INTRODUCTION Deception jamming systems are designed to inject false information into victim radar to deny critical information on target azimuth, range, velocity, or a combination of these parameters. To be effective, a deception jammer receives the victim radar signal, modifies this signal, and retransmits this altered signal back to the victim radar. Because these systems retransmit, or repeat, a replica of the victim's radar signal, deception jammers are known as repeater jammers. The retransmitted signal must match all victim radar signal characteristics including frequency, pulse repetition frequency (PRF), pulse repetition interval (PRI), pulse width, and scan rate. However, the deception jammer does not have to replicate the power of the victim radar system. A deception jammer requires significantly less power than a noise jamming system. The deception jammer gains this advantage by using a waveform that is identical to the waveform the radar's receiver is specifically designed to process. Therefore, the deception jammer can match its operating cycle to the operating cycle of the victim radar instead of using the 100% duty cycle required of a noise jammer. To be effective, a deception jammer's power requirements are dictated by the average power of a radar rather than the peak power required for a noise jammer. In addition, since the jammer waveform looks identical to the radar's waveform, it is processed like a real return. The jamming signal is amplified by the victim radar receiver, which increases its effectiveness. The reduced power required for effective deception jamming is particularly significant when designing and building self-protection jamming systems for tactical aircraft that penetrate a dense threat environment. Deception jamming systems can be smaller, lighter, and can jam more than one threat simultaneously. These characteristics give deception jammers a great advantage over noise jamming systems. Although deception jammers require less power, they are much more complex than noise jammers. Memory is the most critical element of any deception jammer. The memory element must store the signal characteristics of the victim radar and pass these parameters to the control circuitry for processing. This must be done almost instantaneously for every signal that will be jammed. Any delay in the memory loop diminishes the effectiveness of the deception technique. Using digital RF memory (DRFM) reduces the time delay and enhances deception jammer effectiveness. Deception jamming employed in a self-protection role is designed to counter lethal radar systems. To be effective, deception jamming systems must be programmed with detailed and exact signal parameters for each lethal threat. The requirement for exact signal parameters increases the burden on electronic warfare support (ES) systems to provide and update threat information on operating frequency, PRF, PRI, power pulse width, scan rate, and other unique signal characteristics. Electronic intelligence (ELlNT) architecture is required to collect, update, and provide changes to deception jamming systems. In addition, intelligence and engineering information on exactly how a specific threat system acquires, tracks and engages a target is essential in identifying system weaknesses. Once a weakness has been identified, an effective deception jamming technique can be developed and programmed into a deception jammer. For example, if a particular radar system relies primarily on Doppler tracking, a Doppler deception technique will greatly reduce its effectiveness. Threat system exploitation is the best source of detailed information on threat system capabilities and vulnerabilities. Effective deception jamming requires much more intelligence support than does noise jamming. Most self-protection jamming techniques employ some form of deception against a target tracking radar (TTR). The purpose of a TTR is to continuously update target range, azimuth, and velocity. Target parameters are fed to a fire control computer that computes a future impact point for a weapon based on these parameters and the characteristics of the weapon being employed. The fire control computer is constantly updating this predicted impact point based on changes in target parameters. Deception jamming is designed to take advantage of any weaknesses in either target tracking or impact point calculation to maximize the miss distance of the weapon or to prevent automatic tracking. FALSE TARGET JAMMING False target jamming is an effective jamming technique employed against acquisition, early warning, and ground control intercepts (GCI) radars. The purpose of this type of jamming is to confuse the enemy radar operator by generating many false target returns on the victim radar scope. When false target deception jamming is successfully employed, the radar operator cannot distinguish between false targets and real targets. To generate false targets, the deception jammer must tune to the frequency, PRF, and scan rate of the victim radar. The jamming pulse must appear on the radar scope exactly like a radar return from an aircraft. Multiple false targets greater in range than the jammer are generated by delaying the transmission of a jamming pulse until after the victim radar pulse has been received. False targets closer in range are generated by anticipating the arrival of a radar pulse and transmitting a jamming pulse before the victim radar pulse hits the aircraft. If the victim radar employs a jittered PRF, only targets greater in range can be generated. To generate different azimuth false targets, the deception jammer synchronizes its transmitted pulse with the victim radar's sidelobes. Due to their reduced power, when compared to the main beam, sidelobes are difficult to detect and analyze. The receiver in the deception jammer must be sensitive enough to detect these sidelobes and not be saturated by the power in the main radar beam. A false target deception jammer must inject a jamming pulse that looks like a target return into these sidelobes. To penetrate the radar sidelobes requires a lot of power. However, the power must be judiciously used. If a powerful jamming pulse is injected into the main beam, the false targets will be easy to detect. Most false target jammers vary the power in the jamming pulse inversely with the power in the received signal, on a pulse-by-pulse basis. This means the repeater jamming signal is at minimum power when the main beam of the victim radar is on the aircraft and at maximum power when the sidelobes are being jammed. To effectively generate false azimuth targets, the jammer must have a receiver with a wide dynamic range to detect both the main beam and the sidelobes. In addition, the jamming system must be able to generate high power that can be effectively controlled by the receiver. To generate moving false targets, the deception jammer must synchronize with the main beam and the sidelobes in frequency, pulse width and PRF. Amplitude modulated jamming signals, with variable time delays, are transmitted into the sidelobes of the victim radar. The variable time delay provides a false target that changes range, either toward or away from the radar, depending on the time delay. The amplitude modulation provides false azimuth targets that appear to be moving. The effectiveness of false target generation is based on the credibility of the generated false radar returns. If the victim radar can easily distinguish between false returns and target returns, the technique is a failure. The false returns must look identical to an aircraft return. The radar return on the victim radar scope should have the same intensity, depth, and width as a target return.
RANGE DECEPTION JAMMING Although a specific TTR can track multiple targets and direct multiple weapons, the tracking circuit must select a single target return and track it while ignoring all other returns. Target selection is done by using gate bins. The range gate is used as the primary gate for target selection. A range gate is an electronic switch that is turned on for a period of microseconds based on a certain range or time delay after a pulse is transmitted Range deception jamming exploits any inherent weakness in a TTR's automatic range gate tracking circuits. When a TTR's range gate locks on to an aircraft, the range deception jammer detects the radar signal. The range deception jammer then amplifies and retransmits a signal much stronger than the radar return. This retransmitted signal, called a cover pulse, is displayed in the range gate with the target signal. The automatic gain control (AGC) circuit lowers the gain in the range tracking gate to control the amplitude of the cover pulse in the range gate. Reduced gain causes the real target return to be lost, and the range gate only tracks the jamming signal. This is known as range gate capture. Once the range gate is captured by the cover pulse, a technique called range gate pull-off (RGPO) is employed. The deception jammer memorizes the radar signal and introduces a series of time delays before retransmitting. By increasing these time delays, the range gate will detect an increase in range and automatically move off to a false range. Once the range gate has moved well away from the real target, the range deception jammer shuts down, and the radar range gate is left with no target to track. The range gate breaks lock and the TTR must again go through the process of search, acquisition, and lock-on to re-engage the target. There are several advantages of range deception jamming, especially when used as a self-protection technique. It can generate sufficient errors to deny range information and is effective against most automatic range tracking systems. This technique does not require a large amount of power, just enough to cover the radar return of the aircraft. If the time delays are not exaggerated, an operator may not detect the loss of range lock-on until after a missile has been fired. The insidious nature of range deception jamming may generate enough miss distance to save the aircraft and pilot. There are disadvantages to using range deception jamming. First, it can be defeated by a trained radar operator. If the operator detects a problem with the automatic range tracking circuit, the system can be switched to manual range tracking mode to defeat RGPO. Also, if the threat system is still able to track the aircraft's azimuth and elevation, range information may not be required to complete target engagement. To maximize range deception jamming effectiveness, it should be employed in conjunction with azimuth and elevation jamming. Finally, this type of range deception jamming is not effective against a leading-edge range tracking system. A leading-edge tracker will not see the delayed cover pulse. As the cover pulse moves off the target, AGC circuits reset the gain to continue tracking the real target. The only way to defeat a leading edge range tracker is with a deceptive jammer that anticipates the next radar pulse and sends a jamming cover pulse before it reaches the aircraft. This jamming technique can also be defeated by randomly varying the radar PRF. ANGLE DECEPTION JAMMING Angle deception jamming is designed to exploit weaknesses in the angle tracking loop of the victim radar. The specific technique depends on the tracking method used to derive azimuth and elevation information. Inverse amplitude modulation jamming is the main angle deception technique used against TWS radars. For conical scan radars, scan rate modulation and inverse gain jamming are used. Swept square wave (SSW) jamming is used against LORO tracking radars. The azimuth and elevation tracking loop for TWS radar is based on target signal amplitude modulation. The inverse amplitude modulation jammer generates a signal with modulation exactly opposite the expected return. To accomplish this, the angle deception jammer must receive the radar signals from the tracking beams. The jammer responds with a signal of the same frequency, PRF, and scan rate synchronized to the inverse of the radar antenna pattern. This induces an error in the angle tracking gate that, over a series of scans, causes the radar to lose target angle tracking. Inverse gain jamming is also effective against conical scan radars. Since conical scan radars use the phase of the target returns to generate error signals, an inverse gain deception jammer attempts to alter the phase by inducing fake signals into the antennas. In addition, by altering the amplitude of the signal, the jammer induces large errors into the tracking loop. To accomplish this, the jammer must determine the frequency, PRF, and scan rate of the victim radar. It then transmits signals that change the phase and amplitude of the target signal, resulting in a signal 180 degrees out of phase with the actual target. This 180-degree error rapidly drives the antenna off the target and causes break-lock. Scan rate modulation is also used against conical scan radars. This angle deception technique modulates the jamming pulse at or near the victim radar nutation frequency. As the modulation approaches the radar's nutation frequency, large error signals appear in the radar servo tracking loops, producing random gyrations in the antenna system, causing break-lock. This technique is most effective if the modulation jamming is slowly swept in frequency until it matches the nutation rate. Both inverse scan and scan rate modulation jamming require very little power and have proven extremely effective against TWS and conical scan radars. To be effective, however, the angle deception jammer must find the precise scan rate of the victim radar. The jammer must concentrate on one signal at a time, limiting the number of threat systems that can be jammed simultaneously. In a dense threat environment, this can be a severe limitation. The effectiveness of inverse gain and scan rate modulation jamming led radar designers to employ antennas that scan only during the receiving function of the radar system. Generally, this is accomplished by using two antennas. The transmitting antenna illuminates the target. Receiving antennas scan to produce the amplitude modulation of the reflected signal for effective angle tracking. This technique is called Lobe-On-Receive-Only (LORO). Since the transmitting antenna does not nutate, or scan, angle deception jammers cannot detect the modulation required to generate effective inverse gain modulation. Swept square wave (SSW) jamming is the angle deception technique developed to counter LORO angle tracking. SSW jamming continuously varies the frequency of amplitude modulation on the jamming pulse over an expected range of nutation or scanning frequencies. This range is established by either electronic intelligence (ELINT) data on a particular system, or by exploitation. The dotted line in shows a threat's nutation or scan frequency. As the frequency of the modulated jamming pulse approaches the threat scan frequency, it induces errors in the angle tracking loop of the victim radar. The longer the SSW jamming stays near the scan frequency, the greater the induced errors. It is important that the sweep rate of the modulating jamming be slow enough to maximize its impact on the victim radar. VELOCITY DECEPTION JAMMING Pulse Doppler and continuous wave (CW) radars track targets based on velocity or Doppler-shifted frequency. The objective of velocity deception jamming is to deny velocity tracking information and generate false velocity targets. The primary techniques include velocity gate pull-off (VGPO), Doppler noise, narrow band Doppler noise, and Doppler false targets. Velocity gate pull-off counters pulse Doppler or CW radars by stealing the velocity gate of their automatic tracking loop. The objective of VGPO is to capture the Doppler velocity tracking gate by transmitting an intense false Doppler signal. Then the frequency of the false signal is changed to move the tracking gate away from the true target Doppler. This is analogous to the RGPO technique used against the range gate tracking loop. To accomplish an effective VGPO technique, the jammer receives the CW or pulse Doppler signal. It then retransmits a CW or pulse Doppler signal that is higher in power than the return from the aircraft, but at approximately the same Doppler frequency. It is important that the frequency of this initial jamming pulse appears within the same velocity tracking filters as the target return or the victim radar will disregard it. The frequency band of the Doppler tracking filters is an important piece of intelligence information. The velocity tracking gates are quite narrow, roughly 50 to 250 MHz. Once the jamming pulse appears in the tracking gate, the automatic gain control circuit gains out the target return, and the jamming pulse has captured the velocity gate. Once the jamming pulse has captured the tracking gate, the deception jammer slowly changes the Doppler frequency. This frequency shift is accomplished by several methods. The most common method uses frequency modulation (FM) within the jammer’s traveling wave tube (TWT). By varying the TWT voltage, the Doppler frequency of the jamming pulse is changed linearly, and the radar tracking gates follow the jamming pulse. By using FM, the jamming pulse can be moved in either a positive or negative direction, depending on the slope of the voltage. By slowly changing the frequency of the modulation, the jamming pulse pulls the tracking gates off the target. When the maximum offset has been achieved, nominally 5 to 50 kHz, the FM is “snapped back” to a minimum value, and the process is repeated to preclude target reacquisition. The rate of change of frequency offset in a VGPO pulse is an extremely critical parameter. Many CW and pulse Doppler radars employ acceleration stops as part of the tracking gates. By differentiating the velocity outputs of the velocity tracking gates with respect to time, the velocity tracker computes target acceleration. Acceleration stops detect and reject unusually large changes in target acceleration. If the VGPO technique changes the frequency of the jamming pulse too rapidly, the tracking loop, with acceleration stops, will reject the jamming pulse and stay on the target. This means that an effective VGPO technique may take from one to ten seconds. Doppler noise differs from most noise techniques in that it is a repeater technique. The jamming system must receive the pulse Doppler radar signal in order to generate an appropriate jamming pulse. Also, noise jamming output is done on a pulse-by-pulse basis and only lasts as long as the pulse duration, or pulse width, of the victim radar signal. The Doppler noise jammer receives each pulse and applies a random frequency shift, either positive or negative, to each pulse. When Doppler noise jamming pulses are processed by the signal processor, and the Doppler frequencies are sent to the velocity tracking gate, there are so many different velocities that the tracking gate cannot distinguish the target from the jamming. The random distribution of target velocities effectively masks the true target Doppler velocity. If the velocity tracking loop is not saturated, multiple false targets traveling at different speeds will be displayed. When a technique called Doppler noise blinking is employed, it interferes with the angle and velocity tracking within most semi-active radar missiles. Doppler noise blinking is accomplished by rapidly transmitting bursts of Doppler noise jamming. Doppler noise jamming is effective against most pulse Doppler radars and the semi-active missiles employed with these radars. One disadvantage, however, is that it is only effective against the velocity tracking loop. If range tracking is still available to the radar, Doppler noise may highlight the jamming aircraft. Another disadvantage is that Doppler noise requires a sophisticated jammer able to receive the victim radar pulse, generate random positive and negative frequency modulations on this pulse, and retransmit the jamming pulses at the PRF and pulse width of the victim radar. This requires an extremely fast signal processing capability and detailed intelligence information on the victim radar. Narrowband Doppler noise is also a repeater technique. The jamming system receives the pulse Doppler radar signal and generates a noise jamming signal on a pulse-by-pulse basis . Narrowband Doppler noise requires detailed information on the frequency coverage of an individual velocity tracking filter, or velocity bin, employed by the victim radar. Once this frequency range is known, the jammer receives each pulse from the victim radar and transmits jamming pulses with a higher and lower frequency shift based on the real target Doppler. These frequency shifts are always within the frequency range of the velocity bin. When these pulses are processed by the signal processor and the Doppler signals are sent to the velocity tracking gates, the particular bin that contains the target Doppler also contains several other targets generated by the jammer. The victim radar signal processor attempts to distinguish the target Doppler from the jamming pulses. It raises the gain in the velocity tracking bins, thinking that the signal with the highest amplitude is the target. But, as the signal gain is increased, the target is “gained out” with the jamming signals and no target is displayed. This is called velocity bin masking and can completely deny target information to a pulse Doppler radar. The advantage of narrowband Doppler noise is that it completely masks an aircraft's velocity from a pulse Doppler radar. The disadvantages include the following: When the victim radar can range-track an aircraft, narrowband Doppler noise highlights the aircraft's presence. To be effective, narrowband Doppler noise requires knowledge of the frequency range of the victim radar's velocity tracking bins, or filters. This detailed information may be available only through threat system exploitation. Finally, sophisticated signal processing and jamming systems are required to receive and transmit in the very narrow frequency band of the velocity bin. Doppler false target jamming is normally used with narrowband Doppler noise or other deception techniques. Its purpose is to initially confuse the radar signal processor with multiple targets and then force the radar signal processor to raise its gain levels in the velocity tracking loop. The Doppler false target jammer receives each pulse of the victim radar and applies a random frequency shift to a selected number of these pulses. The selected pulses are processed by the signal processor, and multiple Doppler frequencies are sent to the velocity tracking gate. In an attempt to distinguish the target from the jamming pulses, the signal processor increases the gain in each tracking filter, assuming the target Doppler has a higher amplitude than the jamming pulses. This increase in gain sets up the velocity tracking loop for a narrowband Doppler noise technique that will cause the real target to be lost among the generated false targets. The advantage of Doppler false target jamming is that it can initially confuse the radar signal processor and the radar operator as to the velocity of the real target. It also sets up the radar for narrowband Doppler noise technique and increases its effectiveness. The disadvantage is that the signal processor or the radar operator will eventually be able to distinguish the real target from the false targets based on its velocity. This jamming technique is much more effective when used in conjunction with other Doppler jamming techniques. MONOPULSE DECEPTION JAMMING The ability of monopulse tracking radars to obtain azimuth, range, and elevation information on a pulse-by-pulse basis make them extremely difficult to jam. Amplitude modulation jamming used against conical scan or TWS radars, such as inverse scan and swept square wave, highlights a target, making monopulse tracking easier. Frequency modulation techniques, such as RGPO and VGPO, are equally ineffective. They serve as a beacon that aids the monopulse radar's target tracking ability. The monopulse radar may be able to track the jammer with more accuracy than tracking actual radar returns because target glint effects are absent from the jamming pulse. Monopulse angle jamming techniques can be divided into two main categories, system-specific and universal. Examples of system-specific jamming techniques include skirt frequency jamming, image jamming, and cross-polarization jamming. These techniques attempt to exploit weaknesses in the design and operation of specific monopulse radars. Cross-eye jamming, a universal technique, attempts to exploit all monopulse radar systems. Skirt frequency jamming, or filter skirt jamming, is designed to counter the monopulse receiver. Skirt frequency jamming is based on the fact that the intermediate frequency (IF) filter of the monopulse receiver must be correctly tuned to the transmitting frequency of the monopulse radar. It these two components are not exactly tuned, the target signal may be presented on the edge, or skirt, of the receiver IF filter. This offers an opportunity to inject a jamming signal into this skirt Filter skirt jamming attempts to take advantage of this frequency imbalance by transmitting a jamming pulse tuned slightly off the radar transmitted frequency and in the middle of the receiver IF filter. This jamming pulse will generate a false error signal and drive the antenna away from the true target return. A well designed and maintained monopulse system does not have a frequency imbalance. The transmitter and IF filter frequencies will be identical. Jamming signals that are even slightly out of this narrow frequency range will not affect the monopulse tracking capability of the radar. Effective filter skirt jamming requires extensive knowledge of the internal operation of the IF filter. This information can normally be obtained only by system exploitation. Variances from radar to radar and frequency imbalance exists from one radar IF filter to another. This creates a high degree of uncertainty in the effectiveness of this technique. Image jamming exploits another potential weakness in the monopulse receiver. Some monopulse receivers have a wide-open front end with no preselection before the mixer. If the jammer transmits a pulse at the intermediate, or image, frequency, but out of phase with this frequency, the phase of the target tracking signal will be reversed and the antenna will be driven away from the target . Effective image jamming requires detailed information on the operation of the monopulse receiver. Of particular importance are the image, or intermediate, frequency and whether the local oscillation frequency is above or below the transmitted frequency. This may require exploitation of the monopulse threat system. In addition, a well-designed monopulse system has preselection in the front end and will reject signals that are out of phase with the transmitted frequencies. This capability renders image jamming ineffective. Effective filter skirt jamming requires extensive knowledge of the internal operation of the IF filter. This information can normally be obtained only by system exploitation. Variances from radar to radar and frequency imbalance exists from one radar IF filter to another. This creates a high degree of uncertainty in the effectiveness of this technique. Image jamming exploits another potential weakness in the monopulse receiver. Some monopulse receivers have a wide-open front end with no preselection before the mixer. If the jammer transmits a pulse at the intermediate, or image, frequency, but out of phase with this frequency, the phase of the target tracking signal will be reversed and the antenna will be driven away from the target. Effective image jamming requires detailed information on the operation of the monopulse receiver. Of particular importance is the image, or intermediate, frequency and whether the local oscillation frequency is above or below the transmitted frequency. This may require exploitation of the monopulse threat system. In addition, a well-designed monopulse system has preselection in the front end and will reject signals that are out of phase with the transmitted frequencies. This capability renders image jamming ineffective. Cross-polarization jamming exploits the difference in the monopulse antenna pattern for a jamming pulse that is polarized orthogonal to the design polarization. The antenna pattern for a two-channel monopulse radar using sigma and delta beams shows the tracking point to be between the two beams .This is true if the radar is using its design polarization. However, the radar antenna also has a receiving pattern for a signal that is cross-polarized with the design frequency. For a cross-polarized signal, the tracking point is shifted one beamwidth to the right. This shift in the tracking point results in a target tracking signal that is 180° out of phase with the real signal. To be effective, a jamming signal polarized orthogonally to the design frequency of the radar would have to be 25 to 30 decibels, or about 1000 times, stronger than the radar signal. A cross-polarized jammer must receive and measure the polarization of the victim monopulse radar. The jammer then transmits a very high power jamming signal at the same frequency, but orthogonally polarized, to the victim radar. As a rule, the jamming signal must be 25 to 30 dBs stronger than the target return to exploit the tracking errors in the cross-polarized antenna pattern. Additionally, it must be as purely orthogonal to the design polarization as possible. Any jamming signal component that is not purely orthogonal will highlight the target and require more jamming power to cover the target return. A cross-polarized jammer must be able to generate a powerful jamming pulse that is polarized orthogonal to the victim radar. A cross-polarized jammer that generates the power and purity of polarization required to defeat monopulse angle tracking poses extreme technological challenges. Cross-eye jamming is a complex technique that attempts to distort the wavefront of the beams in a monopulse radar and induce angle tracking errors. It exploits two basic assumptions of monopulse tracking logic in comparing target returns on a pulse-by-pulse basis. The first assumption is that a target return will always be a normal radar pulse echo. The second assumption is that any shift in amplitude or phase in a target return is due to the tracking antenna not pointing directly at a target. This condition generates an error signal and the antenna tries to null, but the amplitude or phase shifts. Cross-eye jamming attacks the two assumptions through a process of receiving and transmitting jamming pulses from different antennas separated as far apart as possible.The phase front of a monopulse signal is received by the number 1 receive antenna, amplified by the repeater, and transmitted by the number 2 transmit antenna. The same phase front then hits receive antenna number 2, is shifted 180°, amplified by the repeater, and transmitted by the number 1 transmit antenna. These two out-of-phase signals must be matched in amplitude and must exceed the amplitude of the target return. When these jamming signals arrive at the victim radar, the tracking loop attempts to null out the amplitude and phase differences. With two widely spaced jamming sources at different phases, the antenna never achieves a null position or tracking solution. The distance between antenna pairs is an important parameter that determines the effectiveness of cross-eye jamming. The wider the spacing between antenna pairs, the more distortion in the victim's wave front near the true radar return. Most fighter aircraft do not provide sufficient spacing between the antennas to maximize effectiveness. Effectiveness is also lost when the aircraft is abeam or going away from the radar. To further complicate matters, when the radar is directly in front of the aircraft, the jamming pulses must have a power at least 20 dBs above the target return. Cross-eye jamming can also be defeated with a leading-edge tracker that rejects jamming signals arriving at the antenna behind the target return. Countering monopulse angle tracking is the greatest challenge for selfprotection jamming systems. Skirt jamming and image jamming have had limited success. Cross-polarization and cross-eye jamming techniques require complex and sophisticated circuitry and much power. TERRAIN BOUNCE Terrain bounce is a jamming technique used primarily at low altitude. It is used to counter semi-active, air-to-air missiles and monopulse tracking radars. The technique involves a repeater jammer that receives the radar or missile guidance signal. The jammer amplifies and directs this signal to illuminate the terrain directly in front of the aircraft. The missile or radar tracks the reflected energy from the spot on the ground instead of the aircraft. To be effective, the terrain bounce jamming antennas should have a narrow elevation beamwidth and a broad azimuth beamwidth. This transmission pattern maximizes the energy directed toward the ground and minimizes the energy transmitted toward the missile or radar. To overcome signal losses associated with uncertain terrain propagation, the jamming system should also generate high jamming power. This ensures the energy reflected from the terrain is higher than the energy in the aircraft return. The terrain bounce jamming antennas should have very low sidelobes to preclude activation of any home-on-jam (HOJ) missile capability. For an air-to-air missile, the terrain bounce technique should be activated at long range. This will initially put the aircraft and the jamming spot in the same resolution cell. As the range decreases, the missile will be decoyed by the higher power in the jamming spot. Some problems associated with terrain bounce jamming include the uncertainty of the signal scattering parameters of the various terrain features and the possible changes in signal polarization caused by terrain propagation. In addition, terrain bounce jamming can place maneuvering restrictions and maximum altitude limitations on the aircraft. SUMMARY There is several deception jamming techniques that can be employed to counter threat radar systems. The effectiveness of these techniques can be enhanced when they are employed in combination. For example, the effectiveness of an RGPO technique is enhanced when an angle deception technique is also employed. Determining the most effective deception technique, or combination of techniques, can present a challenge to intelligence and engineering analysts. However, when employed with maneuvers and chaff, deception techniques can mean the difference between success and failure on the modern battlefield. Leave a Reply. |
AuthorPalash Choudhari Archives
June 2021
Categories
All
|