Do we not use HF for anything any more, then?

AlienFTM

MIA
Book Reviewer
#1
I was sent a link to this:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/06/28/ofcom_pln/

Several paragraphs down it says:

Existing PLN equipment operates between 2MHz and 30MHz - right at the bottom of the dial. The only things down there are the amateurs, who've been complaining for a while now, and a few vertical users who don't operate near the homes where PLN is being deployed. But the next generation of kit will run from there right up to 300MHz, which includes the FM radio band (87.5-108MHz)
My bold. That matches our military HF band (Larkspur and Clansman) almost exactly. So has our HF band been given away to the "bearded hobbyists in the ham-radio community" (quote from colleague supplying the link) because we no longer use it?

My italics. What about our military VHF band which ran from 30 - 76MHz on Clansman.

Or is it simply that we never expect to fight on our own soil so we might as well share these bands and if it interferes (if you'll pardon the pun) with our training in this country, it will prepare us for working in difficult conditions overseas?
 
#2
I dont have beard!!!! They use HF in Afghanistan on verticals. With a good Beam you can pick up the traffic if you are prepared to be up at all hours scanning the bands although traffic is guarded.....Ex Mil siggys will get the drift easy enough though. Hams have access to quite a rage of bands so its not just 1.8 - 30 Mhz.
 

AlienFTM

MIA
Book Reviewer
#3
IFCScondor said:
I dont have beard!!!! They use HF in Afghanistan on verticals. With a good Beam you can pick up the traffic if you are prepared to be up at all hours scanning the bands although traffic is guarded.....Ex Mil siggys will get the drift easy enough though. Hams have access to quite a rage of bands so its not just 1.8 - 30 Mhz.
It wasn't my quote. I reserve the phrase "beards and sandals" for Unix freaks (whereas I believe they use the term "dinosaur" for us mainframe freaks: I certainly do). Ho hum.

My bold. Do you really get angry about HF then?
 

AlienFTM

MIA
Book Reviewer
#6
Ulster_Rifleman said:
AlienFTM said:
I reserve the phrase "beards and sandals" for Unix freaks
Is that BSD UNIX or SVR4?
It's usually AIX or z/OS Unix Systems Services, but then our distributed systems (i.e. non-mainframe) cover the whole spectrum, since much of the lab is devoted to writing software to allow any computer to talk to any other. And not just using instant messaging: sending secure data first time every time and persistently so that messages cannot fall between cracks.
 
#7
Abbo said:
Current HF radios are FH and encrypted though they do have clear hail when things go Pete Tong
Not convinced about the FH, they have the capability but we dont have enough frequencies to allocate them to the hopsets, could be wrong but that was how I understood it, definitely encrypted. Not sure how reliable they are though, they are part f THAT system which doesnt get good press. Being FH still doesnt solve the problem of having the frequencies available though, Cant hop anywhere if the frequency isnt available old chap. School boy error there Abbo!
 
#8
Point taken however I was attempting to suggest reasons why the propensity of HF comms traffic has been downwards.............
 
#9
Oh those long ago days of C13, CW ,and antenna theory
 
#10
HF is a cracking capability, still taught and going strong with Bowman. Lots of fiddly/technical bits to the current crop of HF radios letting you do all manner of things such as ALE etc. And there are more modes than just FH, though you are correct in suggesting that we have far too few frequencies available to let us effectively utilise FH.

Encryption is good and is not to be knocked simply because it is Bowman.
 

Guns

ADC
Moderator
Book Reviewer
#11
Navy using it a lot. The delights of AAWC in HF bleeding your ear for 6 hours on watch.
 

Similar threads

New Posts

Latest Threads