WIRELESS CONTROVERSY.

Evening Star, Issue 18158, 26 December 1922, Page 10

WIRELESS CONTROVERSY.

TO THE 'EDITOR. Sir, —In reply to Mr O’Neill’s letter in your issue of .December 18, wo feel Unit the mutter has gone far enough, and since Mr O’Neill has not accepted our advice to refrain from technical and historical arguments , we have to show him up. Air O’Neill, whose experience of wireless covers only a few montlrs, is attempting to bluff the public, but is now finding that though he may bluff some of tiro public some of the time ho cannot bluff all the public all the time, and. that a successful business is founded on a more solid basis than verbosity. Though, hia statements have caused no little amusement in wireless and electrical circles, there are a number of people who, not knowing him, may be deceived by hia “clap trap" (as he calls it), and it is for the Information of these that we reply. If anyone should require further information any electrical engineer in town will no doubt oblige. The reason ho gives for the prohibition of foreign wireless apparatus in Great Britain Is only parity correct and misleading} more than this we do not wish to say. His reference, ‘Hawkins’s Electrical Guide,’ though no doubt excellent for firstyear apprentices, is certainly not a standard work, and was not written with that intention. Wo have not seen it quoted as an authority on wireless telegraphy, and when we add that the paragraph on which ho bases Ms assertion reads i “Do Forest was perhaps the first experimenter to develop a complete wireless telephone transmitting and receiving system" (a email footnote at the bottom of a page), we do not think this la of much value against Fleming, Bodes, Stanley, Soott-Taggart, etc., all authorities in the wireless world, also the proceedings of both the British and American Institutes of Electrical Engineers—all these works and others being available in our library. Mr O'Neill is certainly not in a position to question! any of our data, and wo leave the public to judge who ia more likely to be correct, Mr O’Neill and ‘ Hawkins’s Guido,’ or tho standard reference works of the world.

Regarding broadcasting stations, Mr O’Neill says there are several in operation in New Zealand. The Government specification for a broadcasting station distinctly states “ a station using a power of 500 watts,” and if Mr O’Neill is trying to tell us that there are several stations using this power we are afraid he underestimates our intelligence. Wo are aware that ho has publicly stated that he lias sent out telephone messages bn a wave length of 370 metres and a power of 500 watts, but this statement is obviously ridiculous to anyone conversant with wireless engineering. There will shortly be a station sending on 500 watts in operation in Dunedin, but this will be tho first in New Zealand, and tho public may judge between tho strength of this station and others which they have heard. At present tho Otago Radio Association is sending on a power of 80 to 100 watts, and its conceits are tho best that have been heard in Dunedin.

We have not time or desire to pull any iiktc of Mr O’Neill’s statements to pieces, and, moreover, do not consider them uf sufficient public interest to justify this; but when Mr O’Ne li asks us to recognise the superiority of the wireless set on show at our rooms, which ho, says was made by De Forest (blit as a matter of fact was constructed entirely by ourselves), wo feel highly flattered to think that our local products are' of such a high standard that even Air O’Neill admits their superiority, and that his invitation to come along and see what can bo done by Dunedin tradesmen is unnecessary. Once more we repeat o-ir advice to Air O'Neill -to'think twice before he rushes into print.—l am, etc., Norman Akundel, Managing Director British Radio Supply Company. December 23.