Radio communication

whiskey · Post by **whiskey** » 13 May 2007, 22:00

Vader [WG-A.I.M.] wrote:
biberfinder wrote: There is a bunch of them but I would prefer NATO's militay alphabet code, this since main comms are to be done in english.
Tell me more about it please.

A alpha
B bravo
C charlie
D delta
E echo
F foxtrot
G golf
H hotel
I india
J juliett
K kilo
L lima
M mike
N november
O oscar
P papa
Q quebec
R romeo
S sierra
T tango
U uniform
V victor
W whiskey
Y yankee
Z zulu

biberfinder · Post by **biberfinder** » 13 May 2007, 22:19

Thank you whiskey.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_alphabet

This Wikipedia link is really good.

whiskey · Post by **whiskey** » 13 May 2007, 23:20

shit, I forgot X -Xray, was writing from the top of my head, sorry.

Eldoriath · Post by **Eldoriath** » 14 May 2007, 13:41

Looks good and fine to me. But there would b good if we as well came along how ti hail one another. Is the suggestion i posted before one that people agree on being the most common way that you hail others over radio?

Re-post:
Ie:
Alpha Bravo (HQ) Alpha Charlie (Me)

Me: Alpha Bravo, Alpha bravo
HQ: Alpha bravo here, over
Me: Alpha charlie here, requesting information on other units operating in aproximity of my position, K9 (pre-decided point on the map), over.
HQ: Alpha Hotel is acting around that area as well, over.
Me: Affirmative, over and out.

And a little sidetrack of the subject. Will the B5 staff provide us with a pre-made point system or will we have to make one ourselves?
Will we use some form of confirmation code to validify that we are "the right side" if we suspect something?
Ie:
The code is 13. So, when you ask someone for the code you say "Code 7", and then the right answer would be "Code 6" since 7+6=13.

Good things to know pre-hand.

Finarvas · Post by **Finarvas** » 14 May 2007, 14:05

Sounds very NATOish :p Russian style ftw!

Aleksej Boris Vasilij Grigorij Dmitrij Elena Zhenja Zoya
Ivan Ivan_Kratkij Kilowatt Leonid Maria Nikolai Olga Pavel
Roman Sergej Tatjana Uljana Fjodor Hariton Zaplja Chelovek
Shura Schuka Tviordiy_Znak Igrek Miagkiy_Znak Emilija Yuri
Jakow

biberfinder · Post by **biberfinder** » 14 May 2007, 14:05

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Procedure_word

Eldoriath: the method you are describing is good. And will probably be used by most swedes at Berget5 because it is the swedish military signal procedure.

Still I would prefer NATO/international standard for the procedure words.

Over is the swedish "kom"
Out is the swedish "klart slut"
"Over and out" is Holywoodish for Out - it would be "Kom, klart slut" in swedish. - NEVER use that! - unless you want to be laughed at.

I will translate Eldoriath's repost to international standards.
Ie:
Alpha Bravo (HQ) Alpha Charlie (Me)

Me: Alpha Bravo, Alpha Bravo this is Alpha Charlie, requesting information on other units operating in aproximity of my position, K9 (pre-decided point on the map), over
HQ: Alpha Charlie this is Alpha Bravo, Alpha Hotel is acting around that area as well, over.
Me: Roger that, out.

If you have any questions of how and/or when to use the procedure words, feel free to ask me. I know the drill after 3 years of military service. (Last year in Afghanistan)

Brujo · Post by **Brujo** » 14 May 2007, 14:41

Slut?

Let's keep this discussion civilised, please

Eldoriath · Post by **Eldoriath** » 14 May 2007, 15:32

Okay, didn't know that. Have only seen radio-com on hollywood movies and trained proper communication in swedish.
So, it was in other words good that i brought up that discussion =)
An while on that topic, do you know what the correspondent term to "slut, kom" is in english? Would it be out, over?

So, can we agree on a common in hailing one another? The way that biberfinder suggested looks good to me.

biberfinder · Post by **biberfinder** » 14 May 2007, 15:50

There is no such corresponding term.

- But I guess you can use: Hussy, over!

zub · Post by **zub** » 14 May 2007, 16:01

Me: Alpha Bravo, Alpha Bravo this is Alpha Charlie, requesting information on other units operating in aproximity of my position, K9 (pre-decided point on the map), over
HQ: Alpha Charlie this is Alpha Bravo, Alpha Hotel is acting around that area as well, over.
Me: Roger that, out.

Good, but not perfect (my perfect that is

)

My world:
1:Alpha Bravo, this is Alpha Charlie over. (repeat your own callsign as you wish/need)

2: Alpha Charlie, this is Alpha Bravo, go ahead over.
- Alpha Bravo confirms that he/she is ready to receive the message, and can hear you.

other responses could be:

2A: alpha charlige this is alpha bravo, Stand by OUT
- AB (Alpha Bravo) is NOT ready to receive your signal (reason doesn't matter, they'r not ready.)
"OUT" signals that THEY will call you back

2B: alpha charlie this is alpha bravo, Stand by.
- AB is NOT ready to receive your signal. no "out" means that the "line" is still open, and AB should be ready within 10 seconds. (if not then he/she should send out another "Alpha charlie stand by" or "alpha charlie stand by, OUT"

2c: alpha charlie this is alpha bravo, Signal is weak, signal is weak, go ahead over.
- AB is having problems hearing AC, but is ready.

2c response: Alpha Charlie, re..qu..es..ti..ng inf..or..ma..ti..on on ot..her un..its op..er..at..in..g in apr..ox..im..ity of my po..sit..ion, Kilo9 Kilo9, over
(.. marks that AC is speaking SLOW and CLEAR)

2d: Unkown station, this is alpha bravo, Confirm ID over.
- AB didn't hear who was calling, but did hear that the call was for him.
- AB needs to confirm who he is talking to, otherwise the call is to be taken as an enemy on our net.

Depending on signal strength and radio activity you shouldn't need to confirm who's talking all the time. the last set of the call could therefore be:

Alpha Hotel is acting around that area as well, over.
Roger that, out
- usually you only use "AB this is AC over" when you make the call (dial the number, if you like). the second you hear "AC, AB go ahead over" the line is open and blocked for all others, meaning that noone says anything before they hear "OUT".

HOWEVER, since we can't expect to be able to keep the level of radio discipline that is needed in order to so, it might be an idea to use AB/AC in every line.

And what do you know.. I think I just wrote down the first chapter of my
Command station radio operators manual.

zub · Post by **zub** » 14 May 2007, 16:15

Will the B5 staff provide us with a pre-made point system or will we have to make one ourselves?
Will we use some form of confirmation code to validify that we are "the right side" if we suspect something?
Ie:
The code is 13. So, when you ask someone for the code you say "Code 7", and then the right answer would be "Code 6" since 7+6=13.

A code like that is use full the first 3 times, after that the enemy will figure it out.
(could be used if a single patrol goes out, then they will make a deal with the gate guard that the code is 13)

The way it is done in Denmark is:

you get a random line of characters, eg

ABCDEFGHKLMNOPQRST (just a bit more random

)

for the example below AA = HQ and AB = patrol

AA, This is AB, over
AB, AA, go ahead, over.
(AB)We're inbound base, ETA 2 minutes, request permission to enter the gate without stop.
(AA)Copy that, Confirm AB.
(AB)Confirmation is CD.
(AA) Copy that, your cleared to enter
(AB) Copy that, Out.

AA wants confirmation that AB is friendly, and sends out the first 2 characters of the confirmation code.
AB then locates those two chars, and responses with the next two.

AA (HQ) then strikes out all 4 characters, they are now useless since the enemy knows them. (could be reused when you run out of characters if you'd like)

Pro's:
-impossible to break, since its all random chars, and the enemy therefore have no way of knowing whats coming op.

- easy to use, easy to learn.

Neg's
- each radio operator needs the code on paper, since it is impossible to remember

- completely broken if the enemy gets the confirmation code

- the above system pretty much only work when the HQ wants to confirm a patrol, and not when a patrol wants to confirm the HQ.

The last problem can be worked around be changing the rules a little.. eg. people could just pick 2 random characters, instead of having to use the next 2 in line (patrols can't keep track on how far down the line we are).

biberfinder · Post by **biberfinder** » 14 May 2007, 16:19

Thanks zeb.

zub · Post by **zub** » 14 May 2007, 16:31

Btw, does anyone know of there exist an actual nato standard for things like "signal is weak", "stand by" and all those things?... because i'm not sure that my training follows it, if it exists.

And its not for much use that i send out a "signal is weak", and Biberfinder replies with "WHAT DID YOU CALL ME?"

- therefor i would very much like if someone could confirm if such standard exists, and link to a page that shows it.

Finarvas · Post by **Finarvas** » 14 May 2007, 18:39

Check bibers wikipedia links!

zub · Post by **zub** » 14 May 2007, 18:46

Finarvas wrote:Check bibers wikipedia links!

Doh.. i'd missed the procedure_words link.. thanks for it!