Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Tech Log
Reload this Page >

Military VHF Comms

Wikiposts
Search
Tech Log The very best in practical technical discussion on the web

Military VHF Comms

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 11th Dec 2006, 11:14
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Military VHF Comms

Whenever I talk to civil ATC on VHF I am always "5s" on TX & Rx.
On frequency change to a military ATC it almost always drops to nearly unreadable. As soon as I go back to a civil frequency it's back up to "5s" again. It doesn't make sense to me.
Can't see it being a problem in my a/c. Is there anything different about military transmitters?
Sideslipper is offline  
Old 15th Dec 2006, 18:12
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: belgium
Posts: 236
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Sometimes I have the same while flying. But not always. I know military radios can have a frequency coded system so that other people cannot listen to what is said, but that cannot be the case here since it is a civil known frequency.
(the system works by varying the frequency in a very fast way eg 120 mhz, 120,5 mhz, 119,5 mhz,...; the code of change in frquency is only known by the rx/tx).
Piper19 is offline  
Old 16th Dec 2006, 15:24
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: LIRR
Posts: 140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The freq skipping system u are talking about is known as "have quick" but as u said it's used only by military and in real ops or for training but that's not your problem.
Since military coms are done most of the part on uhf, could be that's the vhf receiver of the mil atc that has some problems. But i'm not convinced about that.

100
onehundred is offline  
Old 16th Dec 2006, 16:18
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Where the Quaboag River flows, USA
Age: 71
Posts: 3,414
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Being a cynic, I think the government simply doesn't, and doesn't need to, spend the money to have first class VHF radios. And UHF is used where clarity is an issue--tactical aviation. Money, the anwer when all other answers fail!

GF
galaxy flyer is online now  
Old 16th Dec 2006, 19:36
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Quite near 'An aerodrome somewhere in England'
Posts: 26,826
Received 271 Likes on 110 Posts
Nothing to do with HaveQuick.....that is UHF only.

It's probably that POS known as Mascot Mincom - and the awful RAF audio circuits rather than the transmitters and receivers.

Years (and years) ago, the RAF Flying Prevention Branch (aka Air Traffickers) defined a new ATC radio control system which was ever-so-whizzy and included rapid T/Rx switching etc. Quite a gucci system.

But then someone else decided on new headsets and microphones. Unfortunately the impedance of the new headsets didn't match the Mascot Mincom thingy - so, ever since then you hear phantom clunks on every RAF frequency as other transmitters are keyed through mutual inductance - and every transmission from an RAF ATCU sounds as though it's being made through cotton wool.....








...or a WAAF's knickers? RAF VHF comms are universally appalling when compared to any civil VHF comms.
BEagle is online now  
Old 20th Dec 2006, 07:24
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Wildest Surrey
Age: 75
Posts: 10,824
Received 98 Likes on 71 Posts
Beagle forgot to mention that the guy who signed the procurement contract then retired and walked straight into a well paid job with a certain comms manufacturer!
chevvron is online now  
Old 10th Jan 2007, 14:07
  #7 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Military UHF

Am I right in suspecting that in military zones ATC talk to military a/c on UHF, and civil a/c on VHF?
Going through one their zones once, ATC constantly asked me if I was still visual with a C130 climbing out, (I could hardly miss him), yet I never heard the C130 being asked if he could see me!
If so, it doesn't seem to make for good spacial awareness.
Sideslipper is offline  
Old 10th Jan 2007, 19:52
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: South West UK
Posts: 367
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Sideslip,

Yep you are spot on. I run a flying club at a mil airfield, mil aircraft on UHF and Civy on VHF requires all players (both pilots and ATC) to keep on thier toes! Very robust airmanship and dilligent lookout are essential.

Also, I think galaxy flyer is on the money; the VHF are not a priority for maintenance or funding.

Happy landings

3 Point
3 Point is offline  
Old 10th Jan 2007, 21:32
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Quite near 'An aerodrome somewhere in England'
Posts: 26,826
Received 271 Likes on 110 Posts
At the Covert Oxonian Aerodrome, the normal way of operating is that everyone uses VHF, whether C-17, An 124 or PA28.

Except for some of the damn Alberts - who seem incapable of operating on VHF as it might require a frequency to be dialled up, rather than clicked over to on a UHF stud. But then I guess their copiglets aren't skilled enough to change radio frequencies manually.....
BEagle is online now  
Old 11th Jan 2007, 00:06
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: 2 m South of Radstock VRP
Posts: 2,042
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Wish I'd said that! (I will, I will)
GOLF_BRAVO_ZULU is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2007, 07:38
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 607
Received 10 Likes on 7 Posts
Originally Posted by Sideslipper
Am I right in suspecting that in military zones ATC talk to military a/c on UHF, and civil a/c on VHF?
Going through one their zones once, ATC constantly asked me if I was still visual with a C130 climbing out, (I could hardly miss him), yet I never heard the C130 being asked if he could see me!
If so, it doesn't seem to make for good spacial awareness.
Not unusual for ATC to transmit on both VHF and UHF at the same time if appropriate. It can be a useful 'filter' to help minimize some of the R/T. If you go to Newcastle approach on UHF they have some sort of rebro; you can also hear the civil VHF transmissions from other aircraft.

As for hearing the C130, it was almost certainly on a different freq. At most busy military airfields that I have worked at the Departures has its own dedicated freq. Again filters out anyone else crossing or operating near the MATZ (Zone) and those recovering (Approach). Somewhere with excellent ATC (Linton) will always tell you about any conflicting traffic plus additional calls if they feel it would be prudent.

If the C130 was at Lyneham (FOT) then things will be different again. They don't have a MATZ but their own (class D?) airspace.

PS. I am not an airtrafficker!
H Peacock is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2007, 08:03
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Wildest Surrey
Age: 75
Posts: 10,824
Received 98 Likes on 71 Posts
Of course, if MASCOT had been specified correctly in the first place, they would be able to cross-couple the UHF and VHF frequencies so that, from a pilot's point of view, it would sound like a single frequency. There is a 'coupling' button on MASCOT, but the problem we found was the time differential between the signal being transmitted and ATC actually releasing the Tx button was so great that you ended up with an 'echo' effect which built up until you deselected the coupling!
Many civil ATC units (all NATS airifelds) have this facility, and it works!
chevvron is online now  
Old 14th Jan 2007, 13:28
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Long ago and far away ......
Posts: 1,399
Received 11 Likes on 5 Posts
H Peacock,

That "Covert Oxonian Aerodrome" mentioned by BEagle has its own Class D airspace
MrBernoulli is offline  
Old 26th Jul 2007, 10:04
  #14 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Military International Comms

Having recently had an interesting transit through a military zone due to me being on VHF and the silent C130 I was avoiding presumably on UHF, I was moved to wonder they don't use VHF in their zones.
Having heard various military aircraft on VHF outside their own zones, I assume they must have the capability, so why not use it?
Is there a blindingly simple reason that has eluded me?
Sideslipper is offline  
Old 27th Jul 2007, 12:08
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Suffolk
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Military VHF Comms

The situation can vary widely from one country to another. Military comms on UHF and with cryptos are where the funding goes. Legacy systems on VHF and HF can be old equipment that is not serviced as effectively as it should be.

In some countries military VHF tx and rx equipment may be wide band valve-based kit. That means that the equipment uses channel bands that are twice or four times the width of current equipment and therefore incompatible.

A frequent problem can be antennae-based. Some military ATC has upgraded VHF to conform to exactly the same rules as civil systems including physical separation between tx and rx equipment and antennae systems. What can happen is that VHF antennae can end up with the worst position on the mast or tower and may be quarter wave aerials that are too close to the newer UHF aerial arrays.

Poor antennae location can lead to screening of signals in some directions and distortion of A planes and E planes. Thirty years back when computer modelling arrived for radio masts, most operators found that their masts would theoretically fall down in storm conditions and that changed the way that the antennae support structures were designed and monitored but did not change established practice for mounting antennae, resulting in heavy shielding by support structures that creates large blind spots.

Cabling may not have been replaced since Marconi was a boy and water ingression is a common problem with old cabling. When metered, water-logged cable shows a varying resistance as the transmitter goes to tx.

One further problem that can be suffered by some military radio systems is harmonic distortion that results from the wealth of equipment transmitting signals in close proximity. If the VHF systems are located at a military airfield, there will be many different ground comms systems on E band and A band VHF, T band and U band UHF, microwave systems in the 1-3 GHz range, together with all the HF, VHF and UHF land mobile and air mobile radio nets and radar systems on the ground and in the air. Older VHF radio and aerial systems are particularly vulnerable to interference form these other systems.
ianjb is offline  
Old 28th Jul 2007, 04:47
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sale, Australia
Age: 80
Posts: 3,832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Used to find the military frequency tolerances were so bad that often had to experiment by tuning .05 up or down to get better reception. This was some years ago and sounds like it hasn't improved.
Brian Abraham is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.