I worked at RCA labs when they designed that set. Marketing thought it was a brilliant idea. Without the remote, the set was a boat anchor. So they said make the remote bigger and heavily pad it in case someone drops it, who is going to loose the remote then. Well sure enough the president of the lab lost his. A replacement could not be found, I had enough spare repair parts , in the stock room, to build one. So I did during a late night session in my shop. I was sworn to secrecy about it.
It was kind of stunning when they said there's no on-set controls. I thought it would at least have some controls hidden on it somewhere. That's crazy.
As a collector, I would like to have one of these RCA sets. Was this an IR remote? If it is, a universal remote by Jasco sold under the GE brand among a few other names has an extensive code library and MAY operate this set. I have an RCA set from the mid 80's that lacks channel up and down by design. A CTC 120 if I remember right.
These sets seem to be "harder to catch"...than even an RCA CT-100!! I have THREE remotes...but NO set--and THREE of them have "gotten away" from me over the last 30 years..TWO of them like this console...and one PORTABLE_-19" version.. Soon I may be able to put my hands on an AMPEX SIGNATURE V SET..but STILL no DA RCA SET !! And to answer that question about knobs...NO there were NO controls on the set itself--for VOLUME.. CHANNEL OR POWER.. ALL were on that remote.,,ONLY !!
I agree 100 percent. RCA should have designed this model so it could be operated manually if anything went wrong with the remote, as they do wear out, the batteries go dead, or can be damaged if dropped. As it is, yes, the television is in fact useless if anything happens to the remote. Since RCA was the pioneer manufacturer of electronic TV, I would have thought their engineers would have had enough foresight to design their sets so they could be used even if the remote were lost and/or damaged.
