• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

FRS vs Mil Issue Radios

Status
Not open for further replies.
c_canuk said:
I just don't see any reason to get rid of the 521, 522 or 138, they work fine, and we have the resources to use them, so why short change ourselves and get ourselves back into the same problem we are having now, by trash canning what we have just because we get a few 117s in Afghanistan? If we hadn't trashed the Legacy stuff when the 521s, 522s and 138s came on line we'd still have loads of radios we could use, plus we would have a force that has experiance linking legacy with new. all they had to do was keep the 77 sets around.

Didn't even read the rest of the thread did you? They don't work. That's what this whole thread is about. Don't wade in half cocked, until you know the parameters of the discussion. Also, before you try defend your position on this, read all the points against first, and don't rehash the old stuff.
 
beg your pardon, but if you read the threads you will see me deconstruct every argument about the radios to one of the following

operator error
lack of parts
lack of radios
battery issue

I keep rehashing what I said, because people keep rehashing their arguments against, which I've already deconstructed.

you will also note that I am a rad op and I've been working intensly with these radios since they entered the system, and military radios in general for 8 years of which even though I'm a Reservist according to the time in calculations for Class C contracts I'm the eqivalent to a MCpl 2, so I'm not just a weekender, and though I'm loath to admit it I was in a Sigs Cadet Corps before that that was run by ex Comms officers, and I actually attended trg with the affiliated reserve unit for 5 years and basicly knew the 25/77 set inside out and backwards before I even joined.

you will also note I've been part of this thread when it was created not just the last 2 times it's resurfaced. -> post #4


I personally believe the TCCCS system put a way too complicated radio into the hands of people who just need to be able to talk, and don't need to know how to program the thing, which is what the DTD is for, it can load everything you could possible need to program into the 522 in a short few seconds with only a few commands needed to be known.

The problem is to get the DTD loaded and ready for an exersize is a monumental task because of "other" features and uses which I'm not going into here.

The extention of the TCCCS system will add really great features that will be extremely useful to all branches without adding complexity if we could deploy the DTD in a timely fashion.

for example all the facts needed about an incident involving pte joe infanteer on the front line including video, and text to go with could be passed up the net through to the CO in seconds, rather than hours or days, allowing a faster responce time. Your Recce's data could be sent back to HQ as you head back.

However this is all still theoretical depending on budgets and a loosening of the use of DTDs and whatnot.

EW is very quiet about how good they are and what they can do, however having been on the wrong end of our EW on 2 different occasions, let me tell you, no means of comms is out of their grasp... if they can't decode it they can still find a 10 figure grid of where it came from, and can get data from the most inconcevable things. all electronic devices emit RF Energy unless they are Tempest, EW can locate that.

Now if the Enemy is not using RF, they obviously can't find them

117s can easily be integrated into TCCCS just like the 138. and they are only the latest cute radio everyone wants if you go through the thread they've also wanted the falcon IIs, FRS, Legacy, etc

I'm not changing my point of view, my point of view is that the radios are fine, the problem is elsewhere, and throwing them away for the same amount or likely less 117s is not a reasonable solution and that using FRS radios instead of using what we have is not only lazy it's dangerous, and a poor practice.

that said, it appears that you'd much rather I just keep this opinion to myself because some people would rather blame everything on the tool and not where it belongs, the one holding it.

Peace out
 
I've had Reg Sig WOs & Sgts tell me they're shit. I'll take their word......and experience. Thanks anyway. :salute:

Maybe the Navy is looking for some new boat anchors. ;D
 
c_canuk said:
beg your pardon, but if you read the threads you will see me deconstruct every argument about the radios to one of the following

operator error
lack of parts
lack of radios
battery issue

I keep rehashing what I said, because people keep rehashing their arguments against, which I've already deconstructed.

You have'nt deconstructed anything. You've demonstrated again and again that you have a REMF mindset where everything always works, and we all have unlimited resources and time to sort it out.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again THE KIT WORKS FINE IN A WORKSHOP, JUST NOT IN THE FIELD

you will also note that I am a rad op and I've been working intensly with these radios since they entered the system, and military radios in general for 8 years of which even though I'm a Reservist according to the time in calculations for Class C contracts I'm the eqivalent to a MCpl 2, so I'm not just a weekender, and though I'm loath to admit it I was in a Sigs Cadet Corps before that that was run by ex Comms officers, and I actually attended trg with the affiliated reserve unit for 5 years and basicly knew the 25/77 set inside out and backwards before I even joined.

you will also note I've been part of this thread when it was created not just the last 2 times it's resurfaced. -> post #4

You will note that no-one here is disputing your qualifications, only your opinions, and your "real world" experience. TCCCs is a deeply flawed system, your cheerleading notwithstanding. TCCCs works great in a heated, stable, well powered CP. It fails in inclement weather, when manpacked, and when used with the peripherals that are a fact of life in this army.

This is reality, from the people who use it on the ground for real operations.

117s can easily be integrated into TCCCS just like the 138. and they are only the latest cute radio everyone wants if you go through the thread they've also wanted the falcon IIs, FRS, Legacy, etc
The Falcon II is the 117. It is not a "cute" radio or the flavour of the month, it is the necessary tool for the job we do. You might be able to get away with LOS comms, but I can't, nor can I stand on a mountain top waving an antennae until I get reception - or shot.

I'm not changing my point of view, my point of view is that the radios are fine, the problem is elsewhere, and throwing them away for the same amount or likely less 117s is not a reasonable solution and that using FRS radios instead of using what we have is not only lazy it's dangerous, and a poor practice.

I would submit that your "view" is somewhat skewed, given that your experience is based in a Signals regiment, not an operational unit; and not in our most recent theatre of operations, where TCCCs has been soundly denounced for what it is, and replaced with a system that works, all the time, off the shelf - the 117.

 
You have'nt deconstructed anything. You've demonstrated again and again that you have a REMF mindset where everything always works, and we all have unlimited resources and time to sort it out.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again THE KIT WORKS FINE IN A WORKSHOP, JUST NOT IN THE FIELD

Explain to me what doesn't work in the field? the only argument you made in this whole thread was something vague about an operator being hit in the back of the head with his radio after jumping and the crypto dumping... and for some reason think that doing a load ez on a Falcon II would be eaiser even though the DTD is the tool being used to load a radio 117 or 522.

does the digital display somehow not work in the field, or the buttons or knobs? what exactly is the problem?

You will note that no-one here is disputing your qualifications, only your opinions, and your "real world" experience. TCCCs is a deeply flawed system, your cheerleading notwithstanding. TCCCs works great in a heated, stable, well powered CP. It fails in inclement weather, when manpacked, and when used with the peripherals that are a fact of life in this army.

This is reality, from the people who use it on the ground for real operations

I felt that the previous poster was calling my quals into question. I have also been in three operations and one of them was a testing ground for our equipment linking with 40 other Nato nations.

You don't use TCCCS you use a very small part of it. Radio that works with TCCCS does not = TCCCS

I agree TCCCS has problems, but the radios are not TCCCS, the 117 is not part of TCCCS but you can use it with TCCCS just like the 138.

I've used the 522 many times in downpour, winter, and extreme heat, just last year I did four recce patrols in two days in a hard downpour that didn't stop, the only problem we had was that one of the batteries broke and shorted out, it was one of the old black plastic screw ons, which is why we use the metal box with the duals. when the black batteries are out of the system that shouldn't be a problem.

The Falcon II is the 117. It is not a "cute" radio or the flavour of the month, it is the necessary tool for the job we do. You might be able to get away with LOS comms, but I can't, nor can I stand on a mountain top waving an antennae until I get reception - or shot.

The 117 is a very nice radio, indeed we should indeed have lots of them, but we will never get enough to replace all the 522s so getting rid of the 522s, which will not get rid of TCCCS, is not a solution to TCCCS having problems.

The 117 Works in Afghanistan because it works with Satillight, if you program your radio to work on any frequency that the 522 operates on, you will have the same problems with the 117... because VHF is line of sight, you need satilight or a butt load of RRB to get reliable comms, if whoever had planned comms in afghanistan had done their homework they would have realized that the 522 would not work, you can't use VHF in that type of terrain, again operator error... or in this case error on the planner's side, however it shows that they are thinking in getting the 117 because it gives us more comms.

How many people in Canada are using 117s right now? not many I'd wager. And while Afghanistan is our only real big operation right now, will it be that way in the future? might we end up in a jungle or forest somewhere where sat comms don't work and you need VHF? sure the 117s can do that, but if we don't have many of them, wouldn't it be great to have a butt load of other radios to help out with that?

I would submit that your "view" is somewhat skewed, given that your experience is based in a Signals regiment, not an operational unit; and not in our most recent theatre of operations, where TCCCs has been soundly denounced for what it is, and replaced with a system that works, all the time, off the shelf - the 117.

I think that it may be a bit, however I never said don't get the 117, I"m all for getting more 117s however I doubt we will ever get enough 117s to replace our suite of radios, that work well when used for what they were designed for, and going to FRS until then is a bad move.

I'm not familiar with the 117, does it's satillight time cost money like the sat phones? or is the satillight simply a repeater? Believe me I do want 117s in the system, I really do and I'd be tickled pink if we got enough to replace the 522s, but if there are not enough 522s their won't be enough 117s, and the two are compatible on the VHF spectrum, so why get rid of them, if combat arms want to use all 117s go for it, just so I don't have to listen about how they are crap cause you can't be bothered to learn how to use them within their capabilities and how to properly deploy assets to accomplish the goal within the given spectrum.

I just heard that the CF is now building RRB boxes... basicly everything you need to make an RRB in a box with directions on the lid, I hope every single unit gets 10 of them. that would be awsome, and would solve a lot of problems.

either way, using FRS is Verboten for legal and practical reasons.
 
You'll not see the 117 replace the 522, at least not anytime soon at all.

There's also a problem integrating the 117 into the TCCCS suite of vehicles like the 138. I'm not sure what it is, I'll be speaking with our Harris rep when I get into the office tomorrow. I'm not sure if it's a RAU problem. I need to pull my 117 CDs out of my case and go over the manuals again.

It is a great radio, but don't expect it to replace TCCCS for the time being. More of an extra.

GO!!!, I do agree that the 117 seems much better suited for the infantry, and I would love to see you guys get dibs on them. But we don't have very many right now. I'll see if I can get dates, numbers, and distribution plans for you.

Hell, we're supposed to be the first-line support, and we only have a couple, which we keep under lock and key!
 
Sig_Des

I was wondering if the CF has to rent bandwidth on the satillights the 117 works with like the INMARSAT, or is it free to use. Just idle curiosity If I get on a TF soon, I'm sure I'll find out in due time.

thanks

 
c_canuk said:
Explain to me what doesn't work in the field? the only argument you made in this whole thread was something vague about an operator being hit in the back of the head with his radio after jumping and the crypto dumping... and for some reason think that doing a load ez on a Falcon II would be eaiser even though the DTD is the tool being used to load a radio 117 or 522.
KYK 13s are a far simpler and faster method of loading crypto, and as such, the main method of loading (for us). 

does the digital display somehow not work in the field, or the buttons or knobs? what exactly is the problem?
As explained earlier, errors that cannot be corrected in the field - by anyone, including QL5 rad ops, or techs, that appear and dissapear with no apparent rhyme or reason, the dumping of crypto, inability to broadcast on 30000 bandwidth with rechargeable batteries, the list goes on and we've already covered it.

I felt that the previous poster was calling my quals into question. I have also been in three operations and one of them was a testing ground for our equipment linking with 40 other Nato nations.
So TCCCS worked well for radops in a test environment?? I think I've been saying that all along...

You don't use TCCCS you use a very small part of it. Radio that works with TCCCS does not = TCCCS
Right. I guess the SAS, RRBs, CPs, HFs, and all their peripherals I use are also a "small part". I've got some news for you - if what I need to work does'nt, and nobody in my unit's sigs platoon can make it work, then it is garbage, period. We are the end user of this system.

I've used the 522 many times in downpour, winter, and extreme heat, just last year I did four recce patrols in two days in a hard downpour that didn't stop, the only problem we had was that one of the batteries broke and shorted out, it was one of the old black plastic screw ons, which is why we use the metal box with the duals. when the black batteries are out of the system that shouldn't be a problem.
Four recce patrols in two days? You poor soul, how did you survive?

I sat in a heated CP for two days once, guzzling coffee and cigarettes and watching TV - I guess I know your job too.  ::)

The 117 Works in Afghanistan because it works with Satillight, if you program your radio to work on any frequency that the 522 operates on, you will have the same problems with the 117... because VHF is line of sight, you need satilight or a butt load of RRB to get reliable comms, if whoever had planned comms in afghanistan had done their homework they would have realized that the 522 would not work, you can't use VHF in that type of terrain, again operator error... or in this case error on the planner's side, however it shows that they are thinking in getting the 117 because it gives us more comms.
I see. Evidently you are unfamiliar with the tactical situation in Southern afghanistan right now, in which small groups of soldiers are regularly attacked with direct and indirect fire both while static and moving. Scattering small RRB dets around in the mountains is not an option, and it is ridiculous to even suggest it.

Now that you are smarter than whoever came up with the comms plan for Afghanistan, perhaps you can explain how VHF comms can be made to work in mountainous areas without RRBs. The RRB boxes explained below are just about the biggest potential breach of COMSEC I can imagine, and how you can advocate leaving RRB boxes anywhere while preaching about the insecurity of FRS is breathtakingly hypocritical.


How many people in Canada are using 117s right now? not many I'd wager. And while Afghanistan is our only real big operation right now, will it be that way in the future? might we end up in a jungle or forest somewhere where sat comms don't work and you need VHF? sure the 117s can do that, but if we don't have many of them, wouldn't it be great to have a butt load of other radios to help out with that?
The 117 can do anything the 522 can, X3 - I've used it.

I'd rather have 20 radios per unit that work than 500 that don't - call me crazy!

... and going to FRS until then is a bad move.
But leaving encrypted radios in unmanned RRB sites is not?

I'm not familiar with the 117, does it's satillight time cost money like the sat phones? or is the satillight simply a repeater? Believe me I do want 117s in the system, I really do and I'd be tickled pink if we got enough to replace the 522s, but if there are not enough 522s their won't be enough 117s, and the two are compatible on the VHF spectrum, so why get rid of them, if combat arms want to use all 117s go for it, just so I don't have to listen about how they are crap cause you can't be bothered to learn how to use them within their capabilities and how to properly deploy assets to accomplish the goal within the given spectrum.
So what it really comes down to is that you think we are too stupid to use the kit as it was designed. I would challenge you to "man up", join the reg force and come to an operational unit, where you can see how this system is employed in the field.

I've encountered other radops and techs with attitudes like yours, and they are invariably changed after seeing the performance of this system in a real unit. 
 
Well said GO!!! especially:
I would challenge you to "man up", join the reg force and come to an operational unit, where you can see how this system is employed in the field.

This thread is pure entertainment!
 
It's also been spinning it wheels for a few pages. You guys know the drill. Locked.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top