[Milsurplus] Question ( RBS; submarine )

[Nick England]

Hi ray - I appreciate the compliments and your confidence in my web site :-)
But DF is far from my area of interest or expertise and my
www.navy-radio.com/rcvrs/d-df.htm page is just a catch-all place for info I
happen to come across.

For anyone  seriously interested in the topic, check out "Abstracts of the
Available Literature on Radio Direction Finding 1899-1965" at
http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf&AD=AD0800110
which has entries for 5,224 articles to keep you entertained....

My point was that NRL etc. were indeed concerned about the possibility of
LO detection. When they designed the RAA, RAK, etc. in the 1930's they were
worrying about what a very clever adversary *might* be able to do in the
next 20 years. Predicting future technology is difficult and assuming the
worst case sometimes makes good sense.

>From Gebhard's NRL history -
"... which included the Models RAA, 10 to 1000 kHz (1936), RAK, 15 to 600
kHz (1939), RAL, 300 to 23,000 kHz (1939), and RBA, 15 to 600 kHz (1941).
These receivers were NRL concepts. They included the NRL multiplexing
technique and the shielding needed to prevent radiation of local-oscillator
energy which could cause detection by an enemy through interception."

I'm just pushing back against what sometimes seems to be a narrative that
this was all just a foolish concern and panicked over-reaction by ignorant
engineers. It wasn't. Just because you are paranoid doesn't mean they
aren't out to get you.

You can't judge what might have happened, by what did happen - without
Enigma decrypts, jeep carriers, centimetric radar, etc. maybe more effort
would have been put into super-sensitive DF. I certainly don't know.

Cheers,
Nick England K4NYW
www.navy-radio.com

On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 12:04 PM, Ray Fantini <RAFANTINI at salisbury.edu>
wrote:

> The base of my argument is your web site.  I am not an expert on history
> or procurement but simply look at the listings, publications and items on
> line and seeing what’s listed on your web site (http://www.virhistory.com/
> navy/rcvrs/d-df.htm ).  What I consider to be the premier web page for US
> Navy communications and looking at the DAK, DAQ and the shore base DAB
> don’t see anything up to that challenge.
>
> If it existed I would think it would be evident in some publication and on
> your web site.
>
>
>
> Ray F/KA3EKH
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20160826/182c4d49/attachment-0001.html>