The NS Infantry Discussion Thread, Model 4

[The Kievan People]

Isn't locking all your radios to a single frequency a bad idea, since it's easy to squelch and intercept?

It is, except...

1. 60ghz is a very big frequency band. There is at least a gigahertz of bandwidth to play with there, which is more than the entire HF/VHF/UHF bands that form the backbone of army communications combined.
2. The unique properties of 60ghz add an exceptional layer of security. Atmospheric absorption is extreme in this band, so the range at which even a very simple radio with no security measures can be intercepted/jammed is only a few kilometers at most. Propagation is also strictly LOS. Between the atmosphere, the bandwidth and the inefficiency of 60ghz radiation power sources jamming these communications would be highly impractical.

[Spirit of Hope]

Isn't locking all your radios to a single frequency a bad idea, since it's easy to squelch and intercept?

It is, except...

1. 60ghz is a very big frequency band. There is at least a gigahertz of bandwidth to play with there, which is more than the entire HF/VHF/UHF bands that form the backbone of army communications combined.
2. The unique properties of 60ghz add an exceptional layer of security. Atmospheric absorption is extreme in this band, so the range at which even a very simple radio with no security measures can be intercepted/jammed is only a few kilometers at most. Propagation is also strictly LOS. Between the atmosphere, the bandwidth and the inefficiency of 60ghz radiation power sources jamming these communications would be highly impractical.

Because you are limiting yourself to line of sight and short ranges. That isn't really a good idea if you are planning to have those communications in any dense terrain or to coordinate separate units over large distances.

[The Archangel Conglomerate]

Because you are limiting yourself to line of sight and short ranges. That isn't really a good idea if you are planning to have those communications in any dense terrain or to coordinate separate units over large distances.

Perhaps that could be remedied by issuing 60ghz radios to the infantrymen, and something longer ranged to a platoon RATELO or vehicle?

[Spirit of Hope]

Because you are limiting yourself to line of sight and short ranges. That isn't really a good idea if you are planning to have those communications in any dense terrain or to coordinate separate units over large distances.

Perhaps that could be remedied by issuing 60ghz radios to the infantrymen, and something longer ranged to a platoon RATELO or vehicle?

Probably could. I think it would be better if it was all one frequency so that communications up and down could be easier, you wouldn't have to transfer orders from one communication set to another.

[The Kievan People]

60ghz is not intended to replace conventional radios. The purpose is that so anyone can in principle talk to anyone in their immediate vicinity (a few hundred meters to a kilometer), even in an electronic warfare environment.

[Spirit of Hope]

60ghz is not intended to replace conventional radios. The purpose is that so anyone can in principle talk to anyone in their immediate vicinity (a few hundred meters to a kilometer), even in an electronic warfare environment.

So your soldiers are carrying to radios? Or are low level troops only issued the 60ghz radios?

[The Archangel Conglomerate]

60ghz is not intended to replace conventional radios. The purpose is that so anyone can in principle talk to anyone in their immediate vicinity (a few hundred meters to a kilometer), even in an electronic warfare environment.

That makes considerably more sense.

[The Kievan People]

Probably could. I think it would be better if it was all one frequency so that communications up and down could be easier, you wouldn't have to transfer orders from one communication set to another.

There is a bit of a physics problem here. HF radios have very long range, but they are not at all secure and almost cannot be used when the enemy is listening (they tend to bring down artillery and airstrikes on the users head). They also require very big antennas for long range communication. VHF & UHF have intermediate range (LOS, thought they can diffract around obstacles) but they require radio relays to push a signal more than a few kilometers, and they are still relatively vulnerable to interception and jamming. Especially from the air. Microwave frequencies are pure LOS.

Secure NLOS communication is only really possible with wire, SATCOM or troposcatter relays. None of which are suitable for individuals are can replace conventional radios for tactical purposes.

Tentatively I was thinking of a three-plus layer network for ground-ground and air-ground communications:
1. Short: 60ghz
2. Intermediate: UHF
3. Long: HF
4. Very Long: SATCOM/Troposcatter

Every man and every vehicle gets a short range set. Intermediate and long range receive-only radios would be on all vehicles and issued to every squad. Long range radios would be for HQs. Very long range would be limited to specialized communication units.

[Fordorsia]

Thus we did learn more from RandCs random post that could have been duely ignored hours ago than we would hav, had only he not posted it otherwise.


And lo, did Corda flatter himself, and indeed did Spree allow it to occure. And so the two bickered, until the mods did commeth and strike them down.

And lo, as the mods did commeth, complainants began.


And Arch did Microcaliber, and Aquiz did ballistics, and Ford did...whatever Ford does. Lo,and there it was: Another day in the IDT.

Yay I'm vague.

[Vakarians]

The main assault rifle of my nation

SCAR-A1
6.8x43mm

http://img4.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb2009 ... ar_JSF.jpg

I pretty much stole it from End War. Oh well, this is a rp.

[New Tsavon]

On the other side, of course.

>includes original ejection port panel
>doesn't use it on conventional config
:Tsavon:

:P

Yep.

It'll be fixed. One of these days.

[Tule]

What about pagers? Are they useless or potentially advantageous in a combat environment?

[The Archangel Conglomerate]

What about pagers? Are they useless or potentially advantageous in a combat environment?

No idea.

I'm wondering about the viability of something like Push To Talk mobiles.

[Purpelia]

What about pagers? Are they useless or potentially advantageous in a combat environment?

Honestly I would not think so. What's the point of a having SMS receiver that won't even let you text back?

[Padnak]

Currently my military is loosely based of Burmas, and in my time spent researching Burma's military I've noticed a few things about what I think is their combat uniform which have raised a question:

-why do they have red bandannas, I initially thought it might of been a one off thing or some sort of over glorified park rangers, but generally you don't see park rangers with akm's or that many of something for it to be a one off

[Imperializt Russia]

What about pagers? Are they useless or potentially advantageous in a combat environment?

Honestly I would not think so. What's the point of a having SMS receiver that won't even let you text back?

Emergency orders.
Mentioned in Dispatches.

[Spreewerke]

Personal comms

In a dynamic battlefeild, the ability to keep up with the change of the environment and in situations in a blink of an eye is key for any person in a command position: fron the lowley corporal to the royal Colonial, everyone needs to know whats going on (within their paygrade).

Who is issued comunication equipment in your infantry? To what degree does it travel? Is your standard rifle squad in contact with Company HQ? Are individual soldiers able to radio to one another as needed, via Walkie Talkies or otherwise? Is it only a squad or platoon based radio with limited means of inter-squad/soldier communication, only by talking face to face?

I'm assuming we're using whatever surplus shit you've sent our way.

[Purpelia]

What would be the smallest practical camera I could ruggedize and mount on a set of powered rails sticking out of a soldiers helmet? The intention is to allow a more direct way of spotting for artillery by allowing my artillery crews to visually see where the target is and where the shells are landing. So resolution is not really that important. But the ability to say integrate a laser range finder into the feed might be nifty.

[Spirit of Hope]

What would be the smallest practical camera I could ruggedize and mount on a set of powered rails sticking out of a soldiers helmet? The intention is to allow a more direct way of spotting for artillery by allowing my artillery crews to visually see where the target is and where the shells are landing. So resolution is not really that important. But the ability to say integrate a laser range finder into the feed might be nifty.

Here is the problem, you can make relatively small cameras, with long battery life, but it won't get you good image quality, especially out to the distances you need for artillery spotting.

[Spreewerke]

What would be the smallest practical camera I could ruggedize and mount on a set of powered rails sticking out of a soldiers helmet? The intention is to allow a more direct way of spotting for artillery by allowing my artillery crews to visually see where the target is and where the shells are landing. So resolution is not really that important. But the ability to say integrate a laser range finder into the feed might be nifty.

It's really hard to see much anything with a GoPro.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V9n8TdSac2M

I mean, yeah, it would probably work "good enough," but someone that knows how to call artillery on a radio is likely going to be more effective.

[Purpelia]

What would be the smallest practical camera I could ruggedize and mount on a set of powered rails sticking out of a soldiers helmet? The intention is to allow a more direct way of spotting for artillery by allowing my artillery crews to visually see where the target is and where the shells are landing. So resolution is not really that important. But the ability to say integrate a laser range finder into the feed might be nifty.

Here is the problem, you can make relatively small cameras, with long battery life, but it won't get you good image quality, especially out to the distances you need for artillery spotting.

Battery life is actually not an issue since the powered rails would feed from the same main power pack as the rest of the soldiers gear does.

It's really hard to see much anything with a GoPro.

Watching that video the image quality over distance seems perfect. Am I missing something here?

I mean, yeah, it would probably work "good enough," but someone that knows how to call artillery on a radio is likely going to be more effective.

I was imagining something like this being used to direct company level mortars and the like. Stuff that would be done from the squad level rather than by dedicated observers like you would have for a howitzer battery.

[Imperializt Russia]

What would be the smallest practical camera I could ruggedize and mount on a set of powered rails sticking out of a soldiers helmet? The intention is to allow a more direct way of spotting for artillery by allowing my artillery crews to visually see where the target is and where the shells are landing. So resolution is not really that important. But the ability to say integrate a laser range finder into the feed might be nifty.

Artillery-directing helicopters and observation planes will be far more effective and useful. Getting six thousand soldier's helmet feeds, quarter of them staring at soil due to deadness, quarter of them burnt out by nuclear flash, quarter or them broken would be nothing short of information overload.

[Purpelia]

What would be the smallest practical camera I could ruggedize and mount on a set of powered rails sticking out of a soldiers helmet? The intention is to allow a more direct way of spotting for artillery by allowing my artillery crews to visually see where the target is and where the shells are landing. So resolution is not really that important. But the ability to say integrate a laser range finder into the feed might be nifty.

Artillery-directing helicopters and observation planes will be far more effective and useful. Getting six thousand soldier's helmet feeds, quarter of them staring at soil due to deadness, quarter of them burnt out by nuclear flash, quarter or them broken would be nothing short of information overload.

Actually I figured I'd issue one or two of these to the company mortar team and have them hand them to which ever soldier in each of the platoons they think is smart enough to use one.

[Spreewerke]

Here is the problem, you can make relatively small cameras, with long battery life, but it won't get you good image quality, especially out to the distances you need for artillery spotting.

Battery life is actually not an issue since the powered rails would feed from the same main power pack as the rest of the soldiers gear does.

It's really hard to see much anything with a GoPro.

Watching that video the image quality over distance seems perfect. Am I missing something here?

I mean, yeah, it would probably work "good enough," but someone that knows how to call artillery on a radio is likely going to be more effective.

I was imagining something like this being used to direct company level mortars and the like. Stuff that would be done from the squad level rather than by dedicated observers like you would have for a howitzer battery.

The GoPros have only one lens, and therefore no depth perception. You would be relying on the guy wearing the camera to relay coordinates anyway, so all the GoPro is going is giving the artillerymen something to look at while relying on spoken-word coordinates, anyway.

[Purpelia]

The GoPros have only one lens, and therefore no depth perception. You would be relying on the guy wearing the camera to relay coordinates anyway, so all the GoPro is going is giving the artillerymen something to look at while relying on spoken-word coordinates, anyway.

I did not notice a lack of depth perception in that video.