Book. WW2 Signal Corps history

[Mike Kelly]

Some heavy reading

https://history.army.mil/html/books/..._Pub_10-18.pdf

Another one for bed time.

THE STORY OF 7 SIGNAL REGIMENT Had a quick look at this book or document or whatever it is. I spotted some bad errors in the types of equipment the authors have noted as being issued to this unit in the M.E. during 1941, such as a late WW2 British airborne receiver the R109 , I believe the authors have confused this receiver with the Aust. W.S. 109 which was in use in the M.E. during 1941.

https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws....nt/7460301.PDF

The authors of this unit history have made little effort in researching the wireless equipment - they include a pic of a post-war Eddystone receiver that was built from the early 1950s to the late 1960s and used by hams, fishermen, govt. departments and more. The pic is supposed to depict a receiver as used by the 7 Sig Regiment in the Middle East in 1941.

Eddystone history http://www.radiomanual.info/schemi/S...war_models.pdf

[Mike Kelly]

Don't know how effective a 19 set would be in the role of HF jamming ? Page 338 of THE STORY OF 7 SIGNAL REGIMENT

The 19 set pictured is one of the 1952 Australian rebuilds , I've had one of these. These are British wartime built sets reconditioned in Australia post-war, the duck egg blue paint is a giveaway. The sets were rewired with PVC wires and recapped.

[Mike Kelly]

Not seen this type of body on a Studebaker, page 377.

[Philliphastings]

Hi Mike,

Could a WS No 19 High Power be used for jamming enemy signals ?

Also the signals repair body in your pic was later tranferred to International MK3 2.5 Ton 4x4 cargo trucks and deployed to South Vietnam in support of 1ATF.

Andrew T in Adelaide licated one of those bodies in restorable condition in the Adelaide hills but despite it’s oriority use as a goat shed the iwner would not oart with it. It remains beside a main road rusting.

I have a Mk3 and would dearly love to find a signal repair shop body for it.

Cheers

Phill

[Mike Kelly]

Originally Posted by Philliphastings

Hi Mike,

Could a WS No 19 High Power be used for jamming enemy signals ?

Also the signals repair body in your pic was later tranferred to International MK3 2.5 Ton 4x4 cargo trucks and deployed to South Vietnam in support of 1ATF.

Andrew T in Adelaide licated one of those bodies in restorable condition in the Adelaide hills but despite it’s oriority use as a goat shed the iwner would not oart with it. It remains beside a main road rusting.

I have a Mk3 and would dearly love to find a signal repair shop body for it.

Cheers


Phill

Hi Phill
With a puny 4 to 5 Watts RF output the 19 set would struggle to jam any transmission that was of higher power output. Even the HP version would be of doubtful use in the jamming role. Might work if the enemy transmission was within a few miles distance.

OK on the Signals repair body , I've not seen that type of setup. I guess they were using Larkspur sets in 1962.

[Philliphastings]

Yes Larkspur in 1962, unless it was a CMF Armoured Corps unit, some of which still used WS No 19 Mk3 until much later.

I have it on good authority that 10th Light Horse Regiment in Western Australia for example still operated Ferret Scout cars with WS No 19 until 1970. Not sure about the other vehicles in the unit at that time.

Of course they were all discarded when the regiment converted to the M113A1s with US radios and intercom gear.

Cheers

Phill

[Mike Cecil]

That shelter type was adapted for much wider use than just signals/signals repair. Anything that needed a clean and, when air conditioned, temperature controlled environment for RAEME to undertake repairs used this type of shelter. These shelters were adapted for optical instrument repairs such as survey instruments, gun sights, periscopes, artillery electronic equipment such as FACE as well as signals equipment repair. Also used for signalling equipment operation as heavy radio stations.

There are a few images of them on Inters serving in SVN in my book Mud & Dust, and a good 3/4 front image (provided by me) in David Doyle's book on the Studebaker US-6.

Mike

[Ken Smith]

Good day,
The Landrover FFR EW on page 541 is the one I own, unfortunately the photo is in negative form but the ARN 33-833 is clearly visible and I am greatful for that. A better photo is on page 505 but no ARN.

It is interesting that other mistakes have been found in the story as the author states that the Landrover EWs were not a success and were stripped upon arrival back in Australia and the equipment fitted into modules on Mogs.

I do have other photos of the Landrovers in the bush no ARNs visible.
I do believe though they would have been a pig to drive with the heavy antenna protection fitted to the top.
The antenna alone was worth a million dollars without any other equipment.

3 Series 3 FFR Landrovers were shipped to Nashua in New Hampshire U.S.A. and the shelters and EW equipment were fitted there. I don't know how many Mogs went there to have their equipment fitted.
A few 1 ton generator trailers are visible in photos on the old 7 Signal Regiment/ 72 EW Squadron site.

[Philliphastings]

C’mon Ken - where’s a pic or two ? 😁

I have a couple of S3 FFR’s tucked away in dry storage. Drove and operated them out bush during my time in the RACMP.

Cheers

Phill

[maple_leaf_eh]

Originally Posted by Ken Smith

Good day,
.....

3 Series 3 FFR Landrovers were shipped to Nashua in Vermont U.S.A. and the shelters and EW equipment were fitted there. ....

Nashua is in New Hampshire, shares it entire western border with Vermont - except for a tiny 'rump' with Quebec. They are both very independent minded peoples but don't like to be confused.

[Ken Smith]

That was a big oops. Thanks for the heads up. I have edited my post to show it as New Hampshire it even says on one of the photos New Hampshire. I did know that it was a freezing cold place as some of the photos of the setting up and training are in a nice green paddock and some of the photos have snow everywhere.
Ken.

[Chris Suslowicz]

Originally Posted by Mike Kelly

Don't know how effective a 19 set would be in the role of HF jamming ? Page 338 of THE STORY OF 7 SIGNAL REGIMENT

Not very.

Having mis-read the links and gone looking in the U.S. Signal Corps history, page 338 was close to the RCM (Radio CounterMeasures) section, which made me think about the "SPF" version of the WS19 used for Operation Fortitude (etc.), but there was nothing about that in the document. (No, I still have no idea what SPF stood for, various people have suggested "Selectable/Switchable Power & Frequency" or "Special Purpose Fortitude", but nothing concrete has been found - and the "Radio Deception" pamphlet in the National Archive is still classified.)

Then I read the correct document (7 Signal Regiment) and things got a little clearer: the exercise was conducted in the 1950s, when most comms had moved to VHF, and the only HF sets were the WS62, WS19 and WS173 - the last being used as a jammer. As such, the WS62 with 0.5W output could easily be jammed by a WS19 (with 10 times that), and the WS173 would flatten everything with around 250 - 350W.

Best regards,
Chris.

[Mike Kelly]

Originally Posted by Chris Suslowicz

Not very.

Having mis-read the links and gone looking in the U.S. Signal Corps history, page 338 was close to the RCM (Radio CounterMeasures) section, which made me think about the "SPF" version of the WS19 used for Operation Fortitude (etc.), but there was nothing about that in the document. (No, I still have no idea what SPF stood for, various people have suggested "Selectable/Switchable Power & Frequency" or "Special Purpose Fortitude", but nothing concrete has been found - and the "Radio Deception" pamphlet in the National Archive is still classified.)

Then I read the correct document (7 Signal Regiment) and things got a little clearer: the exercise was conducted in the 1950s, when most comms had moved to VHF, and the only HF sets were the WS62, WS19 and WS173 - the last being used as a jammer. As such, the WS62 with 0.5W output could easily be jammed by a WS19 (with 10 times that), and the WS173 would flatten everything with around 250 - 350W.

Best regards,
Chris.

Sorry about misleading everyone with the two links .