# Math for signals



## 1911CoLt45 (17 Feb 2010)

Hello

Hey guys.  Can anyone here please steer me in the right direction to what level of math I should study up on to be eligible for signals officer.  I know how the Cfat works, and I wont ask specifics to what is on the test , but a general idea would be helpful.

Thanks again


----------



## dhAWK (17 Feb 2010)

Hi 11911CoLt45,

If you've gone to the recruiter, they will have given you a sample of the question that are asked. The math there is most likely going to be on the test. I've also trawlled the posted around the site a bit now, and it seems like having a good grasp of the basics is needed, so good mental math. 

A good site to hit up for learning and brushing up is ::  www.purplemath.com  I haven't taken the CFAT yet, but I have done lots of looking around for information on it. My suggestion would be to nail down as much math as you can, better to know more than you need than less. Hope that helps some! and good luck with your testing!

    ~dhAWK


----------



## gcclarke (17 Feb 2010)

For some reason, I have a feeling that this dhAWK is in some way financially associated with this purplemath.com.

Anyways, you'd probably be best off focusing on algebra, calculus, and linear algebra (including differential equations). I can't guarantee these are all used, I'm just basing this upon the portion of my own training that I figure might intersect with the training of SIGS Os.

But, this might help you get through the training itself. It may or may not help you get through the CFAT which may or may not determine whether or not you're even in the running to become a signals officer.


----------



## 1911CoLt45 (17 Feb 2010)

Thanks Clarke

I figured the same with are friend here.  Thanks for the tips.  But , now that I know,  its time to study.

All the best


----------



## Bzzliteyr (17 Feb 2010)

English skills will help as well.  From the get go officers tend to do a lot of paper pushing. Don't neglect other courses by focusing on just the ones you need for the trade you want.  I have friends that have started in one but finished in another.

"OUR" friend will also tell you that.


----------



## 1911CoLt45 (17 Feb 2010)

Thank you

And no disrespect to the dhawk.


----------



## dhAWK (18 Feb 2010)

None taken, I'm more amused, i got the site from when i asked a recruiter about brushing up on math myself. mainly because I'm in an art school, we tend to avoid math. lol.  anyways! good luck!  may the Fractions be kind, and the Equations easy!

   ~dhAWK


----------



## CyberJonesy (22 May 2010)

I just finished the "orientation" week at the C&E unit and I was given a math review kit for the POET course. All the stuff in there is basically Maths 436 (Thats what its called in Quebec dunno about other provinces). 

They only gave the books to the LCIS guys but the reason I'm bringing this up is because there is a chance that in the future, the sig op course will have you go trough the POET course. don't take my word on it, its just gossip but it might not be a bad idea to familiarise yourself with this level of mathemathics.


----------



## REDinstaller (22 May 2010)

There shouldn't be any requirement for Sig Ops to take POET, unless they want to become Techs.


----------



## rmc_wannabe (22 May 2010)

With the way our comms situation is going, I can see ACCIS Operators needing a lot more math skills.

Even now our BLOS, HCLOS, TSL and Networking side of the house requires a working knowledge of IP Addressing, subnetting, binary sequencing, etc. 

I'd hope the future recruit could hack it out with a pencil and paper in the middle of nowhere than be screwed royal for a dependency on a calculator no one thought to bring.


----------



## Brasidas (22 May 2010)

rmc_wannabe said:
			
		

> With the way our comms situation is going, I can see ACCIS Operators needing a lot more math skills.



To what end?



> Even now our BLOS, HCLOS, TSL and Networking side of the house requires a working knowledge of IP Addressing, subnetting, binary sequencing, etc.



Alright.



> I'd hope the future recruit could hack it out with a pencil and paper in the middle of nowhere than be screwed royal for a dependency on a calculator no one thought to bring.



I remember a reservist signals officer attempting to explain why the QRT didn't work during 8 hours of testing through the use of boolean logic and a an SFC. It went straight over the heads of the operators in his audience who'd never seen such stuff before. It was material he'd studied in university, not CFSCE. And it was neither necessary to explain the problem nor how to avoid it in the future.

That's not math, just like IP addressing isn't math. There's numbers involved, but...

C & E needs minds that are good at grasping the bigger picture and methodically troubleshooting. I'm not seeing an argument for any more complicated math exposure than P=RI^2, which a seventh grade kid can do.

Sig ops can and do perform the math in the field to cut a field expedient dipole antenna to length. Anybody who can't do long division shouldn't be an operator.


----------



## REDinstaller (22 May 2010)

You should see how many operators coming out of CFSCE don't know what the formula is, much less how to use it. And since when is math required for IP addresses? I agree with you that there is no need for rocket scientists with manpacks. And some of our branch officers just don't get many concepts that aren't formed to make them look smarter than their peers. Unfortunately for CFSCE, CFJSR is not the shinning example to base our Branch on. They are a specialist organization, and should be treated as such. Not as the definition of what every C & E member does.


----------



## PuckChaser (22 May 2010)

Tango18A said:
			
		

> Unfortunately for CFSCE, CFJSR is not the shinning example to base our Branch on.



Shhhhhhh, don't tell JSR that. The Branch revolves around them!  ;D

As stated before, its not Math skills our operators need, its logical troubleshooting ability. We don't need complex calculus skills (unless in extremely specialist roles), just simple algebra, long division and binary/hex/octal/decimal conversions. Someone that has university level math is no good if they can't do basic operator skills like program a CI. CFSCE teaches so much now, trying to hit on every little piece of the trade, that when the troops hit units, they've already forgotten 50% of what got covered. More often than not, that 50% that's lost is what they need to do their new job.


----------



## SeanNewman (22 May 2010)

[sarcasm]

The only math you need to know is the mathematical certainty that every Signals Officer in the CF scored a 100% on every math test they ever took.

And they're possibly all virgins too, but that's entirely inappropriate and not at all relevant.

[/sarcasm]

Sig Os are actually a great bunch, because they take flack like nobody I have every see before.  They're responsible to the CO for everything from 10 types of comms frequencies, to computer viruses, to PowerPoint projectors.


----------



## REDinstaller (22 May 2010)

The water revolves around the inside of my toilets, and i have yet given in to taking a drink. CFSCE should learn this lesson.  >


----------



## McG (22 May 2010)

Tango18A said:
			
		

> There shouldn't be any requirement for Sig Ops to take POET, unless they want to become Techs.


I recall hearing somewhere of the Sig Ops and techs being rolled into a single common trade in the near future ...


----------



## Brasidas (22 May 2010)

MCG said:
			
		

> I recall hearing somewhere of the Sig Ops and techs being rolled into a single common trade in the near future ...



And linemen as well. That doesn't mean that the amalgamated 3's will be include large parts of POET or the lineman trades courses. It means the 3's will include some exposure to the trades so that they can build on it with OJT after being sent to their units.


----------



## REDinstaller (22 May 2010)

And I don't think you will see a ACCIS QL3 at a unit anytime soon.


----------



## PuckChaser (22 May 2010)

First courses are currently scheduled for Jan 2011 at CFSCE, currently serving members are being placed (or forced) into Occ/Sub Occ's as we speak. I don't think the OT system will be ready for the amount of people that will get disenfranchised from this process.


----------



## 211RadOp (22 May 2010)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> ..., currently serving members are being placed (or forced) into Occ/Sub Occ's as we speak.



Really.  I have not heard nor seen this yet at the Regt yet.  I know no one in my Tp has been placed into a sub occ yet and a number of us were talking about this late last week over coffee.


----------



## PuckChaser (23 May 2010)

Perhaps its smaller units doing it first, but I know my unit has at least all the SigOps tagged for where they will be going.


----------



## REDinstaller (23 May 2010)

We have done a loose list, but it still only applies to positions not to troops. That will take a while yet to determine who should be what due to quals, not desire.


----------



## Robbie4296 (25 May 2010)

Just asking a question from the beginning of the thread, I read that you can obtain a sample of the CFAT test from the Recruiting office, now is this the same one that is available for download on the CF website or is it something that the give you pertaining to your trade?


----------



## PMedMoe (25 May 2010)

Robbie4296 said:
			
		

> Just asking a question from the beginning of the thread, I read that you can obtain a sample of the CFAT test from the Recruiting office, now is this the same one that is available for download on the CF website or is it something that the give you pertaining to your trade?



More than likely the same (or similar) as the one on the CF website.  I'm pretty sure there isn't a CFAT "pertaining to a trade" as that is what CFAT results are used to determine.

Is this the one you mean?  http://www.forces.ca/media/_PDF/preparing_for_aptitude_test_en.pdf


----------



## Robbie4296 (25 May 2010)

Yes thats the one ,


----------



## sky777 (26 May 2010)

PMedMoe said:
			
		

> More than likely the same (or similar) as the one on the CF website.  I'm pretty sure there isn't a CFAT "pertaining to a trade" as that is what CFAT results are used to determine.
> 
> Is this the one you mean?  http://www.forces.ca/media/_PDF/preparing_for_aptitude_test_en.pdf


I have heard from people who passed CFAT that your example is much easy according to reality.
Is it true?
It means for preparing we will need much harder  examples.
But some people think that there is not preparation for CFAT.If you have math skills - you will pass test.


----------



## PMedMoe (26 May 2010)

I will probably agree that the actual test _may_ be harder for some people.  

There are several places on the internet that have similar practice tests.


----------



## Neolithium (26 May 2010)

Before I wrote my CFAT I was browsing through some of the existing threads, time and again people had suggested doing some of the online IQ Tests.  At the time it sounded a bit silly to me, however it proved to be pretty sound advice that I'm glad I followed.


----------



## Robbie4296 (26 May 2010)

PMedMoe said:
			
		

> I will probably agree that the actual test _may_ be harder for some people.
> 
> There are several places on the internet that have similar practice tests.


Could you post a link on these similar practise threads, Thanks


----------



## Neolithium (26 May 2010)

Robbie4296 said:
			
		

> Could you post a link on these similar practise threads, Thanks



These were some of the links which helped me brush up on things.
http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/17703/post-673001.html#msg673001


----------



## sky777 (26 May 2010)

Try this also:

http://www.psc-cfp.gc.ca/ppc-cpp/pract-test-examn-pract/index-eng.htm

Also you can watch military US test  (ASVAB).It can help you to train your brain.
http://books.google.com/books?q=ASVAB


----------



## Robbie4296 (26 May 2010)

Much thanks!


----------



## bigabe (27 May 2010)

Brasidas said:
			
		

> That's not math, just like IP addressing isn't math. There's numbers involved, but...



As a friendly occupational rivalry, I'm just going to guess you're an Op not a Tech. 

I've seen this twice now on major exercise.  

Now, let's say theres 200 people in this Biv and a few hardworking techs and linemen have ran the fibre and copper all over the place to get every tent a handful of connections and a few patch cables so they can have internet on their cots and talk to mommy.  This same network is actually being used by a CO doing his distance education, an RSM emailing everyones charge reports etc.

I've only ever seen HCLOS's with crappy ZyXel (sp?) $15 walmart routers, and I've definitely never seen a lineman with a CISCO cert to serial into the switches.

So, here's your situation.  A router into a net of switches running over 500 drops in the field.  500 connections on an HCLOS is unusable.  How do you make sure that the CO's laptop is always connected (and his iPhone) and that the cook watching porn doesn't get the IP address if there isn't space?  Then how do you make sure a guy turning on a laptop in the TOC/JOC will take precedence over the mechanic who is skyping the other mechanics daughter?

You have to use subnetting.  255.255.255.0 that you've seen in your internet settings isn't arbitrary.  Now, you can't just type  255.255.255.5 either.  

With several crucial topics aside (OSI Layer 3, Network Classes A,B,C, 24 bits per octet etc)
If you have 185 "Recreational" connections in the camp, you need to understand this chart:

128  64   32   16   8   4   2   1
---    --     --     --    -    -    -   -
 1     0     1     1     1   0   0   1

128 +  0 + 32  +16 + 8 + 0 + 0 + 1 = 185

Thats just binary conversion from 185 to 10111001.  To figure out the mask so you can separate the subnets you're getting into Class Code:255-(2^'Range')
so 255.255.255.254 is valid but .253 is not  xxx.192 is valid but xxx.198 is not etc.  Follow me?  

ALL OF THAT, just to plug majic interweb wires into porno screens to make the jimmy happy. 

Yup.  Fighting the network fight. 

Dude, there is SOOOO much math involved with Ip addresses.  [/rant]

P.S.  All of the above information found in your local QL5 qualified LCIS techs head.  Its all from our 5's.


----------



## rmc_wannabe (27 May 2010)

bigabe said:
			
		

> P.S.  All of the above information found in your local QL5 qualified LCIS techs head.  Its all from our 5's.



And a fair amount of CFSCE OSQ Courses (mainly CSN, Win Server Admin) and if you're lucky a CISCO CCNA course. All of which I, an Operator have attended and have used regulary in my current position.


----------



## PuckChaser (27 May 2010)

bigabe said:
			
		

> hardworking techs and linemen



To continue the friendly rivalry: quoted phrase is an oxymoron.  ;D


----------



## CommTech13 (27 May 2010)

sky777 said:
			
		

> I have heard from people who passed CFAT that your example is much easy according to reality.
> Is it true?
> It means for preparing we will need much harder  examples.
> But some people think that there is not preparation for CFAT.If you have math skills - you will pass test.



Well first off the sample tests on forces.ca are better suited to demonstrate the format of the test, and the nature of the questions that will be asked, rather than the difficulty of the question.

Ok well i took the CFAT yesterday, and my trade choice is LCIS tech. Here's the deal in my opinion, the verbal is hard enough that you could benefit from brushing up on some of the less commonly used words in English language... let's just say they use words that are more complicated than dog - but with this being said I think they put the least amount of 'scrutiny' on your score in this section (maybe because I'm going for a tech position, quite possibly varies with your specific trade choices). The spatial section is something that your are skilled at, or aren't, not much you can do here. For the math part you could definitely benefit greatly from working on your multiplication, division, and ratios. I don't want to give too much away so if I did please just delete the post, but my point here being the best way to prepare is to brush up on those math skills, in my opinion.


----------



## Robbie4296 (27 May 2010)

Yes agreed, took the test that were posted on the link above and compared to the practise one supplied by CFRC, big difference some stuff is similar but overall a test is a test.


----------



## Neolithium (27 May 2010)

rmc_wannabe said:
			
		

> And a fair amount of CFSCE OSQ Courses (mainly CSN, Win Server Admin) and if you're lucky a CISCO CCNA course. All of which I, an Operator have attended and have used regulary in my current position.



CCNA Course? Thanks! Something else to put into my long term goals list, I've wanted to take the plunge into Cisco gear for a long time; unfortunately their enterprise-level pricing makes even their distance-learning certifications....ridiculously expensive.


----------



## bigabe (27 May 2010)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> To continue the friendly rivalry: quoted phrase is an oxymoron.  ;D



I just laughed and shot chunks of cereal across my living room.  Mostly because its true.  I mean, I am eating cereal in my own living room at 1130 on a weekday. 



			
				Neolithium said:
			
		

> CCNA Course? Thanks! Something else to put into my long term goals list, I've wanted to take the plunge into Cisco gear for a long time; unfortunately their enterprise-level pricing makes even their distance-learning certifications....ridiculously expensive.



clackity clackity ... filling out online ILP form... clackity clackity ...*poof* now doing the distance ed Cisco course on DNDs dime.


----------



## PuckChaser (27 May 2010)

bigabe said:
			
		

> clackity clackity ... filling out online ILP form... clackity clackity ...*poof* now doing the distance ed Cisco course on DNDs dime.



He's not in yet, but will probably just have to pick IST as his sub occ to get the Cisco course.


----------



## Occam (27 May 2010)

bigabe said:
			
		

> clackity clackity ... filling out online ILP form... clackity clackity ...*poof* now doing the distance ed Cisco course on DNDs dime.



I doubt that ILP will be approved.  The reimbursement program says "Courses can be directly related to current job or MOC, but must supplement, not replace, training or education required for the members current job or MOC".  I think you'll find that ICND1/ICND2/CCNA boot camp courses are too closely related to a Sig Op/LCIS Tech/ATIS Tech job function for CDA to fund the training.  Anyone I know who has those quals got them by the unit paying for the course because the member was employed in a position requiring those skills.


----------



## bigabe (28 May 2010)

I've only ever heard of things like SCUBA Diving and Equestrian Appreciation being denied.  All it takes is a substantiation paragraph.  The better you write it, the more likely to get approved.  There's techs who have done everything from Classic German Cinema to Network+ and A+ that work in CNR shops.  Not quite CCNA mind, but same idea. 

Really, its an online form.  No harm in filling it out, worst case scenario is you get an email saying 'Denied: [Reason]'


----------



## Neolithium (28 May 2010)

There is quite a bit of time before any of those types of courses would be something to delve into, I just like having a few generalized goals that point me in the right direction and fine tune them when the opportunities come up.


----------



## Delta26 (13 Jun 2010)

Just a question here, but I'm looking at LCIS, and am a+ certified..  If I gave my recruiter all the details in regards to what the knowledge required  to pass the exams, would that help me any?

a+ essentials exam objectives
http://www.comptia.org/Libraries/Exam_Objectives/CompTIA_A_220-701.sflb.ashx

a+ practical exam objectives
http://www.comptia.org/Libraries/Exam_Objectives/CompTIA_A_220-702.sflb.ashx


----------



## Occam (13 Jun 2010)

Delta26 said:
			
		

> Just a question here, but I'm looking at LCIS, and am a+ certified..  If I gave my recruiter all the details in regards to what the knowledge required  to pass the exams, would that help me any?



Not in the slightest.


----------



## JDR (26 Dec 2010)

I saw that  someone said to brush up on basics like addition, subtraction, ratios and suchwhat, and near the start of the thread someone had brought up things like calculus, and other advanced functions of math.
Are such advanced academic methods necessary to be knowledgeable in as an NCO, as well as as an officer? 
Is there a ton of memorization of formulae? What level of prejudice is exhibited against a single mistake on the CFAT, if you're allowed to answer that?


----------

