Peter Parry wrote:
> Yup - took several months pocket money but it came in its original
> transit case that was a work of art and probably worth more than the
> computer. I don't know how many Proops must have acquired but they
> were advertised for many years. Actually I think it was the Sperry
> MkXlV/T1 rather than the Norden, it had lots of barostats, motors,
> cogs and gears. and kept me amused for many hours (although nothing
> useful was ever made from the bits!).
And if you hadn't taken it to bits and played with it, what would it be
worth now? ;-(
Peter Parry wrote:
> On Mon, 06 Aug 2007 19:54:02 +0100, Old Codger
> <oldcodger@anyoldwhere.net> wrote:
>
>
>> There was a CH site at GT Bentley in Essex. Towards the end of the war
>> local rumours were that the ARP wardens climed to the top of the masts
>>from where they could hear the planes taking off in Germany.
>
> Might this have had more to do with the (some still existing)
> acoustic mirrors used in various places
> (http://www.ajg41.clara.co.uk/mirrors/dungeness.html)
Quite possibly confusing the two technologies or perhaps assuming Radar
was a development of the acoustic ears.
--
Old Codger
e-mail use reply to field
What matters in politics is not what happens, but what you can make
people believe has happened. [Janet Daley 27/8/2003]
M. J. Powell wrote:
> In message <46b76f0e$0$15216$fa0fcedb@news.zen.co.uk>, Old Codger
> <oldcodger@anyoldwhere.net> writes
>> Eeyore wrote:
>>>
>>> I've heard it claimed in the electronics groups. It was alleged that
>>> they could
>>> 'shoot down' birds with their radar beams.
>>
>> I find that difficult to believe unless the bird if flying close to
>> the centre of the beam, in a circle and in sync with the rotating
>> antenna. I suppose it *might* work if the bird was hovering and the
>> radar beam was stationary with the bird at the centre.
>
> My boss at Marconis, Dr. Eastwood, wrote the only book on a subject,
> 'Radar Ornithology'.
Ah, Dr E, a lovely man. He was *the* expert on that subject. He spent
many late evenings/early mornings plotting "angels".
Did the book record any instances of birds being "shot down" by rotating
radars?
--
Old Codger
e-mail use reply to field
What matters in politics is not what happens, but what you can make
people believe has happened. [Janet Daley 27/8/2003]
On Tue, 7 Aug 2007 15:21:50 UTC, Old Codger <oldcodger@anyoldwhere.net>
wrote:
> Iain wrote:
> >
> > Cigarettes kill most of their users, yet nothing about them from you.
>
> One has to die of something and if the fags don't get one something else
> does. :-)
>
> > Despite hundreds of millions of people using them for decades, there is
> > no good evidence of any harm what ever from mobile phones
>
> Apart from to those using them whilst driving. :-)
And Naomi Campbell's maids!
--
[ 7'ism - a condition by which the sufferer experiences an inability
to give concise answers, express reasoned argument or opinion.
Usually accompanied by silly noises and gestures - incurable, early
euthanasia recommended. ]
In message <4p3fb3tvn2l48iem7g4cr8el1vhqmuoahv@4ax.com>, Peter Parry
<peter@wpp.ltd.uk> writes
>On Mon, 06 Aug 2007 19:54:02 +0100, Old Codger
><oldcodger@anyoldwhere.net> wrote:
>
>
>>There was a CH site at GT Bentley in Essex. Towards the end of the war
>>local rumours were that the ARP wardens climed to the top of the masts
>>from where they could hear the planes taking off in Germany.
>
>Might this have had more to do with the (some still existing)
>acoustic mirrors used in various places
>(http://www.ajg41.clara.co.uk/mirrors/dungeness.html)
There was a good programme on those mirrors in the first series of
"Coast". Including a distance test with a Tiger Moth.
In message <46b88d57$0$15217$fa0fcedb@news.zen.co.uk>, Old Codger
<oldcodger@anyoldwhere.net> writes
>M. J. Powell wrote:
>> In message <46b76f0e$0$15216$fa0fcedb@news.zen.co.uk>, Old Codger
>><oldcodger@anyoldwhere.net> writes
>>> Eeyore wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I've heard it claimed in the electronics groups. It was alleged
>>>>that they could
>>>> 'shoot down' birds with their radar beams.
>>>
>>> I find that difficult to believe unless the bird if flying close to
>>>the centre of the beam, in a circle and in sync with the rotating
>>>antenna. I suppose it *might* work if the bird was hovering and the
>>>radar beam was stationary with the bird at the centre.
>> My boss at Marconis, Dr. Eastwood, wrote the only book on a subject,
>>'Radar Ornithology'.
>
>Ah, Dr E, a lovely man. He was *the* expert on that subject. He spent
>many late evenings/early mornings plotting "angels".
>
>Did the book record any instances of birds being "shot down" by
>rotating radars?
Hehe! Not that I remember. I last read it about 10 years ago. Full of
radar pictures of expanding circles as the birds left their roosts at
dawn.
M. J. Powell wrote:
> In message <46b88d57$0$15217$fa0fcedb@news.zen.co.uk>, Old Codger
> <oldcodger@anyoldwhere.net> writes
>> M. J. Powell wrote:
>>> In message <46b76f0e$0$15216$fa0fcedb@news.zen.co.uk>, Old Codger
>>> <oldcodger@anyoldwhere.net> writes
>>>> Eeyore wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I've heard it claimed in the electronics groups. It was alleged
>>>>> that they could
>>>>> 'shoot down' birds with their radar beams.
>>>>
>>>> I find that difficult to believe unless the bird if flying close to
>>>> the centre of the beam, in a circle and in sync with the rotating
>>>> antenna. I suppose it *might* work if the bird was hovering and the
>>>> radar beam was stationary with the bird at the centre.
>>> My boss at Marconis, Dr. Eastwood, wrote the only book on a subject,
>>> 'Radar Ornithology'.
>>
>> Ah, Dr E, a lovely man. He was *the* expert on that subject. He
>> spent many late evenings/early mornings plotting "angels".
>>
>> Did the book record any instances of birds being "shot down" by
>> rotating radars?
>
> Hehe! Not that I remember. I last read it about 10 years ago. Full of
> radar pictures of expanding circles as the birds left their roosts at dawn.
>
> Did you know him! I was at Gt. Baddow '53- '55.
Not personally, although I have attended lectures given by him and some
of my colleagues assisted him in his nightly activities.
In the early 60s, when he was Chief of Research (and my boss's, boss's
boss) our annual rise was very late arriving. Apparently, when the
approved rises were sent from New Street, they were so much below what
he had submitted that he just laughed at them and refused to accept
them. We got our rises about three months late, backdated to April, and
they were significantly higher than the rest of the company had received.
As I said, a lovely man. First class scientist/engineer, excellent
manager and an excellent lecturer. They didn't make many like him then
and I imaging the breed is now extinct.
--
Old Codger
e-mail use reply to field
What matters in politics is not what happens, but what you can make
people believe has happened. [Janet Daley 27/8/2003]
"Peter Parry" <peter@wpp.ltd.uk> wrote in message
news:lqvdb35r2eocgjugm3kfm4f843ib11tt1i@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 6 Aug 2007 10:05:14 +0100, "R. Mark Clayton"
> <nospamclayton@btinternet.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>>There was a tale (and I think it was just a tale) that in the 1960's an
>>engineer claimed you could her the clicks on a big radar and so walked in
>>front of one at RAF Leuchars. After a short period he fell down [dead?].
>
> That was gravity - the radar head at Leuchars was 50ft above the
> ground.
>
> The magnetron in the 4Mk7 anti aircraft surveillance radar though had
> a neat trick - for traveling you swung it down out of its position in
> the waveguide and into a set of transit clamps. The Waveguide just
> fitted a Gingsters meat pie, so to warm up lunch you swung the
> magnetron down, put the meat pie in the waveguide, put the magnetron
> back up and fired up the radar. A few minutes later you had a nice
> warm pie.
In message <46b8e732$0$31724$db0fefd9@news.zen.co.uk>, Old Codger
<oldcodger@anyoldwhere.net> writes
>M. J. Powell wrote:
>> In message <46b88d57$0$15217$fa0fcedb@news.zen.co.uk>, Old Codger
>><oldcodger@anyoldwhere.net> writes
>>> M. J. Powell wrote:
>>>> In message <46b76f0e$0$15216$fa0fcedb@news.zen.co.uk>, Old Codger
>>>><oldcodger@anyoldwhere.net> writes
>>>>> Eeyore wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I've heard it claimed in the electronics groups. It was alleged
>>>>>>they could
>>>>>> 'shoot down' birds with their radar beams.
>>>>>
>>>>> I find that difficult to believe unless the bird if flying close
>>>>>to the centre of the beam, in a circle and in sync with the
>>>>>rotating antenna. I suppose it *might* work if the bird was
>>>>>hovering and the radar beam was stationary with the bird at the centre.
>>>> My boss at Marconis, Dr. Eastwood, wrote the only book on a
>>>>subject, 'Radar Ornithology'.
>>>
>>> Ah, Dr E, a lovely man. He was *the* expert on that subject. He
>>>spent many late evenings/early mornings plotting "angels".
>>>
>>> Did the book record any instances of birds being "shot down" by
>>>rotating radars?
>> Hehe! Not that I remember. I last read it about 10 years ago. Full
>>of radar pictures of expanding circles as the birds left their roosts
>>at dawn.
>> Did you know him! I was at Gt. Baddow '53- '55.
>
>Not personally, although I have attended lectures given by him and some
>of my colleagues assisted him in his nightly activities.
>
>In the early 60s, when he was Chief of Research (and my boss's, boss's
>boss) our annual rise was very late arriving. Apparently, when the
>approved rises were sent from New Street, they were so much below what
>he had submitted that he just laughed at them and refused to accept
>them. We got our rises about three months late, backdated to April, and
>they were significantly higher than the rest of the company had received.
>
>As I said, a lovely man. First class scientist/engineer, excellent
>manager and an excellent lecturer. They didn't make many like him then
>and I imaging the breed is now extinct.
Agreed all through. I worked in Jesty's group on CTV R & D. It was
disbanded while I was doing NS in the RAF. Oddly enough I was sent to
Ekco's in Southend concerning an automatic DF receiver and found most of
my old colleagues there working on Green Satin. When I returned to
Marconi's they would only offer me a job in CCTV so I joined ITV for
about twice the pay.
In message <46B63BD7.687C6D13@hotmail.com>, Eeyore
<rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> writes
>WW2 radars operated over a wide range of wavelengths. From 'metric' for the
>likes of the British Chain Home 'early warning' system to centimetric for
>magnetron based radars.
>
>If it was waveguide then somewhere around 10cm ( 3 GHz ) typically IIRC.
>
>Peak power was very high - up to 10kW for even the earliest magnetrons but the
>pulse duration was only a few microseconds. Average power was probably in the
>tens of watts. Enough to warm your hand though !
On Victors and Vulcans (not really any advanced on WWII) radar systems
the techies learnt to cook hamburgers using the radar.
--
Devs
"Punchdown Pete the old Kroner"
In message <5hp4otF3lv078U1@mid.individual.net>, George Weston
<geoweston@googlemail.com> writes
>I remember learning to use an RAF (mechanical - manual) navigational
>computer when I was in the air cadets in the late 'fifties. It was a
>hand-held box, with an internal belt on rollers, if I remember correctly,
>with an etched metal dial on the front. No electrical power required - just
>turn the dial/knobs! Akin to a three-dimensional slide-rule.
>ISTR that it calculated the aircraft's track compared with its heading, when
>given the wind-speed and direction - or the other way round. It was a long
>time ago and Alzheimer's is setting in fast ;-)
It's not that long ago they were still using similar.
--
Devs
"Punchdown Pete the old Kroner"
> 1. The fact that more than one carrier signal is usually transmitted
> from the mast. Thus, the figure of 60W must be multiplied by the
> number of carriers that are actually transmitted in any particular
> case; in order to minimise inter-carrier interference, however, this
> number is restricted typically to 4 at the most, so the total output
> wattage can be a high as 240W.
Only 240w? Please ask them to turn it up, my signal is still a bit flakey
sometimes.
"Steve Walker" <spam-trap@beeb.net> wrote in message
news:5i6u2kF3nobpkU1@mid.individual.net
: : Lenny wrote:
: :
: : : 1. The fact that more than one carrier signal is
: : : usually transmitted from the mast. Thus, the figure
: : : of 60W must be multiplied by the number of carriers
: : : that are actually transmitted in any particular case;
: : : in order to minimise inter-carrier interference,
: : : however, this number is restricted typically to 4 at
: : : the most, so the total output wattage can be a high
: : : as 240W.
: :
: : Only 240w? Please ask them to turn it up, my signal is
: : still a bit flakey sometimes.
Re: the 60W light bulb misconception 
Linear Mode
