My team uses PSC-5s extensively. Air Force and all other units we work with (including the regular army) use the 117 and ask why we don't have it. It does seem to be a superior system. That said, the PSC-5D using the cable that connects from the data port on the PSC 5 to Serial Port on the Computer seems to work a lot better than using the ViaSat card in the computer. In my experience the data cable that connected to the VDC 400 card is not robust enough and breaks easily, and the cards themselves can fry if too much data is being pushed. The embedded VDC emulator in the PSC-5Ds is better.

The MBITR being used for SAT is ok in a bind, but it pushes less power than the PSC-5. Still we have used it and it is nice to have that on the PACE plan.

Here is a public link to the PSC-5D
http://www.raytheon.com/products/ste...s01_052968.pdf

Hipshot,
Concept of the constellation looks interesting. Question what the prioritization of bandwidth once the system is established. There are some civil sector systems along the same lines. Where the guy on the ground takes it is in quality of service when you are operating in a high-use environment. If I am not on the A list, then I take it in the shorts on QoS...

I have seen a lot of guys complain about this being unreliable. The thing you have to remember about the MBITR as SATCOM is that you need 10W to hit the bird. The MBITR pushes 5W, therefore in most cases you will need to attach 1 atinuator, 2 depending upon atmospherics.

Not to brag, but I had our Jr. Bravo hit a bird with an Mbiter and expedient antenna, but the conditions were perfect. Not to mention that I built the antenna, and the bird was a 45 degree bird. The major issue (s) with the 148 on a sat net is that the radio wasn't made to do sat. The Modulation is not precise enough and it has a tendency to bleed over to other channels, and when using it for data, it (the RT) gets REALLY hot. But it will work in a pinch, and is always figured as part of the PACE. I can't wait to get my hands on the 152 though.......

Just my .02, have a good 'un

SAT Bandwidth
 

From the March edition of National Defense Magazine.
I understand the desire at the command level for information. Especially considering the perishable nature of information from the field. But when we start talking about bandwidth purchases from commercial Sat vendors (you got money GI?) I find myself concerned about dependance upon a market-driven sector.

http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.o...icationsIm.htm

Dude, you need to check Your SA!!!!!!!!

Consequently, that is in place now for those at Sage. I used it, and it worked well. Thanks for the hook-up!

Commo shop perspective of radios:
PSC-5D: Easy to set up, does SATCOM perfectly, and as for data, well, Viasat sucks, but it works...mostly.
PRC-117: PAIN IN THE ASS to program without a computer, UI makes no sense whatsoever, does nothing as well as the PSC-5. Very easy to break remote cable plug on the radio requiring contract repair. Only redeeming value is the High-Performance Wave data mode.
PRC-150: Same as 117, but replace HPW with HF ALE.
PRC-148: Bread and butter radio. UI makes hand-jamming...doable. Can do 20W satcom with the amp mount.
SINCGARS/ASIP: Still the best radio for FH comms. And despite the "improvements" I still prefer to use the old, C/D model 1523s over the new one's keypad-primary operation.