CONCORD IN EUROPE

Evening Post, Volume CXVI, Issue 35, 10 August 1933, Page 19

CONCORD IN EUROPE

WAVE-LENGTH TANGLE

ECKERSLEY'S PLAIN TALK

It used to be said that broadcasting promised to b(j a powerful, perhaps the most .powerful, instrument for reconciling natural differences of opinion and breaking dowu the sentimental barriers that exist along international frontiers. The sanje thing has been, said about other methods of- communication, but the prophecy has not been realised; and in the case of broadcastings the spirit of nationalism has again been too strong. A conference was held recently at Lausanne for the purpose, among, other things, of relieving the European broadcasting system of some of its present mutual interference. The result has induced Captain P. P. Eckersley,,the former chief engineer of the B.B^C, to indulge in some interesting and vigorous criticism, in an article in the "Daily Mail." The actual results, of the ■'.Lucerne Badio Conference—that is, the definite plan for-the new allocation of wavelengths—are not mine yet for qualitative analysis (he writes), but I have gathered something of the general implication. In general there ha 3 been a fight, and, in particular the outcome is not very beneficial to the listener. : Several .countries, about seven in number, : have not signed any agreement, and perhaps never will. They may for their own sakes obey the implications of 'the plan, but they will never agree to it. A pretty state of affairs indeed! Britain has agreed to share some waves with distant foreign stations. She was probably forced to do .so because the situation is political, not technical. 'A shared wave has not much value (the radius of action of a station sharing a wave is bound to be very limited at night time), but in certain circumstances it may be sufficient to includo the inhabitants of a densely populated town or "city. British waves have been changed, but not so drastically as to make a serious difference to their! . carrying power. You will, when the changes take place which they will, I understand, on January 1 next, have to alter your tuning settings, but this ought not to involve you m much trouble. NO BETTER RECEPTION. There may be here and there slight ameliorations in inter-station interference, but there is no hope at all that the quality of reproduction from a wireless set will be, for a long time to come, anything -.but "commercial" (that is, indifferent). „ This is a pity. But it is more .of a pity that the Conference could ■■■not sweep away the petty jealousies, the political intrigue, the cautious and mediocre attitude which obviously determined its findings. The problems were once faced and recognised, and, in their time, solved by six or seven technicians of different nations. ■'We managed years ago to*agree that our job was to see that the listeners of Europo got a fair deal; that wo were as a body the chief engineer of the United States of Europe's broadcasting system; that we served our nationals best by recognising the interdependence of the nations upon mutual goodwill and a clear understanding of the technical] facts. ( ' However skilled one is in using the subjunctive tense in Trench; however logical it appears that each nation has the right to1 erect as many stations, of whatever power it likes, within the limits of its boundaries, nevertheless the technical fact remains that without agreement and co-operation, every station will interfere with every other station. This blind insistence upon "rights" merely produces a poor service to all Europeans, including those who have to suffer for the anarchistic attitude of their representatives. It's so simple! NEED OF SINGLE CONTROL. Imagine Essex and Westmorland and Wales and : Middlesex and the rest fighting as to which should have the' best and/or the most wavelengths. Our technical scheme of broadcasting is for its purpose the best in the world, because one body was responsible for seeing that the majority of those who live in Britain get the best available service. Why cannot this same successful, idea be applied to Europe?.' '■ ■ • Why did not the conference, before squabbling about who should have these or those frequencies, get down to a fundamental principle? If they had been there ten weeks and in that time had agreed only on principles, it would have taken but a few days to put these principles into practice. My work has shown that all the technical data is available. We can calculate what power, what separation in frequency, what wavelength, what aerial, and what interference are necessary at which geographical parts to serve the maximum number of persons. No ambiguity exists. But nations want stations near frontiers so that they can pump propaganda into the homes of those they want to make sympathetic to their ideas,' delegates want fame and honour in their own country for .securing more waves than they are entitled, to, engineers want greater authority in that they, run more and woro powerful stations. It's a sad and beastly mess. You cannot do anything about it. I cannot do anything about it. I was once able to, and the plans we got out in early days -wore right, ideologically at any rate. I saw the beginning of the end before I left tho union. Place-hunters and'debaters ousted those who saw the ■essence'of' tho problems. Tho'-jurists and the administrators had to have their kind-of order. If a monument to. their ingenuity .is.wanted,.listen next winter. It' is not a question of a general agreement to limit or increase power, or to separate by this or that (frequency universally. The necessity is to agree first upon the fundamentals of a European plan and thereafter get tho technicians to work it out. When this was done, here would be a big long wave station (just as we have Daventry), there a baby serving a small but isolated area (just as we have Aberdeen). This very powerful upper medium wave station of 400 kilowatts would want 15 k.e. separation from such and such a neighbour and 20 k.c. from another neighbour. On the other. hand, no such powers are needed for shorter wave stations. That is simple. What is not simple, what is most difficult, is to get the right spirit, then tho right principles, and thch'tho technical implications. From the spiirt of tlio conferoneo to the noise coming out of your set may seem a long way, but in fact it's almost a direct line. Y.ou see, if a real plan could be conceived you could have far more pleasure from, your set eventually. Music, would be pure arid an ■ almost exact

acter of speakers, their asides and subtleties would convey more to you, and there would not bo so many of these hissings and spittiugs which- to me render wireless listening tolerablo only if the programme, is interesting, and therefore usually intolerable. It's a great pity.