A Study of ECCM Techniques and their Performance

Ahmed Abdalla, Zhao Yuan, Sowah Nii Longdon, Joyce Chelangate Bore, Tang Bin
School of Electronic Engineering, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China,
Chengdu 610054, P.R. China
E-mail: ahmed.baoney6@hotmail.com
AbstractIn this paper, Electronic counter countermeasure

Range false targets (RFT) are signals transmitted by the

(ECCM) techniques that are utilized against active deception

DRFM jammer that reasonably look like the target return but

jamming Electronic countermeasure (ECM) are studied. Firstly,

that appear in different ranges (negative or positive range

these schemes are classified into two groups according to the

offsets) from the target return. Whereas range-velocity Gate

ECM threat: techniques which are used to counter the range

Stealers(R-VGS) aim to mislead the radar in tracking mode,

false targets and techniques to counter the range-velocity Gate

assuming that the target is in track and, therefore this track

Stealers deception jamming. Secondly, the pros and cons of these

must be annihilated. Thus, the tracker range or velocity gate

schemes are highlighted and compared under different

must be pulled off from the target return. In view of both RFT

viewpoints. Thirdly, we analyze the performance of these

and R-VGS, therefore, it is crucial to propose an effective

schemes, and we propose new directions based on the insightful

ECCM method to suppress these jamming threats. Irrespective

analysis of the existing work. This paper can greatly enhance

of the ECCM technique employed, the radar must guarantee

understanding of the basic concepts of ECCM electronic welfare

the continuity of its normal work in good performance under

(EW) to counter active deception jamming.

these ECM conditions.

KeywordsElectronic

counter

countermeasure

(ECCM);

Digital Radio Frequency Memory (DRFM); Active Deception

Jamming (ADJ).

This paper aims to study present ECCM techniques and

compare the current developments of chosen radar ECCM
techniques against Active Deception Jamming (ADJ), and
points out the challenges confronting these techniques. We then

I. INTRODUCTION
Modern deception electronic counter measures (ECM)
techniques are enhanced by ways of accurate replication and
reproduction of the radar signal through the digital radio
frequency memory (DRFM), which attempts to deceive the
radar systems and therefore make it hard to discriminate true
and false targets. This kind of jamming signals can be fully
coherently processed by the radar receiver, which means that it
can be processed similar to the real targets. A variety of ECM
heuristic approaches have been proposed such as [1,2,3].
Project supported by the National Defense Pre-Research
Foundation of China (NO.9140A07030713DZ02101).
ICSPCC2015
978-1-4799-8920-1/15/$31.00 2015 IEEE

analyze the trends in the developments of radar ECCM

methods.
II.

LITERATURE SURVEY

During the last decades, many ECCM techniques have been

described to suppress the deception jamming. Unfortunately,
there have been no recent comprehensive survey papers on this
topic to compare favorably the assessment of their efficacy and
therefore predict some proposals of new trends in its
development. In this section we briefly review the ECCM
schemes. Specifically, these schemes are classified into two

classes as follows:

sampling is assumed to process the pulse signal in a base band

the error introduced by the time delay difference has a lower

A. Techniques that aim to Suppress the RFT

Although there are other ways to suppress the RFT, pulse
diversity

[4,5,6,7, 8,9,10,11,12]

is commonly used. It should be noted

that this technique is mostly used in Synthetic Aperture Radar

(SAR).
In view of the fact that the repeat jammer lags at least one
pulse behind the radar and benefiting from orthogonal pulse
block, which was first used by Alamouti in wireless
communication [12], Akhtar proposed schemes [4,5,6] to
combat the range false target via the orthogonal pulse block
design set in slow-time domain in which the process is
assumed to be stationary (no remarkable changes in the
received signals position) known as coherent processing
interval (CPI) . Thus, the jamming signals can be easily
suppressed in the output of the matched filter. These techniques
require integration over several pulses in order to separate the
false target. However, it can also be based on the transmission
of pulses which comprise of two, to decrease the integration
over several pulses. It is worth remarking that, most of the
pulse diversity methods assumed pulse block with four pulses.
Xia et al.[7] proposed an algorithm to overcome the
drawback/shortcoming of Akhtar techniques, which besides
employing only half the received signals in the match filtering
operation, also the motion parameters, i.e. velocity and
acceleration, of all the received signals are assumed to be
stationary and can be estimated. The advantages of this schema
rely

in

the

full-rate

orthogonal

pulse

block

and

two-dimensional frequency domain motion compensation.

Even though this method employs all signal of the receiving
echoes in the matching filter operation. Nevertheless, repeating
the same pulses to attain the full rate orthogonal pulse block
makes it easy for the DRFM repeat jammer to find out that, the
victim radar is using pulse diversity. Thus, the jammer can
overcome this issue and regenerate the false target properly to
blind the victim radar. Lu G et al.[8] confirm that , if uniform

probability than the error introduced in the sampling process.

In such conditions this error can thus be completely neglected
and considered to be stationary or can be modeled with a
linearly increasing offset of the slow-time domain. Lu G et al.
[8] suppress complicated range false targets (chopping and
interleaving (C&I) and Smeared Spread (SMSP). SMSP which
was first invented by Sparrow and Cikalo[13]

aims to

produce false targets which have a different chirp rate with the
transformed signal, and the chirp rate is n times greater than
the original signal. Soumekh[9] provided a study of two
methods for perturbing the phase of an LFM chirp to generate
diverse pulses to counter a repeater jammer . The first one was
based on adding a slow-fluctuating phase to an LFM chirp,
while the other method introduced slight perturbations in the
rate of an LFM chirp in the slow-time domain. Moreover, it
suggested a way to penalize the jammer that tries to repeat the
pulse sequences of radar signal by modeling a focused
range-Doppler map of the ECM targets by matched filtering
with jammer pulse sequence to clip the signatures of the phony
targets.
All above listed techniques do not suppress the false target
simultaneously. Therefore, a suppression algorithm based on
the joint time-frequency pulse diversity is proposed by Lu G et
al.[10] to cancel the false target at current received pulse.
This is achieved in one pulse repetition interval (PRI) by using
the orthogonal frequency division multiplexing (OFDM). Yu C
et al.[11] proposed a schema to enhance the pulse diversity by
combining it with the Fast-time Space Time Adaptive
Processing (STAP) in multichannel SAR. This approach is able
to defeat false targets. Moreover, it had better performance in
another type of jamming known as terrain scattered
interference (TSI).
B. Techniques that aim to eliminate the R-VGS
Generally, these techniques use different approaches to

preserve the radar tracking [14,15,16,17]. However, it should be

On the basis of narrow gate monitoring and memory

selected properly, since the jammer can modulate information

tracking, Fu X et al.[17] proposed a method against RGPO in

to delay, amplitude, frequency and phase on the basis of

End-guidance radar. Firstly, this method outlines an integrated

received radar signal to realize coherent Interference. These

means of jamming recognition by using automatic gain control

techniques make the radar system focus on the target

(AGC) voltage, constant false alarm ratio (CFAR) output, echo

incessantly.

dimension and velocity of tracking gate. Then, the judgment of

As other gate-pull jamming do, the basic steps of

the existence of RGPO jamming is made before the

range-velocity synchronous gate-pull radar jamming contains:

cancellation. This method works well based on modified

1) gate capturing; 2) gate pulling; 3) pull ending.

memory tracking, narrow interval gate monitoring and narrow

Predominantly, the elimination of this type of ECM jamming is

edge gate monitoring.

achieved in the gate puling time, due to the remarkable and

significant change in the spectrum between the jamming and
the target. During this gate period, the pulses from the jamming
are modulated by the delay time and the Doppler frequency,
initiating range gate or velocity gate pull-off or pull -in (RGPO,

In the event that the range-gate pulled more evidently than

velocity-gate Gu X et al.[14] proposed ECCM method based on
cross-correlation(ICC).

This

method

used

phase-coded waveform in radar signals (Barker code with

length 13). Accordingly, the received signal is composed of
two monochromatic signals after ICC. Thus, when radar
confronted by a GPI the jamming component can be removed
through high pass filter (HPF). On the other side, if the
jamming is GPO, the jamming component can be removed
through low pass filter (LPF). Lu G et al.[15] proposed a method
against RGPO/RGPI. According to the error range information
of the split gate system of the victim radar, this method updated
the biased weight in every range tracking interval in the
existence of the jammer. Therefore, the tracker can precisely
focus on the target. Moreover, this method outlined the
tracking performance of the algorithm under the condition of

In this section, we will compare the previous literature in

the form of tables to identify their capability and analyze their
performance. Due to fact that ECCM capability is one of the

In both gate capturing and gate pulling periods, Zhang J et

al.[16] provided a design of waveforms similar to Akhtar

and generalized method for measuring it, therefore, the

comparison is carried out in term of pros and cons of the
techniques. One way to express the ECCM capability of radars
is to measure the target signal to the jamming signal power
ratio (SJR) after employing ECCM technique. Table1 shows
the first class comparison.
Some of the advantages of the pulse diversity technique is
that it does not require parameter estimation of the jammer, it is
flexible in application when the jammer is either off or on and
one does not need to change the hardware, thus on the basis of
old equipment, such techniques can be used. The pulse
diversity technique can use frequency diversity, signal with
random initial phase, jittering chirp rate at adjacent pulses, as
well as orthogonal codes at different pulses capable of
cancelling the signals of the jammer at the output of matched
filters. On the contrary, these techniques are not applicable
when the radar cannot modify the emitting signal. Furthermore,

uniform velocity and uniform acceleration RGPI/RGPO.

[5,6]

which are also orthogonal in frequency domain to remove the

influence of RGPO.

PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS

most important functions of the radar but there is no simple

VGPO or RGPI, VGPI)[3] .

instantaneous

III.

high technology DRFM may recognize this technique easily if

the pulses are not selected skillfully.
From table1 it is obvious that, there is an unavoidable
relationship between computational complexity and higher

performance. However, some ECCM schemes perform better

the time delay, Doppler frequency, pull velocity or acceleration

than others in making this tradeoff.

and the SJR need to be updated properly in order to break radar

It is also evident from table1 that ECM techniques use

tracking. In view of ECCM capability for these techniques, the

different styles of jamming in order to victimize the radar.

probability of successful anti-R-V GP jamming is considered to

Some techniques remove the impact of active jamming

evaluate the radar ECCM performance. From table2 it is clear

simultaneously, whereas others wait for the next PRIs to

that the method with higher capability and reliability require

achieve this purpose.

higher system complexity and more additional equipment,

Table2 compares the second class of the ECCM techniques

which leads to huge cost and is time consuming. It is necessary

which are used agonist R-VGS. There are several advantages

for ECCM Technique to accomplish the R-VGS suppression in

of R-VGS ECM techniques, especially when used for

both gate capturing and gate pulling time, since it has the

self-protection. In general, the information of intercept such as

advantage of prior information about the existence of jamming.

TABLE I.

COMPARISON OF TECHNIQUES COUNTERING THE RFT

Features Analysis

RFT styles

Jammer penalization

Techniques
Akhtar[4,5,7]

Xia et al [7]

Lu et al [8]

Soumekh[9]

Lu et al[10]

Yu et al.[11]

Provided against one

Multiple false

CI @SMSP

Against one RFT

Against one RFT

TSI

RFT

target

Does not support

Does not support

Does not support

Supports the

Does not support

Does not support

property

property

RFT detection probability

Low

Medium

Low

High

High

Very high

SJR after ECCM

High

Very high

High

High

Extremely high

Very high

The impact of target

Estimated

Well compensated

Ignored

Estimated

Not required

Estimated

Does not support

Support the

Does not support

Does not support

Does not support

Does not support

Does not support

Does not support

Supports the property

Supports the

motion
Utilize all the received
signals

property

simultaneously suppress

Does not support

Does not support

the RFT

property

Computational burden

IV.

Low

Low

SOME PROPOSALS OF NEW DIRECTIONS

Low

High

Medium

Very high

newest technology in the electronic science tightly to protect

itself effectively.

Nowadays, the deception jamming techniques have

A new category of radar ECCM known as Counter

developed rapidly and are widely applied against the radar in

Electronic Support Measure (CESM) has been proposed by

the form of different styles. Therefore, the ECCM techniques

Stephen L.[18] to effectively protect oneself.

must follow this rapid development. It is essential to apply the

TABLE II.

COMPARISON OF TECHNIQUES COUNTERING THE R-VGS

Features Analysis

Techniques
Gu X et all[14]

Lu et al.[15]

Zhang J et al.[16]

Fu X et al.[17]

Provided against

Against RGPO ,

Against RGPO Only

Against RGPO , RGPI

R-VGPO, R-VGPI

RGPI

Computational burden

Very high

High

Low

Extremely high

probability of successful

Medium

High

Low

Extremely high

Pulling periods

Pulling periods

Capturing, Pulling

Capturing, Pulling periods

R-VGS styles

anti-R-VGP
specified at procedure periods
of R-VGS

periods

Hereby, ECM techniques cannot easily deceive the radar

Furthermore, this paper predicts some proposals of new

system. Some suggested ways are, increasing number of

directions to the ECCM techniques. Radar ECCM is a

pulses in coherent processing (CPI), using low probability

technology involving different fields, so it requires further

interception (LPI), Carrier frequency agility, repetition

consideration and attention whilst considering reliability.

frequency agility and sufficient use of the polarization

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

characteristics of targets. Consequently, it is essential to

Project supported by the National Defense Pre-Research

consider CESM in both the design and in the modification of

Foundation of China (NO.9140A07030713DZ02101).

existing radars.
Implementation of perfect signal processing ability,

REFERENCES

artificial intelligence, adaptive signal processing and neural

[1]

network which are meaningful in an ECCM role are

[2]

noteworthy. Moreover, using other radiation types to replace

transmission wave of radar such as visible light and infrared is
key, and it may be used to monitor and track enemy planes
during the period when radar stops transmission.
Consequently, the combination of signal processing and
data processing greatly increases the detection probability and

[3]

[4]
[5]

[6]

enhances the suppression performance.

Future ECCM techniques must consider how to apply new

[7]

knowledge in the best way to improve radar ECCM

[8]

performance.
V. CONCLUSION
This paper presents a survey on radar deception jamming
ECCM methods and discusses their performance assessment.

[9]

Roome, S. Digital radio frequency memory. IEE Electronics and

Communications Engineering Journal, 147153, Aug. 1990.
Philip D.,Benjamin,Slocumb, ECM Modeling for Assessment of Target
Tracking Algorithms Proceedings of the Twenty-Ninth Southeastern
Symposium on System Theory, pp. 500 504, 1997.
Hiong Y,Gu H,Zhang Y, Bin Tang, An Investigation of RangeVelocity Deception Jamming Modeling International Conference on
Advanced Computer Science and Electronics Information, 2013
J.Akhtar. An ECCM Signaling Approach for Deep Fading of Jamming
Reflectors 978-0-86341-848-8 IET 2007.
J.Akhtar. Orthogonal block coded ECCM schemes against repeat radar
jammers. IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems,
vol.45, no.3, pp.1218-1226, 2009.
J.Akhtar.An ECCM scheme for orthogonal independent range-focusing
of real and false targets, In ICR '2007 Proceedings, Massachusetts,
USA, pp. 846-849, (2007).
X Lei,LNan, Zhao S and Zhang L A Radar ECCM Method based on
Orthogonal Pulse Block and Two-dimensional Frequency Domain
Motion Compensation , . IET International Conference on DOI:
10.1049/cp.2012.1686.
G Lu, S N Liao, S. C. Luo, and B. Tang, Cancellation of complicated
DRFM range false targets VIA temporal pulse diversity, Progress In
Electromagnetics Research C,2010,Vol.16,pp.69-84.
M. Soumekh."SAR-ECCM using phase-perturbed LFM chirp signals
and DRFM repeat jammer penalization", IEEE Transactions on
Aerospace and Electronic, Vol. 42,pp. 191 - 205, 2006.

[10] G. Lu, B. Tang, and G. Gui, Deception ECM signals cancellation

processor with joint time-frequency pulse diversity, IEICE Electronics
Express, vol. 8, no. 19, pp. 16081613, 2011.
[11] Yu C, Ma X, Zhang Y, Dong Z, Liang. Multichannel SAR ECCM
based on Fast-time STAP and Pulse diversity IEEE International
Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium,pp. 921 924,2011.
[12] Alamouti, S. M. A simple transmit diversity technique for wireless
communications," IEEE Journal Selected Areas in Communications,
1998. Vol. 16, No. 8, 1451-1458.
[13] M. J. Sparrow, J. Cakilo, ECM techniques to counter pulse
compression radar, United States Patent,7081846,2006
[14] Gu Haiyan, Xiong Ying, Wang Pei, Luo Shuangcai, Li Yongping, Tang
Bin. Range-velocity synchronous gate-pull radar jamming suppression
with instantaneous cross-correlation[C]. CIE International Conference
on Radar. 2011, 1839-1842
[15] Gang Lu, S Luo, H Gu, Y Li, Bin Tang. Adaptive biased weight-based
RGPO/RGPI ECCM algorithm. IEEE CIE International Conference on
Radar, Vol.2, pp.1067-1070,2011.
[16] Jindong Zhang,Xiao H, Kerang W.A Waveform Diversity Technique
for Countering RGPO . IET,2009.
[17] Xiongjun Fu, Changyong Jiang, ZongboWang,MeiguoGao.Anti-vessel
End-guidance Radar ECCM against Deception Jamming of Range Gate
Pull Off. IET,pp.1-4,2009.
[18] Stephen L. Johnston. CESM-A New Category of Radar ECCM.
IEEE AES Systems Magazine, Februaty 1995.