Tom does well in unearthing these interesting mystery sets. First he was accosted by an unusual AR88 variation. Now he has an AR80 which [a bit confusingly] is probably a variation of the AR77. It's definitely not the same as an AR88 on size and shape alone [never mind weight]. The AR77 may well have been more friendly in a smaller or domestic environment as suggested.
At one point I was very keen to actually view an AR77 but a little disappointed to see how different it was to the 88 [despite the 77 being described as a good set in it's own right. Looking at things from the other end of the telescope, I wonder how the research and design carried out with the onset of war resulted in such a massive [in every sense] jump to the bigger Rx from an AR77. Was it primarily the required operational spec for example or did the no expense spared military operational attitude dictate a more high quality and solid item? They seem very heavy now of course and they are but the 88's were used in large Diversity Racks. Mine is labelled "Slave 31" for example, out of how many
There would be enough [young] personnel to lift them about back then. Does the large build mean that a greater performance could be achieved than would be difficult in a relatively confined space [it's still well packed as it is]. We've all seen breadboard devices that worked brilliantly but not so when built into a smaller cabinet.
Dave W