AARMS

Vol. 4, No. 2 (2005) 225257

TECHNOLOGY

Hungarian air surveillance against new air defence threats: Netcentric approach augmented by VHF radars
ISTVN BALAJTI
Mikls Zrnyi National Defence University, Budapest, Hungary

The Hungarian Air surveillance system is based on distributed ground-based radar and plot data fusion command centers. The task of the Air Defense Systems (ADS) to produce a Recognized Air Picture (RAP) needs to be modified following the events of September 11. 2001. New platforms for air surveillance and attacking devices have appeared and created a more dangerous situation in the air space. These new threats for air surveillance have appeared in the form of civilian aircraft not controlled by Civilian Air Traffic Control (CATC), Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV), short-tomedium range Tactical Ballistic Missiles (TBM) and modern STEALTH airborne vehicles. Long range radars currently in operation, and recently procured ones, degrade in performance rapidly and their capability is not flexible against new threats. The problem is to find solutions that fully integrate new requirement capabilities into the current long range radar net and infrastructure, keeping research & development, and maintenance costs, low. To do this it is necessary to analyze what capabilities are required against new threats, performances of the current radar net and RAP production, and then develop a cost effective proposal for the air surveillance reform. One of the most promising approaches to emphasis net-centricity is the use of radartriangle netcentric structures augmented by netted VHF radars to solve these problems in a cost and time effective manner. The expertise of the Hungarians is not enough to solve all aspects of the subject, and it make sense to propose and develop a common solution in larger scale of air surveillance such as the area bordered by the Carpathian Mountains. This paper introduces the first step of this analysis. Do what you can, with what you have, where you are Theodore Roosevelt The task (New challenges) The highest uncertainty is in the air-traffic situation, because the air space controlled by CATC is usually large, includes low altitude and the air-traffic is heavy and the
Received: June 8, 2005 Address for correspondence: ISTVN BALAJTI Mikls Zrnyi University of National Defence H1581 Budapest, P.O. Box 15, Hungary E-mail: balajti@pt.lu

I. BALAJTI: Hungarian air surveillance

situation not only complex but changes rapidly. Secondary Surveillance Radars (SSR) used for target Identification can be switched off, and together with flight plan correlations may not be sufficient to distinguish Friend from Foe (IFF) in the air. Analyses show: Radar coverage should be improved at low altitude. Situation recognition should be timely. Urgent information on aircraft behavior, path and shape are needed. (E.g. Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar InSAR) The Unmanned Aerial Vehicle type targets usually are low or/and surface flying equipments, and present problems due to detection in the presence of clutter, terrain masking and flying underneath the radar beam. The high maneuvering capability (e.g. more than 10G for a few minutes) of UAV causes Radar Tracking problem for RAP production centers as well. Moreover, due to tight maneuvers the Radar Cross Section (RCS) reduction of 12 dB halves the detection range. The environmental features often show a widely differing polarization-dependent on radar reflectivity. The increase in speed and low RCS of modern Anti Radiation Missiles (ARM) has created a demand for higher detection ranges in radar systems that are used as self-protection devices, because the probability of detection of an ARM target drops to very low level. Figure 1 shows the RCS versus frequency for a ARM type target seen at 60 degree from nose-on.

Figure 1. Anti Radiation Missile type RCS dependences from frequency3

Analyses show: Radar coverage, dwell time of the target, and detectability should be improved in a heavy clutter environment. Effective Radiated Power should be improved. Resonant Frequency (FR) & Horizontal Polarization (HP) should be used. Plot update time should be improved (ta). New high G maneuver tracker is needed. Situation, type recognition and quantity determination should be timely. Anti Radiation Missile type alert should be increased significantly.

226

AARMS 4(2) (2005)

I. BALAJTI: Hungarian air surveillance

The short and medium range (less than 1000 km) Tactical Ballistic Missile is a relatively expensive type of threat, but it is easy to acquire expertise to manufacture them. After the collapse of the former Warsaw Pact (WP) this cannot be considered as a serious problem. For this reason, TBM detection, tracking and recognition is also one of the major challenges for AD radars and RAP production centers. The results of different calculations and the military field experience of the author confirm that long-range surveillance radar wont be able to detect TBM throughout its trajectory. There are two different phases when the TBM can be detected by a single long-range surveillance radar: at the launch phase (relatively low speed, large RCS) and the impact phase (relatively high speed, small RCS). Certainly a TBM tracker between these two points is also required, but this case needs a well co-operated radar net with well-determined overlapping areas among dedicated radars in the high altitude area as well. Figure 2 shows radar coverage dependences from the elevation angle beamwidth of the radar and from the range of the target. Time consumption of TBM targets in the surveillance radar coverage for TBM speed 100 m/s and 1000 m/s are shown in Table 1. A possible conclusion of the TBM detection is that there are minimum requirements for elevation (and azimuth) beamwidth and for the minimum target range position.

Figure 2. Radar coverage dependences from elevations and from target range

AARMS 4(2) (2005)

227

I. BALAJTI: Hungarian air surveillance

Table 1. Time consumption of TBM targets in the surveillance radar coverage v=100 m/s 15 20 30 45 v=1000 m/s 15 20 30 45 100 km 26.8 s 36.39 s 57.77 s 100 s 2.68 s 3.639 s 5.777 s 10.00 s 300 km 80.38 s 109.19 s 173.2 s 300 s 8.038 s 10.919 s 17.32 s 30.0 s 600 km 160 s 218 s 346 s 600 s 16.0 s 21.8 s 34.6 s 60.0 s 1000 km 267.9 s 363.9 s 577.7 s 1000 s 26.79 s 36.39 s 57.77 s 100.0 s

It is also evident that the greater elevation (and azimuth) beam width of the antenna pattern, the larger the probability for successful detection and tracking of TBM type targets could be. Unfortunately in this case the target detection probability sharply decreases due to decreasing dwell time and Effective Radiated Power (ERP). From the radar detection point of view it is very important to note that the TBM has a large radar cross section in the launch phase due to the vertically polarized Electro-Magnetic Field at the target having resonant frequency. For this reason it is important that the radar uses vertical polarization, so as to exploit the large RCS at target resonance. This type of strong resonance and polarization dependence also detects UAV targets better, but in this case, the horizontal polarization gives better detection possibilities. Analyses show: Radar coverage, dwell time of the target, and ERP should be improved. Anti-Chaff techniques should be used and improved. Low frequency (f)/Resonant Frequency (FR) & Vertical Polarization (VP) should be used. Plot update should be increased (ta). A special type of tracker is needed. Situation, recognition and quantity determination should be timely. Stealth is an expensive way of reducing the RCS of targets, but the technology is known, it is deducible from the radar equation:1

R4 = m
R
[dBm] m

PAV t 0 G T G R 2 F 4 (4 ) 3 kTs D x ( n ) L t L
1 = 4
[dBm 2 ]

(1)
[dB]

1 PAV t 0 + 4 kTs

1 1 (G T G R ) [dB] + 4 2

[dBm]

1 1 3 + F [dB] (D x (n)) [dB] (L t L ) [dB] (4) [dB] 4 4 4

228

AARMS 4(2) (2005)

I. BALAJTI: Hungarian air surveillance

where: Rm PAV=Ptfr Pt fr to GT GR F k Ts Dx (n) x n

Lt L

maximum detection range; average power; impulse power; transmitter impulse-length; Pulse Repetition Frequency (PRF); total observation time (for coherent integration); transmitter antenna gain; receiver antenna gain; wavelength; Radar Cross Section (RCS); pattern-propagation factor Boltzmanns constant (1,38.1023 [W/HzK]); input termination resistor temperature; detectability factor for n (samples); Swerling model number; samples (or pulses) of signal, each with this energy ratio, will be integrated after envelope detection before being applied to target detection threshold; transmission line loss; atmospheric attenuation.

The maximum detection range reduction, in decibel-meter-[dBm], can be illustrated by the following S band radar parameters of Bartons interpreted radar equation (1): (Standard Target); Sw1 =1 m2; Pd=0,8; PFA=106, kTs=1020 Ws 200 dBWs; PAV=10 kW; t0=1 ms (13 hits); GT=GR=42.1 dB; =0.1 m10 dBm; F=10 dB; D1(13)=0 dB; LtL=21 dB;

Rm = 0+

1 (8.7 + 200 ) + 1 (2 42.1) + 1 ( 10 ) + 0 + 0 1 (21) 3 (11) = 54.7 [dBm ] 4 4 2 4 4

See details in Table 2. This S band radar is capable of detecting Sw 1 type targets having 1 m2 RCS at 298 km and Stealthy type targets having 0.01 m2 RCS at 94 km. The measurement sensitivity is determined by the degree of mismatch between the radiated and the re-radiated signal, too. This results in loss of a certain portion of the received energy. To apply stealth technology, it is necessary to decrease the spectral density of the reflected RF pulse over a certain (dwell) time interval. It is possible to do this if the RF energy radiated by the radar on an Aircraft is attenuates by coating, or/and

AARMS 4(2) (2005)

229

I. BALAJTI: Hungarian air surveillance

radiated back in a direction different to the original transmit direction, or/and the spectrum is scattered over a wide frequency band, or/and delayed, or/and changed in polarization. Using active cancellation techniques, signals of equal amplitude and opposite phase are transmitted with reflected radar signals to cancel radar returns are also under development. Solutions require time and money, but due to complexity of the topics it makes sense to have some comparison among the RCS reduction techniques, because almost all of them have strong waveband dependence, and this situation can be used against them. E.g. VHF/UHF/HF low frequency band (f) protection or the so-called wing effect occurs when the received RF energy from the head-on is spreading in the orientation of the wings and not the angle of arrival. In addition it follows from the Table 2 that a reduction of RCS can be overcome by increasing transmitter average power, the antenna gain, observation time and wavelength (1/f) of the surveillance radar and properly exploiting the patternpropagation factor. Note: All mentioned parameters and the RCS are in the numerator of the radar equation (1).
Table 2. Detection possibility of different RCS targets RCS 1 m2 0.1 m2 0.01 m2 0.001 m2 0.0001 m2 0.00001 m2 0.000001 m2 0 dB(m2) 10 dB(m2) 20 dB(m2) 30 dB(m2) 40 dB(m2) 50 dB(m2) 60 dB(m2) If PAV=10 kW (Average Power) Rm Searched volume (R2) 298 km 278845 km2 168 km 88623 km2 94 km 27745 km2 53 km 8820 km2 30 km 2826 km2 17 km 907 km2 9 km 254 km2

Source: Reacting to New Air Defence Threats, IEEE Aerospace and Electronic Systems Magazine, December 2004.

Analyses show: Detectability should be improved. Dwell time of the target and ERP should be improved. Low frequency (f)/Resonant Frequency (FR) & Horizontal Polarization (HP) should be used. Chaff filtering required. Situation and recognition should be timely. ARM alert should be increased significantly. The most important qualities of current long range radar performance From the qualities measurement point of view, the technical and operational possibilities for long range AD radars have already been collected, e.g. in Ref. 2, and analyzed so far. Table 3 shows the antenna gain, azimuth-elevation beamwidth, azimuth-elevation

230

AARMS 4(2) (2005)

I. BALAJTI: Hungarian air surveillance

measurement accuracy for the antenna size of 64.3 m having 50% efficiency in the X (=0.03 m), S (=0.1 m), L (=0.23 m), VHF (=1.7 m) band radars. For the VHF1 and VHF2 radar the size of the antennas are 128.6 m and 5030 m, respectively. The last row of Table 3 illustrates that if there is a possibility for pulse integration, measurement accuracies can increase significantly e.g. in the case of 8 pulse integration, the signal-tonoise-ratio (SNR) is 13 dB better than in the mono-pulse case.
Table 3. Parameters of different antennas HF 2050 315 0.55 ~0.3? VHF2 35.1 1.5 2.5 0.16 0.26 0.05 Radar frequency band VHF1 VHF L 23.5 17.5 34.9 6.4 12.8 1.74 7.9 15.8 2.4 0.67 1.35 0.18 0.83 1.66 0.25 0.23 0.47 00.06 S 42.1 0.75 1.05 0.08 0.11 0.03 X 52.5 0.22 0.31 0.02 0.03 0.008

Antenna Gain [dB] Azimuth Beamwidth [deg] Azimuth Measurement Accuracy [deg] Elevation Measurement Accuracy [deg] Elevation Measurement Accuracy [deg] Azimuth Measurement Accuracy [deg] (n=8)

Resolution is proportional with the bandwidth, hence lower frequency gives less resolution in range, in azimuth, elevation angle and radial speed. Typical values are shown in Table 4.
Table 4. Resolution of range, azimuth, elevation angle and radial speed Resolution Range Resolution (m) Azimuth Resolution (deg) Elevation Resolution (deg) Radial speed Resolution (m/s) DF/15 m/s DF/600 m/s DF/3100 m/s HF 2 00015 000 ? 1.5 Hz 60 Hz 310 Hz Radar frequency band VHF L S 250500 150300 120200 512 1.42.4 1.22.0 717 1.62.6 1.52.2 20 15 17.6 Hz 130 Hz 300 Hz 706 Hz 5.2 kHz 12 kHz 3.65 kHz 27 kHz 62 kHz X 50120 0.51.5 0.71.8 10 1 kHz 40 kHz 206 kHz

Note: DF/15 m/s = Doppler Frequency at target radial speed of 15 m/s

The frequency band has basic importance for Doppler frequency (radial velocity of the target) measurement sensitivity as well. Usually a radar operating in X-band has an eight times higher Doppler-Sensitivity as compared to an L-band radar. In the VHF band there should not be problems of Doppler-Sensitivity, because Doppler tolerance of coded waveforms improves as the frequency of transmission is lowered. However, it may cause problems in the L, S and X-bands. At the same time improved DopplerSensitivity effect has an advantage too, because it gives the possibility to measure radial speed of the targets much better.

AARMS 4(2) (2005)

231

I. BALAJTI: Hungarian air surveillance

Figure 3. Radar coverage of VHF and L band radars in case of different propagation conditions

232

AARMS 4(2) (2005)

I. BALAJTI: Hungarian air surveillance

Figure 4. Propagation effects of the X band radar coverage

The operating range of the radar varies directly with the Propagation Factor applicable to the radar target path. The propagation factor has to be calculated to include the propagation effects from multipath and atmospheric conditions, which are very important for low level propagation. The VHF and L band radars indicate significant differences in this case as is shown in Figure 3, compiled by the TERPEM computer program (developed by Signal Sciences Limited in the United Kingdom) where the electrical centre of the antenna is located at 10 m. Figure 4 introduces the X band specialities of this effect. Summarized importance of Advantages & Disadvantages of Hungarian operational expertise acquired during VHF band radar operation and maintenance prove that the use of metric wavelengths possesses several advantages over various areas of radar techniques: VHF frequencies, due to diffraction propagation, have the ability to detect low flying targets beyond the horizon. Additional to this it gives an improvement of approximately 3 dB due to multipath effect if the area around the radar within 35 km is flat. Measurements at resonance frequencies significantly reduce the efficiency of stealth techniques. Measurements are much less sensitive to clutter and weather conditions than radars operating on higher frequencies. Capability of detecting targets up to 1000 km in the surveillance mode for the cheapest operational price. This type of radars has relatively small system losses, e.g. microwave plumbing losses. Detectability of small targets like UAVs with bi- or multistatic radar case, operating in the VHF band is more convenient than using L or higher frequency band radars due to the large azimuth beamwidth. The passive and multistatic radars, operating in the VHF bands could exploit signals of the broadcasting stations.

AARMS 4(2) (2005)

233

I. BALAJTI: Hungarian air surveillance

On the other hand, there are several problems emerging with the application of metric band radars. Desired spectrallypure transmitter and frequency allocation is required to work in a band, mainly reserved for communications purposes. The measurement accuracy is relatively poor and not always good enough for primary military use e.g. for interception. Due to relatively coarse angular resolution, sensitivity to jamming can be high. Low probability of intercept (LPI) features like extremely small sidelobes and narrow beams cannot be easily realized either. L or S band radars in operation for long-range surveillance today could overcome these deficiencies. The advantages of higher frequency band radars, operating in the L, S and X band are relatively smaller, as they are more precise in target parameter measurements and give less sensitivity for propagation effects than the lower VHF band radars. However, they are more sensitive to clutter, chaff, and weather conditions and in the case of Anti Radiation Missiles. Several types of stealth technologies have been developed against radars at these frequencies. The observations described here are proven in detail in Refs 3, 4, 7 and 8. Summarized importance of Advantages & Disadvantages of radar bands is shown in Figure 5.

Figure 5. Frequency dependence of the importance of radars

The questions are: Is there any possibility to combine advantages on a cost effective way? Can the disadvantages in angular error, weight & size of the VHF radars be reduced significantly?

234

AARMS 4(2) (2005)

I. BALAJTI: Hungarian air surveillance

Can the strong Multipath Effect dependence of VHF radars be exploited for target detection? How is it possible to turn disadvantages to advantages? Target tracking Various forms of Kalman Filters (in Ref. 5) are very popular as a technique for the target track extraction and false plot reduction in the heavy clutter environment of the mono-static radars and for the track queuing in RAP production centers. For target tracking, the algorithm needs at least 34 (frequently 710) plots from the radar for track initiation using Markov-chain type criteria. To build up a track and keep it updated, the plot sequence received from radar should be within the correlation requirement (correlation time & gate size) of target maneuvers. The correlation gate size of the tracker depends only on the target speed and data update time of the radar plots. The correlation time: (2) e 1 = 20 G where: speed of the target G normalized acceleration due to gravity. The correlation gate size of the tracker: (3) R = vmax.ta where: R radius of the correlation gate; ta data update time of the target plot (report) max maximum speed of the target. Using these equations it is possible to determine requirements of trackers for different type of targets having different manoeuvring capability and speed. It is known that (see Figure 6, where the speed of the target is: v=50; 150; 300; 600; 900; 1600; 3600; 6000 km/h) if the plot data update time (one antenna rotation in the mono-radar case) of the radar plot is 10 s, then the correlation requirement for the appropriate track initiation and continuity can only be met by targets having a speed of more than (or equal to) 900 km/h and maneuvering capability of less than (or equal to) 4 G. For low speed targets as UAVs, the required plot update time is 2 s at a speed of 150 km/h. It means that the trackers required for targets of 67 G maneuvering capability, which is equally suitable for manned aircrafts, do not work properly against this new type of threat, even if the radar is maintained properly and it has the required plot detection.

AARMS 4(2) (2005)

235

I. BALAJTI: Hungarian air surveillance

Figure 6. Correlation time requirements

Performances of Kalman Filters are based on the acceptable level of false plot rates. The real probability of false plot rate inside the correlation gate of the target depends on not only the receiver noise and the environmental clutter and jammer condition, but strongly depends on the plot update time of the Covariance matrix. In case of pencil beam used 3D radar the data update time of the target plot (report) of the matrix is on the 5th (see Equation (4)). The false plot product can be reduced significantly with the reduction of the number of the cells inside the correlation gate, but these techniques are usually less effective than techniques related to the plot update time manipulation (see Tables 5 and 6). In the case of mono-static 2D or 3D radars, the number of cells inside the correlation gate is determined by the resolution of radars and by the target range. However, the required high-resolution waveform produces an extremely large number of cells. Example for the pencil beam used 3D radar:
N=
3 t5 B 4 2 max a 3 r c t2 2 PRT

(4)

where: vmax maximum speed of the target; B bandwidth (instantaneous); r range; tPRT pulse repetition time; elevation scan sector; c speed of light. (Note: the data update time of the target plot is on the 5th exponent.) The size of the correlation gate depends on the criteria used for track (plot) extraction, too. If the radar misses one or two plots from the sequence the radius of the gate-size will double or triple (2) (3), from Markov-chain criteria. Markov-chain criteria is the simplest possible: m = n.

236

AARMS 4(2) (2005)

I. BALAJTI: Hungarian air surveillance

The pulse repetition time is 3.5 ms and the data update time of the radar plots is 10 s. The transmitter impulse modulation (instantaneous) bandwidth 1 MHz for VHF, 4 MHz for L or S band, and 8 MHz for X band in search mode and 500 MHz in case of SAR mode. The Elevation Resolution is the best value of Table 4. Considering a TBM with 1000 m/s radial speed and distance from the radar 10 600 km, Table 5 shows the number of the cells inside the correlation gate (4), at VHF, L, S and X band. It is easy to recognise that the number of the cells inside the correlation gate is decreasing linearly in case of 2D radar and exponentially in case of 3D radar with the range.
Table 5. Number of the cells ta=10 s r=10 km r=30 km r=50 km r=75 km r=100 km r=150 km r=300 km r=450 km r=600 km VHF 1.0.106 1.1.105 4.0.104 1.7.104 1.0.104 4.4.103 1.1.103 4.9.102 2.7.102 L (S) 1.9.107 2.1.106 7.6.105 3.3.105 1.9.105 8.4.104 2.1.104 9.3.103 5.1.103 X (8 MHz) 8.2.107 9.1.106 3.2.106 1.4.106 8.2.105 3.6.105 9.1.104 4.0.104 2.2.104 X (500 MHz) 5.0.109 5.5.108 2.0.108 8.8.107 5.0.107 2.2.107 5.5.106 2.4.106 1.4.106

Due to the large number of cells inside the correlation gate it is not possible to avoid false plots even in the case of theoretically ideal conditions (see Table 6).
Table 6. False Alarm rate of the correlation gate (PFA=106) ta=10 s r=10 km r=30 km r=75 km r=150 km r=300 km r=600 km ta=1 s r=10 km r=30 km r=75 km r=150 km r=300 km r=600 km VHF 0.63 0.11 0.01 0.004 0.001 0.0002 VHF 1.0.104 0.1.104 0.4.105 0.4.106 0.1.106 0.2107 L (S) 0.99 0.87 0.28 0.08 0.02 0.005 L (S) 1.8.103 2.0.104 3.3.105 8.4.106 2.1.106 5.0108 X (8 MHz) 1 0.99 0.75 0.30 0.08 0.02 X (8 MHz) 8.1.103 9.1.104 1.4.104 3.6.105 9.1.106 2.2106 X (500 MHz) 1 1 1 0.99 0.99 0.75 X (500 MHz) 3.9.101 5.0.102 8.7.103 2.2.103 5.5.104 1.4104

AARMS 4(2) (2005)

237

I. BALAJTI: Hungarian air surveillance

Figure 7. Limitations in overlapping radar surveillance areas

To increase data update time of the target, state-of-the-art tracking systems utilize measurements fed by multiple radars to a processing site. These radars usually have different measuring accuracies and are geographically dispersed over a region of interest. Availability of reliable communication media allows such a topology of distributed radars for real-time processing of the measurements. In case of Multi Radar Tracking (MRT) the coefficient of overlapping areas are playing the most important role. This depends not only on radar performance but the distance between radars and the terrain masking of the environment. Figure 7 shows an example based on four radar sites of Hungary at altitude 3000 m that illustrates well the limitations of overlapping areas and MRT capabilities. From a military operational point of view, less open for public SSR/IFF systems are welcome since they are more reliable for the potential threat recognition as well. Todays technology on High-Resolution Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) (see Figure 8) can provide the required image of a scene, much like an optical picture. Using this technique with the aid of digital processing, inverse SAR produces images of aircraft which are good enough to differentiate one class from another. There are two main types of this radar, the direct method (Inverse SARISAR) and the more sofisticated Interferometric SAR (InSAR).

238

AARMS 4(2) (2005)

I. BALAJTI: Hungarian air surveillance

Figure 8. High-Resolution radar technology

From a logistic support point of view it is well known that not only the long range radars currently in operation, but the recently procured also, degrade in performance rapidly and their maintenance costs are high. The main reason is the relatively old design, technology and obsolescence of the (Commercial of the Shelf) COTS computer parts and subassemblies. The most expensive and problematic areas are the COTS computers and the high performance (low phase noise) transmitters. Summary of new RAP production challenges Possible conclusions of the new threat challenges and new system upgrade requirements are in Table 7. The new threats require new target detection methods, track queuing and recognition possibilities from the ADS, other than the ones used today. Optimal requirements for known and applied technical solutions are controversial. For this reason new threats require: an increase in radar coverage; capability to use low frequency, if possible resonant frequency, for target detection; capability to use vertical and horizontal polarization (in the VHF band as well); capability to increse data update time and dwell time of the target; specially developed parallel algorithms for detection and tracking of different type of threats (high G UAV, unique TBM and ARM trackers);

AARMS 4(2) (2005)

239

I. BALAJTI: Hungarian air surveillance

use NCTR techniques, first of all InSAR; an upgrade of the MTI/MTD and Chaff filtering techniques; adaptively controlled measurement sensitivity by using task oriented transmitter signals; an increase in Effective Radiated Power with Power management.
Table 7. New threat challenges and new system upgrade requirements Threat type NCTR UAV Current Long Range Radar net Detection Tracking Recognition Excellent?/ Medium Poor Medium Medium?/ Medium?/ Poor Poor Poor Poor Poor Medium? Poor Poor? New System REQUIREMENTS Coverage; InSAR; Time Coverage; ERP; f; FR +HP ; MTI/MTD; ARM detection; ta; High G Tracker; InSAR Coverage; ERP; f, FR +VP , Chaff filtering, ta; TBM Tracker; InSAR ERP; f; Chaff filtering, FR +HP ; ARM detection; InSAR

TBM

STEALTH Poor

Note: improvement required; significant improvement required; application and improvement required; decrease required; significant decrease required; Effective Radiated Power ERP; Moving Target Indicator/Detector MTI/MTD; Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar InSAR; Carrier Frequency f; Resonant Frequency FR; Horizontal Polarization HP; Vertical Polarization VP; Anti Radiation Missile ARM

But how is it possible to achieve these requirements? The results of analysis confirm that the long range ADS radars do not have any significant reserve for further upgrades. But what is the situation in the field of signal, data processing, new techniques, technologies and new system design possibilities? The task is so huge that it seems impossible to solve it, unless the participant is concentrating only on RAP production and will avoid any special weapon systemrelated requirements. Most likely the simplest solution is that each type of threat needs different and relatively independent forms of radars, and command centers have to be optimized to solve problems of that specific threat. But is this the most cost effective and fastest solution as well? There may be other ways of improvement of the RAP production, approaches that are more appropriate for the environment than to develop and rebuild everything in the ADS area. Probably we should look for a RAP concept that can combine recent technologies and techniques and COTS equipment with the modern, advanced technologies, technical and tactical methods in a way of achieving optimal solutions. The opinion of the author is that the

240

AARMS 4(2) (2005)

I. BALAJTI: Hungarian air surveillance

Netcentric approach introduced in Ref. [6], modified and augmented by VHF radars, is the one of the best solution that can solve these problems efficiently. Solving this task, one must ask the question of how suitable is it to satisfy the differently oriented requirements? The set of criteria is made up the most important qualities as given by the object of this study, and the main thrusts should aim to: find techniques to improve detection coverage of new threats; find techniques to increase dwell time and ERP; find techniques to improve target data update time; find techniques to minimize time requirements; find techniques to increase Electronic Support Measures Capabilities; maximize the sensitivity of the radar with the minimum false plot rate acceptable; determine and separate tasks of RAP production, include new threat requirements and connect them to each other on the possibly lowest level of data exchange. Radars using agile beam-steering techniques in azimuth and elevation scanning can increase target detecting, data update time of plot, tracking and sometimes may be good for NTCR as well. However active phased-array radars are having at least one disadvantage over the dual-, multi- or wide-band radars: they are narrow band radars at 510 times higher prices than the current ones. A strong limitation is set on this technique by the use of many strong phase-related RF components, which could be applied only in narrow band. The question is how can the false plot rate management inside the correlation gate technique be useful in new RAP productions if agile beam steering radars are not available? Hungarian operational expertise acquired during former WP RAP operation, maintenance and R&D activity has shown that radars situated very close to each other can co-operate very effectively. Shortcomings of one radar type could be overcome with the others capabilities. It is found that this technique not only increases the overall potential of the system, but also can improve its operational possibilities and flexibilities significantly. Block diagram of the suggested radar-triangle netcentric structures It is well known that the design of the sensors and the tracking system must be performed as a joint effort. But how can new requirements be fulfilled or predicted as a function of the sensor and tracker design, whereas inherent performance limitations appear if the sensors are already in operation? In our case the separate different frequency band radar design is essentially completed, and only the recognition, tracking

AARMS 4(2) (2005)

241

I. BALAJTI: Hungarian air surveillance

and signal processing oriented system design improvements are available to begin the required algorithm definition and development of the new concept. Additional constrains are set by the fact that the software and computer requirements and real time implementation are present. To improve this situation one should consider alternative sensor data rates, which could be achieved using a netcentric approach. A similar effort is required in order to define signal-processing algorithms that transform the raw sensor data more effectively into observations, which are input to the tracker and recognition. Fortunately efficient allocation of sensor resources may reduce a separate sensor performance requirement that is exactly what Generic Netcentric Sensor DetectionTracking Recognition (GNSDTR) systems are doing in a netcentricity solution (see Figure 9). It illustrates the role and connection of sensors in the new RAP production. It is possible to specify a generic network centric sensor model applicable to most sensors of interest, because findings have already been shown in the article, illustrating various factors which a designer wants his models to take into account.

Figure 9. Components and Interconnection of Generic Netcentric Sensor Detection-Tracking and Recognition system

A very (extremely) long-range VHF radar or VHF radar net (see Figures 11 and 14), which has passive sensor mode capability too, has a dedicated task for target detection.

242

AARMS 4(2) (2005)

I. BALAJTI: Hungarian air surveillance

Currently the existing L and S band radars are capable of surveillance mode too, however the long range L or S band radars take over this function only in the case when the VHF radars have lost their superiority in target detection, e.g. in case of interference, low altitude inside the mountains or high elevation. Long range 3D L (or S) band radars, which are traditionally phasedarray radars having electronic scan only in elevation with SSR/IFF system on the top of the antenna are parts of the network, too. The primary function of the radar is to pick up the targets already detected by a VHF radar and initiate a track on it (see Figure 10). If the track initiation is accomplished and there is some uncertainty about the target recognition shape or behavior of the target, it can be clarified by an X-band (InSAR) radar. All three sensors generally provide low-level signal processing in order to isolate the desired information. The output of the signal processing is referred to as hits, plot, and observation, which indicate the presence of the target and its various kinematic or other properties.

Figure 10. Top-view of azimuth positions of the synchronized rotating VHF and L band radar of the GNSDTR system

The Post-Signal Processing element (rather than the Signal processing with the Data Fusion) takes these hits (plots) and attempts to validate them further. The Integrated System Control and Integrated Signal Processing are working in parallel with the traditional Signal Processor, but extract information available only from the common analysis and processing of the radar hits received from the same targets.

AARMS 4(2) (2005)

243

I. BALAJTI: Hungarian air surveillance

The heart of the system is the Pure Transmitter (Tx) with the Direct Digital Synthesizer (DDS) in it, that generates all required types of waveforms. The new operational control of the network is responsible for harmonization of different tasks described later on and it gives possibilities for immediate operational influence and for the data exchange with additional ADS components. Advantages of the solution Optimum use of the advance capability of different frequency band radars The required S (or L) and VHF band radar capabilities have been introduced in Tables 15 and the technical requirements versus maximum detection range can be demonstrated by the radar parameters of Bartons interpreted radar equation [1]. At least 3 different types of VHF radars are needed to solve the required target detection and flexibility in application. They are the following: Mobile medium range VHF radar (VHF1 radar type in Table 2) parameters. (Standard Target) SwI; Pd=0.8; PFA=106, =1 m20 dB; kTs=1020 Ws200 dBWs; PAV=1000 W; t0=10 ms (16 hits); GT=GR=23.4 dB;* =1.7 m2.3 dBm; F=23 dB; D1(16)=0 dB; LtL=21.6 dB. Detection range (in decibel-meter):
1 1 1 1 R m = (R Tx + R Rx ) = 0 + (10 + 200) + (2 23.4) + (2.3) + 2 4 4 2 1 3 + 3 0 (21.6) (11) = 54.7 [dBm] 4 4

This radar is capable of detecting Sw 1 type targets having 1 m2 RCS at 300 km and suitable for bistatic operation having separated (in distance) transmitters and receivers. See details in Table 8.
Table 8. Detection reduction of VHF1 type radar RCS 1 m2 0.1 m2 0.01 m2 0.001 m2 0.0001 m2 0.000001 m2
*

0 dB (m2) 10 dB(m2) 20 dB(m2) 30 dB(m2) 40 dB(m2) 60 dB(m2)

If PAV=1 kW (Average Power) Rm Searched volume (R2) 300 km 282600 km2 169 km 89682 km2 95 km 28339 km2 53 km 8820 km2 30 km 2826 km2 9 km 254 km2

See Table 2

244

AARMS 4(2) (2005)

I. BALAJTI: Hungarian air surveillance

This VHF1 type radar could be built up from the modified MELISSA sensors described in [7] or/and from the modernized versions of radars having Yagi type antenna system (VHF1**). Due to shifted phase centers of antenna in elevation, multipath effect can be exploited further to establish height measurement and increase target detection probability and measurement accuracy. Very long range VHF radar. (Standard Target) Sw1; Pd=0.8; PFA=106, =0.01 m220 dB; kTs=1020 Ws200 dBWs; PAV=5 kW; t0=10 ms (8 hits); GT=GR=26.7 dB; =1.7 m2.3 dBm; F=23 dB; D1(8)=0 dB; LtL=20.6 dB. Detection range (in decibel-meter): 1 1 1 1 1 R m = (R Tx + R Rx ) = (20) + (16.9 + 200) + 3 + (2.3) + (2 26.7) 2 4 4 2 4 3 1 1 (0) (20.6) (11) = 53.3 [dBm] 4 4 4 This radar is capable of detecting Sw 1 Stealthy type targets having 0.01 m2 RCS at 215 km. The radar could be built as a modified Tall Rack type radar. See details in Table 9 and on Figure 11.
Table 9. Detection reduction of very long range VHF type radar RCS 1 m2 0.1 m2 0.01 m2 0.001 m2 0.0001 m2 0.000001 m2 0 dB (m2) 10 dB(m2) 20 dB(m2) 30 dB(m2) 40 dB(m2) 60 dB(m2) If PAV=5 kW (Average Power) Searched volume (R2) Rm 681 km 1456210 km2 383 km 460603 km2 215 km 145147 km2 121 km 45973 km2 68 km 14519 km2 22 km 1520 km2

Extremely long range VHF radar (VHF2 radar type in Table 2). (Standard Target) Sw1, Pd=0.8; PFA=106, =0.01 m220 dB; kTs=1020 Ws200 dBWs; PAV=100 kW; t0=10 ms (4 hits); GT=GR=35.1 dB;*** =1.7 m2.3 dBm; F=23 dB; D1(4)=10 dB; LtL=24.6 dB. Detection range (in decibel-meter): 1 1 1 1 R m = (20) + ( 20 + 200) + 3 + ( 2.3) + ( 2 35.1) 4 4 2 4 3 1 1 (10) ( 24.6) (11) = 59.8 [dBm] 4 4 4
**

***

See Table 2-3 from Table 2

AARMS 4(2) (2005)

245

I. BALAJTI: Hungarian air surveillance

Figure 11. Very long range VHF radar4

This radar is capable of detecting Sw 1 Stealthy type targets having 0.01 m2 RCS at 951 km and suitable for bistatic operation. See details in Table 10.
Table 10. Detection reduction of extremely long range VHF type radar RCS 1 m2 0.1 m2 0.01 m2 0.001 m2 0.0001 m2 0.000001 m2 0 dB (m2) 10 dB(m2) 20 dB(m2) 30 dB(m2) 40 dB(m2) 60 dB(m2) If PAV=100 kW (Average Power) Rm Searched volume (R2) 3008 km 28410921 km2 1692 km 8989393 km2 951 km 2839819 km2 535 km 898747 km2 169 km 89682 km2 95 km 28339 km2

246

AARMS 4(2) (2005)

I. BALAJTI: Hungarian air surveillance

The required almost ideal characteristics for a broadband VHF/UHF radar antenna are as follows.1 operational frequency range from 100 MHz to 1000 MHz; azimuth scanning of the main beam; in the elevation plane a cosecantsquare characteristic (or steerable pencil beam); to allow good azimuth resolution and accuracy, the 3 dB beamwidth in azimuth must be smaller than 3dB=5 even at the minimum frequency; the gain of the antenna despite the wider elevation pattern must be at least 30 dB, even at the lowest frequency; the antenna must be able to handle the radiation of power of the order of 100 kW; in spite of its size and weight (which may be considerable), the antenna is to be built from relatively uncomplicated supporting elements. The requirements for phased array elements are somewhat different from those of the elements having been discussed so far. In this case the parameters of the single radiator must meet the requirements of the whole antenna array. However there are two points to be noted. The important consideration of the illumination function is not the radiators secondary pattern, but rather the intensity distribution across the aperture. In an ideal condition the complex intensity and phase distribution on each elements aperture would be uniform. Only the relative amplitudes and phases would change in accordance with the distribution function required to build up the efficient total radiation pattern. The more uniform the distribution the higher the efficiency of the aperture is. The closer the phase-centers of the individual elements (or sub-arrays) are to each other, the easier it is to reduce the problem of grating lobes in the overall radiation pattern. This reduces the requirement for half-wave length spacing. To provide the determined directivity and beamwidth, an aperture of 5030 m2 is required2. The aperture size of the single radiator should be about 2 m1.5 m and thus the depth of the antenna system is approximately 2 m. From this and the system aperture size discussed previously, the number of the single radiators should be 2520=500. Considering the total power and the approximately 10 dB ratio of the minimum to the maximum amplitude of the exciting function, the total power radiated by one single radiator is about 1 kW.

1 2

See details in Ref. 4 See requirements of Tables 23

AARMS 4(2) (2005)

247

I. BALAJTI: Hungarian air surveillance

Application of VHF type radar to a GNSDTR system and to the new RAP can produce overall system enhancements. The most important is the VHF radar net (see Figure 14), which will be analyzed further. Increased and adjustable data update time and effective radiated power The effective use of the limited sensor resources on Figure 9 require that after detection of the target it should be viewed again within a very short time. This necessity could be solved inexpensively by using a mechanically synchronized rotating VHF, L (or S) band antenna with a position shifted in azimuth. The L (or S) band antenna should have an electrically scanned beam in elevation (ideally: pencil beam e.g: AN/FPS-117). The X band radar management scheme should be employed to direct the beam among priority InSAR targets, which can be started immediately after track initialization (validation) or search for very important (or not validated) targets. These processes are illustrated on Figure 10. Due to multi band radar, the coverage sensor management requirement on the pure Tx spectrum for the blind speed eliminator can be reduced. Adjustable update time of the target controlled by the position of the antenna beams and the measurement result gives an impression about the increased ARM type rockets detection capably of the system. It is possible because RCS of the ARM increases about 10 dB due to VHF radar detection and also because the track initiation and validation can be accomplished within a few seconds in the proposed netcentric system. Transmitter and power management The system introduced in Figure 9 can operate with a number of different transmit waveforms, each with its particular advantages. This system should have outputs of the different matched filters using optimal transmit signal for target detection minimum sidelobes in the time domain and optimal signals for target tracking minimum sidelobes ONLY in the neighbouring cells as Professor Cohen suggested. The first can be implemented in the VHF radar, the other one in the L (or S) band radars. Analysis shows that the transmit signal for L band can be employed only when the VHF radar has already detected the target, but in this case the L band radar can attain at least 15 dB more signal-to-noise-ratio in detection than it can today under the same circumstances. This significantly improves measurement accuracy and detection possibilities of the radar against Stealth and other type targets having small RCS. To achieve the advantages and reduce disadvantages, it is an essential requirement that the transmitter has Clean Transmitted Spectra, where:

248

AARMS 4(2) (2005)

I. BALAJTI: Hungarian air surveillance

the transmitted signal is arbitrary and free within the current technological limits from any spurious signals; the selection of the modulation tries to reach Spectral Compactness and to minimize interference. It also minimizes spectral occupancy. Certainly in addition to the two points above, the modulation should be capable of performing radar measurements. Consequently, the general considerations for selecting the modulation are the following: maximum energy of the radiated RF pulse; minimal Doppler sensitivity of the chosen modulation; maximum dynamic range of the modulation used; spectral cleanness of the radiated RF pulse. The ambiguity function can be used very effectively to investigate the Dopplersensitivity and the measuring dynamic range. The ambiguity function of a modulated Barker-13 BPSK pulse can be seen on Figure 12 as an example). The reduction of interference is a further consideration in defining the necessary modulation signal. The spectral changing of the energy within the pulse duration can be characterized by the Wigner-distribution. The Wigner-distributions of LFM50 modulations can be seen on Figure 13). If the interfering signal is pulsed and not a CW signal, as is the case in a typical radar transmitter, this type of interference requires further investigation that can be done using these two methods in parallel signal processing analyzes.

Figure 12. Ambiguity function of a modulated Barker-13 code4

AARMS 4(2) (2005)

249

I. BALAJTI: Hungarian air surveillance

Figure 13. Wigner-distributions of LFM50 code4

Possibility of using false plot rate management inside the correlation gate The enhanced coverage of GNSDTR system in Figure 9 has better detection at the intersection of the beams, because the different types of radars make it possible to determine (e.g. the elevation and therefore the altitude) more accurately the position of the detected targets. The requirements of the signal detection are similar to the one introduced in Ref. 8, but further development and testing is required. Flexibility in antenna polarization use The radar signal detection, tracking and NTCR can be optimized to obtain the desired information with the capability of polarimetric radar processing. (See the MELISSA radar in Ref. 7). If the polarization received from a jammer or clutter return is known a priori or measured adaptively, the orthogonal polarization can be chosen to optimize target detection. To enlarge possibilities of new RAP systems, polarization flexibility as well as polarimetric target return analysis can be applied into the low frequency, VHF region, where imaging techniques for NCTR are very limited. Very fast and advanced NCTR due to integration of InSAR into the RAP InSAR radar (see Figure 8) is an integrated part of the system in Figure 9. On VHF radars the exploitation of depolarizing properties of different targets may be used to compensate for they lack of resolution. Measuring the full polarization matrix simultaneously in the

250

AARMS 4(2) (2005)

I. BALAJTI: Hungarian air surveillance

VHF/UHF and X bands can help to extract properties such as helicopter rotor modulation, or high-speed TBM warhead, thus increasing target recognition probability. The simplified scattering at lower frequencies might identify gross features of a platform and provide a more stable and tangible mean of identification. Potential for future modular growth VHF radar-triangle netted structure with passive sensors The GNSDTR system has only one powerful VHF radar from the three proposed earlier, but detection performance of the VHF radar can be improved significantly by establishing a VHF radar net using the netted approach (in Ref. 6) as well. This network would be an integrated network built from different VHF radar types specialized for target detection. Basically it is a bi- or multistatic radar net, where the server is located at the VHF radar head of the GNSDTR system. All 3 sensors of the net are connected in an advanced special Intranet system and all are capable of mono-static operation and plot/track level data exchange. To synchronize and distribute the actual transmit waveform among radars an Intranet connection is used. The suggested VHF radar net would consist of three radars and Passive Sensor receivers operating simultaneously and capable not only of mono-static, but coherent and non-coherent type of multi-static radar signal processing too. Detectability for N receivers are simple integrations of non-coherent signal processing data. Passive sensor technology has been identified as one of the most promising technology for future ADS. Especially the methods using coherent signal processing technology are very promising. A net having a VHF radar with a very long-range radar consistently located in the center, and two mobile radars located 200 km from it, supported by a passive sensor is illustrated on Figure 14. The main advantages of the proposed system are the increased detection probability, interference resistance and the use of false plot management inside the correlation gate, along with an improved target location resolution and accuracy. The Passive Sensor, which is the part of the VHF multi-static radar net, is able to detect a Stealth target in advance at the intersection of the target path and VHF2-target lines through wing effects.

AARMS 4(2) (2005)

251

I. BALAJTI: Hungarian air surveillance

Figure 14. VHF radar net concept (against targets with very low RCS)

VHF radar net with UAVs VHF radars on board The tactical advantages of a VHF radar net can be further improved by using a UAV for detection of low flying targets. An UAV platform is capable of carrying a VHF antenna and receiver on board. In this case three UAVs are expected to support the ground based VHF net. They are positioned at the maximum detection range of the original VHF radars. Although the UAV does not transmit, it will be illuminated by the accompanying ground or aerostat or satellite based transmitter in its mainlobe. A receiver antenna gain of about 10 dB is required, the size (22.3 m) and weight (very light micro-circuits) of the antenna is required. A specialized antenna, meeting the UAVs unique form/shape factor is also required. VHF radar net with VHF radar satellite Space Based Radars are being considered for civilian and military surveillance of ground and air vehicles because of their worldwide field of view, and their inherent potential for surveillance of locations not reachable by other radars for political or geographical reasons. For this reason it is possible to construct satellite radars with the parameters of an

252

AARMS 4(2) (2005)

I. BALAJTI: Hungarian air surveillance

extremely long range VHF2 radar.3 The size and weight wont be a problem in space, because the platform can be built from the very light components used in balloon type construction. (Furthermore, size of the antenna can be increased by 5 or 10 times to increase antenna gain and measurement accuracy on modular way.) The required 200400 kW can be available from solar cells, however the best transmitter of opportunity for passive survaillance mode is the SUN. The system losses are low compared to higher frequency band radars. This radar with the required technical parameters of VHF2 radar can search from a 1000 km orbit a territory of 88350 km (3 dB beamwidth). Due to the large surveillance volume and the position of the radar, special MTI technique is required to extract low speed targets and measure their coordinates more accurately. Ionospheric effects could be a problem, but the signals produced by the Pure Transmitter should support this kind of requirement as well. The technical and operational capability of the satellite VHF2 radar could be expanded by connecting 3 of them into one magic netcentric radar net on much higher orbital position. The system can be improved by adding UAVs described earlier as a netted VHF receiver. Peacetime usage of satellite VHF2 radar (net) positioned in higher orbits makes it suitable for the detection of asteroids, which are one of the most challenging radar tasks today. Some aspects of computational requirements of new RAP The advance in the telecommunication industry surpasses that of the radar, not only in usage of the frequency allocation of the radars but in research and development as well. For this reason radar experts should be interested in the conclusions of the Telecommunication System Committee and Informatics Committee of the IEEE. This is a real revaluation, which must be considered for its cost influence on design of future radar systems. This influence will spread to the field of subsystem techniques (with increased bandwidth and system complexity for system adaptivity), information of targets (suggested system with simultaneous polarization processing and detection algorithm) and the signal/data fusion of proposed sensors as e.g the GNSDTR system post signal processing is required. On the other hand, computer capabilities are also growing rapidly. These advances ensure that we have the freedom to reallocate or develop new types of technical solutions. Firstly, due to computer networks being able to transfer large quantities of data quickly and economically, radar system algorithms can be developed for new types of RAP production post as GNSDTR system as required.
3

See Extremely long range VHF radar parameters

AARMS 4(2) (2005)

253

I. BALAJTI: Hungarian air surveillance

The following example is given for the determination of required Data Rate and data transfer. If the transmitter pulse has the following parameters: B=2 MHz; =200 s; PRF=1 kHz, and the ADC/DAC has N=12 bit resolution the required Data Rate is: DR=9,6 Mbit/s. Table 11 shows Data Rate requirements of VHF L/S, X band in search mode and X band in case of SAR mode in different circumstances.
Table 11. Data rate requirements PRF=500 Hz ADC N=12 bit =200 s ADC N=14 bit =400 s VHF(B=1 MHz) 2.4 Mbit/s. 5.6 Mbit/s. L/S(B=4 MHz) 9.6 Mbit/s. 22.4 Mbit/s. X(B=8 MHz) 19.2 Mbit/s. 44.8 Mbit/s. X(B=500 MHz) 1.2 Gbit/s. 5.6 Gbit/s.

These values are much higher then the required one for plot/track processing based system (19.2 kbit/s), but much less than the limits of the technology available at the present. Conclusion The proposed system concept environment can be seen in Figure 15, which illustrates a vertical coverage diagram of an expected multi frequency band radar net using advance netcenricity techniques. The full system is based on new RAP production centers along with Over-the Horizon-HF radars, very long-range VHF/UHF radars and the modernized L (or S) and X band (InSAR) radars are in the middle of the proposed netcentric sensor solution. This analysis shows that the proposed RAP production technique based on long range radars currently in operation could ensure better detection quality, tracking and recognition of traditional aircrafts and it is able to handle new, differently oriented threats in time, no matter if they arise inside or very far from the borders of the countries. The system could be integrated into mobile systems, which are already functioning or being developed, and it would increase their tactical capabilities much further. However, at the same time, overcoming the technical difficulties requires precise, harmonized preliminary studies. Small scale analytic and simulation work must be performed at each step in the design to ensure success. Major points of this proposal could be a sensor upgrade using a VHF netcentric radar approach. It could significantly extend sensor lifetime already under investigation, allow maximum use of infrastructure, logistic background and integrate new techniques into the existing ADS in a cheap way.

254

AARMS 4(2) (2005)

I. BALAJTI: Hungarian air surveillance

Figure 15. Vertical coverage diagrams of an expected multi frequency band radar net

The newly proposed VHF based multisensor netcentric approach for a new RAP production concept is a very promising alternative Sensor Solution and should be capable of handling the diverse threats that one must contend with in air defense systems. Implementation of the proposed system is a complex procedure requiring both time and money for its successful completion. Recommendations Hungarian radar research and development activity had started in 1943 due to German initiative and based on the success of radio tube research work. Leader of these works was Zoltan Bay, a Hungarian radar scientist, who designed and constructed a VHF radar system with a 36-dipole element antenna during the period of 19441946. In February 1946 he succeeded in getting an echo from the Moon; during the same period the U.S. Army Signal Corps project Diana also detected an echo from the Moon.

AARMS 4(2) (2005)

255

I. BALAJTI: Hungarian air surveillance

Hungary is a country with a terrain that is optimal for a VHF band radar and this type of radar is excellent for target detection. Hungarian Home Defence Forces have different types of VHF radars in operation with experience in both Western type and Eastern type of RAP production and sensors.

Figure 16. Required radar net

The environment and infrastructure is suitable for realistic international collaboration. Hungary has a lot of well-educated microwave engineers and computer specialists dealing with prototyping problems for Western companies. It has a highly appreciated expertise collected in the field of digital signal processing, UAV prototyping and real time data software engineering. For this reason Hungary is a perfect place to build the prototype and to test it for a new Recognised Air Picture production centre. Figure 16 illustrates the expected Hungarian radar net using advance netcentricity techniques, as introduced and analysed in this article. The full system is based on three new RAP production centres that are connected to the NATO ACCS system. These new RAP centres along with very long-range VHF radars and the modernised L (or S)

256

AARMS 4(2) (2005)

I. BALAJTI: Hungarian air surveillance

and X band radars are in the middle of the proposed netcentric sensor solution. Additionally VHF radars should be integrated into the radar-triangle net, including equipment like MELISSA radar and VHF1 type radars. This system is capable of solving passive sensor tasks as well. Bistatic VHF radar receivers on the board of UAVs give possibilities for advance detection beyond detection of ground-based radars. InSAR radars are the integrated part of the RAP centres and they are capable of solving observation tasks related to NCTR. Hungarian experts have already started to investigate realisation possibilities of the system introduced in this article. *
This article has been developed from an article previously distributed in the December 2004 issue of IEEE Aerospace and Electronic Systems Magazine Reacting to New Air Defence Threats: A Netcentric Approach to the Hungarian Air Defence System Augmented by VHF Radars. The details of this study were published in j Honvdgi Szemle recently. Classified content and Clean Transmitted Spectra related issues are available in NATO RTO-MP-106 AC/323(SET-062)TP/45 CD published in October 2004. The author gratefully acknowledges his contributions with experts and sciences of Technology Agency of MoD Hungary, Technical University of Budapest and the anonymous reviewers from National Defence University of Hungary for their constructive comments. Furthermore, the author has earned great advantages from the teamwork in the NATO TG21 and different NATO Air Defence Committees. Special thank is given to engineers and management of the NAMSA Air Defence Programme Technical Branch for his support and constructive criticism. However, the responsibility for the content is merely on the author.

References
1. D. K. BARTON: Modern Radar System Analysis. Boston, London, Artech House, 1988. 2. S. L. JOHNSTON: International Radar Directory CD-ROM, at www.eglinaoc.org/ECCM.html. 3. H. KUSCHEL: VHF/UHF radar, Part 1: Characteristics, Electronics Communication Engineering Journal, 14 (2) (2000) 6172. 4. Technical Report RTO-MP-106: The Impact of Emerging Technologies and New Techniques on Air Defence Radar, AC/323(SET-062)TP/45, October 2004. 5. S. BLACKMAN, R. POPOLI: Design and Analysis of Modern Tracking Systems. Boston, Artech House, 1991. 6. C. J. BAKER, A. L. HUME: Netted radar sensing, IEEE AESS Systems Magazine, February (2003) 36. 7. H. KUSCHEL: VHF/UHF radar, Part 2: Operational aspects and applications, Electronics Communication Engineering Journal, 14 (3) (2002) 101111. 8. I. BALAJTI, D. BRNY, V. NMETH: Global Optimalization in CFAR System and Data Fusion to Merge Detection of Extractors of the 2.5 D Surveillance Radar. Proceedings of the CRC-01 China, Benjing.

AARMS 4(2) (2005)

257