[Milsurplus] surplus SINCGARS???

Mon Apr 25 20:07:10 EDT 2005

Hi

Well the setting that I got into all of this in was when I went to pick 
up my Sicgars coffee cup at the ITT Ft. Wayne plant. The guys that were 
in my "wave" were some of the designers of the radio. It turned out 
that a bunch of them where hams and we got to talking while they went 
through all the paperwork to validate us as "authorized"  for receiving 
a $3 ceramic cup with "Sincgars-V" dabbed on the side of it. The main 
topic was "why is this darn thing so much bigger than a ham portable?". 
The obvious answer was because the oscillator was so large, but we 
discounted that one (five people in the room, I won the vote six to 
four ...). We then went through the radio a card at a time and "sliced" 
off what ever was not needed for a simple VHF FM radio. The answer came 
out to roughly two boards ... That's not to say the radio will *work* 
with only two boards installed, obviously it will not.

I'm a little surprised that they will let the radios out into the "real 
world" with the crypto card still in place. Back when they designed the 
radio that was the only card that they freaked out about. It was 
actually made by Tadiran in Israel because ITT didn't want to go 
through all the security stuff ( go figure ...).

	Take Care!

		Bob Camp
		KB8TQ

On Apr 25, 2005, at 7:01 PM, Tony Snider wrote:

> Last time I was in MD I went to the NSA museum which has a sincgars on
> display and asked that very question to a very knowledgeable fellow 
> there
> and was told "It is not the radio that is classified but the key 
> material,
> and as long as the radio is not loaded with a key it is fine to 
> collect"  I
> was a little shocked but who would know better!!
>
> every sincgars radio I have seen to include the RT-1523 and RT-1439 
> both
> have only 1 card that is the com-sec unit, it is held in with 2 screws 
> on
> the bottom and is labeled CCI for controlled crypt. material the actual
> com-sec device used in both airborne and ground sincgars is a   K G 
> V-10,
> the radio will operate just fine in the clear without the card 
> installed,
> mine just says "com sec fail" in the self test
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Bob Camp" <ham at cq.nu>
> To: "Peter Gottlieb" <nerd at verizon.net>
> Cc: <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
> Sent: Monday, April 25, 2005 6:01 PM
> Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] surplus SINCGARS???
>
>
>> Hi
>>
>> Last time I looked inside a Sincgars (it was the ITT version if that
>> makes any difference) about 80% of it was frequency hopping and Comsec
>> stuff. If you pulled that all out of the radio you would be left with
>> very little inside the case. I never got a look at the full blown
>> Korean version but my understanding is that it's the same sort of 
>> thing
>> ....
>>
>> Take Care!
>>
>> Bob Camp
>> KB8TQ
>>
>>
>> On Apr 25, 2005, at 4:34 PM, Peter Gottlieb wrote:
>>
>>> My understanding is that certain capabilities are restricted from the
>>> public but that the radios themselves were not illegal to own per se.
>>> You cannot have any of the spread spectrum, frequency hopping or
>>> encryption hardware but the basic FM radios are fine so long as you
>>> restrict them to the ham bands (6 meters).  My list may not be 
>>> exactly
>>> correct but that is the gist of it.
>>>
>>> Peter
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike Davidsen"
>>> <mike_davidsen at yahoo.com>
>>> To: <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
>>> Sent: Monday, April 25, 2005 4:22 PM
>>> Subject: [Milsurplus] surplus SINCGARS???
>>>
>>>
>>>> For those unfamiliar with the SINCGARS radios, last I
>>>> heard they were illegal to own.  Something about
>>>> restricted COMSEC gear, I don't know the details.
>>>> Recently, I noticed several different people on the
>>>> internet auction sites selling used good condition
>>>> SINCGARS radios for about $1000 to $1500.  They sold
>>>> quickly for their asking price.  One seller even had
>>>> in his ad that they were surplused out through a non
>>>> military entity.  Also stated that they could not be
>>>> exported (this would be a definite for any mil commo
>>>> gear).  Is this true - the surplus part that is?  Has
>>>> someone let go of a few SINCGARS legally, or did these
>>>> units get pawned off the reservation, so to speak?
>>>> Just curious, not sure if anyone else has noticed this
>>>> or not.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Mike
>>>> mike_davidsen at yahoo.com
>>>>
>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>> Do You Yahoo!?
>>>> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
>>>> http://mail.yahoo.com
>>>> ______________________________________________________________
>>>> Milsurplus mailing list
>>>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
>>>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>>>> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>>>
>>> ______________________________________________________________
>>> Milsurplus mailing list
>>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
>>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>>> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>>>
>>
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> Milsurplus mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>