More on wireless
- This topic has 23 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated 7 years, 7 months ago by
.
- Posts
“For some time experiments were carried out with visual appliances but with indifferent success, owing to certain technical difficulties connected with the constant and rapid movement of the (aero)plane. Lamp signalling was tried from aeroplanes near Aire-sur-la-Lys on February, 20th, 1915. From the first, however, wireless was hailed as the obvious means of overcoming the difficulty and, on October 1st, 1914, a wireless mast with receiving apparatus was erected at a battery position. An aeroplane with a small Sterling* transmitter at once carried out ‘spotting’ tests for the guns with conspicuous success. The new invention quickly showed that it had come to stay, and from this date a great organization was built up for this purpose alone, with ramifications which embraced the Signal Service, the RFC, and the Intelligence Branch of the General Staff. Divided authority in this as in all similar cases caused much trouble, but eventually administrative control was vested ion the RFC to whom the sets and men who manned them belonged, while the working of the ‘Ground Sets’, as the sets at the guns were called, was technically supervised by the wireless officer of the formation for which the battery belonged. Much useful work was done by these sets throughout the days of the early development of wireless, small wireless stations in 1914 and early 1915 being confined to the RFC alone. Later, when the attention of the wireless world was fixed more upon the development of small portable wireless sets for command purposes in trench warfare, the RFC sets continued to do good unobtrusive work.” P38-9, Work of the RW in the European War, 1914-1919: The Signal Service (France)
During 1917 “Signaling to aeroplanes did not occupy nearly as prominent place as in the Somme Offensive. The methods employed were again the ground sheet, the ground panel and the aeroplane dropping ground. The panel was cumbersome and slow and still unpopular; the latter was the most popular method and the most efficient. By this means valuable information was brought back by the aeroplane observers and a series of precis of the situation delivered regularly to the General Staff at Division and Corps. Signaling to kite balloons and aeroplanes by visual was again tried without success. Visual, generally, was much employed, but all other methods paled to insignificance beside the efficiency of the Lucas lamp. Flags were little used, discs were used only by very forward units, and by these less than in 1916, other types of lamps other than the Lucas were practically obsolescent, and were superseded as fast as the Lucas lamp came to hand. Very lights and rocket were laid down as part of the equipment of the normal Brigade forward party and were especially useful for the purpose of notifying sudden emergencies and for showing up the position of the front line and of particular posts. They were used also, as in the previous year, for acknowledging the receipt of D.D.D.D. visual messages.“ P220-221, Work of the RE in the European War, 1914-1919: The Signal Service (France)
An alternative view from the ground was presented in the BBC drama Tommies on 2nd June (and still available on iplayer), where the Tyneside Scottish are undergoing training in air-ground communication in preparation for the Somme offensive.
Hi
It is a useful book, but it is a history of the RE Signal Service so other signals organizations like that of the RFC are only periphery to his story. He does mention borrowing ‘Stirling’ sets from the RFC to use as ‘Trench’ sets in June 1915 (page 86). It is actually ‘Sterling’ after the Sterling Telephone and Electric Company of Dagenham, who undertook initial production.
The Sterling set first appears to be used in action at Neuve Chapelle in March 1915, and became ‘standard’ by the autumn of 1915. However, it was in 1916 with the Somme that wireless was used in large numbers (306 aeroplanes fitted). Volume 2 of ‘War in the Air’ has some information on its introduction.Mike
I think that the key thing here is that it offers a different perspective from that usually encountered, and may well be more accurate in terms of gauging the actual effectiveness of the methods employed.
It is true that the author appears to be not overly enamored of the RFC, and is seeking to avoid spending too much time on what he regards as a tangent, but that doesn’t make the comments any less relevant.
It is known that the RFC used airborne wireless sets prior to the Sterling (or Stirling !), and it remains unclear – to me at least – when the Sterling was issues as a standard (as opposed to experimental) set, and when it replaced previous sets. The implication is around September, 1915, in time for Loos, but I am unable to confirm that.I find it interesting that the RFC had enough sets to loan them to the RE(SS) in June, 1915, though I gather it was only a few, and it doesn’t say for how long, although 1st Army had them for Loos. This does give credence to the idea that the RFC had switched to the Sterling in time for Loos.
Useful to know that the wavemeters above 300m are from Trench sets, and not RFC ones.
I note that 1 Squadron carried out trial work with Brock flares to identify infantry positions in August, 1915, which led to general issue to the infantry in November. WitA Vol 2 mentions ‘yellow smoke candles’ were used, unsuccessfully (i.e. no aircraft observer reported seeing any), at Loos. One wonder whether they were the same thing ? The IWM has a collection of such things but, seemingly, little information on them.
Hi
Here are some instructions for signallers for contacting ‘Contact Patrol’ machines for the Somme. It includes some of the devices mentioned on this thread.Mike
As mentioned on the bombing thread, I do note some lack of consistency with reporting in ‘official’ documents; muddied by the generic use of the term ‘Sterling set’ for airborne wireless, instead of ‘Aircraft Transmitter No 1’ of ‘Type 52A’ set (the latter a naval variant) etc.
The standard modern reference source ‘Wireless for the Warrior’ is rather vague on the development of the Sterling Set but, presumably, there was something ‘official’on the RFC use of wireless, even if the volume much anticipated by the author of the RE history (cited above) does not seem to have been published ?
It looks like ‘Wireless World’ published two articles in 1919 which may provide the answers – just need to track them down !
The Wireless World archive is available here: http://www.americanradiohistory.com/Wireless_World_Magazine.htm
There is a search facility by decade.All are available as pdf downloads and had a quick flick through the first six (monthly) issues of 1919 brought up some articles of interest.
Feb:
Wireless In Air Navigation. 5pp.
April:
Forward Wireless In Battle – The Last Phase Before The Armistice. 6pp.
Aircraft Wireless Section. 6pp.
Aircraft Notes. 1pp.
May:
Forward Wireless In Battle (pt 2). 4pp.
Aircraft Wireless Section – The Sterling Transmitter. 4pp
Aviation Notes. 2pp.
June:
Aircraft Wireless Section – The Sterling Transmitter (pt2). 5pp.
Aviation Notes. 5pp.The longer articles are illustrated and there is probably much more of interest hidden away in other articles, comments and reviews.
Lots of good stuff here, an not just on aircraft applications !
In some ways it is a little surprising that war time restrictions on reporting technical subjects were lifted so quickly: The Engineer, Engineering, Proceedings of the Institute of Naval Architects etc all have good reviews of wartime activities.
Unfortunately, what Wireless World doesn’t clarify is the physical development of the sets: The No1 Transmitter Set illustrated is the smaller type, barely larger than the external helical coil, similar to the Type 52 set.
Next thought is Sterling Company production records.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.