how is the standards of comms internationally?
-
kinda curious, seeing as we're still using obsolete equipment. with all the money we're spending procuring new weapons and machines, why not some on comms?
i had been going on at least 1 exercise every week since beginning of this year and almost everytime there'll be some problems with the coms, either cannot hear each other, or cannot recieve, cannot send. seems to always cause alot of probem and downtime.
with all the leaps and bounds in communication technology recently, surely we can get our hands on some cheap, and yet more efficient equipment? longer range? better voice clarity? 2 way sending? -
where r u serving ur ns now?Originally posted by nismoS132:kinda curious, seeing as we're still using obsolete equipment. with all the money we're spending procuring new weapons and machines, why not some on comms?
i had been going on at least 1 exercise every week since beginning of this year and almost everytime there'll be some problems with the coms, either cannot hear each other, or cannot recieve, cannot send. seems to always cause alot of probem and downtime.
with all the leaps and bounds in communication technology recently, surely we can get our hands on some cheap, and yet more efficient equipment? longer range? better voice clarity? 2 way sending? -
41sar
-
LF, HF, VHF and UHF... what do you know about this 'Fs' in the 1st place or you trying to say we should use GSM900/1800...
what do you know about the air wave things when war start? maybe you can enlighten me with all this data b4 making such comment. -
The stuff that we use on exercise is just the tip of the iceberg.And atmospheric changes in the day and night also contribute to signal strength.Originally posted by nismoS132:kinda curious, seeing as we're still using obsolete equipment. with all the money we're spending procuring new weapons and machines, why not some on comms?
i had been going on at least 1 exercise every week since beginning of this year and almost everytime there'll be some problems with the coms, either cannot hear each other, or cannot recieve, cannot send. seems to always cause alot of probem and downtime.
with all the leaps and bounds in communication technology recently, surely we can get our hands on some cheap, and yet more efficient equipment? longer range? better voice clarity? 2 way sending? -
Our comms set is OK la. Bad comms will always be a problem where radio waves are concerned. This is particularly so in Urban areas and in heavily forested and hilly areas. Its just the way radio waves work. If you consistently cannot get comms with HQ then maybe your rebro teams are not doing their jobs?
Bad comms happen to all the armies in the world. So it is not a problem particular to SAF.
Anyway, we just changed signal sets. So i do not forsee any further changes in the near future.
Wat set you using now? -
I still remember what I heard over the comms during an exercise:
"two four to one one. OEI! YOU TAKE THE COMPANY GO HOLLAN AR?!!!"
-
than reply say no la...
a: where are you now?
b: on my right there is tree, on my left there is another tree.... -
There will always be problems with the comms, no matter what the conditions are. Sometimes even when the signal sets are literally next to each other nothing can still be heard. It's all in line with Murphy's Law.
In the end, we more often than not have to use GSM as a backup. I remember my Coy 2ic ordering all the medics in my company to bring along their handphones in case of emergencies (everyone else was prohibited from doing so). This order was passed down after a spate of evacuations due to injuries sustained during outfield... My medics and I had to remain contactable, we didn't carry comms sets, and even when we were near people with comms sets they didn't always work.
Of course, we can't really use GSM in wartime.... can we? -
depends really ..i recall the commander of SAS did talk abt US troops uisng GSM phones to communicate with their peers to coordinate attacks.Not too sure the extent of the usage though .Maybe the americans felt that the iraqis didn't have the technology to eavesdrop on their GSM sets..Originally posted by fudgester:There will always be problems with the comms, no matter what the conditions are. Sometimes even when the signal sets are literally next to each other nothing can still be heard. It's all in line with Murphy's Law.
In the end, we more often than not have to use GSM as a backup. I remember my Coy 2ic ordering all the medics in my company to bring along their handphones in case of emergencies (everyone else was prohibited from doing so). This order was passed down after a spate of evacuations due to injuries sustained during outfield... My medics and I had to remain contactable, we didn't carry comms sets, and even when we were near people with comms sets they didn't always work.
Of course, we can't really use GSM in wartime.... can we?
Aniway ..well not being a signal trained vocation.Can't really talk abt much abt the signal sets, except they have encryption devices within the sets to send the data out btw machines. I did read abt the signal sets being able to detect if the sender who is transmitting was really the authentic sender and not a spoof caused by the enemy trying to do a replay on the transmission.
Is it alright to discuss abt the size of the encryption key used in our signal sets ??
-
I think you mean British?Originally posted by one-niner:depends really ..i recall the commander of SAS did talk abt US troops uisng GSM phones to communicate with their peers to coordinate attacks.Not too sure the extent of the usage though .Maybe the americans felt that the iraqis didn't have the technology to eavesdrop on their GSM sets..
Aniway ..well not being a signal trained vocation.Can't really talk abt much abt the signal sets, except they have encryption devices within the sets to send the data out btw machines. I did read abt the signal sets being able to detect if the sender who is transmitting was really the authentic sender and not a spoof caused by the enemy trying to do a replay on the transmission.
Is it alright to discuss abt the size of the encryption key used in our signal sets ??
Anyway, are you sure? I read in a book that the british army enforces a very stict handphone ban for its soldiers. The book stated that one Major got into trouble when he was spotted using his HP at the airport!
Also, i'm not sure that there is a GSM network in Iraq. Are you perhaps refering to Satellite Phones? I know those are widely used in Iraq because of bad comms. -
Your guys didn't do equipment check b4 move out ? And didn't bring extra sets? But ya, i think the people covering safety needs to carry handphone. Makes perfect sense.Originally posted by fudgester:There will always be problems with the comms, no matter what the conditions are. Sometimes even when the signal sets are literally next to each other nothing can still be heard. It's all in line with Murphy's Law. -
Well, the time needed to locate a radio/signal transmission is scaringly short...even a GSM. The report of US troops using GSM to communicate, is the failure of the troops to follow COMSEC, although it is initative on their end. Not sure when your report is dated, but I am assuming is against the insurgents.Originally posted by one-niner:depends really ..i recall the commander of SAS did talk abt US troops uisng GSM phones to communicate with their peers to coordinate attacks.Not too sure the extent of the usage though .Maybe the americans felt that the iraqis didn't have the technology to eavesdrop on their GSM sets..
Aniway ..well not being a signal trained vocation.Can't really talk abt much abt the signal sets, except they have encryption devices within the sets to send the data out btw machines. I did read abt the signal sets being able to detect if the sender who is transmitting was really the authentic sender and not a spoof caused by the enemy trying to do a replay on the transmission.
Is it alright to discuss abt the size of the encryption key used in our signal sets ??
Old radio sets does not mean they don't work well....juz more troublesome to operate. But they are more rugged. It all depends on the signaller's skill to get the comms....terrain....weather etc....all play a part.
If still don't work well, is usually faulty equipment, but then.....should have checked before moving out.
Size of encyption key in our sets?..........I am pretty sure such info is classifed. Loose lips cost lifes. This is a public forum.
-
Well, I dunno about that, since my medics and I don't carry comms sets. I assume that those who do carry comms sets would do their own checks prior to moving out.Originally posted by lwflee:Your guys didn't do equipment check b4 move out ? And didn't bring extra sets? But ya, i think the people covering safety needs to carry handphone. Makes perfect sense.
Of course, there are bound to be those who didn't do proper checks. Also, surely sometimes there would be a set or two which would malfunction in the field after working perfectly in camp.
Ultimately, there's no such thing as the perfect comms set. Even GSM is limited by factors such as distance from the transmission towers, etc. I remember that at Tekong once you're past the FIBUA training area you're basically out of range of the transmission towers and have to use foreign networks. -
Use satelite Handphone lah!
-
u used 1 b4? how long is the window open? when is it open?Originally posted by zenden9:Use satelite Handphone lah! -
The iridium sat network seems to be very popular. If i was gg to Iraq, i would pay for the service...
-
Ya - Correct, sometimes will cock up. I hope the new 9 series did not cock up though. Its relatively new...Originally posted by fudgester:Well, I dunno about that, since my medics and I don't carry comms sets. I assume that those who do carry comms sets would do their own checks prior to moving out.
Of course, there are bound to be those who didn't do proper checks. Also, surely sometimes there would be a set or two which would malfunction in the field after working perfectly in camp.
Anyway, who carries comms set for medics? Or you guys attached to HQ or something that's y no need. -
We medics don't carry comms sets. Period. Not part of our equipment list.Originally posted by lwflee:Ya - Correct, sometimes will cock up. I hope the new 9 series did not cock up though. Its relatively new...
Anyway, who carries comms set for medics? Or you guys attached to HQ or something that's y no need.
For Rifle Coys, the platoon medics stick with their respective PS. The Coy medic sticks with the CSM. They thus rely on the PS/CSM comms sets.
As for the BCS (medical center) team, they have two signallers from Support Coy attached to them on missions. -
Sat comms is quite ex I think and also at the mercy of the controlling party. There appears to be an instance during GW1 where the Americans simply pulled the plug on an SAS team in Iraq just because they were too noisy.
-
Hey,
Now not only GSM, we have 3G technology. Can have video conferencing between commanders. If we are fighting in Singapore, no problem why can't we use GSM? It is own by SingTel. Who dare to off it? Coverage up to 99% But if we want fight in the North, before the fight Singtel/M1/Starhub might want to consider buying over Celcom.
I am not surprise during exercises, especially durinf reservist, everyone comms with GSM (Primary), Other radio (secondary)...Am I right? ASk the NS guys... -
1. Really? i find that hard to believe.Originally posted by freeman8:Hey,
1.Now not only GSM, we have 3G technology. Can have video conferencing between commanders.
2.If we are fighting in Singapore, no problem why can't we use GSM? It is own by SingTel. Who dare to off it? Coverage up to 99% But if we want fight in the North, before the fight Singtel/M1/Starhub might want to consider buying over Celcom.
3.I am not surprise during exercises, especially durinf reservist, everyone comms with GSM (Primary), Other radio (secondary)...Am I right? ASk the NS guys...
2. Errm - the enemy dares to bomb it? And susceptible to interception by enemy? -
In war, one of the first targets to be taken down are the communication towers & networks...and power grid. Thus you are wrong to say nobody will dare to shut it down. They will make all attempts to do so.Originally posted by freeman8:Hey,
Now not only GSM, we have 3G technology. Can have video conferencing between commanders. If we are fighting in Singapore, no problem why can't we use GSM? It is own by SingTel. Who dare to off it? Coverage up to 99% But if we want fight in the North, before the fight Singtel/M1/Starhub might want to consider buying over Celcom.
I am not surprise during exercises, especially durinf reservist, everyone comms with GSM (Primary), Other radio (secondary)...Am I right? ASk the NS guys...
SAF do not believe in being a sitting duck in defence. Enough said. -
And who controls the satellites?Originally posted by zenden9:Use satelite Handphone lah! -
Wow - Look at the rip off!
http://www.satphone.co.uk/catalog/index.php?cPath=2_24
Prepaid: 75mins, to be used within 3 months = 150 pounds.
Cheapest phone: abt 550 pounds.
Wowow!
That said, i would get one if we were ever gonna be fighting a war.