Talk:Radar in World War II

Broadcasting mention
Broadcasting for May 3, 1943, includes an editorial that says:
 * On April 23, the Army and Navy decided that the secrecy that has shrouded use of that term [radar] might now be lifted. [&hellip;] Many believe the ban on "Radar" had been carried to the point of absurdity.  Government agencies identified with the design, manufacture and purchase of Radar equipment, have been prevented from using the term.  [&hellip;] We're glad the military high commands have decided to release the "secret".  The process itself, however, probably will remain locked within the vaults of the military until after the war.  Then look for a "Radar Age".

121a0012 (talk) 04:50, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

New Zealand
I've not been able to find any mention, and it may not be important but it's my understanding (from my mother) that radar stations around the coast of New Zealand were staffed by women because of fears of that radiation might affect men's fertility. My mother served at Taiaroa Head towards the end of WW2 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Olwenwilliams (talk • contribs) 04:29, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Beginning some extensive trimming

 * There is way too much fat we can can safely discard on this monster, without damaging the integrity of the sources. I will be working on it for the next few days to cut it back a bit. Any comments or feedback welcomed as per my usual working method. Regards Irondome (talk) 23:08, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
 * I am at Chain Home. Will crack on tomorrow. Regards Irondome (talk) 01:12, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Starting on GCI section tmrw. Still a load to do. I have not attempted to alter the basic architecture of the sections. Just radically trimming without losing the sense of the original. Irondome (talk) 22:50, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
 * About 25% of article copyedded and trimmed. Added useful links. Nothing of substance to article integrity removed. Will be starting on Russian section soon. Heavy work. Should take about another 10 days. Then we can remove that damned banner :) Irondome (talk) 23:41, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Early radar developments at start of WWII in South Africa
While doing some digging I found a few online references to the developments of radar by SA in the early parts of the war and the operations in service in East Africa and Egypt and later South Africa. It tallies pretty well with the section Radar in World War II (South Africa) but might be handy for some additional (reputable?) sources and facts if someone is planning further edits. The references will also corroborate some of the English developments.

http://www.mpoweruk.com/papers/SA_Radar.pdf http://samilitaryhistory.org/vol033fh.html http://www.theheritageportal.co.za/article/south-african-radar-overstrand-world-war-ii http://www.historicalpapers.wits.ac.za/inventories/inv_pdfo/A3377/A3377-B-001-jpeg.pdf

Idyllic press (talk) 18:03, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Excellent article
Truly excellent article. scope_creep (talk) 12:32, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

RDF - Radio Direction Finding
The first paragraph has a bad error. It reads, "In Great Britain, it was called RDF, Range and Direction Finding, while in Germany the name Funkmeß (radio-measuring) was used" That should read as "...RDF, Radio Direction Finding"

Initial "radars" were direction only, there being no time-of-flight measurement as in the later development which was called by the acronym RADAR which stands for RAdio Detection And Ranging. RADAR, unlike the earlier RDF, measured time-of-flight of the radar signal to measure the range (i.e., distance) of the target.

Source: Numerous US Navy publications from WWII.

75.148.94.222 (talk) 18:00, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

Carrots
The information on carrots seems to be very questionable. It is based on a Smithsonian magazine article. However, that article says: Much of the article is about carrots in the context of wartime rationing. It is also misleading to suggest there is a myth about carrots helping you see in the dark. They do if you have a deficiency, but not if you don't. This is just an example of the misunderstandings about nutrition. It is not particular to WW2 or radar. Also, as this article shows, the Germans did have radar. Unless something more solid can be found, I think this should be removed.--Jack Upland (talk) 07:53, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
 * "Stolarczyk is not confident about the exact origin of the faulty carrot theory".
 * "I have no evidence they fell for it".
 * Whether "they fell for it" or not is irrelevant. The fact that carrots do not actually help night vision (barring a deficiency) is irrelevant. The fact that Germany had radar is irrelevant; Britain didn't know this, and the carrot myth could have been useful to hide British radar. The two issues are (1) was/is there a myth that carrots help night vision, and (2) was it somehow connected with hiding the existence of radar?" There are many articles found by a search discussing carrots and night vision, so the myth (1) would seem to exist (though I haven't looked for a reliable source).
 * The Smithsonian source given seems reasonably reliable for wartime promotion of the myth. It shows wartime posters saying "NIGHT SIGHT can mean LIFE or DEATH ... Eat carrots ... rich in Vitamin A, essential for night sight". "CARROTS keep you healthy and can help you to see in the blackout". Best wishes, Pol098 (talk) 13:30, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't accept your view of what is "irrelevant". This article is about radar. The posters relate to wartime rationing. And I don't see that they are particularly misleading, by the way. You say "the carrot myth could have been useful to hide British radar" (my emphasis). That assumes that the German high command couldn't take advice from its own nutritionists. I'm removing this because it is speculation. "Could" isn't good enough.--Jack Upland (talk) 15:46, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

Odd Wording
In the US cm wavelength section, there is the following sentence: “The Rad Lab and BTL also improved magnetron performance, enabling the device and associated systems to generate higher wavelengths.”  Higher wavelengths? Should that be shorter wavelengths? Or higher frequencies?