Volkempfanger.

[colly0410]

Reading about the above wireless made for German civilians in WW2, it said it had very low sensitivity to stop people listening to foreign stations. I should have thought putting up a dirty great aerial with a good earth would have pulled in the stations, or was it verboten to have aerials longer than a certain length???

[AlanBeckett]

There's a good description, including Schematic, is here - http://antiqueradio.org/VolksempfaengerVE301dyn.htm
It certinly wasn't overengineered
By the way, I think it should be spelled Volksempfanger

Alan

[m1ecy]

I have one, lets just say they will not win any prizes for sensitivity, even with 50 metres of wire attached, aspirations to mediocrity would be the best description I could think of.

[pwdrive]

I had one of those sets back in the 60's, it came from a captured German gun battery, needless to say I scraped it for bits as was the norm back then....

Lawrence.

[Old Sparky]

How would either of these compare with the British Wartime Civilian Receiver? I have to say I have no experience of these radios, having never owned, repaired or restored either of them

[pwdrive]

That receiver was a superhet, having said that in most cases a good regen will knock spots off a superhet in the sensitivity game.
That German one appears to use a pentode as the regen detector but the regen control is of the type commonly used for a triode ie: a variable capacitor, most pentode regens had screen grid regen control ie: the National SW3 etc.

Lawrence.

[colly0410]

Re # 2.

Thanks for the link Alan, found the whole site interesting.

When I was based at Munster-Lager in Germany I used to listen to the top 40 on 1500 mtrs (200 khz) long wave every Sunday on a cheapo tranie, also radio Luxembourg on other nights if not in NAAFI or pub.

[Yorkie]

How would either of these compare with the British Wartime Civilian Receiver? I have to say I have no experience of these radios, having never owned, repaired or restored either of them

The design brief of the Wartime Civilian Receiver was allegedly that the set should offer satisfactory and reliable performance using the minimum of components and labour. In my view, as far as the 'minimum of components and labour' aspect of the brief, it failed to meet that target. Not only did it not score a bull’s eye - the darts didn’t even hit the board.

It wasn’t known at the time how long the war would last, or how long it would take after the end of the war to get back into peacetime production of consumer goods, but given that it wasn’t released until June 1944, (after D-Day) it rather missed the boat, though yes, the war did drag on into 1945. True, some 175,000 sets were sold in the first year, but if you needed a radio, it was Hobson’s choice so the number sold ought not to be construed as a runaway success. What we’re not told, is how many households during the war and after were connected to wired distribution systems. We know the answer to that – many millions.

The Wartime Civilian Receiver (a collaborative effort by 40 manufacturers, be mainly designed by Murphy engineers) is a bit of a farce, in that it was supposedly built with the minimum of materials at a time of shortages, but even a superficial glance will show that it failed dismally to meet that objective – you only have to pick one up and feel the weight of it to realise how much iron there is in it. At a time when millions of UK households still used DC mains, the set was AC only, so households on DC had to resort to buying the battery model. The set could of course have been designed as an AC/DC set, which would have obviated the need for a mains transformer with consequent saving of iron and copper – both much needed materials for the war effort. Much fuss has been made of the 'innovative' Westector detector, which allegedly saved the need for a detector valve. It didn't. Again, this is just a bit of nonsense because scores of double diode triodes/pentodes valves were available which incorporated two diodes – one for detection - one for AVC.

Then there’s the speaker. Again, as heavy and large a speaker as you’re ever likely to encounter in a domestic radio. 'Economy of materials? I don't think so! Take a look in the back of the set and note the rectifier valve comically perched on top of the mains transformer, and the large speaker, and you realise that it necessitated a large cabinet, said to have been made from ‘orange box wood’. Errm, hello? Such an assertion can only have been made by someone who didn’t live through the war years. How many boxes of Oranges were imported into the UK back then? Not a lot. They cabinets were made from pine, which was plentiful and is fast growing. True, orange boxes may also have been made of pine, just like Wartime Civilian set cabinets were made of low grade pine plywood. Ironically, there is no glass in the dial – again, allegedly to economise on materials, but glass is made from sand, which we have in abundance, and was plentiful during the war years. There was no shortage of glass to replace broken windows caused by bomb blasts, so a piece of 1/8” window glass 2.5” x 5” wouldn’t have made a dent in the war effort - much larger pieces were recycled by glaziers for scrap every day.

As to the cabinet design, it was said to have been designed by the British Radio Cabinet Maker’s Association. It looks like a failed GCSE Design & Technology project ('Woodwork' as it used to be known). During the war years, excellent ‘Wartime Utility Furniture’ was designed and manufacture using the minimum of materials, which is a solid today as the day it was made. Much under-rated and deserving of high praise.

Look too, at the large heavy-duty steel chassis, and the large IFT cans.

Give the same brief, it’s my view that the combined wit on the forum even harking back to the knowledge that existed back in the 1940s, could design a set which would meet the objectives of the brief, which the Wartime Civilian Receiver fails on just about every facet. It epitomises what happens when you have committees and government interference. It’s my view that the design brief was a result of the government wanting to demonstrate to the public at large that it was an era of belt-tightening austerity in which nothing must appear to be stylish or have a hint of luxury about it. In that respect, the set succeeded magnificently – in other respects, notably in economy of materials, it failed dismally.

(As there were no UK LW transmissions in the war years, it was MW only).

A couple of pics of my restored Wartime Civvy is attached to underpin my assertions. (The observant might spot the waxy cap on the speaker transformer, which was replaced).

Notwithstanding my seemingly disparaging comments, the set is not without a certain whimsical charm, it has to be said!

[Joe]

I like the look of them but never managed to get mine working to a usable standard.

- Joe

[boiss]

I think it is Volksempfaenger should be;- Volksempfänger, the umlaut is usually replaced by an extra e in some texts.
I have been after a DKE 38 (Deutsche Klein Empfänger) for sometime, complete with eagle and swastika as a swap for my Romac portable with power supply. Certainly sensitivity wasn't great with only 3 valves, their bigger brothers type VE 301 etc were better with an extra valve at least as far as sensitivity goes. They also had a wooden case instead of the rather flimsy bakelite affair.
There were similar radios in Italy under Mussolini's regime which were rather nice at least in terms of the cases. One reached over 7000 euros in an auction a couple of years ago. These radios were called Radiorurale, MW only and were supposed to receive stations from as far away as 150Km. They were generally 5 valve sets and had to be sold for 600 Lire. They could only be sold to schools, parochial institutions and local government offices, State financing was available.
The quality was a lot better than the German offerings and they have become collectors items.
I have a 1938 Telefunken made in Turin but this was not a part of the Ruralradio program