[ARC5] Japanese technology

[jmfranke]

The US was not that far behind and the others were not that far ahead. The 
US lacked the cavity magnetron, but had the reflex klystron and the TR/ATR 
system. Look how much air-to-air radar used simple triodes like the 15E. The 
US also fielded S-band radars using lighthouse tubes. Fortunately the US 
shared technology with the British.

John  WA4WDL

--------------------------------------------------
From: "Sandy" <ebjr37 at charter.net>
Sent: Saturday, March 24, 2012 4:40 PM
To: <kgordon2006 at frontier.com>; <ARC5 at mailman.qth.net>
Subject: Re: [ARC5] Japanese technology

> We were way behind in radar as well until the "Cavity Magnetron" opened up
> the microwave spectrum for high resolution radar technology.  Nowadays we
> have much superior microwave receiving gear due to solid state amplifiers
> making the receivers MUCH more sensitive!
>
> Anybody interested in "torpedo troubles" that our submarine fleet had 
> should
> research the writings of a sub skipper named Dudley "Mush" Morton, who
> commanded the fleet boat "Wahoo".  Edward L. "Ned" Beach also wrote quite 
> a
> bit about torpedo problems in his writings about the failure of many
> torpedoes which killed not a few of our sub crews and blunted the efforts 
> of
> others.
>
> 73,
>
> Sandy W5TVW
> -----Original Message----- 
> From: Kenneth G. Gordon
> Sent: Saturday, March 24, 2012 1:29 PM
> To: ARC5 at mailman.qth.net
> Subject: Re: [ARC5] Japanese technology
>
> On 24 Mar 2012 at 14:07, gordon white wrote:
>
>>      While they were behind in radar,
>
> And, IMHO, in squad and aircraft communications...
>
> I understand that, at least early in the war, Japanese pilots would
> routinely
> remove their radios because they were so worthless, and that would enable
> them to carry a bit more ammo.
>
>> their night-fighting at sea
>> techniques were ahead of ours in 1941-42 (Maybe the Germans were
>> giving them superior Zeiss night binoculars?)
>
> Yes, but when we finally added radar-fire-direction capabilities to our
> ship-
> board fire control computers, our forces took a quantum leap in
> night-fighting
> capability and effectiveness. An incident mentioned here concerning the
> Battleship "Washington" supports this opinion.
>
>> and their long-lance
>> torpedoes were way ahead of ours for quite a while.
>
> OH, YES! Our torpedoes were a real and very serious scandal from early to
> practically mid-WWII. They were pretty much worthless, and were the cause
> of many deaths and failures. I cannot understand how that situation was 
> let
> go on for so long. It really and seriously stunk to high heaven.
>
> The Japanese Long Lance torpedo was a real masterpiece of design and
> implementation, and was very effective.
>
>> Our superior
>> technologies took a while to get into service as did our superior
>> production. As Yamamato said. "I'll run wild for six months" then
>> watch out. From December 7, 1941 to June, 1942 (Midway) he did.
>
> I always liked his "...behind every blade of grass..." statement. :-)
>
> Ken W7EKB
> ______________________________________________________________
> ARC5 mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/arc5
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:ARC5 at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2012.0.1913 / Virus Database: 2114/4891 - Release Date: 03/24/12
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> ARC5 mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/arc5
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:ARC5 at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>