Zeppelin Staaken R.VI radio
All i found was that there was a transiever for some kind of direction finding as the missions were at nigt.
Was the radio operator the fellow sitting behind pilots in front of a black box? I saw that on a googled out model?
What was the transiever like - a spark gap morse code type?
Does anybody have a picture or know any details?
And - why did it need two pilots?
Thank you. Google doesn't show or say that much.
I remember reading about the Germans using some kind of direction finding, but I can't remember where. I think there were land based transmitter stations and the aircraft could work out it's location using the timings, or something.
I think the reason for two pilots was based on workload. These early aircraft took a lot of effort to fly. A Sopwith Camel pilot had to apply constant force to the stick in order to fly level. With long range missions that sort of flying became too much for one person. So the machines with long endurance (e.g. Felixstowe, Gotha, Caproni) all had two pilots. One exception was the Blackburn Kangaroo, which was used for long uboat patrols but only had one pilot...
Radio direction finding existed before WWI. However, radios in those days were not small nor light.
Tuning into a known broadcasting radio station, and rotating a loop antenna could provide a bearing to that station (good operators could get a reasonable fix in about a minute). Tune into another known radio station, and get a bearing to that station. Then, triangulation would provide a position. With aircraft speeds at the time, and about a minute per bearing, it would be possible to get reasonable navigational fixes. Certainly, a WWI bomber with a good operator, bombing a city would be very possible. A specific building? Not a chance.
For a very large aircraft, like a Zeppelin Staaken, a large, heavy radio with a loop antenna wouldn't be a problem. This wouldn't have worked with anything like a two-seater, and never in a scout.
Mike
"Flying is learning to throw yourself at the ground and miss" Douglas Adams
"Wings of Glory won't skin your elbows and knees while practicing." OldGuy59
Relatively small aircraft that were doing artillery spotting would use small spark gap transmitters. It is a small and simple passive device that replaces a radio frequency amp with DC voltage from a battery. When you push a button, you connect the battery, and the voltage creates a spark in a tiny gap (like what sometimes happens in your outlet at home). That spark creates enough excitement to emit an electromagnetic pulse. Anybody that has a receiver in a sufficient distance can hear the buzz (just like you can hear an occasional spark in your outlet or lightbulb on your battery operated radio). The aerial was a piece of wire that was flying behind the aircraft. There was nothing like an amplifier in it, just a primitive two-piece resonator to help the buzz get stronger for a relatively far distance transmission (the aerial does the same kind of job).
The thingy in Staaken R.VI was a transceiver, which means it could both transmit and receive. I would love to know if it was tube based or what, if it even used a carrier and the signal was AM modulated on it or such. It definitely was a big box. I doubt it was capable of voice transmission yet, although it was possible* at that time (since 1906).
*EDIT: Not only was it possible, but it was in operation.
"Telephone Wireless Aircraft Mk. II
Air telephones were put into production by mid-1917 and fitted in aircraft later in the year. The Telephone Aircraft Mk. II covered the narrow band of 350–450m (667–857 kHz). A photograph of the set can be seen in Figure 18. It had two valves, which was either the B or F, one being used for control and one the power output valve. A 6-volt accumulator was used to supply the valve’s filaments and the HT was derived from a BT-H wind-driven generator producing 600-volts DC. It had a range of 2 miles to other aircraft and 15 miles to ground stations. The aerial was a trailing wire of length 100–150ft with a lead weight at the end.
According to Erskine-Murray: ‘In certain cases we have tried to use an aerial made up entirely within the machine, consisting of wires on the wings and inside the fabric … Fixed aerials were designed for the purpose of fighting, because it is inconvenient, naturally, to have 150 feet of wire trailing below them … it may get entangled and interfere with the controls.’ [15]
The earlier attempts to fit radio telephones in aircraft had been hampered by the high background noise from the aircraft’s engine. This problem was alleviated by the design of a helmet with built-in microphone and earphones to block much of the noise. A typical receiver for use with this transmitter was the Tuner Aircraft Mk III which had three type-R valves, one for the detector and two for low-frequency amplification. The receiver covered the two bands 350–450m, as used in the transmitter, and 600–800m (375 kHz–500 kHz). There was also a remote control unit."
Last edited by Honza; 12-16-2023 at 10:47.
I found a few pictures
The radio post is on the right side, you see the device is quite a piece of electronics. It looks like it may have been an AM modulated tube amp signal after all.
The crew did use an onboard communication system as well. Almost a B-17 type of deal.
The fellow on the left side operates the transceiver.
The drum (on the left side) was hand operated. It would release a trailing antenna (= wire).
https://flyingmachines.ru/Site2/Crafts/Craft25534.htm
Last edited by Honza; 12-16-2023 at 07:31.
Bear in mind that radio as a general communications method is only slightly older than the ariplane itself; and there are always problems developing emergent technology. In this cse, a lot of those problems are caused by the necessary bulkiness of the radio equipment: hence, Mike assertion about the capabilities of aircraft here is entirely on point.
I am not sure what you mean, Sam. Artillery spotting scouts and tandems would carry small spark gap transmitters, since 1917 some of them carried even voice transmission capable devices, and large bombers did carry heavier stuff.
Here is a spark gap transmitter scouts and tandems would carry to Morse code back.
Also, manhandling these monsters around the sky was no small feat in the days before hydraulic or other power assist--and sometimes even with such devices if improperly set up, as Tex Johnston found on the YB-52's first flight.
"...[I]f we're gonna have to manhandle this big SOB around the skies, our arms are gonna be bigger than our legs and we're gonna need new flightsuits to fit them."--Tex, when asked immediately after landing what SAC's new wonder-weapon needed most
Depending on the unit, an airborne spark-gap transmitter in early WWI had a range of 2000 yds! Barely from the plane to the ground. The problem was power and efficiency of the equipment, and the ability to deploy an antenna of a length useful for the frequency. Small planes would get to altitude, reel out a wire behind the plane, and then start transmitting, hoping someone received their transmissions.Originally Posted by Honza
Here is a spark gap transmitter scouts and tandems would carry to Morse code back.
Zeppelin Staakens could rig an antenna along the side of the fuselage, or through the wing sections, without having to reel it out/in for use. And a Zeppelin Staaken had a few engines to run generators for power to a big radio, that could transmit and receive (at this point in technology, this almost doubled the size of the equipment).
I've now read that two-way voice communication was pioneered in mid-WW1! It wasn't put into use until after the war, but it was trialed a lot sooner that I realized.
Mike
"Flying is learning to throw yourself at the ground and miss" Douglas Adams
"Wings of Glory won't skin your elbows and knees while practicing." OldGuy59
According to "The German Giants" (Haddow & Grosz), p.250:
The wireless sending and receiving equipment was located on the port side, behind the pilot. ... The wireless equipment was powered by a 2.5hp Bosch petrol-driven generator which supplied 1000 watts. During wireless silence the Bosch generator could provide electricity for heating the flying suits of seven men and charge the batteries which provided electricity for the lighting system.
I am reading that book right now
It states a few interesting facts:
- There were just 18 Zeppelin-Staaken R.VI built by different companies and just some of them actually made it to the service.
- In Zeppelin Staaken R.VI the transmitter was typically by Siemens-Schuckert (initially built for Austrian bombers) and the receiver by Telefunken.
- The R machines were built by a few different companies, and in March 1918 they tested a telephone transmission in Albatros built R.VI. It was a success within 30km range.
- The range of R.VI transceiver was 600km. Nice.
- These transceivers were used to establish the position of the aircraft (they would fly at night) by triangular method using two ground based stations. So i guess Morse code or actually any kind of pre-determined signal was enough.
From other sources i extracted this interested information:
- Spark-gap transmitters were used from the start (1915). They used transient waves (= pulses), thus the voice could not have been modulated on, and so they were used solely as Morse code devices.
- A small size tube operated transmitters capable of transmitting a continuous wave (= carrier frequency) would later be invented, but did they replace sparks? They could do both Morse and voice.
- Voice transceivers came to RFC in 1917 under "The Telephone Aircraft MkII" (a bit clunky name). It was tested with success. They were a surprisingly small package as well. They would work up to 2 miles between aircraft and up to 15 miles between aircraft and a ground station. The trailing wire antenna was 100-150ft long, but it could be built in the aircraft so it wouldn't become a nuisance during a dogfight.
However, the question stands the same - the voice transceivers, aka. air telephones, were in production and at RFC disposal since 1917, although a fairly small, tube operated voice device was used by Marconi already in 1914. Did the voice devices replace the Morse code devices (spark and tube models) or not? They weren't heavier. Were they expensive or maybe rare? Or maybe the Morse code systems were simpler and more reliable yet sufficient ...
Last edited by Honza; 12-18-2023 at 05:33.
According to this article, it was 8-10 miles. At least the one on the picture, Sterling spark transmitter aka "No. 1 Aircraft Transmitter Spark". They were available since 1915.
https://collection.sciencemuseumgrou...ss-transmitter
A very nice and informative article on this old boy is here:
http://www.tuberadio.com/robinson/mu...terling_Spark/
Last edited by Honza; 12-18-2023 at 01:11.
And this thread is another perfect example why I love being an Aerodrome member. I've always been fascinated with all facets of aircraft development including those discussed in this thread. Thank you to everyone for piquing my interest, and advancing my knowledge on this subject.
Actually this is something I've been trying to find out - just how many crew the RVI flew with. One piece I found on this forum gave it as seven: A commander, pilot, co-pilot, two mechanics on the engines, radio operator and fuel mechanic. But the Wikpedia article gives the crew as eleven! That's a commander, two pilots, two co-pilots, two radio-operators, fuel-attendant and the two mechanics. So they double up the pilot, co-pilot and radio-operator
I'm wondering if the crew of seven was what was required and the additional three crew were there to take over after a period of time.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks