Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T14:32:50.905Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A review of self-protection deceptive jamming against chirp radars

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 July 2017

Samer Baher Safa Hanbali  and
Radwan Kastantin
Samer Baher Safa Hanbali*
Affiliation:
Department of Communication Engineering, Higher Institute of Applied Sciences and Technology, Damascus, Syria
Radwan Kastantin
Affiliation:
Department of Communication Engineering, Higher Institute of Applied Sciences and Technology, Damascus, Syria
*
Corresponding author: S.B.S. Hanbali Email: hanbali.samer@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The well-known range-Doppler coupling property of the chirp radar makes it more vulnerable to different types of deceptive repeater jammers that benefit from the pulse compression processing gain of the radar-matched filter. These jammers generate many false targets that appear before and after the true target. Therefore, the radar cannot distinguish the true target from the false ones. This paper reviews different self-protection repeater jammers and presents their pros and cons, in order to provide a reference for the study of jamming/anti-jamming methods.

Keywords

Frequency-shifting jammingInterrupted-samplingRepeater jammingEcho suppressionECCM
Type
Tutorial and Review Paper
Information
International Journal of Microwave and Wireless Technologies , Volume 9 , Issue 9 , November 2017 , pp. 1853 - 1861
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press and the European Microwave Association 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

[1] Curtis Schleher, D.: Electronic Warfare in the Information Age, chapter 4, Artech House, Boston–London, 1999.Google Scholar
[2] Stimson, G.W.; Griffiths, H.; Baker, C.; Adamy, D.: Introduction to Airborne Radar, 3rd ed., chapter 4, Copyright © 2014 by SciTech Publishing, Edison, NJ, 2014.Google Scholar
[3] Shi, C.; Wang, F.; Sellathurai, M.; Zhou, J.: Low probability of intercept based multicarrier radar jamming power allocation for joint radar and wireless communications systems. IET Radar Sonar Navig., 11 (5) (2017), 802–811.Google Scholar
[4] De Martino, A.: Introduction to Modern EW Systems, chapter 5, Copyright © 2012 by Artech House, Boston–London, 2012.Google Scholar
[5] Yong, Y.; Zhang, W.-M.; Yang, J.-H.: Study on frequency-shifting jamming to linear frequency modulation pulse compression radars, in Wireless Communications & Signal Processing, IEEE, Nanjing, China, 2009, 1–5.Google Scholar
[6] Wang, X.S.; Liu, J.C.; Zhang, W.M.; Fu, Q.X.; Liu, Z.; Xie, X.X.: Mathematic principles of interrupted-sampling repeater jamming (ISRJ). Sci. China Ser. F Inf. Sci., 50 (1) (2007), 113–123.Google Scholar
[7] Pan, X-Y.; Wang, W.; Feng, D-J.; Fu, Q.-X.; Wang, G.-Y.: Repeat jamming against LFM radars based on spectrum-divided, in Radar Conf. 2013: 0490-0490, IET Int, Xi'an, China.Google Scholar
[8] Li, C.Z.; Su, W.M.; Gu, H.; Ma, C.; Chen, J.L.: Improved interrupted sampling repeater jamming based on DRFM, in Signal Processing, Communications and Computing (ICSPCC), 2014 IEEE Int. Conf. on, IEEE, 2014, 254–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[9] Feng, D.; Xu, L.; Wang, W.; Yang, H.: Radar echo cancellation using interrupted-sampling repeater. IEICE Electronics Express, 11 (8) (2014), 1–6.Google Scholar
[10] Tai, N.; Yuan, N.C.; Pan, Y.J.: Quasi-coherent noise jamming to LFM radar based on pseudo-random sequence phase-modulation. Radioengineering, 24 (4) (2015), 1013–1024.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[11] Richards, M.A.: Fundamentals of Radar Signal Processing, 2nd ed., chapter 4, 6, McGraw-Hill, New York, 2014, ISBN: 978-0-07-179833-4.Google Scholar
[12] Richards, M.A.; Scheer, J.A.; Holm, W.A.: Principles of Modern Radar, vol. I: Basic Principles, chapter 16, Copyright © 2010 by SciTech Publishing, Edison, NJ, 2010.Google Scholar
[13] Adamy, D.L.: EW 104, EW against a New Generation of Threats, chapter 4, Copyright © 2015 by Artech House, Boston–London, 2015, ISBN 13:978-1-60807-869-1.Google Scholar
[14] Deng, H.: Polyphase code design for orthogonal netted radar systems. IEEE Trans. Signal Process., 52 (11) (2004), 3126–3135.Google Scholar
[15] Gong, S.; Wei, X.; Li, X.: ECCM scheme against interrupted sampling repeater jammer based on time–frequency analysis. J. Syst. Eng. Electron., 25 (6) (2014), 996–1003.Google Scholar
[16] Hanbali, S.B.S.; Kastantin, R.: Countering a self-protection frequency shifting jamming against LFM pulse compression radars. Int. J. Electron. Telecommun., 63 (2) (2017), 145–150.Google Scholar
[17] Hanbali, S.B.S.; Kastantin, R.: Fractional Fourier transform-based chirp radars for countering self-protection frequency-shifting jammers. Int. J. Microw. Wireless Technol., (2017), 1–7. doi: 10.1017/S1759078717000289.Google Scholar
[18] Hanbali, S.B.S.; Kastantin, R.: Technique to counter active echo cancellation of self-protection ISRJ. Electron. Lett., 53 (10) (2017), 680–681.CrossRefGoogle Scholar