Jump to content
Aero Precision provides OEM part support for military aircraft operators across more than 20 aircraft

Wireless Headsets for C130 ALM's


kiwic130alm
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 52
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

AFSOC tested some aimed primarily at FARP operations - wasn't super successful - lots of bleed-over onto radios and other issues - sounded like they were in a tin can too. I'm sure technology has evolved enough since the mid-late '90s when this was tested - would be good to have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

AFSOC tested some aimed primarily at FARP operations - wasn't super successful - lots of bleed-over onto radios and other issues - sounded like they were in a tin can too. I'm sure technology has evolved enough since the mid-late '90s when this was tested - would be good to have.

Knowing AFSOC they probably where using a tin cans then with cotton string, thats why they were WIRELESS!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Knowing AFSOC they probably where using a tin cans then with cotton string, thats why they were WIRELESS!!!

I remember doing some of those test. Back then as I recall there were sound (volume) problems. But I thought they could of used the same radios that CCT did to communicate with just a different secure frequency -- why reinvent the wheel!

I also tested NVG landing lights that were charged via 9 volt batteries and a single bulb LED/IR mounted on a 2 ft stake at a 45 degree angle. All seven stakes and batteries weighed less than 5#'s and could be seen 2-3 miles out. Also, we worked with an IR laser system -- 4 lights mounted on 2 ft stakes -- the light packs and batteries were about the size of a soda can. The were placed at the approach end and departure end of the runway -- like the close safety lights for a driveway door. When lighted it looked like a straight line on either side of the runway. The problem you could get little breaks in the light with fog patch's or rise and dips in the runway. All-in-all still better than a box and one.

Worked too good is why they were not implemented! Pluss the 9 volt system cost less than $20.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Therein liees the problem Skip, it made too much damn sense.

I always liked the priority of AFSOC parts. The AWADS V1 and Talon V8 RADAR systems shared many of the same parts. If we needed one for an AWADS bird unit, we'd take it from the AFSOC stock and it would get refilled pronto. If we didn't do that, we'd wait for parts for weeks.

Supply abuse? Yes.

Keep 'em Flying? Yes as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I read something recently (if I recall correctly) in the Loadmaster newsletter (put out by AMC) that they were pretty happy with the headsets and they were trying to secure funding for them.

Don't hold you breath getting money out of AMC's hands especilly if it another MAJCOM idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also looked into it for my unit. Long wires suck! But I hit a roadblock with security. Keeping the secure coms inside the plane. Then youd need to justify only needing one on the plane for the load or who ever is in the back. If it was a whole aircrew thing it would be easier. It would be nice thought. Hell I even thought about making something that hung from the overhead to hold the cord up but figured it was easier to learn cable control...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also looked into it for my unit. Long wires suck! But I hit a roadblock with security. Keeping the secure coms inside the plane. Then youd need to justify only needing one on the plane for the load or who ever is in the back. If it was a whole aircrew thing it would be easier. It would be nice thought. Hell I even thought about making something that hung from the overhead to hold the cord up but figured it was easier to learn cable control...

Wouldn't it be easy to use a "scramble channel" like some PD's use when they're discussing things that shouldn't fall on public ears? Yes, they're regular UHF/VHF freqs or whatever PD's use, and anyone with a scanner can hear them, but the encoding/scrambling makes it sound like two drunk guys babbling back and forth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wouldn't it be easy to use a "scramble channel" like some PD's use when they're discussing things that shouldn't fall on public ears? Yes, they're regular UHF/VHF freqs or whatever PD's use, and anyone with a scanner can hear them, but the encoding/scrambling makes it sound like two drunk guys babbling back and forth.

Im sure you could do that but can you justify adding all that when there is already a proven efficent CHEAPER way of doing it? Even if you tear up a cord every 5 flights its still WAY cheaper then outfitting one plane with wireless headsets.

To make it really secure you would need something with codes, then thats one more set of codes needed on the plane.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Telephonics say they have gotten all the interference problems figured out. They had a booth at ATA a couple years ago when I talked to them about it. They're also supplying the new interphone system for the AMP, whilst it is not wireless, it is improved.

I'm gonna get harrassed for using "whilst", aren't I?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im sure you could do that but can you justify adding all that when there is already a proven efficent CHEAPER way of doing it? Even if you tear up a cord every 5 flights its still WAY cheaper then outfitting one plane with wireless headsets.

To make it really secure you would need something with codes, then thats one more set of codes needed on the plane.

Just a thought. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also looked into it for my unit. Long wires suck! But I hit a roadblock with security. Keeping the secure coms inside the plane. Then youd need to justify only needing one on the plane for the load or who ever is in the back. If it was a whole aircrew thing it would be easier. It would be nice thought. Hell I even thought about making something that hung from the overhead to hold the cord up but figured it was easier to learn cable control...

You should try controlling the long cord on a C-5. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does anyone know of a wireless headset system currently being used in the back of the C130. I hate getting the intercom lead caught in the dual rail, seats, load etc. Any leads would be great......

Check out this site: http://www.telephonics.com/

FY09 COMBINED UNFUNDED REQUIREMENTS LIST

C-130, C-5, C-17 LOADMASTER WIRELESS INTERPHONE

BACKGROUND

• Current intercom systems for short-range communications in and around airlift and tanker aircraft

utilize 50–100 ft cords that physically connect the maintainers and aircrew to the aircraft.

• These cords restrict user movement and become tangled with other cords and equipment.

• Maintenance must be conducted beyond the reach of the cords forcing maintainers to use hand signals

which can be misinterpreted.

REQUIREMENT

• Procure a wireless intercom system that provides hands-free, full duplex communication which allows 31

users on a single channel. Six personnel can speak simultaneously to aircraft ground crews during cargo

loading, aircraft maintenance, engine runs, refueling/defueling, pre- and post- ight checks and other

external operations faster and safer. The system is more economical than using current long cord wires.

IMPACT IF NOT FUNDED

• Continue using antiquated, troublesome and dangerous corded systems.

• Existing interphones cords get hung up on equipment or tangled with other cords. This restricts

movement and in extreme cases prevents the loadmaster or maintainer from performing critical duties

in a timely manner, thus reducing mission effectiveness.

UNITS IMPACTED

• 94th Airlift Wing, Dobbins ARB, GA

• 302nd Airlift Wing, Peterson AFB, CO

• 908th Airlift Wing, Maxwell AFB, AL

• 910th Airlift Wing, Youngstown ARS, OH

• 911th Airlift Wing, Pittsburgh IAP, PA

• 440th Airlift Wing, Pope AFB, NC

• 914th Airlift Wing, Niagara Falls IAP, NY

• 934th Airlift Wing, Minn-St Paul ARS, MN

• 433rd Airlift Wing, Lackland AFB, TX

• 445th Airlift Wing, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH

• 452nd Air Mobility Wing, March ARB, CA

CONTRACTOR(S)

• Telephonics Corporation, Farmingdale, NY

C-130,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Check out this site: http://www.telephonics.com/

FY09 COMBINED UNFUNDED REQUIREMENTS LIST

C-130, C-5, C-17 LOADMASTER WIRELESS INTERPHONE

BACKGROUND

• Current intercom systems for short-range communications in and around airlift and tanker aircraft

utilize 50–100 ft cords that physically connect the maintainers and aircrew to the aircraft.

• These cords restrict user movement and become tangled with other cords and equipment.

• Maintenance must be conducted beyond the reach of the cords forcing maintainers to use hand signals

which can be misinterpreted.

REQUIREMENT

• Procure a wireless intercom system that provides hands-free, full duplex communication which allows 31

users on a single channel. Six personnel can speak simultaneously to aircraft ground crews during cargo

loading, aircraft maintenance, engine runs, refueling/defueling, pre- and post- ight checks and other

external operations faster and safer. The system is more economical than using current long cord wires.

IMPACT IF NOT FUNDED

• Continue using antiquated, troublesome and dangerous corded systems.

• Existing interphones cords get hung up on equipment or tangled with other cords. This restricts

movement and in extreme cases prevents the loadmaster or maintainer from performing critical duties

in a timely manner, thus reducing mission effectiveness.

UNITS IMPACTED

• 94th Airlift Wing, Dobbins ARB, GA

• 302nd Airlift Wing, Peterson AFB, CO

• 908th Airlift Wing, Maxwell AFB, AL

• 910th Airlift Wing, Youngstown ARS, OH

• 911th Airlift Wing, Pittsburgh IAP, PA

• 440th Airlift Wing, Pope AFB, NC

• 914th Airlift Wing, Niagara Falls IAP, NY

• 934th Airlift Wing, Minn-St Paul ARS, MN

• 433rd Airlift Wing, Lackland AFB, TX

• 445th Airlift Wing, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH

• 452nd Air Mobility Wing, March ARB, CA

CONTRACTOR(S)

• Telephonics Corporation, Farmingdale, NY

C-130,

Sooo...does this mean it's set in stone?? ...wireless comms? That would be fantastic because I see my (future) unit on that list, and I hope they can get these installed in the 10-12 months I have before I'm working there. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...