Communications interoperability




 
--
 
November 29th, 2015  
Remington 1858
 
 

Topic: Communications interoperability


In another thread in this forum there was a discussion about STANAG, ( Standardization Agreements). This has been the subject of constant negotiation among NATO members and associated nations.
The idea is to have equipment that will interface in the event of joint operations. There are agreements covering many items; especially weapons.
However, the most glaring deficiency that remains as an outstanding issue is communications equipment.
It would obviously be a good idea to have radios that can communicate with your allies. Well, it hasn't happened yet! You can make your own guess as to why. It may be entrenched interests in each nations electronic industry, mistrust of other nation's security, simply national pride.
This last summer there were joint airborne exercises in Poland and Romania involving the U.S., U.K., Spain, Italy, Germany, Romania.
Guess what? There were communications problems.
So, there is a NATO organization,with lots of new members and associates, but it appears to still need some integration.
November 29th, 2015  
The Highway Man
 
 
There is kit out there that will enable it. Here in the UK, we have a radio network that all emergency services can converse with each other. So police, fire, coastguard, mountain rescue, red cross, ambulance, highways, etc are all use the same digital network.
December 20th, 2015  
Capt Frogman
 
 
Can't say I encountered issues communicating with Allied forces during times of conflict?

There are numerous UHF and VHF channels/frequencies used. I've been able to communicate directly with Americans in the air and on the ground.

I'm not going to go into great details of how it happens for obvious reasons, but you only need to know the correct frequency and call sign to get in contact with a neighbouring patrol or the pilot in the aircraft above you.
--
December 20th, 2015  
BritinAfrica
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Capt Frogman
Can't say I encountered issues communicating with Allied forces during times of conflict?

There are numerous UHF and VHF channels/frequencies used. I've been able to communicate directly with Americans in the air and on the ground.

I'm not going to go into great details of how it happens for obvious reasons, but you only need to know the correct frequency and call sign to get in contact with a neighbouring patrol or the pilot in the aircraft above you.
Our radio's were a back pack type, as heavy as a GPMG and had a range of about 3 miles, as long as there were no tree's or hills in the way. Bloody useless.
December 20th, 2015  
The Highway Man
 
 
and to think, my current radio is the size of a mobile phone. I can be on the Scottish border and speak to a patrol on the M25 round London if I'm on the right channel.
December 20th, 2015  
JOC
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Capt Frogman
Can't say I encountered issues communicating with Allied forces during times of conflict?

There are numerous UHF and VHF channels/frequencies used. I've been able to communicate directly with Americans in the air and on the ground.

I'm not going to go into great details of how it happens for obvious reasons, but you only need to know the correct frequency and call sign to get in contact with a neighbouring patrol or the pilot in the aircraft above you.
Most US Military radios used for ground communications use narrowband UHF and VHF bands frequencies and lots of them. This is quite adequate for voice and narrow band digital communications which is what most military radio's are used for. For the soldier in the field the radio is handheld, but much more rugged and capable than say a simple cell phone. At the operations base much larger more capable radios are often used. I've designed the receiver section of handheld radios used by American and NATO ground forces. Their range is certainly > 20 miles and they are relatively immune to ground clutter (trees, hills, building etc. enemy interference) in part due to frequency hopping and signal processing. Of course all parties need to be using the same or compatible systems for reliable communication. This is not a problem for the US forces.
 


Similar Topics
Obama's new communications director a target of Russian media
advanced emergency satellite communications system
Communications on the move
Tip to Improved Communications w/Loved One
China has blown the foreign office’s communications network