|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
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. |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
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/
__________________
If it moves, shoot it, if not push it, if it still doesn't move, use explosives. Nothing happens in isolation - it's called "the butterfly effect" Mors ante pudorem |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Thanks.
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
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). |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#6
|
||||
|
||||
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/ |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 2 (0 members and 2 guests) | |
|
|