Text 29563, 74 rader
Skriven 2012-06-07 20:37:30 av Richard Webb (1:116/901.0)
  Kommentar till text 29556 av Roy Witt (1:387/22)
Ärende: Fidonews Vol 29 No 23 June 04, 2012 Page: 2
===================================================
HI Roy,

On Thu 2012-Jun-07 05:47, Roy Witt (1:387/22) wrote to Richard Webb:

<snip>
 Roy>> The record of what happened in the shack of the Itasca and what
 Roy>> radio events was recorded (on paper) by all the stations and ships
 Roy>> in the vicinity, exists. It consists of 117 pages and can be found
 Roy>> at the Perdue University's website. I'm left it at page 20
 Roy>> yesterday.
<snip>
 RW> INdeed, but they can be perused, so that helps.

Roy> I'd think that would be a task left for someone with computer skills
Roy> that can read them aloud, as what is available can't be cut and
Roy> pasted. I've tried!

NO doubt, probably handwritten, or hand printed anyway,
making a scan and then optical character recognition
difficult if not impossible.

 RW> What people forget with a lot of things like this is the sad fact
 RW> that meticulous research properly done costs real money to get the
 RW> trained professionals with the equipment and knowledge to do it (not
 RW> referencing the radio logs so much as the physical evidence at the
 RW> alleged crash site.) But those logs are an interesting read I'll bet.

Roy> They are, since the one I'm reading was meticulously done by the
Roy> Coast Guard and Navy Dept...

OH yeah, the USCG radio ops are trained to be.  Goes with
the teritory with those guys.

 RW> ON another note from this thread ... size of the radio ...
 RW> IF that radio only did cw then no modulator needed, that
 RW> would cut down on some components.  Most serious pilots back then
 RW> knew MOrse.  IT's quite possible cw was the only mode in use.

Roy> It's possible, but MCW was mentioned several times in those
Roy> archives...

True, but if one's listening to a cw signal with the bfo
engaged it's hard to tell whether one is actually hearing
mcw or regular on off keyed cw.  I don't think receivers of
that period were commonly equipped with an s meter, so
watching the needle bounce wouldn't help ya there <g>.
Someone knowing the specs of the transmitter they took
aboard that flight could tell you for sure, but lack of a
modulator would reduce the bulk quite a bit, always a
consideration.  iF your pilots are using the code anyway and you're trying to
maximize flight distance and duration any
pound you can shed is a plus, especially back then.  That
one might be easily removed from the realm of speculation if one could find the
specs of that unit and know which of any
add-on options were present.

Roy> That could mean that one or two additional tubes would add to the
Roy> size.

YEp, plus additional power supply capability to operate
those tubes.  An old friend and i were reminiscing just last night on the phone
about old homebrew radios such as the
novice ops of yesteryear built to get on the air.  HE was
talking about a kit he built with iirc a pair of 6gf5's,
crystal controlled transmitter of course.  QST published
plans to add a modulator to it so that said novice could get on am voice when
he upgraded, just pop in a different
crystal.  HE noted that it doubled the weight of the
transmitter and then some.

Regards,
           Richard
---
 * Origin:  (1:116/901)