Re: Radio Procedures

[Ben Stigar <sigurd@one.net>]

Sean O'Toole wrote:
> 
> At 09:05 15-04-97 -0400, you wrote:
> >
> >Why is it every time I read about US procedure there are totally different
> >to ever other NATO country out there?
> >
> >Why do they make it so complicated to talk on the radio and keep paperwork?
> >
> >Heres a question for you.  Who is "Sunray" on a radio net?  This is NATO
> >standard.
> >
> When I was in the 101st we used the "old" system that was popular in
> Vietnam of using a Company followed by a nuber to designate who was who:
> 
>         Delta 6 = D co. Commander
>         Delta 5 = D co. XO
>         Delta 7 = D co. First Sgt.
> 
> This system also worked at battalion and higher lever by using the nickname
> of the regiment, division etc:
> 
>         Bulldog 6 = 1/327th Reg. Commander
>         CurrAhee 6 = 1/506th Reg Commander
>         Eagle 6 = 101st Div. Commander
> 
> And so forth.  Most of the time we used these types of call signs, and this
> is what I use in the MP, but the CEOI callsigns are designed for more
> tactical communications where you need more security in a wartime situation.
> 
> Once everyone figures out what 6,5 and 7 stand for it is possible that your
> commo might be compromised.  The whole idea is to make it more secure.
> In my last campaigne, I simply provided for a memorized authorization code which enabled 
a crypto system on a team-packed SATRAD to activate and "synchronize" with other teams. 
It isn't full-proof, since a team member could be captured and the code released (and 
the member's ID card taken), but it worked.
	Also, one could use standard crypto devices, with fills generated on hook-up; in 
that case, a system such as the one mentioned above could be used until other teams are 
contacted or whatever.
-Ben