[Milsurplus] HF SigInt, airborne platform

[J. Forster]

The Germans got clobbered by lack of SIGINT coverage. Their submarine 
RADAR warning receivers could not "see" X-Band signals as I remember.

The opposition is not exactly going to tell you what frequencies they are
going to use.

If the opposition doesn't know or can't detect your transmissions they are
pretty secure.

IMO, you need SIGINT that goes from DC to light, perhaps even more.

FWIW,

-John

==================



>
> I am wondering why the need for airborne SigInt receiving capability in
> the upper
> HF range, say above around 11 Mc/s up. The 96-2 Japanese trans-receiver
> has the
> about the highest frequency range of the Japanese HF AC radios i have
> seen, and
> that one tunes up to 11 Mc/s.  So, what kind of fighter control network
> were we
> supposedly listening to? Japanese VHF equipment began at about 30 Mc/s. So
> use
> a BC-348 or RAX for what, please? "Many" Japanese small aircraft used the
> 99-3
> radio, which had a single 807 final, for a few watts output only, in the
> range up
> to about (i think...) 7 Mc/s, so where is the need for the upper HF range?
> Clearly, the photo Mike Hanz referenced shows the RAX in liaison role. ( I
> suggest
> an extra HF receiver in form of ARC-5 or ARA, could have been preset to a
> common air-ground freq, such as 4495...). The cover of the March (is it? )
> 1945
> CQ magazine shows radioman seated in front of 3-RAX set in PBM. This also
> is liaison. I regard the talk about RAX as a sigint receiver, or designed
> for that
> purpose, as fantasy. -Hue
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>