Did you mean the PRC77? if so, both of its predecessors, the PRC10 and the PRC25 were module based radios that were designed to be repaired by swapping in spare, pre-tuned modules. I did Interchangeability testing on the PRC77, along with final test at the Cincinnati Electronics factory.
Michael A. Terrell
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
-----Original Message-----
From: Jack <goldmort@...>
Sent: Nov 2, 2018 2:16 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [TekScopes] 425 Mil vertical module needed....seeking
Hi thanks Harvey....yes that's about it.....time saving with a good spares
inventory ....replace the faulty aspect of equipment and then send through
the system
to component level repairs. Repair was not always attempted and "U/S" tags
were plentiful. Reliability and cost were a decision. I recall when aircraft
mods were
done in Vietnam conflict we just dumped $millions in unusable inventory,
even here. Our (Defence's) vibration and environmental equipment was given
to AWA,
which then charged Defence for the use of it. I found that..a kind-of
peculiar arrangement. Labour costs yes, but use of the gear wasn't confined
to us.
Component level was not always done at Echelon...a level of testing might be
done and a decision made whether to send to the manufacturer but at the card
level
when it was a card....it may more likely have been tagged 'U/S' scrupulously
recorded then binned, later ...perhaps many years later and when security
allowed it and the
conflict was over.....go through the 'disposals auctions'. The equipment
need to ensure the gear met services' specs was too complex and expensive in
some cases.
Reliability warrantied as being certain is primary especially in weaponry
and radar you mentioned demands manufacturer-level accuracy. My recollection
is that
it was not until after 'Korea' thatmodularisation became common...the TRC77
for example in a small way. Until then changing tubes was the field level
repair.
Michael A. Terrell