Direction finding on spread-spectrum signals using the time-domain filtered cross spectral density

Houghton, A.W.; Reeve, Christopher D.

doi:10.1049/ip-rsn:19971397

Cited by 9 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To intercept coherent signals, a possible improvement is to use a multiple antenna receiver. In the following, we consider the two antennas and correlator (2A&C) receiver [58][59][60] as shown in Figure 10. In Ref.…”

Section: Detection Of a Radar Sourcementioning

confidence: 99%

On the anti‐intercept features of noise radars

Galati,

Pavan

2024

IET Radar Sonar & Navi

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Robustness against Electronic Warfare/Electronic Defence attacks represents an important advantage of Noise Radar Technology (NRT). An evaluation of the related Low Probability of Detection (LPD) and of Intercept (LPI) is presented for Continuous Emission Noise Radar (CE‐NR) waveforms with different operational parameters, that is, “tailored”, and with various “degrees of randomness”. In this frame, three different noise radar waveforms, a phase Noise (APCN) and two “tailored” noise waveforms (FMeth and COSPAR), are compared by time–frequency analysis. Using a correlator (i.e. a two antennas) receiver, assuming a complete knowledge of the band (B) and duration (T) of the coherent emission of these waveforms, it will be shown that the LPD features of a CE‐NR do not significantly differ from those of any CE radar transmitting deterministic waveforms. However, in real operations, B and T are unknown; hence, assuming an instantaneous bandwidth estimation will show that the duration T can be estimated only for some specific “tailored” waveforms (of course, not to be operationally used). The effect of “tailoring” is analysed with prospects for future work. Finally, some limitations in the classification of these radar signals are analysed.

show abstract

Section: Detection Of a Radar Sourcementioning

confidence: 99%

On the anti‐intercept features of noise radars

Galati,

Pavan

2024

IET Radar Sonar & Navi

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The time-delay is not an explicit parameter in the model. Such methods can be derived in time domain [2], [4], [11] or in frequency domain [10], [9], [1]. Some methods also rely on the expansion of the transfer function in some generalized orthogonal basis functions [8].…”

Section: B Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

Identification of continuous-time Box-Jenkins models with arbitrary time-delay

Mahata

Garnier

2007

2007 46th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An extended instrumental variable algorithm is proposed for identification of systems with arbitrary time delays. Our algorithm can handle time-delays which may be non-integer multiple of the sampling interval. It is further shown that the proposed approach can achieve the asymptotic Cramér-Rao bound by properly tuning the user's choices. In simulations the algorithm gives unbiased parameter estimates with good statistical accuracy.

show abstract

“…Techniques have also been proposed to detect linear FM and measure its sweep rate by cross-correlating the signal with a delayed replica of itself [8,9]. This process can be viewed as generating a beat frequency proportional to the product of the chirp rate and the delay time, which can be analysed using a Fourier transform.…”

Section: Special-purpose Intercept Receiversmentioning

confidence: 99%

Low probability of intercept radar strategies

Stove¹,

Hume

Baker

2004

IEE Proc., Radar Sonar Navig.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To reduce probability of intercept, in most cases, the form and magnitude of the radar transmissions are designed to spread energy over as wide a range of dimensions as possible. Equally, in response to this, designs for electronic surveillance measures (ESM) systems have been postulated that increase receiver sensitivity. Their purpose is to increase detection range beyond that of the radar (or to an adequate range if they are to be forward deployed). The authors examine the evolving nature of the relationship between advanced 'low probability of intercept' (LPI) radar designs and future trends in ESM receiving capability. This relationship is far from straightforward, being both probabilistic and dependent on environmental and operational factors. Indeed this is complicated still further by the issue of affordability. The authors compute the performance of ESM and radar systems for a number of cases, including not just simple interception, but also the extraction of information from intercepted signals. In this way the key factors influencing the detectability of LPI radar systems are determined. It is demonstrated that it is never possible to be completely certain that a radar system has not been detected and that the most appropriate way to implement an LPI radar design is always closely related to the tactical environment in which the radar system will be used. Indeed this often overrides the technical aspects of system performance.

show abstract

Direction finding on spread-spectrum signals using the time-domain filtered cross spectral density

Cited by 9 publications

References 4 publications

On the anti‐intercept features of noise radars

On the anti‐intercept features of noise radars

Identification of continuous-time Box-Jenkins models with arbitrary time-delay

Low probability of intercept radar strategies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About