Message-ID: <m11iHAF-000ataC@fwd15.btx.dtag.de>
Date: Mon, 1 Nov 1999 14:06:23 +0100
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
References: <005701bf2401$60427ac0$8aeb869f@beachwood.tinet.ie>
Subject: Re:  LF: re: 500khz
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
From: "Hans-Joachim Brandt" <hajo.brandt.dj1zb@t-online.de>
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Sender: <majordom@post.thorcom.com>

Dear Finbar,

thank You for your comment. I think the high powers of WCC and WSL were the 
result of the competition of the two different telegraph companies in the New 
York area, a situation we had not to deal with here in Europe.

I have also looked up in my list the powers listed for DAN and DAO where I have 
been in training in 1955/56 but I think the powers of the transmitters were 
higher than listed by the ITU. When I do remember right DAN had about 5 kW and 
DAO 1-2 kW.

I also remember that the technicians servicing the pre-war-transmitters had 
problems getting permission for new tubes (in the fifties, many former navy 
transmitters were still be used at german coastal radio stations). They had to 
burn the filaments of old tubes to receive the acknowledgement that they could 
not be used any longer. However, this way did not work any more after the new 
tube technology with low voltage filaments and high currents had been 
introduced! 

But these times have gone now - - - 

After two years in training for coastal stations and two years at sea, I moved 
to Munich into the radio industry to become a design engineer, first with 
Rohde&Schwarz for UHF TV transmitters, then with SIEMENS designing HF equipment. 
But our division had been sold about the same time when coastal radio had been 
abolished. SIEMENS does not produce any HF equipment any more. The last years of 
my career I worked with SIEMENS in Brunswick, designing equipment for railways 
for communication between rails and trains, in the range 75 Hz to 36 kHz!

Most of my coastal radio colleagues have left this servide rather early and had 
been employed in other services of Deutsche Bundespost, but others had been in 
service up to the end and were much struck how things developed in coastal 
radio. Now we should be eager to see what future use will be made with this 
frequency range. If a few kHz could be taken apart for amateur radio - I would 
appreciate it. The technical conditions for those small estates which radio  
amateurs can use would be much more favourable than for LF (on the other side I 
also know that some G stns still love 73 kHz).

73 Ha-Jo, DJ1ZB 

73 Ha-Jo, DJ1ZB

Finbar O'Connor schrieb:
> Hi  Hans-Joachim,
>                            I do not disagree with your power level for WCC
> and WSL,  I  was just  commenting on the sheer power level used by these
> stations, compared to the ususal  1 kw  transmitters used at coast radio
> stations. The 1996  Admiralty List of Radio Signals  Volume 1,  notes the
> high power used by WCC and WSL.  Many a time our own 1 kw transmitters had
> sunk to 500 watts, before  a new pair of output valves were fitted, but we
> still managed to cover  well out into the Atlantic by day and night.
> Very best regards
> Finbar   EI0CF    EJM
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hans-Joachim Brandt <hajo.brandt.dj1zb@t-online.de>
> To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
> Date: 01 November 1999 00:15
> Subject: Re: LF: re: 500khz
>
>
> Dear Finbar et AL;
>
> THE POWER OF WCC and WSL I have taken from a 1959 list of coast and ship
> stations, volume 1, coast stations.
>
> Concerning a medium wave band, as stated on another occasion (DK8KWs medium
> wave tx), we should choose a frequency sufficiently far from the 450 kHz to
> 468
> kHz I.F. range of receivers, therefore I had pleaded for 410 kHz (or
> somewhat
> higher).
>
> 73 Ha-Jo, DJ1ZB
>
> Stations like
> >  Chatham  WCC and Amaganset WSL, were mentioned, but their power levels
> were
> >  exceptional, just imagine   30-40 kw, a bit over the top , and to be
> quite
> >  honest, their signals never struck me as being that much more potent than
> >  the rest.
>
> How about a new  band around      440 khz.  After  136 khz it would be  a
> >  breeze.
> >
> > 73   Finbar      EI0CF       EJM
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>