The Fall, 1997 issue of Proceedings of the Radio Club of America has an
article about the _Titanic's_ wireless system. One paragraph reads, "The
precise frequency of the _Titanic_ and _Californian_ [another passenger ship
just ten miles north of _Titanic_ at the time of the collision] transmitters
at the time of the incident is not known; nevertheless, whatever the
separation [in frequency], the poor receiver selectivity and the closeness
of the two vessels allowed but one transmitter operation."
Elsewhere in the account the author, W1BC, writes, "...the generated
signal of the [typical] spark transmitter was blunt and broad. The spectrum
it occupied was, for example, all of today's broadcast band and then some."
Add to all of the above the fact that when the Navy Department began to
regulate "wireless" operations, they concluded (luckily for all of us hams)
that any wavelength below (shorter than) 200 Meters would never propagate
for great distances, I think it's safe to assume that _Titanic's_ signal was
operating on a frequency below 1500 kilocycles. Kind of puts operation on
our 160 M band in a different, historical light, doesn't it?
BTW, the entire article is fascinating, both from the historical
perspective as well as from the technological. Also, C.B. DeSoto's book
_200 Meters & Down_ is a true education in the developmental years of our
hobby. Both made me better appreciate how far we've come since the
mid-1800's and the early experiments with aethereal energy.
Gene Smar AD3F
From: mike dunlap <firstname.lastname@example.org>
To: email@example.com <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: Thursday, November 11, 1999 5:13 PM
Subject: [TowerTalk] "CQD CQD CQD"
>OK, I know this is not a tower related question but it's for all you ship
>enthusiasts/historians out there.
>What frequency did the illfated RMS Titanic broadcast its distress signal
>on that fateful night of 1912? Actually it was the first SOS that was used
>replacing the long used CQD.
>Bye the way, this isn't a test! Before I start looking elsewhere for the
>answer I thought I'd pose this question to this forum to see if one might
>just know the sought after information.
>Thanks in advance for all your help!!
>A very '73 !!
>FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/towertalkfaq.html
>Administrative requests: towertalk-REQUEST@contesting.com
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/towertalkfaq.html
Administrative requests: towertalk-REQUEST@contesting.com