[Milsurplus] Arnhen.. yet again

[Military1944 at aol.com]

it was said:>>>>>>>>>>>>>.
One of the reasons listed was the failure of the communications
equipment, and they recreated the communications by using what they called a 68 set, a backpack portable in communciation with a base set, which was not identified but looked like a 19
set. 

Their conclusion was that the radios simply lacked the range to be effective.  But wasn't there more to it than that? 

Wasn't there some problem in wrong channels   being supplied, or incompatible equipment being used?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Firstly, a WS68 is not soley xtal controlled, nor is the WS22 which    was also used there, they both can be VFO or xtal. The only set xtal controlled was the WS76, which was used for long range comms, ie back to Blighty. Basically it was aerials.... I can use my WS68, 0.25-0.5 watt, to talk to UK ad Europe, on my 135ft long wire. On an 8ft whip I can't get 3 mile. Every time the signallers tried to get out wires the snippers had them, so, at the bridge (thats Arnhem Bridge for those not in tune) its 5 mile back to HQ at the Hart Hotel... 8 to the DZ, through dense forest at that. So, when John Frost and my good friend Don Hull made it to the bridge his signallers could not get a signal back to the main corps. So it was for most of the 4 days there. 

Even so, the failure at Arnhem has more to do with the fact that the whole force was not dropped on D1... but spread out over 4 days. Had 10,000 troops arrived on Sept 17th then they would have got to the bridge, taken it and held it till 30 Corps arrived. With the entire force on or around the bridge singals would not have been a problem. 

Further, the test this year with modern sets....  poor and ill thought out in my opinion. Typical TV rubbish. 

Personal note. Met Louis Golden, he of "Echos from Arnhem" fame this year just off the bridge in Arnhen town. 

cheers, Ben G4BXD
www.qsl.net/g4bxd/arnhem.htm