Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T09:32:54.719Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Developments in RF simulator technology – approaching the affordable fidelity limit

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 February 2016

M. Pywell*
Affiliation:
BAE Systems – Military Air Solutions, Warton, Lancashire, UK

Abstract

Technology developments in radar frequency simulators of the type used to verify the performance of complex electronic warfare systems are described. The successful verification of this performance prior to combat use is a necessary pre-requisite of military platform survivability and mission success. These simulators and associated modelling and analysis tools have enabled a major shift during the last 15 years from expensive and limited flight trials to repeatable laboratory and anechoic chamber tests, although they will never totally supplant those trials. Most limitations of the early days of many-channel simulators, 25 years ago, have been resolved or adequately and – as importantly – affordably mitigated, largely enabled by computing power increases. Limitations remain that will, within affordability constraints driven by Defence Ministries worldwide, prevent perfect simulation (‘emulation’) and the attendant, tantalising but utopian goal of laboratory and chamber test results that precisely match those from flight test and combat.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Aeronautical Society 2007 

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

1. Noonan, C.A. and Pywell, M.. Aircraft sensor data fusion: An improved process and the impact of ESM enhancements, 1997, NATO AGARD Conf on multi-sensor systems and data fusion for telecommunications, remote sensing and radar (1997), Proc AGARD-CP-595.Google Scholar
2. MacDiarmid, I.P., Alonze, P.M. and Pywell, M.. Survivability – a reward for integrated thinking, September 2002, NATO R&T organisation symp. on combat survivability of air, sea and land vehicles, Proc. RTO-MP-090.Google Scholar
3. Pywell, M., Alonze, P.M., Hurricks, M.E. and Wellings, I.G.. The new enigma – increased survivability with reduced cost? 1999, NATO RTO SCIP Symp on ‘Flight in a hostile environment’, Conf Proc RTO-MP-47, AC/323(SCI)TP/22.Google Scholar
4. Pywell, M.. A question of survival – military aircraft vs the electromagnetic environment, Aeronaut J, September 2004, 108, (1087).Google Scholar
5. Gosling, , Sqn Ldr, T. Platform survivability, Aerospace Int, July 2000, 27, (7).Google Scholar
6. Bloomer, , Flt Lt, M.. AWC support of large aircraft EW suites, Proc. IQPC ‘Electronic warfare 2002’ Conf, 30 September – 1 October, 2002, London.Google Scholar
7. Schleher, D.C., Electronic Warfare in the Information Age, 1999, ISBN 0-89006-526-8.Google Scholar
8. Banks, H. and McQuillan, R. (Eds), Electronic Warfare Test and Evaluation, 17, March 2000, NATO RTO-AG-300, AC/323(SCI)TP/24, ISBN 92-837-1034-7.Google Scholar
9. Richards, P.W.. Testing tomorrow’s EW system today, EDefenseFlash, June 2002.Google Scholar
10. Pywell, M. and Stubley, N.. Environment models and simulators – high quality and lower cost validation of EW systems, NATO AGARD conf on environmental factors in EW related to aerospace systems, May 1995, Proc AGARD-CP-573.Google Scholar
11. Tsui, J.B., Digital techniques for wideband receivers, 2004, 2nd Ed, ISBN 1-891121-26-XGoogle Scholar
13. Ewst, , a Herley Company: http://www.ewst.co.uk/ Google Scholar
14. Ali, E.F., updated by Dubria, P and Barker, R.. Electronic warfare testing at the Benefield Anechoic Facility, ITEA J (January 1984 – April 2006), 17, (2).Google Scholar
15. Jed Staff, A sampling of EW simulators, J Elect Def, January 1993, pp 6775.Google Scholar
16. Herskovitz, D.. A sampling of EW simulators, J Elect Def, December 1998, pp 5358.Google Scholar
17. Mcgahan, R.V.. A sampling of EW simulators, J Elect Def, August 2002, pp 6166.Google Scholar
18. Eberl, E.G.. Changing requirements for EW threat simulation. ADA 355202, October 1998.Google Scholar
19. Talbot, K.I., Duley, P.R. and Hyatt, M.H.. Specific emitter identification and verification, Tech Review J, Spring/Summer 2003.Google Scholar
20. Wiley, R.G., Electronic Intelligence: The Analysis of Radar Signals, 2nd Ed, Ch6 & 7.8., ISBN 0-89006-592-6.Google Scholar
21. Skolnik, M.I., Radar Handbook, McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York, 1970.Google Scholar
22. Kahan, T. and Echart, G., Theorie de la propagation des ondes élétromagnetiques dans la guide d’onde atmosphérique, [Theory of electromagnetic wave propagation in the atmospheric waveguide] Ann Phys 5, (1950), pp 641705.Google Scholar
23. Navy Modeling and Simulation Management Office: Department of the Navy – Modeling and simulation verification, validation, and accreditation implementation handbook, Vol I – VV&A Framework, March 2004, http://www.simval.org/document/modeling_simulation_verification_Validation_accreditation_implementation_handbook/081804_hdbk_Vol_1_final_033004.pdf, (Accessed 31 10 2006.)Google Scholar
24. Electronic warfare test and evaluation process – direction and methodology for EW testing, Air Force Manual 99112, March 1995, http://www.e-publishing.af.mil/pubfiles/af/99/afman99-112/afman99-112.pdf, (Accessed 31 10 2006.)Google Scholar
25. Anderson, R.B., Bieling, R., Strombo, G., Hunt, D. and Brown, F.. Threat correlation to ground test stimulators at the Benefield Anechoic Facility (BAF) US Air Force T&E Days, 68 December 2005, Nashville, Tennessee, AIAA 2005-7659.Google Scholar
26. VV&A recommended practices guide special topic: fidelity, US DoD Defense Simulation & Modeling Office, 30-9-2000. http://vva.dmso.mil/special_topics/Fidelity/Fidelity-pr.pdf (Accessed 9 02 2007).Google Scholar