1970s CF Radios
 

Thanks to Darrell Z, I am now the proud owner of a manual on the VRC12 series of radios. It is very informative.

My questions to our radio gurus, re:RT-524A, I am wondering what the usual configuration was;
RT-524A (VRC-46), or
RT-524A w/R-442 (VRC-47), or
RT-524A w/R-442 x 2 (VRC-48)
RT-524A x 2 (VRC-49)

I am thinking as my M38A1 CDN3 was an armoured recce veh that I want to portray a correct comms jeep of the era. I have dual mounts for antennae and am leaning more towards a dual radio configuration. I would like to do the most common representation.
I want to have an operational setup (yes I know about licenses etc)

Not being well versed in radio jargon, here is how I understand it.
The 524 was a receiver/transmitter. The 442 was strictly a receiver.
I assume that in the field 442 sets would be tuned to other frequences from other mobile units (manpack PRC25 or 77 sets) and then to be re-broadcast on the 524 set, perhaps to a command center? If not, what was the purpose of fitting 442 sets alongside the 524?
What was the reasoning behind dual 524 sets? (VRC-49)

From my light armoured recce days, the answer is: One radio only in the recce jeeps, which, as of around 1979/80 would have been the 524. Dual radio setups were in certain officer's jeeps only, which were usually M151A2s in my unit.

Dual sets were used for maintaining a net on two frequencies. The other role of using dual RT-524 was to use the second RT-524 set to receive on one frequency and then re-transmit the signal on a second frequency. The principle is the same as a commercial or amateur radio repeater. That way, two stations who can not recieve and transmit to each other directly, can work each other through the dual station.

Yes, but in order to do that you must have a C2299 Control Box fitted, with the appropriate cabling.

My M38A1CDN3's whole history was with 1RCR, so I mounted dual radios as C/S 91 (Sig O attach/posted to 1RCR).So, I'm surmising that the Sig O, being part of the CO's Rover group, could position himself wherever he saw fit in order to facilitate any retransmission requirement.

I installed an RT-524A and an AN/VRC-125 in an AN/VRC-49 configuration...the 125 working down to the coys, the 524 working up to Bde.

So, were R-442s used by our units? As I understand it, the 442 could monitor coy, platoon or section level radio transmissions and then pass it along to higher levels (Bde) etc by utilizing the RT524 set?
Was it common then to use different frquencies in order to keep Bde level comms open rather than be cluttered up with excess transmission or was it a case of transmission distance which relegated the use of R442 sets as monitoring units within coys?
Sorry for my ignorance as I'm no radio techie.

How about when they had a rt-524 mounted beside a prc-77 in a apc or iltis what would that be called?

That would just be a vehicular mounted RT524 in an AN/VRC-46 configuration.The AN/PRC-77 beside it is just that...a manpack.

However, if you have the RT 524 mounted as above and an RT-841 mounted on the AM 2060 Power Tray Assembly, it would then be an AN/GRC-160. The accessory pack would be issued for the "77" so that it could be used as a vehicular radio, or for use as a manpack.

Taking the above paragraph further, If the RT-841 was mounted "permanently", i.e. no accessory pack provided, it would then be an AN/VRC-64.

Clear as mud, but it covers the ground. :D

Would both the Rt-524 and the Prc-77 in the am2060 be hooked into the intercom or just the 524.

Recce jeep
 

I want to echo Rob Love's comment about 1x RT524 per troop vehicle. Add a Prick 77 set and maybe a pair of T-43 field telephones with WD1 wire. The risk is overthinking the restoration based on possibilities rather than realities.

The facts of life in my small town militia unit were simple: we were 100 miles from our support base, the regular support staff were more worried about advising the CO, RSM, Chief Clerk and QM than policing the troops. We didn't have a fulltime tech stores guy, so we were on our own.

Getting ready for an exercise was a juggle between - corraling ungrounded vehicles, enough guys and enough working radios. As soon as we discovered that the coax cable to the AMU and 10' antenna also connected to the 77 and the handset mike also worked on the RT524, we were in business back and forth. The 10' antenna fits the gooseneck base (I think) and it would point back towards the CP without radiating to the enemy or grounding on the vehicle.

The 5/4 CP might have had 2 radios but most nets had the one frequency for all squadron business. The other reality was frequencies were allocated per unit, and we had maybe 5 or 6 to use. Undisciplined use of the spectrum was hammered into us because no one wanted to miss a radio check. There was no reason to get complicated - and what would a second net accomplish without a mast or ground plane antenna to talk backwards? We never had either.

Terry is totally on the mark about possibilities vs realities. In my own experience, I never saw a GRC-160 install in anything but a Section Vehicle (2 CER anyway). The logic was if the Field Section had to operate dismounted from the vehicle, you just popped out the 77 Set, fitted it to the Man-Pack, and off you go. RT-524s were found in most everything else requiring a Radio. Dual installations were really only in Command Posts (Troop and Squadron), Squadron OCs, and CO's Tac etc. Troop Commanders and Troop Recces often nabbed a dual installation as well, but I don't believe that was "doctrine" for us until the Assault Pioneers/Assault Troopers were stood down and Engineer Sub-Sub Units were tasked with intimate support to the manouvre arms. The fancy stuff like HF was rarely if ever used at the Regt level in the normal operating environment. IIRC, HF was usually a function of the Brigade HQ & Sigs guys, but I suppose there are one offs like FOO/FACs that may have used them, but i'm wandering way out of my lane now.

Having said all of that, i'm a bit of a hypocrite and have a RT-524A and GRC-160 (PRC-77 in AM-2060) in my M151A2. Highly unlikely combination in a Sapper Jeep, especially the Support Squadron 2 I/C, but I hauled around a 77 Set enough to enjoy owning one now.

The intercom feature is/was found only in crewed vehicles, i.e. tanks.

Then, you need C2296, C2297, C2298, C2299 Control Boxes all cabled into a 1780 Control Unit.

Then, each crewman would have intercom and potential radio transmission capabilities, depending on certain switch positions.

Bosnia was a nightmare for Comms from the end user perspective. We got pretty good at setting up and tearing down the Mast and Sputnik by the time I left. Our Sat Phone came in a kit the size of a Barracks Box and required a portable generator to run it. This was during the VRC-12 days and there was no low level HF Comms at that point. I'm not surprised HF showed up years later, especially when operations consisted of parking a C/S or two at every polling station in the AO or similar stuff. Regardless, Bosnia wasn't doctrine. Had the Iltis remained in service after we pulled out of the Balkans, that Comms setup would have been yanked upon return to Canada, sorta like the RT-117F of late.

Nothing wrong with doing what your doing in my eyes. Its the guys who are painting Iltis' 383 Desert Tan and passing them off as legit period correct Op ATHENA vehicles that irks me.

MX-6707 antenna mount plates.
Does anyone have any of these surplus to their needs? I have two different types of antenna mounts but both have the small hole style for C42 sets antennae. Failing surplus units, does someone have the hole diameter required? I could always torch or holesaw out my mounts.

3 1/2"
 

I have a complete antenna set up for sale; two antenna elements, MX 6707 Base Matching Unit, securing ring, AND sugar scoop antenna mount for $75.00 which I want to sell as complete unit. The hole for the BMU is 3 1/2". Hope this info helps.

CHEEMO! :cheers:

Derek.

ok heres a question or two..
all my doghouses came from iltis.
on one, there is faded paint which clearly shows an m1029 tray was mounted directly on top, ie not it a second doghouse...

also, it was mounted facing backwards, indeed if you check the multitude of holes in the doghouses, the tray only lines up with mounting holes when its facing backwards...


also on one of the double doghouses i have, both have the 18pin connector cables...which I thought (???) were for connection to crew boxes but why would you need that in an Iltis?

After Scotty checked my vehicle history, there is some hint that it might have been used by the Cdn Cmdr in Bosnia...IF this turns out to be the case...would he have had one 524 or ????

When I first started working on my M151A2 I came on this forum and asked many questions, and asked for photos. One of the comments I got was from Colin MacGregor Stevens was something to the effect of "Pick the era you want to represent...." I'm glad he mentioned that. Because once I did, it made things easy.

With an Iltis it is crucial you do this.

The Iltis was used with both Tac Rad systems (VRC-12 and then later IRIS/TCCCS), and in the case of Bosnia, the Iltis was used during in that Theatre when the transition from one system to the other occurred.

Both Theatres (Afghanistan and Bosnia) saw things happen to these vehicles that went against some of the "rules" at the time:

- In Bosnia, the Area of Operation was much larger than what TAC Rad was designed for, hence HF being fitted to an Iltis. Either system could have been employed (TCCCS or VRC-12), but not concurrently.

- In Afghanistan, the Iltis utilized TCCCS (and possibly the 117F HF) and was on its last legs prior to disposal, so what ever you could dream up was only a visit to the Mat Tech away who basically had "carte blanc" to make changes to the vehicles. They did not however have VRC-12 stuff, and the rules for TCCCS Installations were quite rigid and rarely deviated from due to COMSEC considerations.

The point i'm trying to make is that i'm seeing all kinds of references to Afghanistan and the late days of Bosnia, GPS Mounts (or is it actually a TCCCS Control Indicator Mount?), yet details about VRC-12/MT-1029 18 Pin Connections, Dog Houses etc etc.

By all means do what you want as they are your vehicles, just be aware of those facts, and that guys like me will probably ask why TCCCS stuff is being used in conjunction with VRC-12 stuff (which didn't happen), or why VRC-12 stuff is being used on a vehicle trying to depict the post GWOT era (which also didn't happen). Your either restoring something to represent and era, or your simply just owning an MV. When these cross over is when things become muddy and you end up with this:

http://www.surfacezero.com/g503/data...267m8k_20.jpeg

Maybe I take it personally as I deployed numerous times on both of those Operations, but now I digress....

Ugly....
 

Man,that is one ugly chick on your front fender...

:drunk: :yappy:

Not mine, but if you're interested :):
http://ontario.kijiji.ca/c-ViewAdLar...AdId=297143425

There was an interesting (heated) discussion about re-enactors portraying the European Campaign in 44-45 and the correct weapons in use. I won't try and reproduce the whole thread, but in essence, although there was an original photo showing a Canadian using a Thompson in Europe, the correct SMG for Europe was the Sten. But the mere existence of the photo created a scenario where everyone who wanted to carry a Thompson justified it through that photo.

I tip my hat to Iltis guys. That is the bitch about restoring/owning something fairly new I guess. As you alluded to, TCCCS is not legally available and if you install anything VRC-12, then you're limiting yourself to portraying 2001 and earlier. TCCCS and VRC-12 did not crossbreed, period.

Did the VRC-12 and HF co-exist in an Iltis? Not in 1999 or earlier. Is there a chance that they did between 1999 and TCCCS in 2000-2001? I personally doubt it, but I don't know for certain, and I wouldn't use that vagueness as a basis to legitimize it.

Although it is very very remotely possible that someone could have rigged up a VIC System in an Iltis, doing so on that premise opens to door to all kinds on nonsense, like guys putting a Javelin Missile on the back seat, me pulling a Giant Viper behind my MUTT, and that "thing" in the Kijiji Add above, and then displaying it at a show as legit.

But, if a guy wants a VIC System or Desert Cam paint for his Iltis, then by all means do it, as long as its understood that it wasn't legit and it isn't passed off as legit:
http://alberta.kijiji.ca/c-cars-vehi...AdIdZ290251712
http://alberta.kijiji.ca/c-cars-vehi...AdIdZ286797246

In my mind, and by no means am I any kind of an authority on this, but in my mind, being period correct is having the correct kit for the era being portrayed. Being a purist means that you can't have an MT-1029 (or some other piece of hardware) with a Dataplate dated 1989 in a vehicle that was divested in 1986. Sounds crazy but this is the sort of thing I see on the US Forums.

I am now the proud owner of an operational RT-524 and a PRC-77.
All I need now is the co-ax to the AMU, the control cable for the AMU and a power cable for my jeep. I require the Bendix style from the batteries to the bracket as well as the Bendix from there to the radio.

Now, someone tell me about the 77 set. I am a little confused from previous posts here. Was the 77 equipped to be mounted in a vehicle, was it ever tied in with the 524 etc. What would I require, if anything to accomplish this?
My 77 came as the basic unit: radio with battery box, handset and flex base with tape antenna.

Option 1:

On the Man Pack and probably the most legit way during the era:
http://www.surfacezero.com/g503/data...IQ00aa00nn.jpg

Option 2:

Or mounted on an AM-2060 Tray:
http://www.surfacezero.com/g503/data.../IMG_26091.JPG
http://www.surfacezero.com/g503/data...m/IMG_2610.JPG

For Option 1 you have everything already. For Option 2 you will require:
AM-2060 (not cheap)
MT-1029
C-2299 (under the 524 in the last pic)
MX-6202 and Antenna Elements
Cables
Adapter Bracket for MT-1029 (plate under the MT-1029 in the pics above)
AMU Utility Bracket and an illusive AMU Corner Mount

In a nutshell, you essentially need doubles of everything you needed to run the RT-524, minus the Power Cable with Bendix and the C2299 Box.

If it were me, i'd enjoy it now as is and collect the other items as time goes on. Some items like the 2060 Tray are expensive and the AMU Corner Mount can be very tricky to find.

Congrats on the find.

Heres some clearer snaps of the installations:

http://www.surfacezero.com/g503/data.../IMG_10163.JPG

http://www.surfacezero.com/g503/data.../IMG_10172.JPG

http://www.surfacezero.com/g503/data.../IMG_10183.JPG

well I dont want to hijack Chris' thread but although the"'legacy" radio considerations are similar the thread is getting off topci, so will transfer other questions to a new Iltis comms topic

So yesterday I bumped into my battle group CO from Bosnia (Roto 11 '02-'03), and I mentioned your discovery. We wondered aloud which mission's commander would have been using Iltis and which level of command. UNPROFOR? IFOR? SFOR? Company? Battalion? Contingent? Then we remembered he had a nice diesel Jeep SUV as his rover, and a LAVIII if there was anywhere he needed to go with his manoeuver elements. There were Iltis' (Ilti?) in Transport, all you needed were valid 404s and a place to go. So, a little more specificity on the CFR and time frame will help ID the who and what of you vehicle.

Hi Terry
although the radio systems for early Iltis are the same as Chris question, i dont wish to get off topic on Chris thread, pls go to Iltis comms thread.
Thanks !

Antennas
 

Is all of this available still