HF - Lost art or Lost Cause

[291er]

Some people seem to think HF is dead, but they tend to forget some of the countries that may not have the comms capabilities we do.  HF is still widely used in the world as it is relatively cheap and effective comms.  Plus when you get into things like tropospheric ducting and meteor burst, then we can increase the range.  There's all sorts of signals being propagated through the HF spectrum still, and I suspect there will be for some time to come. 

 

[Radop]

For some reason, some of my colegues seem to think it is imposible to jam HF.  I asked them why they would think that?  HF can put out a lot of power so the jammer would have to put out a lot as well.  That could prove deadly for them the same as when were blasting out RF.  I talked to some of the new guys and they thought field expediant antennas were the b&w antenna.  When I asked how they build a multi-freq di-pole they looked at me like I had two heads.  Two of us were talking about a rombic antenna the other day and one of the young guys asked us if we thought he was born yesterday.  We both replied yes as he didn't know what type of antenna that was.

 

[elbarto]

I'm saying yes because:

1.  Last time I used any type of satellite comms, there was always a concern over the fact that the up link/downlink time had to be leased, rented etc.  The costs for using HF is still much more affordable in these days of fiscal restraint.

2.  HF is still likely  to be used in any type of joint operations with the other services.

3.  Even though they are apparently starting to become rare, a Rad Op might still find onself in a posting using HF - ie MACS. For an operator to go into a situation like that, a working knowledge of HF along with some hands-on experience makes life much easier than having to learn everything OJT.

 

[Radop]

Well said Art

 

[buzgo]

HF is still used all over the place, maybe not in a tactical setting, but definitely strategic. I even know of a long haul ADDN link that goes from Esquimalt to Aukland, New Zealand, using HF!

A lot of the eastern European countries are using HF based data comms sytems, even using gateways into the internet, and into their own wired networks. I have seen email sent from a laptop running outlook hooked up to an HF set, coming up on my system on a network that had the gateway connected. Very cool

 

[Radop]

HF is still used all over the place, maybe not in a tactical setting, but definitely strategic. I even know of a long haul ADDN link that goes from Esquimalt to Aukland, New Zealand, using HF!

A lot of the eastern European countries are using HF based data comms sytems, even using gateways into the internet, and into their own wired networks. I have seen email sent from a laptop running outlook hooked up to an HF set, coming up on my system on a network that had the gateway connected. Very cool

I agree except that I think it is just as important in a tactical setting and less in strategic.  As an NCCIS Op, I have satcom back ups to my satcom primary and an HF backup to the backup.  We had to push for an HF exercise so that we could maintain the skill set

 

[Canadian Sig]

Howdy Radop... Just thought you might like to know that the Sqn is taking HF very seriously. Just came back from up north where we maintained an HF rear-link and used SAS via secure HF. Also did some testing with our Brit counterparts. It seems that those in charge of the Sqn these days like the HF system and plan on maintaining its usefullness through training of the new guys. 

 

[buzgo]

Did you have Inmarsat or Iridium systems as well, or did you just rely on HF. What HF system was used? MCT?

 

[Canadian Sig]

We were just using the 138 amped system out of a rad v ( with NVIS ) 

 

[Radop]

Were was "up North", in the Yukon or NWT?  We were going to try HF SAS in Afghanistan but never got the chance with all the other things we tried.  Those wienies in Rover troop could never get that right even.  lol.  So how is the Sqn in Pet doing?  Tell Tracey congradulations on getting top cantidate on his TQ 5 course.  I just heard that he did very well on the course.

I did do some testing going up TV Hill with mobile HF.  I had also done it in the Regiment in the Late 90s as well (after 96 but before 98) with the IRPVs back then.  But that is a story for some time I am up there with everyone wearing helmets.  lol.  :warstory:

 

[Ex Ranger Instructor]

While I probably think that HF is more important than anyone else does on this whole board, Radop, I think you'll have to admit that current op experience dictates that despite doctrine, HF is NOT used as meaningful backup for NCCIS dets.  This is proved by the current status of NCCIS dets deployed on op ATHENA.  No HF resource is meaningfully depl/used/tested on that op, or at least not when I was over there last year.  Pls advise if current ops have proven me wrong. 

I think that HF is useful because we own it and it's reqr resources outright.  That said, we should take advantage of our ownership of such resources better than we currently do.  HF could potentially be used as a moderately reliable backup to other forms of NCCIS, but I don't think we're currently doing so effectively.

 

[Radop]

NCCIS Ops dictate that we use the inmarsat as the back up for essencial circuits which poses its own problems.   HF is suppose to be the primary backup for ADDN but when was the last time you saw that?   NCCIS course would probably be the answer.   You have to give the gateway notice before going live with them.   Some of the new regs are requiring 45 days advance notice.   Tell me how we will work that out and who came up with that brain child!!!

But I digress.   HF is more of a tactical necessity in a guard net or linking forward elements to NCCIS elements such as what was done in Bosnia.   I will give a total theoretical scenerio here before anyone talks about OPSEC.   We could have a central det in Kabul for NCCIS NRL.   Put a light det in Kandahar and deploy coys in the AOO would get QRTs to pass secure msg traffic.   This is not what will probably happen but is one option.   HF is a vialble option especially for forward units but 400 watts is not reliable back to a gateway from Afghanistan.   I think that if we had to do something with HF, too many people do not have the skill and we would risk falling on our face if tasked with that.   I would hate to go to the comd and tell him we could not do that because our people are not trained to do that even though we have the equipment.

In Afghanistan, we used it on the Tac Rad side of the house as a guard net only.   We could also use it to pass TMHS and other data circuits if we get more stable users with it.   We have to trust and have faith in the system and ourseves to use this asset.   That is only by utilizing the equipment and seeing what we can do with it.

 

[CH1]

Now there is a lot of good ideas floating around.  If the powers that be would listen instead of going off half cocked, we would probably do the true Canadian thing.  Blow every body away with our own home grown technology & know how!

I guess one of my questions is now answered, judging by some of the detailed responses.  There is ppl out there that have advanced beyond their Trg.  Keep up the good work!  Be proud of the blue & white.
cheers

 

[Radop]

We were at a trade fair the other day and someone asked us some questions about the HF systems that we use.  He was a ham operator and the young guys pointed him in our direction.  We talked with him for 15 min on our systems and how we use them.  He definitely pushed the limits of my knowledge but I answered him with what I knew and he seamed happy with the responses.  Unfortunately, the days are gone were we can go out and put two frequencies into our radios anytime we want and use the radios to find out how well they work.  Rather than getting people to sweep floors, maybe we should concentrate on teaching them the crafts as we know them.  All I have run into is obsticals when I have tried that.

 

[CH1]

Dig out the Gin Palaces, C33 xmtr, & the Hro 60's. Seriosly though, I get the impression that the eqt is being utilised at the low end of it's capabilities. Has any one tried the old boys net work, to see if there is a reason (s) why.  At one time, it was not unusual to push the radios, & rad ops to their potential.  As I am familiar with only some of the "new" eqt (leaning heavily on the tech side), it does leave questions as to why the enhanced capabilities are not used.

May be part of the reason is our allies only use certain modes, & we follow our neighbours to a certain degree.  There also could be hidden flaws that prevent using certain modes, eg C45's toasting when not following the full tuning procedure.

It's definetly not my strong suit any more, but I can't see all the capability being built in & not utilised.  Maybe the wizards figure a rad op can only be trained to handle a couple of modes with the required software with out tieing his WD6 in knots.

So much for my un informed opinion!

Cheers

 

[Radop]

CH1, you remember LTACS?  How much did the military use it.  We proved that we could tactically extend an MM (now MT) det using the LTACS System.  Did they use the system?  No.  I think the different units and commands don't want to cross training and loose their sphere of influence.  It will only get worse as sig ops now only set up the equipment for others to talk on.  The users don't have the patience that HF requires and don't see the potential inherent in the use of this frequency band.

We are also very constrained in the frequencies that we use.  Frequency hopping is difficult to obtain permission and doing some of the more complicated system intergrations is expensive.  This is more the cause of the problem and we as sig ops have to find the way around it.  Further complicating matters is that the system is new and we haven't had time to look at what it can do.

 

[CH1]

sorry for the delay Radop.
out of country for a short hop.  I do remember LTACS.  We never really used it that much. Every thing in CFCC at that time was in flux as CFCC was new.  There was eqt in our TOE's & EIS, but never made it to service, or the allotments were not accessible.  I remember being on the carpet, with the "old Man" (said with smile) because the sqn ended up with eqt, that wasn't supposed be brought into service for several years.  Can't remember the system, but it was replacing the C33's & primary mode was RTTY.

 

[CH1]

Choices, choices.

As I was doing the last reply, I was being called for a real home made breakfast! First real food in 2 weeks.

There was probably 3 or 4 different systems in the LTAC time. They all seemed to quietly retire to the rear with out much hoopla or use.

As for freq hopping, you are probably restricted more because of my generation. Aside from tac split freqs, we used to jump into the ham bands & others to break the boredom in quiet times. This generated many a pink sheet from DOC, for out of band ops.  We also used to experiment more with our eqt, to find the limits & keep our skills sharp. All though the rules were explicit, we were always pushing the envelope, trying different ways to operate the radios.  The only radios, that we didn't mess with were the CPRC 26's, for obvious reasons. The 510 & PRC 25's were fair game as was every thing else.  I think we gave new meaning to split freq RRB, with some of our improvised nets. A lot of the playing invovled non auth eqt mods.

In the mid 80's @ Beaverlodge, we managed to get our grubby paws on some HT's, that were quite similar to the pilot survival radios. They were a lot of fun. Col Andrews (base CO) used to shake his head at his lead radar tech, rad det NCO, & sec offr (me). To this day I think he would dis avow any knowledge of our antics.

The HT's were interesting because my BDF team, could use burst mode for our field comms & the base rad det couldn't track us. Seems to me they were US issue on loan.

Short & long of it, was that we were never idle always playing with the equipment.

Cheers

 

[Radop]

We use to go into the compound at E30 in Kingston and we would set up and practice.  We would just pick frequencies.  I remember racing other dets to tune the 106s and tx to the control station (the senior det on the ground).  We never got into trouble for that as far as I know or our bosses just ignored it.

 

[CH1]

Radop

Most of the time we were ok until we received a pink sheet or somebody complained.  For some silly reason, I have spent 98% of my time in command positions, (both in Sigs & 031).  The brass was always amazed with how we were able to solve comms problems. I don't know if this had any bearing on having a free hand most of the time. To the best of my knowledge, I had the only heavy rad det that was able to do base line repairs in the field. Had a 3/4 PU set up with my test eqt in back.

Having commanded only several radio dets, since I went to 031 in the late 70's, I have lost touch with most of the eqt. Although some of the dets expected an NCO or Officer fresh out of school, there has been a few raised eye brows, with the grey haired OT, that had a working knowledge of some of the eqt.  It brought about a few funny situations.

Still can pull a few rabbits out of the hat, with my own rad gear.

At some point we will have to get together for a regimental & discuss the finer points.  When I was  with PPCLI, I stood out with the Jimmy on my head in charge of UCW section or weapons det. Wish I could have spent more time playing with radios, although I had to concentrate on my assigned position. I really have a thing for things that go bang in the night.  Been a long time since I taught @ Kingston.
Cheers