WHAT'S WRONG WITH OUR RADIOS, OVER?

The following is an exclusive interview with an electrical engineer and former mc officer on the state of communications in our ground forces:

"Re: SINCGARS. The PRC-77 was a much less complex radio. The only problem was that it was old technology and way too heavy for real ops when you included crypto. Besides, the whole crypto procedure is far too complicated. DoD could very easily go with Motorola bricks...we were on a student exercise at TBS when I was an instructor. At about 2:30am, I got a call on the brick that we instructors were carrying, w/ it's little 6" antenna, and the 2ndLt right next to me couldn't get a call from the same site when he had the 10' whip on the 77.

DoD screws themselves with their acquistion process. First off, they put unqualified people in place, b/c in the Corps, every Marine is a rifleman. Second, the rules and regs are written and administered by lazy fat-ass civilians who have no idea what an operation environment looks like. Third, most of the "users" out there can't even express themselves clearly enough to define a simple set of requirements for a new piece of gear."

So that CO doesn't understand the need to keep SINCGARS in synch? Dumb grunt type, huh?

"That's the way grunt battalion COs tend to be...the laws of physics and the universe have to bend to their will. I think most Marines are a little short in the G2 dept. This is not to say _all_ Marines...not at all..."

Im totally against those two systems on anybody's backs. Its all micro-managing the battle driven by the wishes of higher headquarters types.

"Another problem is it's utility. When I was in college we had a Spec Forces officer teaching a class, and he told us that he never carried a piece of gear that didn't have more than one use...like a Leatherman, etc. Well, you'd never catch him w/ PLRS then! You can easily get a radio the size of a standard Motorola brick that included crypto and GPS..."

Now, you are the SME here. Why couldn't we if the radios have to be backpack size, have the handset with the controls like the Brit radios do?

"(1) Because it would make sense.
(2) DoD screws itself with it's own acquisition process."

If someone with your SME-ise had been in charge representing the services with "clout" ($$$$) the contractors might be made to listen?

It's really more that the military can't define it's own requirements ...the process it too bogged down and the operators, the guys who should be training, get fed up. Then the project is bid, and the lowest bidder wins...for some reason, the contracts say "best value" but 100% of the time, that is equated with "lowest price". This leads to overruns...the contractor needs more money to complete a task that he's already screwed up beyond belief, b/c he's convinced the program manager that it would actually cost more to rebid the contract. From what I have seen, no federal agency has ever enforced punishments for poor performance on a DoD contract. Oh, and let's not even bring politics and members of Congress into it..."

I can pass your ideas on without your name mentioned---if you like--- to a certain nationally famous defense critic and get some "mega heat" on the services for this. This web page is just a beginning.

"What you need to do is have someone who is familiar with the DoD acquisition process take a look at some of the big programs. Look at the MV-22 Osprey...I was standing on my front porch (I lived in Building E, up across from the old officer's club at Quantico) the day an MV-22 crashed at MCAF. Something like this needs to be approached just like "60 Minutes" went after used car salesmen years ago...it needs to be much bigger in scope than you pointed out. And I am saying this in all honesty..."

I hope you are staying in the Reserves! We can ill afford to lose your skills!

"My "skills" are not desired. I got out completely. Isaw the light, after doing my time. I have done what I need to do to be the "citizen-soldier" I intended the day I walked onto the VMI post. I got tired of doing all that work putting my facts together and supposedly being the SME, only to be shot down b/c the CO or OpsO didn't like it...no reason why, he just didn't like it. And I talk to some of the guys from my area that I knew in college that are USMCR out of Roanoke...I have much better things to do with my time than kick rocks on a range day."

Let me tell you about this 21st Century Land Warrior deal. They want to put the radio controls into the helmet---so far so good.

"Well, the thing you're faced with is this...in VietNam, regardless of the amount of technology that was available, it still came down to the guys slogging through the rice paddies with Remington 870 or M-16. Technology is great, but there can be too much reliance on it...in my mind, being low on batteries, a radio not working, or planes not flying due to weather is no excuse for loosing a platoon in a fire fight. I think the REAL trouble is that they've taken the toughness out of the training...troops in boot camp (even Marines) now have some sort of bull-shit stress card they can wave if they feel stressed out. Well, that doesn't work when you're up against Somali's or Iraqi's who can't even read their own language.

I think the real issue is that we need to get leaders in place who can stand up for their service...not some guy like Krulak who stands up in front of the entire world and says he had no idea "blood winging" was taking place in the Corps. That's crap...a lot of us lost respect for him. To take it further, the military is shrinking, but the missions are actually getting more numerous...which puts stress on marriages, etc. You can't expect to have an effective fighting force when all your guys (and gals) just got "Dear John" letters or divorce papers during mail call. Also, there are no incentives to keep the good people. I had too many Marines leave my platoons at EAS that could've been kept with a more timely promotion or some other incentive. In the long run, "duty, honor, and country" can only get you so far, especially when you are paying child support. And yes, it is a leadership problem, but not one for platoon or company commanders. It's for the JCS to fix...

It seems to me---field the helmet controls. Then have GPS, the Tac Radio and the Puter as walkie-talkie sized modules that can be clipped as needed high on your Tac Load Bearing Vest instead of being wedded to the fat backpack frame set-up.

What do you think? How would you fix/replace SINCGARS?

"Given that I could start from scratch, I would walk down to Radio Shack, or just get a Motorola catalogue. These things need little, if any, modification to be usable by the military on a large scale basis. There is no need to pay development costs. The systems are already in wide-spread use, so parts and batteries are no problem. COTS is the way to go...in fact, the HP-48GX calculator I used during graduate studies has a GPS plug-in card. There are also cards for laptops. Why pay a ton of money to reinvent the wheel? Just look at what is available already..."

Thanks for your time and well thought out points!

Well, readers..want to make a differance>>? Contact these officials below and ask for the improvements!

U.S. Army CECOM Logistics and Readiness Center

SINCGARS Program Managers

SINCGAR TEAM Home page

General Dynamics Land Systems Tallahassee Operations