Approved for public release - DTIC

Approved for public release;distribution is unlimited.

Headquarters,Department of the Army

Special focus: [terse description], Pg. [X] [Major story], Pg. [X] [Major story], Pg. [X] [Major story], Pg. [X]

Voice of the Signal Regiment PB 11-03-4 Edition 2003 Vol. 28 No. 4

Boutelle gives testimony on terrorismBrigade Task Force communicates in OEF

Media on the battlefield: ‘A non-lethal fire’AN/PRC-150HF radio in urban combat


Report Documentation Page Form ApprovedOMB No. 0704-0188

Public reporting burden for the collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering andmaintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information,including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, ArlingtonVA 22202-4302. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to a penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if itdoes not display a currently valid OMB control number.

1. REPORT DATE 2004 2. REPORT TYPE

3. DATES COVERED 00-00-2004 to 00-00-2004

4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE Army Communicator. Voice of the Signal Regiment. Vol. 28 No. 4, Spring 2004

5a. CONTRACT NUMBER

5b. GRANT NUMBER

5c. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER

6. AUTHOR(S) 5d. PROJECT NUMBER

5e. TASK NUMBER

5f. WORK UNIT NUMBER

7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) U.S. Army Signal Center and Fort Gordon,Army Communicator,ATTN:ATZH-POM,Fort Gordon,GA,30905-5301

8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATIONREPORT NUMBER

9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSOR/MONITOR’S ACRONYM(S)

11. SPONSOR/MONITOR’S REPORT NUMBER(S)

12. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT Approved for public release; distribution unlimited

13. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

14. ABSTRACT

15. SUBJECT TERMS

16. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF: 17. LIMITATION OF ABSTRACT Same as

Report (SAR)

18. NUMBEROF PAGES

69

19a. NAME OFRESPONSIBLE PERSON

a. REPORT unclassified

b. ABSTRACT unclassified

c. THIS PAGE unclassified

Standard Form 298 (Rev. 8-98) Prescribed by ANSI Std Z39-18

PERIODICALSPostage and fees paid

at Augusta, Georgia, andadditional cities

ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMYARMY COMMUNICATOR

USASC&FGATTN: ATZH-POM

Fort Gordon, Georgia 30905-5301

OFFICIAL BUSINESSISSN 0362-5745

Signal Towers, Room 713Fort Gordon, Georgia 30905-5301

PIN: 080459-000PIN: 081391-000

OFFICIAL BUSINESS

Approved for public release;distribution is unlimited.

Headquarters,Department of the Army

Special focus: [terse description], Pg. [X] [Major story], Pg. [X] [Major story], Pg. [X] [Major story], Pg. [X]



Boutelle gives testimony on terrorismBrigade Task Force communicates in OEF

Media on the battlefield: ‘A non-lethal fire’AN/PRC-150HF radio in urban combat

Chief of Signal’s Comments

The Regiment at War

BG Janet A. HicksChief of Signal

‘We are an Army atwar. The SignalRegiment, as it’s alwaysbeen, is a vital part ofour nation’s war onterrorism. You aremaking it happen.’

Fellow Signaleers, I commend allof you for the great work you’re contrib-uting to our Regiment and our Army, andI’d like to “crow” a little about the vital roleall of you are playing in America’s GlobalWar on Terrorism. An analogy betweenthe events of December 7th, 1941, andthose of September 11th, 2001, is veryappropriate.

In each case, the focus of ournation and the use of her national powerwere radically changed and redirectedas a result of events on those days. Ournation’s Army, battle-tested many timesin our history, was called upon to ensurethat not only our own country remainedsafe and free, but that oppressed peopleof the world could share in the dreamthat has made our country what it istoday. Take comfort and pride in know-ing that our nation is in full support of ourmission. You are all in our nation’sthoughts every day.

We are an Army at war. The SignalRegiment, as it’s always been, is a vitalpart of our nation’s war on terrorism. Youare making it happen. Signal Soldiersfrom all components are fighting side-by-side, ensuring that commanders havethe information that is vital to success onthe battlefield.

Our leaders continue to deployand redeploy their units from all pointson the globe. The Soldiers of the SignalRegiment understand and accept thatsustained operations and a high Opera-tions Tempo will be the norm for sometime to come. Separation from our fami-lies will be unavoidable, and will putadded strain on our Army and on our

loved ones at home.Our Regiment’s brigades, bat-

talions, and separate companies haveperformed brilliantly, and continue toserve in Operations Enduring Free-dom and Iraqi Freedom. When westarted to tally up a list of our unitsthat had been deployed to the area ofresponsibility, or soon would be, wequickly discovered that it was quickerto count those who had not. OEF andOIF have touched nearly everyunit…Network Command, our corpsunits, division signal battalions, plusthe critical support of strategic signalassets, the Chief Information Office/G6 team, Communications-Electron-ics Command, our brethren in the

National Guard and Army Reserveunits…they’ve all contributed to our nation’scontinuing success in OEF and OIF. OurArmy civilians are invaluable in every as-pect of this continuing campaign. And overa thousand of our industry partners havedeployed and are present anywhere andeverywhere their support is needed.

I can assure you that every element ofour Army is engaged fighting this war. Asnever before, we are fighting as a Regimentwith all of our diverse elements comingtogether in defense of our nation.

Your accomplishments are a sourceof inspiration for every member of our Regi-ment and will be captured in history booksfor generations. At the same time, I worryabout each and every one of you and wishthat you could all return safely to your homestations. As we all understand, however,that is not possible as long as there arethose who wish our country harm.

I close by expressing, once again,that my pride in what you are doing, and thesuperb manner in which you are doing it, isboundless. One Team.

Pro Patria Vigilans.

AOR – area of responsibilityCECOM – Communications ElectronicsCommandCIO – Command Information OfficeNETCOM – Network CommandOEF – Operation Enduring FreedomOIF – Operation Iraqi FreedomOPTEMPO – Operations Tempo

ACRONYM QUICKSCAN

CommunicatorVoice of the Signal Regiment

Table of Contents

2 Boutelle gives testimonyAs given to the Committee on Armed Srvices Subcommittee on terrorism

5 Brigade Task Force communicates in OEFCPT Michael P. Martel

10 Media on the battlefield: ‘A non-lethal fire’CPT David Connolly

19 AN/PRC-150HF radio in urban combatRetired LTC David M. Fiedler and LTC Edward Farmer, P.E.

28 Mobility favors small antennas: small-loop high-frequency antennasLTC Edward J. Farmer, P.E.

31 HF combat net radio lesson learned againRetired LTC David Fiedler

U.S. ARMY SIGNAL CENTER AND FORT GORDON

Army Communicator (ISSN 0362-5745) (USPS305-470) is an authorized, official quarterlyprofessional bulletin of the U.S. Army Signal Center,Fort Gordon, Ga. 30905-5301. Periodicals paid atAugusta, Ga. 30901 and additional mailing offices.

POSTMASTER: Send address changes to ArmyCommunicator, U.S. Army Signal Center, FortGordon, Ga. 30905-5301.

OFFICIAL DISTRIBUTION: Army Communica-tor is available to all Signal and Signal-related units,including staff agencies and service schools. Writtenrequests for the magazine should be submitted toEditor, Army Communicator, U.S. Army SignalCenter, Fort Gordon, Ga. 30905-5301.

This publication presents professionalinformation, but the views expressed herein arethose of the authors, not the Department of Defenseor its elements. The content does not necessarilyreflect the official U.S. Army position and does notchange or supersede any information in other officialU.S. Army publications. Use of news itemsconstitutes neither affirmation of their accuracy norproduct endorsement.

Army Communicator reserves the right to editmaterial.

CORRESPONDENCE: Address all correspon-dence to Army Communicator, U.S. Army SignalCenter and Fort Gordon, Signal Towers (Bldg.29808A), Room 713, Fort Gordon, Ga. 30905-5301.Telephone DSN 780-7204 or commercial (706) 791-7204. Fax number (706) 791-7088.

Unless otherwise stated, material does notrepresent official policy, thinking, or endorsement byan agency of the U.S. Army. This publicationcontains no advertising.

U.S. Government Printing Office: 1984-746-045/1429-S.

Army Communicator is not a copyrightedpublication. Individual author’s copyrights can beprotected by special arrangement. Acceptance byArmy Communicator conveys the right forsubsequent reproduction and use of publishedmaterial. Credit should be given to Army Communi-cator.

Features

PB 11-04-1Edition 2004Vol. 29 No. 1

Worldwide web homepage addresshttp://www.gordon.army.mil/AC/E-mail [email protected]

51 Circuit check38 Index 200347 TSM update

Departments

Cover: The Regiment at War is a vital part of our nation’s war on terrorism.The Regiment’s support towards Operation Iraqi Freedom in Iraq andOperation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan is the focus of the Spring ‘04issue of the Army Communicator. Design by Tammy Moehlman

COMMAND

Commander/CommandantBG Janet E.A. HicksCommand Sergeant MajorCSM Michael Terry

EDITORIAL STAFF

Editor-in-Chief/Graphic DesignerJanet A. McElmurray

Senior AdviserSusan Wood

IllustratorsTammy Moehlman, Terry Moehlman

PhotographySGT Gustavo Bahena, Charles Cortese, BobFowler, PVT Armando Monroig, AnthonyRicchiazzi, SPC Sam Smith

0409805

By Order of the Secretary of the Army:

PETER J. SCHOOMAKERGeneral, United States Army

Chief of Staff

ARMY

2 Spring 2004

Mr. Chairman andmembers of the subcom-mittee, thank you for theopportunity to providetestimony on Departmentof Defense informationsystems architecture andinteroperability.

Today, we are anexpeditionary Armysupporting our nation inthe Global War on Terror-ism. Our Army is in themidst of a massive reorga-nization creating modularfighting units that can berapidly deployed aroundthe world. Our forwarddeployed forces must havecapability to reach backfrom anywhere on theglobe through globalnetworks to tap intelli-gence resources andcollaboration tools on a real-timebasis. Our forces will continue todeploy as an integral part of a Jointforce and often as a part of a coali-tion team as we continue the fightagainst a global terrorist network.

As a Joint or Coalition expedi-tionary force, interoperability is notan option. Existing systems must beinteroperable or made interoperable.All new systems must be developedwith Joint interoperability andinterdependencies as Key Perfor-mance Parameters. The good newsis that our services have achievedmuch interoperability today. Manyof our communications systems andnetworks are based on the samecommercial Internet Protocol thatserved as the foundation for theWorld Wide Web. This is a man-dated standard of the Department ofDefense’s Joint Technical Architec-ture. This, and other commercialbased information technologyprotocols and standards are a

foundation for achieving Joint,interagency and multi-nationalinteroperability. The Army hasnearly completed the migration to anIP-based network as part of thelarger Joint Network. In accordancewith the Joint Technical Architectureand current DoD guidance, we aremoving to IP version 6.0 for a moreefficient and effective network. Inpractical terms, interoperabilityexists today at the network level andextends through space-based andterrestrial-transmission systems.These transmission systems serve aspart of the Global Information Gridsupporting users around the world.The DoD GIG Data Strategy directs amore complete migration to com-mercial web-based technologies,which will further strengtheninteroperability across the Joint,interagency and multi-nationalenvironment.

Network level interoperabilityis vital to all organizations within

the DoD. An example of this type ofinteroperability is a user with anApple computer sending email to auser with an IBM computer. Bothcomputers have different operatingsystems and probably differentemail programs, and the network iscomprised of piece parts from manymanufacturers such as Sun, Cisco,IBM and Microsoft. However,common and enforced standards,such as those that reside in the JointTechnical Architecture, ensure youremail transits the mix of equipmentand is successfully delivered. Anexample of the military applicationof network interoperability is theJoint Blue Force Situational Aware-ness, or Blue Force Tracking, imple-mented in Operation EnduringFreedom and Operation IraqiFreedom. While each service useddifferent platforms and computers totrack Blue (friendly) Forces, theNetwork interoperability standardsenabled commanders on the ground

The following is the testimony of LTG Steven W. Boutelle Chief Information Officer/G-6 United StatesArmy before the Committee on Armed Services Subcommittee on terrorism, unconventional threats and

capabilities United States House of Representatives regarding Department of Defense InformationSystems Architecture and Interoperability. It is dated Feb. 11, 2004.

Boutelle gives testimony

Our forward deployedforces must have

capability to reach backfrom anywhere on theglobe through global

networks to tapintelligence resources

and collaboration toolson a real-time basis.

-- LTG Steven W. Boutelle

Army Communicator 3

to enjoy near-real-time visibility offriendly forces on dissimilar systemsfrom individual trucks, tanks,helicopters, command centers andeven here in the Washington area.

Our Army and DoD continueto expand the networkinteroperability of all of our pro-grams. We continue upgradingindividual platform interoperabilitybased on the standards of the JTA.The bottom line is that while wehave interoperability between theservices now, it will be even morepervasive and richer inthe future. Additionally,we are committed toworking with OSD toensure the GIG alignswith the Federal Enter-prise Architecture.

As the Armytransforms to the FutureForce, we are developinglighter, highly mobile,more modular andstrategically responsiveorganizations fullyenabled by a more robustnetwork of satellites,fiber-optic cables, radiosand tactical-communica-tion systems. Battle-command capabilities,tied together by these enhancednetworks will be the bridge fromcurrent to future forces and enablethe Expeditionary Joint ForcesCommander to fully conduct inter-dependent, globally dispersed,network-centric warfare. Battlecommand is the essential operationalcapability that fundamentallyenables the global conduct of futureJoint operations. Our Chief of Staffhas seventeen focus areas; one ofthese is networks. As we realign intomodular units, we are adjusting thearchitecture of these units to exploitthe success we saw in OperationEnduring Freedom and OperationIraqi Freedom and to align with theJoint Technical Architecture. We arenow in fact restructuring the ThirdInfantry Division at Fort Stewart,Ga., which has recently returnedfrom Iraq. We are redesigning thisunit to be flexible, adaptive andJoint.

Systems such as the JointTactical Radio System, WarfighterInformation Network - Tactical,Strategic Tactical Entry Point,Teleport and Global InformationGrid - Bandwidth Expansion areessential to support warfighters withsecure, simultaneous real-time voice,data, imagery and video globally.

The Joint Tactical Radio Systemis the next generation radio. Thissystem changes the construct forradio hardware by relying onsoftware to change frequencies and

waveforms. In addition to increasedease of interoperability, a commonfamily of radio systems across thedepartment allows for savings indevelopment and procurement costs.JTRS represents Joint communica-tions at its purest form. It is a fullyintegrated and fully interoperablesystem combining the best of multi-service programmatic, technologyand operational experience andleadership while taking advantage ofeconomies of scope and scale fordevelopment. This high-capacity,software-programmable family ofradios is multi-band/multi-modecapable and will provide simulta-neous voice, data and video commu-nications enabling it to support theworldwide Joint mission tasks. Italso lays the foundation for achiev-ing network connectivity across thefrequency spectrum and providesthe means for digital informationexchanges, both vertically and

horizontally, between Jointwarfighting elements. It represents akey part of success for our futurewarfighter and Joint teams.

The Warfighter InformationNetwork - Tactical is absolutelyessential in our expeditionary Army.WIN-T will serve as the Army’scommunications network for thefuture warfight, replacing theArmy’s twenty-five-year-old tacticalcommunications system, MobileSubscriber Equipment. WIN-Tleverages the rapid growth of

commercial communica-tions technologies we allenjoy, and brings thosetechnologies on to themodern battlefield. Thiswill allow the Army tofully use enhancedservices such as high-resolution imagery,operations on the moveand collaborative toolsacross the battlefield.WIN-T represents theArmy’s requirement to beborn Joint, is a missioncritical system, and is anintegrating communica-tions network that bringsnext generation communi-cations to the Joint

Warfighter. Based on DoD’s JointTechnical Architecture, it is opti-mized for offensive and Jointoperations, while providing theTheater Combatant Commander thecapability to perform multiplemissions simultaneously and stillmaintain campaign quality.

The Army’s flagship transfor-mation program, the Future CombatSystems, is a networked “system ofsystems” that uses advanced com-munications and technologies tointegrate the soldier with “families”of manned and unmanned platformsand sensors. The FCS network iscomposed of various communica-tions nodes supported by UAVs(Unmanned Aerial Vehicles) andUGVs (Unmanned Ground Ve-hicles). The FCS is a distributednetwork centric system leveragingWIN-T to allow reach back throughSTEP sites, Teleport, and the GIG-BEto critical war fighting resources.

As we realign into modular units,we are adjusting the architecture ofthese units to exploit the successwe saw in Operation EnduringFreedom and Operation IraqiFreedom and to align with the JointTechnical Architecture.

4 Spring 2004

This highly agile and lethal force willprovide the tactical formationsrequired to fulfill the Army’s visionfor its future force.

The Satellite/Teleport/STEPare currently, and will remain, alinchpin for the war on terrorism.Our nation’s military relies on thisinformation projection capability tolink intelligence sources withcommanders allowingcollaborative planning andexecution worldwide on areal-time and virtuallyinstantaneous basis. Weactively participate in theJoint Satellite Communica-tions Acquisition Councilwith our sister services,OSD and Joint partners.Additionally, the Armymeets with ASD (NII) SeniorC4 (command, control,communications andcomputers) representativesto discuss emerging satellitecommunications architec-ture and technology inser-tions to gain synergy andensure the Army architecture isthoroughly aligned with the otherservices and combatant commands.

Upgrading select STEPs toTeleports is another extremelyimportant program. Selected Strate-gic Tactical Entry Point STEP sitesthat currently access only militarysatellites are upgraded with addi-tional satellite terminals operating incommercial Satellite Communica-tions and radio bands. This capabil-ity greatly increases our ability andflexibility to support the warfightersdeployed globally. This is currentlyfunded to take place in three genera-tional upgrades from Fiscal Year 03through FY 08.

The Army is actively involvedin synchronizing its informationsystems architecture. The Joint

C4 – Command, Control, Communi-cation and ComputersDoD – Department of DefenseFCS – Future Combat SystemsFEA – Federal Enterprise Architec-tureFY – fiscal yearGIG – Global Information GridIP – Internet ProtocolJIM – Joint, interagency, and multi-nationalJTRS – Joint Tactical Radio SystemMSE – Mobile Subscriber Equip-mentOSD – Office of the Secretary ofDefenseSATCOM – satellite communicationsSTEP – Strategic Tactical Entry PointUAVs – Unmanned Aerial VehiclesUAGs – Unmanned Ground VehiclesWIN-T – Warfighter InformationNetwork

ACRONYM QUICKSCAN

Tactical Radio System, theWarfighter Information Network -Tactical, Strategic Tactical EntryPoints and Teleport are all beingdeveloped in conjunction withguidelines from the Joint TechnicalArchitecture and OSD, whichcontinues to provide adequateoversight. Our nation is in the midstof a global fight on terror. The

relevant and ready Army functionsas the country’s expeditionary forceof power. The future success of theArmy depends upon its ability totransform within a fully integratedJoint environment and we cannotafford to delay that transformation.The Army’s C4 (command, control,communication and computers) andinformation technology transforma-tion is the enabler for an Army atWar and transforming. With thecontinued support of Congress, wewill achieve our goal of an inte-grated net-centric, knowledge-basedFuture Force that functions as anintegral part of the Joint warfight.Our nation requires a relevant,ready, Joint and integrated Armycapable of winning the nation’swars.

The Army’s C4 (command,control, communication andcomputers) and informationtechnology transformation isthe enabler for an Army at Warand transforming.

LTG Boutelle is Chief InformationOfficer of the Department of the Army.He assumed this posting in July 2003.Previously he served as director forInformation Operations, Networks andSpace, Office of the Chief InformationOfficer. From 1996-1997, Boutelle wastrail boss responsible for air defense,intelligence, artillery, logistics, maneu-ver, satellite and tactical radio software

and systems integration for theArmy’s Task Force XXI. Otherduty assignments include U.S.Army Europe deputy Chief ofStaff of Operations and Plans,and Chief Test and Evaluationand Executive Officer for theCommand System IntegrationAgency. Boutelle’s awardsinclude the DistinguishedService Medal, the Legion ofMerit with Oak Leaf Clusterand the Defense MeritoriousService Medal. He received hisbachelors from the Universityof Puget Sound and a mastersin business administrationfrom Marymount University.

Brigade Task Forcecommunicates in OEF

Army Communicator 5

by CPT Michael P. Martel

Fighting and communicating inthe deserts of Afghanistan proved tobe tough and tricky for the 1st

Brigade Task Force of the 82nd

Airborne Division. The mountain-ous terrain and sandy environmentmade line-of-sight communicationsimpossible and equipment mainte-nance essential. This is how onelight infantry brigade solved thecommunication problems of Opera-tion Enduring Freedom and some ofthe lessons learned along the way.

First the basics: single-channelcommunications

Tactical satellite ruled thebattlefield with single-channelcommunications. It was the primarymeans of communications for allfirebases for both voice and data.Although we tried several methodsfor sending data, the ViaSat DataController-400 cards became themethod that worked best. We triedHigh-Performance Wave guidesoftware, but not enough Harris117F

radios were present to make it theprimary method. Another reasonHPW was not used was because ofafter action reports from the previ-ous 82nd units. They had reportedthat the 117Fs while using HPWwould often overheat. In some casesthe radios would damage some oftheir own internal parts. The radioswere too valuable to risk losing. Wedid experience some problems usingthe VDC-400 cards (such as gettingsettings correct, cables breaking,occasional data errors, etc.) but themethod worked most of the time.PSC-5s and 117Fs were the primaryradios used. Both radios can push20 watts and are menu driven. Theinfantry relied heavily on theseradios, to where they started askingfor more radios than available. TheMulti-Band Inter/Intra Team Radiowas the only solution. With onlyfive watts, this radio provided asolution that was not as powerful asthe bigger radios, but with itssmaller size and versatility, it wasthe infantry favorite. The MBITTRin the TACSAT mode soon became

known as the MSAT. The MST-20was also used when available, but itsage made it prone to maintenanceproblems. These radios also lackedthe ability to pass data.

Key to the success of the single-channel TACSAT communicationswas the channel or segment. In theAfghanistan environment, withmany mountains and low groundscoupled with the harsh weather andenvironment, the segment was keyto the fighter’s success. It wasimportant to have a widebandsegment that units in contact couldtalk on excitedly without having toslow down the messages to makethem understood. It was importantto have a dedicated channel, not aDemand Access Multiple Assignedchannel, that units could talk onimmediately without waiting for atime slot. It was important being ona satellite with an elevation greatenough that units did not have to beon the highest point or exactly on thecorrect azimuth and elevation to geton the bird. Most units mountedantennas pointing straight up on

Brigade Task Forcecommunicates in OEF

In the Afghanistanenvironment, with many

mountains and lowgrounds coupled with theharsh weather andenvironment, thesegment was key tothe fighter’s success.

6 Spring 2004

vehicles and were able to communi-cate while on the move.

Each infantry battalion had fivesingle-channel TACSAT radios madeup of two 117Fs and three PSC-5s.The brigade had an additional threeradios for use in the tactical-opera-tions center, tactical-assault centerand one to use where needed.Aviation units also had single-channel TACSAT radios to talk toaircraft and ground stationsthroughout the country. We did nothave enough radios to monitor morethan one network with all thefirebases on the command net.

The command net was primarywith the data net used occasionally.The MBITTR became worth itsweight in gold and would have beenmore useful if a dismounted ampli-fier solution was available for adismounted role.

Very-high-frequency, fre-quency modulation radios were alsoused in the single-channel securemode. This was for one primaryreason – special forces and otherbranches did not frequency hop.The brigade itself was very profi-cient at frequency hopping, but theother joint units were used to using

single channel. Although communi-cations security was changed weeklyfor these nets, the reported threat ofenemy forces breaking our encryp-tion or intercepting our transmis-sions was very small, so the decisionwas made to not use frequencyhopping. Each firebase or airfieldhad its own net. Since all organiza-tions needed to be on that net or beable to get on that net quickly, singlechannel was used. This also made iteasier for inbound aircraft to talk tothe ground units. The use of singlechannel made it significantly easierto program a station in the commandand control aircraft that was notplanned for. The C2 aircraft waswidely used to control many airassaults as well as operations andground assault convoys.

High frequency was not usedeffectively in this operation. Thiswas not because radios were notavailable. It all goes back to thesame old problem with HF – havinga good training program. The newHarris PRC-150 radios worked great.These radios with Automatic LinkEstablishment capability cut out theneed for a lot of frequency propaga-tion, testing frequencies and work-

ing with antennas. Some areas evenhad their radios working great andcommunicating clearly over greatdistances. Other stations couldn’ttalk to anybody. The biggest prob-lems we say were antennas andgetting the settings correct on theradios. Most Soldiers do not knowenough to select or set up the correctantenna. The AS2259, near verticalincident sky wave, worked some-times, but a doublet antenna 10 feetoff the ground nearly alwaysworked. With its many levels ofmenus and setting, the PRC-150presented problems to those whowere untrained and those who likedto make adjustments.

The role of Mobile SubscriberEquipment

Mobile Subscriber Equipmentwas a success in this operation;however, habitual support relation-ships went away. In an operationwhere the light-infantry brigade taskforce is the largest fighting element,telephones only at the brigadeheadquarters and forward supportbattalion did not work. The infantrybattalions required phones as well as

The single-channel TACSAT is used while thebrigade and battalion commander talk during acombat operation.

Army Communicator 7

secure Internet protocol routingnetwork and nonsecure Internetprotocol routing network drops. Theforward support battalion, whichsupported much more than normaloperations grew into its own logisti-cal task force to include servicesnormally provided by a divisionsupport command, and neededmuch more support than normal.With the nature of operations inAfghanistan and having company orbattalion command posts at firebasesas well as combat multipliers andintelligence and medical assets, weneeded many more MSE systems.

Our need to send immediatedata and reports from firebases inconstant contact was greater than thesingle-channel TACSATwith its limited datacapability could supply.Small extension nodes andTSC-93 packages, whichcould be slung into remotesites, were used to supportfirebases. However, theamount of TSC-93s andSENs was inadequate. Weneeded smaller, dis-mounted packages for theremote sites. The 35th

Signal Brigade was starting to puttogether Promina 100s with a UXC-60 for a satellite link to be put at allfirebases to supply voice, SIPRNETand NIPRNET capability. Laterunits will have to discuss howsuccessful these packages were.

The SIPRNET ruled commandand control at the TOCs. Besides thenormal email traffic, SIPRNET wasprimarily used for web baseddistribution and immediate situ-ational awareness using chatting.We posted every operation order,graphic, intelligence picture, frag-mentary order and slide show to aweb site. Each staff section had itsown site to update and keep every-one current. Any person with a SIPRaccount could surf the battalion,brigade, corps or CFLCC web sitesand gain situational awareness of thelatest events, significant acts oroperations.

Another newcomer wasInternet Relay Chat. IRC is fairlycommon on the Internet but new to

the military. mIRC is freeware thatwas developed with Windows inmind and was used throughout thetheater to pass information immedi-ately between all branches andunits. Battle captains spent muchmore time monitoring mIRC thanthey did radios. It was immediateand everyone logged on received themessage along with who sent it.However, the validity of somemessages had to be checked – thefirst report isn’t always the mostaccurate. This capability was adefinite asset that should be sus-tained. You can learn more aboutmIRC at www.mirc.com.

The NIPRNET was key tomorale of the Soldiers. NIPR was

used for e-mail to home station aswell as home and surfing the web.Army Knowledge Online accountswere the standard for soldiers whodid not have NIPRNET e-mailaccounts on the local mail servers.Everyone wanted a NIPRNET dropand an account that led to thishaving to be controlled in order topreserve what little bandwidth wasavailable. Some crafty Soldiers wereeven caught subnetting their ownnetworks off of one Internet Protocoladdress. The Air Force, weatherunits, Central Investigations Divi-sion, contracting office and supplysupport units also used NIPRNET,which became very important tonormal business and keepingoperations and supplies moving.NIPRNET was brought to firebasesthat had SEN and TSC-93 support bytunneling through the SIPRNET. AKG-175 tactical LAN encryptiondevice was placed on both ends toencrypt the packets riding over the

secure network. The KG-175s werevery effective and easy to use. Thispiece of equipment was a greatreplacement for the high-mainte-nance Network Encryption Systemwe had grown accustomed tofighting with during entire fieldproblems.

As you can probably guess, allthe data being passed took its toll onthe limited MSE network. Localnetworks were built at both Bagramand Kandahar with fiber runs andcommercial switches. This increasedthe bandwidth greatly on thosebases while controlling what wentout of the network. At Bagram, theamount of bandwidth even allowedfor media servers where you could

watch many movies orlisten to many songs.The bottleneck wasobviously getting off ofthose air bases. This wassolved at Bagram withcommercial switches anddeployable Ku bandearth terminals. 4Mbpspipes carried the IPpackets off the base. AtKandahar and remotesites, we still relied on

MSE to carry our data loads.512kbps and 674kbps was adequatebut made everything much slowerthan most people are accustomed.NIPRNET was pulled off a strategictactical entry point through a FCC-100 over a TSC-85 satellite terminal.At 674kbps this link was hardly“Road Runner” quality, but it got thejob done if the number of users wereclosely controlled. A DKET andcommercial switch was in the worksfor Kandahar as well.

Operations in Afghanistanshowed us very important lessonsfor our networks. First we need tohave smaller packages available forremote locations. We need to be ableto support several firebases withouthaving to bring in a SEN and TSC-93for each one. Units at remotelocations for that long shouldn’t bethat isolated especially when theyare constantly in contact. Second,we need more FCC-100s and/orProminas. These had great capabili-ties in a smaller package. Along

Our need to send immediate dataand reports from firebases in constantcontact was greater than the single-channel TACSAT with its limited datacapability could supply.

8 Spring 2004

with that equipment comes the needfor training. Third, we need morebandwidth for sustained operations.Small pipes are fine initially, but asmore units bring their capabilities,more bandwidth is needed tosupport and sustain.

Our current equipment doesn’thave the capability to support largebandwidths. Fourth, we need moretraining on commercially availabletechnologies. Soldiers were asked toinstall switches they had never seen,terminate fiber they had neverworked with and fix systems theyhad never heard of. Last, we needmore phones. No unit had enoughtelephones to support what theywere asked to support. Two-wirephones would have been a goodoption if we had been able to acquirethe two-wire cards to populate ourLine Termination Units.

Results of new systems

There were many systems triedand tested during OEF. These aresome of the new systems that the82nd used during our rotation andthe lessons learned with thesesystems as well as older systems.

Iridium phones were widelyused throughout the country.Apparently the government bailingout this company was a good ideaand was extremely useful. Iridiumphones were used by every agency,branch of service and contractor inthe country. The lack of existingtelephone infrastructure throughoutthe majority of the country madethese phones very important. Thesystem was reliable, fairly clear andavailable everywhere. On top ofthat, the government had very goodrates, if you don’t include theoriginal cost of salvaging the ven-ture. Secure sleeves were alsoavailable to pass classified informa-tion. Most of the time, these phoneswere the only link for some Soldiersat firebases for months to talk totheir families.

Another big success was theForceXXI Battlefield CommandBrigade and Below system. TheFBCB2 was a system that included amonitor, keyboard, processor andtransceiver. It provided situational

awareness through a map on thescreen showing your location alongwith the location of other units andany graphics. FBCB2 communicatesover satellites and gives the user theability to send messages to any otheruser in the network. These systemswere mounted in vehicles andhelicopters. TOCs could see a unit’smovement, as well as, send mes-sages to them for command andcontrol or logistics. As GroundAssault Convoys became morecommon, this system was relied onmore heavily. TOCs could tracktheir movements. Supply messageswere sent instead of tying up airtimeon a command net. There were evenseveral cases when the primarymeans of communications failed andthe only means to communicate waspassing messages over the FBCB2.

Mobile Transmitter was asystem similar to FBCB2. The MTXwas a system used for dismounts. Itconsisted only of a small box with anantenna placed on the carrier. Unitswith access to the Global Commandand Control System feed were ableto see the movement of the Soldiers.This system did not pass traffic backand forth. It only passed its locationup. Initial problems receiving theGCCS feed prevented the brigade

from using the system. However,special operations units used themroutinely. The brigade was laterable to pull the GCCS feed onto theirManeuver Control System-Light andsee both the FBCB2 and MTX on thesame picture.

The Global Broadcast Suitewas used to pull the Predator feedsand CNN. We did not use the fullsuite of services. The system itselfwas very reliable and took minimaleffort to maintain once it wasworking properly.

Voice over IP was also usedminimally. Very few phones wereavailable as well as only one server.The service itself was very clear butdegraded quickly as the network gotbogged down with its limitedbandwidth. The KG-175s as men-tioned before were very successfuland required very little mainte-nance.

Armed Forces Network,although not a new system, was newto some of us maintaining it. TheAFN is usually run by trainedpersonnel but was put in the handsof untrained Soldiers at manyremote sites. They soon had tobecome experts or suffer the com-plaints of fellow Soldiers hungry fora piece of back home and entertain-

Shown on this page and the facing page is the FBCB2 system.

Army Communicator 9

AKO – Army Knowledge OnlineAFN – Armed Forces NetworkALE – Automatic Link EstablishmentCFLCC- Coalition Forces Land Com-ponent CommandCOMSEC – Communications Secu-rityC2 – Command and ControlDAMA –Demand Access MultipleAssignedDKET – Deployable Ku Band EarthTerminalDSN – Defense Switched NetworkFBCB2 – Force XXI Battlefield Com-mand Brigade and BelowFM – Frequency ModulationGBS – Global Broadcast SuiteGCCS – Global Command and Con-trol SystemHF – High FrequencyHPW – High PerformanceWaveguideIP – Internet ProtocolIRC – Internet Relay ChatLAN – Local Area NetworkLOS – line-of-sightLTU – Line Termination UnitMBIITR – Multi Band Inter/Intra TeamRadioMCS-L – Maneuver Control System- LightmIRC – Microsoft Internet Relay Chat– there is no official explanation ofwhat the m stands for but most sus-pect it stands for MicrosoftMSAT – MBIITR SatelliteMSE – Mobile Subscriber Equip-mentNES – Network Encryption SystemNIPRNET – Nonsecure Internet Pro-tocol Routing NetworkOEF – Operation Enduring Free-domSEN – Small Extension NodeSIPRNET – Secure Internet Proto-col Routing NetworkTAC – Tactical Assault CenterTACLANE – Tactical LAN Encryp-tionTACSAT – Tactical SatelliteTOC – Tactical Operations CenterULLS – Unit Level Logistics SystemUSB – Universal Serial BusVDC – ViaSat Data ControllerVOIP – Voice Over IP

ACRONYM QUICKSCAN

ment.Key drives or pen drives were

hugely successful. They largelyreplaced disk drives as a transport-able storage medium. Floppy 3.5inch disk drives wouldn’t last longin the heat and extremely dustyconditions in most locations. Keydrives were easier to transport, heldmore data and every computer had aUSB port. Unit Level LogisticsSystem computers suffered the mostwithout the ability to use the newstorage medium.

The Gavin Gator was a conceptto take a John Deere Gator all-terrainvehicle and mount communicationssystems on it. Single channelTACSATs, FMs and HF radios weremounted on the back with amps anda generator for power. The vehiclewould then have the ability to befloor loaded in a CH-47 and broughtto any objective with the Soldiers.This would give a mobile and stableC2 platform. This was an excellentconcept mounted on the wrongvehicle. The Gators could nothandle the loads. They became tooheavy and would not make it up thesmallest hills. They were soon leftbehind. The concept is still verygood, but another vehicle is neededfor transport.

Out of all the lessons learned,the most important went back tomaintenance. A good maintenanceplan for all equipment saved many

outages. Schedulingtimes to bring downequipment andservice them wastough but mighthave saved lives ifoutages would haveoccurred while liveswere at stake. Allcommunication andautomation equip-ment had to bemaintained andserviced in thishostile operatingenvironment.Having a good planup front saved ourcommunicators fromcertain failure withequipment that was

constantly used.OEF proved to be a different

operating environment for allSoldiers involved. Many communi-cations systems used in trainingwere pushed to their limits in thisharsh environment operating forextended periods. While the impor-tance of single channel systemsproved itself again, the brigade andbattalions came to rely upon thelarger network for sustained com-munications. New relationshipswere formed, new equipment wasused and new ways of doing busi-ness were successful within theInfantry brigade task force.

CPT Martel is the Regimental S-6 at11th Armored Calvary Regiment at theNational Training Center. He was thecommander of A Company, 82nd SignalBattalion during OEF III. His previousassignments include Signal officer, 3rd

Battalion, 187th Infantry, 101st; Signalofficer, 1st Battalion, 9th Infantry, 2 nd

Infantry Division; brigade Signal officer,504th Parachute Infantry, 82 nd ABN;and division radio officer, 82 nd Airborne.

He attended the Information SystemsEngineering Officers Course and has amasters in telecommunications from theUniversity of Colorado.

easier by using themedia, we should.It is safe to saythat 99 times outof 100, we the

members of the U.S.military, are acting

with the right intentions.Meaning, we have nothing

10 Spring 2004

by CPT David Connolly

Public Affairs and the mediaplayed a key role in Operation IraqiFreedom. This operation provedthat now more than ever, the U.S.military must be prepared to engagethe media and provide timely,factual information. This articleattempts to share some experienceswith the media during Operation

Enduring Freedom and

the early stages of OIF. Theintent is to explain, from a com-pany/field-grade point of view, howmedia played a part in the opera-tions and how our tactics, techniquesand procedures related to currentdoctrine. Thoughts on how field-grade officers can prepare them-selves to conduct media interviewsin today’s environment are shared.At this time, it is uncertain howdoctrine will change as a result ofour lessons learned.

From August 2002 to July 2003,I was assigned to 3rd U.S. Army,Coalition Forces Land ComponentCommand as the media relationsofficer. During that time I supportedOEF in Kuwait and Djibouti, Horn of

Africa. My responsibilities includedinvolvement in the planning andexecution of OIF embed mediainitiative.

I am currently assigned to FortLeavenworth in the Center for ArmyTactics, U.S. Army Command andGeneral Staff College. I had theopportunity to address students inan elective course, “Media on theBattlefield.” The presentation was

well received and many believedthat some of the information shouldbe presented for future use.Introduction

Former Chief of Staff of theArmy, GEN Eric Shenseki, once saidthat “If we do not speak for theArmy others will.” This is a verytrue statement. The media should beconsidered as a component of non-lethal fires/non-kinetic targeting,another tool at our disposal to helpaccomplish the mission. The mediawill write their story, with or with-out our input. It only makes sense toengage the media to ensure the

whole story is told. Themedia is a venue in

which we can passalong our com-mand messages,which containtruthful andfactual informa-tion. Thebottom-line isthat we shouldalways keep inmind what weare there to do.Always remem-ber the Soldiers,

Sailors, Airmenand Marines whoare on the groundsacrificing every-day. If we canhelp their moraleand ultimatelymake their jobeasier by using themedia, we should.It is safe to saythat 99 times outof 100, we the

members of the U.S.military, are acting

with the right intentions.Meaning, we have nothing

Media on the battlefield:‘A non-lethal fire’

CFLCC Public Affairs Officer, COLRick Thomas, briefs members ofthe media near the Martyr’sMonument in Baghdad.

Army Communicator 11

hide. We have been given ourorders and are attempting to carrythem out within laws of land war-fare. But bad things happen in war.Not everything goes our way.During these times it is best toconfront the media and articulate tothe world our side of the story.

When integrated and synchro-nized with InformationOperations efforts, PublicAffairs and in particular,the media, can be a forcemultiplier. In CFLCCprior to crossing the LD,the Public Affairs staffleveraged the InformationOperation themes andmessages to the fullestextent possible. It isimportant to understandthe difference between IOand PAO, however.Basically IO and PAO belong to thesame career field, InformationOperations.

One difference is that IO canuse deception and specifically targetthe enemy. Public Affairs must beaware what themes and messagesthat IO is pushing during each phaseof the operation. The intent is toleverage IO. During the initialphases of OIF CFLCC alwaysensured that Public Affairs plannerswere involved in the InformationOperations Working Groups. Thisensured they were involved in theeffects targeting board process. Inthat case, they could bring thatinformation to the media director.The media director would then havea clear picture of what thecommander’s intent was and whatthe staff was attempting to accom-plish.

Armed with this knowledgethe media director could prioritizewhich of the thousands of mediaqueries to work on while maintain-ing a level of fairness and equity toall reporters. As an example, priorto crossing the LD, IO was pushingthemes to the enemy concerningcapitulation. Knowing this, themedia director could push reportersout to units responsible for dealingwith large numbers of enemyprisoners of war. These type stories

would send a message to the enemyand the world. The enemy wouldsee how they would be fed, clothedand provided shelter. Capitulationmight appear to be a good optiongiven their current status. Theworld would see that we weretrained and ready.

We should cooperate with the

media within the limits of mission,safety and operations security.There is always a tendency to over-classify information to avoid speak-ing to the media. There are essen-tially two things you always want toprotect: timing and intentions.

Always ask if the informationprovided to the media will give anadversary something that they canuse against us. If OPSEC or safetyconcerns make it impossible tosupport a media request, thensimply tell them so. But rememberthat information is classified for acertain time period. Always remem-ber timing and intentions.

How many times have you runacross a document that was classi-fied by the originator ten years ago?When reading the document youcan’t figure out why it is classified.Today’s graphics may be classified,but once that phase line is crossed orthe information can no longer beused against you, they probably areno longer a secret. You still must beresponsible with information. Thereporter should understand whenhe/she can write or speak aboutwhat is seen. We were successfulduring the decisive combat phase ofOIF when reporters were allowed toaccess to command centers. Thepractice of allowing reporters incommand centers is elaborated upon

later when embedded reporters arediscussed. This is always a sensitivearea.

“Go ugly early” is a termsometimes used in public affairs.Bad things happen in war. Again,not everything goes our way. Wehad nearly 700 embedded reporterswith units prior to crossing the line

of departure. They sawand heard everything.There were many timeswhen something badhappened and Soldierswere unsure how torespond when a reporterwas on the scene. Therewas a case early on nearthe Umm Qasr area.Some civilians had beeninjured by coalition fire.

A CNN embeddedreporter captured the

scene as British and U.S. troopsattended to the injured. Initiallythey shouted at the reporter to getback and not be “such a ghoul.”Eventually cooler heads prevailedand they allowed the reporter tocontinue to film as long as heremained out of the way. Theimages of the Soldier’s faces told thestory. They were concerned thatthey had injured innocent civilianson the battlefield. Again, bad thingshappen. But the film showed thatthe primary concern at that pointwas to provide medical attention.The same care we would give to acoalition Soldier.

The embedded reporter had aright to be there to do his job, whichwas to report the activity. We couldhave gained more leverage byengaging the reporter (by way ofshort stand-up interview) with aleader on the scene who could havereleased known information anddelivered a command message. Themessage could have included thesympathy for the injured and howwe make every attempt to avoidthese things from happening fol-lowed by basic, releasable facts thatwere known.

Coupled with the images, theworld would understand the situa-tion and not have only part of thestory told or taken out of context.

When integrated and synchronized

with Information Operations efforts,

Public Affairs and in particular, the

media, can be a force multiplier.

12 Spring 2004

Again, embeds will be dis-cussed later. We must now, morethan ever, be able to articulate ourstory on the spot without violatingOPSEC. In order to do this, we mustincorporate public affairs training athome station.

The best-case scenario is whenSoldiers, Sailors, Airmen andMarines are the spokespersons, notthe PAO. Again, it goes back totraining. All soldiers must beprepared to answerquestions pertaining tohis or her area of respon-sibility. 3rd InfantryDivision had the benefitof a great deal of trainingprior to crossing the LD.They were on rotationfor Operation DesertSpring in the fall of 2002.We began what wecalled, “training em-beds”. We knew that ifwe went to war with Iraqwe were going to embedhundreds of reporters like neverbefore.

Reporters were embedded withunits for three to four day periods.This gave the Soldiers an opportu-nity to get used to having reporterspresent 24/7 as they carried out theirduties. They got used to the pres-ence of reporters and learned how todeal with them. The reporters saw itall, the good, the bad and the ugly.The reporters also learned how to dotheir job in the harsh desert condi-tions. They began to learn how theirequipment would work, how tomove with a unit, etc.

The benefit from this experi-ence was evident when they crossedthe LD with the embeds. There werevery few problems regarding thenew relationship. Following therelief in place in Baghdad between1st Armored Division and 3rd InfantryDivision, we immediately begangetting several complaints aboutreporters having their cameras takenand not being allowed to do theirjob.

This may have happened forseveral reasons. 1st AD did not havethe benefit of the training embedprogram. It appeared that 1st AD

had trouble initially dealing with thevolume of reporters. Even thoughby this time, there were relativelyfewer embeds, there were stillhundreds of reporters present.

As stated earlier, training andexperience dealing with the mediaweren’t the only issues. Initially, wedid not have a Coalition PressInformation Center established inBaghdad. There were problems withreporters using press badges issued

in Kuwait and attempting to getthrough checkpoints with them inBaghdad.

There were two types ofbadges issued in Kuwait. One forembeds and the other for those whowere not. The badges issued to non-embeds in Kuwait were not intendedfor use in Iraq. They were only to beused during coordinated opportuni-ties through the Kuwait CPIC.

The decision on whether or notto badge is debatable. CFLCC madea conscious decision not to badge inBaghdad initially. Reporters knewtheir way around the city. Theydidn’t desire or need PAO escort. Atthat time, they only needed informa-tion on where to go to cover certainactivities.

On one hand, badges issued bythe coalition at least show Soldierson the ground that this person has atleast been through some sort offormal registry process with themilitary. On the other hand, badgescan be abused by reporters. Initiallyin Baghdad, they became the “get-into-every-checkpoint-free pass.”

At this point, many reportersand affiliates were tired of havingtheir freedom of movement dictated

by the military. That is one reasonthey chose to leave their embed slots.In some cases, it was apparent thatthe reporters wanted a badge in Iraqto make moving around easier, notto be escorted or coordinate oppor-tunities. Some of the reporters inIraq had not registered throughKuwait previously. They wantedtheir “pass.” Remember, this wasvery early after the fall of Baghdad.

As time went on and a CPICwas established, badgescould once again be issuedand controlled. We failedto predict the early massexodus of embeds once afew statues fell down.Again, embeds are ad-dressed later.

Preparing for interviews

Preparing to conductmedia interviews is a skillrequired of today’s militarymembers. There are two

basic types of interviews to beprepared for: the taped, stand-upinterview and the print interview.During these types of interviews, noone hears the question, only theresponse.

Press conferences are usuallyreserved for those higher in thechain of command. Even at theCFLCC level, a decision was madenot to conduct press conferencesinitially. It was known that Depart-ment of Defense would be conduct-ing them in the District of Columbiaand Central Command wouldconduct a daily press conference inQatar. CFLCC had 700 embeds withunits. There was no need to place aleader in front of reporters and havethem attempt to articulate accuratetimely information. Press confer-ences are unique in that the audiencehears the question as well as theresponse. The preparation for alltypes of interviews remains essen-tially the same however.

Preparing for an interview isbasically a negotiation. Stress to thereporter the need for informationbefore you begin. Remember, themedia can be a non-lethal fire. Askyourself what the story can do for

Preparing to conduct media inter-

views is a skill required of today’s

military members. There are two basic

types of interviews to be prepared for:

the taped, stand-up interview and the

print interview.


your unit, the mission.Think about what phase of the

operation the unit is in. Whatthemes and messages are IO push-ing? How does this story helpleverage them? Is this the right timeto do the story? Remember toprotect timing and intentions.

For example, in Kuwait prior tocrossing the LD, maybe you don’twant to do a story about how youare going to fight oil well fires.Don’t give the enemythat information yet.After you cross the LDand have passed thatphase, go for it. Manyreporters will want“fluff” stories. Those arefine, but given thechoice, prioritize storiesdepending on whatphase of the operationyour unit is in. If youhaven’t crossed the LDyet, a story about Soldiers training inthe desert should be given emphasisover one about women in the Army.Remember, you can send a messageto the world and the enemy that youare trained and ready. You can do astory about women in the Army, orwhatever requests a reporter has,later. Be polite, honest, helpful andfriendly to journalists, but rememberthe mission and Soldiers on theground. How can you help them?

When preparing for an inter-view, do what is done preparing forother military operations; gatherintel. Ask questions like “what is thestory about?” Know what angle thereporter is after? What aspects of asubject are they after? Who else arethey talking to? You may have toaugment information they arealready getting. Sometimes, if youknow who they spoke to previouslyyou may have to refute information.How knowledgeable is the reporteron the subject? What do they knowabout the military? You may have toeducate them. What type of storiesdoes this reporter typically write?Are they pro- or anti-military? War?Gather background information onthem, get their bio.

Ask the journalist to send youhis/her questions. They won’t give

you everything, but look for thefocus. Facts may need to be gath-ered from the rest of the subject-matter experts on the staff to helparticulate our side or the rest of thestory. Remember, you want themedia to walk away with the wholestory and message. Asking forquestions also helps to prepare forwhat might be asked during theinterview. Sit down and brainstormevery question you think might be

asked, especially, hard ones. Whatquestion do you not want to be askedand be unprepared for? You need tohave a response for all questions.

If you can’t do the interviewtell them why. More times than not,they will understand. For example,in Baghdad a CBS crew got wind ofwhat they thought was an effort tofind a pilot downed in the 1991 GulfWar. CFLCC would often get off-the-wall requests like this, but aftersome investigation, it was learnedthat, in this particular case, it wastrue; a team was in fact, investigat-ing the whereabouts of missingNavy CMDR Michael Scott Speicher.For obvious reasons (timing andintentions), they could not do thestory at that time because it wouldjeopardize their investigation. Aftera meeting between the CBS crew andinvestigating team, agreements weremade to wait until such time as theinformation could be releasedwithout detriment to the investiga-tion.

Never get out in front of thePresident or DoD. Know whatsenior leaders are saying about theunit’s operation. This helps youanticipate questions. Another term,“PAO (PAG) by transcript.” Issometimes used. If you have access

to the Internet, review recent DoDtranscripts. Chances are the samequestions will be asked at your level.You don’t have to regurgitate theSECDEF’s responses, but you canensure that your messages are in lineand focused on how things are fromyour foxhole.

Military leaders must be awareof what is being said to avoid theirintended message being taken out ofcontext. For example, if the Presi-

dent said yesterday“there are indicationsthat foreign fighters areinvolved in conductingthese attacks” and yousay, “We have noindications of foreignfighter involvement.” Itwould appear that youare not on the same sheetof music. If you knewwhat the President’sstatement was, you could

re-phrase the response to moreaccurately articulate your message.

Maybe, in your specific area ofresponsibility there are no indica-tions of foreign fighters. The Presi-dent is speaking for the entirecountry. You are talking about yourAOR, however large or small it maybe. You could have said, “In ourarea, there are no indications…”This way, you can attempt to avoidbe taken out of context. Just beingaware is the start point.

Know current events. If doingan interview tomorrow, whathappened in the news today thatrelates? How does that event impactwhat you are going to talk about?Remember, you are the military tosome journalists no matter what thetopic. Stay in your lane and speakonly about what you know about.

Conducting the interview

The interview itself is all aboutcontrol. You want it, the reporterwants it. You have to learn how tostructure effective answers andcontrol the interview.

Don’t be question driven, bemessage driven.

The trick is to use your mes-sages as guideposts and not repeated

Military leaders must be aware of

what is being said to avoid their

intended message being taken out of

context.

14 Spring 2004

phrases. This is where the skillcomes in. Everyone gets annoyedwhen they see someone on TV whosounds like a robot continuing topress rewind and play over andover. Those people lose credibilityand appear never to actually answeranything. Some people can transi-tion and flow well, somecan’t. It takes a certainamount of preparation andexperience. You are notconducting an interview justto play stump-the-chumpwith a reporter. You shouldtry to articulate commandmessages that will posi-tively influence the outcomeof your mission. Use themedia as a non-lethal fire.

Help raise the moraleof that young E-4 on thecheck point. If you have theinformation, and it isreleasable, by all means giveit. But consider what otherinformation you need todeliver to tell the rest of thestory.

For the purpose of thisarticle, the focus is on stand-up, taped interviews wherethe question is never heard.This is a situation many of us willmore than likely be involved in.

Structuring effective answers:

As stated previously, you areengaging the media not only torespond to their questions, but alsoto deliver a message about yourmission that is important for theworld to understand. Again,constantly ask yourself how you canhelp the soldiers on the ground byproviding information to the media.To do this, you need to structureeffective answers or responses.Come to the interview with aboutthree or four messages to deliver.Think of each message as a pyramid.

State your message:

At the top of the pyramid youshould state your message. This isyour response to the first question.And for a taped-standup interview,

it doesn’t mater what the question is.Deliver your most important mes-sage first. So, if interrupted later, itis already out there. Nobody willhear the question on a taped inter-view.

Many times even if a journalistcame to you with a specific question

in mind, if you deliver a clearlyarticulated message, they will use it.You may tell them something thatthey didn’t know. It may look andsound so good on tape that theaffiliate’s editors desire to use it astheir sound bite.

For the many skeptics out therethat will say this would never work,here is an example. Memorial Daywas a bad day. The coalition hadsome incidents in and aroundFallujah. A number of Soldiers losttheir lives. About this time it wasalready clear that the media wastending to focus on things that wentwrong, almost ignoring many detailsabout the good things that werecontinuing to happen. Daily theywould receive two news releasesfilled with facts and statistics aboutrecovery and security. Yet, if oneambush or fatality occurred, thatwas all the public heard about. Whoknows the reason why, you canprobably guess; maybe it was

sensationalism, politically drivenfrom their bureaus, whatever.

The CFLCC Commander, LTGDavid McKiernan was painfullyaware that this was happening aswell. After the evening battleupdate assessment he was providingthe staff with guidance. He told

them that they must allbecome a public affairsofficer and get thismessage out. He askedthe staff, “What did wecome here to do?” Aftera short silence, hestarted talking about themission’s objectives;removing the regime,searching for andeliminating weapons ofmass destruction, etc.

His basic messagewas “We are not doneyet.” We were onlyweeks into what weknew would be a long,tough campaign and itwas important to himthat the world knewthis. We were preparedto hunker down andwould expect that theseweren’t the first or the

last casualties we would endure.The CG was back in Kuwait at

this time. As the CFLC mediadirector, I was watching the battleupdate assessment from our van inthe EECP in Baghdad. At this time,we still didn’t have a CPIC estab-lished. I usually would meet report-ers at the Baghdad convention centerand attempt to field their queries.So, I knew the next morning whatthe focus of their queries would be. Iknew what the CG’s message was. I,as a PAO, normally would not go oncamera, but when it is important, itdoesn’t hurt. I didn’t have time toprepare or even have access to acommander or key leader. I didhave a coalition partner with me, alieutenant colonel from the Austra-lian army, but they still weren’ttalking to the media at that time.

It would have been nice tohave him go on camera and articu-late this message. Bottom-line was

Your response to first question:

State your message

* positioning statement* hook

Support message

Illustrate message

* explanation* evidence* hook

* examples* anaologies* hook

STOP

STOP

InitialBriefAnswer

FurtherExpansion

Elaborate


that time was of the essence and Ihad what I had. Me and my note-book where I scribbled notes as theCG spoke. Early the next morningone of our Marine PAOs and Ifinalized a position statement, baseddirectly from the CG’s commentsand ran it by my boss, the CFLCCPAO, who said go for it.

The first call came fromAssociated Press Television, I think.(A worldwide audience, perfect.)They called me andasked, “What happenedat Fallujah?” Theywanted a talking headand I wanted the CG’smessage heard. I saidcome on down, I’ll giveyou a standup. They didand asked what hap-pened at Fallujah. I gavemy statement and nevermentioned any facts ofany specific incident atFallujah. They quickly said thanksand packed up and ran. Theywanted to be the first, the exclusive.Next came CNN, Reuters, all withinternational audiences. Only one,Reuters, asked the follow-up “Ok,got that, but can you tell me whathappened at Fallujah.”

By now everyone was runningthe position statement, the rest of thestory, the message. They neededand wanted the rest. Which I thengave because I had the informationand it was releasable. The importantthing is that the world heard, firstthing in the morning, what the CGwanted them to hear.

You’ll be glad to hear that Itook my share of trash talking frommost of the staff that day, “Heythere’s Hollywood.” But moreimportantly, everyone rememberedwhere he or she heard those words.“Isn’t that what the CG said lastnight?” Exactly! My point is that itdoesn’t take a PAO to do this.Anyone listening could have donethe same thing. Being a PAO andhaving other good PAOs from oursister services and coalition partnersaround me helped accomplish themission. Know what is important toyour commander. Know the mes-sage.

Support your message:

After delivering your message,support the message. In the middleof the pyramid elaborate yourposition statement. Provide anexplanation, evidence that supportsthe initial statement. At this pointprovide facts, key stats, descriptionof a certain program, or a supportingargument or rationale. For example,

if supporting a statement madeabout what you are doing in West-ern Iraq, talk about how manypatrols conducted, the number ofarrests made, The food and waterdelivered. If the position statementsaid that you are doing great andwonderful things winning heartsand minds, back it up with the factsthat the media may have over-looked.

At the bottom of the pyramidexpand. Illustrate your messagehere by giving a prepared exampleor analogy. If using the exampleabove, tell them about a specific raidin one of the towns.

Be in control:

During this entire process thegoal is to be in control of the inter-view. Get them to follow. Hook thereporter’s interest. Be passionateabout what you are talking about.Usually you can have a reporterfollow you through one message orpyramid. The skill comes in whenbridging to a second or third mes-sage. The goal is to smoothlytransition to the message so youdon’t sound like an idiot or a parrotrepeating things over and over. This

takes practice and experience andsometimes a bit of charm. One keyleader who comes to mind is ColinPowell. He uses textbook communi-cation skills in delivering a speech,as well, as when talking withreporters. He transitions fluidly sothe untrained eye/ear may notnotice. The fact is, he effectivelycommunicates his messages andavoids losing credibility by soundinglike a robot. The need is to continu-

ally bridge back to yourmessage. The hard part isto always be aware ofwhich questions are out ofyour lane. The tendencyis to attempt to answerany and all questions.

The key is to firstthink about what is beingasked. If it’s not for youto answer, transition backon track, “I don’t knowabout that, but what I can

tell you is…” or “DoD might havemore information on that, but theimportant thing to remember is…”Control the interview. Flag orspotlight your message with phraseslike: “First, let’s clarify the facts…”or “Let’s look at what is reallyimportant…”

The hook is a tool used toeffectively control the interview.You want the reporter to follow. Thepyramid states to briefly stopbetween your initial answer andelaboration. What that means is tooffer a statement like, “You shouldhave seen what happened yester-day..” or “We have this new ap-proach….” Then pause brieflyenough time so the reporter can ask,“Well, what’s that?” I realize thatthis won’t work that easily everytime especially, with savvy report-ers. But, you get the idea. You wantthe control.

Embeds

During the decisive combatphase of Operation Iraqi FreedomCFLCC embedded an unprec-edented number of reporters. It isdebatable whether or not this is theway of the future or not. It remainsto be seen how the military will

It is debatable whether or not this

is the way of the future or not. It

remains to be seen how the military

will deploy embed reporters in the

future.

16 Spring 2004

deploy embed reporters in thefuture. We may never embeddedreporters in the numbers seen duringOIF. The affiliates have a say in theissue as well. They need to committo the resources the idea as much asanybody.

The notion of embedding from“beginning to end” never reallymaterialized. Many reporters dis-embedded themselves for differentreasons soon after arriving inBaghdad or shortlythereafter. Some leftsimply because theywere exhausted,mentally and physi-cally. They had seen alot of action. And insome cases, seen fellowjournalists killed orwounded.

Embeddingduring decisive combatwas a good deal. Theydidn’t seem to mind the structureand limited freedom of movement(between units). They enjoyed acertain sense of security, especiallywhen facing many unknown circum-stances. Once decisive combat wasdeclared over, many journalists andtheir affiliates decided it was time todis-embed. Some took pressurefrom colleagues who called them“turncoats” or accused them oflosing their objectivity. They desiredto go back to “real” reporting.

Embeds worked for us becausemany connected with the military.No longer did they report, “they justdid this” rather they started saying,“we just did this.” They became partof the unit. They saw that humanbeings who cared about their actionsfought the war. They saw that evenwhen things went bad, the militarymembers went out of their way to dothe right thing, many times at risk totheir own safety.

Embeds saw things that wehave been saying for years but couldnever really prove. They saw thatwe care about limiting collateraldamage. They saw in commandposts, hundreds of minds strugglingall night over target lists and theeffects of striking specific targets.They saw the amount of thought and

work involved in deciding on eachand every target. We didn’t simply“carpet bomb” Baghdad or targetevery single power source. We tooka look at each location to be hit andif striking that target would achievethe desired effect.

They saw Soldiers put theirown lives in danger to save the livesof civilians on the battlefield.

There was a reporter fromAssociated Press who was embed-

ded with the 3rd ID during the“Thunder Run” into the airport.This reporter was in a tank withinthe column and was given a headset.Every intersection was heavilydefended. The roads were crowdedwith everything from uniformedenemy soldiers, to combatants incivilian clothes in technical trucks, toaverage citizens going about theirbusiness because they believed thatthe coalition was not there yet. Thefighting was aggressive. Soldiersand leaders all were fighting outsidethe hatch with M16s, M4 andsometimes beating people off theirvehicles with ammo cans.

As this happened, lead vehicleswere still passing information like“Blue car, bad guys with RPG, whitecar, family of four, let them go.” Thereporter simply could not believethis. You can tell someone about it,but unless you show them, they maynever believe you.

Getting back to the future ofembeds, there are two thoughts:One is that maybe, we are currentlyriding a wave of popularity with themedia. We are in their favor, fornow. Things may go back to acertain level of tolerance with eachother. But what we have accom-plished with embeds can continue.

Many of the embedded reporterswere young, 20 or 30 somethings.They were some of the best andbrightest that their affiliate had tooffer. They will someday be theleaders of their organizations. Theymay be the anchors, or key leaderswho can advise the bureau chiefs onmilitary related matters.

Already some who previouslywere relatively unknown, areworking the weekend anchor slots.

These reporters saw forthemselves and havedeveloped a certain under-standing, respect andrapport with us that cancontinue for years to come.

Another thing welearned by embeddinghundreds of reporters isthat the rate of informationhad drastically increased.We didn’t fully appreciatehow much information

would be out before it went throughthe official reporting chain. We stillhad to be responsible with informa-tion and not officially “release” ituntil it was confirmed and on thesignificant activities report. Therewas a lot of pressure to confirmthings, which we simply couldn’t onthe spot. We had to accept that theywere out there and let them report.We would still handle information inthe same manner. Once it wasconfirmed we would acknowledge.If unconfirmed, we would eitherrefute or simply state that to ourknowledge, it didn’t happen.

The way in which we released,or articulated information, had alsochanged. We now, more than ever,had to confirm the obvious. Therewas a young Soldier who apparentlyshot himself in a port-a-potty in oneof the camps in Kuwait before wecrossed the LD. We had just recentlyRSOI’d the embedded reporters inthe units. When the release waswritten it stated something to theeffect, “A Soldier has died from anapparent, self-inflicted gunshotwound to the head.” CENTCOMasked why we chose those words.

We never used those wordsstrongly speculating a suicide. True,but we never had a FOX reporter as

Embeds saw things that we have

been saying for years but could never

really prove. They saw that we care

about limiting collateral damage.


the first person on the scene either.The reporter heard the shot, wasstanding right there when the doorwas opened. One Soldier, oneweapon, and a gunshot wound tothe head. Apparently, he died of aself-inflicted wound. We didn’t saythat he killed himself. The investiga-tion would reveal what happened.The point is that we all realized atthat moment that the game wasdifferent. If we didn’t confirm theobvious up front, wewould have lost acertain amount ofcredibility.

I think it is usefulto understand howembeds were deployed.For OIF it worked likethis: DoD askedCFLCC how manyreporters they couldhandle given the taskorganization. CFLCCworked with subordinate PAOs towork out specific numbers. CFLCCthen provided DoD with a number.DoD took the number and allocatedslots to specific affiliates and mediaorganizations. Those affiliates andorganizations assigned personnel tofill the slots. Not all the reportersassigned as embeds wanted the slot.Some had been in the AOR formonths and benefited from thetraining embeds. Some had neverbeen there at all. Between DoD andCFLCC the best attempt was madeto ensure the right reporters andmedia types were in the right place.There was a mix of different catego-ries of media spread out among thetask force (print, TV, weekly maga-zines, regional/Arab media, etc).Subordinate commands had input ifthey desired a specific anchor orreporter to embed with their head-quarters. Some had already built agood rapport with individualsthrough training. The DoD embedlist assigned reporters down todivision level. Divisions thenpushed them down, at times, tocompany level.

Some are very passionate todisagree with letting reporters incommand centers without a securityclearance. It is safe to say that it was

proven that we can do this withoutviolating OPSEC by establishingstrict ground rules while still beingresponsible with information. Somehave said, “We give away too muchabout our capabilities by letting incivilians without clearances.” Oneexample given is that reporters learntoo much about how far and fast wecan go. We give this away by doingit. After we cross the LD andexecute, everybody knows our

capability. What we must protectare our TTPs and information thatwe will use again in the future.

Just because a reporter is letinto a command center doesn’t meanthat you show them every secret inthe book. Be responsible withinformation. It is challenging, butdo-able. Again, we need to get awayfrom the tendency to over-classifywhile still protecting sensitiveinformation that should remainclassified even after the current fightis over.

It is a balancing act thatrequires thought. Tomorrow,today’s graphics and basic plan orconcept of the operation may nolonger be sensitive but some of thetactics, techniques and proceduresrequired to build them still need tobe protected. Security at the sourcerequires that each individual under-stand the difference. Be conscious ofwhat information you are providingand the situation at the time you areproviding it. Once more, protecttiming, intentions and anything thatan adversary can use against us.

Ground rules:

All reporters who desire accessto our forces are required to sign

ground rules whether they areembedded or not. Most will abideby them because they want tocontinue to have access to our forces.Enforcing the ground rules issometimes difficult. As mentioned,once embeds were pushed down tothe units, before you knew it, therewas some poor company executiveofficer who had the additional dutyof “babysitting” a reporter. Securityat the source was the rule. It became

impossible to watch areporter 24/7.

It was especiallydangerous when report-ers had satellite phonesand the capability to golive at any moment.

Geraldo Rivera is aprime example. He wentlive on air and basicallyviolated everything youwould normally protect;timing, intentions and

things an adversary can use againstyou. He was embedded with the101st while they were on the movetoward Baghdad. He scratched out asketch in the sand that showed theirformation, where they were, how farand fast they had traveled and whenthey would be at their next location.

V Corps immediately notifiedCFLCC and asked to pull him, whichwas CFLCC initiated. The 101st, whodid not have the benefit of livetelevision was upset because, “Hewas their man.”

Say what you will aboutGeraldo, but he is great for morale.That was apparent even when hecame to Kuwait for a meeting onCamp Doha pleading for a lateembed slot. Even lieutenant colonelsand colonels would light up at thesite of him. He was a nice breakfrom endless hours of nagging staffwork and operation orders.

Not many reporters drew thatsort of reaction. His incident withthe 101st was an example of thedifficulty in watching a reporter 24/7. He was eventually pulled,knowing he would go back becausethe division wanted him back, aftera heartfelt apology, of course.Luckily, it did not appear his actions

Be conscious of what information you

are providing and the situation at the

time you are providing it. Once more,

protect timing, intentions and anything

that an adversary can use against us.

AD – Armored DivisionAPTN – Associated Press Televi-sionBUA – battle update assessmentCFLCC – Coalition Forces LandComponent CommandCGSC – (U.S. Army) Command andGeneral Staff CollegeCPIC – Coalition Press InformationCenterEECP – Early Entry Command postEPW – Enemy Prisoner of WarIO – Information OperationsIOWG – Information OperationsWorking GroupsLD – Line of departureOEF – Operation Enduring Free-domODS – Operation Desert SpringOIF – Operation Iraqi FreedomOPORDS – operation ordersOPSEC – Operational securityRIP – relief in placeRSOI – Reception, staging, onwardmovement, integrationSIGACTs – significant activitiesTTPs – tactics, techniques and pro-ceduresWMD – Weapons of mass destruc-tion

ACRONYM QUICKSCAN

18 Spring 2004

ever got anyone killed.Units can always add to

ground rules that reporters sign withthe higher headquarters, in this case,CFLCC. One good one would be toinstruct the reporter never to go liveunless there is a Soldier or “handler”present. This would have workedwell in the Geraldo situation.

Depending on the reporter,they may have good intentions andjust not realize that a certain piece ofinformation may be sensitive at thetime. Remember, reporters are justlike Soldiers, in that there are goodones, bad ones, experienced andinexperienced ones. You have towork to train them and set thestandard of conduct.

No ground rule is foolproof. Ifit is in writing, we must live with it.One of the CFLCC ground rulesstated that no image or photographwould be taken of a deceasedcoalition Soldier. LTG McKiernanfelt strongly about this ground rule.He did not want family members tolearn of their loved ones’ fate in themedia. There was much debate withDoD on whether or not it should bea ground rule.

Army Times had a photographof a young 101st Soldier who wasbadly wounded and was beingcarried by his comrades. He laterdied. The first reaction to ArmyTimes was, “You can’t run thatphoto, it violates the ground rules.”They took the position that were notviolating a ground rule because theSoldier was “dying” and at the timeof the photo was not dead. Evenafter CFLCC and the Soldier’s familypleaded that they not run the photo,they did.

Historical note:

We dis-embedded four journal-ists and two photographers, because

the intent of the ground rule was onpublication of the photograph. Thiswas obviously an editorial positiontaken by Times Publishing. As aresult, all Times Publishing employ-ees were dis-embedded for oneweek. DoD did not re-embed them,CFLCC did.

To be fair, one of the journalistsand one of the photographers wereleaving anyway. Of the remainingthree, we allowed one to go back to aunit. It was not the person who tookthe photograph. The other recoursethat was taken was to have the paperpublish a letter to the editor fromMcKiernan. Not so effective sincethey did not have to print his lastline, which stated that he andhopefully nobody he ever associateswith ever buys another copy of theArmy Times. So, even when youthink a ground rule is self-explana-tory or simply in good taste, be sureif they are in writing to articulateyour intentions in detail.

Dealing with media effectivelyrequires training and experience likeanything else. You won’t personallylike every reporter encountered. Putpersonal feelings aside and get onwith the mission and allow them todo theirs. When encountering themedia, always ask yourself how touse this non-lethal fire to helpaccomplish the mission and mostimportantly, how to assist theSoldier on the ground at the check-point or on patrol.

CPT Connolly was assigned fromAugust 2002 to July 2003 to the 3rd U.S.Army, Coalition Forces LandComponent Command as the mediarelations officer. During that time hesupported Operation Enduring Freedomin Kuwait and Djibouti, Horn of Africa.He was then involved in the planningand execution of Operation IraqiFreedom in Iraq including the embedded

media initiative. Connolly was amember of CFLCC’s Early EntryCommand Post, which entered Baghdad,Iraq on April 10, 2003.

Following his tour in 3rd Army,Connolly was assigned to FortLeavenworth at the Command andGeneral Staff College. During that time,he was afforded the opportunity toinstruct some of the CGSC studentsduring the C401 (Media on theBattlefield) portion of the course.

Prior to be assigned to Third Army,Connolly was assigned to the UnitedStates Army Recruiting Command, FortKnox, Ky., as the Public Informationofficer (October 2000-August 2002).


AN/PRC-150 HF radioin urban combat– a better way to commandand control the urban fight

by retired LTC David M. Fiedler andLTC Edward Farmer

Communications in the urbanenvironment

Using Army standard-tactical-radio communications systems onurban and complex terrain has neverbeen very easy. Inherent equipmentlimitations found in military radios(low power levels and inefficientantennas) coupled with systemdegrading effects inherent in theurban setting such as signal absorp-tion, scattering and diffractionpresent many challenges for thecombat-net radio user operatingwith the current suite of militaryfrequencies (2-512 MHz).

Civilian police, fire and mu-nicipal service agencies have facedthese same challenges for manyyears. The classical answer has beento position retransmission stations(repeaters) at strategic locations onthe urban area of operations. Byplacing repeaters intelligently(usually atop high structures) and byselecting power levels and antennaswith good coverage patterns citygovernments have long been ablecommunicate among base-station,hand-held and vehicular radiospretty well. As far back as the 1930sthe radio frequencies employed bycivil government were in the samegeneral very-high frequency/ultra-high frequency range used by manyof today’s military radios. Recently,in order to relieve frequency conges-tion and bandwidth availabilityproblems, many urban centers havemigrated to much higher frequencyranges where scattering, reflectionand absorption are worse than they

are in the military VHF/UHF frequency bands. Tocompensate, multiple remoterepeaters connected to transmis-sion hubs are used to improvecoverage over wide areas or intohard-to-cover spots. Networkrepeaters are connected to commandstations (trunked) over telephonecable, fiber-optic cable or microwavecarriers and typically assure maxi-mum reliability, area coverage anduser access to the civil networks.

Modern cell-phone networksnow also operate in this samegeneral frequency range. Each “cell”access point (antenna tower) ispositioned for direct (radio line-of-sight) connectivity to subscriber-cellphones located in their coveragearea. The access points areinterlinked with additional infra-structure including switches and tielines.

These systems work well in thecivil-urban environment because thesystem designers have the luxury ofcontrolling the infrastructure andmajor-system parameters such aspower levels, antenna locations,number of access points and repeat-ers. If a “dead spot” is discovered itis usually a simple matter to engi-neer and interconnect additionalrepeaters or cells to eliminate it. Inaddition, most civil-radio and cell-phone communications are directedto subscribers in relatively open non-

hostile locations oropen structures whereabsorption, reflection

and other signal-propagationlosses are a factor that can be dealtwith. When operation becomesmarginal users can simply stepoutside or move closer to a buildingwindow etc. and operations willnormally improve as a result ofimproved line-of-sight signals to therepeater or cell access point.

It’s different with the Army…When the Army is engaged in

urban-combat operations the com-munications situation is consider-ably different from the situationfaced by civil government or cellphone users. Military differencefactors include:

1) operation restricted to thefrequency range of common militaryradios (2-512Mhz),

2) limits on the output powerof military radio equipment,

3) limited number of availablerepeater assets if any,

4) limited access to goodrepeater locations due to enemyaction,

5) need to communicate to bothoutside street locations and insidestructures,

6) lack of standard compactantenna systems useful for urbancombat,

7) severe restrictions on the

20 Spring 2004

λλπ

Kd

PLLossPath +⎟⎠⎞

⎜⎝⎛= 4

log20)(

movements of system users,8) lack of manpower required

to cover multiple signal sites caneasily exceed available resources.And more.

… but there are ways …Fortunately, there are new

equipment and techniques availablein the force that can, if intelligentlyapplied, overcome many of thecommunications limitations createdby urban combat. One of these is theuse of the lower portion of the HFradio spectrum.

Near Vertical Incidence Sky-wave

For many years the Army hasknown that radio signals in thelower portion of the HF frequencyspectrum (2-8Mhz) when radiated atnear-vertical angles shower down offthe earth’s ionosphere (a atmo-spheric layer of electrically-chargedgases at an altitude of approximately200 miles) in an omni-directionalgap-free energy pattern with aradius of hundreds of miles. Thistransmission technique is calledNear Vertical Incident Sky-wavebecause the signal energy islaunched mostly on high (toward thesky) angles between 45 degrees andthe zenith and returns to earth afterionospheric reflection. The returningsignal comes down from above athigh angles in an omni-directionalpattern that has no gaps and a radiusof hundreds of miles.

While in the past the Army wasprimarily interested in NVIS forcovering theater/corps size areas ofoperations NVIS is also very usefulon the urban battlefield. The advan-tage of NVIS signals for urbancombat is simply that most of theradio energy after ionosphericrefraction is not bent, blocked orabsorbed by the urban environ-ment in the way that surface wave(low angle) signals from verticalantennas would be. NVIS signallosses are limited to only free spacepath loss and some absorbs ion at theionosphere reflection point. Becauseof this, a Soldier with the Army’snew AN/PRC-150 HF man-packradio (see Army Communicator

Winter 2001) and the correct (hori-zontal) antenna (see Army Communi-cator Fall 2002) can easily receivethese high-angle signals if located inopen areas between urban structuressuch as streets, parks, roof tops andother open urban places. The com-munications path is from the trans-mitting antenna to the ionosphereand on to the receive antenna.Transmission losses remain fairlyconstant at around –120 db (anumber that can be overcome easilywith our equipment) over the entirearea covered by the signal. The NVISsignal pattern is truly omni-direc-tional even at very short distancesand this makes the transmissionmode useful for urban fighting aswell as wide area and long distancecommunications.

HF and structuresBecause of their longer wave-

lengths (lower frequency) HF (2-30Mhz) signals will naturallypenetrate urban structures moredeeply than signals on higher,shorter wavelength frequencies.How deep the penetration dependson exact frequency, signal powerlevel, antenna efficiency and themakeup of the urban structures inthe path.

The name of the game in allradio communications and particu-larly urban combat radio communi-cations is overcoming path loss.Simply put, the greater the radiatedsignal and the lower the frequencythe more path loss can be overcome.This raises the probability of success-ful communications in urban areasand inside buildings. Stated math-ematically, and greatly simplified:

π is the well-known constant, d

is the distance between transmitterand receiver, l is the wavelength atthe operational frequency, and Kl isa power loss constant determined bycharacteristics of the obstructions inthe signal path at the wavelength of

the operational frequency. Forgrounded solid-metal buildingswithout windows etc. K is a verylarge, meaning that path lossescannot be overcome in order tocommunicate. For wood andtarpaper structures still found inmany urban environments K be-comes very small so the first term inthe equation predominates. Brickand concrete structures increase Kbut not to a level where communica-tions fail more often than not. Moststructures are inherently (andsurprisingly) fairly radio-transparentat HF frequencies. As an example ofHF signal penetration it is notuncommon for a small groundpenetrating radar transmitteroperating in the HF frequency rangeto penetrate over 100 feet intocommon kinds of earth while thesame power radar on a higherfrequency will penetrate much less.

What does this equation meanin practical tactical communicationsterms? It means, for example, that ifwe are using a common VHFmilitary radio operating at 30Mhz(lowest frequency for single-chan-neled ground-to-air radio systemsetc.) and replace it with an HF radiolike the AN/PRC-150 operating, atsay, 5Mhz the path loss drops by 20decibels (db) because of the way thatlonger wavelength (lower frequency)signals propagate. In this caselowering the frequency is theequivalent to increasing the power ofthe transmitter by a factor of almostseven.

Another important consider-ation for urban combat is rawpower. Obviously, the more poweryou have the more path loss you canovercome and the deeper your

signals will penetrate into struc-tures. Common tactical VHFman-pack radios like SINCGARShave a maximum output powerof four watts. The AN/PRC-150HF radio has a maximum outputpower of 20 watts. That is 7db*

more signal power to overcomelosses caused by the path, pathobstructions, inefficient antennasand other signal consuming factors.Yes the extra power will help youbut power relationships are tricky,


look at the table below:4 watts = 36 dbm*20 watts = 43 dbm*50 watts = 47 dbm*150 watts = 52 dbm*400 watts = 56 dbm*

dbm* = decibels above amiliwatt. The db* is a logarithmicunit used to describe a ratio. Theratio may be power, or voltage orintensity or several other factors butin this case it is power (watts). If youdo the math you will see that youcan measure the difference of twopower levels by taking 10 log oftheir power ratio. If the ratio ofpower is, for example, two, meaningone radio transmitter is double thepower of the other then the differ-ence is 3db. Put another way, forevery 3db gained by making a moreefficient antenna system or cuttingtransmission line loss etc., is theequivalent to doubling the transmit-ter power.

The point here is that often,adjustments to antenna systems oroperational frequencies to make anantenna more efficient can producefar more dbs of signal power thansimply increasing the raw transmit-ter power. More power will alwayshelp overcome path loss for bothNVIS and ground wave systems butmany times it is not the best or onlyanswer. If you are already operatingat the maximum power that thetransmitter can produce then theseadjustments do become the onlyway to compensate for path loss andimprove signal penetration in theurban combat environment.

Think “system”Communications between two

radio stations requires that thetransmitter power – transmitterantenna gain – receiver antenna gain– receiver performance overcomethe path loss between stations. Alow-power outstation radio such asa man-pack radio with an inefficientantenna used by forward troops canbe “compensated for” to a degreewhen communicating with a basestation that is typically using ahigher performance receiver and a

more efficient antenna. When thepath is reversed, the typicallyhigher-power base-station transmit-ter and the more efficient antennaagain compensates for lower per-forming combat unit radios in thenet. Communications between low-power outstations is much moredifficult and may even requireretransmission (relay) through amore efficient base station.

In the urban fight, man-packsmall unit HF radios, such as thenew AN/PRC-150 are extremelyportable, but are antenna and powerchallenged. A high degree ofportable NVIS (sky-wave) effect canbe obtained when needed by simplyphysically reorienting standardvertical man-pack or vehicle (whip)antennas to the horizontal plane (seeFig. 2). Direct (surface wave) signalsare simpler to generate and useinside structures are also producedfrom the same antenna by justleaving the antenna vertical.

Communication between twostations by either NVIS (sky-wave)or surface wave transmission onlyrequires that the path lossbetween them be overcomeby the radios and equip-ment at the ends. Surfacewave connectivity whilesimple to produce is oftenmore difficult to achievewhen there are signalrobbing surface pathobstructions. Surfaceobstructions can be elimi-nated under some condi-tions if the path chosen issky-wave (NVIS). Do nothowever rule out the use ofsurface wave (low angle)signals as a transmissionmode in urban combat.

A large station suchas a fixed or mobile tacticaloperations center has theopportunity to erect moreefficient antennas andoperate more powerfulradio equipment thuscompensating for some ofthe system limitationsencountered when tryingto communicate with

typical low powered radios (usuallyman-packs) carried by combattroops. Highly efficient, large,horizontal-wire antennas are fine forfixed or at the halt, company andhigher command-post locations.CPs, have more freedom to selectgood communications sites even onthe urban battlefield. Base-stationequipment can make up for much ofthe system losses caused by havingto use low power man-pack radioswith inefficient antennas at thefighting locations. The decision touse high-angle or low-angle trans-mission mode is the call of thecombat unit Signal officer. Thisdecision must be made based uponand a knowledge of antennas andradio propagation.

Generally, if the fighting is inthe streets and from rooftop torooftop, C2 elements can standofffrom the battle area and control thefight using high-angle (NVIS)communications. If the fighting isinside structures and masked fromhigh-angle signals the C2 elementmay need to get in close and pump

Fig. 1 Horizontal dipole antenna pattern 8meters above ground. Note that at the lower(NVIS) frequencies, the bulk of the radiatedenergy is on angles between 40 and 90degrees.

22 Spring 2004

frequency range (MHz) horizontal length (feet)2.5 – 4.0 1503.5 – 6.0 1005.0 – 7.0 80

Fig. 1a Vertical power gain at various heights across the NVISfrequency band.

signal energy directly at structuresbeing attacked using vertical (lowangle) whip antennas.

A C2 HF base stationHigh-angle NVIS signals can be

easily generated from simple horizon-tal wire dipole antennas located closeto the earth (see Fig.1). The bestperformance at NVIS frequenciesoccurs when the antenna is about ¼wavelength (about 30 feet at 8 mHz)above real ground. The desired gap-free omni-directional antenna patternshape remains constant, but withmarkedly reduced signal strength,even when the antenna is lowered toground level (see Fig. 1a).

A good base-station antenna iscritical because it helps the path lossin both directions however, when thetactical situation is such that it is notpossible to erect an antenna at theideal height a lower height will notshut the circuit down. This is true oflength also. Perhaps the ideal antennafor a tactical CP base station is theinverted “L” (see Fig. 3a and 3b).

This antenna is efficient if it hasthe correct dimensions and producesboth high angle horizontal polariza-tion for NVIS communications andvertical polarization for compatibilitywith man-pack and vehicular verticalantennas using low angle (ground-wave) signals at the same time (seeArmy Communicator Fall 02 for discus-

sion on polarization). It is impor-tant to note that mixing polariza-tion in Line of Sight ground-wavenets (cross polarization) will causea huge (20db+) amount of signalloss. Inverted “L” antennas avoidthis problem simply because theyprovide efficient signals with bothpolarizations in case someonedoesn’t get the word. ComparingFig. 1 (dipole) and Fig. 3 (inverted“L”) shows the magnitude of thesignal difference in the vertical(NVIS) direction when comparedto a standard horizontal dipole(Fig. 1).

This loss that is small and isthe price paid for generating bothhigh and low angle signals fromthe same antenna. Inverted “Ls”do need some room to be operatedat peak efficiency. Ideal lengths for35 foot vertical elements are shown

below:shorter lengths to match

tactical situations will also workbut antenna efficiency again will besomewhat reduced.

Portable antennasThe AN/PRC-150 is normally

equipped with the OE-505 10-footvertical monopole whip antenna.Even at ten feet, this is a very“electrically short and inefficient”antenna (an ideal quarter-wave whipat 5 MHz would be 47-feet long). Itis normally operated using only theradio loosely coupled to surround-ing earth as its counterpoise (radiofrequency ground system needed tocomplete the antenna circuit). Thisis a very inefficient arrangementcompared to what we easily achieveat base stations through the use ofbalanced antennas (dipoles) orground radial systems for verticalantennas.

When the fight enters buildingseven the ten-foot whip becomesimpossible to use. With the fullrealization that a still shorter an-tenna will have even lower efficiencythan the OE-505 we are left with therequirement to find one. Fortu-nately, the AN/PRC-150 includes anexcellent antenna tuner capable ofelectrically matching the radioimpedance to extremely shortantennas, so choices are available.

Physically shortening an OE-505 is an obvious approach, butthere’s an even better answer thatdoes not destroy the OE-505. TheAS-3683 3 foot metal tape antennathat comes with the AN/PRC-119SINCGARS radio (the most commonradio in the Army) will fill this billperfectly (see Fig. 7). In addition tohaving a less than 3-foot longradiating element that is shortenough to take into a building andstay vertical (the predominant

orientation fortroops movinginside buildings),the antenna base isa flexible “gooseneck” that can beeasily bent horizon-tal for man-packNVIS operation

when the situation permits.There are some other things we

can do to improve the performanceboth of these admittedly short andinefficient antennas. Operators needto remember that man-pack anten-


Fig. 2 Man-pack vertical (whip) antenna bent horizontal toproduce highangle (NVIS) horizontal dipole like antenna pattern.

Fig. 3a Typical inverted “L” horizontal antennapattern generated by the horizontal part of the “L”note high andgle (NVIS) energy pattern.

nas really consist of the whip(radiating monopole) and what everis under the whip. All antennashave two sides, and when used inthe standard way, the man-packantennas other side (called theground plane or counterpoise) reallyconsists of the radio chassis, theoperator’s body, and whatever thesoldier is standing near at the timethe radio is operating. Improvingthe counterpoise/groundplane canprovide a tremendous improvementin radiated power and receivedsignal level at almost no cost.

A much better counterpoise inthe urban situation is simply a “tail”(see Fig. 6) connected to the radio’sground terminal and hung behindthe operator. The longer the tail isthe better. Making it about the equallength as the AS-3683 (1 meter)works well in terms of both electricalperformance and practicality. Anyconductor will do, but the moresurface area the better, and copperworks better than materials withhigher resistive characteristics. Thebest “tail” construction that we havefound is a simple section of com-puter ribbon cable shorted on bothends with one end terminated on theequipment (chassis) ground. This“tail” can dramatically increase theeffective radiated power from the

antenna. When possible, removingthe radio from the operator’s backwill also improve the signal strengthsince the body will no longer serveas a signal robbing capacitive path toground. While on the ground, aground rod and at least four wireradials spread outand connected tothe radio groundcan produce evengreater signalpower.

Can it everget better thanthis?

This looksgreat but don’trush off just yet toreplace the VHFradio in yoursquad with an HFman-pack radio.Why? The antennaagain! See Fig. 5.The path lossequation aboveonly describeswhat happensonce a signal hasbeen radiated – nothow the signal getsgenerated. Youmust remember, to

radiate at top efficiency a monopole(whip) antenna should be physically¼ wavelength (λ) long, and it alsoneeds an extensive low impedancecounterpoise. At HF frequencies thatis physically a very large antenna.All small antennas suffer inefficien-cies.

As an example of how effi-ciency is reduced as the antenna getsshorter and antenna impedance ismismatched to the radio, look at Fig.5. Fortunately, modern HF equip-ment such as the AN/PRC-150 areequipped with a very effectiveantenna matching unit that is quitecapable of providing acceptableantenna electrical impedancematching even to very short anten-nas. Unfortunately, while thecoupling process electrically com-pensates for a physically shortantenna it also reduces effectiveradiated power of the radio asshown.

The AN/PRC-150 has someadditional tricks to help make upfor this…

In addition to the higherpower levels and better physical

24 Spring 2004

Fifteen-foot vertical whip antenna pattern.

Thirty-two-foot vertical whip antenna pattern.

Fig. 3b Typical inverted “L” vertical antennapattern generated by the vertical part of the “L”note low angle (groundwave) energy pattern.

signal penetration capabili-ties of HF radio the AN/PRC-150 has other ways tomake back signal lost in thepath and the inefficientantenna. The U.S. govern-ment (NSA) along withprivate industry has devel-oped and adopted a newform of digital voice modula-tion coding called MixedExcitation Linear Prediction.

MELP implemented inthe AN/PRC-150 can operateat both 600 and 2400 bps datarates. MELP has demon-strated an ability to provide asignificant increase in securevoice availability overdegraded channels particu-larly at the 600bps data ratewhen compared to otherdigital and analog forms ofvoice modulation. The MELPspeech mode uses an inte-grated noise pre-processorthat reduces the effect ofbackground noise andcompensates for poorresponse at the lower speechfrequencies. By using digitalvoice techniques such asband-pass filtering, pulse-dispersion filters, adaptive-spectral enhancement andadaptive noise pre-process-ing voice communicationsperformance over channelswith low signal-to-noise ratiostypical of the urban combat environ-ment can now be made useable andreliable.

The MELP capability just likelowering the frequency, using higherpower, and improving antennaefficiency translates into dbs of“processing gain” and a bettercapability to communicate overurban terrain. In effect MELP iscompensating for path loss andantenna inefficiency.

The signal-to-noise channelcharacteristics needed to supportvarious modulation modes areshown in Fig. 8. Note that MELP600(bps) digital voice performsalmost as well as a CW (manualMorse Code) expert operator. Quitean achievement since until recently

all services tried without success tokeep a pool of trained CW operatorsavailable because CW Morse Codecould get through under conditionsthat would support no other meansof communication. A good look atFig. 8 also shows this. Analog voicecommunications is achieved at a S/N ratio of about 12-to-1. Good MELP600 digital voice communications isachieved at about a ratio of 3-to-1.The ratio of the two modes means a4-to-1 improvement in communica-tions by going to MELP 600. Fromthe signal power prospective, this isan increase of 6 db (equal to fourtimes the transmitter power) due togain from digital signal processing.Viewed another way signal gains ofthis magnitude effectively make a 20watt radio into the equivalent of an

80 watt radio at the pushof a software button butwithout causing increasedstress on radio compo-nents that would normallyrequire higher (moreexpensive) power ratings,and decreased operationallife of the radio batteries.

Also shown in Fig. 8is a digital voice modeidentified as Last DitchVoice. This mode as thename implies is designedto work when nothing elseeven a manual Morse CWexpert will. LDV takesadvantage of digital voiceprocessing at a muchlower data rate (75bps) inorder to slash digitalerrors caused by marginalconditions. LDV is not a“real time” transmissionmode but LDV has both abroadcast and an auto-matic-request-for-retrans-mission capability. Voicedata packets are createdand sent in the transmit-ting radio. The radio thensends the packets at a veryslow data rate usingsophisticated errordetection and correctiondigital coding techniques.Data packets are stored inthe receiving radio and

checked for errors in transmissioncaused by poor transmission pathcharacteristics. In ARQ mode anautomatic request to retransmitcorrupted packets can be returned tothe transmitting radio in the event tomany packets have too many errorsfor decoding into useable voicecommunications. In broadcast modeall packets are stored upon receiptthe first time. Radio software thenassembles the packets and cues theoperator. The soldier at the receivingradio then plays the message like avoicemail. The lower data rate andextensive signal processing canproduce impressive performancesince LDV can recover signals frombelow the noise levels (see Fig. 8).This again can be equated a consid-erable increase (perhaps 3db or


Fig. 5 Effect of shortening vertical HF antennas from 15 feet to 4 feetfor convenient operation when in urban combat (6-9db). Shorterantennas will give even greater antenna losses. In addition, mostradios will automatically cut output power as the antenna getsshorter.

double) in transmitter power.To summarize, S-6s and G-6s

should consider the following pointsthat make the Army’s new family ofHF radio a better way to communi-cate than other means for urbancombat if:

1 – Lower signal loss and betterpenetration into buildings due topropagation characteristics of loweroperating frequency.

2 – Higher raw transmitterpower to make up for signal lossesin the path and due to inefficientantennas.

3 – Lower signal loss throughheavy foliage, rain and snow be-cause of longer wavelength.

4 – Lower transmission linelosses.

5 – Eliminates need for hard toplace and tactically dangerousrepeater stations.

6 – Less effected by complexterrain.

7 – Better performance (effec-tive power gain) due to MELP 600DSP.

8 – Last Ditch Voice digitalmode for recovery of extremelyweak signals.

9 – Ability to use both sky-wave and surface-wave pathsdepending on the tactical situation.

Make no mistake; tacticalcommunications under urbancombat/complex terrain conditionsis sometimes a very hard thing to do.G6 and S6 officers will need to knowhow to pick an antenna, mode oftransmission, and frequency bandthat will provide the key to success.Much depends upon the skill of unitSignal officers. Using our new HFequipment can help get the messagethrough. Communications plannersat every level need to understand theconcepts of propagation, path loss,antennas, antenna couplers anddigital signal processing as outlined.When they do the chances of gettingcritical C2 information to all ech-elons of an urban combat force viaHF-CNR will be much better.

Note: At this time, the numberof HF radios in the force is not

overwhelming.There will besituations wherethere just is no AN/PRC-150 or other HFman-pack radiosaround to use in theurban fight. In thiscase we will have tofall back on existingstocks of VHF/UHFradios likeSINCGARS or AN/PRC-126, or the newcommercial-off-the-shelf CNRs that arenow appearing insignificant numberssuch as the AN/PRC-117F (man-pack/vehicular) andthe AN/PRC-148(handheld). Theprincipals outlinedabove such as usingthe lowest frequencyat VHF and improv-ing antenna effi-ciency all still apply.Measures such as

Fig. 6 Ground-plane tail(counterpoise) concept forthe on-the-movecommunications. Tieantenna horizontal for high-angle (NVIS) radiationpattern. pattern.

26 Spring 2004

Fig. 7 AS-3683 SINCGARS metal tape Manpack Antenna withflexible gooseneck base that can be made vertical for ground-wave HF communications or horizontal for sky-wave (NVIS)communications. AN/PRC-150 antenna tuner/couplers willimpedance match this antenna but efficiency will be poor.Antenna suitable for vertical use inside buildings. Use longerOE-505 if possible. Try higher (shorter wavelength) HFfrequencies if possible for better efficiency.

Fig. 8 Signal-to-Noise Ratios requiredfor different AN/PRC-150 transmissionmodes. Note LDV recovers signalsfrom below the noise level and MELP600 operates well in a low S/N rationweal signal environment commonlyfound in urban combat environments.

Fig. 9 COM-201 VHF (30-88Mhz)self-supporting ground-planeantenna. COM-201 can easily bebrought forward for urban combatsince it has a small self-containedpackage and requires no mast.Good low angle radiation and gaincharacteristics are a great helpunder urban combat conditions.

providing antenna tails etc. will alsohelp these radios to increase signallevels just like they will an HF radioand for the same reasons. NVIS ofcourse will not apply since theionosphere cannot reliably reflecthigh angle signals on frequenciesabove around 10Mhz or less. Ifforced to use VHF radios for urbancombat there is yet one more thingwe can do. Many units are nowreceiving the COM-201 free standing30-88Mhz antennas that replace theirold OE-254 bi-conical antenna. TheCOM-201 is an excellent 30-88Mhzvertical ground plane extendedrange antenna with a low takeoffangle and excellent performancecharacteristics (see Army Communica-tor Summer 2001). The antenna isdesigned to be lightweight, easy tomove, and to stand on its own

integral tripod/ ground plane. Dueto this construction, it is a balancedantenna and therefore more efficientthan any man-pack whip etc. TheCOM-201 can be brought forwardand setup on the ground near towhere C2 Headquarters are operat-ing or even inside buildings. Thecombination of high antenna effi-ciency and low takeoff angle and theuse of the lowest possible opera-tional frequency will greatly im-prove the signal penetration prob-ability for VHF surface wave trans-missions. The COM-201 (see Fig. 9)can be connected to any 30-88Mhzradios in the inventory and becauseof its performance and portability isvirtually the only thing in the VHFinventory that can improve standardVHF radio equipment operations inthe urban environment. Unit Signal

officers need to be aware of thisantenna when only VHF radio isavailable to support units in urbancombat.

Tactical communications usingCNR in the urban environment is ahard but not impossible mission forsmall unit Signal officers. A littlebasic knowledge about currentequipment capabilities and thecritical factors of antenna andfrequency selection will reduce thedifficulty of urban combat communi-cations to a much more manageabletask.

To smooth this bump in ourprofessional roads the smart unitSignal officer needs to learn a little,hopefully by reading this article (andother publications) and experiment alot. Drag out those HF radios andantennas. Even the older ones that


don’t have all the capabilities of theAN/PRC-150.

Try different antennas, powerlevels and frequencies etc. until youfind the combination of things thatwork in your situation before youhave to do it for real. The same goesfor the VHF radios you have. Don’twait to go to the NTC, JRTC or theMOUNT site. The barracks andcantonment areas of major armybases are fine for getting ready tocommunicate in urban combat. Theyare just like cities and towns any-where in the world. National Guardunits have it even easier, in manycases all they have to do is get out ofthe armory and into the neighbor-hood! The Signal Center also needsto get in gear! Current doctrine,training materials and POIs on howto use CNR in urban-combat justdon’t have the detail required.Documented requirements for urbancombat specific equipment don’texist either as far as we can tell. Withthe prospects of large-scale urbancombat looming larger every dayand the reality of Operation IraqiFreedom with us now, we need toact!

Mr. Fiedler – a retired SignalCorps lieutenant colonel – is an engineerand project director at the project

manager for tactical-radio communica-tions systems, Fort Monmouth. Pastassignments include service with Armyavionics, electronic warfare, combat-surveillance and target-acquisitionlaboratories, Army CommunicationsSystems Agency, PM for mobile-subscriber equipment, PM-SINCGARSand PM for All-Source AnalysisSystem. He’s also served as assistantPM, field-office chief and director ofintegration for the Joint Tactical FusionProgram, a field-operating agency of thedeputy chief of staff for operations.Fiedler has served in Army, ArmyReserve and Army National GuardSignal, infantry and armor units and asa DA civilian engineer since 1971. Heholds degrees in both physics andengineering and a master’s degree inindustrial management. He is the authorof many articles in the fields of combatcommunications and electronic warfare.

Mr. Farmer is a Vietnam-eraSignal soldier and former lieutenantcolonel in California’s State MilitaryReserve, where he ran intrastateemergency communications. He’s agraduate of USMC Command and Staffcollege. He’s a professional engineer,has an extra-class Amateur Radiolicense and is president of EFA Tech-nologies, Inc., in Sacramento, Calif. Hehas a bachelor’s degree in electrical

engineering and a masters in physics,both from California State University.He has published three books and morethan 40 articles, holds four U.S. Patentsand is a frequent guest speaker atcommunications and antenna-orientedconferences.

ACRONYM QUICKSCAN

ARQ – automatic request for re-transmissionCNR – combat net radioCOTS – commercial-off-the-shelfCP – command postdb – decibelsDSP – digital signal processingJTRC – Joint Readiness TrainingCenterLDV – Last Ditch VoiceLOS – line-of-sightMELP – Mixed Excitation Linear Pre-dictionMOUT – Military Operations on Ur-ban TerrainNTC – National Training CenterNVIS – Near Vertical Incident Sky-wavePL – path lossOIF – Operation Iraqi FreedomRF – radio frequencySINCGARS – single-channeledground-to-air radio systemS/N – signal to noiseTOC – tactical operations centerUHF – ultra high frequencyVHF – very high frequency

28 Spring 2004

by retired LTC Edward J. Farmer,P.E.

In our modern suite ofcommunication options, high-frequency radio has the uniqueproperty of requiring no infra-structure. A complete voice anddata radio station is easily man-portable and capable, with properuse, of communicating with anyother spot on earth.

When the German army wasdeveloping the doctrine thatbecame Blitzkrieg it was obviousfrom the outset that a paradigm shiftin communications was essential.Heinz Guderian, the architect of“Blitzkrieg” said, “I want to com-mand over the radio from the front,not talk about it in the rear on atelephone.” Since he was originallycommissioned as a signal officer andspent much of his career with issuesrelated to staff organization andcommunication, he had an unusualperspective on the essential roll ofcommunications in maneuverwarfare, and how it could beachieved.

A complete HF radio system is

easily man-portable, but perfor-mance improves with the size of theantenna – and a full-sizeantenna can be over a hundredfeet long. Mobility favorssmall antennas, and the “holygrail” of HF antenna researchis a physically small antennacapable of “full-size” perfor-mance. One of the notableefforts along the way, butcertainly not the holy grail, isthe small loop.

Small-loop antennas havebeen around for a very long

time. While opinionsvary as to whether theantennas were loopsor top-loaded mono-poles, the German army inWWII fielded a number ofscout and command ve-hicles with loop-like an-tenna structures. Probablythe most famous is ErwinRommel’s command ve-hicle, as seen in Fig. 2.

The idea of a loopantenna comes from therealization that radiationfield is the space integral ofantenna current overdistance. Long antennaswith low current producethe same field intensity assmall antennas with high

current. The problem becomesdesigning a radiating structurethat promotes the flow of verylarge radio-frequency currents.The obvious “cut-to-the-chase”answer is, “make a closed loop.”If the loop circumference is fairlysmall its radiation resistance willbe small. Because such a struc-ture will be inherently inductivethere will be some inductivereactance opposing current flow,but it can be easily eliminated byadding some series capacitance toform a series-resonant circuit. In

such a situation, the net reactance iszero and the resistance is the radia-

tion resistance plus the loss resis-tance of the loop, both of which arevery small — perhaps even less thanan ohm. This “short circuit” pro-motes the flow of huge currents andtherefore the possibility of largefields from physically small struc-tures.

As the circumference of thestructure increases, so does theradiation resistance. Also, the phaseof the antenna current in one place issufficiently different from the phaseof the current in another that theradiation pattern becomes a strongfunction of the frequency of opera-tion, and the expected performanceonly occurs near the design fre-

Mobility favors small antennas:small-loop high-frequency antennas

Heinz Guderian had an

unusual perspective on

the essential roll of

communications in

maneuver warfare, and

how it could be achieved.

Fig. 1 General Heinz Guderian commandingfrom the front over a radio, circa 1940.

Fig. 2 General Erwin Rommel’s WWIIcommand vehicle showing a loop-likeantenna structure.


quency. This causes such a loop tobehave more like the linear antennaswith which we are more familiar. Aclassical “full size” loop has acircumference of one wavelength atits intended operating frequency,and isn’t especially useful formilitary purposes.

The “small loop” term isusually reserved for closed-loopantennas in which the currentaround the loop is more-or-less in-phase, so the loop antenna can betreated as a magnetic dipole. Thiscriteria limits the antenna to acircumference of about ¼-wave-length at the highest frequency atwhich it is to be used. Also, itbecomes harder and harder to matcha radio to a small loop as the fre-quency increases – the feedpointimpedance becomes quite large andextremely reactive. Matching aradio to a small loop is one of thevery interesting engineering chal-lenges of loop antenna engineering.

The components of a smallloop are shown in Fig. 3.

The advantage of a small loop,at least at the high end of its fre-quency range is that it provides gain

and patternsvery similar towhat one wouldexpect from afull-size (1/2-wavelength)dipole at the same frequency. This isa huge advantage – a physicallysmall, lightweight, easy-to-deployantenna that provides about thesame performance normally ob-tained only after three Soldiers do 15to 30 minutes work erecting mastsand stringing wire.

There are two significantlimitations. First, loops are sensitiveto objects moving in their vicinity(near field) so re-tuning can be afrequent requirement.

Second, as frequency decreasesfrom the size-defining highestfrequency so does efficiency. Whilea loop will theoretically operate atany lower frequency the efficiencydecreases so significantly thatpractical issues restrict it to about anoctave (2:1 frequency range), so thelowest frequency is generallyassumed to be about half the highestfrequency. While the antenna’spattern remains the same as fre-

quency decreases, the loss inefficiency dramatically reduces thegain. At the lower frequency theloop’s gain will be down by about 10dB from what it was at its highestfrequency.

This effectively converts a 100-watt radio at the higher frequency toa 10-watt radio at the lower one, andrelegates the performance to some-thing more equivalent to the com-monly used vehicular whip antennasthan it does to a full-size dipole. Thisdoes not however eliminate the loopfrom one of its most importantmilitary applications, that of a smallvehicular on-the-move antenna. Itdoes require that care be taken intrading off antenna size, radiationefficiency, and transmitter power.

Loops can be arranged with theplane of the loop vertical or horizon-tal. Both give satisfactory perfor-mance for modern land HF combatcommunications. The horizontalconfiguration produces more lower-

Fig. 3 The components of a small loop antennasuitable for military applications. Variations inconfiguration are possible, but one way oranother, all the elements shown are required.Tuning the loop is a separate issue from tuningthe radio to the feedline – the tuner in the radio isnot suitable for both – a loop-tuning system ofsome kind is essential, hence the need for thetuning capacitor.

Fig. 5 – The pattern for a horizontal small loop includesan overhead minimum which reduces NVISeffectiveness, but what’s missing in the overhead isradiated at lower angels useful for ground wave orlong-haul paths.

Fig. 4 – a vertical small loop cut for a high frequencyof 8 MHz with patterns shown for 2 MHz (inner trace)and 8 MHz (outer trace). Note the NVIS-compatiblepattern at both frequencies. In this case there is about5 dB difference in vertical gain although there is morethan 10 dB difference in gain at lower angles.

30 Spring 2004

angle radiation useful for longdistance (low angle) communi-cation and surface wave(ground) LOS systems, at theexpense of the near-verticalradiation required for NVIS(near vertical-incidenceskywave) operation. NVIS isthe most useful mode foroperation in theater/corps-sizeareas so many of the world’sarmies (ie. Russia, China andNorway) have opted for thisorientation.

The gain and pattern of avertical small loop is shown inFig. 4, and a horizontal smallloop in Fig. 5.

Understanding efficiencyis the key to understanding andeffectively using small loops.Assuming the loop-tuningmechanism balances the induc-tive reactance of the loop itselfwith the capacitive reactance ofthe tuning capacitor, then thefeedpoint impedance of the loop isthe radiation resistance plus the lossresistance. In all radiating struc-tures, radiation resistance increaseswith length, so we would expect theradiation resistance to be prettysmall.

A common relationship for theradiation resistance of a small loopis:

Rr = 197 [ Circumference /

Operating wavelength ]4(eqn 1)

If the loop circumference is ¼wavelength the radiation resistanceis about 0.77 ohms – about a hun-dredth that of a full-size dipole – butthen that’s necessary to get the verylarge loop currents we’re after.

If radiation resistance is the“good” resistance (that representingthe conversion of applied radiofrequency energy into radiation

field) then the“bad” resistance isthe “loss resis-tance.” It includesthe skin-effectresistance of theloop conductor plusthe resistance of alljoints and connec-tions. If the connec-tions are kept to aminimum and well-made the main lossis in the tuningcapacitor and in theskin-effect resis-tance of the loopmaterial itself. It iscrucial the loop bemade of a highly

conductive material, and that itbe large in cross-section.Assuming the loop is copper,the relationship for skin-effectloss resistance is:

Rs = 9.96 x 10-4 * “f * S / d

Where R is in ohmsf is the frequency in MHzS is the circumference in feetd is the conductor diameterin inches

Note that loss resistancechanges as the square root offrequency, while radiationresistance changes as the fourthpower of frequency. Asfrequency decreases from theloop’s upper design frequencythe radiation resistance de-creases as the fourth power offrequency while the lossresistance decreases muchmore slowly. Efficiency is

calculated as:

Efficiency = Rr / (Rr + Rloss)

Which decreases as the 3.5th

power of frequency. This is whyefficiency falls off so badly near thebottom of the frequency range. Thisis much easier to visualize on agraph. These data were computedfor a loop designed for operation upto 30 MHz and the results areplotted in Fig. 6.

Fig. 7 – Shown here is the tuningcapacitor from a commercial small loop.Note the welded construction intended tominimize connection loss, and also thelarge spacing between plates. This loopcan tune down to about 12 MHz. Lowerfrequencies would require more plates orlarger plates. Higher power radios wouldrequire more spacing between the plates.

Fig. 6 The graph shows radiation resistance, loss resistance, and efficiency of a 30 MHzsmall loop over frequency. Note that while efficiency is good at the upper designfrequency it becomes less 50 percent just below 15 MHz.


ACRONYM QUICKSCAN

CNR – combat net radioGHz – gigahertzHF – high frequencyJTRS – Joint Tactical Radio SystemLOS – line-of-sightMHz – megahertzNVIS – Near Vertical Incidence Sky-waveOhm – unit of electrical resistanceR&D – Research and development

There are two other issues. Thefirst is bandwidth. A radiatingstructure involving very low resis-tance and very high reactance is thedefinition of a high Q circuit, andsuch circuits have very narrowbandwidth. This means the tuningcapacitance will have to be adjustedwith even the smallest change inoperating frequency.

The second issue is the tuningcapacitor itself. It must be adjustableover the required range of values forthe specific loop design, and mustwithstand the substantial voltages(easily several thousands of volts)that appear across it. In the case of“simple” air dielectric variablecapacitors (see Fig. 7) this amountsto large spacings between the plates,which, to achieve the requiredcapacitance, involves very big plates.

There are alternatives to airvariable capacitors, the two commonones being vacuum variable capaci-tors (although the large glass enclo-sure makes them somewhat fragilefor military purposes) and discretecomponent capacitors that areswitched in and out of the circuit asneeded. The switches have towithstand the very substantial r.f.current flows. One such switch ismade by Kilovac Corporation and

amounts to a vacuum relay. Eventhough fairly small (2-inch diameter)these relays are rated for 25,000 voltsand 30 amps making them appropri-ate for most loop applications.

Whether the tuning capacitor isa rotary (air or vacuum variable) ormade of individually switchedcomponents operation is much easierif adjusting the loop tuning capaci-tance for loop resonance is doneautomatically. This requires somekind of specially designed automaticloop tuner. Such equipment existsand is available in one form oranother from loop antenna manufac-turers. It is critical to mention,however, that the antenna tuner in acommercial radio probably isn’tgoing to do loop tuning more thanonce. The high current and espe-cially the high voltage dramaticallyexceeds the design parameters ofthese commercial tuners and theodds one would survive loopoperation are extremely small.Military tuners and radios will havea somewhat better chance, but thereal answer is a purpose-designedloop tuning system.

While there are some chal-lenges with the successful designand application of loops it has beendone quite successfully since well

before WWII. The following photo-graphs illustrate some more contem-porary applications.

Mr. Farmer is a Vietnam-eraSignal soldier and former lieutenantcolonel in California’s State MilitaryReserve, where he ran intrastateemergency communications. He’s agraduate of USMC Command and Staffcollege. He’s a professional engineer,has an extra-class Amateur Radiolicense and is president of EFA Tech-nologies, Inc., in Sacramento, Calif. Hehas a bachelor’s degree in electricalengineering and a masters in physics,both from California State University.He has published three books and morethan 40 articles, holds four U.S. Patentsand is a frequent guest speaker atcommunications and antenna-orientedconferences.

Fig. 9 (Left) A Russiancommunications vehicle withtwo vertical loop elements.

Fig. 8 (Above) A Russian tank with aguard-rail-like small loop. Note theplane of the loop is horizontal.

Fig. 10 (Below right) An Israeliarmy vehicle with two half-loopelements. The vehiclestructure completes the loop.This is a somewhat primitiveresearch and developmenteffort by Chelton in France.Using the vehicle as part of theloop is not without challenges.The loss resistance of thevehicle will be much higherthan copper or aluminumconductor (the resistance ofsteel is more than six times thatof copper), and the effect of thehigh radio frequency currentson vehicle components andequipment requires evaluation.

32 Spring 2004

by retired LTC David M. Fiedler

Recently, at the 2003 SignalSymposium and prior to that in histestimony to the Congress, LTGWilliam “Scott” Wallace, formercommanding general of V Corpsduring the invasion of Iraq, madethe following statement about thecommand, control and communica-tions situation during the Iraq fight.“Despite the introduction of battle-command-on-the-move capabilitiesthat I enjoyed in my assault com-mand post, the vast majority oftactical leaders and CPs (commandposts) enjoyed few on-the-movecapabilities. Most were tethered to aCP and largely dependant upon line-of-sight communications.

“Case in point. At the corpslevel the G2 could see individualfighting positions defending acritical bridge because we had aUAV (unmanned-aerial vehicle)leading the lead formations. But wecould not get the data down to theunit who was taking the objectivebecause all the CPs were moving. Itwas a deliberate attack at the corpslevel, but a movement to contact atthe battalion level,” Wallace said.

This statement upsets megreatly both as a student of militaryart, science and history; and as aSignal professional with over 35years service in all components ofthe U.S. Army. Wallace’s statementwhen reasonably analyzed can onlylead to the conclusion there was afailure in both communicationsplanning and communicationsexecution. The means to providewhat Wallace needed (beyond–line-of-sight-on-the-move communica-tions) certainly exist today in ourwidely deployed family of high-frequency combat net radios and hasfor many generations. Why thenwere we not able to improvise, and

adapt our existing resources toovercome Wallace’s communicationsproblems?

Wallace and the whole Coali-tion Force in Iraq were magnificentlyexecuting classic offensive “Blitz-krieg” operations. In German,Blitzkrieg means lightning war. Inthe modern tactical sense it includesattacks where the enemy thinks youcannot attack, rapid advances intothe heart of enemy forces andterritory, and coordinated massiveair and artillery attacks that withtoday’s technology also includes

missiles, attack helicopters andprecision guided weapons. The useof such tactics is intended to stun theenemy and shock them to the pointthat they can no longer react. TheGerman Army in World War II wonmost of their great victories with thistactic. Field Marshall’s Hans vonSeekt, Irwin Rommel and HeinzGuderian (a signal branch officer),are all given credit for inventing andperfecting the Blitzkrieg tactic withmilitary scholars giving the lionsshare of the credit to Guderian thesignalman. Guderian was not only

HF combat net radiolesson learned again

Fig. 1 Sd.Kfz-223 wheeled communications/liaison vehicle circa 1935used for ground to air coordination. note the “frame” (horizontal loop)high frequency antenna that generates NVIS (sky-wave) signals thatprovide terrain independent radio communications using NVIS signalsover corps/theater size areas. Aircraft flying low-level reconnaissance andattack missions passed their information to this facility for further relay viaradio, telephone, teletype or messenger to command and control facilitiessimilar to modern U.S. Army Tactical Operations Centers. Communicationswere self contained and operable both fixed and on-the-move.


Germany’s premier tactician, heeventually became Chief of Staffof the army imagine thathappening to a U.S. Signalofficer!

Why Guderian from thesignal branch? Because, notonly was old Heinz a tacticalgenius who conceived a newcombined arms organization toexecute the Blitzkrieg concept(the Panzer Division/Corps/Army) but also in his ownwords circa 1920: “I realizedthat I would no longer com-mand from the rear with atelephone (World War I style) butfrom the front with a radio”.Because of Guderian’s signalbackground and position in thehigh command, he assured thateach tank, aircraft, and unitcommand post in the Panzerforce had long-range, mobile,combat-net radio communica-tions of the right type to sup-port its mission. (See Figs. 1 and2). The same type radio Wallaceneeded almost 70 years later.

These were in large partthe FuG-10 HF operating in theHF 2-18 MHz frequency range.The Guderian designed HFradio nets provided a level ofcommand and control neverbefore achieved on the battle-field. Long-range (HF) Combat-Net Radio made the PanzerDivision and its air support themost destructive and efficientcombined arms force in history.The U.S. Army learned muchfrom the Germans of the 1930sand 1940s and thanks to officerssuch as Fox Connor, Ben Lear,George Marshall, DwightEisenhower and the alwaysrevered George Patton, the U.S.Army could also combine commandand control, logistics, firepower andair support and by 1944 could outBlitzkrieg the inventors of the wholeidea. We continue to improve thiscapability to this day as our victoriesin Iraq prove.

The basic concept of theGerman combined arms Panzer forcerefined by the American Army overthe last 70 years and given modern

technology was the force thatWallace entered Iraq with in 2003. Interms of organization and tactics.Rommel and Guderian would havefelt quite at home in V Corps withtheir rapid movements, ability to seethe battlefield, and elaborate meth-ods of command, control andcommunications between groundand air elements. What would haveshocked them all but particularly

Guderian with his emphasis oncommunications, would havebeen the combat communicationsfailure at the key defendedhighway bridge that Wallacedescribed, and V Corps’ apparentinability to provide timelycommand, control and intelli-gence information to its forwardelements with the resources italready had. The problem ofreaching the battalion Wallacerefers to as being unreachableand therefore conducting amovement to contact not adeliberate attack because “all thecommand posts were moving” isa problem that was solved wellbefore to 1939 in both the Ger-man and U.S. armies.

Not only was it solved, itwas solved without the use ofsatellite communications, com-plex tactical data networks,unmanned aerial vehicles,balloons, retransmission stationsetc. A simple single-channel HFradio with the proper antenna,frequency assignment and theknowledge to use it is all thatwas required both then and now.

By the time the Germansinvaded Poland (1939) Guderianhad long worked out the tech-niques of Near Vertical IncidenceSky-wave HF radio communica-tions and how to use FuG-10 HFradios, both monopole and loopantennas, surface wave radiopropagation and the reflectiveproperties of the ionosphere(NVIS) to communicate overhuge areas when halted, on-the-move, or in the air. (See Fig. 3).Near Vertical Incidence Sky-wave techniques are described inU.S. Army Signal Corps publica-tions as far back as the 1930s and

are still currently reflected in ourdoctrine (FM24-18, FM11-53, FM11-64, FM11-65, TM11-666, MIL-HDBK-413, to name a few). Moreover,ground and airborne HF radio bothfixed and on-the-move using NVIStechniques has been a topic ofdiscussion by several authors in theArmy Communicator more than adozen times since 1983 alone.

Additionally, Special Opera-

Fig. 2 Stryker-like Sd.Kfz-232 heavyarmored wheeled command-post vehiclecirca 1938. Note use of both the NVIS“frame” (horizontal loop) antenna for long-distance wide area on-the-movecommunications reflected off theionosphere and a long efficient verticalmonopole antenna for shorter distance“ground wave/surface wave” LOScommunications. Facility communicationswere self-contained and capable of on OTMoperation. NVIS was the primary mode ofOTM omni-directional communications. Ashort vertical (whip) antenna was alsoprovided for short distance OTM LOScommunications.

34 Spring 2004

tions Forces, Army Aviation and theArmy Medical Department havedeployed hundreds of new AN/ARC-220 and AN/PRC-138/150 HFradios for exactly this purpose overthe last 15 years. C3 elements of the“big” Army also possess largenumbers of HF radio’s that rangefrom the most modern (AN/PRC-150 family) to somewhat obsoletebut still useable (AN/PRC-104family) but as this instance proves,have not employed them nearly aswell. This forces us to raise thequestion “why were minimumessential doctrinally required HFcommunications not available to VCorps Headquarters when theyneeded them in 2003 like they werefor Rommel and Guderian in 1939and for Patton and Eisenhower inthe great Louisiana Maneuvers of1940?”

Further, it also forces us to askthe question why is the U.S. Armywith certain notable exceptions(SOF, AMEDD, Army Aviation) theonly army in the world and the onlydepartment in the U.S. Departmentof Defense with the mindset to rejecta proven viable, inexpensive, meansof LOS and BLOS fixed and OTMmilitary communications?

A large part of the answer isthat HF communications is thevictim of numerous “communica-tions failure myths” created over theyears by Signal officers desperatelysearching for reasons for failure totell their commanders because theyfailed to be taught or to learn enoughradio technology to effectively usethe proven military potential of theHF medium and the equipment theywere given. In short, you have toknow something about HF to use it.This bad reputation was made evenworse in the 1970s when it wascoupled with the need to find “billpayers” for other programs such assatellite communications so HFresources were cut for both procure-ment and training. Additionally,during the same timeframe, SignalCorps leadership was bent onwashing its hands of all combat netradio systems by declaring them“user-owned and operated”. Onecan only wonder at the politics

behind this decision. Let’s begin toanalyze Wallace’s problem bydebunking some of the worstcommon myths about HF tacticalcommunications:

Myth 1 – The HF spectrum (2-30Mhz) by international treaty islimited to analog voice singlesideband AM modulation in 3Khzchannels and therefore can onlysupport digital voice and data atrates no faster than 2400 bps.

-False; slow speed digital voicemodes are in most modern HFradios for operation over degradedchannels but so are MODEMS thatcan operate at speeds up to 9.6Kbsinside the mandated 3Khz channels.This allows voice, and digitalapplications such as e-mail, andimagery to be viable HF modes ofoperation.

Myth 2 – HF radios are notgood for short distance tacticalcommunications beyond-line-of-sight and leave gaps in area cover-age.

- False, while intercontinentalcommunications distances arecommonly achieved using some HFtechniques, use of properly selectedantennas and frequencies willproduce antenna patterns good forcommunications over Corps andbelow size areas independent of theintervening terrain and without gapsin coverage. ONLY HF RADIO CANDO THIS WITHOUT THE NEEDFOR SATCOM OR UAV SUPPORT!See fig 3.

Myth 3 – HF radio systems arenot omni-directional and are there-fore not suited for tactical communi-cations.

- False, common HF antennaslike vertical monopoles (whips),horizontal wire dipoles, and loopantennas all provide omni-direc-tional communications when config-ured properly for that purpose. Evena horizontal wire dipole whenlocated close to the earth is an omni-directional antenna (see Fig 3). These

antennas can be made directionalbut only when elevated to a consid-erable height.

Myth 4 – HF radio systems aremore adversely affected by iono-spheric storms, solar flares, suddenIonospheric disturbances and polarblackouts.

- False to a large degree. Thesenaturally occurring phenomena tosome degree affect all radio systems.The lower portion of the HF bandwill be affected first. Affects rangefrom almost nothing to completeblackout. Most modern HF systemsemployed by the Army have afeature called Automatic LinkEstablishment. This feature scans theradio’s assigned frequency band andwill automatically establish commu-nications on any authorized work-able frequency quickly after adisturbance subsides. Tactical radiosoperating in other bands and equallyaffected by these factors don’t havethese features and may take longerto recover.

Myth 5 – “Sunspots” kill HFradio systems.

- False to a large degree.Sunspots are whirling masses ofelectrically charged gas formed bymagnetic fields deep within the Sun.Magnetic fields often more powerfulthan the magnetic field of the Earthoccur at the center of a sunspot.Huge waves of energy produced bythe Sun’s core erupt through thesurface launching a mass of electri-fied gas and other material. Viewedfrom Earth this looks like a dark spoton the surface of the Sun where theeruption occurred. The electrifiedgas has a large magnetic field at itssurface that races through space andcan disrupt radio communicationsand electrical systems here on Earth.These disruptions can last a whileand affect all radio communications.The lower frequencies such as HFtake a while to recover from suchdisturbances. ALE again will findchannels suitable for communica-tions and restore service faster thansystems using other tactical radiofrequencies. Sunspots don’t happen


that often but this complex soundingphenomenon has been used toexplain signal outages to command-ers far beyond what is justified.

Myth 6 – Levels of manmade,atmospheric, cosmic and internalelectrical noise are greater in the HFfrequency range and cannot becompensated for.

-False, The combination of ALEthat selects the best authorizedchannel based on the best signal-to-noise ratio, higher transmitterpower, and the system gain derivedfrom the use of powerful voice anddata digital signal processingtechniques including Mixed Excita-tion Linear Predictive coding allowHF communications to proceed in anextremely degraded environment.Some techniques internal to modernarmy HF radios such as MELP willactually recover signals from near orbelow the noise level.

Myth 7 – BLOS HF communi-cations OTM don’t work.

-False, like everything else inradio system engineering success inOTM/BLOS HF communicationsdepends on the critical selection ofantennas and frequency. Vehiclemounted vertical monopole (whip)antennas work and will produce“surface-wave signals”. Surfacewave signals will propagate out to acertain distance along the earth andthen due to their contact with theearth become to weak for use intactical communications. Dependingupon the type of ground or waterunder the signals, signals at HFfrequencies can go relatively shortdistances to the horizon or in thecase of seawater and certain groundconditions tend to bend along thesurface of the earth and travel wellbeyond line of sight. Signals de-signed to take advantage of iono-spheric reflection by using mobileantennas that produce high angleenergy (loops and bent over whips)will commonly cover Army Corps/Theater size areas of operationswithout gaps in coverage. Onlysignals in the HF frequency band can

be used since the ionosphere will notreflect signals at higher frequencies.While the U.S. Army has yet todeploy a loop antenna we do haveplenty of various length whipantennas and adaptor fittings thatshould make OTM, BLOS tacticalcommunications commonplace inthe Army.

Myth 8 – HF doctrine does notexist in the U.S. Army.

-False again. Despite SovietAdmiral Sergei I. Gorshkov’s oftenquoted dictum that it is “fruitless tostudy U.S. doctrine because theydon’t study it and if they did wouldfeel no obligation to follow it”. Inthis case doctrine is there and valid.There is a huge list of field manuals,technical manuals, military hand-books and training aids that detailsolid doctrinal concepts in HF

communications that are available.On top of that there is an equallyhuge pile of similar doctrine in DoDand other service publications. Someof this information dates back wellinto the early 1920s. Lack of doctrinecannot be an excuse for S/G-6s notto employ tactical HF communica-tions.

Over the past three-plusdecades (roughly the time the SignalCenter and School moved from FortMonmouth to Fort Gordon), belief inthese myths has been handed downfrom generation to generation ofSignal Officers until “HF is no damngood” has become a mantra recitedby the uninformed in order toconceal their lack on knowledge andeducation. This is the root cause ofwhy Wallace was not able to emu-late the performance of Guderian,Rommel and the Panzer’s of the1930s not the lack of doctrine or

Fig. 3Concept of Near Vertical Incidence Sky-wave signal propagation. Horizontalwire dipoles, bent (forward or rear) monopoles (whips), and aircraft orvehicle mounted loop antennas will all produce the high angle HF radiationthat was needed to solve GEN William “Scott” Wallace’s problem. Operationcan be fixed or OTM and since the entire signal is showered down fromabove via ionospheric reflection terrain is NOT a factor. Frequency selectionis a critical factor since higher frequencies will penetrate the ionosphereand go off into deep space. Automatic Link Establishment features inmodern radios will find the best authorized frequency to establish NVIScommunications. Frequencies are normally 2-4Mhz at night and 4-8Mhzdaytime for corps/theater areas of coverage.

36 Spring 2004

equipment.Sadly, the Army has deployed

across the force many of the ele-ments that were needed to solve thecommunications OTM problem thatWallace so eloquently presented toboth the Signal Symposium and inhis testimony to Congress. Moresadly still much of what was re-quired was present and underWallace’s own command at the timehe needed it so desperately. Specifi-cally elements present that shouldhave solved the problem were:

1 – Skimpy but adequatequantities of HF radios to provideOTM/BLOS HF communicationsover corps/theater size areas fromcorps to battalion level if anyonecared to locate them. This equipmentis on the unit Table of Organizationand Equipment.

2 - Doctrine that laid out thecorrect net radio structure to providemultiple HF communications pathsfrom where the bridge informationexisted to where it was needed ifanyone cared to read it.

3 – Procedures required to getthe correct antennas configured andthe radio equipment on the air in theOTM/BLOS mode - if anyone caredto implement them.

What was not present andcaused the critical breakdown incommunications was:

1 – Education- The Army nolonger conducts an military occupa-tional specialty producing coursecalled Radio and Microwave SystemOfficer (O505) as it did in the 60sand 70s. This hurts in an Army thatuses combat net radios for almosteverything on the battlefield. Theidea of calling CNR “user-ownedand operated” is bankrupt. Radiocommunications is not a trivialsubject and to learn it to a levelrequired for effective use in combatSignal officers, warrant officers andsenior NCOs need to be bettereducated - particularly in the basicfields of radio physics/systemsengineering, antennas, radio-wave

propagation and frequency engi-neering. These subjects cannot begiven the rush treatment duringinitial training as we do today. Eachrequires hard time in the classroom.This doesn’t mean everyone inSignal needs to have a bachelor ofscience in electrical engineering butit does mean far more instructionthan we give now and at a far higherlevel - particularly for OTM andBLOS communications such as HFand SATCOM. Signal personneleducated this way would have inthis situation been able to analyzethe tactical situation and had theright CNR (HF) and the rightantenna, and the right frequencyassignment ready to go as thesituation developed. If it is beyondthe Army’s current capability toeducate to this level then we shouldconsider contracting a local commu-nity college or technical school todeliver the proper instruction. Thisneeds to be backed up with atakeaway package of technicalpublications and computer-basedtraining that is retained by eachgraduate for use in the field. This isnot new and is currently imple-mented by other services.

2 – Training – For far too longthe Signal Corps idea of training hasbeen teaching students what buttonto push, or what module/box tochange. What we have failed toteach is the “why”. In many casesSignal personnel cannot explain whythey are doing what they are doing -they are just doing it by rote when itcomes to CNR systems. A logicalthinking process and a reasonableknowledge of how things work isjust not being imparted to many (notall) of our signal soldiers. Whenthese personnel get to field (S-6)assignments they are expected to bethe commanders technical expertswith all communications/automa-tion equipment whether it is ownedby the user or not. Often they failwith CNRs through no fault of theirown because they have not seen this“user” radio equipment before.When as so often happens in de-ployed situations something unusualhappens, the button - pushers and

the module changers are stymiedbecause they have no training in alogical method that will isolate CNRsystem problems and fix them basedon knowing the equipment and howit works. Additionally, personneltrained this way are not prepared tojump into situations like the one thatfaced Wallace with innovativetechnical applications to fit uniquetactical situations on the fly. Formany years, I have heard numeroussenior Signal officers say essentially“you really never learn this stuffuntil you get to a unit and you’re onthe job”. The incident at the Iraqibridge proves that our branch “OJT”concept is as bankrupt as the “user-owned-and-operated” concept.Hoping for the best is just not acourse of action that works. Hardtime in the classroom backed up byfield training is the only thing thatdoes prepare a Signal soldier forcombat operations.

The situation that Wallace talksabout is not new. In fact it is roughlyequivalent to the famous OperationMarket Garden of World War-IIdepicted in the film A Bridge Too Far.In both operations higher headquar-ters knew the tactical situationconfronting the forward force wellbecause of air reconnaissance andsimilar high command resources.What failed in both cases was thesupporting signal organizationsability to use on-hand, existing, CNRsystems to establish radio communi-cations between forward andsupporting forces that were BLOSbut really not that far away. In 1944GEN Omar Bradley stated to hissubordinate commanders after theMarket Garden force had beenextricated “It took an act of Con-gress to make you officers andgentleman it takes communicationsto make you a commander.” Truerwords were never spoken.

We failed Wallace in thisinstance. He knows it. It was a smallbut significant action in a big opera-tion but he is focused on it. The forceand the Signal staff recovered fromthe shortfall in combat communica-tions and moved on to take thebridge eventually but with somedifficulty. The force and the Signal


ACRONYM QUICKSCAN

Mr. Fiedler – a retired SignalCorps lieutenant colonel – is an engineerand project director at the projectmanager for tactical-radio communica-tions systems, Fort Monmouth. Pastassignments include service with Armyavionics, electronic warfare, combat-surveillance and target-acquisitionlaboratories, Army CommunicationsSystems Agency, PM for mobile-subscriber equipment, PM-SINCGARSand PM for All-Source AnalysisSystem. He’s also served as assistantPM, field-office chief and director ofintegration for the Joint Tactical FusionProgram, a field-operating agency of thedeputy chief of staff for operations.Fiedler has served in Army, ArmyReserve and Army National GuardSignal, infantry and armor units and asa DA civilian engineer since 1971. Heholds degrees in both physics andengineering and a master’s degree inindustrial management. He is the authorof many articles in the fields of combatcommunications and electronic warfare.

ALE – Automatic Link EstablishmentAMEDD – Army Medical DepartmentAVN – Army AviationBCOTM – Battle-Command-on-the-moveBLOS – beyond-line-of-sightC2 – command and controlC3 – command, control and commu-nicationsCNR – combat net radiosCP – command postDoD – Department of DefenseDSP – digital signal processingHF – high frequencyLOS – line-of sightMELP – Mixed Excitation Linear Pre-dictiveMOS – military occupational spe-cialtyNVIS – Near Vertical Incidence Sky-waveO&O – operations and organizationalOJT – on-the-job-trainingOTM – on-the-movePACE – primary, alternate, contin-gency, emergencySA – systems architectureSATCOM – satellite communica-tionsSIDs – sudden Ionospheric distur-bancesSOF – Special Operations ForcesForcesTOC – Tactical Operations CentersTOE – Table of Organization andEquipmentUAVs – unmanned aerial vehicles

staff continued the fight until wewon the war. The failure washowever indicative (at least toWallace) that something was verywrong with combat communicationsand the Signal Corps. Wallace wouldnot have brought this up before theCongress of the United States andagain at the 2003 Signal Symposiumif he were not highly concerned.

What we need to do is listen towhat the general is saying and fix itwith the resources we have on handtoday. This includes:

1) getting more HF hardwareand putting it where it needs to be,

2) building a working systemsarchitecture for all Army organiza-tions,

3) building unit TOEs thattrack the systems architecture,

4) having operations andorganizational concepts that trackthe SA and the TOE, and

5) by dispelling the mythsabout HF radio systems shownabove through a well thought outprofessional CNR education andtraining program,

6) by replacing in the SignalCorps the bankrupt concepts of“user owned and operated” and “onthe job professional signal training”with level appropriate knowledgeand experience and by providingCNR sustainment training on aregular basis to signal staffs in theirfield locations.

We need to remember in thisage when the “technology junkies”seem to rule our thinking with theirexotic networking and informationtransfer ideas that the simple CNR isas basic to the Signal Corps as therifle is to the infantry. Often inBlitzkrieg operations like OIF thenetwork centric way of fighting isout the window (Wallace talks aboutthis in his presentation also) and thesimple HF-CNR is the only systemthat can get the minimum essentialtraffic through -even if the force ismoving and spread BLOS. The HFradio has the characteristics that canhold highly mobile operationstogether over any kind of battlefielduntil more elaborate higher volume

What we need to

do is listen to what

the general is saying

and fix it with the

resources we have

on hand today.

systems can be deployed. Thefamous Signal dictum of PACE(primary, alternate, contingency,emergency) is a very valid conceptthat includes HF and all CNRs(VHF/UHF etc.).

In order to be responsive tochanging battlefield situations andmaintain our credibility with thecommanders, signal personnel needto understand all systems (includingthe humble single channel HF radio)and be able to fit the tool to the job.On the battlefield you never knowwhat system will have to carry theball for a commander who needs tocommunicate.

38 Spring 2004

Army CommunicatorVoice of the Signal Corps RegimentFor Volume 28, Issues 1-4

Title Index … Page 38Author Index … Page 41Subject Index …

Editorial/support staffEditor-in-chief/graphic designer … Lisa Alley/Janet A. McElmurray (28:1), Janet A.McElmurray (28:2-4)Senior advisor … Susan Wood (28:1-4)

IllustratorsSGT Clifton McDonald (28:1, 2, 3); Tammy Moehlman (28:4); SGT Michael Nesmith(28:1); Barbara Hall Powell (28:1, 3, 4); Mike Rodgers (28:4)

Photography55th Signal Combat Camera (28:3); SGT Jan Allende (28:1); Jason Baer (28:3);Linda Bartosik (28:3); Steve Brady (28:2); Rick Brosey (28:1); Jimmy Buffington(28:4); Charlie Cardimona (28:2,3); Gene Collarini (28:2); Gene Curran (28:3);1SGT Timothy Czuba (28:1); Detachment 1, 444th MPAD (28:3); SGT Lyle S. Dillie(28:4); CPL Paula M. Fitzgerald (28:2); Bob Fowler (28:2,3,4); John Glatz (28:3, 4);Ragen Hamilton (28:1); SGT Robert Jones (28:3); MSG Emma Knouser (28:2);SSG Brian Lamar (28:3); Debbie Linton (28:2); Lockheed-Martin Space andSatellite Systems (28:2); Stephen Markowich (28:3); MAJ Christopher Martin (28:2);Kevin Martin (28:2); SGT Ryan Matson (28: 3, 4); SSG Kelly McCargo (28:4); TonyMedici (28:4); Tammy Moehlman (28:4); PVT Armando Monroig (28: 4); SPC ZoeMorris (28:1); CPT Pam Newburn (28:2); SPC M. William Peterson (28:2); PH2(AW/5W) Jessica Sterling (28:1); CPL Todd Pruden (28:3, 4); Anthony Richiazzi(28:2, 3, 4); SGT Richard Robbins (28:1); Ray Roxby (28:2, 3); Joseph Shields(28:2); SSG Mark Swartz (28:2); Melvin D. Tarpley (28:3); Marlene Thompson(28:4); SSG Jennifer K. Yancey (28:2); Michele Yeager (28:2, 3, 4); LindaValenzane (28:2); SGT Courtney Vickery (28:1); WHCA Photolab (28:1)

Titles103rd ACS links data to distant terminals; SPC Eugena Roache and PVT2Fernanda Bergerson; 28:311 Soldiers first to graduate from Army Depot’s 35E course; Michele Yeager;28:2112th Signal Battalion Soldiers get valor awards; CPT Brad Mills; 28:1142nd Signal Brigade ‘lifts bosses’; SFC David Carney; 28:12003 marks the 31st Annual Signal Regimental Symposium; Symposium CellMembers 28: 330th revamps civilian training; Michelle Morton; 28:130th Signal Symposium attracts 2,700 attendees, 200 exhibitors; CPT ThomasBirch 28:13rd Signal Brigade conquers voice, data and video; 1LT Michael Windon311th support to Balikatan ’03 is firm and constant; SFC Michele Hammonds;28:3311th TSC binds UFL together; CPL Jang, Seung-mo; 28:3311th TSC generals visit 1st Signal troops; 2LT Amanda Olney311th Theater Signal Command leads Grecian Firebolt;’03; 28: 331Us make it happen in IT/IA; SFC Curtis L. Rucker; 28: 3IND

EX

‘03


35th Signal deploys off Puerto Ricofor first time in years; SGT RyanMatson and SPC Marimer Navarette;28:3442nd Signal avoids washout fromJoint Thunder hail, rain and sleet;LTC Steven R. Ranson; 28:35th Signal Command general pins onsecond star; Danny M. Johnson; 28:25th Signal Command finds first jointEuropean network operations drill tobe a ‘Dragon’; Danny Johnson; 28:1507th Soldier relates Iraq deployment;SPC Lindsay Oliveras; 28:4509th Operations in Northern Iraq;SGT Peter Fitzgerald; 28: 358th Signal Battalion members enjoyOkinawa dance theater; LTC LeoThrush; 28:159th HHD wins Army supply award;MSG Wesley Weygandt; 28:459th Signal Battalion extends local-area network more than 1,500 milesto Shemya; MAJ Brian Owen; 28:159th’s Thomas publishes fourthmystery book; Bill McPherson; 28:267th Signal departs for desertrotation; SSG Kelly McCargo; 28:478th Signal Battalion Soldiers helpCamp Zama Junior Reserve OfficersTraining Corps; CSM Darrel Calton;28:178th supports Japan’s Disaster Dayexercise; 1LT Luan Nguyen; 28:4Advanced warfare Environmentserial-to-socket conversion programhelps soldiers ‘get the picture’; MAJTim Sellars and Marc Neely; 28:1Agreement aligns Reserve ITfunctions with G6, NETCOM; JoeBurlas; 28:2A meeting of the minds FA 24 and 53Senior Focus Group at the 31st

Sympoium; MAJ Pier Durst; 28:4A new doctrine for a new day; RussellMcCray; 28:4Army Knowledge Awards winnerslist; Patrick Swan; 28:3Army Reserve Signal Commandreceives networking award; CPTGreg Majewski; 28:4Army Small Computer Programlaunches IT E-mart, next generationgovernment website; 28:4Assignment Oriented Training;Beverly Friend; 28:1Assignment Oriented Training; J.S.Vann; 28:3Automating the local purchasingprocess at Karshi-Khanabad Airbase,Ubekistan; CPT David Stern; 28:1Back to Kuwait: Team returns todesert to provide radio support;

Anthony Richiazzi; 28:2Battalion Commanders Forum re-born in 2003; LTC Olen L. Kelley; 28:4Be a bandwidth nibbler, not aKobayashi; LTG Peter Cuviello; 28:1Boutelle relays messages of Army’ssenior leaders, talks about future ofthe Regiment; SGT Ryan Matson; 28:4Byran speaks of changes inRegiment, need to managebandwidth; SGT Ryan Matson; 28:4Can you hear me now?; CPL PaulaFitzgerald; 28: 2CAISI come to bat for coalitionwarfighters in Iraq; Stephen Larsen;28:2“CINC” is sunk; Jim Garamone; 28:1CIO’s career spans the draft, all-volunteer Army; Joe Burlas; 28:2Cisco Academy graduates charterclass during GF ’03; PVT2 FernanadaBergerson and 1LT Shawn Herron; 28:3Command view: we got the righthorses; MG George F. Bowman; 28:3Commentary: Are you a transformingmammal, bug or dinosaur?; PatrickSwan; 28:2Communications-ElectronicsCommand nabs Thomas EdisonAward; 28:1Communications prove no casualtyfor 319th Signal Battalion support;Rob Schuette: 28:3Defense Executive of the Year:Boutelle’s vision kept the militaryconnected in Iraq; Sami Lais;28:4Deployable communications systemunsnarls port cargo snafus; BobFowler and Stephen Larsen; 28:2Depot repairs Sidewinder: U.S. Navy– Another satisfied customer; MicheleYeager; 28:4Digital battle command: Baptism byfire; LTC John W. Charlton; 28:4‘Digital Bridge’ brings technology toStryker Brigade at NTC; SPC AlfredoJimenez; 28:2Donahue takes command of 516th; BillMcPherson; 28:3E-newsletters made easy; CPT DavidStern; 28:1Enhanced Position LocationReporting System; TSM-TR; 28:1Enhancements in store for futureStryker Brigades; Tonya K. Townsell;28:4Enlisted Division Update; MSG JohnPlotts; 28:2Establishing communications: vitalkey to success; Denise Allen; 28:4Eyes of the multiple launch rocketsystem direct rounds to support

frontline units; Timothy L. Rider; 28:3Firebolt communication centerrelocates after mock chemical attack;SPC Crista M. BirminghamFive nations test coalitioncommunications; MAJ RodHedgepath; 28:1Forging the path of Armytransformation; MAJ Robert M. Collins;28:3, 4Former Sailor remembers fallencomrades; SGT Shawn Woodward;28:1Fort Monmouth telecommunicationsinfrastructure upgrade starts;Stephen Larsen; 28:1Four Distinguished Members of theRegiment are honored at the 31st

Symposium; Susan Wood and JanetMcElmurray; 28:4From tactical to installational 63rd

Signal Battalion in Operation IraqiFreedom; LTC John Rutt; 28: 3; CPTJeremiah J. Jette; 28: 3G6 says OIF validates ITtransformation path; Joe Burlas; 28:2Gerstein made impact on 93rd SignalBrigade; 28:2GF ’03 tests new communicationcapabilities for Homeland Defense,Global War on Terrorism; SPC CristaM. Birmingham and CPT Patrick A.Swan; 28:3Hawaii Military Police are first toreceive Pacific Mobile EmergencyRadio System; Joe Halligan and JimArrowood; 28:1IA Workshop focus: ensure securetransmission; PVT Armando Monroig;28:4Incompatible info systems pose aHomeland Security challenge, WhiteHouse info czar says; Gerry Gilmore;28:1Information disseminationmanagement – tactical: providinginformation at the right place andformat; Douglas R. Linton III; 28:4In memoriam: LTG Douglas D.Buchholz, 1946-2003; James Hudgins;28:2Joint Force 4CI integration –significant challenges ahead; JohnSaputo; 28: 2JWID leads the way tointeroperability; Michael A. Brown Sr.;28:2Keeping families informed duringOperation Enduring Freedom; CPTDavid Stern; 28:1Knowledge warriors’ assessnetwork-centric needs at Armysymposium; Patrick Swan; 28:3

40 Spring 2004

Korea: U.S. Navy pilots can landsafely thanks to Tobyhannaupgrades; Michele Yeager; 28:4Kunia begins GSC-52 modernization;SFC Christopher Shamberger; 28:1Layered information assurancedefense is no tootsie roll; CPT ChrisMongirdasLessons learned from StrykerBrigade Combat Team JRTCCERTEX; MAJ Gregg Powell; 28: 3Lifelong learning; Barbara Walton;28:1MARS grams send messages todeployed soldiers; Denise Allen; 28:2MARS volunteer radio operators trainfor emergency scenarios; SFCMichele R. Hammonds; 28:3MILSTAR satellite successfullylaunched to complete theconstellation; 28:2Moving out SMART-T; 28:4Multifaceted RC Workshop assists inmeeting the challenge to get thefuture right; MAJ James Shrader Jr.;28:4National Guard Signal general tappedfor second star; 28:1National Science Center Celebratesflight celebration; 28:1NETCOM Transition Team winsaward; 28:2Network Enterprise TechnologyCommand and InstallationManagement Agency stand up: TeamSignal adds third hat; Bill McPherson;28:1Network operations and securitycenters; G3 Staff, 5th Signal Command;28: 3Network Enterprise TechnologyCommand gets new deputycommander; 28:1New battle-focused FM available thissummer; 28:2New detachment stands up at 30th

Signal Battalion; 1LT Kim Hiland; 28:1New front lines: the defense ofHawaii’s networks; 1LT MarcusBrakewood; 28:4Newest Distinguished Members ofthe Regiment bring a century’sexperience; Susan Wood and LisaAlley; 28:1New product manager overseesArmy’s Europeantelecommunications infrastructure;Stephen Larson; 28:1New switch briefs up DISN-Ebackbone; Pat Connell and DougRasmussen; 28:2New web site online for unitmanning; Joe Burlas; 28:2

Nine team Signaleers supportWarfighter 2002; SPC AdrienneGardner; 28:1No direct funding needed – Armyenterprise agreement provides494,000 Microsoft licenses; StephenLarsen; 28:3OIF lessons learned are shared; PVTArmando Monroig; 28:4Our Regiment is at a turning point;28:3PM DMS-Army streamlines tacticalmessage system, receives DefenseAcquisition Executive recognition;Stephen Larsen; 28:4Poor man’s digitization of thebattlefield; CPT Stephen Hamilton;28:2Prepare for the future at Jointcourse; LTC Reynold Palaganas; 28:1Project Touchdown: how we paid theprice for lack of communicationssecurity in Vietnam; David Fiedler;28:1Reflecting tomorrow’s needs intoday’s training; MAJ Nicole Morris;28:2; MAJ David Long; 28:2Regiment receives new senior-enlisted leader; 28:1Repair success for Air Force radiosparks more workload; AnthonyRicchiazzi; 28:4Reserve Signaleers open CiscoAcademy; 1LT Shawn Herron; 28:1Satellite terminal program earns AMCpartnering success award; StephenLarsen; 28:2Seminar develops joint operatingenvironment; Jim Caldwell; 28:2Senior NCO Symposium Workshopdiscussions; CSM Michael A. Terry;28:4Shaping Hawaii’s information-technology future; MAJ Rod Laszlo;28:1Signal Brigade reactivates in Kuwait;SPC M. William Petersen; 28:3Signal Center welcomes newhistorian; 28:1Signal Center welcomes newmuseum director; Steve Brady andBob Anzuoni; 28:2Signal master sergeant providescommo for North Korea mission; SGTCourtney Vickery; 28:1Signal Regiment reunites atSymposium; SSG Kelly McCargo; 28:4Signal Symposium techno-expoprovides two-way adventure; PVTArmando Monroig; 28:4Signal units at Fort Dix highlighttraining, innovation; SGT Joe Nye;28:3

Signal Soldiers thrive on homestylefield cooking; SGT Joe Nye, SPCEugena Roache and PVT FernandaBergerson; 28:3SIPRNET Connectivity: Do’s andDon’ts; COL Tim Gibson: 28:1Soldiers help set up phone networkin Northern Iraq; SPC JoshuaHutcheson; 28:4Soldiers of 2-3 FA wire schools; CPLTodd Pruden; 28:4Space and Missile Command takesover Fort Greely installation; BillMcPherson; 28:1Special Ops Signal Battalionprovides special support for OIF;CPT Patrick Flood; 28: 3State of the art network providesfaster more reliable information tothe warfighter; G6 Staff Members; 28:3State of the Signal Regiment strong;Denise Allen; 28:1Tactical satellite terminals to get newlease on life; Anthony Ricchiazzi; 28:3Task Force Network formed; LTCNello Thomas; 28:4Team Cobra: 141st Signal Battalion’s“Tip of the Sword” in Iraq; 1LT DavidHumphreys; 28:4Team supports Army’s Recapmission at Tobyhanna; 28:4Teamwork starts missions, improveshandbook; 28:2Technicians enhance personalsurvival radio for warfighters; MicheleYeager; 28:2The 20-year transformation of themulti-compo 142d Signal Brigade;SFC David Carney; 28:1The ashes: Phoenix Rising from thenew Triband Terminal contractawarded; Debbie Linton; 28:2The warfighter and the deployablecommunications package-strategic;CPT Lynn Smolinski; 28: 2; and CW2Theodore Kantor; 28: 2Think like the wolf: Protect yourcritical information with an OPSECprogram; Stephen Larsen; 28:4Tobyhanna high-tech training siteimproves military training; 28:1Tobyhanna kits increase utility ofartillery data vehicles; 28:1To the editor; retired Robert Destatte;28:1Training and Doctrine updated tosupport transportation; Jim Caldwell;28:1Transformation information-technologyplanning continues inHawaii; Walter Taketa and Mike Sato;28:1


Transforming the Army to a network-based organization; Denise Allen; 28:1TRC-170s supported by Tobyhannakey to communication for troops;Michele Yeager; 28:2TROKA communications upgrade;2LT Frank Medina; 28:3Troops phone home courtesy of 40th

Signal Team; SPC M. WilliamPetersen; 28:2TSM-TR update joint tactical radiosystem – cluster 5; 28:4Unit of Action NETWORK MAPEX:Testing the network in a virtualwarfight; COL Joseph Yavorsky; 28:2;Mike Hamilton; 28:2Vital link between ports, U.S. ArmyEurope and CENTCOM; 1LT Nick Inge;28: 3Warfighter: 10th Mountain Division’swinter training exercise; CPT PamNewburn; 28:2Web of integrated command controlsforces in Operation Iraqi Freedom;Timothy Rider; 28: 3White House CommunicationsAgency transforms to meet newchallenges; LTC Laura Hill; 28:1White House honors those keepingthe force manned; Joe Burlas; 28:2Yama Sakura’s informationsuperhighway; SFC Mathew Fearingand SFC Michele Hammonds; 28:3

AuthorsAllen,Denise; ‘Cyberman’ makes

everyone cyberwarriors; 28:1Establishing communications:vital key to success; 28:4MARS grams send messages todeployed soldiers; 28:2State of the Signal Regimentstrong; 28:1Transforming the Army to anetwork-based organization; 28:1

Alley, Lisa and Wood, Susan; NewestDistinguished Members of theRegiment bring acentury’s experience; 28:1

Anzuoni, Bob and Brady, Steve;Signal Center welcomes newmuseum director; 28:2

Arrowood, Jim and Halligan, Joe;Hawaii Military Police are first toreceive PacificMobile Emergency Radio System;28:1

Bergerson, PVT2 Fernanda andRoache, SPC Eugena; 103rd ACS links

data to distant terminals; 28:3

CISCO Academy graduatescharter class during GF ’03; 28:3

Birch, CPT Thomas; 30th SignalSymposium attracts 2,700attendees, 200 exhibitors; 28:1

Birmingham, Crista M.; Fireboltcommunication center relocatesafter mock chemical attack; 28:3

Birmingham, Crista M. and Swan,CPT Patrick A.; GF ’03 tests new

communication capabilities forHomeland Defense, Global Waron Terrorism; 28:3

Bowman, MG George F.; Commandview: We’ve got the right horses;28:3

Brakewood, 1LT Marcus; New frontlines: the defense of Hawaii’snetworks; 28:4

Brady, Steve and Anzuoni, Bob;Signal Center welcomes newmuseum director; 28:2

Burlas, Joe; Agreement aligns ReserveIT functions with G6, NETCOM;28:2CIO’s career spans the draft, all-volunteer Army; 28:2G6 says OIF validates ITtransformation path; 28:2New web site online for unitmanning; 28:2White House honors thosekeeping the force manned; 28:2

Caldwell, Jim; Seminar develops jointoperating environment; 28:2Training and Doctrine updated tosupport transportation; 28:1

Calton, CSM Darrel; 78th SignalBattalion Soldiers help CampZama Junior Reserve OfficersTraining Corps; CSM DarrelCalton; 28:1

Carney, SFC David;142nd SignalBrigade ‘lifts bosses’; 28:1The 20-year transformation of themulti-compo 142nd SignalBrigade; 28:1

Charlton, LTC John W.; Digital battlecommand: Baptism by fire; 28:4

Collins, MAJ Robert M.; Forging thepath of Army transformation; 28:3,4

Cuviello, LTG Peter; Be a bandwithnibbler, not a Kobayashi: 28:1

Fearing, SFC Mathew andHammonds, SFC Michele; Yama

Sakura’s informationsuperhighway; 28:3

Fiedler, David; Project Touchdown:how we paid the price for lack ofcommunications security inVietnam; 28:1

Fitzgerald, CPL Paula; Can you hear

me now?; 28:2Fitzgerald, SGT Peter; 509th

Operations in Northern Iraq; 28;3Flood, CPT Patrick; Special Ops

Signal Battalion provides specialsupport of OIF; 28:3

Fowler, Bob; Deployablecommunications system unsnarlsport cargo snafus; 28:2

Friend, Beverly; Assignment OrientedTraining; 28:1

Durst, MAJ Pier; A meeting of theminds FA 24 and 53 Senior FocusGroup at the 31st Symposium;28:4

G3 Staff, 5th Signal Command; Networkoperations and security centers;28:3

G6 Staff Members; State of the artnetwork provides faster and morereliable information to thewarfighter; 28:3

Garamone, Jim; “CINC” is sunk; 28:1Gardner, SPC Adrienne; Nine team

Signaleers support Warfighter2002; 28:1

Gibson, COL Tim; SIPRNETConnectivity: Do’s and Don’ts;28:1

Gilmore, Gerry; Incompatible infosystems pose a HomelandSecurity challenge, WhiteHouse info czar says; 28:1

Halligan, Joe and Arrowood, Jim;Hawaii Military Police are first toreceive Pacific Mobile EmergencyRadio System; 28:1

Hamilton, Mike and Yavorsky, COLJoseph; Unit of Action NETWORK

MAPEX:Testing the network in avirtual warfight; 28:2

Hamilton, CPT Steven; Poor man’sdigitization of the battlefield; 28:2

Hammonds, SFC Michele; 311th

support to Balikatan ’03 is firmand constant;MARS volunteer radio operatorstrain for emergency scenarios;28:3Yama Sakura’s informationsuperhighway; 28:3

Hedgepath, MAJ Rod; Five nationstest coalition communications;28:1

Herron, 1LT Shawn; ReserveSignaleers open Cisco Academy;28:1

Herron, 1LT Shawn and Bergerson,PVT2 Fernanda; Cisco Academy

graduates charter class during GF’03; 28:3

Hiland Kim; New detachment standsup at 30th Signal Battalion; 28:1

42 Spring 2004

Hill, LTC Laura; White HouseCommunications Agencytransforms to meet newchallenges; 28:1

Hudgins, James; In memoriam: LTGDouglas D. Buchholz, 1946-2003;28:2

Hutcheson, SPC Joshua; Soldiershelp set up phone network inNorthern Iraq; 28:4

1LT David Humphreys; Team Cobra:141st Signal Battalion’s “Tip of theSword” in Iraq; 28:4

Inge, 1LT Nick; Vital link betweenports, U.S. Army Europe andCENTCOM; 28:3

Jette, CPT Jeremiah J. and Rutt, LTCJohn A.; From tactical to installational

63rd Signal Battalion in OperationIraqi Freedom; 28:3

Jang, CPL Seung-mo; 311th TSC bindsUFL together; 28:3

Jimenez, SPC Alfredo; ‘Digital Bridge’brings technology to StrykerBrigade at NTC; 28:2

Johnson, Danny; 5th Signal Commandgeneral pins on second star; 28:2

5th Signal Command finds firstjoint European network operationsdrill to be a ‘Dragon’; 28:1

Kelley, LTC Olen L.; BattleCommanders Forum re-born in2003;28:4

Lais, Sami; Defense Executive of theYear: Boutelle’s vision kept themilitary connected in Iraq; 28:4

Laszlo, MAJ Rod; Shaping Hawaii’sinformation-technology future;28:1

Larson, Stephen; CAISI come to batfor coalition warfighters in Iraq;28:2Deployable communicationssystem unsnarls port cargosnafus; Bob Fowler and StephenLarsen; 28:2Fort Monmouthtelecommunications infrastructureupgrade starts; 28:1New product manager overseesArmy’s Europeantelecommunicationsinfrastructure; 28:1PM DMS-Army streamlinestactical message system, receivesDefense Acquisition Executiverecognition; 28:4Satellite terminal program earnsAMC partnering success award;28:2Think like the wolf: Protect yourcritical information with anOPSEC program; 28:4

Linton, Debbie; The ashes: PhoenixRising from the new TribandTerminal contract awarded; 28:2

Linton III, Douglas R.; Informationdissemination management –tactical: providing information atthe right place and format; 28:4

Long, MAJ Daron and Morris, MAJNicole: Reflecting tomorrow’s needs in

today’s training; 28:2Majewski, CPT Greg; Army Reserve

Signal Command receivesnetworking award; 28:4

Matson, SGT Ryan and Navarette,SPC Marimer; 35th Signal deploys off

Puerto Rico for first time in years;28:3

Matson, SGT Ryan; Boutelle relaysmessage of Army’s seniorleaders, talks about future ofRegiment; 28:4Bryan speaks of changes inRegiment, need to managebandwidth; 28:4

McCargo, SSG Kelly; 67th Signaldeparts for desert rotation; 28:4

Signal Regiment reunites atSymposium; 28:4

McCray, Russell; A new doctrine for anew day; 28:4

McElmurray, Janet and Wood, Susan;Four Distinguished Members ofthe Regiment are honored at the31st Symposium; 28:4

McPherson, Bill; 59th’s Thomaspublishes fourth mystery book;28:2Donahue takes command of516th; 28:3Network Enterprise TechnologyCommand and InstallationManagement Agency stand up:Team Signal adds third hat; 28:1Network Enterprise TechnologyCommand and InstallationManagement Agency stand up:Team Signal adds third hat; 28:1

Medina, 2LT Frank; TROKAcommunications upgrade; 28:3

Mills, CPT Brad; 112th Signal BattalionSoldiers get valor awards; 28:1

Mongirdas, CPT Chris; Layeredinformation assurance defense isno tootsie roll; 28:3

Monroig, PVT Armando; Conferencekicks off lifelong learning; 28:4IA Workshop focus: ensuresecure transmission; 28:4OIF lessons learned are shared;28:4Signal Symposium techno-expoprovides two-way adventure; 28:4

Morris, MAJ Nicole and Long, MAJ

Daron: Reflecting tomorrow’s needs intoday’s training; 28:2

Morton, Michelle; 30th revamps civiliantraining; 28:1

Navarette, SPC Marimer and Matson,SGT Ryan; 35th Signal deploys off

Puerto Rico for first time in years;28:3

Neely, Marc and Sellars, MAJ Tim;Advanced warfare Environmentserial-to-socket conversionprogram helps soldiers ‘get thepicture’; 28:1

Newburn, CPT Pam; Warfighter: 10th

Mountain Division’s winter trainingexercise; 28:2

Nguyen, 1LT Luan; 78th supportsJapan’s Disaster Day exercise;28:4

Nye, SGT Joe; Signal Units at Fort Dixhighlight training, innovation; 28:3;

Signal Soldiers thrive onhomestyle field cooking; 28:3

Oliveras, SPC Lindsay; 507th Soldierrelates Iraq deployment; 28:4

Onley, 2LT Amanda; 311th TSCgenerals visit 1st Signal troops;28:3

Owen, MAJ Brian, 59th Signal Battalionextends local-area network morethan 1,500 miles to Shemya; 28:1

Palaganas, LTC Reynold; Prepare forthe future at Joint course; 28:1

Petersen, SPC M. William; SignalBrigade reactivates in Kuwait;28:3Troops phone home courtesy of40th Signal Team; 28:2

Plotts, MSG John; Enlisted DivisionUpdate; 28:2

Powell, MAJ Gregg; Lessons learnedfrom Stryker Brigade CombatTeam JTRC CERTEX; 28:3

Pruden, CPL Todd; Soldiers of 2-3 FAwire schools; 28:4

Ranson, LTC Steven; 442nd Signalavoids washout from JointThunder hail. Rain and Sleet; 28:3

Ricchiazzi, Anthony; Back to Kuwait:Team returns to desert to provideradio support; 28:2Repair success for Air Force radiosparks more workload; 28:4ctical satellite terminals to getnew lease on life; 28:3

Rider, Timothy L.; Eyes of the multiplelaunch rocket system directrounds to supportfront-line units; 28:3

Roache, SPC Eugena and Bergerson,PVT2 Fernanda ; 103rd ACS links data

to distant terminals; 28:3


Signal soldier thrive on homestylecooking; 28:3

Rucker, SFC Curtis; 31Us make ithappen in IT/IA; 28: 4

Rutt, LTC John A. and Jette, CPTJeremiah J.; From tactical to

installational 63rd Signal Battalionin Operation Iraqi Freedom; 28:3

Saputo, John; Joint Force 4CIintegration – significantchallenges ahead

Sato, Mike and Taketa, Walter;Transformation information-technology planningcontinues in Hawaii; 28:1

Sellars, MAJ Tim and Neely, Marc;Advanced warfare Environmentserial-to-socket conversionprogram helps soldiers ‘get thepicture’; 28:1

Schuette, Rob; Communications proveno casualty for 319th SignalBattalion support;28:3

Shamberger, SFC Christopher; Kuniabegins GSC-52 modernization;28:1

Shrader Jr., MAJ James; MultifacetedRC Workshop assists in meetingthe challenges to get the futureright; 28:4

Stern, CPT David; Automating the localpurchasing process at Karshi-Khanabad Airbase, Ubekistan;28:1; E-newsletters made easy; 28:1;Keeping Families informed duringOperation Enduring Freedom;28:1

Swan, Patrick; Commentary: Are you atransforming mammal, bug ordinosaur?; 28:2Knowledge warriors’ assessnetwork-centric needs at Armysymposium; 28:3Army Knowledge Awards winnerslist; 28:3

Swan, CPT Patrick A. andBirmingham, Crista M.; GF ’03 tests

new communicationcapabilities for HomelandDefense, Global War onTerrorism; 28:3

Symposium cell members; 2003marks the 31st Annual SignalRegimental Symposium;28:3

Taketa, Walter and Sato, Mike;Transformation information-technology planning continues inHawaii; 28:1

Terry, CSM Michael A.; Senior NCOSymposium Workshop

discussions; 28:4Thomas, LTC Nello; Task Force

Network formed; 28:4Thrush, LTC Leo; 58th Signal Battalion

members enjoy Okinawa dancetheater; 28:1

Townsell, Tonya K.; Enhancements instore for future Stryker Brigades;28:4

Vickery, SGT Courtney; Signal mastersergeant provides commo forNorth Korea mission; 28:1

Walton, Barbara; Lifelong learning;28:1

Windon, 1LT Michael; 3rd SignalBrigade conquers voice, data andvideo; 28:2

Weygandt, MSG Wesley; 59th HHDwins Army supply award; 28:4

Wood, Susan and Alley, Lisa; NewestDistinguished Members of theRegiment bring a century’sexperience; 28:1

Wood, Susan and McElmurray, Janet;Four Distinguished Members ofthe Regiment are honored at the31st Symposium; 28:4

Woodward, SGT Shawn; FormerSailor remembers fallencomrades; 28:1

Yavorsky, COL Joseph and Hamilton,Mike: Unit of Action NETWORK

MAPEX: Testing the network in avirtual warfight; 28:2

Yeager, Michele; 11 Soldiers first tograduate from Army Depot’s 35Ecourse; 28:2Depot repairs Sidewinder: U.S.Navy – Another satisfiedcustomer; 28:4Korea: U.S. Navy pilots can landsafely thanks to Tobyhannaupgrades; 28:4Technicians enhance personalsurvival radio for warfighters; 28:2TRC-170s supported byTobyhanna key to communicationfor troops; 28:2

SubjectsArmy Knowledge OnlineArmy Knowledge Awards winnerslist; Patrick Swan; 28:3Army Small Computer Programlaunches IT E-mart, next generationgovernment website; 28:4Knowledge warriors’ assessnetwork-centric needs at Armysymposium; Patrick Swan; 28:3Army transformation

Forging the path of Armytransformation; MAJ Robert M. Collins;28:3Network Enterprise TechnologyCommand and InstallationManagement Agency stand up: TeamSignal adds third hat; Bill McPherson;28:1Enhancements in store for futureStryker Brigades; Tonya K. Townsell;28:4Training and Doctrine updated tosupport transportation; Jim Caldwell;28:1Transformation information-technology planning continues inHawaii; Walter Taketa and Mike Sato;28:1

Awards59th HHD wins Army supply award;MSG Wesley Weygandt; 28:4Army Knowledge Awards winnerslist; Patrick Swan; 28:3Communications-ElectronicsCommand nabs Thomas EdisonAward; 28:1PM DMS-Army streamlines tacticalmessage system, receives DefenseAcquisition Executive recognition;Stephen Larsen; 28:4NETCOM Transition Team winsaward; 28:2Satellite terminal program earns AMCpartnering success award; StephenLarsen; 28:2Teamwork starts missions, improveshandbook; 28:2White House honors those keepingthe force manned; Joe Burlas; 28:2

Books59th’s Thomas publishes fourthmystery book; Bill McPherson; 28:2

Career management(enlisted)Enlisted Division Update; MSG JohnPlotts; 28:2

Coalition communicationsCAISI come to bat for coalitionwarfighters in Iraq; Stephen Larsen;28:2Five nations test coalitioncommunications; MAJ RodHedgepath; 28:1

Commander’s CommentsGreetings to all members of ourRegiment; 28:2

44 Spring 2004

Lifelong learning: A new look attraining; 28:1Our Regiment is at a turning point;28:3

CommentaryBe a bandwidth nibbler, not aKobayashi; LTG Peter Cuviello; 28:1Commentary: Are you a transformingmammal, bug or dinosaur?; PatrickSwan; 28:2SIPRNET Connectivity: Do’s andDon’ts; COL Tim Gibson; 28:1

Computer security andtechnologyIncompatible info systems pose aHomeland Security challenge, WhiteHouse info czar says; Gerry Gilmore;28:1No direct funding needed – Armyenterprise agreement provides494,000 Microsoft licenses; StephenLarsen; 28:3Project Touchdown: how we paid theprice for lack of communicationssecurity in Vietnam; David Fiedler;28:1Think like the wolf: Protect yourcritical information with an OPSECprogram; Stephen Larsen; 28:4

DoctrineA new doctrine for a new day; RussellMcCray; 28:4

G6Defense Executive of the Year:Boutelle’s vision kept the militaryconnected in Iraq; Sami Lais; 28:4CIO’s career spans the draft, all-volunteer Army; Joe Burlas; 28:2G6 says OIF validates ITtransformation path; Joe Burlas; 28:2Knowledge warriors’ assessnetwork-centric needs at Armysymposium; Patrick Swan; 28:3

General information11 Soldiers first to graduate fromArmy Depot’s 35E course; MicheleYeager; 28:23rd Signal Brigade conquers voice,data and video; 1LT Michael Windon;28:231Us make it happen in IT/IA; SFCCurtis L. Rucker; 28: 358th Signal Battalion members enjoyOkinawa dance theater; LTC LeoThrush; 28:159th Signal Battalion extends local-

area network more than 1,500 milesto Shemya; MAJ Brian Owen; 28:178th supports Japan’s Disaster Dayexercise; 1LT Luan Nguyen; 28:4Army Small Computer Programlaunches IT E-mart, next generationgovernment website; 28:4Can you hear me now?; CPL PaulaFitzgerald; 28: 2 “CINC” is sunk; Jim Garamone; 28:1CAISI come to bat for coalitionwarfighters in Iraq; Stephen Larsen;28:2Deployable communications systemunsnarls port cargo snafus; BobFowler and Stephen Larsen; 28:2Depot repairs Sidewinder: U.S. Navy– Another satisfied customer; MicheleYeager; 28:4Fort Monmouth telecommunicationsinfrastructure upgrade starts;Stephen Larsen; 28:1Hawaii Military Police are first toreceive Pacific Mobile EmergencyRadio System; Joe Halligan and JimArrowood; 28:1Information disseminationmanagement – tactical: providinginformation at the right place andformat; Douglas R. Linton III; 28:4JWID leads the way tointeroperability; Michael A. Brown Sr.;28:2Korea: U.S. Navy pilots can landsafely thanks to Tobyhannaupgrades; Michele Yeager; 28:4MARS grams send messages todeployed soldiers; Denise Allen; 28:2New front lines: the defense ofHawaii’s networks; 1LT MarcusBrakewood; 28:4Network Enterprise TechnologyCommand and InstallationManagement Agency stand up: TeamSignal adds third hat; Bill McPherson;28:1New switch briefs up DISN-Ebackbone; Pat Connell and DougRasmussen; 28:2No direct funding needed – Armyenterprise agreement provides494,000 Microsoft licenses; StephenLarsen; 28:358th Signal Battalion members enjoyOkinawa dance theater; LTC LeoThrush; 28:1Seminar develops joint operatingenvironment; Jim Caldwell; 28:2Signal Brigade reactivates in Kuwait;SPC M. William Petersen; 28:3Signal Center welcomes newhistorian; 28:1Signal Center welcomes new

museum director; Steve Brady andBob Anzuoni; 28:2Soldiers help set up phone networkin Northern Iraq; SPC JoshuaHutcheson; 28:4Soldiers of 2-3 FA wire schools; CPLTodd Pruden; 28:4Team supports Army’s Recapmission at Tobyhanna; 28:4Technicians enhance personalsurvival radio for warfighters; MicheleYeager; 28:2Tobyhanna kits increase utility ofartillery data vehicles; 28:1TROKA communications upgrade;2LT Frank Medina; 28:3Troops phone home courtesy of 40th

Signal Team; SPC M. WilliamPetersen; 28:2

Grecian Firebolt 2003103rd ACS links data to distantterminals; SPC Eugena Roache andPVT2 Fernanda Bergerson; 28:3311th TSC binds UFL together; CPLJang, Seung-mo; 28:3311th TSC generals visit 1st Signaltroops; 2LT Amanda Olney; 28:3311th support to Balikatan ’03 is firmand constant; SFC MicheleHammonds; 28:335th Signal deploys off Puerto Ricofor first time in years; SGT RyanMatson and SPC Marimer Navarette;28:3442nd Signal avoids washout fromJoint Thunder hail, rain and sleet;LTC Steven R. Ranson; 28:3Cisco Academy graduates charterclass during GF ’03; PVT2 FernanadaBergerson and 1LT Shawn Herron; 28:3Command view: we got the righthorses; MG George F. Bowman; 28:3Communications prove no casualtyfor 319th Signal Battalion support;Rob Schuette: 28:3Firebolt communication centerrelocates after mock chemical attack;SPC Crista M. Birmingham; 28:3GF ’03 tests new communicationcapabilities for Homeland Defense,Global War on Terrorism; SPC CristaM. Birmingham and CPT Patrick A.Swan; 28:3Layered information assurancedefense is no tootsie roll; CPT ChrisMongirdas; 28:3MARS volunteer radio operators trainfor emergency scenarios; SFCMichele R. Hammonds; 28:3Signal units at Fort Dix highlighttraining, innovation; SGT Joe Nye;28:3


Signal Soldiers thrive on homestylefield cooking; SGT Joe Nye, SPCEugena Roache and PVT FernandaBergerson; 28:3Yama Sakura’s informationsuperhighway; SFC Mathew Fearingand SFC Michele Hammonds; 28:3

Information Technology (IT)Agreement aligns Reserve ITfunctions with G6, NETCOM; JoeBurlas; 28:2G6 says OIF validates ITtransformation path; Joe Burlas; 28:2Information disseminationmanagement – tactical: providinginformation at the right place andformat; Douglas R. Linton III; 28:4

InteroperabilityFive nations test coalitioncommunications; MAJ RodHedgepath; 28:1

Leadership/valor112th Signal Battalion Soldiers getvalor awards; CPT Brad Mills; 28: 15th Signal Command general pins onsecond star; Danny M. Johnson; 28:2Gerstein made impact on 93rd SignalBrigade; 28:2In memoriam: LTG Douglas D.Buchholz, 1946-2003; James Hudgins;28:2National Guard Signal general tappedfor second star; 28:1Network Enterprise TechnologyCommand gets new deputycommander; 28:1New product manager overseesArmy’s Europeantelecommunications infrastructure;Stephen Larson; 28:1Regiment receives new senior-enlisted leader; 28:1

Lessons learnedProject Touchdown: how we paid theprice for lack of communicationssecurity in Vietnam; David Fiedler;28:1

Letters to the editorTo the editor; retired CW3 RobertDeStatte: 28:1

National Science CenterNational Science Center Celebratesflight celebration; 28:1

Operation Enduring

Freedom (OEF)Automating the local purchasingprocess at Karshi-Khanabad Airbase,Ubekistan; CPT David Stern; 28:1E-newsletters made easy; CPT DavidStern; 28:1Keeping families informed duringOperation Enduring Freedom; CPTDavid Stern; 28:1

Operation Iraqi Freedom(OIF)507th Soldier relates Iraq deployment;SPC Lindsay Oliveras; 28:4509th Operations in Northern Iraq;SGT Peter Fitzgerald; 28: 3OIF lessons learned are shared; PVTArmando Monroig; 28:4Team Cobra: 141st Signal Battalion’s“Tip of the Sword” in Iraq; 1LT DavidHumphreys; 28:4

Radio communications78th supports Japan’s Disaster Dayexercise; 1LT Luan Nguyen; 28:4Hawaii Military Police are first toreceive Pacific Mobile EmergencyRadio System; Joe Halligan and JimArrowood; 28:1Repair success for Air Force radiosparks more workload; AnthonyRicchiazzi; 28:4TSM-Tactical Radio EnhancedPosition Location reporting system;28:2

Satellite communications‘Digital Bridge’ brings technology toStryker Brigade at NTC; SPC AlfredoJimenez; 28:2Enhancements in store for futureStryker Brigades; Tonya K. Townsell;28:4MILSTAR satellite successfullylaunched to complete theconstellation; 28:2Kunia begins GSC-52 modernization;SFC Christopher Shamberger; 28:1Tactical satellite terminals to get newlease on life; Anthony Ricchiazzi; 28:3The ashes: Phoenix Rising from thenew Triband Terminal contractawarded; Debbie Linton; 28:2TRC-170s supported by Tobyhannakey to communication for troops;Michele Yeager; 28:2

Serial communicationsAdvanced warfare Environmentserial-to-socket conversion programhelps soldiers ‘get the picture’; MAJ

Tim Sellars and Marc Neely; 28:1

Signal leadersIn memoriam: LTG Douglas D.Buchholz, 1946-2003; James Hudgins;28:2Signal level commands (chart); 28:1

Signal people507th Soldier relates Iraq deployment;SPC Lindsay Oliveras; 28:4Former Sailor remembers fallencomrades; SGT Shawn Woodward;28:1MARS grams send messages todeployed soldiers; Denise Allen; 28:2Signal master sergeant providescommo for North Korea mission; SGTCourtney Vickery; 28:1Soldiers of 2-3 FA wire schools; CPLTodd Pruden; 28:4Troops phone home courtesy of 40th

Signal Team; SPC M. WilliamPetersen; 28:2

Signal units (ActiveComponent)30th revamps civilian training;Michelle Morton; 28:15th Signal Command finds first jointEuropean network operations drill tobe a ‘Dragon’; Danny Johnson; 28:1Donahue takes command of 516th; BillMcPherson; 28:358th Signal Battalion members enjoyOkinawa dance theater; LTC LeoThrush; 28:159th Signal Battalion extends local-area network more than 1,500 milesto Shemya; MAJ Brian Owen; 28:167th Signal departs for desertrotation; SSG Kelly McCargo; 28:478th Signal Battalion Soldiers helpCamp Zama Junior Reserve OfficersTraining Corps; CSM Darrel Calton;28:1New detachment stands up at 30th

Signal Battalion; 1LT Kim Hiland; 28:1Shaping Hawaii’s information-technology future; MAJ Rod Laszlo;28:1Soldiers help set up phone networkin Northern Iraq; SPC JoshuaHutcheson; 28:4

Signal units (ReserveComponent)142d Signal Brigade ‘lifts bosses’;SFC David Carney; 28:1Army Reserve Signal Commandreceives networking award; CPT

46 Spring 2004

Greg Majewski; 28:4Nine team Signaleers supportWarfighter 2002; SPC AdrienneGardner; 28:1Reserve Signaleers open CiscoAcademy; 1LT Shawn Herron; 28:1The 20-year transformation of themulti-compo 142d Signal Brigade;SFC David Carney; 28:1

Signal Symposium 200230th Signal Symposium attracts 2,700attendees, 200 exhibitors; CPTThomas Birch 28:1‘Cyberman’ makes everyonecyberwarriors; Denise Allen; 28:1Newest Distinguished Members ofthe Regiment bring a century’sexperience; Susan Wood and LisaAlley; 28:1State of the Signal Regiment strong;Denise Allen; 28:1Transforming the Army to a network-based organization; Denise Allen; 28:1

Signal Symposium 20032003 marks the 31st Annual SignalRegimental Symposium; Symposiumcell members; 28: 3A meeting of the minds FA 24 and 53Senior Focus Group at the 31st

Sympoium; MAJ Pier Durst; 28:4Battalion Commanders Forum re-born in 2003; LTC Olen L. Kelley; 28:4Boutelle relays messages of Army’ssenior leaders, talks about future ofthe Regiment; SGT Ryan Matson; 28:4Byran speaks of changes inRegiment, need to managebandwidth; SGT Ryan Matson; 28:4Establishing communications: vitalkey to success; Denise Allen; 28:4Four Distinguished Members of theRegiment are honored at the 31st

Symposium; Susan Wood and JanetMcElmurray; 28:4IA Workshop focus: ensure secure

transmission; PVT Armando Monroig;28:4Multifaceted RC Workshop assists inmeeting the challenge to get thefuture right; MAJ James Shrader Jr.;28:4OIF lessons learned are shared; PVTArmando Monroig; 28:4Senior NCO Symposium Workshopdiscussions; CSM Michael A. Terry;28:4Signal Regiment reunites atSymposium; SSG Kelly McCargo; 28:4Signal Symposium techno-expoprovides two-way adventure; PVTArmando Monroig; 28:4Task Force Network formed; LTCNello Thomas; 28:4

Tactical radioBack to Kuwait: Team returns todesert to provide radio support;Anthony Ricchiazzi; 28:2Enhanced Position LocationReporting System; 28:1Technicians enhance personalsurvival radio for warfighters; MicheleYeager; 28:2TSM-Tactical Radio EnhancedPosition Location reporting system;28:2TSM-TR update joint tactical radiosystem – cluster 5; 28:4

TRC-170s supported by Tobyhannakey to communication for troops;Michele Yeager; 28:2

Training Systems ManagerForging the path of Armytransformation; MAJ Robert M. Collins;28:3, 4Moving out SMART-T; 28:4TSM-Tactical Radio EnhancedPosition Location reporting system;28:2

Training and education11 Soldiers first to graduate fromArmy Depot’s 35E course; MicheleYeager; 28:2Assignment Oriented Training;Beverly Friend; 28:1Assignment Oriented Training; J.S.Vann; 28:3Can you hear me now?; CPL PaulaFitzgerald; 28:2Conference kicks off lifelonglearning; PVT Armando Monroig; 28:4‘Digital Bridge’ brings technology toStryker Brigade at NTC; SPC AlfredoJimenez; 28:2Reflecting tomorrow’s needs intoday’s training; MAJ Nicole Morrisand MAJ Darron Long; 28:2Lifelong learning; Barbara Walton;28:1New battle-focused FM available thissummer; 28:2New web site online for unitmanning; Joe Burlas; 28:2Prepare for the future at Jointcourse; LTC Reynold Palaganas; 28:1Team supports Army’s Recapmission at Tobyhanna; 28:4Teamwork starts missions, improveshandbook; 28:2Tobyhanna high-tech training siteimproves military training; 28:1

White HouseCommunications AgencyWhite House CommunicationsAgency transforms to meet newchallenges; LTC Laura Hill; 28:1

WIN-TForging the path of Armytransformation; MAJ Robert M. Collins;28:3, 4


TSM-WIN -T

Updates from Training and Doctrine Command systems managers for satellite communications, tactical radio and Warfighter Information Network-Tactical

TSM update

JOINT NETWORKMANAGEMENT SYSTEM

(AN/USQ-176 (V) 1, 2 and 3)The JNMS is Acquisition

Category level III Joint program thatprovides an automated networkplanning and management capabil-ity to joint tactical communicationsnetwork planners/manag-ers at Combatant Com-mands, Combatant Com-mand Service components,Joint Task Forces, and JTFService components. Itintegrates the capabilitiesof Commercial Off-The-Shelf, Government Off-The-Shelf and somedevelopmental software tomeet network planningand management deficien-cies identified by theCombatant Commands. Itwill replace the interimsystem, the Joint DefenseInformation InfrastructureControl System – De-ployed, now fielded to thewarfighting CombatantCommanders. It providesthe means for timelydecisions and synchroniza-tion of communicationassets to support missionrequirements, addsflexibility to better supportthe commander’s intent,improves situationalawareness by providing acommon view of thenetwork and provides acapability to better utilizescarce resources to opti-mize the capacity of thenetwork and support thefight.

There are three

versions of the JNMS being devel-oped. The versions are distin-guished by the level of functionalityprovided. Versions 1 and 3 have amonitoring and security capability.Version 2 has the full JNMS capabil-ity which includes planning, moni-toring and reconfiguration, faultmanagement and security and isaccredited for use on secret net-works. Version 1 has a NationalSecurity Agency approved one-wayfiber modem that can be used with

unclassified networks to forwardstatus information to a version 2system. This provides a capability todisplay both unclassified and secretnetwork situational awarenessinformation on one system. Version3 was specifically developed for useon Top Secret networks. Its possibleusage for coalition networks iscurrently being investigated.

JNMS is in the final stages ofthe System Development andDemonstration phase of the acquisi-

tion life cycle havingsuccessfully completedits Functional Qualifi-cation Testing inDecember 2003. It isnow undergoing itsOperational Testing atthree sites – FortMonmouth, N.J.;Norfolk, Va.; andTampa, Fla. Thesponsoring combatantcommand is U.S. JointForces Command. Thetest consists of person-nel from the Army, AirForce, Marine andJoint CommunicationsSupport Element andNavy augmentation atthe JFCOM Global C4CommunicationsCenter.

JNMS is sched-uled for a formalMilestone C decision inApril 2004 with theMilestone DecisionAuthority, ProgramExecutive Office forCommand, Control,and CommunicationsTactical. This decisionwill authorize entryinto the Productionand Deployment phaseof the acquisition lifecycle and also allowthe Services to support

Marines Air Force

JNMSServer

Army Navy

48 Spring 2004

fielding in 4QFY04. A Full RateProduction decision and formalMateriel Release would be soughtafter the final Operational TestReport is published and before thestart of fielding. Fielding is sched-uled to begin in September 2004 forapproved U.S. Central Commandand U.S. Special Operations Com-mand units. Army units down toand including Corps Signal Brigadesare scheduled to receive the JNMS,with the 35th Signal Brigade scheduleto be the Army’s first JNMS fieldedunit.

The Product Manager forCommunication ManagementSystems is now conducting NewEquipment Introductory Briefingsfor units scheduled to receive theJNMS. The NMIBs provide thegaining commands with operational,

ACRONYM QUICKSCAN

ACAT – JNMS is Acquisition Cat-egoryCENTCOM – U. S. Central Com-mandCOTS – Commercial Off-The-ShelfFRP – Full Rate ProductionFQT – Functional Qualification Test-ingGCCC – Global C4 Communica-tions Center.GOTS – Government Off-The-ShelfITRO – Inter-Service Training Re-view OrganizationJCSE – Joint Communications Sup-port ElementJDIICS – Joint Defense InformationInfrastructure Control System – De-ployedJTF – Joint Task ForcesJNMS – Joint Network ManagementSystemMDA – Milestone Decision AuthorityNMIBs – New Equipment Introduc-tory BriefingsNSA – National Security AgencyOT – Operational TestingPEO C3T – Program Executive Of-fice for Command, Control and Com-munications TacticalPdM CMS – Product Manager forCommunication Management Sys-temsSOCOM – Special Operations Com-mandUSJFCOM – U.S. Joint Forces Com-mand

JOINT TACTICAL RADIOSYSTEM:

On Feb. 26, 2004, the JointTactical Radio System Joint ProgramOffice sponsored an Industry Dayevent. The purpose of which was tooutline the JTRS JPO’s goals for thesoftware-defined radio initiative andto offer an opportunity for potentialvendors to pose questions andcommunicate their concerns. Theevent successfully sparked anexchange of ideas and informationto fully explore the role of industrywithin the program from a lifecycleperspective that will span decades ofevolutionary JTRS development.The JTRS industry day briefingincluded presentations by the Officeof the Secretary of Defense, theArmy and the JTRS JPO. Themeetings involved discussion on theJTRS program and its architectureand networking issues.

The Program Executive Officefor Command, Control and Commu-nications Tactical expects to awardthe JTRS Cluster 5 contract by 3rd

Quarter Fiscal Year 2004. The

TSM-TACTICAL RADIO

training and support information aswell as laying out responsibilities forthe gaining command during theirfielding.

The Army requested that theInter-Service Training ReviewOrganization conduct a study todetermine the feasibility of conduct-ing JNMS resident training for allServices at one location. The firstphase of the study was completed inOctober 2003. The final phase isscheduled to be conducted in May2004. The Army has recommendedestablishing the course at the U.S.Army Signal Center, Fort Gordon,Ga.

For further information onJNMS, contact CPT Quentin Smith orBilly Rogers, TSM WIN-T, (706) 791-2721/2334 or DSN 780-2721/2334.Email addresses [email protected] [email protected].

Cluster 5 program, which willconsist of man pack, hand held andsmall-embedded form factor vari-ants, is expected to produce the firstJTRS software-defined radiosspecifically designed with the soldieras a system concept in mind. ITTIndustries, Fort Wayne, Ind., andGeneral Dynamics Inc., Falls Church,Va., submitted proposals for theJTRS Cluster 5 contract. ITT’s teamincludes Harris Corp., Melbourne,Fla., and Boeing Co., Chicago, Ill.General Dynamics team membersare BAE Systems, Fort Wayne, Ind.;Rockwell Collins, Cedar Rapids,Iowa; and Thales Group, Alexandria,Va.

ENHANCED POSITIONLOCATION REPORTINGSYSTEM:

The Enhanced Position Loca-tion Reporting System fieldingpreparation continues. New Equip-ment Training Contractors com-pleted training of EPLRS NetworkManager operators and systemplanners for 3-265th Florida NationalGuard in December 2003. Thetraining was conducted at the U.S.Army Signal Center and FortGordon, Ga., and on-site for thegeneral-purpose users. Initialfielding of assets to support the 172nd

Signal Company began during earlyJanuary 2004. Refresher training forthe Military Occupational Specialty31C ENM operators was alsocompleted in January. NET Contrac-tors are on-site continuing to trainthe operation of the EPLRS radio set.A newly improved version of theEPLRS Network Control Station wasfielded to the Florida NationalGuard and the 3rd Stryker BrigadeCombat Team in Alaska. Retrofit ofexisting EPLRS-equipped units suchas the 4th Infantry Division, 1st

Cavalry, SBCT-1, SBCT-2, and the 3rd

ID will be completed during the nexttwo calendar years. The retrofit andtraining of the 4th ID is tentativelyscheduled for July/August. EPLRSis one of the key data communica-tions backbones which supports theArmy’s tactical Internet and AirDefense Artillery sensors as well as


unit weapons systems. The ENMprovides greater network manage-ment capability and operator flexibil-ity compared to the current EPLRSNCS.

EPLRS testing continuedduring the 2nd Quarter FY 04 at FortHuachuca. Software tests will verifythe latest upgrades to the EPLRSRadio Set. The U.S. Navy Space andNaval Warfare Systems Commandwas awarded the production con-tract in December, which will resultin the building of all remaining NetControl Stations. (These are alsoreferred to as the ENM). Plans forfielding to SBCT-4 are also ongoingto support Cohesive OperationalReadiness Training and fielding laterthis year.

ACRONYM QUICKSCAN

ADA – Air Defense ArtilleryCOHORT – Cohesive OperationalReadiness TrainingENM – EPLRS Network ManagerEPLRS – Enhanced Position Loca-tion Reporting SystemFY – fiscal yearGPU – general-purpose usersID – Infantry DivisionJPO – Joint Program OfficeJTRS – Joint Tactical Radio SystemNET – New Equipment TrainingNCS – Net Control StationPEO C3T – Program Executive Of-fice for Command, Control and Com-munications TacticalSPAWAR – Space and Naval War-fare Systems CommandSBCT – 3rd Stryker Brigade CombatTeam

KA-STARSby Debbie Linton

The Ka-Band Satellite TransmitAnd Receive System will provide awideband communication capabilityto meet essential user operationalrequirements, leveraging theWideband Gapfiller program.KaSTARS is being introduced toalleviate the spectrum saturation ofX-band. KaSTARS will greatlyincrease both available single userdata rate and total satellite capacityover today’s DSCS Ill satellites andsubsequent WGS satellites whilefocusing support to the warfightingforces.

KaSTARS is engineered andconfigured to satisfy validatedGlobal Command and ControlSystem requirements by providing

TSM-SATCOMhigh-availability communications forthe National Command Authorities,the Joint Chiefs of Staff and theunified and specified commanders.The KaSTARS also provides connec-tivity from early warning, sensorsites, and intelligence agencies tocommand centers and informationprocessing centers. The primaryoperational objective of theKaSTARS is to provide continuoushigh quality communications foreach validated user.

The KaSTARS, AN/GSC-XXsystem, design shall comply with theJTA-Army and is in use in communi-cations throughout the WGS Ka-Band and other military satellites. Itis fabricated in a fixed configuration,but capable of being relocated. Theitem is controlled, and its status andperformance is monitored continu-ously by a Control, Monitor andAlarm subsystem, which providesfor local or remote operation and

Current Location Terminals Date Fielded

CECOM, Fort Monmouth, N.J. 2 1998

Signal Center, Fort Gordon, GA 6 1999

124th Signal Bn, Fort Hood, TX 12 1999

USAREUR HQ, Mannheim, GE 1 2000

3rd Corps, Fort Hood, TX 15 2001

SBCT-1, Fort Lewis, WA 3 2001

SBCT-2, Fort Lewis, WA 3 2002

13th Signal Bn, Fort Hood, TX 12 2002

141st Signal Bn, 1AD, Germany 10 2003

440th Signal Bn, Germany 5 2003

121st Signal Bn, Germany 10 2003

SBCT-3, Fort Wainwright, AK 3 2004

Projected Location Terminals Date Due For

Fielding

(3ID) 123rd Signal Bn, Fort Stewart, GA 12 2004

(101st)501st Signal Bn, Fort Campbell, KY 12 2005

447th Signal Bn, Fort Gordon, GA 6 2005

(1ID) 331st Signal Co. Fort Riley, KS 2 2005

(1AD) 596th Signal Co. Fort Riley, KS 2 2005

SBCT-4, Fort Polk, LA 3 2005

2nd Infantry Division, Korea 10 2005

SBCT-6, 28th ID, Pennsylvania NG 5 2006

50 Spring 2004

integration with Defense SatelliteCommunications System networkcontrol facilities.

Projected locations for sixKaSTARS terminals are: CampRoberts, Calif.; Landstuhl, Germany(2); Lago Patria, Italy; Northwest,Va.; and Wahiawa, Hawaii. Fieldingwill be begin in 2006.

Point of contact for additionalinformation on the KaSTARSprogram is Frank Stein, DSN 780-7903, Commercial (706) 791-7903,email: [email protected].

AN/TSC-154/SMART-TFielding Plan

The Secure Mobile Anti-jamReliable Tactical Terminal, AN/TSC-154 is a transportable, tacticalsatellite communications terminalthat operates with the Milstarsatellite low data rate and mediumdata rate communications payloads.SMART-T provides multichannelrange extension for MSE at echelonscorps and below. Fielding of theterminals is underway. Projectedprocurement is 209 terminalsthrough 2008.

Point of contact for additionalinformation on SMART-T fielding isSteve Churm, DSN 780-3418,COMM (706) 791-3418, email:[email protected].

MILSTAR MILESTONE

The first Milstar 1 communica-tions satellite has achieved its 10-

CMA — Control, Monitor and AlarmDSCS — Defense Satellite Commu-nications SystemGCCS - Global Command and Con-trol SystemJCS - Joint Chiefs of StaffKa STARS - Ka-Band Satellite Trans-mit And Receive SystemLDR — low data rateMDR — medium data rateNCA - National Command Authori-tiesSMART-T — Secure Mobile Anti-jam Reliable Tactical TerminalWGS - Wideband Gapfiller

ACRONYM QUICKSCAN

year design life of on-orbit serviceproviding secure, reliable communi-cations to warfighters engaged in avariety of global military operations.Launched aboard a Titan 4 launchvehicle from Cape Canaveral, Fla.,on Feb. 7, 1994, the first Milstarsatellite is one of two Block I space-craft on orbit equipped with a UHFand Low Data Rate EHF payload. Itis also equipped with crosslinkpayloads to communicate with otheron orbit satellites. In 2001, transitionto a Block II satellite configurationwas accomplished with the success-ful launch of the first Milstar 2satellite.

The Milstar Block II systemoffers a variety of enhanced commu-nications features for the U.S.military, including the Medium DataRate EHF payload which can processdata at speeds up to 1.5 megabits persecond.

Milstar is the DefenseDepartment’s most technologicallyadvanced communications satellitesystem, which provides critical,secure links to national leadershipand U.S. forces around the world.The Milstar system is the onlysurvivable, endurable means that thePresident, the Secretary of Defenseand the Commander, U.S. StrategicCommand have to maintain positivecommand and control of U.S.strategic forces. April 8, 2003, thefinal Milstar 2 satellite was success-

fully launched thereby completingthe first space-based global networkcapable of transmitting voice, data,imagery and video.

Point of contact for additionalinformation on the Milstar system isSteve Churm, DSN 780-3418, Com-mercial (706) 798-6711, email:[email protected].

Ms. Linton is with the TRADOCSystems Management – TacticalSatellite, Fort Gordon, Ga.


News and trends of interest to the Signal Regiment

Circuit check

LANDWARNET EQUIPSSOLDIERS WITH BATTLEFIELDINFORMATION

by SPC Lorie Jewell

WASHINGTON – Just asSoldiers need the best equipmentand training to be successful on thebattlefield, a steady diet of informa-tion is just as vital, Army leadersbelieve.

“Information is power,” saidBG Jan Hicks, Chief of Signal andcommanding general of the U.S.Army Signal Corps and Fort Gor-don, Ga. “We want to know thingsabout the battlefield and we want toknow things about our enemy on thebattlefield. At the same time, wedon’t want the enemy to know whatwe know, or to know things aboutus.”

Connecting Soldiers to infor-mation they need, whenever theyneed it and wherever they are, is thejob of the Network, recently re-named LandWarNet. It’s one of 17focus areas the Army is emphasizingto win the Global War on Terrorism.

Hicks heads the task forceassigned to make recommendationson how best to develop and improveLandWarNet so that it deliversbetter battle command capabilities tocurrent, future and joint forces.

The joint aspect is of particularinterest, Hicks said.

“We’re not going to war as anArmy. We’re going to war with ourSailor and Airmen friends,” Hickssaid. “We must be able to communi-cate with them without an extra step.We need a system that allows onecall.”

Ultimately, the task force wantsto see a LandWarNet that givescombatant commanders the samecapabilities for accessing informationin any location, whether that’s at a

NEWS

desktop computer in their office, inan aircraft, on a vessel at sea, in avehicle en route to battle or in a post-battle camp, Hicks said.

“We’re working on differentways to get there,” she added.

One of those ways is throughthe Global Information Grid, or GIG.Hicks describes it as scaffolding builtup around the globe.

“Communication lines go allover, pulsing through the GIG,” shesaid. “It services the defense infor-mation switch network, or DISN,which is provided by the DefenseInformation Services Agency.”

Forces can reach into the DISNwith satellites and pull informationservices down to wherever they arein the world, she explained.

A combination of military andcommercial technology powersLandWarNet, with leaders commit-ted to pursuing programs that willenhance it even more.

“Our current IT investmentstrategy is centered on leveragingthe best available commercialtechnology,” said COL JamesCostigan, director of Combat Devel-opment at the U.S. Army SignalCenter.

Leaders acknowledge thatgetting the network to the level the

task force envisions is an expensiveendeavor. Just how much is stillbeing determined.

“We’re talking about an almostclean sweep of the kind of equip-ment we have now,” Hicks said. “Itwill take a great deal of money toretool our networks while at war.”

Many leaders believe the Armycan’t afford not to makeLandWarNet all it can be, however.

“The application of informa-tion technology can enhance theefficiency and effectiveness of theprocesses involved in war fighting,”said Costigan. “Our experimentationwith objective force concepts andour real-world experience in OIFshows us this notion is valid. Invest-ing in IT systems to enable warfighting is therefore logical andnecessary.”

SPC Jewell is with the Army NewsService.

BG Janet A. Hicks talks with Information Assurance Symposium workshopattendees. Hicks heads the task force assigned to make recommendationson how best to develop and improve LandWarNet.

JFCOM EMPOWERSWARFIGHTERS BY SETTING UPSTANDING JOINT FORCEHEADQUARTERS

U.S. Joint Forces Command hasdelivered the standing joint force

52 Spring 2004

headquarters core element to tworegional combatant commanders duringthe last five months and will deliverthree more by October.

by SGT Jon Cupp

SUFFOLK, VA. — U.S JointForces Command recently assistedin the delivery of additional jointwarfighting capability to two of theDefense Department’s regionalcombatant commands when thecommand charged with leading thetransformation of the U.S. militaryhelped stand up a vital new func-tion.

USJFCOM delivered theStanding Joint Force HeadquartersCore Element, a 58-member team ofoperational planners and informa-tion command and control special-ists which forms the core of a jointtask force headquarters commandstructure.

Within the past five months,USJFCOM helped bring on line twoSJFHQs for regional combatantcommanders at U.S. Pacific Com-mand and at U.S. Southern Com-mand. According to SJFHQ plan-ners, USJFCOM also plans to standup SJFHQs at three other unifiedcommands, including the U.S.European Command and U.S.Northern Command who arescheduled to be on line by October2004.

All geographic combatantcommands are slated to haveSJFHQs by fiscal year 2005, accord-ing to Navy Rear ADM Richard J.O’Hanlon, who oversees the SJFHQdevelopment and implementationefforts. The capability is a highpriority of Chairman of the JointChiefs of Staff Air Force GENRichard Myers due to its importanceto the warfighter.

“(The SJFHQ) provides a readyfull-time team that aids in the abilityto stand up a joint task force head-quarters quickly,” said O’Hanlon.“By providing a joint cadre oftrained planners and operators whohave a thorough understanding ofeffects based operations and theregional commander’s intent, wehave found that a joint task force

headquarters can come up to fight-ing speed quicker than we have seenin the past.

“Using tools such as thecollaborative information environ-ment, a JTF headquarters using theenabling capabilities of the SJFHQcan get all the relevant planning andoperating information on the tablemuch faster thus decreasing itsplanning and recommendation cycleso commanders can make decisionsfaster than we’ve seen in the past,”said the admiral.

“What would have normallytaken (the RCC) days to weeks, inplanning effort, now takes hours toless than a couple of days,” saidNavy CPT Tom McKeon, deputydirector of USJFCOM’s SJFHQprototype.

According to McKeon, theprocess’ speed increases since all orpart of an SJFHQ element work for acombatant commander.

Through the use of collabora-tive tools such as the CIE, the SJFHQdevelops a pre-crisis knowledgebase of an adversary’s systems andcapabilities which leads to thecreation of an operational networkassessment.

“The ONA gives the warfightera great analysis of the area they’reoperating in so they know what thekey nodes are that they need toinfluence to reach their objectivesand get the results they’re lookingfor in their theater,” said O’Hanlon.

The SJFHQ also incorporateseffects based planning, whichdesigns strategies to attack keystrengths and weaknesses of anenemy. Within this process, anSJFHQ enables RCCs to coordinatewith members of the interagencycommunity, such as the U.S. StateDepartment or Department ofJustice, to assist in crisis interactionin the planning of a campaign.

The ONA supports the SJFHQin performing effects based opera-tions, which deal with the diplo-matic, information, military, eco-nomic and social aspects of a cam-paign and are designed to alter anadversary’s behavior and ability tocontinue effective operations.

An additional six-member

system of systems analysis teamhelps build the SJFHQ’s situationalawareness in the theater of opera-tions, said McKeon.

“You actually have a coregroup of 58 people, supported by the6 SoSA, who are cross-functionallyorganized with logisticians, opera-tions specialists, planners andcommunicators that come from allthe services,” said McKeon, “Theyoperate together within the RCCheadquarters both in exercises andplanning and can focus on an area ofinterest before it becomes a crisisarea.”

When combatant commandersneed to stand up a joint task force,they will now have a well-informedcadre of individuals from the SJFHQwho have worked together, trainedtogether, understand what is goingon in the area of responsibility, havedeveloped situational awareness anda situational understanding of thecommander’s intent, according toMcKeon.

One of the major roles forUSJFCOM in assisting the set up ofSJFHQs involves an 11-monthtraining process that includes notonly classroom training, but alsotraining via the CIE.

“We do some forming exerciseswhere we take members of theSJFHQ and put them through someexercises that help teach them theirjobs and duties, capped off bytheater exercises where the SJFHQgets to demonstrate it’s ability toplan and execute an operation,” saidO’Hanlon.

“After the SJFHQ is formed weroutinely contact themcollaboratively to answer theirquestions or to provide continuingtraining or keep them informed onwhat we’re learning as we continueto evolve some of the aspects ofSJFHQ,” he added.

Prior to the forming of SJFHQs,USJFCOM focused its efforts fornearly five years to figure out how toconduct operations in tandem withthe standing up of a JTF HQ. In thepast, problems arose when com-manders at service-centric two orthree star headquarters were taskedwith standing up a JTF HQ due to


their service centric manning andunfamiliarity with the operationallevel situation, according toO’Hanlon.

By February 2002, USJFCOMhad moved the SJFHQ from theconceptual stage to the experimentaldesign phase. Another high mark forthe SJFHQ came later that yearduring Millennium Challenge 02.

“SFHQs were one of the mainfocus areas examined during MC02,and it was proven there that theyadded real value,” said O’Hanlon.

Recent exercises to includeTerminal Fury 04 and Blue Advance04 have also helped to prove theworth of SJFHQs through feedbackfrom combatant commanders,according to O’Hanlon.

“PACOM leaders were im-pressed with the effects basedmentality that their SJFHQ broughtto the table and the effects assess-ment process that allowed them tosee whether or not their plan wasworking,” said O’Hanlon. “Theywere also impressed with theinteragency coordination aspects.”

“SOUTHCOM liked theplanning processes in that thesituational awareness of the rest ofthe headquarters staff was higherprior to the (Blue Advance) exer-cise,” added O’Hanlon. “This wasbecause of the SJFHQ not forcing,but facilitating people to thinkthrough the problem and beingbetter able to begin.”

The mission of the SJFHQcurrently in operation at USJFCOMwill not cease once all the combatantcommands have their own SJFHQsformed.

“The one that’s in existenceright now is a training unit, and oncethe SJFHQs are stood up by FY05,we intend to keep this unit inexistence to continue to train newcrewmembers that are showing up atthe RCC and to be able to provideassistance to the RCCs as necessary,”said O’Hanlon.

Additionally, according toO’Hanlon, strategic planningguidance for 2006 gives direction forthe establishment of anotherUSJFCOM SJFHQ-one whichfunctions as an operational unit.

“Once trained and ready, wewill be able to deploy this SJFHQworldwide to support RCCs withtheir focus areas,” said O’Hanlon.“We’ll have an operational missionand if an RCC asks for our SJFHQ, asforce provider, we will supply thatSJFHQ to support the RCC.”

Participants in the project saidestablishing the SJFHQs has been aworthwhile experience.

“This is a tremendous opportu-nity to contribute to the joint world,”said O’Hanlon. “We have attackedthe traditional problems with thestand up of joint task force head-quarters and have developed newtools to help (combatant command-ers) analyze their tasks more thor-oughly. My people are pretty excitedabout what they’re doing and lookforward to continue to meet thechallenges ahead in bringing theSJFHQ to the field.”

McKeon echoed O’Hanlon’ssentiments.

“To be able to build this teamthat has the potential for averting aconflict before it can start and bringall the elements of national power tobear should the conflict go into crisisis wonderful,” said McKeon. “You’retalking about not only saving thelives of our service members but alsothe men, women and children of acountry that may be facing a poten-tial conflict.”

SGT Cupp is with USJFCOM PublicAffairs Office.

by SGT Jon Cupp

SUFFOLK, VA. — One ofUSJFCOM’s Joint Experimentation

Directorate’s (J9) new capabilitiesmay help change the waywarfighters experiment and train inthe urban battlefields of the future.J9 developers and engineers arecurrently testing the Scale ParallelProcessor, a multi-million dollarsuper computer, which the com-mand will use to help combatantcommanders experiment and trainin urban operations by creating arealistic simulation of the environ-ments in which they conduct futureoperations. J9 programmers, work-ing with the powerful SPP canmodel an urban environment, toinclude representations called“entities” of items such as detailedcity streets, buildings, vehicles,aircraft, ocean tides, weather, treesand civilian populations.

According to project engineers,the SPP allows simulations at a scaleand level of resolution never beforepossible. “As we started doingentity-based experiments, we couldnot scale the experiments to thedesired levels with the computerhardware that was available,” saidRae Dehncke, from the Institute ofDefense Analyses, who is support-ing J9’s modeling and simulationefforts. “We needed an SPP toincrease the number of entities in agiven scenario, and to allow higherresolution and higher fidelity in theentities and the synthetic environ-ment.

The SPP increases our com-puter power so we could model alarger number of urban environ-ments and populate them withthousands of vehicles and civilianswe would expect to find in suchurban areas. We just could not dothat with the existing PC basedcomputer system.”During Millen-nium Challenge 02, programmerscould simulate only about 35,000entities, but utilizing the power ofthe SPP they can now create overone million, according to Tony Cerri,director of J9’s experimentation,engineering support department.Cerri said the SPP enables JFCOM tobetter represent the real urbanenvironment and that will helpcombatant commanders betterunderstand some of the problems

NEW SUPER COMPUTERENHANCES STATE OF THE ARTFOR URBAN WARFAREEXPERIMENTATION

Engineers and developers areworking on creating some powerful newcapabilities at USJFCOM’s JointExperimentation Directorate. Increasedpower in modeling and simulation supercomputer hardware will mean jointwarfighters will receive more realistictraining as they prepare to tackle urbanbattlefields around the world.

54 Spring 2004

that occur when fighting on urbanterrain.

“We can simulate multi-elevation buildings down to detailssuch as stairs, situations in whichsoldiers are waiting in ambush andwe can represent the urban environ-ment in much greater detail, givingcombatant commanders the oppor-tunity to experiment and train on thetypes of problems he faces in thecomplex urban battlespace.”

“During Operation IraqiFreedom, our simulations werelimited and we could only simulate acouple of city blocks in great detail.Now we can play ‘where’s Sadaam’in a much more realistic setting,”said Cerri. “We can simulate realcities tree by tree and building bybuilding if necessary. Troops coulddeploy to any nation on earth andwe’re currently dealing with terri-tory all over the world so that wecan more quickly provide simulationsupport to the warfighters.

”Developers are constantlyworking to increase the capabilitiesof the simulations,” said Cerri. Thesimulation federation now runningon the SPP can also simulate struc-tures and obstacles which can befound on urban warfighting land-scapes such as underground tunnels,roadside explosives, concertina wire,sand bags and metal barriers called“dragon’s teeth” to name a few.Cerri said upcoming challengesinclude accurately mirroring culturalaspects of the population such asgoing to work and home again at theright times of day.

The “clutter” of civiliansmoving about the urban environ-ment on foot and in vehicles greatlyadds to the realism of the simulation.

“We can also build things in asimulation that don’t yet exist inorder to test new concepts or newtechnology. The purpose of ourexperimentation is to simulate theseconcepts and new technologies andsee if they work,” added Cerri. Dr.Bob Lucas, from the InformationSciences Institute at the University ofSouthern California, said the powerof the SPP J9 is currently using, acomputer about the size of a largefiling cabinet, can be compared to

having the combined capabilities of256 top-of-the-line, dual-processorpersonal computers linked together.During a recent J9 capabilities test,three SPPs, one in J9’s SimulationAnalysis Center in Suffolk, Va., onein Maui, Hawaii, and one at WrightPatterson Air Force Base in Ohiowere linked together over theDefense Research EngineeringNetwork to demonstrate the abilityof the SPPs and the network to worktogether to support J9. J9 has beenworking in cooperation with ISI, theInstitute of Defense Analyses andthe High Performance ComputerCenter in Maui, Hawaii, to developthe capabilities of the SPP to poten-tially support other JFCOM pro-grams such as the Joint NationalTraining Capability.

“Our partnership with ISIallows us to take advantage of theexperts in academia in theseprojects,” said Dehncke. “There’s noway we could have done this byourselves and one of ADM (EdmundP.) Giambastiani’s goals is to involveindustry and academia to help us getthese projects off the ground.”

“The High PerformanceComputer Management Programrecognized the joint warfighter isdoing significant experimentation, sothey gave us our own computer.JFCOM was their number onepriority thanks to the work we hadalready done and the advancementswe’re making here,” addedDehncke.

In the future, combatantcommanders will be able to networkinto the SPP-simulated environ-ments through the DistributedContinuous ExperimentationEnvironment and one of the goals ofthe SPP Project is for the combatantcommanders to have easy access tothe computer’s capabilities.

“From any installation withinthe United States, we want people tohave the ability to link to ourevents,” said Dehncke. “Our goal isto be able to turn on, plug in and usethis anywhere across the country, sopeople won’t have to travel continu-ously to participate in JFCOMevents.” Development of the proto-type began over a year and a half

ago, and by October 2002, thedevelopment teams were building,testing and growing the capabilities.

Several specialists workingwith the SPP Project recently at-tended the Interservice/IndustryTraining Simulation and EducationConference in Orlando, Fla., andpresented papers on the subject.“From the JFCOM perspective, thisis a great opportunity to advance thestate of the art through modelingand simulation,” said Dehncke.“Implementation of the SPP truly isa major step forward and our targetof modeling a million entitiesrepresents a significant advance-ment.

”Dehncke said the project hascreated a lot of interest from peopleinvolved with joint experimentation.

“This is cutting-edge stuff andeveryone is excited,” said Dehncke.“All of the services and representa-tives from joint commands areeagerly awaiting our demonstrationof the SPP operating within theDCEE.”

An upcoming joint urbanoperations experiment will featurethe SPP in the computer’s firstofficial use with JFCOM. J9 hopes tohave the SPP fully implemented andavailable for use by regional combat-ant commanders in October 2004.

SGT Cupp is with USJFCOM PublicAffairsOffice.

FRIEND OR FOE REPAIRS GETAIRCRAFT FLYING AGAIN

by Anthony Ricchiazzi

Tobyhanna Army Depot, Pa. —Technicians quickly responded to anurgent request to repair criticalIdentification Friend or Foe systemsin support of Operation Iraqi Free-dom.

Tobyhanna received therequest in January from the U.S.Army Missile Command to repairand test four TS-1843B/APX In–Flight Transponder Test Sets.

“The 1843 is installed in aircraftor ships as part of the IFF transpon-der systems; it’s connected between


the IFF antenna and the RT-859A/APX-72 Transponder,” explainedJohn Ross, Transponder Divisionchief, Avionics–Intelligence Electron-ics Warfare Systems Directorate. “Itallows the crew to monitor theperformance of the transponderwhen it is challenged by signals fromexternal interrogators.”

The test set can also interrogatethe AN/APX-72, evaluating func-tions such as receiver sensitivity andtuned frequency, and reply fre-quency.

The AN/APX-72 providesautomatic radar identification offriendly units and is used by allmilitary branches. It receivesinterrogations, decodes them andtransmits replies.

Due to back orders of the testsets caused by high usage rates, fouraircraft were grounded. Divisionpersonnel expedited the repairs andshipped them within days of therequest.

“We got the call on Jan. 21 andhand-carried the test sets to DDTP[Defense Distribution DepotTobyhanna] for shipping on Jan. 23,”Ross said.

The work involved mechanicalrepairs and repair of circuit cardsand A5 modules, which ensure radiofrequency and pulse accuracy, said

Bob Harvey, anelectronicsmechanic.

“We alsoalign the system;however,alignmentsrequire an AN/UPM-362TransponderTest Set,” headded. “Wedon’t have thattest set so weworked withProductionEngineering todevelop asolution.”

Align-ments ensurethat the test sets,especially the A5

module, work properly with compo-nents such as the different–lengthcables used in various aircraft andships.

“We developed an externaltester as a troubleshooting aid forthe A5 that nobody else had before,”said Martin Simko, electronicsmechanic. “It has more capability,giving us a better idea of the condi-tion of the A5 module.”

“Our standard workload alsoinvolves support shops from theSystems Integration and SupportDirectorate,” Ross noted. “The testsets from the field can be very dirtyand beat up. They are repaired intolike-new condition. Our customer isvery happy with our work.”

Ross said division personnelcompleted 75 test sets in Fiscal Year2003 and completed another 15 afterthe urgent request was fulfilled.

“The entire APX-72 programhas been an outstanding success,”said George Bellas, Avionics–Intelligence Electronics WarfareSystems Directorate Systems direc-tor. “Division personnel saved$859,000 in FY03 and are currentlysaving more than $1,300 per unit inFY04, which equates to $1.5 million.This is all attributed to the employ-ees learning the Lean process andimplementing Lean initiatives to dothe work better, cheaper and faster.”

Bob Harvey, an electronics mechanic in TobyhannaArmy Depot’s Avionics–Intelligence Electronics WarfareSystems Directorate, tests a TS-1843B/APX In–FlightTransponder Test Set. Tobyhanna technicians met anurgent request in January to repair and test four testsets to support Operation Iraqi Freedom.

Tobyhanna Army Depot is theDefense Department’s largest centerfor the repair, overhaul and fabrica-tion of a wide variety of electronicssystems and components, fromtactical field radios to the groundterminals for the defense satellitecommunications network.Tobyhanna’s missions support allbranches of the Armed Forces.

About 3,700 personnel areemployed at Tobyhanna, which islocated in the Pocono Mountains ofnortheastern Pennsylvania.

Tobyhanna Army Depot is partof the U.S. Army Communications-Electronics Command. Headquar-tered at Fort Monmouth, N.J.,CECOM’s mission is to research,develop, acquire, field and sustaincommunications, command, controlcomputer, intelligence, electronicwarfare and sensors capabilities forthe Armed Forces.

Mr. Ricchiazzi writes for theTobyhanna Army Depot Public AffairsOffice.

SUGGESTION IS REAL DUSTBUSTER: EMPLOYEES’ IDEACLEANS UP PATRIOTCOMPONENT

by Michele Yeager

Tobyhanna army depot, Pa.—Three electronics mechanics heredevised a solution to a problem thatwas causing dust and debris to enterparts of the Patriot Missile System.

Charlotte Ache, Henry Eggertand Michael Verrastro, who work inthe depot’s Surveillance SystemsDirectorate, perform mechanicalchecks on the Patriot Missile’sIdentification Friend or Foe systems,which are overhauled and repairedhere.

They realized that there wereinadequate air filters on the signalprocessor, which was allowingunwanted particles to go through thesystem, causing equipment failures.

They submitted a suggestionthrough the Army Ideas for Excel-lence Program to add filter materialand will share a monetary award of$2,700.

56 Spring 2004

The award wasapproved at the U.S.Army Communications-Electronics Commandlevel, based on thehighly significant,intangible improvementto the value of a prod-uct, said Bob Reese(Scranton), the depot’sAIEP coordinator.

“As the Patriotsystems are returnedfrom the field and comethrough Tobyhanna forrepair, we continuallynoticed that excessivesand was clogging thefiltering system of thesignal processor,” Acheexplained. “Our sugges-tion reduced equipmentfailures and drasticallycut maintenance time.”

The signal proces-sor controls the IFF functions for thePatriot system. It is housed within aside panel of the system and uses thecooling fans of the radar.

Prior to suggestion implemen-tation, it was not adequately pro-tected from environmental hazards,such as sand and dust.

“Contamination related toenvironmental conditions was beinginducted into the signal processor,resulting in pitting and malfunction-ing of the internal components,”Verrastro added. “When the PatriotMissile System was deployed toSouth West Asia last year in supportof Operation Iraqi Freedom, theproblem increased because of desertconditions.

“Our suggestion added anotherlayer of air filtering material to theexisting RF filter. We secure it to theframe of the air supply with Velcrostrips.”

“We chose Velcro because it iseasily accessible to soldiers in thefield, as well as easy to handle,”Ache added. “It can be removedeasily to clean or replace the filters.”

Additionally, the longevity ofthe unit in the field is now 10 timesgreater regarding sand intrusion,Verrastro said. “Our contact withthe warfighters in the field verifies

this.”The use of this air filter has

reduced manhours required to cleanand repair the signal processor, inaddition to reducing equipmentfailures, according to the suggestionevaluation prepared by EdwardSeamans, an electrical engineer atCECOM who granted approval ofthe idea.

The suggestion was imple-mented by CECOM only threeweeks after it was submitted becauseof the urgency to ensure the Patriot’soperations were not further affected.

Also, the suggestion wasincluded in the December issue ofThe Preventive Maintenance Monthly, amaintenance guidance publicationfor Soldiers.

Ms. Yeager is assistant editor withthe Tobyhanna Army Depot PublicAffairs Office.

A suggestion to stop sand from clogging theIdentification Friend or Foe component in Patriotmissile systems was included in the Decemberissue of The Preventive Maintenance Monthly,a maintenance guidance publication forSoldiers. (Graphic courtesy of The PreventiveMaintenance Monthly)

WANT TO LEARN ABOUT THEGOOD, THE BAD AND UGLY OFIT BUYS? COME TO ASCP’S2004 ARMY INFORMATIONTECHNOLOGY CONFERENCE

FORT MONMOUTH, N.J. -The Army Small Computer Program

will conduct its 2004 Army Informa-tion Technology Conference fromJune 8-10, 2004, at the HersheyLodge and Convention Center,Hershey, Pa. The theme for theconference is “Centralizing ITEnterprise Acquisitions… the good,the bad and the ugly.”

The conference – which is freefor all Army, Department of De-fense, federal/government employ-ees, support contractors, and exhibit-ing vendors - brings together themost important and knowledgeablepeople driving the Army’s presentand future IT requirements and willalso feature a number of industrybriefings, an internet café andhospitality events.

Guest speakers will includeKevin Carroll, the Program Execu-tive Officer, Enterprise InformationSystems; BG Charles W. Fletcher Jr.,U.S. Army Assistant Deputy Chief ofStaff for Logistics (G-4); COL MarkBarnette and Steve Klynsma of theArmy Chief Information Office/G6;James Claussen, co-chair of the DoDEnterprise Software InitiativeWorking Group; and retired MGRobert Dees of Microsoft.

In the exhibit hall, more than30 vendors will showcase the latestIT products and services availableon ASCP contracts and BlanketPurchase Agreements, including thenewest Information TechnologyEnterprise Solutions awards andproducts from CA, CDW-G, Dell,DLT, EMC, Gateway,GovConnection, GTSI, HP, ID, IBM,iGov, Immix, Insight, Lexmark,Lockheed, MPC, Mythics, Softchoice,Panasonic, PlanetGov,Structurewise, QSS, Sybase, Xeroxand more.

Attendees may join the OpenForum Panel Discussion and hearfrom industry and governmentexperts about “Centralizing ITEnterprise Acquisitions… the good,the bad and the ugly.” The good -what benefits can be realized forboth the Army and Industry? Thebad - what are the “no-nos” aboutcentralizing IT acquisitions - toomuch, too soon? The ugly - what arethe hardest things to change -cultures, mindsets, “ain’t broke,


don’t fix it” attitudes?”Attendees may also learn more

about Performance Based Contract-ing within the ITES environment andhow to get the most out of theArmy’s Enterprise buy for MicrosoftDesktop and Server softwareproducts through formal side-bartraining sessions that were designedprimarily from ASCP’s interactionwith its customers over the past sixmonths.

Attendees can earn continu-ous learning credits, get OPSECtraining

Ray Semko, the famed“Diceman” from the InteragencyOPSEC Support Staff, will present aprovocative, uncompromising andirreverent look at the world ofsecurity. Proof of attendance forSemko’s 90-minute presentation willbe issued, which may satisfy localrequirements for an annual securitybriefing.

Defense Acquisition WorkforceImprovement Act members of theDefense Acquisition Workforce canearn required Continuous LearningPoints by attending the AITC.DAWIA requires acquisition billetedpersonnel to participate in continu-ous learning activities. To earncontinuing credits, a supervisormust approve attendance on anemployee’s individual developmentplan. Reference for this is the UnderSecretary Of Defense (Acquisitionand Technology) Policy on Continu-

Want to learn about the good, the bad and uglyof Information technology buys – and get somekeyboard time with the latest IT products? Thencome to the Army Small Computer Program’s2004 Army Information Technology Conference,June 8-10, 2004 at the Hershey Lodge andConvention Center, Hershey, Pa.

ous Learning for theDefense AcquisitionWorkforce. You can alsofind this information atthe Army AcquisitionCorps website underPolicy.

ASCP providescommercial IT productsand services for theArmy Enterprise -including hardware,software, peripherals,networking and supportservices – which complywith DoD and Armypolicies on standardiza-tion and interoperability.ASCP takes the hassleout of buying computersin the federal govern-

ment, as ASCP vendors can deliverin as little as two days after receivingan order.

To register, or for more infor-mation about the 2004 Army Infor-mation Technology Conference, visitthe ASCP website at https://ascp.monmouth.army.mil or call 1-888-232-4405 or 732-427-6787.

UNIQUE SATELLITECOMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMSUPPORTS MISSILE DEFENSE

by Anthony Ricchiazzi

Tobyhanna army depot, Pa.—Engineers and technicians havedesigned and built a satellite com-munications system that supportsthe ground-based missile defenseprogram in Alaska.

Work on the system began inearly 2000 when the ProgramManager for Defense Communica-tions and Army TransmissionsSystems tasked Tobyhanna to buildthe AN/TSC-86D satellite communi-cations system that could act as afixed terminal at a site until apermanent system is installed.

Employees from the depot’sSatellite Communications Systems,Production Support Services andSystems Integration directoratescarried out the mission.

“It’s intended as a temporarysystem, but is complete enough that

it will be used as a communicationssystem by itself,” said JohnDeininger, electronics engineer,SATCOM.

The system is used for voice,data and video communications. Itis currently supporting the MissileDefense Space Battalion, the firstground-based midcourse defensebattalion, at Fort Greely, Alaska.

The battalion will provideoperational control and security overground-based interceptors located inAlaska to protect the nation fromlimited ballistic missile attacks.

“The 86D is a unique, first-of-its kind system; it has dual antennasfor communications through sepa-rate satellites, but can operate usingone antenna,” Deininger said.

The system is composed of fivetrailers, each about 40 feet long. Theheart of the system is the 86D trailerthat houses the main systems, suchas modems, channel converters andbaseband racks.

“There is also a supply andmaintenance trailer, a power trailerthat provides uninterruptible powersystems and generators, a trailer thathouses the antennas and air condi-tioning equipment, and an equip-ment trailer, which has all theequipment to assemble the system,”said Charles Cortese, mechanicalengineering technician, SATCOM.“We customized each trailer to notonly house equipment meant for afixed site, but also to be transport-able by C-17 cargo aircraft.”

Depot technicians extensivelymodified the trailers. For example,special undercarriages and tireswere installed to help the trailers fitinto a C-l 7. Also, the 86D trailer’sheight had to be lowered.

“One of our major hurdles wasgetting some of the moving equip-ment certified for Air Transportabil-ity,” said Tom Musso, SATCOM.“All trailer design details wereprovided to the TransportabilityGroup at Wright Patterson Air ForceBase (Ohio). As a result of resolvingthis, we received C-130 and C-17transportation certification.”

Personnel also designed andfabricated support brackets, hun-dreds of feet of cables and electron-

58 Spring 2004

ics racks, some-times redesigningracks during theprocess whenupgrades wererequested.

“The entireelectrical powersupply systemwas fabricatedhere,” noted JackPallien, electron-ics technician,SATCOM. “Wealso modified thelightning protec-tion system.”

“The systemis totally redun-dant; it will notgo off the air,”added RichardBudgeon, elec-tronics technician,SATCOM. “If a component goesdown, its function is automaticallyswitched to another component.”

PM DCATS supplied the mainSATCOM systems.

Completed in January 2003, thesystem was deployed to SchrieverAir Force Base, Colo., in March 2003,to support the AN/GSC-52 Modern-ization Program and returned toTobyhanna in August 2003, whereadditional upgrades were installed.Tobyhanna technicians are currentlyinstalling the system in Alaska.

Installation includes staging allthe trailer assemblies, erecting theantenna assemblies, properlyanchoring the system and connectingall the external power, groundingand communication cabling.

“Once that is done, a secondcrew will align and test the systemprior to completing on–site finalacceptance testing,” Budgeon said.Tobyhanna will maintain the systemwherever it is fielded.

“We received great supportfrom several (depot) directorates,”Musso said. “All told, there wereabout 45 people throughout thedepot who had a hand in completingthis project.”

Mr. Ricchiazzi is with theTobyhanna Public Affairs Office.

Members of the Tobyhanna Army Depot installationteam assist to unload a depot–designed and fabricatedAN/TSC-86D satellite communications terminal froma C-17 cargo plane in Alaska. The terminal will supporta missile defense battalion until a permanent SATCOMsite is built.

FORT MONMOUTH TEAMPROVIDES COMMUNICATIONSREACHBACK FOR LOGISTICIANSIN IRAQ, AFGHANISTANby Stephen Larsen

It’s pretty much a given. In awar zone, Combat Service Supportunits - which support thewarfighter’s logistics needs, frombullets to butter - aren’t going to getmuch in the way of communications.Military communications systemsare usually focused on maneuverand control, so the logistics slice isoften insufficient to meet the com-munications requirements of for-ward-deployed logistics elements.

Until now, that is.Thanks to a trio of systems

provided by the Product Manager,Defense Wide Transmission Systems- including Very Small ApertureSatellite Terminals in tandem withthe Multi-Media CommunicationsSystem and the Combat ServiceSupport Automated InformationSystems Interface - the Army’sforward-deployed CSS logisticselements in Iraq and Afghanistannow have communicationsReachback capabilities to Continen-tal United States support facilities.

How successful are these

systems? According to CWO2 BrianWimmer, Automation ManagementOfficer for the 4th Infantry Divisionin Iraq, the systems have “hit a homerun.”

“The VSAT has been the mostconsistently available method ofconnectivity available anywhere intheater throughout OIF I (OperationIraqi Freedom I),” said Wimmer.“The ability of Forward SupportBattalions to electronically pass andtrack supply requisitions cannot beoverstated. VSAT has been a CombatPower force multiplier directlycontributing to greater operationalreadiness rates and reduced downtime of combat systems in the entireTask Force.”

Heady praise, indeed. LTC EarlNoble, who as PM DWTS is assignedto the Project Manager, DefenseCommunications and Army Trans-mission Systems at Fort Monmouth,is quick to point that what makes theVSAT valuable is the capability itprovides in tandem with systemslike MMCSO and CAISI.

A deployable office forCombat Service Support units

MMCSÒ, said Noble, is amodular, rapidly-deployable, mobilesystem that provides forward-deployed logistics elements withvoice, video and data communica-tions, with connectivity to theDefense Switched Network andcommercial telephone systems andaccess to Non-Secure InternetProtocol Router Network , SecretInternet Protocol Router Networkand e-mail.

“MMCSÒ provides CombatService Support people the samecommunications capabilities theyhave back in their home stationoffices,” said Noble, “except that it’sdeployable to wherever in the worldCSS units are deployed.”

Noble said that MMCSÒ can beconfigured in sizes ranging from amicro “flyaway” unit in three transitcases for 24 users to a mega unitaccommodating more than 1,500users. The mega unit comes in atrailer or shelter, complete with airconditioning and heating – “truly adeployable office,” said Noble. At


the low end, he added, theMMCSÒ cost is about $16,000for a micro unit and at the highend, about $1 million for a megaunit in a shelter or trailer.

The MMCSÒ configura-tions are used in conjunctionwith either dual-band (C and Kuband) or tri-band (C, Ku and Xband) VSATs to provide satelliteconnectivity back to sustainingbase information systems.

Exactly how small are VerySmall Aperture Satellite Termi-nals? They come in two sizes,said Noble, 1.8 meter or 2.4meter quick-erect sizes, whichcan typically be set up by a two-person team in 30 minutes.

“MMCSÒ used with VSATis a mobile, commercialSATCOM (satellite communica-tions) capability for the CSScommunity,” said Noble,“supporting broadband informa-tion exchange, rapidly deployableanywhere in the world, and fullyintegrated into the GIG (GlobalInformation Grid).”

For smaller networks - wherethe emphasis is on e-mail and datatransfer, such as with CSS users -Noble said the use of time divisionmultiple access - a digital transmis-sion technology that allows multipleusers to access a single radio-frequency channel by allocatingunique time slots to each user - canreduce costs.

“By contrast, most networksassigned a fixed bandwidth based onthe highest expected demand,”Noble said. “But not everybodyneeds the same bandwidth all thetime, so why pay for huge band-width all the time? That’s likealways having a huge warehousefull of ammo, regardless of howoften you need it.”

He gave an example of 30users, each of whom typically needonly 250 kilobits per second ofbandwidth, but occasionally need upto 1 megabits per second. “Instead ofbuying 1 meg all the time for each of30 users at a cost of $300,000 permonth,” said Noble, “we buy only250K for each user, at a cost $30,000per month - and pay a surcharge just

for the times they actually needmore than that. That’s a 90 percentcost reduction.”

Support to the CENTCOMArea of Responsibility

All in all, said Noble, PMDWTS has fielded more than 90MMCSÒ/VSAT systems forWarfighters in Iraq, Kuwait andAfghanistan, for customers includ-ing the Coalition Forces LandComponent Command; the U.S.Central Command; the SurfaceDeployment and DistributionCommand (SDDC, formerly knownas the Military Traffic ManagementCommand); the Product Manager,Medical Communications forCombat Casualty Care and U.S.Army Forces Central Command.

Noble said that a key user inthe CENTCOM area of responsibilityis the Army Material Command’sArmy Field Support Command, forwhich PM DWTS has provided anetwork of some 32 systems.

“Our AFSC network provides astrategic communications backbonefor AMCs LARs (logistics assistancerepresentatives) in Southwest Asia,”said Noble

The AFSC network is backed24-hours-a-day, seven-days-a-week

by a Network OperationsCenter, located at FortMonmouth, said Noble, for avariety of reasons.

“We need to hit theTelstar 12 satellite to reach theWarfighter in SouthwestAsia,” said Noble. “Due tothe curvature of the Earth, theNOC must be on east coast tohit the Telstar 12 satellitebecause of latency (responsetime) and throughput (capac-ity) issues.”

Another reason theNOC is at Fort Monmouth,said Noble, is to take advan-tage of facilities and person-nel of the Communications-Electronics Research, Devel-opment and EngineeringCommand’s Space andTerrestrial CommunicationsDirectorate and the U.S.Army Communications-

Electronics Command’s Logisticsand Readiness Center. “There’s awealth of facilities and expertisehere at Fort Monmouth,” said Noble.

Noble added that his teamincludes some 67 contractors fromTAMSCO, on the ground in theCENTCOM AOR, in Iraq, Afghani-stan, Uzbekistan and Kuwait.

According to Wimmer, some ofthese contractors were among thefirst civilians that came into Iraqduring the war and demonstrated“extraordinary professionalism” inproviding support to VSATs for theCFLCC.

“They (the contractors) havebeen extremely cooperative andaccommodating and have integratedvery well into my CSSAMO (Com-bat Service Support AutomationManagement Office) team,” saidWimmer. “Their mission assessmentacumen, acute technical skill andsense of operational priority areprecisely what the Army is lookingfor in contractors on the battlefield.They have lived like soldiers andhave the bug bites to prove it.”

Noble takes it a step further. “Ican’t say enough about thesepeople,” he said. “They’re awayfrom their families for a year at atime. Some of them have been shot

Standing outside the Fort Monmouth NetworkOperations Center are members of the teamthat helps keep the Army’s forward-deployedlogisticians in Iraq and Afghanistan connectedto CONUS support facilities (left to right): LTCEarl Noble, the Product Manager, DefenseWide Transmission Systems; Art Reiff, theDeputy Project Manager, DefenseCommunications and Army TransmissionSystems; Archie Castle of TAMSCO; Jeff Price,project leader with PM DWTS; Pete Berardi ofCECOM’s Logistics and Readiness Center;and Tom Wasilewski of TAMSCO.

60 Spring 2004

at, robbed, subject to car bomb andmortar attacks – but they stay thereand do the job for our Soldiers.”

CAISI comes to bat forWarfighter

The third piece PM DWTS isproviding to solve the logisticspuzzle for the forward–deployedCSS logistician is CAISI, the CombatService Support Automated Infor-mation Systems Interface, a secure,wireless local area network thatprovides “last-mile” connectivitybetween combat service supportcomputers and their logistics basenetworks.

“When you add CAISI to themix, CSS folks can go wireless, andextend the MMCSÒ/VSAT capabil-ity to remote users in the field,” saidNoble.

CAISI, with 11Mb wirelessline-of-sight transmission, encryp-tion on all wireless LAN links and2Mb Digital-Subscriber Line backupcapability for non-LOS requirementswithin a four mile distance, extendstactical connectivity capability fromthe theater level to the BrigadeSupport Area, and is providingtraditionally-lacking communica-tions for combat service supportmissions such as supply chainmanagement, maintenance andbusiness systems. CAISI has beenlauded by CSS folks for helping toeliminate “sneaker net” – the need tophysically walk information fromone point to another in the rear area.

Wimmer said that when VSATis used with CAISI, the systems offerlogisticians a “one-two punch” inestablishing connectivity acrossForward Operation Bases withlimited resources. “This, addition-ally,” said Wimmer, “providescommanders greater flexibility tolocate local assets without theconstraint of compromising connec-tivity.”

MAJ Forrest Burke, who waslogistics automation chief with theCFLCC during OIF in Kuwait,echoed that. “CAISI allowed us to bemuch more flexible in where wepositioned units, both in tactical andgarrison facilities,” said Burke.

Warfighters around the world

1ST SIGNAL BRIGADE ONCUTTING EDGE OF FIELDCOMMUNICATIONS

Stars and Stripes, Pacific edition

YONGSAN GARRISON, SouthKorea — The Army’s 1st SignalBrigade — which handles voice anddata communications for forces onthe peninsula — has become the firstbrigade to field three of themilitary’s newest control systems,allowing commanders to managebattlefield communications.

The Integrated Systems Con-trols system will strengthen theability of command-and-controlcenters to manage tactical networksthat often are cluttered by dozens ofvoice and data sources, officials said.

“The ISYSCON is the mostadvanced tool General Dynamics hasbuilt to date,” said CPT MichaelKaul, Headquarters and Headquar-ters Company, 1st Signal Brigade. “Itprovides planners the ability tomanage all available tactical assets inthe brigade.”

The system relies on twoadvanced software programs tofollow all data paths on themilitary’s network. If one or morerouting paths or links have beendamaged, officials said, the system

will soon be able to enjoy the capa-bilities of MMCSÒ, VSAT andCAISI, said Noble, pointing to plansto incrementally field more than 700additional SATCOM systemsworldwide in support of the CSScommunity.

Wimmer, for one, applauds theeffort and calls for the SATCOMcapabilities provided by PM DWTSto become part of the Army inven-tory, provided as standard equip-ment to every support battalion.

“The reliability and perfor-mance of the VSAT has truly beenextraordinary,” said Wimmer. “Thebenefits of having dedicated VSATresources are undeniable.”

Mr. Larsen is a Public AffairsOfficer with Program Executive Office,Enterprise Information Systems at FortMonmouth, N.J.

will track and forward that informa-tion.

“Real-time” tracking of com-munications is one of the biggestbenefits, 1st Signal Brigade officialssaid.

“With the networking monitor-ing tools we are able to capture near-real-time information and currentstatus of the network,” said WORobert Byrd, of the 307th SignalBattalion. “This is an important partof the situational awareness neces-sary to react promptly, and possiblysave a soldier’s life because we knowwhat is happening at that moment.”

Another feature of theISYSCON is that it houses a fulldatabase of all tactical equipmentand communications gear for everyunit in the Army, officials said.

“This gives us the opportunityto preplan for units being deployedfrom the U.S. to the Republic ofKorea and tie into our network, justin the case of a future conflict,” Kaulsaid.

The system also can help unitsset up communications hubs interrain that otherwise might block ordisrupt signals, officials said.

ISYSCON makes use of mapsand terrain models to simulatetransmission strengths from variouslocations.

The system then makes arecommendation of where to set upcommunications systems so that theimpact of rough terrain on signalstrength is mitigated.

CPT ELLIS SELECTED TOATTEND MARINE CORPSEXPEDITIONARY WARFARESCHOOLby CPT Darcy Saint-Amant

Instead of heading to FortGordon for the Captains’ CareerCourse next summer, CPT Tony O.Ellis will be joining the few and theproud aboard Marine Corps BaseQuantico, for the ExpeditionaryWarfare School in July. Ellis wasselected as one of five Signal Corps

SIGNALEERS


officers to attend EWS in lieu of theCaptains’ Career Course.

The Marine Corps Universityruns one EWS course each year andonly 23 percent of all Marine Corpscaptains are selected to attend inresidence.

Ellis will spend ten monthswith Marine Corps, Air Force, Navyand international officers learningabout expeditionary operations, jointdoctrine and the Marine CorpsPlanning Process (similar to theArmy’s Military Decision MakingProcess). For the last eight weeks ofEWS, communications officersattend the Marine Corps’ C4IPlanners’ Course.

Ellis is from Vaiden, Miss. andis currently serving as the ExecutiveOfficer for B Company, 302nd SignalBattalion at Fort Meade, Md.

To compete for selection toattend EWS, a DA 4187 and twoletters of recommendation are due tothe Signal non-branch qualifiedcaptains’ assignments officer byNovember each year. A boardselects the most qualified applicantsand results are released in January.For more information, see the EWSwebsite at: www.mcu.usmc.mil/ews.

CPT Saint-Amant is the com-mander of B Company, 302nd SignalBn., 21st Sig. Bde., Fort Detrick, Md.

CPT Tony O. Ellis was selected forthe Expeditionary Warfare School.

SIGNAL SOLDIERS RECEIVENAVAL CITATION: TROOPSDECORATED FOR SUPPORTINGMARINES IN IRAQby SGT M. William Petersen

FORT HUACHUCA, Ariz. —The Soldiers of 86th Signal Battalionand C Company, 40th Signal Battal-ion were awarded the Naval Presi-dential Unit Citation March 24 onBrown Parade Field for their supportduring Operation Iraqi Freedom.

The units were awarded theCitation for supporting I MarineExpeditionary Force. The ceremonymarked the 34th time the NavalPresidential Unit Citation has beenpresented since its creation, and thefirst time it has been awarded since1968.

To represent theMarine Corps, LTGRobert M. Shea,director of Command,Control, Communica-tions and ComputerSystems for The JointStaff, hung thestreamer on each unit’sguidon.

“A PresidentialUnit Citation carriesaccolades of theCommander in Chief.Few units receive thisaward,” Shea said.

As a MarineCorps communicator,Shea identified thecrucial need for flex-ible, dependable andrapid communicationson the battlefield.

“I can’t state theabsolute necessity ofthings taken forgranted at home, likepicking up a phone andhaving a dial tone … Itbecomes a matter of lifeand death,” Shea said.“You were truly anenabler on the battle-field.”

Both part of 11th Signal Brigade,C Company 40th Sig. Bn. and 86th Sig.Bn. were presented battle streamersalong with IMEF for their accom-plishments in Iraq from March 21 toApril 24, 2003.

“These Soldiers represent the1,800 members of the 11th Sig. Bde.Thunderbirds, most of whom havebeen deployed for a very long time,and all of whom have answered thenation’s call in the Global War onTerrorism,” said COL Brian R.Hurley, commander of 11th Sig. Bde.“This demonstrates our true Jointcapability and, more importantly,recognizes the heroic efforts of theseoutstanding soldiers.”

The Secretary of the Navy - inthe name of the President - awardsthe Naval Presidential Unit Citationto any ship, aircraft, or naval unit, orany Marine Corps aircraft, detach-ment, or higher unit for outstanding

SIGNAL UNITS

Two units of the 11th Signal Brigade received theNaval Presidential Unit Citation.

62 Spring 2004

OF INTEREST

DOCUMENT WARRIORS

by Judith Reid

Just how big are 39,000 feet ofpaper files? Big enough to fill aformer truck plant, and enoughwork to keep six archives techni-cians fully engaged. That’s the U.S.Army Europe Command RecordsHolding Area located in Bensheim,Germany. It is home to archivedrecords from throughout the Euro-pean theater.

What’s an “archived record?”It is information the Army wants to

performance in action against anarmed enemy of the United States onor after Dec. 7, 1941.

To justify the citation, the unitmust have clearly rendered itselfconspicuous by action of a charactercomparable to that which wouldmerit the award of a Navy Cross toan individual. The citation is desig-nated to recognize specific acts ofheroism on the part of the unit actingas a team.

The 11th Sig. Bde. is headquar-tered at Fort Huachuca, Ariz., andprovides tactical communicationscapabilities such as secure and non-secure phones, Internet, videoteleconferencing and satellitecommunications. ThunderbirdSoldiers supported Operation IraqiFreedom from sites throughoutSouthwest Asia including Iraq andKuwait, and some are still deployedin support of the Global War onTerror.

Historical information regard-ing the Naval Presidential UnitCitation was provided by the U.S.Marine Corps Historical Center.

SGT Petersen is the Public Affairschief for 11th Signal Brigade and writer/photographer/editor of the unit’smagazine, Thunderbird Quarterly. Hehas previously worked on Fort Rucker’sArmy Flier and Joint Task Force -Bravo’s The Iguana in Honduras. He isa native of Chicago, Ill.

keep for a long time. Information itmay need in the future for medicalresearch, legal cases, or lessonslearned. Households archiverecords all the time. Those are theold tax files, old medical records,and past personnel papers hiding ina box in the basement. “Currentrecords” are those hand carriedduring a PCS. These are the currentmedical and personnel records, thekids’ school records and variousbanking documents. Currentrecords are papers and electrons thatare actively in use. Archived recordsare past active use but may beneeded, and are, therefore, retained.

The Army also retains records,lots of records. In Europe, 39,000boxes of paper and innumerable bitsand bytes of electrons. What kind ofrecords are these? What is in thisarchive library? Maybe by followinga military operation, we can under-stand the value of this collection.

Let’s use Operation JointEndeavor in Bosnia to follow therecord trail. In 1995 a WarningOrder came from the Pentagon to theU.S. European Command to movethe 1st Armored Division intoSarajevo, Bosnia. After that,EUCOM produced the first Opera-tions Order to 1AD and others.From that moment on, lots ofelectronic and paper-based recordswere generated by a host of Soldiers,civilians and contractors: Fragmen-tary Orders and their supportingdocuments. Somewhere a 42Lcreated a personnel roster andtransportation orders for troops. Inanother office, a contractor createdsupply movement orders for equip-ment, while at the hospital, a civilianwas reviewing and updating shotrecords. The personnel roster, thetransportation and supply ordersand the updated medical records areall now in the UCRHA.

Then there were the financialdocuments. Funding to support theOPORD came from a mix of opera-tional funds, unfunded requirementsand contingency operations funds.Count at least three different sets ofrecords in the system to pay for theefforts of OEF. All three sets offinancial records are housed at

UCRHA.When 1AD moved into

Sarajevo, they set up camp. Can youhear the FRAGOs coming out in acontinuous feed from the printer?With every day and every action,more documentation is created.1AD engaged the enemy, supplieswere used, maintenance occurred,Soldiers were evacuated, prisonerswere taken, forms were filled out,more forms were filled out – paper,paper, paper. Electrons, bits andbytes. All documents, all records.The unending documentation, evenwhen done electronically seemsoverwhelming. And to what end?

For history. For posterity. Forresearch. For the ability to knowwhat happened from the soundingbugle to the final battle. The abilityto reconstruct the engagement fromits historical records has provencritically important to the Army. Ithelps in creating the evaluationcalled Lessons Learned. It’s how theArmy retools itself after each opera-tion. What went right and whatcould we have done differently?This information is gathered fromoperational records, analyzed andthen plugged into the planningprocess for future improvement.When legal questions arise, data ispulled from the 39,000 archivedboxes. When someone’s past x-ray isneeded, it may come from Bensheim.When the history books are written,information comes from UCRHA’sprimary data store-house for back-ground.

Every day, dozens of boxes ofrecords arrive into UCHRA. Everyday new inquiries come in fromlawyers, medical professionals andresearchers for information from thatcollection. Every day six “documentwarriors” receive, catalogue, store,search, retire and destroy criticalinformation the Army holds dear.One doesn’t often think of that boxof documents in the basement untilthe IRS calls or an old back injuryflairs up. But just like those coupleof boxes that make every move withthe family, the records holdingfacility in Bensheim is here, active,and answering questions every dayfor the good of the Soldier and the


good of the Army. Brigade ofExcellence!

Ms. Reid is the Chief, InformationSystems Management Division for theHQ, 2nd Signal Brigade in Mannheim,Germany. In this role, she leads theU.S. Army Europe’s Command RecordsHolding Area and is the U.S. ArmyEurope’s official mail manager. Shecame to this position after years ofprocess reengineering experience, and asa researcher. Reid holds a masters ofInternational Business Administration,and a Doctorate in InternationalManagement.

COMMENTARY

COMMENTARY: THE AMERICANSOLDIER — ONE YEAR INTOOIFby SFC Donald Sparks

WASHINGTON — When Iwas asked to write an editorialreflecting on the one-year anniver-sary of Operation Iraqi Freedom,initially I thought it would be tooeasy to transfer my thoughts to myfingers — yet this piece was astruggle.

I couldn’t keep track of howoften I pressed my backspace key orhow often I deleted entire sentencesand paragraphs because I knewwhatever I wanted to say – it justhad to be right. And then I recalled aquote from former Sergeant Major ofthe Army George W. Dunaway in a1990 interview with the Center ofMilitary History on the AmericanSoldier.

I studied line by line his wordsand it is appropriate as we look backon a year in which our Army andthe resolve of the American Soldierhave been tested and friendships onthe battlefield have been forged.

“The American Soldier…isunbeatable in war.” The entire worldwitnessed first hand how lethal awell-trained, well-equipped Soldiercan take out his enemy on thebattlefield. Breaking tradition andputting aside its differences with the

media, the Department of Defenseallowed embedded journalists andreporters to eat, sleep and get dirtywith Soldiers.

Although there was some earlydebate and griping from the Ameri-can public about how much newscoverage was too much, there is noquestion the role the media played indelivering to our homes the successand determination of the AmericanSoldier on the battlefield.

“We cannot give the AmericanSoldier too much credit…He deserveseverything we can do for him and hedeserves all the respect we can showhim.” When Time magazine an-nounced the American Soldier as itsPerson of the Year, there had to be anoverwhelming sense of pride foreach and every Soldier wearing theuniform.

I hurriedly went and bought acopy. The anticipation of readingprofiles of courage, stories of strifeand passages of survival was worththe wait. And to quote one of theSoldiers on the cover, SGT RonaldBuxton, “It’s not just us,” Buxtonsaid of the Person of the Year award.“It’s all of us, all the Soldiers.”

It seems in time of peace theAmerican Soldier is forgotten. Yet intimes of war, the American Soldierbecomes an integral part of theAmerican conscience. Instantly thefreedom our nation takes for grantedeach day is remembered when eachflag-draped coffin returns home. TheAmerican Soldier deserves respectfor going into a foreign land anderadicating a regime of terror,pulverizing its foe and survivingmoments in hell.

“They perform their dutiesmagnificently and bravely.” Whether itwas on CNN, FOX News or MSNBC,the images of the American Soldierthroughout the Operation IraqiFreedom campaign displayed thesignificance of the Noncommis-sioned Officer Education System.

In many instances it was theyoung sergeant preparing andleading troops into harm’s way. Asthe first line of the NCO Creedstates, no one is more professionalthan I.” Indeed the American Sol-diers were professionals in carrying

out their missions in Iraq.“They don’t make policies, and

they don’t declare war.” By no meansis this line to be interpreted that theAmerican Soldier is a pawn on achessboard. We simply do whatwe’re told to do and we followorders. The American Soldier on thebattlefield doesn’t care about duty,honor and country. The AmericanSoldier cares about his teammate tohis front, to his left, to his right andto his rear.

The American Soldier doesn’thave the time to play politics on thebattlefield. During the past year theAmerican Soldier has served hiscountry and his fellow Soldier. Andwhen the order was given to fight,indeed the American Soldier did.

“But they fight, they bleed andthey die.” This past year more than500 American service members havedied in support of Operation IraqiFreedom. It was someone’s son,daughter, husband, wife, brotherand sister. Those Americans gave theultimate sacrifice serving our nationand securing the freedom of the Iraqipeople.

I was told once a warrior’s lifeis a lonely time with little joy, littlethanks and visions not too kind. I’dlike to think those brave warriorswho died during this past year hadtheir share of moments of joy, they’dbeen thanked more than once forserving their country and they’denvisioned many days of kindness.

We must all remember, oneyear later, name-by-name thoseAmericans -- for they fought, theybled and they died.

“And they do it unhesitatingly.”I’ve told many Soldiers, “The Armyisn’t for everybody and everybodyisn’t for the Army.” For those whoserve our nation and are sent intoharm’s way, we all know there areno guarantees on the battlefield —except for death. When the Ameri-can Soldier goes into the valley ofthe shadows of death, he goesunhesitatingly.

The American Soldier duringthe past year in support of OperationIraqi Freedom has done the nationproud. Mama might not understandwhy her son or daughter volunteers

64 Spring 2004

ACRONYM QUICKSCAN

1AD – 1st Armored DivisionAIEP – Army Ideas for ExcellenceProgramAMC – Army Materiel ManagementAFSC – Army Field Support Com-mandAOR – area of responsibilityARCENT – Army Forces CentralCommandASCP – Army Small Computer Pro-gramCAISI – Combat Service SupportAutomated Systems InterfaceCECOM – Communications-Elec-tronics CommandCENTCOM – Central CommandCERDEC – Communications-Elec-tronics Research, Development andEngineering CommandCFLCC – Coalition Forces LandComponent CommandCIE – Collaborative Information En-vironmentCONUS – Continental Unites StatesCSS – Combat Service SupportCSSAMO – Combat Service Sup-port Automation ManagementDAWIA – Defense AcquisitionWorkforce Improvement Act DCEE – Distributed Continuous Ex-perimentation EnvironmentDDTP – Defense Distribution DepotTobyhannaDISN – defense information switchnetworkDoD –Department of DefenseDSL – Digital Subscriber LineDSN – Defense Switched NetworkEBO – effects based operations

ESI – Enterprise Software InitiativeEUCOM – U.S. European CommandEWS – Expeditionary WarfareSchoolFRAGO – Fragmentary OrdersFY – Fiscal YearGIG – Global Information GridHPPC – High Performance Com-puter CenterIDP – individual development planIFF – Identification Friend or FoeIMEF – I Marine Expeditionary ForceIOSS – Interagency OPSEC Sup-port StaffIT – Information TechnologyITES – Information Technology En-terprise SolutionsJOpsC – Joint Operations ConceptsKbps – kilobits per secondLOS – line-of-sightLRC – Logistics and Rediness Cen-terMbps – megabits per secondMMCSS – Multi-media Communica-tion SystemMMCSO – Multi-Media Communi-cations SystemNIPERNET – Nonsecure InternetProtocol Router NetworkNOC -- Network Operations CenterNORTHCOM – U.S. Northern Com-mandOIF – Operation Iraqi FreedomOIF I – Operation Iraqui Freedom IOJE – Operation Joint EndeavorONA – operational network assess-mentOPORD – Operations OrderOPSEC – Operations Security

PACOM – Pacific CommandPBC – Performance Based Con-tractingPEOEIS – Program Executive Of-ficer, Enterprise Information SystemsPM DCATS – Program Manager,Defense Communications and ArmyTransmission SystemsPM DWTS – Program Manager,Defense Wide Transmission Sys-temsPM MC4 – Medical Communicationsfor Combat Casualty CareRCCs – regional combatant com-mandersSATCOM – satellite communicationsSDDC – Surface Deployment andDistribution CommandSIPERNET – Secure Internet Proto-col Router NetworkSJFHQ – Standing Joint Force Head-quarters Core ElementSPP – Scale Parallel ProcessorSOSA – system of systems analysisSOUTHCOM – U.S. Southern Com-mandSTRATCOM – Strategic CommandTDMA – time division multiple ac-cessUC04 – Unified Course 04UFRs – unfunded requirementsUQ04 – Unified Quest 04UCRHA – U.S. Army Europe Com-mand Records Holding AreaVSAT – Very Small Aperture Satel-liteWARNORD — Warning Order

for deployment. The AmericanSoldier can tell mama there arevalues like loyalty, duty, selflessservice, honor, integrity and courage

we all use and hold close to us.Those values, and more, we share —unhesitatingly.

SFC Sparks is the NCOIC for theArmy Intelligence Center and FortHauchuca Public Affairs Office.

ARMYCommunicator

We need Your help!Keep us informed when you move.

Let us know your current mailing address. Simply fill in theform provided below and mail or fax the information to the editor.You may also e-mail the information to AC. When e-mailingplease provide the same information requested on the formbelow. Thanks for your help!

Please update mailing address with each move:

Name:__________________________________________________________

Mailing Address:________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________

(Old Address)___________________________________________

Number of copies requested: ___________________

Fax number:706-791-7088/ DSN 780-70888

Email address: [email protected]

Mail us at: Cdr, USASC&FGBuilding 2808A (Signal Towers) Room 713 (Army Communicator)Fort Gordon, GA 30905

Thanks for taking the time to help us get each issue delivered toyou and keeping our records current.

The Signal Regiment’s professional magazine links the widely scattered members of theRegiment: officers, enlisted, civilians; Active or Reserve Component.

Approved for public release - DTIC

Documents

Transcript of Approved for public release - DTIC