R-392a manpack radio
 

Does anyone know the weight of a R-392a manpack radio? - http://www.kpjung.de/e_r392.htm

I'm guessing at something like 5kg but I wondered if anyone knew?

Thanks for any help.

Mahatatain.

I've found the manual and asked a friend of mine to translate it. Hopefully we'll have the answer shortly.
http://photo.qip.ru/users/otrok/3851598/

Thanks.

Sorry I haven't got a definitive answer but I have a little bit of help.
The R-392 and R-392A replaced the R-126 in the 1980s and appear to be something of an upgrade of that earlier radio set. Given that the R-126 weighs in at just 2.8kg, you could argue that the R-392 weighs about the same (maybe somewhere between 3 and 4 kilograms even).

Thanks for the info - very useful. It's a hell of an upgrade in terms of range but you're right, it's a good indication of the weight of an R-392 and an R392a.

As a point of interest, here's some data on three Soviet/Russian radios used for platoon & company comms.

R-126 Used 1966? to 1980s Wt: 2.8kg Range: 1.5m blade antenna 2km; long wire 4-5km
R-352 Used 1960 to 1980s Wt: 2.8kg Range: 1.5m Kulikov antenna 3km; ling wire 6-7km
Both these sets are about the same size and both use vacuum tubes and/or pencil valves

R-392 Used 1980s+ Wt: best guess 3kg? Range: Kulikov antenna 10km; long wire 25km
R-392A Used 1980s+ Wt: best guess 3kg? Range: Kulikov antenna 10km; long wire 25km
Both these sets use crystals rather than vacuum tubes so it could be argued that the range increase doesn't increase the weight due to the savings from changing from valve to crystal technology?


If you're interested, this site (while a pain in the rear sometimes) features plenty of radios from around the world
http://www.radiomuseum.org/

Thanks for the info and the link. Very useful!

My friend has translated parts of the manual and there's some very interesting info in there. Although the radio does have an internal battery, it is only intended for emergencies and has a life of just 10 minutes. It is supposed to be hooked up to something like a car battery, preferably in a vehicle (although you could haul the battery around in your pack if you really, really wanted).

Leg,

Are you sure that your friend has translated this correctly? If you look at the description of the radio on the link I first posted it's described as "a solid state, portable radio, especially for striking forces" and that doesn't seem to fit with a battery life of 10 mins or the need to lug a car battery around with you, particularly as the R-392 may well still be in use these days.

Additionally if you look at this site http://www.armyradio.com/arsc/custom...rol_Radios.htm the R-392a is regarded as a patrol radio and it was originally "designed as a special mission radio for the paratroopers" that was subsequently "mass produced for use by the entire Soviet Military for use as a patrol radio".

None of that fits with a battery life of 10 mins so I'm a little unsure of your friend's translation.

Sorry.

Absolutely certain. As a 7 year resident of Kazakhistan and his wife a Russian doctor, I tend to trust their word on translations.
My guess is the 10 minutes could be continuous transmission which will soak up the power. Just sitting on standby recieving messages it's probably going to last a fair while longer.
It is worth mentioning though that radios from all countries around the 50's and 60's tended to weigh a tonne, mainly because to the inefficiency of batteries. Just think of the size mobile (cell) phones where in the late 80's eary 90's and how limited their batteries where.

10 mins of continuous transmission makes more sense.

Also the R-392a is from the early 1970's (one of the references implies 1973) so I think that the weights StainlessSteelCynic suggested make a lot of sense to me.