MLU FORUM  

Go Back   MLU FORUM > GENERAL WW2 TOPICS > The Wireless Forum

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #511  
Old 16-01-21, 01:09
Bruce Parker Bruce Parker is offline
GM Fox I
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: SW Ontario, Canada
Posts: 2,184
Default

Often when you see a "C" in front of a number it is a 29 set part.
Reply With Quote
  #512  
Old 16-01-21, 21:07
David Dunlop David Dunlop is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Posts: 2,605
Default

Ah, Bruce. You have touched on another of the Great Mysteries in Life: Military Nomenclature. It never ceases to amaze me!

For starters, one practically trips over the letter ‘C’ in Canadian Army communications. In researching my 52-Set, I have seen communications between Canadian Marconi and the Canadian Army where Marconi identifies any wireless set they are referencing by its full name. In the return correspondence from the Army, these names invariably become,’C9’, ‘C9 MkI’, ‘C9 MkII’, ‘C52’, ‘C19’ and on and on it goes. One would think it was to denote the word ‘Canadian’ because the sets were designed and built in Canada, but they were still doing it in the 1960’s when the Plessey 42 Set came over from England for use in the Canadian Army and became the C42. But nothing about the 42 Set was ever built in Canada to my knowledge.

Then you have the British VAOS Directory, which adds a whole new spin.

Take this battery connector for example.

In a copy of the 1940 edition of the VAOS Directory I have, ZA 2270 is indeed a Connector, Single. But the similarity ends there. In 1940 it was a 12-inch cable of lighter gauge and the two end lugs were single hole items. Not at all like this heftier CMC product for the 52-Set.

The 52-Set Manual identifies this cable in the Parts Listings in the back of the manual as ‘Connector, Single #3 ZAC 2270’.

However, in the illustrations in the manual, this same part is identified as ‘Connector, Single No. C3’.

The 1945 and 1948 Master Parts Lists for the 52-Set both identify this part as, ‘Connector, Single No. C2A’ and make note that earlier ID of ‘Connector, Single No. C3’ should be ignored. No mention of the ‘#3’ version at all. But then to add insult to injury, this same part has a new VAOS Number, ‘ZA/CAN 4268’.

I am assuming the ‘C’ in all these part numbers probably refers to ’Canadian’ What I do not understand is if there is any real significant difference at all in the part if it has, or does not have the ‘C’ in its name. Usually, if something is changed significantly, it gets a brand new VAOS Number, and in this example, perhaps that is recognized by this heftier cable getting a new number moving from 2270 up to 4268.

One final stir of the waters with a stick.

The VAOS Directory is a British thing, with quite a long history. Typically, if you see a number like ZA 2270, it tells you it is a British Army part at the very least. What is not clear to me is what a number like ZA/CAN 2270 means. Is this an identical part manufactured in both England and Canada?

If so, then what relevance to parts do listings have such as ZA/CAN/BR 2270? If it started out being made in Britain, and then Canada got involved, why did they bother going back and mentioning Britain again?

Very confusing. But on the bright side, after reading the VAOS Directory for a while, I always feel like going for a drink afterwards!

David
Reply With Quote
  #513  
Old 16-01-21, 21:20
David Dunlop David Dunlop is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Posts: 2,605
Default DIALS, Engraved CMC 115-477 ZA/CAN 4653

Just a bit of a way point in the continued direction of this project.

To recap this photo, the original dial to the Sender is the one on the left. All three dials look that bad. the one on the right is the one to be used on the Sender. It was off the Parts receiver.

The original dial is going to become a test bed of sorts. According to what I had read on electroplating, plating metal will not adhere to a cathode item at all if it is not meticulously clean. The existing adonized and painted dial has darkened somewhat over the years but is not that bad. the zinc plating around the rim and central dial plate is another matter. What I am curious about is what will happen if the rim and central metal are carefully cleaned back to good metal and I then electroplate the dial. In theory, no new metal should transfer to the painted section at all. Only the centre, back and rim of the dial, along with the four small rivet heads.

I am going to try it out and see what works and does not. It may be a useful restoration process for the other two remaining dials.

David
Attached Thumbnails
DIALS, Engraved CMC 115-477 1.JPG  
Reply With Quote
  #514  
Old 16-01-21, 22:28
Chris Suslowicz Chris Suslowicz is offline
Junior Password Gnome
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: England
Posts: 616
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Dunlop View Post
Ah, Bruce. You have touched on another of the Great Mysteries in Life: Military Nomenclature. It never ceases to amaze me!

For starters, one practically trips over the letter ‘C’ in Canadian Army communications. In researching my 52-Set, I have seen communications between Canadian Marconi and the Canadian Army where Marconi identifies any wireless set they are referencing by its full name. In the return correspondence from the Army, these names invariably become,’C9’, ‘C9 MkI’, ‘C9 MkII’, ‘C52’, ‘C19’ and on and on it goes. One would think it was to denote the word ‘Canadian’ because the sets were designed and built in Canada
The 'C' prefix was to denote Canadian design or manufacture because not all of the parts would interchange with the British manufactured set (if such existed).

Quote:
, but they were still doing it in the 1960’s when the Plessey 42 Set came over from England for use in the Canadian Army and became the C42. But nothing about the 42 Set was ever built in Canada to my knowledge.
No, that is entirely different: they changed the set numbering system from the original "Single digit refers to its distance from the sharp end, 2 digits mean the first digit is the 're-design' level, second digit is the role, so you get WS1 = front line set, replaced by WS11, then WS21 (except it wasn't); WS2 replaced by WS12, WS4, 5 & 6 were progressively higher power (only 3 WS6's were built, one for Aldershot, one for Gibraltar, and the third for Hong Kong as the Army Communications Chain).

The "New Range" after WW2 classified sets by their input power requirements, from 'A' - man-portable, runs off dry batteries, through 'B' vehicle mounted, low-power; 'C' medium power; 'D' high power in trucks, and 'E' very high power (static).

I've got the actual figures somewhere... Ah, decided in 1947 as the earlier nomenclature was based on the tactical role:

A - 0 - 10 Watts Dry battery operated.
B - 10 - 100 Watts Low power secondary battery sets
C - 100 - 1000 Watts medium power sets
D - 1000 - 10,000 Watts High power sets
E - above 10kW Very high power sets.

The figures following represented the frequency spectrum and version of the set.

10 - 30 MF/HF band 3-30 MHz
40 - 60 VHF band 30 - 300 MHz
70 - 90 SHF/EHF band above 300 MHz

"Thus a set with an input of under 10 watts with a frequency average of 3-8 MHz and the fourth in its series would be designated A14."

Quote:
Then you have the British VAOS Directory, which adds a whole new spin.

Take this battery connector for example.

In a copy of the 1940 edition of the VAOS Directory I have, ZA 2270 is indeed a Connector, Single. But the similarity ends there. In 1940 it was a 12-inch cable of lighter gauge and the two end lugs were single hole items. Not at all like this heftier CMC product for the 52-Set.

The 52-Set Manual identifies this cable in the Parts Listings in the back of the manual as ‘Connector, Single #3 ZAC 2270’.

However, in the illustrations in the manual, this same part is identified as ‘Connector, Single No. C3’.

The 1945 and 1948 Master Parts Lists for the 52-Set both identify this part as, ‘Connector, Single No. C2A’ and make note that earlier ID of ‘Connector, Single No. C3’ should be ignored. No mention of the ‘#3’ version at all. But then to add insult to injury, this same part has a new VAOS Number, ‘ZA/CAN 4268’.

I am assuming the ‘C’ in all these part numbers probably refers to ’Canadian’ What I do not understand is if there is any real significant difference at all in the part if it has, or does not have the ‘C’ in its name. Usually, if something is changed significantly, it gets a brand new VAOS Number, and in this example, perhaps that is recognized by this heftier cable getting a new number moving from 2270 up to 4268.
I think the renumbering happened when they split the UK and Canadian VAOS to avoid confusion. As far as I'm aware the 'C' in 'C3' just means Canadian manufacture, ZA/CAN, ZA/US and ZA/BR are used to distinguish the different catalogues, and there are parts labelled ZA/US/BR.nnnn (cable clips) where the item from either catalogue can be used because they're interchangeable.
Quote:

One final stir of the waters with a stick.

The VAOS Directory is a British thing, with quite a long history. Typically, if you see a number like ZA 2270, it tells you it is a British Army part at the very least. What is not clear to me is what a number like ZA/CAN 2270 means. Is this an identical part manufactured in both England and Canada?

If so, then what relevance to parts do listings have such as ZA/CAN/BR 2270? If it started out being made in Britain, and then Canada got involved, why did they bother going back and mentioning Britain again?
See above.
Quote:

Very confusing. But on the bright side, after reading the VAOS Directory for a while, I always feel like going for a drink afterwards!

David
The VAOS was originally "description, specification, and price" only. The numbers were added just before WW2 because it was getting out of hand and they needed to streamline orders. (This is why the early numbers are allocated in (mostly) alphabetical order of stores description - as you can see in the 1940 VAOS.)

Best regards,
Chris.
Reply With Quote
  #515  
Old 16-01-21, 22:55
Bruce Parker Bruce Parker is offline
GM Fox I
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: SW Ontario, Canada
Posts: 2,184
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Dunlop View Post
I am assuming the ‘C’ in all these part numbers probably refers to ’Canadian’ What I do not understand is if there is any real significant difference at all in the part if it has, or does not have the ‘C’ in its name
Yes, the C probably denotes Canadian. But it's only so they'd know who to blame if the part broke.
Reply With Quote
  #516  
Old 17-01-21, 20:29
David Dunlop David Dunlop is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Posts: 2,605
Default Handles No. 72

The Gloss Navy Grey finish coat on the Handles No. 72 and 80 had cured perfectly by this morning, so I was able to get the next step completed.

This involved reapplying the two red and blue Flick Indicator Dots to the face of the Handles No. 72. I decided to do this with a pair of the round, pointed end toothpicks one can buy at any Dollar Store these days, rather than attempting it with a fine point paint brush. The reasoning behind this was I would be able to have much more control over the amount of paint being applied and exactly where it would go. I felt a brush has a tendency to hold more paint than you expect and would be too flexible in such a confined space as a 5/64-inch hole.

It took a few tries to get a drop of paint on the end of the toothpick that was small enough to pass into the hole. Once ready, a steady hand is needed to insert the toothpick until it touched bottom. They you just slowly lean the toothpick to one side until the paint droplet makes contact with the side of the hole. It then instantly wicks completely around the hole. Straighten up the toothpick and remove it, and you are done.

Once this paint has dried, the next step will be to mask the marker slots on the Handles No. 72 and 80 and apply the flat white base coat paint to them.

David
Attached Thumbnails
HANDLES, No. 72 .JPG   HANDLES, No. 72 Paint Tools.JPG  
Reply With Quote
  #517  
Old Yesterday, 19:58
David Dunlop David Dunlop is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Posts: 2,605
Default HANDLES No. 72 and 80

I was able to apply the flat white base coat to the four marker slots on the Handles No. 72 and the single Marker Slot on the Handles No. 80 this morning. It actually took more time setting up all the little bits of masking tape than the painting itself.

Hopefully tomorrow, I can start filling in the marker slots with the luminous red and green paints.

David
Attached Thumbnails
HANDLES, No. 72 and 80 4.JPG  
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Canadian staff car wireless: World War 2 Canadian R103 Receiver Demo Mike Kelly The Wireless Forum 5 24-07-16 16:20
Found: CMP Wireless body project Jim Burrill For Sale Or Wanted 7 05-04-15 01:02
Canadian dehavilland mosquito restoration project David Dunlop WW2 Military History & Equipment 9 10-07-14 01:51
Canadian project David Ellery The Carrier Forum 9 28-04-07 02:36
FOR SALE/TRADE: 1944 CHOREHORSE PROJECT for Signal Corps Wireless Power Unit Project Alain For Sale Or Wanted 1 21-02-07 01:11


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 13:16.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Maple Leaf Up, 2003-2016