Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
From: Frank Gilliland on Dec 18, 11:00 am
On Sun, 18 Dec 2005 17:19:28 GMT, Dave Heil wrote wrote: part of the military that wasn't glamorous, didn't wear flashy or cute uniforms, and bore the brunt of national defense as it always has since 1776...with the casualty rates the highest of any branch, from battlefields of Pennsylvania to the Persian Gulf area of Dubya's rule. The Signal Corps has the highest casualty rate, or did you mean the U.S. Army? The Signal Corps. The first target of any combat unit is the guy (or tank, amtrack, jeep, etc.) with the antennas. The second target is the guy -next- to the guy with the antenna because he is usually an officer. Frank, I originally wrote ARMY, relative to Navy, Air Force, etc. Davie, in an effort to be as dick-tatorial as possible, edited the quote to set up a following rebuke of the Signal Corps. Department of Defense casualty figures are the reference as to which branch gives the most. Anyone can look those up. In the Army the "front-line" (we called them just "line") radio users were just ordinary infantry, artillery, or armor troops who've had quickie courses in using their radios. Those aren't Signal Corpsmen per se. Is that something to brag about? Yep. It takes some big, hairy balls to walk onto the battlefield carrying a piece of equipment that will be the first thing the enemy shoots at, especially when the radio is bulky and/or heavy enough to limit your mobility. The casualty rate for radiomen in combat is even higher than EOD. That used to be true but the paradigm has flipped over today. The common manpack radio is the SINCGARS for land forces, both Army and Marines. The SIP or SINCGARS Improvement Program has resulted in a manpack radio that is half the bulk and half the weight of the original (beginning 1989) SINCGARS sets. Some 250 thousand total R/Ts were manufactured and operational as of the end of 2004, making that the most-produced military radio of all time...roughly double that of the PRC-25/-77 of the Vietnam era. I don't have any current figures on the SIP production-fielding, but the older SINCGARS cases-chassis (PRC-119) have been turning up on E-Bay, so there is a new beginning "surplus" area for "green" (military) collectors. When I was in, we "rear echelon" troops would exercise in infantry training using PRC-6s and PRC-9s (manpack). Those VHF whips aren't that noticeable and the (about) 20 pound manpack radio was half the weight and bulk of the old WW2 SCR-300 Walkie-Talkie. Being of average height and build, I never found it limited my mobility much then. During the Korean War active phase, the highest casualty rate got specialized to the pole linemen...extremely vulnerable targets at work with absolutely no cover but the pole. The Army got wise unusually quickly and set about getting lay-on- the-ground multi-channel cable such as the "Spiral-4" stuff used in newer terminal/radio-relay equipments. That was used more than aerial line pairs in Vietnam. I doubt that big, hairy ball USAF MARS operators in SE Asia ever noticed that. The SE Asian topography and dictated limited movement of troops led to concentrations of communications on whatever hilltops could be secured. That led to concentration of enemy fire on those relatively concentrated units with resulting heavy casualties. The Army was stuck with most of those tasks although the Marines did some of those radio hilltops. USAF MARS operators weren't doing those things, despite their claims of "being in-country" as much as combat troops. By 1990-1991 the "command track" concept of concentration of radios in certain vehicles was already lessening. Newer radios were more multi-purpose, multi-band, more agile and there were fewer tell-tale antennas to spot. Desert Storm isn't a good model for comparison since EVERYONE on land was ON THE MOVE in perhaps the quickest panzerfaust operation of any military at any time. It was largely armor-against-armor in an overwhelming over-run condition. The USAF and Navy Air had cut the Iraqi communications centers already during Desert Shield, leaving their ground forces with limited command track capability and little coordination. It was a rout for our side, taking only five days of ground war. By the time of Dubya's War, things were turned around again. Humvees are the local "command tracks" all over and the targets of hidden bombs and mines. Those are indiscrimate as to whether they have visible radio equipment or not. Different game, different rules, different playing field. While land forces have radios with excellent resistance to interception and jamming, we are up against Iraqis (and Afghanis) who aren't "radio knowledgeable" to any useful degree and don't know enough to look for "command tracks" or antenna concentrations. EVERYONE who wears a uniform in those areas needs big, hairy balls to venture about. Happy Christmas |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
From: Frank Gilliland on Dec 18, 6:54 pm
On 18 Dec 2005 14:04:25 -0800, wrote in snip In the Army the "front-line" (we called them just "line") radio users were just ordinary infantry, artillery, or armor troops who've had quickie courses in using their radios. Those aren't Signal Corpsmen per se. My bad. I thought they came from the same stock -- I guess that shows how old I'm not :-0 No problem. "All parts are interchangeable" in the land forces, something that's been mentioned for decades...before I was in and will be long after today. Soldiers are soldiers first, specialists second. USUALLY, but not always, the infantry radio ops are infantrymen with some short training in their manpack radios. Signalmen are found from Battalion level and up to Brigades, and do the mass-communication stuff for Brigade through Division command. Field radio equipment has been designed for wired-remote control (many hundreds of feet away, as needed) of transmitters for over a half century. Major reason being RDF *might* be able to pinpoint an emitter and drop some nasty stuff on it. The personnel at the control point won't necessarily be hit so those are still survivable. If the comms equipment is destroyed and no replacements are available, the signalmen revert to their basic duty: Soldiering the infantry way. That used to be true but the paradigm has flipped over today. Very true. Real sci-fi stuff they have these days. Won't be long and every grunt will be equipped with a helmet-mounted sat-comm complete with bio-telemetry and "black box" A/V recorders. Not quite. That stuff is PR material that's been out for years. The Army tried out the "squad radio" concept in Vietnam during the early 1970s. Didn't work out well and that was generally abandoned for wholesale use on the line. I don't know WHY it didn't work out since I've never been involved directly with it, just the manpack-to-high-power- vehicular-amp families of "regular" (in ham ideas) radios and some other interesting DoD stuff. :-) Back in 1990 the land forces had the AN/PSC-3 radio with voice and data capability on the military aviation band, three different antennas from whip to wire mesh parabolic reflector. The data part had a "chiclet" keyboard and a small LCD-like screen and messages could be typed in, stored, sent at 1200 BPS on UHF, either to an airborne radio relay or through military comm sats. Can't verify if the data part could be encrypted, but today's PSC-7 can do that. The PSC-3 was used in unfriendly territory during Desert Shield and none were compromised. Some old- timers in here thought the military was still using something like WW2 OSS HF sets with morse code during the first Gulf War! :-) The present-day survival radios (HT size) can cooperate with the DME of TACAN to yield distance information and their voice is both digitized and encryptable. Same size as 20-year-old survival radio-beacons but have more electronic features and better battery packs. The AN/PRC-104 HF manpack transceiver (operational 1986, will be replaced soon by an updated unit) by Hughes Ground Systems has an automatic antenna tuner integral to the manpack R/T. One can physically shorten the whip by removing sections to cut down visibility and the antenna tuner will compensate for the shorter sections. Won't be quite as efficient as the full whip but it is less visible on the ground. The lil 20 W PEP transmitter will shove as much RF into the whip as it can without damaging itself. While I haven't been with the Army units testing anything in the last half-dozen years, I can see that the "command track" concept (actually a command vehicle, a Humvee now more than a Bradley tracked vehicle) is still strong. That lends itself to the "many antennas" visibility for un- friendlies who have some smarts on sorting out targets. With two NVIS whips (bent-over long ones) and a couple VHF, UHF antennas on a Humvee, those stand out pretty well from the ordinary gunner-style Humvee. There are "mini- huts" for making up a Humvee into a radio command vehicle holding lots of radios inside...similar to the full-size hut on a deuce and a half flatbed. Armor units have the flashy toys now with a couple dynamic (on the move) automatic positioning location and reporting systems still undergoing more field testing. [why, I don't know, they were first out in the field a decade ago] Artillery can confirm its position super-accurately with military-mode GPS in the little HT-size "plugger" or AN/PSN-11 receiver. The same plugger can connect to any SINCGARS radio to update its calendar clock for good networking in FHSS mode; GPS provides a super-accurate time base. Plugger was in use during Desert Storm. I haven't followed the progress of the SIDs (Seismic Intrusion Device) that first saw service in later years of the SE Asia Live-Fire exercise. My RCA division in Van Nuys did the casing and geophone amplifier-filter- processor, me doing the final whip design desired to be a simple wire rather than the original OD tape style. Buryable unit intended for Vietnam but that war ended early without full deployment. It could distinguish between two-footed and four-footed creatures and report back (by coded radio signal) detection of the two- footed variety. In the three decades since there must have been improvement in that area. shrug There's more stuff coming along with the first signs of in SIGNAL magazine published by AFCEA along with Defense Industry Newsletter. The latest is an RF psycho weapon using ultra-wideband microwave stuff to scare-shock-disturb unfriendlies at a distance. First operational test contract was awarded a couple months ago. While it uses radio, it might not be handled by signalmen at all, probably not by artillery types either. Psy-war units? :-) The first NODs (Night Observation Devices) were operational during the latter half of the 1960s and used in Vietnam. Too many were stolen/captured with the USSR making their own versions. Now those "Buck Rogers" devices can be bought at sports stores as a regular consumer electronics product. shrug |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 19 Dec 2005 10:38:46 -0800, wrote in
. com: From: Frank Gilliland on Dec 18, 6:54 pm snip Very true. Real sci-fi stuff they have these days. Won't be long and every grunt will be equipped with a helmet-mounted sat-comm complete with bio-telemetry and "black box" A/V recorders. Not quite. That stuff is PR material that's been out for years. The Army tried out the "squad radio" concept in Vietnam during the early 1970s. Didn't work out well and that was generally abandoned for wholesale use on the line. I don't know WHY it didn't work out since I've never been involved directly with it, just the manpack-to-high-power- vehicular-amp families of "regular" (in ham ideas) radios and some other interesting DoD stuff. :-) One version of the "squad radio" was the PRC-68, a cool little VHF-lo rig. The problem was the radio wasn't built very well (mic screen kept falling off, battery boxes dented easily, antennas broke, etc), and the batteries were expensive, didn't last very long, and weren't compatible with any commercial equivalent. snip The AN/PRC-104 HF manpack transceiver (operational 1986, will be replaced soon by an updated unit) by Hughes Ground Systems has an automatic antenna tuner integral to the manpack R/T. One can physically shorten the whip by removing sections to cut down visibility and the antenna tuner will compensate for the shorter sections. Won't be quite as efficient as the full whip but it is less visible on the ground. The lil 20 W PEP transmitter will shove as much RF into the whip as it can without damaging itself. We had the PRC-104 in the early '80s; the RT was used as the exciter for the MRC-109/110 (400/1000W) jeep radios. Mechanical push-button tuning from 2-30 MHz. I still want one. snip The latest is an RF psycho weapon using ultra-wideband microwave stuff to scare-shock-disturb unfriendlies at a distance. First operational test contract was awarded a couple months ago. While it uses radio, it might not be handled by signalmen at all, probably not by artillery types either. Psy-war units? :-) I heard about that a couple years ago. Not a psych weapon -- it causes significant "discomfort" in the eyes and skin at a distance. It is/was intended for domestic purposes (i.e, riot control -- make sure to wear your aluminum-foil hat to the upcoming anti-war rallies). The first NODs (Night Observation Devices) were operational during the latter half of the 1960s and used in Vietnam. Too many were stolen/captured with the USSR making their own versions. Now those "Buck Rogers" devices can be bought at sports stores as a regular consumer electronics product. shrug Yeah, I have a Soviet unit that takes 2 AA batteries. Hmmmm..... ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() Frank Gilliland wrote: On 19 Dec 2005 10:38:46 -0800, wrote in snip The latest is an RF psycho weapon using ultra-wideband microwave stuff to scare-shock-disturb unfriendlies at a distance. First operational test contract was awarded a couple months ago. While it uses radio, it might not be handled by signalmen at all, probably not by artillery types either. Psy-war units? :-) I heard about that a couple years ago. Not a psych weapon -- it causes significant "discomfort" in the eyes and skin at a distance. It is/was intended for domestic purposes (i.e, riot control -- make sure to wear your aluminum-foil hat to the upcoming anti-war rallies). All the NPR types that riot at the economic summits might be interested. And Bono. |
#6
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
From: Frank Gilliland on Dec 19, 1:28 pm
On 19 Dec 2005 10:38:46 -0800, wrote in From: Frank Gilliland on Dec 18, 6:54 pm The AN/PRC-104 HF manpack transceiver (operational 1986, will be replaced soon by an updated unit) by Hughes Ground Systems has an automatic antenna tuner integral to the manpack R/T. One can physically shorten the whip by removing sections to cut down visibility and the antenna tuner will compensate for the shorter sections. Won't be quite as efficient as the full whip but it is less visible on the ground. The lil 20 W PEP transmitter will shove as much RF into the whip as it can without damaging itself. We had the PRC-104 in the early '80s; the RT was used as the exciter for the MRC-109/110 (400/1000W) jeep radios. Mechanical push-button tuning from 2-30 MHz. I still want one. I'm not familiar with the MRC-109 or MRC-110, but a reference on C4I has that compatible with the AN/VRC-49 which is FM in the 30 to 76 MHz region. The AN/PRC-104 basic R/T was used in the AN/GRC-213, a vehicle mount configuration with audio amplifier and DC vehicle power supply conditioning, 20 W PEP SSB output. The AN/GRC-193 is also for vehicle mounting, uses the basic R/T, but includes a 100/400 Watt linear amplifier for transmitter and a higher- power antenna coupler/tuner. The basic R/T has digit push-wheel frequency selection (like digit thumbwheels but with a single button mover). The AN/VRC-11 through AN/VRC-49 had, variously, 10 push-button or rotary switch selection of frequencies in the 30 to 76 MHz region, FM, and were compatible with the AN/PRC-25 and -77 VHF FM sets. The lower number VRCs I've seen all have chromed push buttons, something left over from WW2. :-) The latest is an RF psycho weapon using ultra-wideband microwave stuff to scare-shock-disturb unfriendlies at a distance. First operational test contract was awarded a couple months ago. While it uses radio, it might not be handled by signalmen at all, probably not by artillery types either. Psy-war units? :-) I heard about that a couple years ago. Not a psych weapon -- it causes significant "discomfort" in the eyes and skin at a distance. It is/was intended for domestic purposes (i.e, riot control -- make sure to wear your aluminum-foil hat to the upcoming anti-war rallies). I'll have to get out my aluminized Nomex full-body suit! :-) The "riot control" version was an R&D model. DoD has upped the ante with a fieldable system contract awarded for testing on whoever wherever they want to try it. The first NODs (Night Observation Devices) were operational during the latter half of the 1960s and used in Vietnam. Too many were stolen/captured with the USSR making their own versions. Now those "Buck Rogers" devices can be bought at sports stores as a regular consumer electronics product. shrug Yeah, I have a Soviet unit that takes 2 AA batteries. Hmmmm..... In 1967 the U.S. military had three field models of NODs. Electro-Optical Systems division of Xerox in Pasadena produced one of those models. Three were stolen/turned-up-mission that year, feds in there asking questions after. The production manager "resigned." I have no idea where those missing NODs wound up but I read reports in 1970 where the USSR military now had them. First ones were "blotchy" in imaging and sensitivity didn't have any automatic gain control but they could enable anyone to "own the night." They have improved considerably since 1967. |
#7
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 19 Dec 2005 20:41:35 -0800, wrote in
. com: From: Frank Gilliland on Dec 19, 1:28 pm On 19 Dec 2005 10:38:46 -0800, wrote in From: Frank Gilliland on Dec 18, 6:54 pm The AN/PRC-104 HF manpack transceiver (operational 1986, will be replaced soon by an updated unit) by Hughes Ground Systems has an automatic antenna tuner integral to the manpack R/T. One can physically shorten the whip by removing sections to cut down visibility and the antenna tuner will compensate for the shorter sections. Won't be quite as efficient as the full whip but it is less visible on the ground. The lil 20 W PEP transmitter will shove as much RF into the whip as it can without damaging itself. We had the PRC-104 in the early '80s; the RT was used as the exciter for the MRC-109/110 (400/1000W) jeep radios. Mechanical push-button tuning from 2-30 MHz. I still want one. I'm not familiar with the MRC-109 or MRC-110, but a reference on C4I has that compatible with the AN/VRC-49 which is FM in the 30 to 76 MHz region. The AN/PRC-104 basic R/T was used in the AN/GRC-213, a vehicle mount configuration with audio amplifier and DC vehicle power supply conditioning, 20 W PEP SSB output. The AN/GRC-193 is also for vehicle mounting, uses the basic R/T, but includes a 100/400 Watt linear amplifier for transmitter and a higher- power antenna coupler/tuner. Well hell, I guess I -am- getting old. I found references to the 400 watt MRC-138 but not the 1000 watt version. I could have sworn they were called the MRC-109/110....... The basic R/T has digit push-wheel frequency selection (like digit thumbwheels but with a single button mover). The AN/VRC-11 through AN/VRC-49 had, variously, 10 push-button or rotary switch selection of frequencies in the 30 to 76 MHz region, FM, and were compatible with the AN/PRC-25 and -77 VHF FM sets. The lower number VRCs I've seen all have chromed push buttons, something left over from WW2. :-) Got a couple of tuners like that in the parts pile. The latest is an RF psycho weapon using ultra-wideband microwave stuff to scare-shock-disturb unfriendlies at a distance. First operational test contract was awarded a couple months ago. While it uses radio, it might not be handled by signalmen at all, probably not by artillery types either. Psy-war units? :-) I heard about that a couple years ago. Not a psych weapon -- it causes significant "discomfort" in the eyes and skin at a distance. It is/was intended for domestic purposes (i.e, riot control -- make sure to wear your aluminum-foil hat to the upcoming anti-war rallies). I'll have to get out my aluminized Nomex full-body suit! :-) The "riot control" version was an R&D model. DoD has upped the ante with a fieldable system contract awarded for testing on whoever wherever they want to try it. The FEMA bunkers come to mind. The first NODs (Night Observation Devices) were operational during the latter half of the 1960s and used in Vietnam. Too many were stolen/captured with the USSR making their own versions. Now those "Buck Rogers" devices can be bought at sports stores as a regular consumer electronics product. shrug Yeah, I have a Soviet unit that takes 2 AA batteries. Hmmmm..... In 1967 the U.S. military had three field models of NODs. Electro-Optical Systems division of Xerox in Pasadena produced one of those models. Three were stolen/turned-up-mission that year, feds in there asking questions after. The production manager "resigned." I have no idea where those missing NODs wound up but I read reports in 1970 where the USSR military now had them. First ones were "blotchy" in imaging and sensitivity didn't have any automatic gain control but they could enable anyone to "own the night." They have improved considerably since 1967. Sounds about right. On this one the lens is pretty good quality but the electronics are nothing more than a noisy inverter and a finger trigger. Suprisingly sensitive tho, especially to short IR. ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
#8
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
From: Frank Gilliland on Tues, Dec 20 2005 12:42 am
On 19 Dec 2005 20:41:35 -0800, wrote in From: Frank Gilliland on Dec 19, 1:28 pm On 19 Dec 2005 10:38:46 -0800, wrote in From: Frank Gilliland on Dec 18, 6:54 pm The AN/PRC-104 HF manpack transceiver (operational 1986, will be replaced soon by an updated unit) by Hughes Ground Systems has an automatic antenna tuner integral to the manpack R/T. One can physically shorten the whip by removing sections to cut down visibility and the antenna tuner will compensate for the shorter sections. Won't be quite as efficient as the full whip but it is less visible on the ground. The lil 20 W PEP transmitter will shove as much RF into the whip as it can without damaging itself. We had the PRC-104 in the early '80s; the RT was used as the exciter for the MRC-109/110 (400/1000W) jeep radios. Mechanical push-button tuning from 2-30 MHz. I still want one. I'm not familiar with the MRC-109 or MRC-110, but a reference on C4I has that compatible with the AN/VRC-49 which is FM in the 30 to 76 MHz region. The AN/PRC-104 basic R/T was used in the AN/GRC-213, a vehicle mount configuration with audio amplifier and DC vehicle power supply conditioning, 20 W PEP SSB output. The AN/GRC-193 is also for vehicle mounting, uses the basic R/T, but includes a 100/400 Watt linear amplifier for transmitter and a higher- power antenna coupler/tuner. I'll have to amend what I said on the PRC-104. Hughes Aircraft Ground Systems got the initial development contract for it from the USMC some time between 1975 and 1977; seems there was a bit of disagreement between a couple of ex-HAC people who worked on it south of here as to exact year. :-) The Army got into the act on seeing field performance of the first USMC ones and they wanted one, too. :-) Army changed a few things (not much) and - probably - they added the "IHFR" moniker to the series ("Improved High Frequency Radio")...which meant an "A" suffix to the original PRC-104 and its R/T unit (RT-1209). Not to be outdone, the USMC wanted some changes after that with a resulting "B" suffix. :-) USMC had them first in the latter half of the 1970s, Army got theirs in the first half of the 1980s. :-) Somewhere in the era between 1977 and 1985, Hughes incorporated a microprocessor in the synthesizer. One result was the change from a single push button per digit with mechanical display to an LCD screen with rubber-sealed push buttons on frequency control of the R/T. That, plus some more minor revisions inside resulted in a re-issue of TMs in 1985 - 1986. Same basic R/T that is a full SSB receiver plus Tx exciter (the 20 W PEP Amp is in the automtic tuning unit alongside the manpack, higher power Amp and auto antenna tune in the vehicular or "ground" version (GRC-193). I tried to find a better description of the MRC-138 but could not. Maybe that was the Marines' own version of the GRC-193? Either way, it was described as selectable 100 W or 400 W PEP on HF. Note: A lot of "MRC-" radios out there but all for Marines; I find no direct Army "MRC-"s described. Well hell, I guess I -am- getting old. I found references to the 400 watt MRC-138 but not the 1000 watt version. I could have sworn they were called the MRC-109/110....... Given a mere 64 years since we got into WW2 until now, there's a whole potfull of different radios, radar sets, transponders, gizmos that have gotten the U.S. military nomenclature. A few of those were civilian developments, bought intact, and given MIL monikers (AN/FRC-93 for the Collins KWM-2 all-band HF transceiver; AN/FRC-23 and FRC-35 for a GE microwave terminal). I'm glad I "took notes" with my camera during my 4 active years just to jog the memory much later; came easy enough with visual clues to pull out certain technical details. :-) The basic R/T has digit push-wheel frequency selection (like digit thumbwheels but with a single button mover). The AN/VRC-11 through AN/VRC-49 had, variously, 10 push-button or rotary switch selection of frequencies in the 30 to 76 MHz region, FM, and were compatible with the AN/PRC-25 and -77 VHF FM sets. The lower number VRCs I've seen all have chromed push buttons, something left over from WW2. :-) Got a couple of tuners like that in the parts pile. Probably from the old BC-603 and BC-604 "tank radios." [add 80 to the numbers for corresponding non-tank radios] Those were all-tube, FM, and definitely crystal-controlled using 1 to 10 FT-241 holder crystals with "channel numbers" on them plus the air frequency (highest end of HF). Those just selected the crystal and cam-operated a couple variable capacitors. Those "tank radios" were among the first to get their nomenclature changed to "AN/VRC-" in the last year of WW2. In 1967 the U.S. military had three field models of NODs. Electro-Optical Systems division of Xerox in Pasadena produced one of those models. Three were stolen/turned-up-mission that year, feds in there asking questions after. The production manager "resigned." I have no idea where those missing NODs wound up but I read reports in 1970 where the USSR military now had them. First ones were "blotchy" in imaging and sensitivity didn't have any automatic gain control but they could enable anyone to "own the night." They have improved considerably since 1967. Sounds about right. On this one the lens is pretty good quality but the electronics are nothing more than a noisy inverter and a finger trigger. Suprisingly sensitive tho, especially to short IR. The sensitivity is due - according to a PhD in Optics I worked under at Rocketdyne - an innovative expansion of the basic photomultiplier tube still used for light level measurements down to single photon level. The difference with the NOD is that it does it as a wavefront of EM light as opposed to the "stages" of the photomultiplier tube with a small target area. That requires the higher voltages from the internal battery supply. Sensitivity is best at IR due to less wavefront energy there, thus the photon multiplication has higher gain at IR. Weird science! First time I looked through one at EOS in Pasadena (test area completely enclosed in double black plastic sheet), the "illumination" came from a guy's radium- marked wris****ch dial! "Eye opening" experience! :-) |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Power Industry BPL Reply Comments & Press Release | Antenna | |||
Power Industry BPL Reply Comments & Press Release | Antenna | |||
BPL pollution - file reply comments by August 6 | Antenna | |||
BPL pollution – file reply comments by August 6 | Antenna | |||
BPL interference - reply comments - YOUR ACTION REQUIRED | Antenna |