Wireless Set No. 52 Canadian - Project

[David Dunlop]

After weeks of on again off again thinking about this stage of the project, I finally committed to starting it this morning.

Up to this point in time, 98% of my military vehicle and restoration work has involved, stripping, repairing and repainting steel items. The front panel of the Coil, Aerial Tuning No. 2 A , as I noted earlier, is 1/8-inch aluminum Plate and the reliable green chromate primer I had last used for aluminum nearly 50 years ago, has all but disappeared from the consumer market.

Adding to that was another concern that my usual approach to stripping away old paint was by use of a pair of old steel putty spatulas and touching up with sandpaper as needed. I had visions of these blades cutting into the much softer aluminum and creating no end of problems, so decided the safer approach was to sand down the old paint carefully before the repaint work started. This idea came about as I was going to have to hand sand the small spot welded reinforcing plate behind the tuning knob due to the many weld dent in it.

The first photo today is the starting image of the bare front panel assembly prior to any sanding and the next two are various stages as I worked down through the Gloss Navy Grey top coat, a grey primer coat and the original initial Green Chromate primer.

The last photo is of the new base coat of a modern (hopefully reliable) flat white aluminum primer. I shall let that hard cure for a week and then give it an overcoat of flat grey primer.



David

[David Dunlop]

With 48 hours of dry time out of the way this morning, I gave the front panel a ‘2nd coat’ of primer, but this coat was the grey primer needed to go under the final colour top coat. If everything goes well, I should be able to get that done next weekend.


David

[David Dunlop]

Well here is what a test board looked like after an attempt to spray paint a finish coat on it with my new Preval system.

The paint is an oil based, rust resistant enamel the manufacturer advises not to thin, and to use Mineral Spirits for clean up work. Under that advise, the system could not get the paint out of the spray jar.

Step 2 was to start over with a new system assembly and thin with Mineral Spirits at 4:1, as recommended by the system maker, ensuring the filter assembly at the bottom of the intake tube was removed. Paint barely made it out the nozzle and produced the attached fine textured orange peel look. Not even close to what I need. Tossed that system as well.

Now I am thinking about what to do next. At least the colour is exactly what I wanted.


David

[Jordan Baker]

It’s hard to say from the picture but if it’s a dry dusty sandpaper feel to the paint it’s either too thick still or too much air pressure is being used. This causes the paint particles to dry while airborne. If the paint is too thin you would just have to do light coats and build up the colour. In the model kit world I am for a milk like consistency of paint for spraying.

[David Dunlop]

Hi Jordan.

Thanks for your comments. Much appreciated.

Your observations are on the mark. The paint on both attempts went down in a fine spatter. The Mineral Spirits has a very slow evaporation rate and the test board was still wet after six hours in the house and did not dry to the touch for about 16 hours. When dry, it indeed feels like fine sandpaper.

I was hoping to avoid hauling out my main spray gun setup from the basement out to the garage to work this all out but that is clearly in the cards now. Wind, dust, bugs and a long walk to the house are not my friends and it is shaping up to be a stinky hot weekend here.

My gut tells me the 4:1 mix ratio of paint to thinner is probably correct. The little Preval system could just not deliver the paint. So, I shall start another test, weather permitting next weekend at 4:1, with the compressor at 40 psi, which will provide a proper air volume. If the paint flows well I will move directly to the required finish work. If it still spatters, I will try a remix at 3:1 and see what happens.

Must say I am not fond of working with the mineral spirits, turpentine and varsol family of thinners any more. They take forever to dry and always seem to leave a greasy feeling residue.

Also miss my old spray gun outfit. I had two paint canisters for it and a canister cap so I could have one on standby with thinner for a quick clean of the gun and I could also cap a mixed canister of paint for a while if I needed to do so.

CH seems to have outsourced their parts operation in the USA to several third party dealers and here in Canada I could get a second canister from Grainger, but canister caps no longer appear to be available. Better start raiding Debs stash of jam jar lids to see if one will fit.

I will post again after the weekend, if my sanity allows. Thanks again,


David

[David Dunlop]

Finally. Success!

As of this morning, the front panel of my Coil, Aerial Tuning No. 2 A has a lovely finish coat of the required gloss enamel.

I ended up chatting with our Head Body Shop Painter at work last week and took him my spray gun to have a look at. He confirmed the setup needed for it to operate as a Pressure Fed, Internal Mixed gun and also confirmed the wrong parts package came with the gun. It had one extra piece completely irrelevant for the model of gun and the Allan Key supplied was not the correct size. Raided my spare keys box and got the correct size.

I will post a photo of the panel later today, after I come back down from my current Happy Place.


David

[David Dunlop]

It has been eight hours since I painted the front panel and the paint is still wet. Mind you the panel is sitting on my work table in the basement and the AC has been running in the house most of the afternoon. so I shall give it until Tuesday to see what happens and consider at that time if it needs to come upstairs to dry better.



David

[David Dunlop]

A dawn of a new day and I am right back at square one.

After spending a good hour yesterday morning setting up my spray paint equipment in the garage and getting the paint filtered and mixed to the recommended 4:1 ratio, I took another 20 minutes or so adjusting the spray gun to get, what I thought was a good paint flow...

The test piece I worked on had a nice even gloss to the paint when I switched to the Coil front panel. Again, the paint went down in what appeared to be a nice even glassy gloss. It was a little thicker than I wanted, as a slight ridging was starting to show up around the outside edge of the panel, but I was happy so into the house the panel went to dry. It looked good for about one hour. Then, a mist of what first looked like very tiny bubbles slowly started to appear in the paint. Eight hours in and the paint was still very wet and the misty look even more evident, but at least the perimeter ridging was starting to to disappear.

This morning, 22 hours later, the paint is dry but the finish has turned to sandpaper once again. I have no choice now but to resand this sucker once it hard cures and start over. More time wasted.


David

[Chris Suslowicz]

Not wishing to ruin your day any further, but are you using the correct type of paint? "Varsol" and "Mineral Spirits" are an oil-based (paraffin/turpentine substitute) paint - OK for wood where it can soak in and it's a rough surface anyway, but probably not for metal.

I'd be inclined to try a cellulose-based paint and thinner combination, as used on machinery and vehicles - it's fast-drying and you can use multiple thin coats to build up the thickness if required.

I think the wrinkle/sandpaper effect is due to the slow evaporation of the solvent and consequent small bubble formation as the paint dries.

Best regards,
Chris.
(I have zero painting experience but have watched the production line at Perkins Engines (years ago: mid-1980s) where the completed engine (mounted on a "J Hook") passed in front of a "water wall" to catch the overspray and was spray-painted blue by the operator in under a minute!)

[David Dunlop]

Hi Chris.

I wondered abut that also but the paint is definitely designed for use on primed metal.

I was thinking it all over today and am now wondering if my spray distance of 10 to 12 inches from the panel was too excessive. Reviewing the spray gun manual indicated an ideal distance of 6 to 8 inches for best results. Conditions permitting, I will attempt another set piece on the weekend.

In the meantime I need to source another supply of medium mesh paint strainers. The pack I just purchased are far too fine and it takes ages for any decent amount of paint to filter through.


Cheers,


David

[David Dunlop]

Well the comments Chris made, along with some from a couple of professional painters I know got me to the point of where all else fails, track down contact information for the paint manufacturer.

I did that this morning and had an informative chat. First big discovery was that although mineral spirits are the recommended clean up substance for this enamel, it must not be thinned...with anything. This will set up differential drying producing the results I had been experiencing. Interestingly enough, this agent knew his stuff, we side-tracked into the realm of wrinkle paint finishes, which was where I was headed with my thinning attempts and he did point out where to find the small print on the label advising not to thin this paint. When I pointed out that even with laboratory grade optical equipment, it would be challenging to find said print, he chuckled and said that was the direction a lot of manufacturers were going these days. It's more of a compliance issue these days, rather than an effort to inform the consumer.

The manufacturers recommendations were to increase air pressure enough to get the paint moving out of the canister and then, if necessary adjust the air/paint mix to get the required smooth, glassy coat needed for a good finished product. So we shall try again this weekend after I sand out the sandpaper effect in place on the front panel of the Coil, Aerial Tuning No. 2 A.


David

[Chris Suslowicz]

Ah... you may need a 'gravity feed' spray gun if the paint is too thick for the standard suction type. (They're available in the UK from about 20 GBP upwards for the "Made in China" ones you will have to buy the connector adapter for, up to 150GBP for a basic DeVilbiss which doesn't even include the air hose!)

I can't find any air consumption requirements, except for the 150 GBP DeVilbiss that wants 2 Bar and 9.7 cfm, so you may need a bigger compressor.

(The more expensive ones assume you have a factory air-line to connect them to, and thinking about it the Perkins Engines tour I got had them using pressure-fed paint hoses for mass production! Rather out of the hobbyist league, I think.)

[David Dunlop]

I picked this item up this morning from Pembina ND.

It is a custom cut 9-inch square of 1/4-inch thick, canvas impregnated Brown Phenolic Resin which will eventually become the insulating mounting plate for the Aerial Base C2. The original on mine was missing.

The custom cut square was $11.00 USF plus shipping of $9.00. The only Canadian Company I could find selling small pieces had a one square foot minimum at $41.00 Cdn, plus shipping.

Went down first thing this morning and was the only car in line both ways. In fact, I think I woke up the Border Agents on both sides and even the Commercial Lanes were empty.


David

[David Dunlop]

While I think of it.

If anyone has an Aerial Base C2 with a surviving, original Brown Phenolic plate still fitted, can you tell me if the edges of the plate are lacquered the same colour as the two sides, or are the edges just the exposed, lighter interior plate colour?


David

[David Dunlop]

Sometimes it pays to look closer to home.

I was reorganizing my work desk this morning and suddenly noticed what I thought was a large block of cork sitting under some stuff I had placed there quite some time ago. Upon closer examination, I discovered it was a package of 1/16-inch cork sheets, 11-3/8 inch x 17-3/8 inch in size that Debbie had purchased about three years for a crafting project she had worked on for our oldest granddaughter. Son of a Gun!

This is exactly the material I needed to find to make the gasket that runs around the lower edges of the 1/4-inch Brown Phenolic Resin Plate used to insulate the Aerial Base C2 from whatever vehicle it is mounted upon. I checked with Debbie and she said to fill my boots as she did not need it any more. I will check to see my Cricut Maker can cut that cork sheet and with any luck will be able to write a patten program to make the needed gasket.


David

[David Dunlop]

So I have been spinning my wheels with this part of the project since 18 May 2025, trying to get a matched coat of paint down on the front panel of the COILS, Aerial Tuning No. 2A. Attempt number four went down this weekend after discovering the problem was air being dissolved in the paint during the spray process. The finished spray coat looks perfect but as soon as drying gets underway, millions of micro-bubbles of air start coming out of the paint to the point when it has dried, it looks like a very fine mica flake metallic. This can apparently be wet sanded out with a 600 grit or higher sanding paper, but one must be careful not to cut into the primer.

Meanwhile, on the back burner, I was getting low on the gloss Navy Grey (Misty Grey today) that was the original grey colour used at the factory for the 52-Set. It had been discontinued at Canadian Tire but a product internet search turned up a supply at Brantford Surplus in Ontario so I ordered another can this morning. Since the wooden case for the Coils Assembly has been restored to factory original colour and plating, I decided to complete the process with a factory original Navy Grey to complete the item and allow me to move on to getting the new luminous decals sorted out. The overall look of the complete 52-Set will then be of one in service prior to the conversion to the NATO Green paint that came into use sometime in the late 1950’s or early 1960’s. It will simply have acquired a new Coils Assembly from Stores, for whatever reason.

Once this Coils Assembly is finally finished, I can then move to the Supply Unit to finish its restoration. It already has a set of Workshop Rebuild decals on the upper left corner of the front panel and I have photographed them and speced them out, so a Navy Grey paint on its front panel will also be a logical alternative. The only wrinkle here will be that the Workshop Rebuild decals were all white on clear which cannot be replicated on a home printer and I suspect a small run of such an item from a supplier would be cost prohibitive. In any event, the history of the Supply Unit will be well documented and the project can continue to move forward at an acceptable pace once again.



David

[David Dunlop]

I have been a bit remiss in updating this year and this seemed like a good place to start.

Early on in this project, I was very fortunate to find a very nice example of the Satchels, Signal No. 1, as pictured and described in the Issue 1, 15 February 1945, printing of the Parts List for the 52-Set, and was quite pleased something was ticked off my search list. Then, a couple of learned gentlemen here on the forum, pointed out to me that t1o 0f these satchels were actually issued with the 52-Set and the hunt was back on.

Recently, I was able to track down a second satchel in NOS condition and it arrived last week to complete the required pair I needed. I was expecting a satchel identical to the first one I had found but discovered several subtle differences. The material used is identical to both: the later war lighter weight cotton fabric, as opposed to the earlier heavier canvas. The design of both cases is identical with the exception of the first satchel has the buckle end of the shoulder strap fitted to the right side of the satchel. on the new one, the buckle end of the shoulder strap is sewn on the left side of the satchel.

On the original satchel, the ID is, SATCHELS, SIGNAL No. 1 ZA 6292, stamped on the cover with a C Broad Arrow, reading from the back of the satchel. No makers name or date anywhere.

On the new satchel, the ID is, SATCHEL, SIGNALS, with JELCO 44 centred below, and this can be read facing the satchel. No VAOS Number anywhere. This struck me as a bit odd, but I recalled seeing a comment somewhere in the 52-Set literature about available Signals satchels and went looking this morning. I found it in the 15 February 1945 Issue 1 of the Parts List, where there was a special note beside the illustration for this satchel. It stated there were 2 other types of Satchels, Signal No. 1, differing slightly from each other but all were completely interchangeable. I remembered when I first read this note years ago that I had assumed the note was making reference to all the other available Satchels, Signal that were produced during the war, and indeed, they all would easily interchange. But rereading the note now, in light of the two satchels I now have to compare, of exactly the same model, I now think there were actually three slightly different versions of this model Satchels, Signal produced late in the war. I the 01 July 1948, Issue 2 of the 52-Set Parts List, the special note on the model variations was deleted.



David

[David Dunlop]

This is an item I had reached the point with searching for that I had decided had to be replicated. Then, a few weeks ago, in casual conversations with a friend in Ontario, he turned one up in a cables bin full of bits and bobs.

There is no wear or signs of usage at all on this one and all indications are it was very early production of the 52-Set. The yellow ID sleeve identifies it as a “LEADS, AERIAL No. C6”, with “CMC 115-549” and temporary VAOS Number “ZA/C 00102” added for good measure. It eventually became known as “LEADS, Aerial 16-inch No. C1” with an assigned VAOS of “ZA/CAN 4266”.

This, along with a number of other small cables/connectors for the 52-Set, were HT Cables that utilized a stranded, copper core wire, 7mm rubber sheathed automotive spark plug wire. When I first saw a photo of this item, I immediately thought the brown colour was to blend the cable in with the top of the Carriers No. 4, which was painted No. 2 Brown. My friend laughed and reminded me that early in the war, everything that was commercially available, and could be put to war production use was diverted to do so. Automotive ignition wire of the day came in black rubber, brown rubber and even a tan clothed loomed version, and probably other variations. Pure chance this brown cable ended up being used for early 52-Set items.

A couple of other early features are evident on this cable also. The plug end of the cable uses the early pattern 1-inch long plug. In use, these proved to be too short for the Operators to safely insert into the Sender Socket, or the output socket on the Coils, Aerial Tuning No. 2 A, so a longer version plug was introduced partway through the 52-Set production run to solve that safety problem. The 90-Amp Slotted Lug on the other end of the cable was also a crimped and soldered item that was replaced in production as well with a soldered on only version that became the standard 90-Amp Slotted Lug in the Army Supply System.

Now I am really motivated to get the restoration of my Coils, Aerial Tuning No. 2 A finished so I can get it back in place on top of the Carriers No. 4 and correctly hooked up to the sender.


David

[David Dunlop]

This particular Leads arrived with the one I posted on just ahead of this post. It is basically the feeder from the 52-Set to the aerial system being used, either of the vertical 20, or 34-foot telescopic masts, or the smaller vehicular Aerial Base C2.

This particular one is a late production item. First clue is the presence of the late issue 1.25-inch long Plug with the larger burled surface area for safer handing by the Operator. The second upgrade is the use of the later 90-Amp Slotted Lug on the opposite end, which was the solder on only style. One can compare these two details easily enough with the photo in the Post directly above.


David

[Chris Suslowicz]

Originally Posted by David Dunlop

I have been a bit remiss in updating this year and this seemed like a good place to start.

Early on in this project, I was very fortunate to find a very nice example of the Satchels, Signal No. 1, as pictured and described in the Issue 1, 15 February 1945, printing of the Parts List for the 52-Set, and was quite pleased something was ticked off my search list. Then, a couple of learned gentlemen here on the forum, pointed out to me that t1o 0f these satchels were actually issued with the 52-Set and the hunt was back on.

Recently, I was able to track down a second satchel in NOS condition and it arrived last week to complete the required pair I needed. I was expecting a satchel identical to the first one I had found but discovered several subtle differences. The material used is identical to both: the later war lighter weight cotton fabric, as opposed to the earlier heavier canvas. The design of both cases is identical with the exception of the first satchel has the buckle end of the shoulder strap fitted to the right side of the satchel. on the new one, the buckle end of the shoulder strap is sewn on the left side of the satchel.

On the original satchel, the ID is, SATCHELS, SIGNAL No. 1 ZA 6292, stamped on the cover with a C Broad Arrow, reading from the back of the satchel. No makers name or date anywhere.

On the new satchel, the ID is, SATCHEL, SIGNALS, with JELCO 44 centred below, and this can be read facing the satchel. No VAOS Number anywhere. This struck me as a bit odd, but I recalled seeing a comment somewhere in the 52-Set literature about available Signals satchels and went looking this morning. I found it in the 15 February 1945 Issue 1 of the Parts List, where there was a special note beside the illustration for this satchel. It stated there were 2 other types of Satchels, Signal No. 1, differing slightly from each other but all were completely interchangeable. I remembered when I first read this note years ago that I had assumed the note was making reference to all the other available Satchels, Signal that were produced during the war, and indeed, they all would easily interchange. But rereading the note now, in light of the two satchels I now have to compare, of exactly the same model, I now think there were actually three slightly different versions of this model Satchels, Signal produced late in the war. I the 01 July 1948, Issue 2 of the 52-Set Parts List, the special note on the model variations was deleted.



David

There may be more than that! I have a hazy memory of multiple manufacturers, each with their own variation of markings, but I can't remember which ones I have in the collection. There was certainly Jelco, but also ZL&T (Zephyr Loom & Tool) and MSU (Montreal Suspender & Umbrella), plus various manufacturers in the USA (for Lend-Lease, probably all for WS19 & WS48 issue).

The actual "Satchel, Signals" was a range of at_least_ 12 distinct types for different purposes (I don't have all of them, and one is a mystery at present).

Satchel, Signals
____ - ZA.6292
No.1 - ZA.11947
No.1T - ZA.27294 (green or khaki)
No.2 - ZA.13347 (Shoulder strap stitched to bag at one end)
No.2 Mk.2 - ZA.21324 (Detachable shoulder strap, 'L' strap fittings)
No.2 Mk.2/1 - ZA.29367 (Tropicalized version of ZA.21324)
No.3 - ZA.14869 (Wireless Set No.46 backpack - without harness, etc.)
No.4 -
No.5 - ZA.22756 (For Detector, Mine [Polish] No.3)
No.6 - ZA.24242 (for Detector, Mine, No.4 or 4A)
No.7 - ZA.24805 (For Charging Set, Pedal Driven, 60 Watt - ancillaries)
No.8 - ZA.24907
No.9 -
No.10 - ZA.26516 (For Wireless Set No.38 Mk.3)
No.11 -
No.12 - ZA.29004 (For Detector, Mine, No.6A)

The original "Satchel, Signals" replaced the leather "Bags, Telephone Receiver" and "Cases, Message Book, Mk.IV" sometime prior to 1940. It soldiered on (Sorry!) until the 1970s, I think, going from khaki to "44 pattern light green", to "58 pattern dark green" and being renamed "Haversacks No.1", and there may have been a nylon/polyester version later on.

The US and Canadian versions were a much thinner/lighter material, rather then the British '37 pattern cotton canvas used for web equipment.

Best regards,
Chris. (Still wondering what No.8 was intended for, it's small, zippered, and has a DMC/VAOS section of Z5 which is "Bomb and Mine Disposal Equipment" AFAIK.) I'm still looking for info/examples of Nos. 4 (mine detector backpack with a large cable entry hole on the bottom), 9 & 11.

[Mike K]

Originally Posted by Chris Suslowicz

There may be more than that! I have a hazy memory of multiple manufacturers, each with their own variation of markings, but I can't remember which ones I have in the collection. There was certainly Jelco, but also ZL&T (Zephyr Loom & Tool) and MSU (Montreal Suspender & Umbrella), plus various manufacturers in the USA (for Lend-Lease, probably all for WS19 & WS48 issue).

The actual "Satchel, Signals" was a range of at_least_ 12 distinct types for different purposes (I don't have all of them, and one is a mystery at present).

Satchel, Signals
____ - ZA.6292
No.1 - ZA.11947
No.1T - ZA.27294 (green or khaki)
No.2 - ZA.13347 (Shoulder strap stitched to bag at one end)
No.2 Mk.2 - ZA.21324 (Detachable shoulder strap, 'L' strap fittings)
No.2 Mk.2/1 - ZA.29367 (Tropicalized version of ZA.21324)
No.3 - ZA.14869 (Wireless Set No.46 backpack - without harness, etc.)
No.4 -
No.5 - ZA.22756 (For Detector, Mine [Polish] No.3)
No.6 - ZA.24242 (for Detector, Mine, No.4 or 4A)
No.7 - ZA.24805 (For Charging Set, Pedal Driven, 60 Watt - ancillaries)
No.8 - ZA.24907
No.9 -
No.10 - ZA.26516 (For Wireless Set No.38 Mk.3)
No.11 -
No.12 - ZA.29004 (For Detector, Mine, No.6A)

The original "Satchel, Signals" replaced the leather "Bags, Telephone Receiver" and "Cases, Message Book, Mk.IV" sometime prior to 1940. It soldiered on (Sorry!) until the 1970s, I think, going from khaki to "44 pattern light green", to "58 pattern dark green" and being renamed "Haversacks No.1", and there may have been a nylon/polyester version later on.

The US and Canadian versions were a much thinner/lighter material, rather then the British '37 pattern cotton canvas used for web equipment.

Best regards,
Chris. (Still wondering what No.8 was intended for, it's small, zippered, and has a DMC/VAOS section of Z5 which is "Bomb and Mine Disposal Equipment" AFAIK.) I'm still looking for info/examples of Nos. 4 (mine detector backpack with a large cable entry hole on the bottom), 9 & 11.

Adding to the list. There were also numerous Australian ( and N.Z ) made satchels ....

[Chris Suslowicz]

I'd love to add the earlier "Bags, Telephone Receiver" and/or "Cases, Message Book, Mark IV" to the collection, but apart from the Royal Signals Museum in Blandford, the only places I've ever seen them are photographs in Australia and New Zealand. (Presumably because they carried on using leather for longer, and may not have taken it abroad in favour of the 1937 pattern canvas webbing, until much later.)

Oh well... I probably wouldn't be allowed to import it into the UK these days (ITAR and Biosecurity regulations) even if I could afford one.

Chris.

[Chris Suslowicz]

Originally Posted by David Dunlop

This is an item I had reached the point with searching for that I had decided had to be replicated. Then, a few weeks ago, in casual conversations with a friend in Ontario, he turned one up in a cables bin full of bits and bobs.

You do find the occasional little gem tucked away. WS52 parts are extremely scarce in the UK, though the odd item turns up. The Netherlands had rather more equipment abandoned and sold as surplus than the UK.

There is no wear or signs of usage at all on this one and all indications are it was very early production of the 52-Set. The yellow ID sleeve identifies it as a “LEADS, AERIAL No. C6”, with “CMC 115-549” and temporary VAOS Number “ZA/C 00102” added for good measure. It eventually became known as “LEADS, Aerial 16-inch No. C1” with an assigned VAOS of “ZA/CAN 4266”.

That looks completely new and post-WW2 production, particularly with the shiny insulation and bright yellow printed ID sleeve instead of "yellow" varnished cambric. It's more like the 1950s "Larkspur" cables, and may have been ordered as a replacement using the original specification documents.

This, along with a number of other small cables/connectors for the 52-Set, were HT Cables that utilized a stranded, copper core wire, 7mm rubber sheathed automotive spark plug wire. When I first saw a photo of this item, I immediately thought the brown colour was to blend the cable in with the top of the Carriers No. 4, which was painted No. 2 Brown. My friend laughed and reminded me that early in the war, everything that was commercially available, and could be put to war production use was diverted to do so. Automotive ignition wire of the day came in black rubber, brown rubber and even a tan clothed loomed version, and probably other variations. Pure chance this brown cable ended up being used for early 52-Set items.

I have a set of aerials on the wooden board winders that have _white_ rubber insulation. Most of the UK rubber insulation was black rubber, though I've got a white aerial base spacer (as well as a green-painted plywood Canadian one with glued on cork gaskets, plus the later or postwar(?) stamped and seam-welded steel types). Anything that was available could get used.

A couple of other early features are evident on this cable also. The plug end of the cable uses the early pattern 1-inch long plug. In use, these proved to be too short for the Operators to safely insert into the Sender Socket, or the output socket on the Coils, Aerial Tuning No. 2 A, so a longer version plug was introduced partway through the 52-Set production run to solve that safety problem.

David

I suspect the longer knurled section was to provide a better grip when pulling it out with wet/muddy hands. (You wouldn't be touching it if the set was live!)

Chris.

[David Dunlop]

One other small detail has surfaced with the two slotted lugs shown in Posts 1188 and 1189 above. It shows on the collar of the lug in Post 1188 but is on the back side in Post 1189.

Some sort of marking is stamped in this location. It is centered down the collar starting from the end, going towards the slotted lug section and consists of three characters that are a bit hard to read: It is either, "S" "_ "Z", or perhaps "5" "_" "2".

Could this be a Manufacturers Code? The size of the font used on this mark is the same as was used to stamp the face of the slotted lug with the Amperage Rating for the lug.


David