FRS vs Mil Issue Radios

[DG-41]

Any chance I could get a citation on the PAM for this? The paper is due this week.

My own efforts on the DIN have proved fruitless.

I need the TX wattage and expected range for:

1) 521 with whip

2) 522 with whip on "medium"

3) 522 vehicle mount, on "high", AMU antenna

4) 522 vehicle mount + amplifier (A+ set) on highest power, AMU antenna

Tanks,

DG

 

[chrisf]

Without having to look up the individual manuals for the radios...

B-GL-351-003-FP-001 (Communications Electronics Standing Instructions) (The new big book of all things communications related, should have all the data for the TCCCS gear)
B-GL-321-006/FT-001 (Signals Field Handbook) (The old big book of all things communications related, should have all the data for the pre-TCCCS gear)

Great books, the first one should be standard issue to all rad dets, but it's not, a shame.

Going out shortly, but if you don't have DIN access, I'll even look up the figures for you later on.

 

[chrisf]

Ok, apparently I'm not going out for a bit...

AN/PRC 521 - Operates on 0.5W on low power and 2W on high power. Range is 0.5-3kms

AN/VRC 513 (V1) (Vehicle mounted, Rad A) - Operates on 0.1W, 4W, and 16W (Adding an amp and making it a AN/VRC 513 (V2) AKA Rad A+ will change the maximum power setting to 50W). Maximum range on Rad A is 20kms, 50kms with A+

AN/PRC 522 - Operates at 0.1W and 4W with a maximum range of 20kms (I know that's the same as the vehicle mount configuration with a max power of 20kms, and I'd also say it's wrong, with a max range of I think 12kms, but it says 20kms in the book)

An/PRC 77 - Output of 0.5W and 2W with a maximum range of 8kms

An/VRC-46 (RT-524) - High power 35W - Low Power 1-3W - Range of 32Kms Stationary or 24kms Mobile

(All references drawn from the last two manuals I mentioned, the TCCCS stuff from the new one, the non-TCCCS from the old one. The range of the 522 manpack is suspect, I would suggest looking it up in the 522 manual.)

 

[chrisf]

Also note, the ranges I gave were under "ideal" conditions, like c_canuck said, it changes depending on factors... I've seen a 521 not be able to broadcast to a CP 200 down the road, and I've seen a VHF RRB cover about 80kms (Stuck on top of a really big mountain)

 

[DG-41]

Thanks.

Is that 50km range with the A+ with the big mast antenna, or with the standard vehicle whip AMU mount antenna?

DG

 

[chrisf]

Just says 50kms, doesn't specify.

That being said, you're not going to get 50kms with a whip (Line of sight) unless you're on top of a mountain or you're in the prairies.

 

[GO!!!]

Here's a new one for all of you sigs Jedi Masters.

a man - packed 522 with fresh batteries works just fine on freq in the 4000 band +, but when switched to any freq starting with 3000, gives the "last chance battery" change signal. (alternating hi/low continuous tone)

Before you answer, this radio worked fine on any channel not beginning with 3000 prior to, and after this incident for about 10 more hours, all of the antennaes and headset/handset were installed correctly and functional and there was no crypto used or needed on any of the nets in question, nor was there any "fixed super" (FXS) use, the NTX button was not used, the keypad was not locked blah blah blah.

Vehicles in the same area were able to switch to the 3000 frequency and Tx without difficulty, which leads me to the conclusion that;

Since Tx in the lower frequency bands require more power to transmit (in theory anyway) that rechargeable batteries that are at less than 70-80% of a charge are unable to transmit in the lower end of the 522 band. As such, our rechargeables are wholly unsuited to our uses for them.

Besides getting Li batts, or going to vehicle mounts (both impossible) any solutions?

 

[c_canuk]

I've seen that before, i think the radio might need a ZEROing, that pops up sometimes if the radio hasn't been zeroed regularly. was it working ok before this or from the start of the Ex? radios should have a detailed check before being deployed, I'll bet the BIT will return some codes on this radio. I use the 522 in the 3000 band quite a bit with the NiCD batteries... they work, just they're worn out and need replacing and we need more of them and more rechargers

 

[chrisf]

Here's a new one for all of you sigs Jedi Masters.

a man - packed 522 with fresh batteries works just fine on freq in the 4000 band +, but when switched to any freq starting with 3000, gives the "last chance battery" change signal. (alternating hi/low continuous tone)

Before you answer, this radio worked fine on any channel not beginning with 3000 prior to, and after this incident for about 10 more hours, all of the antennaes and headset/handset were installed correctly and functional and there was no crypto used or needed on any of the nets in question, nor was there any "fixed super" (FXS) use, the NTX button was not used, the keypad was not locked blah blah blah.

Vehicles in the same area were able to switch to the 3000 frequency and Tx without difficulty, which leads me to the conclusion that;

Since Tx in the lower frequency bands require more power to transmit (in theory anyway) that rechargeable batteries that are at less than 70-80% of a charge are unable to transmit in the lower end of the 522 band. As such, our rechargeables are wholly unsuited to our uses for them.

Besides getting Li batts, or going to vehicle mounts (both impossible) any solutions?

The radios should transmit fine in any on any of the freqs within it's range (30 to erm... 88Mhz?). It is NOT an issue of manpack vs vehicle mount, rather an issue with the radio itself.

Did you do a BIT test? Weird things *do* occasionally happen with the radios, the only thing that can be done if you go through all the basic checks (Is the headset ok? Is the antenna ok? Is the tranmission power ok? Are the batteries fresh? Is the frequency right? Is the crypto correct? If the net isn't using crypto, was the radio zeroized?) is turn the radio in for exchange and have your RQ send it off to a tech.

 

[GO!!!]

The radios should transmit fine in any on any of the freqs within it's range (30 to erm... 88Mhz?). It is NOT an issue of manpack vs vehicle mount, rather an issue with the radio itself.

Did you do a BIT test? Weird things *do* occasionally happen with the radios, the only thing that can be done if you go through all the basic checks (Is the headset ok? Is the antenna ok? Is the tranmission power ok? Are the batteries fresh? Is the frequency right? Is the crypto correct? If the net isn't using crypto, was the radio zeroized?) is turn the radio in for exchange and have your RQ send it off to a tech.

Radio passed a bit test, and later was mounted in a LUVW, where it functioned perfectly.

As I stated earlier, all the peripherals were correctly installed and functional.

The ONLY changed variable between the veh mount (where it worked) and the batteries (where it did not) was the power source. For confirmation, we checked with another man pack, and he was having the same problem.

 

[chrisf]

Very strange, as pretty much all the freqs I've ever used were in the 30-40 range, never had a problem... with the NiCad batteries, very strange indeed...

Did anyone try pulling one of the radios out of a truck and sticking on the battery pack?

 

[c_canuk]

this could also happen if the vehicle mounted radios have a newer flash than the manpacks... it ends up being a squelch tone conflict, although I haven't seen that since 2003. could the manpacks talk to eachother?

or

did the manpacks give you an error tone when you tried to put in the freq and talk... sometimes if the ant connection is bad the coupler has a hard time tuning at lower freqs, try cleaning the connection points or exchanging the ant componets.

 

[GO!!!]

Did anyone try pulling one of the radios out of a truck and sticking on the battery pack?
Yes, the problem came up again, which lead my to suspect batteries.

this could also happen if the vehicle mounted radios have a newer flash than the manpacks... it ends up being a squelch tone conflict, although I haven't seen that since 2003. could the manpacks talk to eachother?
The manpacks could not talk to each other with batteries on, bit when connected to veh power (power only, no veh ant or CI) worked fine. Flash would not be an issue here. When both manpacks were placed in the vehs, they worked fine, and in all higher band channels they worked fine both mounted and dismounted.

did the manpacks give you an error tone when you tried to put in the freq and talk... sometimes if the ant connection is bad the coupler has a hard time tuning at lower freqs, try cleaning the connection points or exchanging the ant componets.
After the 031s had a go at them, the jimmies had a try, with identical results. We spent alot of time ruling out faulty antennaes and headset/handsets.

This stumped 6 guys, all very proficient with light and mounted radios, thanks for your efforts here, but this lemon is off to be repaired.

 

[GAP]

Reminds me of a grunt who stalked into the tec shop one day totally P%$#ed off. He slammed a PRC-25 onto the workbench and said "It talks, but won't listen", then turned around and walked out.

 

[GO!!!]

Reminds me of a grunt who stalked into the tec shop one day totally P%$#ed off. He slammed a PRC-25 onto the workbench and said "It talks, but won't listen", then turned around and walked out.

Or the techs who smugly proclaim that the only problem is the operator, and return N/S kit to the units without fixing it, because they don't know how, or can't, or simply can't be bothered.

So many problems could be solved so much faster if the "fixing" side of the army would  fix a little more and second guess a little less.

 

[c_canuk]

it could be a power issue like you mentioned... however I suspect the guts of the radio, not the batteries, unless you got a whole batch of bad batteries.

the reason is the batteries in the manpack adapterplate are designed to feed the radio 12v, the veh mount feeds it 24 volts, inside the radio it decides how to deal with various feeds... now I'm totally guessing out of my bottom here cause I've never been allowed to gut a 522 before, but the mechanism that deals with the different voltages might be broke... If you had one of the doesn't officially exist adapter plates that puts the batteries in series rather than parallel and feeds 24 v to the radio, you might not have had this issue.

btw, does anyone know if the old black batteries that take the place of the adapter plate provide 24 volts or 12? if 24 that might have solved your issue too

 

[chrisf]

Or the techs who smugly proclaim that the only problem is the operator, and return N/S kit to the units without fixing it, because they don't know how, or can't, or simply can't be bothered.

A tech recently walked into my buddie's LCT, which was having electrical problems... the breaker would throw sparks every time it was engaged... my buddy was standing by with a plastic marker to flip the switch to demonstrate the problem... the tech said nonsense, that there was nothing actually wrong with the breaker, and flipped it himself with his fingers... and was promptly shocked... poetic justice anyone?

 

[couchcommander]

Or the techs who smugly proclaim that the only problem is the operator

Because it usually is!

My favourite T-Shirt describes it beautifully.

(Problem Exists Between Keyboard and Chair - at least 95% of the time in my civvie experience tis true)

 

[Klc]

Working in retail electronics tech services, I see piles of returned product every day. Literally.

In the civvie world, 'defective' returns are 70-90% NFF (No Fault Found)

-- Of course, many of these are for questionable reasons, as they get refunds..

I couldn't see military kit sent for service being very often without fault.
I mean... in cadets we would use kit until it literally fell apart, and repair it ourselves, probably more than we should have.

(Thats right... I was in cadets... bring on the flames  :threat

 

[GO!!!]

I couldn't see military kit sent for service being very often without fault.
I mean... in cadets we would use kit until it literally fell apart, and repair it ourselves, probably more than we should have.

This is true of us too, as a radio sent away for repair is often not seen for months or even years.

I also find that techs will usually do the first repair they come accross - and not necessarily the one it needs, or bounce it back to us because it is "too dirty to be serviced" five months later.

The 522s are really bad for this, and I get the impression that there are not that many people able to fix them!