My favorite part of this article is the reason for saying "SAY AGAIN" instead of "REPEAT".
The word "REPEAT" should not be used in place of "SAY AGAIN",
especially in the vicinity of naval or other firing ranges,
as "REPEAT" is an artillery proword defined in ACP 125 U.S.
Supp-2(A) with the wholly different meaning of "request for the
same volume of fire to be fired again with or without corrections
or changes" (e.g., at the same coordinates as the previous round).[12]
You'd think something as destructive as artillery fire might be given a slightly longer and less common word...
Sometimes in real actions, you don't have that luxury for long phrases. For example, in professional gaming (Overwatch), you don't say "keep focus fire on Lucio". You only say "Lulululululu..." And keep repeating that.
Not like gaming is comparable to real combat, but a hundred milliseconds is a lot in life & death situations.
That is absolutely a fair point. Speaking as someone who does not have military experience, I can't speak to it. But it would make sense that if you have the time to wait for them to repeat the phrase, that the longer phrase "SAY AGAIN" could be used.
Whereas "REPEAT" might not involve the time luxury.
Been a while, but there’s an entire script you read when calling in artillery. It’s designed to be simple, so the dumbest joe can figure it out, and verifiable so that the chances for mistakes or releasing a round by accident are minimized.
Exactly. In the French Navy they even call it an artillery mass (like a church service). There are similar procedures for surface engagement by a fleet (but not used as much today because of tactical data links).
Minimizing the risk of a mistake and coordinating fire between units is more important in naval warfare than reaction time. In Anti Air Warfare it is different.
Correct. I was in the Royal Australian Artillery corps for a number of years, and RATEL procedures (across all corps) drill this into you.
However it is unlikely to occur in practice - the artillery battery will (generally) be on a separate radio net, and the proword will only be applicable if you're in an active fire mission - though it's good to be safe. My wife still gets frustrated with my use of SAY AGAIN.
When you get a good sig on each end, the speed of fire mission comms is a thing of beauty - and once the mission is opened both ends will drop all callsigns.
"a good signal" // "once the (firing) mission has begun" // "no longer address each other by name, and instead simply use keywords as the recipient / originator are obvious" (ie it's one person transmitting to a lot of receivers)
Almost, "a good sig" is a good signaler - the operator of the radio. It takes a bit of skill and when you get one on each end that can get into a good rhythm it's fantastic.
Yes, the fire mission (FM) will be opened by the FO (Forward Observer), and then they'll drop the callsigns - so something like this:
2 this is 21, fire mission battery, over.
21 this is 2, fire mission battery, out.
# from here they will go to abbreviated callsigns, so just stating theirs (it has been a while since I've done the FO's sequence of orders so it may be out a bit :)).
21, grid 12345678, range 1000, bearing 3759, over.
# and now they drop them completely so 2 will respond with the readback:
grid 12345678, range 1000, bearing 3759, out.
When it's bad, you want a VERY quick way of saying "shoot it again."
The "repeat" vs "say again" distinction is so ingrained that I've been out of the military for a decade and I still always, only say "say again." I don't do it on purpose, it's just part of me now.
I also use "say again" in regular conversation, and I've never been in the military. I picked it up from living in Singapore for a few years. Some of the short, simplified, not-always-grammatical phrases used in Singlish work great for communication - distinct enough to be understood despite the speaker's accent, few fluff words so that they can be parsed easily and spoken easily. Very close to the goals of the military and NATO in that regard.
We often forbid operators the use of "repeat", and we find ourselves using only "say again" on the phone, especially when the link is bad or the other speaker difficult to understand. Imagine speaking to a Pakistani or a Portuguese over a satellite phone.
That actually explains why quite a few people I know tend to use that form in a way that, to me, sounds pretty rude - it's probably just natural for them.
Fantastic. I was just telling the commentor before you that I do not have a military background. I'm glad you could weigh in. That makes complete sense.
I often use say again, but I use it because of of Limoncelly and Hogans book, "the Practice of Systems and Networks Administration" where they (or someone they refer to) suggest it works better in noisy environments.
I guess they have worked with someone with experience from the army..?
