[Milsurplus] Operation Market Garden

[J. Forster]

The WS 22 is lower power than the WS 19 and has no B set or IC.

-John

Bob Camp wrote:

> Hi
>
> Ok, a little more investigation comes up with the answer to the WS 19
> question. The radios on the other end of the link often were 22's
> rather than 19's. Judging from the comments on the 22 it seems to have
> been a set down from the 19 in terms of effectiveness on HF.
>
>         Enjoy!
>
>                 Bob Camp
>                 KB8TQ
>
> On Nov 13, 2004, at 8:43 PM, Bob Camp wrote:
>
> > Hi
> >
> >
> > Early on in the segment on the program they mentioned testing with
> > modern gear. That whole thread seemed to die out about half way
> > through. They certainly stated at the end of the segment that they had
> > done tests with a real WS 68 and it had failed to do the job.
> >
> > The radio on the "other end" of the link was not a WS 68. It was
> > obviously British and WWII gear. The earlier reference to the WS 19
> > was in the context of being the other end of the link. I pretty much
> > expected them to talk about both ends of the circuit but they never
> > did. I also expected them to do comparisons of modern gear running to
> > old gear and vice versa. Again no information.
> >
> > About the only thing they did present as results was that the WS 68
> > they had failed pretty badly when it came to doing the job.
> >
> >       Take Care!
> >
> >               Bob Camp
> >               KB8TQ
> >
> >
> >
> > On Nov 13, 2004, at 7:11 PM, J. Forster wrote:
> >
> >> Bob Camp wrote:
> >>
> >>> The 68's they showed were the battery powered version. If that is
> >>> representative of what was really used then there's another issue.
> >>> Having run low power battery powered tube gear I can speak to this
> >>> directly. The power you get on a brand new set of batteries is maybe
> >>> 30% higher than what you get after the battery has been used for a
> >>> few
> >>> minutes. The 1/4 watt probably was down to half of that after a few
> >>> hours of use ...
> >>>
> >>> Be interesting to see if anybody on the list has any real data.
> >>>
> >>>         Take Care!
> >>>
> >>>                 Bob Camp
> >>>                 KB8TQ
> >>
> >> My understanding is that the tests were done using modern HF rigs.
> >> There were
> >> problems getting enough working WS 68s to do a test. There was a post
> >> on the
> >> WS-19 list a while back from a Brit looking for the WS 68 EMER
> >> (Workshop
> >> Manual).
> >>
> >> Also, I believe the 68 set is derived from the 18 set, not the 19 set
> >> as
> >> previously stated. The 58 set has the same heritage, and I collect
> >> those. The 18
> >> set was the workhorse on the Bruneval Raid to capture a German
> >> Wurtzburg Radar
> >> set and on D-Day.
> >>
> >> -John
> >>
> >> ______________________________________________________________
> >> Milsurplus mailing list
> >> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> >> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> >> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
> >>
> >
> > ______________________________________________________________
> > Milsurplus mailing list
> > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> > Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
> >
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net