[Earthpig]

Originally Posted by bigehauser

To go a little more off topic, but still have context with the original post, I am a radio man in the US Army. I have not actually done my job in a tactical environment as of late, but I will say this. Short distance, tactical radios have gotten better by leaps and bounds. So much so that there doesn't even need to be an RTO standing next to a squad leader, or does there?

The problem with having outstanding small, portable, ultra high speed radios like the MBITR (link to official sale points sheet), or a prick 152 is that it tempts the chain of command to no longer assign another man to be next to a leader and hold onto the radio. In THEORY, this could be great as a leader now is just a literal push of a button away from his higher ups.

HOWEVER, in any combat operation, ESPECIALLY the deadly urban environment, a squad leader would have to, if having his hands on the radio himself, take his mind off the situation at hand-his eyes too- get on his radio, ensure it is good for transmitting, then talk to whomever. The problems with that are obvious. His reaction time to receiving contact, or something else is greatly hindered.

That is just something I wanted to add concerning comms, and radio equipment. In today's world, comms are easy to establish, but they don't always stay that way.

A squad leader usually has his handset clipped on his chinstrap with the earpiece wedged on his ear and the mouthpiece near his mouth(go figure) .He already has his freq's loaded and, at least on the PRC 126, turns the knob a number of clicks to the required channel (a squad leader only needs a Co. Freq and Plt. Freq in combat, and usually only the latter) this requires at most one free hand. Now with newer setups(I retired three years ago) it may be a different deal. It doesn't seriously affect his job as a squad leader.....in fact it enhances it. As a platoon leader or a company commander having a RTO is more of a necessity (bigger radio more freqs and more responsibility)