A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Military Aviation
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Audio recording of RAF Lancaster under nightfighter attack



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old October 4th 03, 11:24 PM
Gordon
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Engine noise on aircraft has always been a problem, specifically on combat
(non-passenger) types. On some aircraft, you can tell which position a person
is sitting at by how much engine noise bleeds over to the ICS. Even something
as small as a B-25 has noticeable engine noise and high freq tones bleeding
over when you key the ICS, so I really can't see how a crew aboard a Lanc could
use their normal speaking voices and be heard. As for the technology of
noise-canceling microphones in 1943, I think its implausible that a Lanc would
be fitted with a system equipped with such microphones for every member of the
crew - I agree with the guys who feel this is a studio-done, or
studio-cleaned-up, product. I don't doubt that the dialogue came primarily
from a Lanc crew, but its too clean! Think of what its like in a WWII bomber -
you can barely hear yourself think. The drone of those Merlins would be
present on the recordings no matter what measures were taken to screen them out
- it would be like recording a dialogue aboard the "Maid of the Mist", and
somehow screening out the sounds of Niagra Falls, a few feet away. How likely
is that? My hunch is that the BBC guys did fly along on the mission, did
record it, and brought it back and (at a minimum) cleaned it up before
broadcast.
Next, I'd like to hear a recording of the Reichsjägerweile - the "running
commentary" radio broadcasts that occurred over Northern Europe during massive
Allied raids. Once the EW stations were overwhelmed, the Lulftwaffe ground
controllers switched to this commentary to tell units where and how the battle
raged - "Many trucks over Dortmund, heading Southward at 7,000 meters; at
fifteen after the hour, Christmas trees and duppel were dropped over Hanover
for what appears to be a feint attack. All aircraft in sector FA are ordered
to land for refueling and await further orders. Pfadfinder reported dropping
flares on Osnabruck in advance of a strong raid..." etc. Hour after hour of
the details of a strike, from the enemy perspective. I think it would be
highly interesting to hear, but as far as I know, there are no recordings
available...?

v/r
Gordon
====(A+C====
USN SAR Aircrew

"Got anything on your radar, SENSO?"
"Nothing but my forehead, sir."
Ads
  #52  
Old October 4th 03, 11:38 PM
av8r
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Hi Gord

Nobody has addressed the issue of the use of the term bombardier by the
skipper.

Cheers...Chris

  #53  
Old October 5th 03, 12:47 AM
Keith Willshaw
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"av8r" wrote in message
...
Hi Gord

Nobody has addressed the issue of the use of the term bombardier by the
skipper.


They have on several occasions.

Keith


  #54  
Old October 5th 03, 01:27 AM
Guy Alcala
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

av8r wrote:

Hi Gord

Nobody has addressed the issue of the use of the term bombardier by the
skipper.


ISTM that it has been addressed at great length. Among many others I
noticed it, and I agree it _is_ unusual, but maybe not decisive.

Guy

  #55  
Old October 5th 03, 03:48 AM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

av8r wrote:

Hi Gord

Nobody has addressed the issue of the use of the term bombardier by the
skipper.

Cheers...Chris


I know...I saw you mention it a few times but for the life of me
I can't remember what term we (RCAF) used in the fifties...mind
you now, this was an RAF crew I believe so I can't speak for
them..

I seem to be leaning toward 'Bomb Aimer' but without a lot of
conviction.
--

-Gord.
  #56  
Old October 5th 03, 05:16 AM
Blair Maynard
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


"Gordon" wrote in message
...
Engine noise on aircraft has always been a problem, specifically on combat
(non-passenger) types. On some aircraft, you can tell which position a

person
is sitting at by how much engine noise bleeds over to the ICS. Even

something
as small as a B-25 has noticeable engine noise and high freq tones

bleeding
over when you key the ICS, so I really can't see how a crew aboard a Lanc

could
use their normal speaking voices and be heard. As for the technology of
noise-canceling microphones in 1943, I think its implausible that a Lanc

would
be fitted with a system equipped with such microphones for every member of

the
crew - I agree with the guys who feel this is a studio-done, or
studio-cleaned-up, product.


If crew members had to yell over the mics to be heard, then it could not
have been a cleaned up recording. The speakers are not yelling. You could
filter out the engine sound, but a yelling voice is clearly noticible and no
filtration could make it sound like those voices, they were not yelling. If
you accept the premise that Lancaster crew members had to yell to be heard
over the intercom, it must have been a reenacted scene.

I don't doubt that the dialogue came primarily
from a Lanc crew, but its too clean! Think of what its like in a WWII

bomber -
you can barely hear yourself think. The drone of those Merlins would be
present on the recordings no matter what measures were taken to screen

them out
- it would be like recording a dialogue aboard the "Maid of the Mist", and
somehow screening out the sounds of Niagra Falls, a few feet away. How

likely
is that? My hunch is that the BBC guys did fly along on the mission, did
record it, and brought it back and (at a minimum) cleaned it up before
broadcast.
Next, I'd like to hear a recording of the Reichsjägerweile - the "running
commentary" radio broadcasts that occurred over Northern Europe during

massive
Allied raids. Once the EW stations were overwhelmed, the Lulftwaffe

ground
controllers switched to this commentary to tell units where and how the

battle
raged - "Many trucks over Dortmund, heading Southward at 7,000 meters; at
fifteen after the hour, Christmas trees and duppel were dropped over

Hanover
for what appears to be a feint attack. All aircraft in sector FA are

ordered
to land for refueling and await further orders. Pfadfinder reported

dropping
flares on Osnabruck in advance of a strong raid..." etc. Hour after hour

of
the details of a strike, from the enemy perspective. I think it would be
highly interesting to hear, but as far as I know, there are no recordings
available...?

v/r
Gordon
====(A+C====
USN SAR Aircrew

"Got anything on your radar, SENSO?"
"Nothing but my forehead, sir."

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 8.0

iQA/AwUBP3+a6VBGDfMEdHggEQJfZQCgljEO2pVd4ZNo2k5TFgqHhm dmXDoAoIqR
p4oxoheyDePFAT26RP09rpLE
=lIPP
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



  #57  
Old October 5th 03, 11:35 AM
Keith Willshaw
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Gord Beaman" wrote in message
...
av8r wrote:

Hi Gord

Nobody has addressed the issue of the use of the term bombardier by the
skipper.

Cheers...Chris


I know...I saw you mention it a few times but for the life of me
I can't remember what term we (RCAF) used in the fifties...mind
you now, this was an RAF crew I believe so I can't speak for
them..

I seem to be leaning toward 'Bomb Aimer' but without a lot of
conviction.


The RAF at that time seem to have used both 'bomb aimer' and
'air bomber' the latter being often shortened to 'bomber'

IF the broadcast was a reconstruction based on a noisy recording
its quite easy to see how 'bomber' could become 'bombardier'

Keith


  #58  
Old October 5th 03, 03:44 PM
av8r
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Hi Keith

The problem with my server is that I'm only getting a certain percentage
of the responses to any post (about 40 percent I reckon) so it's most
likely I did not see whatever was said about the bombardier.

Cheers...Chris

  #59  
Old October 6th 03, 03:09 AM
Peter Stickney
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
nt (Gordon) writes:
Engine noise on aircraft has always been a problem, specifically on combat
(non-passenger) types. On some aircraft, you can tell which position a person
is sitting at by how much engine noise bleeds over to the ICS. Even something
as small as a B-25 has noticeable engine noise and high freq tones bleeding
over when you key the ICS, so I really can't see how a crew aboard a Lanc could
use their normal speaking voices and be heard. As for the technology of
noise-canceling microphones in 1943, I think its implausible that a Lanc would
be fitted with a system equipped with such microphones for every member of the
crew - I agree with the guys who feel this is a studio-done, or
studio-cleaned-up, product. I don't doubt that the dialogue came primarily
from a Lanc crew, but its too clean!


The first thing that popped out at me was the "No Engine Noise" thing.
Again, not only are the engines loud, but they're passing vibrations
into the structure at 2000-3000 Hz (engine revs) and 1000-1500 Hz
(prop revs) each. There should be a bug change in the character of
the background noise when the Flight Engineer pushes the props
up. (Increase RPM) Even with isolated engine mounts, the whole
airplane, and everything/everyone in it will be bucketing away. I
doubt any kind of 1940s recording technology, whether it be disk
(etching grooves in flight - how quiet will that be?) or wire (rare,
and, in fact, it could be that only the Germans had wire or steel tape
(sort of like a bandsaw blade) recorders at that time (Don't tell the
Rootin' Teuton I said so). If the sound were that well isolated, why
do the machnie gunes come through so well?
One last thing - This is supposed to be a Lancaster or Halifax (I
makes no difference for this point) on a night raid. That means that
all the crew would be on Oxygen, and they'd be using the mask
microphones. I don't here anyone breathing. They're talking, I'd
bloody well expect them to be breathing.

Next, I'd like to hear a recording of the Reichsjägerweile - the "running
commentary" radio broadcasts that occurred over Northern Europe during massive
Allied raids. Once the EW stations were overwhelmed, the Lulftwaffe ground
controllers switched to this commentary to tell units where and how the battle
raged - "Many trucks over Dortmund, heading Southward at 7,000 meters; at
fifteen after the hour, Christmas trees and duppel were dropped over Hanover
for what appears to be a feint attack. All aircraft in sector FA are ordered
to land for refueling and await further orders. Pfadfinder reported dropping
flares on Osnabruck in advance of a strong raid..." etc. Hour after hour of
the details of a strike, from the enemy perspective. I think it would be
highly interesting to hear, but as far as I know, there are no recordings
available...?


A combination of a Rugby play-by-play broadcast and the morning
traffic report. But a cleaver colution to the Command and CCOntrol
problem, and, in, some wwys, superior from the OPSEC point of view.

--
Pete Stickney
A strong conviction that something must be done is the parent of many
bad measures. -- Daniel Webster
  #60  
Old October 6th 03, 04:41 AM
William Donzelli
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Keith Willshaw" wrote in message ...

The equipment used was apparently restricted to the range
60 Hz to 4500 Hz


The microphones and interphone equipment, on the other hand, had a
frequency response of roughly 300-3000 Hz. Depending on the type of
microphone used (T-17, T-44, British HI, or a zillion others - the
Station Boxes (probably Bendix MI-22s) could handle lots of different
types of microphones), the response characteristics might be a little
different, but not much. The interphone amplifier likely also has a
filter to supress anything out of the 300-3000 Hz range. There were
noise cancelling mikes back then, but they were not very good.

Did someone mention a disc recorder being used? Frankly, I can not
think of anything worse to take on a big bomber. The virbrations from
the engines would go right thru to the cutting head mechanically, even
with a good shockmount.

--
William Donzelli
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
King KMA 20 TSO Audio Input tony roberts Home Built 10 November 20th 04 07:06 AM
Aux. Audio Input Eugene Wendland Home Built 1 April 5th 04 04:16 AM
Lancaster returns to AWM Graeme Hogan Military Aviation 2 July 24th 03 01:08 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:25 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2018 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.