Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*LF\:\s+Titanic\s+Frequency\s*$/>

Return to KLUBNL.PL main page

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*LF\:\s+Titanic\s+Frequency\s*$/: 10 ]

Total 10 documents matching your query.

1. Re: LF: Titanic Frequency (score: 1): Author: Steve Dove <[email protected]>; Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2012 15:00:26 +0000; Good find, Dave. Thanks! 73 Steve On 4/15/2012 2:10 PM, DAVE PICK wrote: According to all the information on the Marconi historical sites it would have been 600m. The installation on the Titanic coul; /rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2012-04/msg00007.html (10,292 bytes)
2. Re: LF: Titanic Frequency (score: 1): Author: pa3abk <[email protected]>; Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2012 11:49:11 +0200; Nice question. My friend Google couldn't produce an instant answer. What I know is that they used to have two frequency bands in use: 300m & 600m. Knowing that the MGY was a modern vessel assume he h; /rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2012-04/msg00035.html (11,144 bytes)
3. Re: LF: Titanic Frequency (score: 1): Author: Jacek Lipkowski <[email protected]>; Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2012 21:17:44 +0200 (CEST); BTW The company I work for, still has of a wirelesstation in the showroom from those days (1916). A Telefunken spark transmitter working on both 300m & 600m. PSE QSO :) VY 73 Jacek / SQ5BPF; /rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2012-04/msg00124.html (9,616 bytes)
4. LF: Titanic Frequency (score: 1): Author: [email protected]; Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2012 10:41:18 +0200; Does anybody know, on which frequency the titanic sent the SOS? Was it really 500kc/s? 73 de Toni, HB9ASB; /rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2012-04/msg00172.html (8,645 bytes)
5. Re: LF: Titanic Frequency (score: 1): Author: Andy Talbot <[email protected]>; Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2012 08:52:51 +0000; It was using spark wasn't it ? So an early spread spectrum transmission Centre frequency based on antenna resonance ? 'jnt; /rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2012-04/msg00215.html (10,021 bytes)
6. Re: LF: Titanic Frequency (score: 1): Author: DAVE PICK <[email protected]>; Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2012 15:10:04 +0100; According to all the information on the Marconi historical sites it would have been 600m. The installation on the Titanic could use LW (600m) or SW (300m) bands but was set to 600m when it went down.; /rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2012-04/msg00307.html (9,653 bytes)
7. Re: LF: Titanic Frequency (score: 1): Author: [email protected]; Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2012 13:07:46 +0200; Of course it was "spread spectrum". But what was the center frequency of the transmission? The 500 kHz calling and distress frequency was introduced later - after the Titanic accident. In the protoco; /rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2012-04/msg00344.html (9,930 bytes)
8. Re: LF: Titanic Frequency (score: 1): Author: John Rabson <[email protected]>; Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2012 11:29:39 +0200; No, but it is good to know the reflector is working a bit quicker. G4WGT's message of Friday 13th took 20 hours to get to me. 73, John F5VLF (sent 15 Apr 2012 1129CEST); /rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2012-04/msg00457.html (9,285 bytes)
9. Re: LF: Titanic Frequency (score: 1): Author: [email protected]; Date: 15 Apr 2012 09:48 GMT; According to the state of the art at that time the Titanic had used a spark transmitter, emitting a frecuency band of at least 100 kHz! 73 Ha-Jo, DJ1ZB; /rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2012-04/msg00500.html (9,179 bytes)
10. RE: LF: Titanic Frequency (score: 1): Author: Rik Strobbe <[email protected]>; Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2012 17:16:18 +0000; Jan, all, have a look at http://www.hf.ro/ 73, Rik ON7YD - OR7T ________________________________________ Van: [email protected] [[email protected]] namens pa3abk [pa; /rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2012-04/msg00549.html (11,709 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 10
Page: [1]