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 <[email protected]>
To: [email protected] <[email protected]>
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
>
>
|
