practice. It sounds more to me like
some sort of field expedient devised by some crafty radioman to operate
a field radio while mobile without having the proper installation equipment.
One of even more grandiose scale, during the exodus of allied troops from
Burma during the early days of WW-II, SCR-299's(BC-610) were mounted in
JEEPS! The GRC-9/Marines/Lebanon tale is one I'd like very much to learn
more about. Get the ex-radio-operator, tie him in a chair, and get the
hole story!! I don't even know what a "2259 ant" is. Field Portable repeaters
are an interesting subject for which very little is known. Jim Karlow
has some sort of set also composed of PRT-4/PRR-9 components into a single
package. Years ago I had a most interesting set hand built by Motorola
around a single standard PRC-25. It was a simplex repeater that operated
using time-domain-sequencing. It really worked, and only had a very slight,
almost non-detectable putter in the received signal. Dennis Starks; MILITARY
RADIO COLLECTOR/HISTORIAN military-radio-guy@juno.com ***********************************************
US MILITARY PORTABLE RADIOS; More Discussion SAR Radios Lacking Squelch,
Reference: why no squelch on several "survival radios". The radios were
designed to be operated by anybody, the simpler the better, having operated
all most all of the units between 1960 and 1985, the simpler radios were
always the best. You don't want to be using a PLD "personal lowering device"
with one hand ,after landing in the top of a forest canopy and try to
figure out how to operate a radio adjusting squelch etc. The reassuring
hiss told you it was working and was ready.With the squelch open the units
were very sensitive. The older radios of course were very broad banded
and you could hear near by transmissions on frequencies close to 121.5
as the squelch was open. You saved battery power by only listening only
at designated times or when it was obvious help was in the area. On the
subject of batteries, two things I aways carried was extra ammo and extra
batteries. The "survival radios" were used for many things, I've even
used a URC-4 at a drop zone for giving information to in coming aircraft
as to winds and clearance to drop, "green smoke" was always confirmed
by radio if it was possible This was always done on a "training frequency"
During land and sea survival training, the radios were always on a "training
frequency". A reminder that some of your new members may not be aware
is the use of 121.5 and 243.0 MCs, (I dont recognize MHz) 243.0 MCs was
picked for the UHF frequency as it was the second harmonic of 121.5. Most
of the first "survival radios" had a very strong second harmonic as they
were "simple" in constrution. If there was any confusion, scratch that
there was always confusion during a rescue, but anyway if you listened
on 243.0 you has all the bases covered in the early days. The URC-4 was
very popular to convert to two meters in the sixties, several articles
appeared in CQ magazine. I have even used them on repeaters as they FM
slightly, very low audio but still detectable. You can "slope detect"
for receive. Great display item at shows. 73 Breck K4CHE ed) I concur
the non-recognition of MHZ, you'll never see me using it. Also the lack
of a squelch control on Downed Airman's radio or otherwise in the hands
of ill trained personnel. But for use by highly trained FAC's it doesn't
seem practical in radios designed for this purpose. The URC-4 was indeed
a popular radio for conversion and use on 2 & 6 meters, as well as 220.
The URC-4 was also converted to both 220 and 2 meters by many hams. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
KEL, Motorola PRC-68, R-1051, Regard KEL ASR-100. Didn't KEL make the
GE Pocket Mate for a while? That could explain the folding antenna. Regard
experemental PRC-68. It is roughly the same size as the Magnavox unit
but it has the antenna built into the base. There is also a provision
for an external antenna. I used to own some of the prototypes that are
in Janes, they are almost like the production unit execpt that the battery
attaches by 2 studs that go through the battery rather than the clips
on the side. Other than that the radio is identical to the production
unit. They were marked XN or XE (can't remember which.) There are no "X"
designations on the Motorola unit. Have you had a discussion of the R-1051/T-827/URC-35/GRC-106?
I believe General Dynamics did invent it and the original set was the
SC-901. The SC-901 is similar to the URC-35 (i.e. a receiver/exciter.)
I was told that the original set was designed for communications among
missile silos. Tom tbryan@nova.org ed) it is very possible your observed
KEL/GE connection is so. The internal construction of the ASR-100 is VERY
similar to the GE Pocket Com. I've heard the same story in regard the
R-1051 family use in missile silos. I believe the origin was Jim Karlow,
I wonder if we might impose on him to elaborate in detail. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NVIS, Dennis, The AS-2259 is an antenna used with the PRC-47/104/etc for
NVIS, near vertical incidence skywave, ops for 0-300 miles. I'll track
down Pat Melly to see if will yak to a recorder about mid '50s Marine
ops with the GRC-9 and the Lebanon deployment in particular. He was surprised
I had the old radio gear and mentioned his using the GRC-9 with the leg
key on the beach after their landing. By the way, Pat's experience in
the '50s, the cannibalized PRT/PRRs, and the AS-2259 are some what related.
Pat was using HF to comm with the afloat element for support etc. 25 years
later the Marines were again in "The Root" but had VHF comms. Those VHF
relays built using the PRT/PRR parts were to allow the Marines ashore
and out of LOS with the ships or patrols blocked by cityscape to have
comms. Beirut was not a friendly place and those interested should look
for a copy of "The Root". The RPV/Relay was tested in the desert at 29
Palms then deployed. Research into NVIS for use with tactical radios got
on a roll, and the Marines PRC-47 was a prime radio at the time. There
was also work done on mobile NVIS from a Hummer and similar vehicles.
The AS-2259 is one of the products from that era. I still have a co workers
published work concerning the problem, math models, field test reports,
and suggested fixes. Surprisingly, the study was not really followed up
here in the US but was jumped on hard by NATO, especially the Germans,
and also the Israelis who were faced with urban scenarios and had similar
radios. Funny how stuff stays the same......Pat Melly actually had a better
chance 25 years earlier. Then there is the story of the low visability
antenna to replace the '1729 VHF vehicle antenna and the procurement follies...but
thats another story. Ed Zeranski This is a private opinion or statement.
home email: ezeran@cris.com ed) NVIS radiation is indeed a very interesting
subject, and one I would have liked to elaborated further on in the article
but didn't feel it appropriate at the time. Maybe you'd like to do something
in-depth for us??? In a nut shell, the practice involves using inverse
wave propagation and radiating an HF signal near to strait up. This signal
is then reflected back to earth in an umbrella pattern providing effective
short range communications with HF radio equipment where VHF equipment/communications
were not suitable either because of range or terrain. I have had some
interest & experience with this type propagation in both civilian and
military applications. Perhaps I will cover it in more detail in a future
article. *********************************************** BURNING QUESTIONS;
-Anybody seen a real, in the flesh, PRC-103? -Is the PRC-96 still the
prime Navy lifeboat rescue radio, or did it get replaced by the PRC-112
also? -The USMC used a version of the RT-10 called the PRC-93. It had
a mechanical (shutter type) volume control, and was marked 'Code 1' Any
idea what frequency they were on? -Was the PRC-68B(V)2 high-band radio
ever produced? -What was a PRC-68(X)? PRC-68(L)? -What is the difference
between a URC-104 and URC-111? -What is the battery number and voltage
for a URC-64? -For the PRC-70, is there a TM 11-5820-553-35? If not, what
is the maintenance manual number? -What is the difference between a PRC-75
and the A version and the B version? -What is the difference between a
PRC-113 and the A version and the B version? -ELTs used to be mostly on
243.0 MHz. Rumor has it they moved. Did they? If so, where to? -What was
a KEL something or other. Kel Com used to be a company here in the Boston
area that was owned for a while by Bell and Howell. Did they make these?
-Did they ever make any PRC-66 guard receivers? Alan atasker@ix.netcom.com
*********************************************** (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 or this group are included.
For more information conserning this group contact Dennis Starks at, military-radio-guy@juno.com)
|
|