ABIW
So you are saying that when the system WAS fitted in 1995 this would have been known by all and sundry – yet no one comes forward to describe it.
Perhaps you can find out and tell us all what was involved in the fit (in 1995) – or are you going to deny that it was fitted by then?
.
tecumse
Perhaps a little more explanation of the system may help explain the point you made regarding the sets requiring the same code – briefly from memory:
In a personnel recovery scenario in hostile territory, the PRC112 is dormant until interrogated by the a/c’s ARS6;
So that the en cannot get the personnel’s equipment to transpond to a similar signal giving away the personnel’s position, the PRC112 only responds to a pulse which is coded appropriately for a friendly a/c;
Conversely, the return pulse from the PRC112 contains an identifying code for that particular set so that the a/c can have some confidence that they are approaching the right people and further confidence is obtained by talking to them through the system via the intercom;
For the system to be practical when working with other NATO units – eg in an op area when asked to retrieve another friendly’s downed pilot – the commonality of the code for a large block of sets is required;
Presumably this code would be changed en masse when thought necessary;
I doubt that, at an early time in its introduction into service, the system would have had different code from, say, the Americans.