Euro Control Reference of RASS-S Technical

EUROPEAN ORGANISATION FOR THE SAFETY OF AIR NAVIGATION
EUROCONTROL
RADAR SENSOR PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
Edition Edition Date Status Class
: : : :
0.1 June 1997 Working Draft EATMP
EUROPEAN AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL HARMONISATION AND INTEGRATION PROGRAMME
DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION SHEET
DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION
Radar Sensor Performance Analysis
EWP DELIVERABLE REFERENCE NUMBER PROGRAMME REFERENCE INDEX SUR.ET01.ST01-STD-01 EDITION 0.1: EDITION DATE : June 1997 Abstract
WARNING The present version of the document is working draft. It will be validated through the Radar Sensors Appraisal Programme. The results of this programme are expected end of 2001. Then the document will migrate to a released status. Until then it should be used as a support document for the EUROCONTROL Standard document for Radar Surveillance in En-Route Airspace and
Major Terminal Areas.
Keywords
CONTACT PERSON :
S. Adamopoulos
TEL : 3259
UNIT :
SUR
DOCUMENT STATUS AND TYPE STATUS Working Draft Draft Proposed Issue Released Issue CATEGORY Executive Task Specialist Task Lower Layer Task CLASSIFICATION General Public EATMP Restricted
o o o
o o
o o
ELECTRONIC BACKUP INTERNAL REFERENCE NAME : D:\TEMP\RSPA.DOC HOST SYSTEM MEDIA Microsoft Windows Type : Hard disk Media Identification :
SOFTWARE(S) Word 6.0
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
DOCUMENT APPROVAL The following table identifies all management authorities who have successively approved the present issue of this document.
AUTHORITY SURT Chairman DIS M. Rees
NAME AND SIGNATURE
DATE
J. Van DOORN
EATMP Project Leader W. Philipp
Edition 0.1
Working Draft June 1997
Page iii
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
DOCUMENT CHANGE RECORD The following table records the complete history of the successive editions of the present document.
EDITION (Edition)
DATE (Edition date)
REASON FOR CHANGE
SECTIONS PAGES AFFECTED
Page iv
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
TABLE OF CONTENTS
DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION SHEET ............................................................................... ii DOCUMENT APPROVAL ...................................................................................................... iii DOCUMENT CHANGE RECORD ........................................................................................iv TABLE OF CONTENTS.........................................................................................................v FOREWORD............................................................................................................................ 1 1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................ 3 1.1 Purpose .......................................................................................................................... 3 1.2 Scope .......................................................................................................................... 4
2. REFERENCES .................................................................................................................... 5 3. DEFINITIONS, SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS ......................................................... 8 3.1 Definitions......................................................................................................................... 8 3.2 Symbols and abbreviations .......................................................................................... 23 4. RADAR SENSOR PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS............................................................. 25 4.1 General ........................................................................................................................ 25
4.2 Analysis method ............................................................................................................. 26 4.3 Procedure ....................................................................................................................... 26 4.4 Interpretation of results................................................................................................ 31 5. PRIMARY SENSOR DETECTION PERFORMANCE PARAMETERS ANALYSIS....... 32 5.1 General ........................................................................................................................ 32
5.2 Probability of target position detection ...................................................................... 32 5.3 False target reports....................................................................................................... 34 6. PRIMARY SENSOR QUALITY PERFORMANCE PARAMETERS ANALYSIS............. 35 6.1 General ........................................................................................................................ 35
Edition 0.1
Page v
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
6.2 Positional accuracy. ....................................................................................................... 35 6.3 Resolution....................................................................................................................... 39 7. SECONDARY SENSOR DETECTION PERFORMANCE PARAMETERS ANALYSIS 42 7.1 General. ........................................................................................................................ 42 7.2 Probability of target position detection. ..................................................................... 42 7.3 Probability of code detection . ..................................................................................... 44 7.4 False / Multiple SSR target reports ratio.................................................................... 46 8. SECONDARY SENSOR QUALITY PERFORMANCE PARAMETERS ANALYSIS...... 54 8.1 General ........................................................................................................................ 54
8.2 Positional accuracy. ....................................................................................................... 54 8.3 False code information.................................................................................................. 58 8.4 Resolution....................................................................................................................... 60 9. PSR/SSR DATA COMBINING ANALYSIS ...................................................................... 62 9.1 General ........................................................................................................................ 62
9.2 Data analysis................................................................................................................... 62 9.3 Interpretation of results................................................................................................ 63 10 ON-SITE DELAY ANALYSIS ........................................................................................... 63 10.1 General ........................................................................................................................ 63 10.2 Data analysis................................................................................................................. 63 10.3 Interpretation of results 63 11. AVAILABILITY ANALYSIS............................................................................................... 65 11.1 General ........................................................................................................................ 65 11.2 Data analysis................................................................................................................. 67 11.3 Interpretation of results.............................................................................................. 68
ANNEXES ANNEX A (RECOMMENDED) RADAR SENSOR TECHNICAL PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS
Page vi
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
ANNEX B (INFORMATIVE) RADAR SENSOR DETAILED TECHNICAL PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS ANNEX C (RECOMMENDED) FLIGHT TESTING METHODS ANNEX D (RECOMMENDED) METHOD TO ASSES THE RESOLUTION CAPABILITIES OF RADAR SENSORS
Edition 0.1
Page vii
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
FOREWORD 1. Responsible Body This Standard has been developed and is maintained by the Surveillance Subgroup on Standards (SSGS). 2. EATCHIP Work Programme Document This Standard is identified as deliverable O1 in the EATCHIP Work Programme Document (EWPD), Surveillance Domain, Executive Task O1, Specialist Task 03. 3. 3.1 3.2 4. Approval of the Standard This Standard is adopted in accordance with the procedures outlined in the Directives for EUROCONTROL Standardisation Ref OO2 - 2 - 93. This Standard becomes effective upon adoption by the Permanent Commission of EUROCONTROL. Technical Corrigenda and Amendments This Standard is kept under review by the responsible body who, when changes or corrections are necessary, will prepare the required amendments or technical corrigenda. The procedure for the maintenance of this Standard is laid down in the Directives for the Uniform Drafting and Presentation of EUROCONTROL Standard Documents Ref OO 1 - 1 - 92. 5. 5.1 5.2 Editorial Conventions The format of this Standard complies with the Directives for the Uniform Drafting and Presentation of EUROCONTROL Standard Documents. The following practice has been adhered to in order to indicate at a glance the status of each statement. Normative Elements have been printed in light face roman text; Recommended Elements have been printed in light face italics, the status being indicated by the prefix Recommendation. 5.3 The following editorial practice has been followed in the writing of specifications: for Normative Elements the operative verb shall is used; for Recommended Elements the operative verb should is used
Edition 0.1
Page 1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
5.4
Any information which is essential to the understanding of a particular indent will be integrated within the text as a note. It will not contain specifications and will be placed immediately after the indent to which it refers. Relationship to other Standard Documents This Standard is related to the EUROCONTROL Standard for Radar Surveillance in En-Route Airspace and Major Terminal Areas Ref OO6 - xx.
6.
7.
Status of Annexes to This Document There are four Annexes to this Part of the Standard Document, the status of each being defined as follows: Annex A Recommended; Annex B Informative; Annex C Recommended; Annex D Recommended.
8.
Language Used The underlined version of this Standard Document is in the English language.
Page 2
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
1. 1.1 1.1.1
INTRODUCTION Purpose This document constitutes the EUROCONTROL Standard concerning the methods and procedures for the Radar Sensor Performance Analysis which will apply for the verification and maintenance of Radar Surveillance systems in the frame of EATCHIP. The comprehensive and continuous radar coverage of high quality and reliability is essential for the uninterrupted provision of radar services and the application of specific radar separation standards. As an integral part of Air Traffic Management, radar positional data constitute the principal means of Surveillance of Aircraft for the efficient execution of Air Traffic Control. The EUROCONTROL Standard for Radar Surveillance specifies common criteria with the aim of achieving the optimal use of the Surveillance Function and the harmonised application of radar separation minima, in line with the relevant objectives as contained in the European Civil Aviation Conference (ECAC) En-Route Strategy for the 1990s adopted by Transport Ministers of ECAC States at Paris in April 1990 and in the EATCHIP Work Programme Document (EWPD) and the EATCHIP Convergence and Implementation Programme Document (CIPD). The EUROCONTROL Radar Sensor Performance Analysis Standard specifies methods and procedures for analysing and maintaining the performance of Radar Sensors in accordance with the EUROCONTROL Radar Surveillance Standard.
1.1.2
1.1.3
1.1.4
In accordance with the ECAC En-Route Strategy, comprehensive Radar coverage is to be completed throughout the continental ECAC area by 1996, at the latest. A common En-Route separation of 5 NM is to be implemented throughout high density traffic areas. Elsewhere En-Route separation of not more than 10 NM is to be implemented. In accordance with ECAC Strategy and its related documents (EWPD and CIPD), a common radar separation standard of 3 NM is to be implemented in major terminal areas.
1.1.5
Edition 0.1
Page 3
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
1.2 1.2.1 1.2.2
Scope This EUROCONTROL Standard specifies the methods and procedures for the performance analysis of the Radar Sensors used for Air Traffic Management. The illustration at Figure 1.1 gives an overview of the operational requirements for radar data in relation to the services to be provided within the different types of Airspace and the corresponding technical requirements of the radar system. The illustration at Figure 1.2 gives a functional overview of the radar chain. These functions can be performed using different system layouts (e.g. integration of the monoradar tracking function in the Plot Filter Combiner). The methods and procedures for the performance analysis specified within this standard are limited to the Radar Sensor. The elements involved in the Radar Sensor are Primary (PSR) and Secondary (SSR) Radar Sensors. The methods and procedures specified in this standard are not intended to verify exhaustively the performance of the Radar Sensor. Only those performance parameters which are specified in the EUROCONTROL Radar Surveillance Standard are included (ERSS). Recommended methods and procedures for the technical performance analysis of the radar sensor are specified in ANNEX A. Methods and procedures for the detailed technical performance analysis of the different elements of the Radar Sensor (i.e. antenna, receiver etc.) are specified in ANNEX B (Informative).
1.2.3
1.2.4
1.2.5
1.2.6
Page 4
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
Figure 1.1 Relationship between Airspace Types and Services, Operational Requirements and the Surveillance Equipment.
Edition 0.1
Page 5
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
Page 6
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
2. 2.1
REFERENCES The following documents and standards contain provisions which, through reference in this text, constitute provisions of this EUROCONTROL Standard. At the time of publication of this EUROCONTROL Standard Document, the editions indicated for the referenced documents and standards were valid. Any revision of the referenced ICAO Document shall be immediately taken into account to revise this EUROCONTROL Standard. Revisions of the other referenced documents shall not form part of the provisions of this EUROCONTROL Standard until they are formally reviewed and incorporated into this EUROCONTROL Standard Document. In the case of conflict between the requirements of this EUROCONTROL Standard and the contents of EUROCONTROL Standard for Radar Surveillance the Standard for Radar Surveillance shall takes precedence.
2.2
At the time of publication , the documents listed below are those that are referenced from within this Eurocontrol Standard : EUROCONTROL Standard for Radar Surveillance in En-Route Airspace and Major Terminal Areas. Edition May, 1996 ICAO Annex 5 : Units of Measurement to be used in Air and Ground Operations 4th Edition July 1979. ICAO Annex 10 : Aeronautical Telecommunications - Volume 1 4th Edition, April 1985. ICAO Document 8071 Edition March 1972.
Edition 0.1
Page 7
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
3. 3.1
DEFINITIONS, SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS Definitions For the purpose of this EUROCONTROL Standard document, the following definitions shall apply. Acceptance tests: The radar sensor performance is analysed and compared to that specified in the contract between the administration and the manufacturer. Active Reflector:. A device used in Primary Radar systems for geographical alignment and system performance checking. It generates a signal from a stationary installation with an artificial Doppler shift which ensures that a stationary target will be presented on an ATC screen after Moving Target Detection (MTD) or Moving Target Indicator (MTI) processing. Analogue: In radar terms, a signal which has not been converted into digitally encoded values, usually quantised into discrete time periods. Analogue signals are to be found at antenna and receiver level in radar systems. Analogue - to Digital Converter: A device for the conversion of analogue signals into digital values. Usually operates by sampling the analogue signal at regular time intervals and converting the measured value of the analogue sample to a digitally encoded number. Antenna (General): In the case of Radar, an electromechanical device for the concentrating of radio frequency energy into a "beam" of known and predictable direction. An antenna can be used for the "concentrating" of energy transmitted from or received at the antenna. Typically the beam shape in either the transmit or receive directions shall be very similar (assuming the same or similar transmitted and received frequencies and beam polarisation).The concentration of radio frequency energy may occur in both the azimuth and elevation planes. Normally, but not always, an air traffic control radar antenna is mounted upon a rotating platform such that it can scan a volumetric airspace through 360 deg of azimuth. However, static electronically scanned radar antennas also exist. Antenna (Large Vertical Aperture (LVA)): An SSR antenna comprised of a two dimensional array of radiating elements. A typical LVA consists of a number of columns, each consisting of a vertical linear array designed to produce beam shaping in the vertical plane, arranged in a horizontal linear array to produce between 2 and 3 azimuth beamwidth. Antenna (Sum and Difference): An antenna which has been electrically split into 2 halves. The 2 half antenna outputs are added in phase at one output port (sum, ) and added in anti phase at a second output port (difference, ) to produce output signals which are sensitive to the azimuth angle of arrival of
Page 8
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
received signals, enabling an Off Boresigth Angle for the signal source to be obtained. Antenna (Reflector): In the case of a reflector antenna the beam is produced by a method analogous to optics. In most cases the "reflector" surface of the antenna (which may be solid metal, "metalized" synthetic materials or metal mesh) is illuminated by a radio frequency source (e.g. a radio-frequency "horn" assembly). The dimensions of the reflector antenna both in the horizontal and vertical plane, together with the characteristics of the illuminating source, determine the shape and magnitude of the radar beam produced. Antenna Elevation (Tilt): Angle between the direction of maximum gain of the antenna and the tangent to the surface of the earth at the location of the antenna. A distinction is sometimes made between electronic (radio signal) and mechanical tilt, especially for Large Vertical Antennae (LVA) for SSR. In this case the mechanical tilt may be zero when the antenna is radiating at its nominal design value for electronic tilt, which may typically be 3 deg.. Anntenna (Omni-Directional): Antenna with a circular radiation pattern in the horizontal plane. In earlier ISLS systems often used for transmitting the P2 pulse and sometimes also for transmission of the P1 pulse (I2SLS). Modern omni-directional antennae for SSR use, include a "notch" about the peak of the control pattern. Availability requirements (ERSS): The availability requirements are expressed by: maximum outage time due to any given failure; cumulative outage time due to all failures over a period of one year; outage time due to scheduled actions. Azimuth: The angle between North (normally true North) and a radar target, measured from the sensor site. Azimuth Count (or change) Pulses (ACPs): The output pulses of the incremental azimuth measuring device fitted to the radar antenna turning platform (turning gear). The encoding device may give its output in serial or parallel form, but typically provides 4096 pulses (12 bit encoding), 16 384 pulses (14 bit encoding) or 65 536 pulses (16 bit encoding) in serial form per 360 of azimuth rotation. Azimuth Extension (Run length, delta theta): The azimuth increment, often expressed as a number of ACPs, from detection of the leading edge of a radar plot to detection of the trailing edge of that plot, in a digital plot extractor system.
Edition 0.1
Page 9
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
Back Lobe: A lobe of radiated energy to the rear of an antenna (180 in azimuth with respect to the main lobe). Beam Width: The angle subtended (either in azimuth or elevation) at the halfpower points (3 dB below maximum) of the main beam of an antenna. Boresight: The main lobe electrical (radio) axis of an antenna.
Cancellation Ratio: The clutter to noise ratio at the output of a processor divided by the clutter to noise ratio at the input of a processor. The processor may be MTI, MTD or ASP. The cancellation ratio is averaged over all target speeds. Chaining: A process of linking together radar target reports (plots and tracks) and other information relating to one particular object. Clutter: A general term used for interfering reflections of radio energy in PSR. There can be a number of different types of clutter: ground clutter (generally non-moving); weather clutter (rain, snow, etc.); sea clutter; angel clutter (slow moving flocks of birds and anomalous propagation conditions). Code: A combination of data bits contained in signals transmitted by an SSR Transponder in reply to an SSR Interrogator. Code Train: The sequence of bracket (framing) and code pulses in an SSR Mode A or Mode C reply. Co-located: An expression used for antennas which are at the same physical location, but may be on-mounted, back-to-back mounted, etc., and may use a common turning gear. Combination Criteria: The criteria with respect to azimuth and range coincidence which a primary radar plot and an SSR plot must meet to be considered to have come from the same aircraft and therefore to be able to be combined. Commissioning: The radar sensor performance is analysed in order to define the airspace volume where the radar sensor can provide radar services according to local operational requirements. Combined target report: A target report detected by both PSR and SSR and such that both detections were sufficiently adjacent to be combined into one target report.
Page 10
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
Control Antenna: An SSR antenna has a polar diagram which is designed to "cover" the sidelobes of the main interrogating antenna. It is used to radiate a control pulse which, if it exceeds in amplitude the associated interrogation signal at the input to the transponder, will cause the transponder to inhibit responses to the interrogation pulses. Modern SSR antenna have the control elements built into the main array. The control antenna is also known as the SLS (Sidelobe Suppression) antenna. Control Pattern: This is the polar diagram of the Control Antenna discussed above. Modern integrated SSR antennae have a "modified cardioid" beamshape. Control Pulse: A pulse (P2 for Modes A and C, P5 for Mode S), transmitted in accordance with ICAO Annex 10 recommendations, by the ground equipment (SSR Interrogator) in order to ensure sidelobe suppression at transponder level. Cone of Silence: A gap in coverage above a radar due to the limitations of the antenna performance at high elevation angles. Coverage: Radar Sensor coverage is the three dimensional volume of Airspace within which the specified performance and availability requirements are satisfied . Coverage Measurement Volume (CMV): The coverage measurement volume is defined as the three dimensional volume of Airspace within which the performance and availability requirements will be analysed during a particular measurement campaign. Correlated Tracks: Tracks which have been correlated with a flight plan (sometimes this term applies only to tracks for which the Mode A code has been correlated with a Call Sign in the Code/Call-Sign list i.e. Flight Plan Association). Cosecant - Squared Antenna: An antenna pattern for which the gain is proportional to the square of the cosecant of the elevation angle. This results in an approximately constant signal, as a function of range, from an aircraft at constant flight level. Dead Time: The period of time during which a SSR transponder is inhibited from receiving signals after a valid interrogation is received and a reply transmitted. The term is also used to describe the time after the normal range for returns and before the next transmission of a an interrogator or from a primary radar system. Defruiting: A process by which aircraft replies accepted by the InterrogatorResponsor are tested by means of storage and a comparator for synchronism with the interrogation-repetition frequency. Only replies which are in synchronism (correlate on a repeated basis in range) will be output from the defruiter. Other replies are rejected as "fruit" or false.
Edition 0.1
Page 11
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
Degarbling: The process of separating (and possibly validating) garbled SSR replies. See also Garbling. Difference Pattern: The receive (1090 MHz) characteristic of a monopulse SSR antenna, obtained by connecting together in anti phase the signals (replies) received by two partial antennas. The difference pattern has a minimum in the main radiation direction of the antenna, and an amplitude and phase characteristic which varies as a function of angle of arrival of the received signal. Used in conjunction with the sum output of the antenna, it enables the off boresight angle to be found. Doppler Speed: The radial (to the radar sensor) velocity of a target (aircraft) or of a clutter source (false alarm) measured from its Doppler frequency shift in a received primary radar return. Downlink: Associated with signals transmitted on the 1090 MHz reply frequency channel. Error: Error is the difference between the measured value (observed) and the reference value (actual)of a physical quantity. The radar errors in position are divided to: a) systematic or bias errors which are represented by fixed values: slant range bias (at zero range); slant range gain ( variation of range bias proportional to range); azimuth bias. b) random errors which are represented by standard deviations: slant range random error; azimuth random error. For the general case the important parameters for a Sensor are the RMS errors and not the st. dev. . This is since the std. dev. is the RMS error with a mean of zero, i.e. the systematic errors are removed. ERP: Abbreviation for Effective Radiated Power. It is the Transmitted Power enhanced by the gain of the antenna less the losses of cables, rotary joints etc. False Plot: A radar plot report (PSR, SSR or combined plot) which does not correspond to the actual position of a real aircraft (target), within certain limits. Flight Level: The vertical distance above mean sea level when referenced to standard pressure setting of 1 013.25 hectopascals.
Page 12
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
Framing Pulses: The pulses which "frame" the data pulses (code) of SSR Mode A and C replies (described as F1 and F2 respectively). Also known as "bracket pulses". Fringe Envelope: The Fringe envelope is the intersection of the vertical plane passing from the Radar Sensor and the actual coverage. It defines the limits within which the system satisfies the specified performance and availability requirements. Fruit: Unwanted SSR replies received by an interrogator, which have been triggered by other SSR interrogators. Fruit is the acronym of False Replies Unsynchronized in Time or False Replies Unsynchronized to Interrogator Transmission. Garbling: A term applied to the overlapping in range and/or azimuth of two or more SSR replies so that the pulse positions of one reply fall close to or overlap the pulse positions of another reply, thereby making the decoding of reply data prone to error. Gain (of Antenna): A measure for the antenna of the increased radiation intensity radiated in a particular direction as compared with the radiation intensity that would have been radiated from an isotropic antenna with the same power input (expressed in dB). Hit: A hit denotes the reception by the aircraft equipment (transponder) of one usable set of interrogation pulses as evidenced by a reply code return, (i.e. receipt of 2 interrogation pulses and 1 control pulse). Horizontal Polar Diagram (HPD): This is a polar plot of the antenna's radiation pattern taken in the horizontal plane. I and Q Channels: The In-phase and Quadrature channels of a Moving Target Indicator (MTI) or Moving Target Detection (MTD) equipment used for the extraction of phase and amplitude information of the received signal. In older systems these channels were processed separately to avoid blind phases. Improved Interrogation Sidelobe Suppression (I2SLS):A technique where by interrogation pulse P1 is transmitted via both the main beam and the control beam of the SSR antenna, such that a transponder in a sidelobe direction more reliably receives a P1-P2 pulse pair thus suppressing the reply. Interlace: A repeating series of SSR interrogation modes. The interlace pattern may be determined either on a p.r.p. (pulse-repetition period) to p.r.p. basis or on an antenna rotation to antenna rotation basis. It may also be made on a combined p.r.p./antenna basis.
Edition 0.1
Page 13
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
Interleave: The condition where two or more pulse trains become superimposed in time such that their pulse time spacing can be distinguished and the correct codes established. Interrogator Repetition Frequency (IRF): See also Pulse Repetition Frequency; Average number of interrogations per second transmitted by the radar. Interrogation Side Lobe Suppression (ISLS): A method of preventing transponder replies to interrogations transmitted through the ground antenna sidelobes. The method involves a comparison of the amplitude of the first interrogation pulse (P1) of the interrogation with the amplitude of the control pulse (P2). Interrogator-Responsor: The ground based combined transmitter-receiver element of an SSR system. Leading Edge (Pulse): Front edge of a pulse.
Lobing (Antenna pattern): Due to the process of interference of two waves, one direct and one reflected, differences in phases may cause larger or smaller amplitudes than expected for free space, causing differences in signal amplitudes measured position of large numbers of dB's. This process is called lobing. Mode: The coding of SSR Interrogation transmissions according to ICAO Annex 10 recommendations. Modes of interrogation are determined by the relative spacing of a sequence of transmitted pulses. Mode A and Mode C interrogators use the following spacings between the P1-P3 pulse pair: Mode 3/A : 8 0.2 microseconds; Mode C : 21 0.2 microseconds. Mode of flight or MOF (General): An aircraft state of motion, characterized by its Transversal and Longitudinal Accelerations. Examples are Left Turn, Right Turn, Climbing/Descending state, Uniform Motion, etc. MOFs are used as input classes in the evaluation system -particularly for accuracy analysis. The classification of Modes-of-Flight (MOF) concerns modes in three directions transversal modes, longitudinal modes and vertical modes. Within these classes the following aircraft motions shall be distinguished:
Transversal modes: left expedite turn; left standard turn;
Page 14
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
uniform motion; slow change of course; right expedite turn; right standard turn. ii. Longitudinal modes: uniform motion; slow speed changes; typical and fast speed changes. iii. Vertical modes: altitude hold or slow altitude change; typical or fast altitude change. Figures 3.1. and 3.2. represent the MOF classification in the horizontal and vertical plane -respectively. The duration of a mode of flight segment (i.e. a part of the flight where one particular MOF prevails) depends on the particular MOF. This aspect is not covered in both figures. Mode of flight (Applicable): For the evaluation of a tracker the following more simplified subdivision shall be used: i. Transversal: a. Constant Course; b. Intentional Right Turn; c. Intentional Left Turn. ii. Longitudinal: d. Constant Ground Speed; e. Intentionally Increasing Ground Speed; f. Intentionally Decreasing Ground Speed. iii. Vertical: g. Level Flight;
Edition 0.1
Page 15
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
h. Climb; i. Descent; Monopulse: A technique used for determination of the angle of arrival of a single pulse, or reply within an antenna beamwidth. The angle-of-arrival is determined by means of a processor using the replies received through the sum and difference patterns of the antenna. The monopulse technique is generally termed "monopulse direction finding" and is a very important technique for SSR in modern ATC. Moving Target Indicator (MTI): A primary radar filtering device designed to reject fixed clutter and pass moving target on the basis of their Doppler shift. Or more generally a prewhitening filter that reduces the fixed clutter below the white noise level.. Moving Target Detector (MTD): A technique for achieving fixed and moving clutter rejection by a cascade of digital MTI and Pulse Doppler Filters. Multipath: Interference and distortion due to the presence of more than one path between transmitter and receiver. See also reflections. Nautical Mile (NM): A measure used in navigation. The unit is equal to 1852 m. Noise Factor : A figure defined for a receiver as the ratio of the noise at the output of the practical receiver and the noise output of an ideal receiver at standard temperature T0 (290 K). The noise factor is in practice defined as the Signal-to-Noise ratio at the input divided by the Signal-to-Noise ratio at the output of a receiver. North Message: Special message(s) generated by a plot extractor to indicate the passage of the antenna boresight bearing through North. Object: A combination of radar targets and related information which are correlated in time and space. Off Boresight Angle (OBA): In monopulse SSR, the angle (calculated by the OBA processor) by which a target is off (away from) the boresight (see definition), within the beamwidth of the antenna. On-site processing delay (ERSS): The time expressed in seconds between the moment a radar target for a given aircraft is detected and the moment when the corresponding report starts to be transmitted. Operational Coverage Volume.(OCV): The airspace volume defined during the site commissioning of the Radar Sensor and in which radar services can be provided according to the local operational requirements.
Page 16
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
Over-Interrogation: Interference in the operation of a secondary radar system due to the fact that the number of interrogations exceeds the capacity of the ttransponder (a preset value). The action of the transponder is an automatic reduction in transponder receiver sensitivity. Overall (ERSS): When used means that the measurement method shall be applied without geographical restrictions to the whole sample of the recorded data obtained from opportunity traffic. This sample shall be representative of the whole population of aircraft to which air traffic services are provided irrespective of radar cross sections and clutter environments for PSR sensors, and irrespective of transponder deficiencies for SSR sensors . Performance requirements (ERSS): The performance requirements are divided into detection and quality requirements . Detection requirements: The detection requirements are expressed by the: target position detection; false target reports; multiple target reports; code detection . Quality requirements: The quality requirements are expressed by the: positional accuracy; false code information; resolution . Plot: A target report resulting from digital integration of the received echoes (PSR) or replies (SSR) inside the antenna beamwidth. The PSR report contains range and bearing information whereas the SSR report contains in addition Mode 3/A identity code and the Mode C decoded altimeter height value. Plot Combiner: A signal processing device for the combination of PSR and SSR data ascertained as having originated from the same target (aircraft). Targets failing to meet pre-defined combination criteria will be output as "PSR only" or "SSR only" plots in place of "combined plots". Plot Extractor: A signal processing equipment, which applies digital integration techniques to detect and resolve , depending upon design , either PSR reflected returns or SSR transponder replies to provide a single message output for each aircraft in the OCV. Both PSR and SSR plot extractors provide range and bearing of the aircraft in the plot output messages whereas SSR
Edition 0.1
Page 17
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
plot extractors also include Mode 3/A identity code and the Mode C decoded altimeter height value. Plot Filter: A signal processing device which has the function to filter out radar plot data which can be positively identified as non aircraft returns by a scan-to-scan correlation process. Plot Run Length: The number of ACPs between the first and last detection of a plot presence in a sliding window plot extractor. Polar Diagrams: Horizontal or vertical radiation diagram for a radar antenna, whereby the relative gain is plotted as a function of the relative azimuth (Horizontal Polar Diagram, HPD) or as a function of the relative elevation angle (Vertical Polar Diagram, VPD) generally with respect to the main beam axis). Polarization: Direction of the electrical field vector of radiated radar energy with respect to a plane tangential to the earth (horizontal, vertical, left-hand circular, right-hand circular, elliptical, etc.). Polished plots: Target reports at the output of the plot filter which rejects false targets coming from fruit, reflections, etc. Alternatively they are called filtered plots. Primary Surveillance Radar (PR or PSR): A radar which detects presence of a target based on reflected radar energy from that target. Probability of target (position) Detection (Pd): Probability of detection is the probability that for a given aircraft, at each scan a radar target report with positional data is produced. Probability of False Alarm (Pfa): For a long observation period, the actual number of detected false alarms divided by the theoretical maximum number of detections.. Pulse Length: The time between the 50 % amplitude points on the leading and trailing edges of a pulse. Also known as Pulse Width Pulse Repetition Frequency (p.r.f.): Also known as Pulse Recurrency Frequency. It is the average number of pulses/interrogations per second transmitted by the radar (See Stagger). Pulse Train: The sequence of framing and code pulses in the coded SSR reply. Radar Data Processing System (RDPS): A sub-system of an ATC centre which processes the incoming radar data (from one or more radar data sources) and prepares it for display.
Page 18
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
Radar Cross Section (RCS) : The area intercepting that amount of power which, when scattered equally in all directions, produces an echo at the radar equal to that from the target. Radial: A straight line of constant azimuth from the radar sensor site. A radial test flight would follow such a line. Receiver Side Lobe Suppression (RSLS): A method, using two (or more) receivers to suppress aircraft replies which have been received via sidelobes of the main beam of the antenna. Reflections: Unwanted signals (PSR or SSR) in the uplink and/or downlink paths resulting in erroneous replies entering the data processing system. Typical reflectors are ground obstructions such as aircraft hangars, buildings, towers and adjacent hills or mountains. Reply: The pulse train received at a SSR ground station as a result of successful SSR interrogation. Ring-Around: The continuous reception of aircraft replies to interrogations by the sidelobes of the ground antenna. This normally occurs only at short ranges and high elevation angles, usually due to the nonexistence of a sidelobe suppression mechanism or the improper functioning of this mechanism at either the interrogator or the transponder side. Round Reliability: The probability that when a SSR transmission is made that a correct reply is received. Screening: When the shape of the terrain or certain objects prevent the detection of targets in certain parts of the airspace, one speaks about screening of the parts of the airspace concerned. Second-Time Around Targets (STAT): Target beyond that associated with a basic PRF interval. returns from ranges
Sensitivity Time Control (STC): A circuit which controls the gain of a radar receiver, allowing it to rise from an initial preset value to maximum at a predetermined rate to compensate for the decrease in received signal strength as range increases. This can also be a dynamical threshold operation with fixed gain receivers, such that the threshold below which signals are discarded decreases with range. Also known as GTC(gain time control). Sidelobes (Antenna): Lobes of the radiation pattern of an antenna, which are not part of the main or principal beam. Radar systems can have sufficient sensitivity via sidelobes for successful detection of aircraft (particularly for SSR, but also for PSR). Special precautions are necessary to protect against these false plots. Sidelobe Suppression (SLS): A mechanism in an SSR transponder actuated by the transmission (radiation) of a Control Pulse (P2 or P5) of
Edition 0.1
Page 19
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
amplitude greater than the antenna sidelobe signals in space, which will enable the transponder to prevent itself from replying to the sidelobe interrogation signals. Split Plot(s): A generation of two plots by a radar extraction system for the same target for one passage of the antenna main-beam through the target. Spurious Plots(s): Unwanted radar plot not corresponding directly with an aircraft position (generally applied for SSR). Stagger (p.r.f.): Deliberate, controlled variation of the p.r.f. of a PSR to overcome blind speeds and decorrelate second time around replies. Deliberate, controlled variation of the p.r.f. of the SSR to prevent aircraft plots due to second-time around replies, or synchronous fruit. Sum Pattern: Normal radiation pattern for the main directional beam of an antenna. Contrasts with the "difference-pattern", where a part of the radiating elements of the antenna are switched in anti-phase to produce signals proportional to the amount by which the source is off the boresight of the sum pattern. Target report: A digital message which depending on the filtering function applied can be either polished / filtered plot or track. Track: A target report resulting from the correlation, by a special algorithm (tracking) of a succession of radar reported positions for one aircraft. The report normally contains smoothed position and speed vector information. Transponder: A unit which transmits a response signal on receiving an SSR interrogation. The expression is a derivative of the words transmitter and responder. Time stamp: The addition of the time information -in the relevant fieldin the target report (plot or track). In the ASTERIX the time information is coded in two octets with Least Significant Bit (LSB) equal to 1/128 seconds. Time stamp error: Time stamp error is the constant time difference between the time system used for plot detection time stamping and a common reference time. Validation : The process of determining whether the requirements for a system or component are complete and correct , the product of each development phase fulfil the requirements or conditions imposed by the previous phase , and the final system or component complies with specified requirements.
Page 20
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
Figure 3.1 Horizontal Mode of flight.
Edition 0.1
Page 21
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
Figure 3.2 Vertical Mode of Flight
Page 22
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
3.2
Symbols and abbreviations For the purposes of this EUROCONTROL Standard document, the following are used: ACP ATC ATCC ATS BITE CFAR CMB CMTP CMV DGPS DPE EATCHIP EGNOS ERP ERSS FAT FRUIT GNSS GTC GPS GLONASS HPD ICAO IISLS IF IRF I/O ISLS LVA MDS MOF MTD MTI MTPA MSSR OCV OBA PAT Pd Pfa Pcd Pcv PRF Azimuth Change Pulse Air Traffic Control Air Traffic Control Centre Air Traffic Services Built-In Test Equipment Constant False Alarm Rate Combined (PSR and SSR) Common Medium-Term Plan Coverage Measurement Volume Differential Global Positioning System Digital Plot Extractor European Air Traffic Control Harmonization and Integration Programme European Geostationary Orbit System Effective Radiated Power EUROCONTROL Radar Surveillance Standard Factory Acceptance Tests False Replies Unsynchronised In Time Global Navigation Satellite System Gain Time Control Global Positioning System (US GNSS system) Global Navigation Satellite System (CIS GNSS system) Horizontal Polar Diagram International Civil Aviation Organisation Improved Interrogation Side Lobe Suppression Intermediate Frequency Interrogation Repetition Frequency Input/Output Interrogation Sidelobe Suppression Large Vertical Aperture Minimum Detectable Signal Mode Of Flight Moving Target Detection Moving Target Indicator Mobile Transponder Performance Analyser Monopulse Surveillance Secondary System Operational Coverage Volume Off Boresight Angle Provisional Acceptance Tests Probability of Position Detection Probability of False Alarm Probability of Code Detection Probability of Code Validation Pulse Repetition Frequency
Edition 0.1
Page 23
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
PRI PRP PSR RASS RCS RDPS RF RSLS RSS RFM RMCS RTQC/A SAT SLS SPAS SSR STAT STCA STC VPD VSWR
Pulse Repetition Interval Pulse Repetition Period Primary Surveillance Radar (also 'PR') Radar Analysis Support System Radar Cross Section Radar Data Processing System Radio Frequency Receiver Side Lobe Suppression Radar Separation Standard Remote Field Monitor Remote Monitoring and Control System Real Time Quality Control/Assessment Site Acceptance Tests Side Lobe Suppression Sensor Performance Analysis Standard Secondary Surveillance Radar Second Time Around Target Short Term Conflict Alert Sensitivity Time Control Vertical Polar Diagram Voltage Standing Wave Ratio
Page 24
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
4 4.1
RADAR SENSOR PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS General This standard specifies a multilevel approach for the performance analysis of surveillance radar sensors (PSR/SSR). The level applied depends on the objectives of the analysis as follows: 4.1.1 First level: Overall performance analysis This analysis is to assess the quality of the information, provided by the radar sensor, by measuring the overall performance of the sensor against the performance parameter reference values specified in the EUROCONTROL Surveillance Standard and this is the objective of this document. 4.1.2 Second level: Technical performance analysis. This analysis is the in depth evaluation of the radar sensor performance which shall result either in the definition of the coverage (commissioning) or in the identification of the reasons of possible performance degradation (ANNEX A). 4.1.3 Third level: Detailed technical performance analysis. This analysis is the evaluation, of the technical performance, of the individual radar sensor components e.g. antenna, receiver, etc.(ANNEX B).
4.1.4
The first level of testing shall be applied initially upon the completion of the second level of testing during system / sensor commissioning leading to definition of the OCV, and then at regular intervals to ensure that the system / sensor continues to meet the requirements of the EUROCONTROL Radar Surveillance Standard (Quality Control). The second level of testing shall be applied initially during commissioning of the system / sensor leading to definition of the OCV and then on subsequent occasions if the first level of testing indicates a failure to meet the stated performance requirements. The third level of testing shall be applied in order to supplement the first and second levels of testing when the system / sensor has been found to be failing to meet the stated performance requirements. All three levels of testing shall also be applied, as appropriate, and to a suitable level , in the following cases:
Edition 0.1
Page 25
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
Overall System F.A.T. S.A.T. (P.A.T) Commissioning RTQA/Maintenance Problem investigation Post modifications
Technical (ANNEX A) System C C C C C
Detailed Technical (ANNEX B) Sub-System C C
C C C
C C
Table 1: Relation of Evaluation Usage to SPAS sections and System 4.2 Analysis method The Radar Sensor performance analysis shall be based on the computer based analysis of recorded data at the output of the sensor / input of the central radar data processing system. Chaining and trajectory reconstitution algorithms shall be applied to the data, in order to evaluate the performance parameters, of the radar sensor under test. 4.3 Procedure The procedure for the analysis shall be as follows: 4.3.1 Preparation for the analysis Before the collection of the data the following shall be done : 4.3.1.1 Definition of the Coverage Measurement Volume For the overall performance analysis the CMV shall be the Operational Coverage Volume OCV(defined during site commissioning see ANNEX A ). 4.3.1.2 Recording of the radar sensor status To facilitate the comparison of the results of different recordings the status of the radar sensor during the recording shall be known. The person responsible for the analysis shall ensure that at least the radar sensor parameters listed below have been recorded and are up to date at the time of the data collection.Additional system parameters should be traceable through the maintenance records. 4.3.1.2.1 Primary radar sensor (PSR ). PARAMETERS. Antenna tilt R.P.M Rotations Per Minute (Antenna) UNITS / REMARKS. Deg. rotations / minute.
Page 26
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
P.R.F Pulse repetition Frequency Staggering ratio/pattern Instrumented range M.T.I range Beam switching Power
Hz = 1/ sec.
dimensionless/Hz. NM . NM (if applicable). azimuth-range pattern. KWs-The reading from the power meter of the radar sensor. Noise figure dB-the reading from the noise figure indication meter. Receiver sensitivity The relative indication from the equipment's B.I.T.E., or recent measurement. M.T.D / M.T.I The indication from the B.I.T.E (internal tests.), or recent measurement. Plot extractor parameters / The reading from the B.I.T.E ., or recent status measurement. Plot filter / combiner parameters The reading from the B.I.T.E ., or recent / status measurement. 4.3.1.2.2 Secondary radar sensor (SSR ). PARAMETERS Antenna tilt R.P.M P.R.F Staggering ratio / pattern Instrumented range Power Mode interlace pattern / ISLS/ IISLS / RSLS Receiver sensitivity Plot extractor parameters / status Plot filter combiner parameters / status 4.3.2 UNITS / REMARKS Deg. rotations / minute. Hz. dimensionless/Hz. NM. KWs The reading from the powermeter of the radar or the relative indication 3/A,C,1.2 / Yes(No) / Yes (No) / Yes (No). The relative indication from the B.I.T.E ., or recent measurement. The reading from the B.I.T.E ., or recent measurement. The reading from the B.I.T.E ., or recent measurement.
Data Collection The person responsible for the evaluation shall ensure that the recording contains sufficient quantity and quality of data for the measurements to be performed. The recorded data shall comprise: polished/filtered primary target reports; polished/filtered secondary target reports; polished/filtered combined target reports; and additional messages as specified in the table below according to analysis objectives:
Edition 0.1
Page 27
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
Special messages Multilevel recordings
Overall Recommended Recommended
Technical Yes Recommended
Detailed Technical Yes Yes
NOTES 1. Special messages are PSR and SSR RTQC messages, overload indications, North crossing, etc. Special messages are present on the normal operational output and therefore recorded together with the target reports. The analysis of such messages is recommended since it can yield useful information about the changes in status of the Sensor(s). 2. Multilevel recordings at different I/O interfaces of the radar sensor. The target reports used for analysis shall comprise: Overall Performance Technical Performance Detailed Technical Performance Opportunity Traffic Opportunity Traffic, Special Test Flights Opportunity Traffic, Special Test Flights, Simulated Data
The following characteristics shall be used for judging acceptability of a recording for use in an evaluation of the overall performance. It may be necessary to adjust the recording parameter values to obtain sufficient quantity of data for reliable analysis results.. 4.3.2.1 Recording. High Density Traffic Areas (en-route or major TMA) 1 hour, Medium Density Traffic Areas - 2 hours, Low Density Traffic Areas - 4 hours Probability of Detection - 200 chains >5 minutes per chain Accuracy Analyses - 150 chains Systematic Error Estimation -200 chains >5 minutes duration in cover of > 2 radars. Normal Operational configuration for prevailing traffic and environment. No Anoprop conditions. or heavy Angel Activity or abnormal conditions (e.g. jamming, interference) should be used to verify PSR / SSR overall performance. For the site commissioning, of the Primary Radar Sensor, data should be collected, under all seasonal conditions and if applicable ,also under anomalouspropagation periods (ANAPROP ).
Minimum Duration
Minimum Quantity of Data
System Configuration Environment, Weather
Page 28
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
Traffic
Recording shall be made in Peak Traffic times if possible.
4.3.2.2
Data Quality Recorded quality
>99% of recorded data shall be correctly recorded and available for chaining. Recording with excessive data transmission errors shall not be used for analysis.
Recommendations 1) General. The reliability of the evaluation results is directly linked to the quantity and quality of the recorded data. The quantity of data necessary for the evaluation is dependant on the purpose of the evaluation - For the purpose of this standard the evaluation objective is the Overall Performance Analysis of the sensor for the parameters defined in the EUROCONTROL Surveillance Standard. The analysis methods described in this standard are based on the concept of chains (chained target reports) which may be non-air traffic information clultter, fruit, etc. To obtain consistent and reliable evaluation results over a period of time it is important that the chains used for analyses are chosen carefully and consistently. The types of chain chosen must be representative of the air traffic in the airspace covered by the sensor. For example; Probability of Detection results based on chains of which 60% were correlated clutter would not be considered reliable. 2) Data Collection Duration. The target report sample size is determined by the parameters to be measured. The standard recommends that one data collection should serve for all the parameter measurements in a campaign. Therefore the data collection duration should be adapted to provide sufficient data for the analyses to be carried out. The general rule is - the more (longer) the better within the limitations of the analysis system and time available. Since analysis system resources and time are often limited and traffic patterns irregular, the following recommendations should allow a reliable set of results to be obtained for most sensors. To estimate the duration one of the principle parameters may be considered; Probability of Detection, Systematic Errors (multi-radar systems) or accuracy. The following example should clarify the principle: Probability of Detection: For a sensor with 160NM maximum range, a 6 second scan rate and an average plots/scan rate of 50 SSR plots. Assume that 95% of the SSR plots are from real targets (47 plots per scan). To obtain the sample size for the overall Detection Calculation the required number of chains (200 of at least 5 minutes) requires (200 / 47) * 5 minutes = 25 minutes of recording. If the coverage space is divided into Range/Azimuth/Height cells of say 20NM x 22.5 degrees x 50 FL then it is more useful to try to record at least two chains per cell. In this case the required duration can be linked to the sample size required for each cell - say 20 target reports per cell. Thus we get the required sample size:
Edition 0.1
Page 29
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
SampleSize =
MaxRange NAzimuthCells NHeightCells NPlotsPerCell RangeCellSize
For our radar - assuming 75% of cells have data the sample size is:
160 360 700 20 75% = 30240 plots 20 20 50 30240 60 150minutes 47 6
Thus for 47 plots per scan the duration is:
Therefore a 2 1/2 hour recording should yield sufficient data for the Pd calculations 4.3.3 Data Analysis The analysis of the Radar Sensor performance PSR or SSR shall result in the estimation of the performance parameters specified in the EUROCONTROL Radar Surveillance Standard. The analysis methods are described in the following sections. The performance parameters are divided into : Primary sensor performance parameters (sections 5 and 6); Secondary sensor performance parameters (sections 7 and 8); PSR/SSR Data Combining (section 9); On-Site Processing Delay (section 10); Availability (section 11).
Recommendation. When opportunity traffic is used for the performance analysis the data should conform to the following criteria with regard to chaining , chain characteristics and position reconstruction : i) Chaining. The following criteria may be used to judge if chaining is sufficient before proceeding with the analyses. The criteria are to be applied to each sensor to be measured: >90% of recorded data shall be chained. >70% of chains are more than 5 minutes duration. Allowing 5% of chains terminating within 5 minutes of start and beginning within 5 minutes of end of recording. <10% of chained data are in resolution state no test target chains are used in the analysis
Page 30
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
The 5 minute rule is intended to promote the concept that the performance of the sensor can only be reliably measured when both the sensor and the measurement tool are in stable condition. ii)Position Reconstruction.
Reconstruction Errors should be excluded from analysis using trajectory reconstruction filtering . Trajectory reconstruction filtering should be based on the concept of sampling the generated reference trajectory (a posteriori) at short intervals (e.g. 1 sec) along the trajectory path and comparing the changes in the trajectorys adjacent velocity components. These changes should be used in order to compute either the trajectorys acceleration or turn rate between the sampling intervals. These terms should then be compared against a user supplied threshold (e.g. 1g or 10 deg./s) in order to reject those trajectories where the behaviour reflects either a highly manoeuvring target (e.g. high performance military) or a trajectory reconstruction problem with a civil en-route target. The principle is to restrict the analysis to using stable trajectories exhibiting civil aircraft characteristics. An additional filtering criterion which should be used in conjunction with the trajectory filter is minimum ground speed (e.g. 50 m/s) 4.4 Interpretation of results The results of the overall performance analysis shall be interpreted to conform with the figures for these performance parameters in the EUROCONTROL Radar Surveillance Standard. The results shall not be considered conformant if in comparison they are worse than the corresponding value specified in the EUROCONTROL Radar Surveillance Standard. Recommendation. In the event that the results are not conformant further investigation should be undertaken, as described in ANNEX A or /and ANNEX B.
Edition 0.1
Page 31
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
5.
PRIMARY SENSOR DETECTION PERFORMANCE PARAMETERS ANALYSIS General The detection performance parameters of a Primary(PSR) sensor are: Probability of target position detection; False target reports rate.
5.1
5.2
5.2.1
Probability of target position detection

Data analysis For the estimation, of the probability of the target position detection the recorded primary and combined target reports (at the output of the radar sensor) shall first be chained. The chaining function shall associate each target report to one and only one trajectory, identified by an aircraft number. With this association the number of the expected target reports inside the CMV can be calculated. The recorded target reports shall come from opportunity traffic except the case of heavy ground clutter environment in which the target reports shall come from test flights. The Pd measurement shall be Sensor performance based but if multi-radar information is available, it shall be used to establish whether a target is present in the CMV of the Radar sensor being analysed. In a monoradar evaluation the expected number of target reports is taken to be the number of antenna scans between the first and the last detection of the target. In the case of special test flights the expected number of target reports equals to the number of aircraft radar sensor beam encounters. The overall probability of target position detection inside the CMV shall be calculated using the formula 5.1. Extrapolated and false target reports shall be excluded from the calculation.
Pd = The number of expected primary & combined target reports

(5.1) NOTE The number of detected target reports is defined as one target report per scan per radar per target (chain ). In case of multiple plots and /or non-combination the target report which best fits the true path of the target shall be used for the Pd calculation. Recommendation. The chaining algorithm should be the Object Correlator currently under use in RASS tool or equivalent.
The number of detected primary & combined target reports
Page 32
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
5.2.2
Interpretation of results The interpretation of the results shall be to assess the quality of the target position detection compared to that specified in the EUROCONTROL Surveillance Standard.
Edition 0.1
Page 33
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
5.3 5.3.1
False target reports Data analysis. The analysis of the false target reports shall be based on the characteristics and behaviour they exhibit which differentiates them from real aircraft reports. A chaining algorithm shall be applied to the recorded primary and combined target reports at the output of the radar sensor. As a result chained data shall be derived with the history and the characteristics of each target forming a chain. Then the false target reports shall be identified by their particular characteristics which will include several of the following: they are pure primary reports except the case of ships carrying transponders; they form tracks with short life and relative low speed; they appear, in high density in ground, sea, weather and angel clutter areas; they appear in a ring, around the radar sensor (sidelobes); they appear in pairs with azimuth separation less than the antenna beamwidth (splits).
For the overall performance the average number of false target reports per antenna scan shall be estimated. Recommendation. The chaining algorithm should be the Object Correlator cur-rently under use in RASS tool, developed jointly by EUROCONTROL and FAA or equivalent. 5.3.2 Interpretation of results. The interpretation of the results shall be to assess the quality of the average number of false target reports compared to the specified value in the EUROCONTROL Surveillance Standard.
Page 34
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
6. 6.1
PRIMARY SENSOR QUALITY PERFORMANCE PARAMETERS ANALYSIS General The quality performance parameters of a Primary (PSR) sensor are: Positional accuracy; Resolution. Positional accuracy. General The positional accuracy is defined as the measure of the difference between the position of a target as reported by the sensor and the true position of the target at the time of detection. We consider the reference position of the target to be the true position. This reference position can be extracted either from data recorded at different input /output (I/O) interfaces of the radar sensor under test (e.g. .I/O between primary receiver and primary signal processor or I/O between the radar sensor and the Radar Data Processing System at the centre), or from DGPS positional data recorded on board a test flight aircraft. We assume an error model as follows: m(t)=(1+)* ref (t+ t)+ + m(t)= ref(t+ t)+ + m = measured slant range; ref = reference slant range; = slant range bias error; = slant range random error; = slant range gain error; m = measured azimuth; ref = reference azimuth; = azimuth bias; = azimuth random error; t = time stamp error; (6.1)
6.2 6.2.1
Edition 0.1
Page 35
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
The above error model is used in the MURATREC algorithm for the estimation of the systematic and random errors. The time stamping error is only applicable when sensors fusion techniques are used in the RDPS system.The error model is based in addition on the assumption that there is a range clock bias error which is represented by the parameter .The bias errors are considered as fixed values corresponding (for range and azimuth bias) to the mean random error. The accuracy of the reference position shall be at least an order of magnitude better than the accuracy of the measured position of the target reports at the radar sensors output. According to the EUROCONTROL Radar Surveillance Standards positional accuracy shall be expressed by the following categories of errors: systematic or bias errors; random errors; jumps.
The performance for systematic / bias errors shall be expressed by: slant range bias; slant range gain error; azimuth bias; time stamp error.
The performance for random errors shall be expressed by: slant range error standard deviation; azimuth error standard deviation. Jumps are target reports with errors in position three times higher or more than the standard deviation for range and azimuth
NOTE -
6.2.2
Data analysis For the estimation of the overall positional accuracy the recorded primary (at the output of the radar sensor) shall first be chained. Then a reference trajectory shall be reconstructed for each target inside the CMV and compared against the measured positions without any classification of the targets or geographical limitations.
Page 36
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
The reconstruction of the reference trajectory (for each target inside the CMV) shall be based: a) on recorded target reports when: a.1) at least part of the CMV is covered from another two radars ; NOTE The sharing of coverage is most important for systematic error measurement . At least 50% of the chained data inthe CMV should be seen by two or more sensors if the results are to be reliable. a.2) at least n trajectories can be built with a minimum of m target reference positions. Where each target reference position shall be within the reference position accuracy stated in par. 6.2.1. b)on multilevel recordings (e.g. recordings at the video level and at the plot level) when the a.1 and a.2 are not applicable. c) on DGPS data (coming from test flights) time synchronised with the recorded target reports or any other reference positioning system. The DGPS position of the target together with the corrected DGPS time should be taken as the reference . The DGPS position must be projected onto a common plane for comparison with the target report data. A stereographic projection using the same earth model as the sensor under test is best. Recommendation. The relative accuracy of the reference should be known compared to DGPS/GLONAS/EGMS system.For evaluations undertaken for EATCHIP the coordinate conversion algorithms should be those used by the RASS-C system (so-called MURATREC transformation algorithm). From the comparison of the measured position and the reference position for each target inside the CMV and assuming the model 6.1 the following errors shall be estimated: i) systematic (bias) errors: slant range bias; slant range gain error; azimuth bias; time stamp error.
The systematic errors shall be represented by fixed numbers. ii) random errors: slant range error;
Edition 0.1
Page 37
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
azimuth error.
The random errors shall be represented by the standard deviation of the distribution they follow. iii) positional jumps. Because it is not possible with the existing methods to make a distinction between positional jumps and false target reports the positional jumps are counted as false target reports. Recommendation The following algorithms should be applied: a) Object Correlator or similar for the chaining and MURATREC or similar for the trajectory reconstruction in the case that recorded multiradar data are available. MURATREC is a curve fitting technique using 4th order beta-splines currently under use in RASS tool developed jointly by EUROCONTROL and FAA. b) RASS-S or equivalent when the analysis of multilevel recordings is used. c) DGPS. 6.2.3 Interpretation of results The interpretation of the results shall be to assess the quality of the overall positional accuracy compared to that specified in the EUROCONTROL Radar Surveillance Standard.
Page 38
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
6.3 6.3.1
Resolution. General According to the EUROCONTROL Radar Surveillance Standard the resolution is the capability of the sensor to discriminate between two aircraft in close proximity and to produce target reports for both. The probability of detection is applicable to each individual aircraft. Close proximity is defined for PSR as follows: slant range azimuth 2 * nominal (compressed) pulse width; 3 * nominal 3 dB beamwidth.
These areas are shown in Figure 6.1. This diagram indicates the relative separation - as it is seen by the Radar Sensor - between the two aircraft. The origin O of the axes coincides with the position of the first aircraft. The areas are: isolated targets area is represented by area 3 ; Close proximity area is represented by areas 1 and 2 ; No resolution requirement area is represented by area 1; PSR Resolution measurement area is represented by zone 3a. The area 1 in which no resolution capabilities are required is defined by a corresponding difference in slant range <1.5 * nominal (compressed) pulse width and a difference in azimuth <1.5 * nominal 3 dB beamwidth (NM) (3) p* (3a) 2 (2) 1.5 (1)
1.5 b 3 b q*b Figure 6.1
(Deg.)
Edition 0.1
Page 39
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
= nominal (compressed) pulse width in NM; (NM) = (sec) c / 2; b = nominal 3 dB beamwidth; c = velocity of light = 161987 NM/sec; p = range inclusion factor; q = azimuth inclusion factor. Inclusion factors are used to concentrate the results on portions of chains which are in within potential resolution (close proximity). If the factors p and q are not limited then the results for area 3a will be meaningless since most of the chains in the data set will fall into this category. 6.3.2 Data analysis For the evaluation of the overall resolution of the radar sensor the probability of position detection for each individual target being in close proximity shall be estimated. For this the recorded primary and combined target reports at the output of the radar sensor shall first be chained, then a reference trajectory shall be reconstructed for each target inside the CMV. The reconstruction of the reference trajectory shall be done as it is described in par. 6.2.2 above. Using this reference trajectory information an algorithm shall sort out all the trajectory pairs with relative separation falling inside the shaded zone 3a which is defined by 6.2. |2| |p*| |3b| |q b| From this information the algorithm shall calculate the number of expected target reports with relative separation fulfilling the above (6.2). Then using chaining information the detected target reports associated to the above pairs shall be sorted out. All target reports used in the resolution analysis shall have a reference position. The overall probability of detection for an individual target in resolution shall be estimated using the following formula : (6.2)
Pd= The number of expected target reports in zone 3a

(6.3)
The number of detected target reports chained to trajectories in zone 3a
Page 40
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
6.3.3
Interpretation of results The interpretation of the results shall be to assess the quality of the resolution capability compared to that specified in the EUROCONTROL Radar Surveillance Standard.
Edition 0.1
Page 41
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
7.
SECONDARY SENSOR DETECTION PERFORMANCE PARAMETERS ANALYSIS General. The detection performance parameters of a Secondary (SSR) sensor are: probability of target position detection; probability of code detection; false target reports ratio; multiple SSR target reports ratio.
7.1
7.2 7.2.1
Probability of target position detection. Data analysis. For the estimation of the probability of the target position detection the recorded secondary and combined target reports at the output of the radar sensor shall first be chained. The chaining function shall associate each target report to one and only one trajectory identified by an aircraft number (aircraft identification ). With this association the number of the expected target reports can be calculated. The Pd measurement shall be Sensor performance based but shall use multi-radar information, where available to determine whether a target is present in the CMV of the Radar sensor to be analysed. In a monoradar evaluation the expected number of target reports is taken to be the number of antenna scans between the first and the last detection of the target. The overall probability of target position detection, inside the CMV, shall be calculated using the formula 7.1. Extrapolated and false target reports shall be excluded from the calculation.
Pd = The number of expected secondary & combined target reports

(7.1)
1234-V
The number of detected secondary & combined target reports

1234-I XXXX-V XXXX-I
Figure 7.1 The symbols used in the figure 7.1 denote the following:
Page 42
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
the code is validated and correct (17); there is no detection (3); the code is correct but not validated (3); the code is incorrect but validated (2); the code is incorrect and not validated (1). So in figure 7.1 the Probability of detection equals to Pd = 23/26. TE If a target report falls outside the jump window (ERSS) it is classified as a false target report . This is interpreted as if the target report was used operationally then its position may lead to erroneous interpretation of the targets position for the purposes of radar separation. As the ERSS considers jumps to be classified as false target reports then for the purposes of Probability Detection Analysis (PDA) any jump shall be considered as a missed target report for the respective sensor. Recommendation The chaining method should be the Object Correlator currently, under use in RASS tool or equivalent. 7.2.2 Interpretation of results The interpretation of the results shall be to assess the quality of the probability of target position detection compared to that specified in the EUROCONTROL Surveillance Standard.
Edition 0.1
Page 43
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
7.3 7.3.1
Probability of code detection . Data analysis . For the estimation of the overall probability of code detection, only the secondary or combined target reports used for the calculation of the target position detection shall be taken into account . So only the target reports that the chaining process shall associate to an aircraft trajectory shall be considered. The Pcd measurement shall be sensor performance based but shall use multi-radar information where available to detect whether a code change is due to a pilot action or to system malfunction. The overall probability of Mode A or Mode C code detection shall be calculated using the following formula : (7.2)
Pcd = The number of target reports with validated and correct Mode A Mode A The number of detected target reports chained to trajectories Pcd = The number of target reports with validated and correct Mode C The number of detected target reports chained to trajectories Mode C
(7.3) NOTES 1. The code validation of Mode A or Mode C is a process carried out by the Radar sensor under question. The validation is a flagged indication of the correctness of the Mode A/C message derived from the above process. Correct means the Mode A/C code value corresponds to the current "correct" value for the associated trajectory. The correct value is determined and maintained by the analysis system.
2.
Page 44
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
3.
The Correct Mode C value is calculated from the chained data using interpolation to estimate the likely Mode C value for a chain at instant during the life of the chain. In the case where the Flight Level is known (GPS or Test Flight) then the reference Mode C may be fixed to the known value. The reference Mode A value must be synchronised with code changes.
4.
If we apply the above formula for figure 7.1 Pcd = 17/23. Recommendation. The chaining algorithm should be the Object Correlator currently under use in RASS tool, developed jointly by EUROCONTROL and FAA or equivalent. 7.3.2 Interpretation of results . The interpretation of the results shall be to assess the quality of the probability of code detection compared to that specified in the EUROCONTROL Surveillance standard.
Edition 0.1
Page 45
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
7.4 7.4.1
False / Multiple SSR target reports ratio. Data analysis . For the estimation of the False / Multiple SSR target reports ratio the secondary and combined target reports recorded at the output of the radar sensor shall at first be chained. As a result chain data shall be derived with the history and the characteristics of each target report forming a track. Then the False /Multiple target reports shall be sorted out based on the particular characteristics they possess which are generally the following: a) False SSR target reports they are not synchronised ( asynchronous fruit which normally shall not appear at the output of the plot filter); they form track with relative short life. (synchronous fruit and second time around replies ).
b) Multiple SSR target reports they may have the same A/C code as the real aircraft target reports but they form tracks with relative short life and they appear in certain sectors bounded, by the orientation and the size of reflecting surfaces (reflections); they appear in pairs with small azimuth separation less than the antenna beamwidth (splits ); they appear in a ring ,around the radar sensor (sidelobes).
It is useful also to correlate the recorded and processed data with the HPDs of the antenna of the radar sensor for the identification of the multiple SSR target reports coming from sidelobes. The False / Multiple SSR target reports rate shall be calculated using the following formula :
R = The number of False / Multiple SSR target reports Fal/Mul The number of detected secondary & combined target reports
(7.4) NOTE The denominator includes all detected targets i.e. a/c and false.
For the overall performance analysis the following ratios shall be calculated:
Page 46
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
a)
The number of false SSR target reports (fruits, STAT) (7.5) R = The number of detected secondary & combined target reports False The number of multiple SSR target reports (7.6)
b)
Multi The number of detected secondary & combined target reports b.1) (7.7) The number of multiple SSR target reports from splits The number of detected secondary & combined target reports
= =
Splits b.2)
(7.8) The number of multiple SSR target reports from reflections R = The number of detected secondary & combined target reports Refl.
b.3)
=
Sidel.
(7.9) The number of multiple SSR target reports from sidelobes The number of detected secondary & combined target reports
Recommendations The following criteria should be applied to detect the false/multiple plots: 1) False plots The false plots are coming either from second time returns or from fruit (synchronous or un synchronous). 1.1) Criteria for False plots coming from fruit (synchronous or un synchronous). False plot should not be combined; the mode A and mode C may be swapped in the plot message depending on the mode interlace; the following inequalities should hold:
( r- f) > fruit minimum range difference = min r-f fruit maximum azimuth difference = max The reference plot is the real plot and represents the real position of the target see figure 7.3. 1.2) Criteria for False plots coming from second time around replies. False plot should not be a combined plot;
Edition 0.1
Page 47
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
the mode A and mode C may be swapped in the plot message for 2nd trace targets, depending on the mode interlace; the following inequalities should hold:
r- f -R second time around maximum range difference = max r-f second time around maximum azimuth difference = max The reference plot is the real plot and represents the real position of the target see figure 7.4. Parameter fruit minimum range difference second time around maximum range difference fruit/sec. time around maximum azimuth difference Symbol min max max Value 0.5 NM 10 NM 1
2) Multiple plots. Multiple plots are coming from reflections , splits, sidelobes. 2.1) Criteria for multiple coming from reflections. The criteria to detect reflections are different for the reflections received from the main beam (multipaths) and from sidelobes. 2.1.1) Criteria for reflections inside the main beam (multipaths). The false plot has the same mode A code as the reference plot; the false plot has the same mode C code as the reference plot (if both of them are present); the multiple should satisfy all of the following conditions:
r- f multipath maximum range difference = max r-f multipath maximum azimuth difference = max
Parameter multipath maximum range difference multipath maximum azimuth difference
Symbol max max
Value 0.0625 NM 0.05
2.1.2) Criteria for reflections outside the main beam. The false plot has the same mode A code as the reference plot (validated); the false plot has the same mode C code as the reference plot (if both of them are present);
Page 48
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
the multiple should satisfy the following conditions:
min= minimum range difference < r- f maximum range difference = max min =minimum azimuth difference<r-f maximum azimuth difference=max
Parameters reflection minimum range difference reflection maximum range difference reflection minimum azimuth difference reflection maximum azimuth difference
Symbol min max min max
Value 0.0625 NM 20 NM 5 150
NOTE: A useful parameter for analysis is to specify the realistic maximum range of reflectors - say 20NM - beyond which no reflecting surface should be large enough to cause any reflections.
2.2) Criteria for multiple coming from split plots. Split replies are generated by the same aircraft producing more than one target separated by a small range and/or azimuth difference. The split plots are divided into three subclasses: Range Split; Azimuth Split; Range/Azimuth Split.
The criteria are the following: the false plot has the same mode A code as the reference plot (either validated or non-validated); the false plot has the same mode C code as the reference plot (if both of them are present); the following conditions should hold :
i) for range/ azimuth split : split minimum range difference< r- f | split maximum range difference split minimum azimuth difference <r-f split maximum azimuth difference
Edition 0.1
Page 49
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
ii) for range split: split minimum range difference< r- f | split maximum range difference 0 <r-f split maximum azimuth difference iii) for azimuth split: 0 < r- f | split maximum range difference split minimum azimuth difference <r-f split maximum azimuth difference
Parameter Split minimum azimuth difference Split maximum azimuth difference Split minimum range difference Split maximum range difference
Symbol min max min max
Value 0.05o 3.00o 0.0625 NM 0.25 NM
2.3) Criteria for multiple coming from sidelobes. False targets ,which appear due to the sidelobes, are generally caused by the nearest (i.e., highest) lobes and the backlobe (180 deg). The ringaround is a special type of sidelobes effect since the phenomena causing the ringaround and sidelobes are same. However, a certain number of sidelobes should occur to have a ringaround phenomenon. The ringaround false plots are generated by sidelobe interrogations are outside the main beam approximately 10 degrees from the centroid of the true target. So the multiples are divided in three subclasses: sidelobes; backlobes; ringaround.
The criteria are the following: the false plot has the same mode A code as the reference plot (validated); the false plot has the same mode C code as the reference plot (if both of them are present); Range difference is a function of azimuth difference between the false and reference and the radial speed of the target (for ringaround); the multiple should satisfy the following conditions:
i) for sidelobe:
Page 50
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
sidelobe minimum range difference< r- f | sidelobe maximum range difference; sidelobe minimum azimuth difference <r-f sidelobe maximum azimuth difference ii) for backlobe: backlobe minimum range difference< r- f | backdelobe maximum range difference; backlobe minimum azimuth difference <r-f backdelobe maximum azimuth difference; iii) for ringaround : i { { (tN-ti )* ( N- i ) /(tN-t1) }+ 1} ,ringaround range tolerance N ringaround minimum plot confirmation. Assuming N plots in time order with ti, i, the time stamp and the range of the ith plot. Parameter Sidelobe minimum azimuth difference Sidelobe maximum azimuth difference Side/backlobe minimum range difference Side/backlobe maximum range difference Backlobe minimum azimuth difference Backlobe maximum azimuth difference Ringaround range tolerance Ringaround minimum plot confirmation Symbol min max min max min max N Value 3o 10o 0.50NM 1.00NM 177o 180o 1NM 10
Edition 0.1
Page 51
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
Range separation (NM)
Reflections
Refl Max Rng
SP Max Rng Refl Min Rng SP Min Rng Multipath Max Rng Multipath Min Rng ONM Range Split Range/Az Split Back Lobe
Mul' Path
Az Split
Side Lobe Ring Around
O deg Split Min Az Split MaxAz
Azimuth separation (degrees)

Refl Min Az Sidelobe Min Az Refl Max Az Sidelobe Min Az Backlobe Min Az Backlobe Min Az
Figure 7.2 Position difference between reference(true) and multiple (false ) plot. NOTE The above diagram assumes LVA antenna characteristics .
7.4.2
Interpretation of results. The interpretation of the results shall be to assess the quality of the False / Multiple target reports ratios compared to the ones specified in the EUROCONTROL Surveillance Standard.
Page 52
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
Figure 7.3 False Reply / plot from unwanted interrogation (Fruit).
Figure 7.4 Second Time around reply/plot.
Edition 0.1
Page 53
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
8.
SECONDARY SENSOR QUALITY PERFORMANCE PARAMETERS ANALYSIS General The quality performance parameters of a Secondary Sensor (SSR) are: Positional accuracy; False code information; Resolution.
8.1
8.2 8.2.1
Positional accuracy. General The positional accuracy is defined as the measure of the difference between the position of a target as reported by the sensor and the true position of the target at the time of detection. We consider the reference position of the target to be the true position. This reference position can be extracted either from data recorded at different input /output (I/O) interfaces of the radar sensor under test (e.g. I/O between monopulse receiver and monopulse signal processor or I/O between the radar sensor and the Radar Data Processing System at the centre), or from DGPS positional data recorded on board a test flight aircraft. We assume an error model as follows: m(t)=(1+)* ref (t+ t)+ + m(t)= ref(t+ t)+ + m = measured slant range ref = reference slant range = slant range bias error = slant range random error = slant range gain error m = measured azimuth ref = reference azimuth = azimuth bias = azimuth random error (8.1)
Page 54
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
t = time stamp error The above error model is used in the MURATREC algorithm for the estimation of the systematic and random errors. The error model is also based on the assumption that there is a range gain - the range bias varies as a function of range. The gain may be due to an error in the range clock or some systematic pulse deformation /attenuation problem. The time stamping error is only applicable when sensors fusion techniques are used in the RDPS system.
The bias errors are considered as fixed values corresponding for range and azimuth bias to the mean random error. The accuracy of the reference position shall be at least an order of magnitude (10 times) better than the accuracy of the measured position of the target reports at the radar sensors output. According to the EUROCONTROL Radar Surveillance Standards positional accuracy shall be expressed by the following categories of errors: systematic or bias errors; random errors: jumps. The performance for systematic / bias errors shall be expressed by: slant range bias; slant range gain error; azimuth bias; time stamp error. The performance for random errors shall be expressed by: slant range error standard deviation; azimuth error standard deviation. NOTEJumps are target reports with errors in position three times higher or more than the standard deviation for range and azimuth. Jumps are single scan events.
Edition 0.1
Page 55
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
8.2.2
Data analysis For the estimation of the overall positional accuracy the recorded data shall at first be chained. Then a reference trajectory shall be reconstructed for each target inside the CMV and compared against the measured positions without any classification of the targets or geographical limitations. The reconstruction of the reference trajectory (for each target inside the CMV) shall be based: a) on recorded target reports when: a.1) at least part of the CMV is covered from another two radars; NOTE Position reconstruction can only be reliable when the target is seen by two or more sensors . If more than 30% of the chained data are seen by only one sensor then the quality analysis results may be unreliable. a.2) at least n trajectories can be built with a minimum of m target reference positions. Where each target reference position shall be within the reference position accuracy stated in par. 8.2.1. b) on multilevel recordings (e.g. recordings at the video level and at the plot level) when the a.1 and a.2 are not applicable. c) on DGPS data (coming from test flights) time synchronized with the recorded target reports or any other reference positioning system. The DGPS position of the target together with the corrected DGPS time should be taken as the reference. The DGPS information will normally be in Latitude/Longitude and height above Mean Sea Level with coordinates in WGS84. The sensor data will normally be either Range/Azimuth/FL, X/Y local/FL or X/Y System/ FL. The coordinates for the sensors and system origin must be stated in WGS84.To chain the two sources of data and to use the DGPS position as a reference both data sources must be projected onto a common coordinate system. Either a Stereographic system (height independent) or a x/y/FL system may be used. In the case of a mono-radar evaluation the system origin should be the sensor site coordinates, i.e. x/y local = x/y system. The GPS altitude values or sensor FL values must also be normalised if errors are to be minimised - correction of Mode C or GPS Altitude values for the regional QNH at the sensor location and time of recording would be adequate. From the comparison of the measured position and the reference position for each target inside the CMV and assuming the model 8.1 the following errors shall be estimated: i) systematic (bias) errors: slant range bias; slant range gain error;
Page 56
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
azimuth bias; time stamp error. The systematic errors shall represented by fix numbers. ii) random errors: slant range error; azimuth error The random errors shall be expressed by the standard deviation of the distribution they follow. iii) positional jumps The positional jumps shall be expressed by the overall ratio of jumps as follows:
Rj = The number of detected target reports
The total number of jumps
(8.2)
Recommendation The following algorithms should be applied: a) Object Correlator or similar for the chaining and MURATREC or similar for the trajectory reconstruction in the case that recorded multiradar data are available. MURATREC is a curve fitting technique using 4th order beta-splines currently under use in RASS tool. b) RASS-S or equivalent when the analysis of multilevel recordings is used. 8.2.3 Interpretation of results The interpretation of the results shall be to assess the quality of the overall positional accuracy compared to that specified in the EUROCONTROL Radar Surveillance Standard.
Edition 0.1
Page 57
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
8.3 8.3.1
False code information General The false code information according to the EUROCONTROL Surveillance Standard shall be expressed by: overall false code ratio; validated false Mode A code ratio; validated false Mode C code ratio. NOTES 1. The code validation of Mode A or Mode C is a process carried out by the Radar sensor under question. The validation is a flagged ìndication of the correctness of the Mode A/C message derived from the above process. Correct means the Mode A/C code value corresponds to the current "correct" value for the associated trajectory. The correct value is determined and maintained by the analysis system.
2.
8.3.2
Data analysis For the estimation of the false code information only the secondary or combined target reports used for the calculation of the probability of target position detection shall be taken into account . So only the target reports that the chaining process shall associate to an aircraft trajectory shall be considered. The measurement shall be sensor performance based but shall use multiradar information where available to detect whether a code change is due to a pilot action or to system malfunction. The false code information shall be estimated using the following formulas: for the overall false code ratio:
Over/f
R = The number of detected secondary/combined reports chained to trajectories

(8.3)
The number of reports with incorrect Mode A or/and Mode C (valid or not)
for the validated false Mode A codes ratio:
Page 58
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
R = The number of detected sec/combined reports chained to trajectories A f/v

(8.4) for the validated false Mode C codes ratio:
The number of reports with incorrect and validated Mode A
R = The number of detected sec/combined reports chained to trajectories

C f/v
If we apply the above formulas for the figure 7.1 we have the following: for the overall false code ratio R over/f = 3/23 ; for the validated false code ratio R f/v = 2/23. 8.3.3 Interpretation of results
The number of reports with incorrect and validated Mode C
(8.5)
The interpretation of the results shall be to assess the quality of the false code information compared to that specified in the EUROCONTROL Radar Surveillance Standard.
Edition 0.1
Page 59
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
8.4 8.4.1
Resolution. General According to the EUROCONTROL Radar Surveillance Standard the resolution is the capability of the sensor to discriminate between two aircraft in close proximity and to produce target reports with correct code for both . The probability of position and code detection is applicable to each individual aircraft.. Close proximity is defined for SSR as follows: slant range 2 NM; azimuth 2 * nominal 3 dB interrogation beamwidth.
(NM) 2
(2)
(1)
1 (3) 1 Figure 8.1 2 (deg.)
1 = 2 n360 f t
For: n (number of SSR interrogation modes) = 2 f (interrogation repetition frequency) t (antenna rotation period ) = 240 Hz
= 10 sec.
Page 60
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
1= 0.6 Deg. 2 = 2 * nominal 3 dB interrogation beamwidth. 1 = 0.05 NM 2 = 2 NM The 3dB beamwidth of a MSSR antenna is typically 2.5. 8.4.2 Data analysis For the evaluation of the overall resolution capability of the radar sensor the probability of position and correct code detection for each individual target shall be estimated. For this the recorded data shall at first to be chained then a reference trajectory shall be reconstructed for each target inside the CMV. The reconstruction of the reference trajectory shall be done as it is described in par. 8.2.2 above. Using this reference trajectory information an algorithm shall first sort out all pairs of trajectories having parts falling inside the close proximity area (Figure 8.1 thick line) and then define the parts falling inside areas 1, 2 and 3. Then the algorithm shall calculate the number of expected target reports for each part of the trajectory and the total number of expected target reports for each close proximity area. At last using the chaining information the number of detected target reports associated to trajectories inside the areas 1, 2, and 3 shall be calculated. The overall probability of position detection Pd and correct code detection Pcd shall be estimated for the areas 1, 2 and 3 using the following formulas:
Pd= The number of expected reports in close proximity
The number of detected reports chained to trajectories in close proximity (8.7) The number of reports with correct and valid Mode A (8.8)
Pcd= The number of detected reports chained to trajectories in close proximity

Mode A The number of reports with correct and valid Mode C (8.9) Pcd= The number of detected reports chained to trajectories in close proximity Mode C
8.4.3 Interpretation of results The interpretation of the results shall be to assess the quality of the resolution capability compared to that specified in the EUROCONTROL Radar Surveillance Standard.
Edition 0.1
Page 61
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
9. 9.1
PSR/SSR DATA COMBINING ANALYSIS General According to the EUROCONTROL Surveillance Standard PSR/SSR data combining is the capability of the radar sensor to associate each antenna scan the target reports of the same aircraft detected by the two sensors and to combine these reports into a single target report. This capability shall be expressed by the following parameters: overall probability of association (Pas); overall false association rate (Rfas). An association is considered as false if the target reports from two unrelated targets detected by the two sensors have been associated. The above are based on the following assumptions:
9.1.1
The PSR and SSR sensors are collocated and they have the same OCV (Operational Coverage Volume); Only aircraft flying inside the above mentioned OCV who have active SSR transponders will be detected as combined targets. Data analysis For the evaluation of the data combining capability of the radar sensor the overall probability of association Pas and the overall false association rate Rfas shall be estimated for the targets flying inside the OCV of the sensor. For the estimation of the overall probability of association and the overall false association rate the following formulas shall be used: (9.1)
9.1.2
9.2
Pas = The number of expected combined reports
The number of detected correct combined reports
Rfas = The number of detected combined reports
The number of detected false combined reports

(9.2)
NOTE Correct / false combined target report is a target report coming from a correct / false association of a primary and a secondary target report.
Page 62
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
Recommendation: Collimation analysis is an important aspect of Combination Analysis, e.g. CMB target and PSR target in close proximity. If the CMB position is derived form the SSR and the collimation error is significant safe radar separation may be compromised. NOTE Special analysis techniques outside the scope of this document are required for Non co-located Combined radars.
9.3
Interpretation of results The interpretation of the results shall be to assess the quality of the data combining capability of the sensor compared to that specified in the EUROCONTROL Surveillance Standard taking into account the assumptions 9.1.1 and 9.1.2.
Edition 0.1
Page 63
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
10 10.1
ON-SITE DELAY ANALYSIS General According to the EUROCONTROL Surveillance Standard the on site delay is the time between the moment a radar target for a given aircraft is detected and the moment when the corresponding report starts to be transmitted. These target reports are polished / filtered primary/secondary/combined target reports providing measured radar data after reduction of false data using mono-radar processing techniques.
10.2
Data analysis To estimate the overall on site processing delay the time of detection for each target and the time of transmission shall be recorded and their average difference shall be calculated. The recording shall be done at the level of: azimuth change pulses (ACPs); video (receiver output); plot (plot extractor output); and filtered plot (plot combiner output). NOTES 1. The target report on-site delay is the time expressed in seconds between the moment a radar target report for a given aircraft is detected and the moment the corresponding report starts to be transmitted. The time of detection is the time at which the centre of the antenna beam illuminated the target, i.e. the time at which the antenna was at the target measured azimuth.
2.
The above data shall be time stamped using a reference clock preferably GPS. The recordings shall be done in normal conditions i.e. overload periods shall be excluded. 10.3 Interpretation of results The interpretation of the results shall be to assess the quality of the on site delay compared to that specified in the EUROCONTROL Surveillance Standard.
Page 64
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
11. 11.1
AVAILABILITY ANALYSIS General Availability is the probability that a system will be available for use at a given random time or time interval. The term available for use means that the system provides services within the specified limits. The availability can be categorised as follows: instantaneous availability A(t) which is the probability that the system will be available at any random time t; mission availability Am(t) which is the probability that the system will be available at a time interval t = t2-t1 and it is expressed by the following formula;
Am =
t2 t1 t1
t2
A(t)dt
(11.1)
steady-state availability As(t) which is the probability that the system will be available for a very large period of time and it is expressed by the following formula:
1 As() = lim A(t )dt t 0
(11.2)
For systems which are to be operated continuously as a radar system the steady state availability shall be measured and from now on will be symbolised by A and will be called simply Availability. Using theoretical models we can predict the availability of a system. For example assuming that: a) the failures and repairs follow exponential distributions; b) the failure rate of the equipment is known and equals ; c) the repair rate of the equipment is known and equals .. The availability for a single system is given by the formula: - A=
(11.3)
Edition 0.1
Page 65
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
the availability for a duplicated system in parallel configuration (one system is main the other is stand-by) as in figure 11.1 is given by the formula:
2 + 2 2 + 2 + 22
(11.4)
A (, )
B (, ) Figure 11.1
These theoretical models are used during the design phase of a system for the prediction of the availability of the final product and during the operational life of the system to improve the availability of the system (e.g. by increasing the repair rate or decreasing the failure rate or both). According to EUROCONTROL Surveillance Standard the availability of the radar data shall be expressed by the following characteristics: maximum outage time due to any given failure fmax; cumulative outage time due to all failures over a period of one year ftot; outage times due to scheduled actions s. The above are illustrated in the figure 11.2. a1 Operating a2 a3 a4 a5 a6 a7
Non-operating
f1
f2
f3
f4
f5
Specified operating time (one year) Figure 11.2
Page 66
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
f tot = fi
i =1
(11.5) (11.6)
fmax= max{f1, f2,...,fn}
NOTE The term failure means failure of the sensor to provide data inside the specified limits in the EUROCONTROL Surveillance Standard and may be caused by a malfunction of the sensors hardware, firmware or software. 11.2 Data analysis The estimation of the availability of a sensor shall be based on the recorded outage time due to any given failure of the system over a period of one year. This can be done either by the sensors monitoring and control system or by an external equipment . We can define the failure of the sensor in many different ways depending on the level of sophistication of the monitoring and control system. One simple way is to define a failure as the non provision of target reports including field monitors for more than 2 antenna scans as it is defined in the EUROCONTROL Surveillance Standard. This definition is based on the assumption that the monitoring and control system of the sensor will switch off the sensor or give an alarm to the user if the quality of the provided data is below the specified level. This is not always the case because the existing monitoring and control systems are checking a very limited number of performance parameters usually in an indirect way. The monitoring system of the primary sensor usually checks indirectly: a) the Pd by checking the station parameters which are related to the detection performance such as: a.1) in the transmission path: power; noise figure; a.2) in the reception path: receiver sensitivity (using test target at RF level); MTI (using moving test target); b)the alignment error by checking the position of active/passive reflectors. The monitoring system of the Secondary sensor usually checks indirectly:
Edition 0.1
Page 67
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
a) the Pd by checking: a1) in the transmission path: power; a2) in the reception path: receiver sensitivity using an injected test target. b) the alignment error by checking: the position of the remote field monitor. At present there is no available external equipment for RTQC(Real Time Quality Control) (measuring on line all radar sensor performance parameters). The monitoring of the quality of the radar information is done at the existing systems by the controller. So for the existing systems we shall use the above described definition of failure assuming in addition that the monitoring system of the sensor is sensitive to changes of the station parameters which have an impact to the detection and quality performance of the sensor. Recommendation The assessment of the availability of the radar sensor should be done either on site by the use of RASS-S (or equivalent), or at the centre by the use of RASS-C (or equivalent) or alternatively the radar data processing system using a sample of the radar data coming from the radar sensor connected to the centre. New radar sensors should have a monitoring system recording single and total non operating periods. 11.3 Interpretation of results The interpretation of the results shall be to assess the quality of the sensors availability compared to that specified in the EUROCONTROL Surveillance Standard.
Page 68
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
ANNEX A (RECOMMENDED) TECHNICAL PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS. A.1 A.1.1 RADAR SENSOR PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS General The aim of the technical performance analysis is the in-depth and thorough evaluation of the radar performance parameters so as they; can be predicted before the installation (factory tests); can be optimised (on site tests); can be measured at each point of the airspace volume under test (commissioning); and eventually can be checked and compared against the reference values (problem investigation, post modifications). A.1.2 Analysis method The technical performance analysis should be carried out using the same data collected for an overall performance assessment. In this way the overall results provide a link between the technical performance results and those of other evaluations. The analysis technique is that of computer aided evaluation using recorded data at the output of the sensor / input of the central radar data processing system supported (if needed) by multilevel recordings at various I/O interfaces, map data, digital terrain elevation data and visual observations. Chaining and trajectory reconstitution algorithms shall be applied to the data in order to evaluate the performance parameters of the radar sensor under test. A.1.3 Procedure The procedure for the analysis shall be as follows : A.1.3.1 Preparation for the analysis For the technical performance analysis of the Radar Sensor, the conditions of the data collection shall be known but also the whole set up of the radar sensor. In this way the technical staff can find the reasons of possible deviations of the sensors performance from the previous one. So before the collection of the data the following shall be done :
A.1.3.1.1
Preparation of the Radar Sensor. The integration of a radar sensor in the ATC system follows a series of tests, which are the following:
Edition 0.1
Page A/1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
a) Acceptance tests. The radar sensor performance is checked against the specifi-ed in the contract between the administration /agency and the manufacturer. Prior to these tests the manufacturer tunes / sets the radar sensor so as to meet the con-tractual requirements. b) Commissioning .The radar sensor performance is analysed in order to define the airspace volume where the radar sensor can provide radar services according to local operational requirements. This airspace volume is called Operational Coverage Volume OCV. The CMV shall be set to the OCV for all evaluation campaigns whose objective is to allow results comparison between different sensors and for submission to EATCHIP CIP. Subsequent modification to the system Functionality and/or operational use may require the recalculation of the OCV. For this the CMV shall be included in the evaluation report (annex) so the correlation of results between evaluations will be more efficient. Prior to the commissioning tests the manufacturer or the administration / agency shall configure the system so as to satisfy the local operational requirements. The settings of the radar sensor made during commissioning shall be used as a reference for all subsequent technical performance analyses. This shall be changed only if there is a replacement or modification of a radar sensors equipment that affects the performance of the sensor (e.g. replacement of the antenna with another with a better polar diagram). So before any technical performance analysis, the radar sensor shall be restored to its initial condition (commissioning). The radar sensor preparation refers to a series of measurements / checksand if needed repair actions undertaken by the technical personnel to ensure that the radar sensor is been restored to its initial condition. The term radar sensor includes the main, the standby equipment, the ancillary equipment (e.g. remote control and monitoring ,remote field monitor) and the standby power (e.g. UPS , power generator ).The Radar sensors are divided to: Primary radar sensors (PSR ); Secondary radar sensors ( SSR ). A.1.3.1.1.1 Primary radar sensor (PSR). For the technical performance analysis of the Primary radar sensor the following parameters shall be measured (if applicable):
PARAMETERS Antenna tilt Antenna polar diagrams R.P.M P.R.F Instrumented range M.T.I range Beam switching
UNITS / REMARKS Deg. Horizontal and vertical polar diagrams. rotations / minute. Hz = 1/sec. NM. NM azimuth/range pattern.
Page A/2
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
Waveguide losses Power Spectrum Pulse shape Noise figure M.D.S S.T.C / G.T.C Dynamic range M.T.I / M.T.D filters response
dB. KWs (peak or average). AdBv / dBw = f (f) f in Hz. AV = f ( t ). dB. dBm. AdB = f ( t ) dB. AdB = f ( f/v ) (v = Doppler speed = Doppler Shift) Plot extractor parameters/ Pd, Pfa, performance Plot filter parameters / Pd, Pfa, Overload reaction performance The measurement methods for the above are described in Annex B. A.1.3.1.1.2 Secondary radar sensor (SSR).
For the technical performance analysis of the secondary radar sensor the following parameters shall be measured (if applicable): PARAMETERS Antenna tilt Antenna polar diagrams uplink and downlink R.P.M P.R.F Staggering ratio / pattern Instrumented range Power / power sectorization Mode interlace pattern ISLS / IISLS RSLS Pulse shape / pulse spacing Power spectrum Receiver sensitivity Receiver dynamic range Receiver bandwidth Plot extractor parameters Plot extractor performance UNITS / REMARKS Deg Horizontal and vertical polar diagrams rotations / minute Hz = 1/ sec dimensionless / Hz NM KWs / P = F() sectorization Yes / No A = f(t) / sec P = f(f) dBm dB A = f(f) a) Pd, Pfa, Pcv; b) Defruiting; c)Degarbling;
Plot filter combiner parameters Plot filter combiner perfor- a)Pd, Pfa Pcv;b)Reflection rejection; mance / Overload reaction The measurement methods for the above are described in Annex B. A.1.3.1.2 Environmental measurements
Edition 0.1
Page A/3
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
The radar sensor (PSR / SSR) is a decision making system. By sampling an airspace volume (coverage volume) and applying sophisticated data processing techniques the system decides about the presence or not of targets of interest inside the airspace volume under test. This process is called target detection / identification. The radar sensor detection / identification capability has physical limitations (e.g. due to the screening effect) and it is strongly affected by the external conditions. The radar sensor performance should be analysed using mainly recorded data coming from opportunity traffic. The term environment in this document defines not only the external to the data sample factors (i.e. weather, jamming, lobing etc.), but also the specific characteristics / MOF (Mode Of Flight), of the data sample, that may affect the radar performance (i.e. transponder performance, traffic density, etc.). The above factors shall be identified, in order to evaluate their effect to the results of the analysis. In this sense the environmental factors that affect the technical performance of the primary sensor are the following: external interference / jamming; lobing; clutter areas / density; air-route structure; mode of flight(MOF); distance to the neighbouring a/c (resolution limitations); radar cross section distribution. For the secondary radar sensor the environmental factors are the following: external interference / jamming; lobing; interrogation rate, sidelobe suppression rate, TCAS operation; transponder performance; air-route structure; mode of flight (MOF); distance to the neighbouring a/c (resolution limitations); reflectors/multipath effects. These factors can either be identified by the analysis tool or by the use of special test set-ups. The level of testing depends on the measurement campaign (i.e. acceptance tests, commissioning, post modification ).
Page A/4
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
A.1.3.1.2.1
Environmental factors for the Primary radar sensor. The environmental factors affecting the performance of the primary radar sensor are the following:
A.1.3.1.2.1.1 External interference / jamming. For acceptance tests /commissioning all the interfering / jamming sources and their characteristics in the frequency and in the time domain shall be defined. This shall be done either by analysing the spectrum at the output of the receiver by using special tools (before data collection) or using the recorded data at the output of the radar sensor with the transmitter switched to the dummy load. A.1.3.1.2.1.2 Lobing. The theoretical lobing diagram / s of the sensor antenna shall be calculated. The calculation shall use digital terrain elevation data and the antenna vertical polar diagram A.1.3.1.2.1.3 Clutter areas / density. The areas of ground and sea clutter shall be identified using map data . When it is needed the clutter density shall be measured, either by recording the video at the output of the receiver, or by using special tools. A.1.3.1.2.1.4 Air-route structure. The structure of the air-routes creates certain flight patterns (i.e. tangential flights) that affect the radar detection performance. So this effect shall be identified and used for the classification of the data according to the aspect angle to the sensor. A.1.3.1.2.1.5 Mode of flight (MOF). The performance of the MTI/MTD depends on the radial (to the radar sensor) speed of the target. In the case that the plot filter combiner uses tracking, the MOF of the target may degrade the radar sensor detection performance. For this the MOF of each target shall be identified. This shall be done using the reconstituted trajectory information. A.1.3.1.2.1.6 Distance to the neighbouring a/c (resolution limitations). The radar sensor performance is degraded, when the targets are in close proximity (resolution limitations).These cases shall to be identified and the data sample shall be classified accordingly. A.1.3.1.2.1.7 Radar cross section distribution. The primary radar sensor detection performance depends on the radar cross section of the target. An estimation of the radar cross section distribution of the data sample can be done using video recordings at the output of the receiver.
Edition 0.1
Page A/5
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
A.1.3.1.2.2
Environmental factors for the Secondary radar sensor. The environmental factors affecting the performance of the secondary radar sensor are the following:
A.1.3.1.2.2.1 External interference / jamming. For acceptance tests /commissioning all the interfering / jamming sources and their characteristics in the frequency and in the time domain shall be defined. This shall be done either by analysing the spectrum at the output of the receiver by using special tools (before data collection) or using the recorded data at the output of the radar sensor with the transmitter switched to the dummy load. A.1.3.1.2.2.2 Lobing. The theoretical lobing diagram / s of the sensor antenna, for uplink and downlink, shall be calculated. The calculation shall use digital terrain elevation data and the antenna vertical polar diagram. A.1.3.1.2.2.3 Interrogation rate, sidelobe suppression rate, TCAS operation. The interrogation rate, the sidelobe suppression rate and the impact from the TCAS operation inside the CMV shall be measured and taken into account in the analysis of the performance of the radar sensor. A.1.3.1.2.2.4 Transponder performance. According to EUROCONTROL MTPA measurements about 10% of all transponders operate more or less outside ICAO tolerances. For this the transponder performance of the data sample shall be measured. This shall be done either by using multiradar data or by using special tools. A.1.3.1.2.2.5 Air-route structure. The structure of the air-routes creates certain flight patterns (i.e. tangential flights) that affect the radar detection performance (i.e. shielding of the transponder antenna). So this effect shall be identified and the data sample shall be classified according to the aspect angle to the sensor. A.1.3.1.2.2.6 Mode of flight (MOF). In the case, that the plot filter combiner uses tracking, the MOF of the target may degrade the radar sensor performance. For this the MOF of each target shall be identified .This shall be done using the reconstituted trajectory information. A.1.3.1.2.2.7 Distance to the neighbouring a/c (resolution limitations). The radar sensor performance is degraded (position and code detection), when the targets are in close proximity (resolution limitations) .These cases shall to be identified and the data sample shall be classified accordingly.
Page A/6
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
A.1.3.1.2.2.8 Reflectors/ Multipath effects. The reflectors (reflecting surfaces) shall be identified and classified using map data in two classes permanent and temporary. The recorded data shall also be checked regularly for false targets coming from multipath effects and the period and area shall be identified. A.1.3.1.3 Definition of the Coverage Measurement Volume (CMV) For the site acceptance and the site commissioning the CMV shall clearly be defined, before the collection of data, using the contractual / operational require-ments, digital terrain elevation data and theoretical calculations of the coverage. In all other cases the CMV shall be the OCV. A.1.3.2 Data collection See par. 4.3.2. A.1.3.3 Data classification Input classification is a general scientific approach when dealing with analysis of the behaviour of complex non-linear systems. In experiments to measure any physical variable one tries to control all conditions that may be of influence to the results. The same principles are applicable to radar performance analysis. Therefore a very important part of the measurement is to find well defined input classes. This means that the main factors that have an influence on the (performance) parameter to be measured shall be identified and each of them shall be used as a separate dimension in the multidimensional measurement space. This should lead to consistent results ,which means that when comparing the measured Pd values derived from two different data sets ,for one and the same input class, the only reason of difference is the performance of the radar.In practice we can only try to reach this ideal, limited by our resources. The approach that is taken is meant to provide an efficient solution that is sufficient to reach our analysis goals.Input parameters are conditions or variables of processes that have a significant impact on the performance to be measured. In the following paragraph a non exhaustive inventory of such parameters is given. A.1.3.3 .1 Inventory of input parameters Input classification used in an evaluation at the measured target report level of a system may be restricted in the parameters available. Three generic groups of Input classes are defined; Evaluation Static, Analysis level Static and Analysis level Dynamic. Static Input classes are those which do not (or should not) change during the evaluation or an Analysis. Dynamic classes are those which do change by their nature or at the request of the system operator. Dynamic classes may be either sensor or evaluation system parameters (e.g. display selections) and are intended for controlling the measurement. Additionally classes may have discrete or continuous values. The following lists identify examples of Static and Dynamic classes at the Evaluation and Analysis Levels.
Edition 0.1
Page A/7
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
A.1.3.3 .1.1
Evaluation Level - Static Input Classes Two groups of static Input Classes at the evaluation level are foreseen: a) Radar system parameters: radar type; maximum range ;prf; polarisation ; HPD, VPD; STC; transmitter power; resolution characteristics; MTI/MTD characteristics ; on site plot filter parameters etc. b) geographical oriented, site dependent (time invariant): antenna position and height; terrain properties; screening angles ; ground/sea clutter areas etc.
A.1.3.3 .1.2
Analysis Level - Static Input Classes Coverage Measurement Volume Airspace volumes Environment - Time, Area Flight Level Ranges Range Azimuth Segments
A.1.3.3.1.3
Analysis Level - Dynamic Input Classes The table below gives an extensive, but not exhaustive, list of dynamic input classes for use at the Analysis level. Many classes are linked to a particular analysis whilst others may be employed in any analysis Time Plot Type A Invalidated A Incorrect The time would be split into discrete intervals Type of the plot PR/SSR/COMB If the mode A code of the plot is Invalidated If the mode A code of the plot is assessed to be incorrect
Page A/8
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
A Absent A Garbled C Invalidated C Incorrect C Absent C Garbled C Out of Spec False Resolution State Resolution Distance Chain Class Chain Length MOF Range Azimuth X Y Mode C Altitude Elevation Angle Visibility Class Cone Of Silence Mode C Different
Active Transponder Bad Transponder Active Mode C Mode A Group Multi-Radar Segment
If the mode A code of the plot is absent If the mode A code is garbled If the mode C code of the plot is Invalidated If the mode C code is assessed to be Incorrect If the mode C code is Absent If the mode C code is garbled If the mode C code is Out of Spec (FL-12 ..FL700) If the plot is identified as false If the chain/plot occurred during a resolution incident Distance between targets in close proximity The classification of the chain (civil, military etc.) The length of chains in discrete steps The 3 Modes of Flight - Longitudinal, Transversal and Vertical of the reference trajectory at the time of the plot The range would be split into discrete steps The azimuth would be split into discrete steps The X would be split into discrete steps The Y would be split into discrete steps The mode C value would be split into discrete steps The altitude would be split into discrete steps The elevation angle would be split into discrete steps Visible, Not Visible, Undetermined, Not Applicable The target report is in or out of the Sensor Cone of Silence or undetermined. Difference between reference Mode C and measured mode C. N.B. this is the actual difference between the measured and reference not the assessed correctness If the transponder is presumed to be switched on Evaluation system has unambiguously identified a transponder error If the aircraft with a transponder is sending Mode C Possibly Static but defined sets of mode A codes Areas where the radar is seen by multiple radars
A.1.3.4
Data Analysis The data analysis shall result in a detailed evaluation the Radar Sensor (PSR /SSR) performance parameters specified in the EUROCONTROL Radar Surveillance Standard. The methods for the analysis, are described in the following paragraphs. The performance parameters are divided into: Primary sensor performance parameters; Secondary sensor performance parameters;
Edition 0.1
Page A/9
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
PSR/SSR Data Combining; On-Site Processing Delay; Availability. A.1.3.5 Presentation of results The results of the performance parameters analysis shall be given in an appropriate form. The figures A-4, A-5, A-6, A-7, A-8 are typical examples of presentation of the results taken from RASS systems. In the case of acceptance testing or commissioning the above results shall be correlated manually or preferably automatically with screening data to give the Coverage of the sensor in a form of Polar (Horizontal) diagrams for selected Flight Levels and Vertical diagrams graduated for selected azimuths (Fringe Envelopes). A.1.3.6 Interpretation of results The results of the technical performance analysis of the radar sensor during acceptance / commissioning testing shall define the Coverage. During the operational life of the system it shall be possible to identify degradation of the performance using results from baseline measurement campaign(i.e. commissioning).
Page A/10
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
A.2
PRIMARY SENSOR ANALYSIS General
DETECTION
PERFORMANCE
PARAMETERS
A.2.1
The detection performance parameters, of a Primary(PSR) sensor, are: Probability of target position detection; False target reports rate. A.2.2 A.2.2.1 Probability of target position detection Data classification For the technical performance analysis of the radar sensor the data shall be classified manually or automatically, as a function of : distance to neighbouring aircraft (resolution limitations) radar cross section taking into account the aspect angle (if possible); Doppler speed and Mode of Flight (MOF ); clutter/interference conditions (ground sea and weather clutter ). Any extrapolated target reports shall be identified and removed from the analysis. The above classification is justified by the simplified formula A.2.1 which gives the average probability of detection at the output of an ideal IF receiver, in the presence of white noise, in relation to the probability of false alarms and the signal-to-noise ratio(of the target).
<Pd>=(Pfa)
1 1+S/N
S =2* 2
(A.2.1)
Pfa the probability of false alarm ; S The signal power; N The noise power; the mean cross section of the target. In the presence of clutter the noise power shall be substituted by the N=N0+C where C is the clutter residue at the output of the MTI / MTD in this case the signal power S depends on the radial speed of the target (Doppler speed). In the presence of RF interference not rejected by the receiver then N should be substituted by I=N+Io ( Io is the interference power). The mean cross section of the target depends also on the aspect angle of the target. The probability of detection is also affected by the presence of other a/c
Edition 0.1
Page A/11
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
near to the target (the adjacent a/c can be considered as a very strong interference) and in case of the use of tracking for plot filtering by the Mode Of Flight of the target. A.2.2.2 Data analysis For the estimation, of the probability of the target position detection the primary and combined target reports recorded at the output of the radar sensor shall first be chained. The chaining function shall associate each target report to one and only one trajectory identified by an aircraft number. With this association the number of the expected target reports inside the CMV can be calculated and the gaps due to detection misses identified. The recorded target reports shall come from opportunity traffic except the case of heavy ground clutter environment in which the target reports shall come from test flights. The Pd measurement shall be Sensor performance based but shall use multi-radar information where available to determine whether a target is present in the CMV of the Radar sensor to be analysed. In a monoradar evaluation the expected number of target reports is taken to be the number of antenna scans between the first and the last detection of the target. In the case of special test flights the expected number of target reports equals to the number of aircraft Radar Sensor beam encounters. For the technical performance analysis based on the opportunity traffic the CMV shall be subdivided in elementary three dimensional cells and the Pd inside each cell shall be estimated. The size of the cell depends on the required accuracy of the measurement and actually from the number of the expected target reports inside the cell. The recommended default cell size for an sensor are given below, the sizes may be adjusted to suit local requirements, however when comparing results between different evaluations consistent cell sizes must be used. sensor En- Route TMA Range cell size (NM) 20 10 Azimuth cell size (deg) 20 20 FL cell size (FL) 50 20 FL Limits 12 - 450 12 - 200
The probability of target position detection of a cell shall be calculated using the formula :
Pd = The number of expected primary & combined target reports

(A.2.2) The calculation shall not take into account any extrapolated target report or false target report. For the test flights or individual flights, the probability of detection of each point of the trajectory and the average probability shall be calculated. The calculation of the Pd of a point of a trajectory shall be based on the above formula (A.2), using a sliding window
The number of detected primary & combined target reports
Page A/12
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
whose centre is the point of the trajectory under test see figure A1. This shall be called elementary or local Pdi. The <Pd> (average) of the trajectory shall be calculated by the formula A.2.2.
i=k i=j
Pdk
Pdj
Figure A-1 Recommendation The length of the sliding window should be equal to 9. When opportunity traffic is used the Pd for the following class and its subclasses of targets shall be estimated : Class A outside the close proximity area (area 3 figure A-2). Subclasses of A: targets flying over ground clutter; targets flying over sea clutter; targets flying in weather clutter and over ground or sea clutter; tangential flying targets. The above subclasses shall be subdivided as a function of the Doppler speed of the target the Mode of Flight (if tracking is used for plot filtering) and if it is possible (using video recordings or flight plan information) of the target cross section area. The estimation of the Pd for the targets inside the close proximity area (areas 1a, 1, and 2 figure A-2 ) Class B it is related to the resolution capabilities of the radar sensor and it is treated in the relevant paragraph A.3.3. Recommendation The chaining method should be the Object Correlator currently under use in RASS tool, or equivalent . A.2.2.3 Presentation of results
Edition 0.1
Page A/13
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
The Pd shall be presented in : Horizontal polar(for selected flight levels) and Vertical polar (for selected azimuthal sectors) diagrams graduated in discrete detection bands such as e.g. 50%, 50-80%, 80-90%, 90-95%, 95-98%, 98-100%; Overall Figures (for all the subclasses of targets) derived from the mean detection values, for each detection cell in the calculation; Vertical diagrams in the case of special test flights, or when the majority of the target reports are combined (there is height information from the SSR target report). These shall be in a form of iso-Pd lines drawn for selected azimuths; Horizontal polar and Vertical polar scattergraphs for the misses generated by the chaining process; Distribution in space and time and the size of the detection gaps . An example of the above is given in Figures A-3, A-4, A-5. The horizontal polar diagrams shall be overlaid on an aeronautical map of the radar sensor site. A.2.2.4 Interpretation of results In order that the results of the Pd analysis may interpreted correctly and be compared against specified figures (acceptance tests) or measured figures (previous campaigns) the data sample shall be strictly controlled regarding the distance to neighbouring a/c(resolution limitations) and additionally the: radar cross sections(taking into account the aspect angle of the targets); the Doppler speed of the target; the clutter/ interference conditions ; For this, in the case of site acceptance tests special test flights are considered mandatory especially if there is heavy ground clutter and no multiradar coverage. Recommendation The user must be aware that the Pd results for cells with only one chain may not normally be used for judging the sensor Pd performance . However data in such cells may be used for further analysis and problem investigation. In the situation where only one chain is present and the Pd is poor the benefit of the doubt should be given to the sensor unless it is certain that the target was well visible.
Page A/14
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
A.2.3 A.2.3.1
False target reports Data classification. The data shall be classified by their generic cause in two classes: Class A. False targets generated by external / internal interfering sources (noise, internal or external interference). Class B. False targets generated by unwanted echoes. This class shall be subdivided into the following subclasses : Subclass B1. False targets generated by true aircraft : sidelobes; splits; positional jumps. Subclass B2. False targets generated by non aircraft targets : ground clutter; sea clutter; weather clutter; angel clutter (birds, insects, anaprop , atmospheric echoes ); ships, cars.
A.2.3.2
Data analysis. The analysis of the false target reports shall be based on the different characteristics and behaviour that appear from the true aircraft targets. A chaining algorithm shall be applied to the recorded data. As a result chained data shall be derived with the history and the characteristics of each target forming a chain. Then the false target reports shall be sorted out based on the particular characteristics they possess which are the following : they are pure primary reports except the case of ships or remote passive / active reflectors; they form tracks with short life and relative low speed; they appear, in high density in ground and sea clutter areas; they appear in a ring around the radar sensor (sidelobes); they appear in pairs with azimuth separation less than the antenna beamwidth.(splits).
Edition 0.1
Page A/15
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
For the technical performance analysis each class of false target reports shall be estimated. To this an algorithm shall correlate the recorded data with map data (from an aeronautical map of the site of the radar sensor) for the identification of false target reports coming from clutter and with the antenna Horizontal Polar Diagrams to identify sidelobe effects. An indication of the amount of the false target reports generated by noise and interference and the location of the interfering sources can be derived by recording the output when the sensor is in standby mode (the transmitter shall transmit to the dummy load) and all associated receiver and processing thresholds shall be allowed to stabilised. A recording of 10 to 20 minutes per channel would be probably be sufficient. An alternative method for the estimation of the total number of false target reports to the above is the use of visual observations. Recommendation. For the Chaining the Object Correlator algorithm should be applied. For the correlation of the recorded data with horizontal polar diagrams RASS-S should be used. A.2.3.3 Presentation of results. The results shall be presented in a table, showing all the categories of false target reports. Also on a aeronautical map of the site of the radar sensor, the position and the number of false target reports shall be indicated. A.2.3.4 Interpretation of results. In order that the results of the false targets reports analysis may interpreted correctly and be compared against specified figures (acceptance tests) or measured figures (previous campaigns) the data sample shall be supported by visual observations (i.e. to sort out data that appear to be false targets but that are real targets forming sort life tracks due to detection misses caused by screening or lobing effects.) and controlled regarding the source of the false target report to: non-aircraft objects (i.e. interference, noise, clutter, ships, cars); aircrafts (i.e. sidelobes, splits, multiple time around.
Page A/16
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
A.3 A.3.1
PRIMARY SENSOR QUALITY PERFORMANCE PARAMETERS ANALYSIS General The quality performance parameters of a Primary (PSR) sensor are : Positional accuracy ; Resolution.
A.3.2 A.3.2.1
Positional accuracy. General The positional accuracy is defined as the measure of the difference between the position of a target as reported by the sensor and the true position of the target at the time of detection. We consider as the true position of the target a reference position. This reference position can be extracted either from data recorded at different input /output (I/O) interfaces of the radar sensor under test (e.g. .I/O between primary receiver and primary signal processor or I/O between the radar sensor and the Radar Data Processing System at the centre), or from DGPS positional data recorded on board a test flight aircraft. We assume an error model as follows : m(t)=(1+)* ref (t+ t)+ + m(t)= ref(t+ t)+ + m = measured slant range; ref = reference slant range; = slant range bias error; = slant range random error; = slant range gain error; m = measured azimuth; ref = reference azimuth; = azimuth bias; = azimuth random error; t = time stamp error. The time stamping error is only applicable when sensors fusion techniques are used in the RDPS system.The error model is based in addition on the assumption that there is a range clock bias error which is represented (A.3.1)
Edition 0.1
Page A/17
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
by the parameter .The bias errors are considered as fixed values corresponding for range and azimuth bias to the mean random error. The accuracy of the reference position shall be at least an order of magnitude better than the accuracy of the measured position of the target reports at the radar sensors output. According to the EUROCONTROL Radar Surveillance Standards positional accuracy shall be expressed by the following categories of errors : systematic or bias errors ; random errors : jumps. The performance for systematic / bias errors shall be expressed by : slant range bias ; slant range gain error ; azimuth bias ; time stamp error. The performance for random errors shall be expressed by : slant range error standard deviation ; azimuth error standard deviation . NOTEtimes and A.3.2.2 Data classification For the technical performance analysis of the radar sensor the data shall first to be classified in accordance to the distance to neighbouring aircrafts and then in accordance to: radar cross section taking into account the aspect angle; Mode of Flight (MOF )(Doppler speed); environmental conditions ( ground, sea, weather clutter conditions, The above classification is based on the following theoretical aspects. For an ideal receiver the minimum measurement errors for targets in free space (in presence of white noise only) for range and azimuth are: r = c/2** (S/N) (A.3.2) Jumps are target reports with errors in position three higher or more than the standard deviation for range. azimuth .
Page A/18
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
0.53*/ (S/N) rms signal bandwidth = 1/; S/N signal to noise ratio; c velocity of the light; half-power beamwidth . The signal power at the detector input depends on the cross section of the target. If the target flies over a clutter area (ground or sea clutter) or in weather clutter the standard deviations depends on the signal to clutter ratio (S/C). At the signal processor output -after the MTI/ MTD processing- the signal to clutter ratio depends on the targets Doppler speed. More generally the errors depend on the signal to interference ratio (S/I), if we define as interference every signal that interferes the useful signal. In that sense the neighbouring aircrafts shall be considered as a very strong interfering source if there are in the close proximity (see A.3.1). rf interferences). A.3.2.3 Data analysis For the estimation of the positional accuracy the recorded primary and combined target reports (at the output of the radar sensor) shall first be chained. Then a reference trajectory shall be reconstructed for each target inside the CMV and compared against the measured positions without any classification of the targets or geographical limitations. The reconstruction of the reference trajectory (for each target inside the CMV) shall be based : a) on recorded target reports when : a.1) at least part of the CMV is covered from another two radars ; NOTE The sharing of coverage is most important for systematic error measurement . At least 50% of the chained data inthe CMV should be seen by two or more sensors if the results are to be reliable. a.2)at least n trajectories can be built with a minimum of m target reference positions. Where each target reference position shall be within the reference position accuracy stated in par. 6.2.1. b)on multilevel recordings (e.g. recordings at the video level and at the plot level) when the a.1 and a.2 are not applicable. c) on DGPS data (coming from test flights) time synchronised with the recorded target reports or any other reference positioning system. The DGPS position of the target together with the corrected DGPS time should be taken as the reference . The DGPS position must be projected onto a common plane for comparison with the target report data. A stereographic projection using the same earth model as the sensors under test is best. In the case of monoradar evaluation the earth model of the host RDPS shall be chosen.
Edition 0.1
Page A/19
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
From the comparison of the measured position and the reference position for each target inside the CMV and assuming the model A.4 the following errors shall be estimated: i) systematic (bias) errors : slant range bias; slant range gain error; azimuth bias; time stamp error. The systematic errors shall be represented by fix numbers. ii) random errors : slant range error; azimuth error The random errors shall be represented by the standard deviation of the distribution they follow. iii) positional jumps Because it is not possible with the existing methods to make a distinction between positional jumps and false target reports the positional jumps are counted as false target reports. The random errors shall be estimated for the following classes and subclasses of targets : Class A : targets outside the close proximity area (area 3 figure A2). Class B : targets inside the close proximity areas ( areas 1a, 1 and 2 figure A-2). Subclasses of A and B : targets flying over ground /sea clutter; targets flying in weather clutter and over ground / sea clutter; tangential flying targets; And if possible for subclasses of the above based on to the Doppler speed of the target, the Mode of Flight (if tracking is used for plot filtering) and the targets cross section area. Recommendation The following algorithms should be applied : a) Object Correlator or equivalent for the chaining and MURATREC or equivalent for the trajectory reconstruction in the case that recorded multiradar data are available.
Page A/20
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
b) RASS-S or equivalent when multilevel recordings are used. A.3.2.4 Presentation of results The random errors shall be presented in histograms showing the distribution they follow figure A-7 is an example of such an evaluation made by RASS-C tool. A quick way to detect sensors malfunctions is the use of scattergraphs as the one in figure A-8 where large errors in certain azimuths indicate probable malfunction of the sensor in this sector. A.3.2.5 Interpretation of results In order that the results of the accuracy analysis may interpreted correctly and be compared against specified figures (acceptance tests) or measured figures (previous campaigns) the data sample shall be strictly controlled regarding mainly the distance to neighbouring a/c (close proximity classification) and additionally the; the clutter/ interference conditions ; radar cross sections(taking into account the aspect angle ); the Doppler speed of the target; and the MOF (if tracking is used for plot filtering). In the case of site acceptance tests the close proximity area shall be checked thoroughly. If the opportunity traffic does not provide suitable data sample , special test flights shall be used ( the same data sample shall be used for the resolution analysis.)
Edition 0.1
Page A/21
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
A.3.3 A.3.3.1
Resolution. General According to the EUROCONTROL Radar Surveillance Standard the resolution is the capability of the sensor to discriminate between two aircraft in close proximity and to produce target reports for both . The probability of detection is applicable to each individual aircraft.. Close proximity is defined for PSR as follows : slant range 2 * nominal (compressed) pulse width; azimuth 3 * nominal 3 dB beamwidth.
It is also specified that the area in which no resolution capabilities are required is defined by a corresponding difference in slant range 1.5 * nominal (compressed)pulse width and a difference in azimuth 1.5 * nominal 3 dB beamwidth.. The resolution cell of a radar sensor it is defined in range by /2 ( the effective pulse width in meters) and in azimuth by b (b 3dB beamwidth of the antenna) that means that two targets can not be resolved if they lie in the same cell. These areas are shown in Figure A-2 . The diagram is giving the relative separation - as it is seen by the Radar Sensor - between the two aircrafts. The origin O of the axes coincides with the position of one aircraft . The areas are: isolated targets area is represented by area 3; Close proximity area is represented by areas 1, 1a and 2; No resolution requirement area is represented by area 1; Radar resolution cell is represented by area 1a. (NM) 2 1.5 (1) (1a) O b 1.5 b Figure A-2 3 b (Deg.) (2) (3)
= nominal (compressed) pulse width in NM;
Page A/22
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
(NM) = (sec) c /2 ; c = velocity of light = 3 x 108 meters/sec=161987 NM/sec b = nominal 3 dB beamwidth. A.3.3.2 Data classification For the technical performance analysis of the radar sensor the data shall be classified in accordance to : clutter/interference conditions (ground, sea and weather clutter ). the difference between the radar cross sections of the targets (if possible); the difference between the Doppler speeds of the target; A.3.3.3 Data analysis For the evaluation of the resolution capabilities of the radar sensor the probability of position detection for each individual target being in close proximity shall be estimated. For this the recorded primary and combined target reports at the output of the radar sensor shall at first to be chained, then a reference trajectory shall be reconstructed for each target inside the CMV. The reconstruction of the reference trajectory shall be done as it is described in par. A.3.2 above. Using this reference trajectory information an algorithm shall sort out all pairs of trajectories having parts falling inside the close proximity area (Figure A.2 thick line) and then define the parts falling inside areas 1,1a and 2. Then the algorithm shall calculate the number of expected target reports for each part of the trajectory and the total number of expected target reports for each close proximity area. At last using the chaining information the number of detected target reports inside the areas 1, 1a and 2 shall be calculated. The probability of position detection Pd shall be estimated for the areas 1,1a and 2 using the following formulas: The number of detected reports chained in close proximity Pd = The number of expected reports in close proximity (A.3.3) The Pd inside the close proximity area shall be estimated for the classes defined in par. A.3.3.2 above.
A.3.3.4
Presentation of results The results of the analysis shall be presented in a table showing the Pd in each close proximity area for the defined classes of targets.
Edition 0.1
Page A/23
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
A.3.3.5
Interpretation of results The results of the resolution analysis may interpreted correctly and be compared against specified figures (acceptance tests) or measured figures (previous campaigns) if the data sample provides suitable patterns (i.e. target reports distributed uniformly all over the close proximity area) and the data sample is controlled regarding the : the clutter/ interference conditions ; radar cross sections(taking into account the aspect angle ); the Doppler speed of the target; and the MOF. For this in site acceptance testing special test flights (see ANNEX D) are considered as mandatory in order to produce a suitable data sample which can also be used for accuracy analysis.
Page A/24
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
A.4
SECONDARY SENSOR DETECTION PERFORMANCE PARAMETERS ANALYSIS General. The detection performance parameters of a Secondary (SSR) sensor are : probability of target position detection; probability of code detection;. false target reports rate; multiple SSR target reports rate.
A.4.1
A.4.2 A.4.2.1
Probability of target position detection. Data classification For the analysis of the Pd the data shall at first to be classified in accordance to the distance to neighbouring aircraft. Then the data sample coming from targets outside the close proximity area (area 4 figure A-9) shall be classified in accordance to : transponder performance taking also into account the aspect angle ; environmental conditions (fruits, overinterrogations, TCAS); Mode of Flight (MOF)(in case of on site tracking). Any extrapolated target reports shall be excluded from the calculation. The justification for the above classification is given by the following formula A.4.1 . The probability of detection for a Secondary Radar sensor using sliding window extraction is equal to:
N Pd = C p (1 p) N N =
N number of interrogations ;
(A.4.1)
minimum number of replies to accept a target(criterion to reject Fruits ) ; p Pd transponder x Pd radar receiver. The Pd of the transponder is the probability of replying or the round reliability.
Edition 0.1
Page A/25
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
The Pd of the receiver is the probability of detecting a reply. So the probability of detection of a SSR depends on : the performance of the transponder which is expressed by the Round reliability; the number of interrogators operating near the station (because they may block the transponder); the flight pattern (if the flight is tangential to the radar the fuselage may shield the transponders antenna); the number of Fruit (if there are too many fruits we have to increase the threshold n). The above are applicable in the case that the a/c is outside the close proximity area. A.4.2.2 Data analysis. For the estimation of the probability of the target position detection the target reports shall at first to be chained. The chaining function shall associate each target report to and only one trajectory identified by an aircraft number (aircraft identification ) .With this association the number of the expected target reports can be calculated and the gaps due to detection misses identified . The Pd measurement shall be Sensor performance based but shall use multi-radar information where available to detect whether a target is present in the CMV of the Radar sensor to be analysed. In a monoradar evaluation the expected number of target reports is taken to be the number of antenna scans between the first and the last detection of the target. In the case of special test flights the expected number of target reports equals to the number of aircraft Radar Sensor beam encounters. For the technical performance analysis based on the opportunity traffic the CMV shall be subdivided in elementary three dimensional cells and the Pd inside each cell shall be estimated. The size of the cell depends on the required accuracy of the measurement and actually from the number of the expected target reports inside the cell.The probability of target position detection inside a cell shall be calculated using the following formula :
Pd = The number of expected secondary & combined target reports

(A.4.2) The calculation shall not take into account any extrapolated target report, false target report or multiple target report. For the test flights, or individual flights, the probability of detection of each point of the trajectory and the average probability shall be calculated.
The number of detected secondary & combined target reports
Page A/26
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
The calculation of the Pd of a point of a trajectory shall be based on the above formula (A.8) using a sliding window whose centre is the point of the trajectory under test see figure A-3 . This shall be called elementary Pdi. The <Pd> (average) of the trajectory shall be calculated by the formula A.4.2.
i=k i=j
Pdk
Pdj
Figure A-3 Recommendation The length of the sliding window should be equal to 9. The Pd for the class of data coming from targets lying outside the close proximity area (area 4 figure A-7) shall at first to be estimated and then for the subclasses defined in par A.4.2.1 above The estimation of the Pd for the targets inside the close proximity area (areas 1, 2, and 3 figure A-7 ) it is related to the resolution capabilities of the radar sensor and it is treated in the relevant paragraph A.5.3. Recommendation The chaining method should be the Object Correlator currently, under use in RASS tool developed jointly by EUROCONTROL and FAA or equivalent. A.4.2.3 Presentation of results The Pd shall be presented in : Horizontal polar (for selected Flight levels) and Vertical polar(for selected azimuthal sectors) diagrams graduated in discrete detection bands such as e.g. 50%, 50-80%, 80-90%, 90-95%, 95-98%, 98-100%; Overall Figures (for all the subclasses defined above) derived from the mean detection values for each detection cell in the calculation; Vertical diagrams These shall be in a form of iso-Pd lines, drawn for selected flight levels; Horizontal polar and Vertical polar scattergraphs for the misses generated by the chaining process ; Distribution of the occurrence and the size of the detection gaps .
Edition 0.1
Page A/27
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
An example of the above is given in Figures A-4, A-5, A-6.. The horizontal polar diagrams shall be overlaid on an aeronautical map of the radar sensor site. A.4.2.4 Interpretation of results In order that the results of the Pd analysis may be interpreted correctly and be compared against specified figures (acceptance tests) or measured figures (previous campaigns) the data sample shall be strictly controlled regarding mainly the distance to the neighbouring a/c and additionally the : transponder performance (including aspect angle); the Mode of Flight MOF; environment (fruit, overinterrogations, TCAS).
Page A/28
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
Figure A-4 Horizontal polar diagram (SSR probability of detection)
Edition 0.1
Page A/29
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
Figure A-5 Vertical polar diagram (SSR Probability of detection)
Page A/30
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
Figure A-6 Tabular presentation (SSR probability of detection)
Edition 0.1
Page A/31
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
A.4.3 A.4.3.1
Probability of code detection . Data classification. The data shall at first to be classified in accordance to the distance to neighbouring aircraft. Then the data sample coming from targets outside the close proximity area (area 4 figure A-9) shall be classified in accordance to : transponder performance taking also into account the aspect angle ; environmental conditions (fruits, overinterrogations, TCAS); Mode of Flight (MOF)(in case of on site tracking). The extrapolated target reports shall be sorted out.
A.4.3.2
Data analysis . For the estimation of the probability of code detection only the target reports used for the calculation of the target position detection shall be taken into account . So only the target reports that the chaining process associate to an aircraft trajectory shall be considered. The Pcd and Pcv measurement shall be sensor performance based, but shall use multi-radar information, where available, to detect, whether a target is present in the CMV and whether a code change is due to a pilot action or to system malfunction. The probability of Mode A or Mode C code detection for a trajectory shall be estimated using the following formulas :
Pcd = The number of target reports with validated and correct Mode A Mode A The number of detected target reports chained to the trajectory Pcd = The number of target reports with validated and correct Mode C The number of detected target reports chained to the trajectory Mode C
(A.4.3) NOTES
Page A/32
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
1.
The code validation of Mode A or Mode C is a process carried out by the Radar sensor under question. The validation is a flagged ìndication of the correctness of the Mode A/C message derived from the above process. 2. Correct means the Mode A/C code value corresponds to the current "correct" value for the associated trajectory. The correct value is determined and maintained by the analysis system.
For the technical performance analysis of the radar sensor the performance of the validation process shall be known, so the probability of code validation shall be estimated. The probability of Mode A or C code validation for a trajectory shall be calculated using the following formula :
Pcv = The number of target reports with validated Mode A/C The Mode A/C number of detected target reports chained to the trajectory
(A.4.4)
A measure of the efficiency of the validation process is the Probability of validating incorrect codes P`cv which is equal to : P`cv = Pcv - Pcd (A.4.5)
When the analysis is based on the opportunity traffic the CMV shall be divided in elementary three dimensional cells and the Pcd and Pcv inside each cell shall be calculated. The size of the cell depends on the required accuracy of the measurement and actually from the number of the expected trajectories inside the cell. The Pcd and Pcv shall be estimated for all the classes defined in par. A.4.3.1 (data coming from targets lying outside the close proximity area figure A-7). The estimation of the Pcd, Pcv for targets inside the close proximity area (areas 1, 2, and 3 figure A-7 ) it is related to the resolution capabilities of the radar sensor and it is treated in the relevant paragraph A.5.3. Recommendation. The chaining method should be the Object Correlator currently under use in RASS tool or equivalent. A.4.3.3 Presentation of the results For the technical performance the Pcd and Pcv shall be presented in :
Edition 0.1
Page A/33
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
Horizontal polar (for selected Flight Levels) and Vertical polar(for selected azimuthal sectors) graduated in discrete detection bands such as e.g. 50%, 50-80%, 80-90%, 90-95%, 95-98%, 98-100%; Overall Figures derived from the mean detection values for each detection cell in the calculation; Vertical diagrams .These shall be in a form of iso-Pd lines, drawn for selected flight levels. An example of the above is given in Figures A-4, A-5, A-6. The horizontal polar diagram shall be overlaid on an aeronautical map of the radar sensor site. A.4.3.4 Interpretation of results . In order that the results of the Pcd and Pcv analysis may be interpreted correctly and be compared against specified figures (acceptance tests) or measured figures (previous campaigns)the data sample shall be controlled regarding mainly the distance to the neighbouring a/c and additionally the : transponder performance taking also into account the aspect angle ; environmental conditions (fruit, overinterrogations, TCAS); Mode of Flight (MOF).
Page A/34
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
A.4.4 A.4.4.1
False / Multiple SSR target reports ratio. Data classification. For the technical performance analysis of the radar sensor the data shall be classified in accordance to : transponder performance; Mode of Flight; distance to neighbouring a/c; environmental conditions (Fruits, overinterrogations, TCAS); Type of traffic ( civil , military, civil /military ). The extrapolated target reports shall not be used for the analysis .
A.4.4.2
Data analysis . For the estimation of the False / Multiple SSR target reports ratio the target reports shall at first be chained. As a result chain data shall be derived with the history and the characteristics of each target report forming a chain. Then the False /Multiple target reports shall be sorted out based on the particular characteristics they possess which are generally the following : a) False SSR target reports they are not synchronised ( asynchronous fruits which normally shall not appear at the output of the plot filter); they form track with relative short life. (synchronous fruits and second time around replies ); b) Multiple SSR target reports they may have the same A/C code as the real aircraft target reports but they form track with relative sort life and they appear in certain sectors bounded, by the orientation and the size of reflecting surface. (reflections ); they appear in pairs with small azimuth separation less than the antenna beamwidth (splits ); they appear in a ring ,around the radar sensor (sidelobes). The algorithm shall also correlate the recorded and processed data, with HPD of the antenna of the radar sensor, for the identification of the multiple SSR target reports coming from sidelobes. The classification of Multiple target reports is made on the basis of range and azimuth separation from a reference target. The diagram below illustrates how the range and azimuth separation classes associate with each other. Where the classes overlap other criteria are used to decide to which class a multiple
Edition 0.1
Page A/35
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
target will be assigned, e.g reflections can only be greater in range than the reference target. Although the classes are defined with individual minimum and maximum range/azimuth limits, in practice several of the boundaries are defined by the range precision and 3dB beamwidth of the system under test. Radar parameter ONM Range Precision Antenna Beamwidth Last expected sidelobe
Range separation (NM)
Value 0 1 range quanta 3DB 150 deg
Corresponding FPA classes Multipath Min Rng Multipath Max Rng , Split Min Rng, Reflection Minimum Range Split Max Az, Reflector Min Az, Sidelobe Min Az Sidelobe Max Az, Backlobe Min Az
Reflections
Refl Max Rng
SP Max Rng Refl Min Rng SP Min Rng Multipath Max Rng Multipath Min Rng ONM Range Split Range/Az Split Back Lobe
Mul' Path
Az Split
Side Lobe Ring Around
O deg Split Min Az Split MaxAz
Azimuth separation (degrees)

Refl Min Az Sidelobe Min Az Refl Max Az Sidelobe Min Az Backlobe Min Az Backlobe Min Az
Figure A-7 Position difference between reference(true) and multiple (false ) plot.
The False / Multiple SSR target reports ratio shall be calculated using the following formula : (A.4.5)
R = The number of detected secondary & combined target reports Fal/Mul

(A.4.6)
The number of False / Multiple SSR target reports
Page A/36
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
The number of false SSR target reports (fruit, STAT) a) reports (A.4.7) The number of multiple SSR target reports b) reports (A.4.8) The number of multiple SSR target reports from splits RSplits = The number of detected secondary & combined target RMulti = The number of detected secondary & combined target RFalse= The number of detected secondary & combined target
b.1) reports
(A.4.9) The number of multiple SSR target reports from reflections b.2) reports (A.4.10) The number of multiple SSR target reports from sidelobes b.3) reports In addition to the above an algorithm shall correlate the processed data with map data and if possible with digital terrain elevation data for the identification of the reflecting surfaces. Recommendations. 1) See recommendation of par.7.4.1. 2) False plots due to resolution problem. The resolution case induced false plots are generated due to the radar performance degradation when two or more aircraft are in a resolution case (inside the close proximity area). The estimation of this class is straightforward, if the false plot and the reference plot are observed in a resolution case then the multiple is classified as resolution case induced false plot and filtered. 2)For the Chaining the Object Correlator algorithm or equivalent should be applied. For the correlation of the recorded data with digital terrain elevation data RASCAL/SALADT or equivalent should be used. For the measurement of the antenna diagram RASS_PDP or equivalent shall be used. A.4.4.3 Presentation of results. RSibel.= The number of detected secondary & combined target RRefl.= The number of detected secondary & combined target
Edition 0.1
Page A/37
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
In addition to the above on a aeronautical map and on a topographical ordnance survey map of the site of the radar sensor, the position and the number of false target reports shall be indicated and the position of the reflecting surfaces . A.4.4.4 Interpretation of the results. In order that the results of the False/multiple false targets analysis may be interpreted correctly and be compared against specified figures (acceptance tests) or measured figures (previous campaigns) the data sample shall be controlled regarding mainly the distance to neighbouring a/c and additionally the : transponder performance; Mode of Flight MOF ; environmental conditions (fruit, overinterrogations, TCAS).
Page A/38
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
A.5
SECONDARY ANALYSIS General
SENSOR
QUALITY
PERFORMANCE
PARAMETERS
A.5.1
The quality performance parameters of a Secondary Radar Sensor (SSR) are: Positional accuracy ; False code information ; Resolution . A.5.2 A.5.2.1 Positional accuracy. General The positional accuracy is defined as the measure of the difference between the position of a target as reported by the sensor and the true position of the target at the time of detection. We consider as the true position of the target a reference position. This reference position can be extracted either from data recorded at different input /output (I/O) interfaces of the radar sensor under test (e.g. .I/O between monopulse receiver and monopulse signal processor or I/O between the radar sensor and the Radar Data Processing System at the centre), or from DGPS positional data recorded on board a test flight aircraft. We assume an error model as follows : m(t)=(1+)* ref (t+ t)+ + m(t)= ref(t+ t)+ + m = measured slant range ref = reference slant range = slant range bias error = slant range random error = slant range gain error m = measured azimuth ref = reference azimuth = azimuth bias = azimuth random error t = time stamp error (A.5.1)
Edition 0.1
Page A/39
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
The time stamping error is only applicable when sensors fusion techniques are used in the RDPS system. The error model is based in addition on the assumption that there is a range clock bias error which is represented by the parameter . The bias errors are considered as fixed values corresponding for range and azimuth bias to the mean random error. The accuracy of the reference position shall be at least an order of magnitude better than the accuracy of the measured position of the target reports at the radar sensors output. According to the EUROCONTROL Radar Surveillance Standards positional accuracy shall be expressed by the following categories of errors : systematic or bias errors ; random errors : jumps. The performance for systematic / bias errors shall be expressed by : slant range bias ; slant range gain error ; azimuth bias ; time stamp error. The performance for random errors shall be expressed by : slant range error standard deviation ; azimuth error standard deviation . NOTE- Jumps are target reports with errors in position three times higher or more than the standard deviation for range and azimuth . A.5.2.2 Data classification. The positional accuracy mainly depends on the signal to noise ratio of the reply pulses at receiver output which in turn depends from the transponder performance. Interrogations from adjacent SSRs may block the transponder and certain flight patterns (tangential ) may shield the transponders antenna . The signal to noise ratio is strongly affected if there are other a/cs in close proximity . So the data shall at first classified in accordance to the distance to the neighbouring a/cs in two major classes : data coming from targets in the isolated targets area (area 4 figure A10);
Page A/40
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
data coming from targets in close proximity area (areas 1, 2, and 3 Figure A-10). Then the above classes shall be subdivided in accordance to : transponder performance; Mode of Flight MOF; environmental conditions (Fruits, overinterrogations, TCAS). A.5.2.3 Data analysis For the estimation of the positional accuracy the recorded data shall at first to be chained. Then a reference trajectory shall be reconstructed for each target inside the CMV and compared against the measured positions. The reconstruction of the reference trajectory (for each target inside the CMV) shall be based : a) on recorded target reports when : a.1) at least part of the CMV is covered from another two radars ; NOTE Position reconstruction can only be reliable when the target is seen by two or more sensors . If more than 30% of the chained data are seen by only one sensor then the quality analysis results may be unreliable. a.2)at least n trajectories can be built with a minimum of m target reference positions. Where each target reference position shall be within the reference position accuracy stated in par. 6.2.1. b)on multilevel recordings (e.g. recordings at the video level and at the plot level) when the a.1 and a.2 are not applicable. c) on DGPS data (coming from test flights) time synchronised with the recorded target reports or any other reference positioning system. The DGPS position of the target together with the corrected DGPS time should be taken as the reference. The DGPS information will normally be in Latitude/Longitude and height above Mean Sea Level with coordinates in WGS84. The sensor data will normally be either Range/Azimuth/FL, X/Y local/FL or X/Y System/ FL. The coordinates for the sensors and system origin must be stated in WGS84. To chain the two sources of data and to use the DGPS position as a reference both data sources must be projected onto a common coordinate system. Either a Stereographic system (height independent) or a x/y/FL system may be used. In the case of a mono-radar evaluation the system origin should be the sensor site coordinates, i.e. x/y local = x/y system. The GPS altitude values or sensor FL values must also be normalised if errors are to be minimised correction of Mode C or GPS Altitude values for the regional QNH at the sensor location and time of recording would be adequate.
Edition 0.1
Page A/41
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
From the comparison of the measured position and the reference position for each target inside the CMV and assuming the model A.19 the following errors shall be estimated: i) systematic (bias) errors : slant range bias; slant range gain error; azimuth bias; time stamp error. The systematic errors shall represented by fix numbers. ii) random errors : slant range error; azimuth error The random errors shall be expressed by the standard deviation of the distribution they follow. iii) positional jumps The positional jumps shall be expressed by the overall ratio of jumps as follows :
Rj = The number of detected target reports
The total number of jumps
(A.5.2)
The positional accuracy shall be estimated for all the classes and subclasses defined in par A.5.2.2 above. Recommendation The following algorithms should be applied: a) Object Correlator or equivalent for the chaining and MURATREC or equivalent for the trajectory reconstruction in the case that recorded multiradar data are available. MURATREC is a curve fitting technique using 4th order beta-splines currently under use in RASS tool. b) RASS-S or equivalent when multilevel recordings are used. A.5.2.4 Presentation of results. The random errors shall be presented in histograms showing the distribution they follow figure A-8 is an example of such an evaluation made by RASS-C tool. A quick way to detect sensors malfunctions is the use of scattergraphs as the one in figure A-9 where large errors indicate probable malfunction of the sensor in this sector.
Page A/42
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
A.5.2.5
Interpretation of results In order that the results of the positional accuracy analysis may be interpreted correctly and be compared against specified figures (acceptance tests) or measured figures (previous campaigns) the data sample shall be strictly controlled regarding first the distance to the neighbouring a/cs and then in accordance to : transponder performance (including aspect angle); the mode of flight; environment (fruit, overinterrogations, TCAS).
Edition 0.1
Page A/43
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
Figure A-8 Presentation of the range and azimuth errors
Page A/44
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
Figure A-9 Scattergraph
Edition 0.1
Page A/45
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
A.5.3 A.5.3.1
False code information General The false code information according to the EUROCONTROL Surveillance Standard shall be expressed by : overall false code ratio ; validated false Mode A code ratio; validated false Mode C code ratio . NOTE 1. The code validation of Mode A or Mode C is a process carried out by the Radar sensor under question. The validation is a flagged ìndication of the correctness of the Mode A/C message derived from the above process. Correct means the Mode A/C code value corresponds to the current "correct" value for the associated trajectory. The correct value is determined and maintained by the analysis system.
2.-
A.5.3.2
Data classification. The data shall at first to be classified in accordance to the distance to neighbouring aircraft. Then the data sample coming from targets inside and outside the close proximity area (see figure A-10) shall be classified in accordance to : transponder performance taking also into account the aspect angle ; environmental conditions (fruits, overinterrogations, TCAS); Mode of Flight (MOF).
A.5.3.3
Data analysis For the estimation of the false code information only the secondary or combined target reports used for the calculation of the probability of target position detection shall be taken into account . So only the target reports that the chaining process shall associate to an aircraft trajectory shall be considered. The measurement shall be sensor performance based but shall use multi-radar information where available to detect whether a code change is due to a pilot action or to system malfunction. The false code information shall be estimated using the following formulas : for the overall false code ratio
Page A/46
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
Over/f
R = The number of detected secondary/combined reports chained to trajectories

(A.5.3)
The number of reports with incorrect Mode A or/and Mode C (valid or not)
for the validated false Mode A codes ratio :
R = The number of detected sec/combined reports chained to trajectories A f/v

(A.5.4) for the validated false Mode C codes ratio :
The number of reports with incorrect and validated Mode A
R = The number of detected sec/combined reports chained to trajectories

C f/v
(A.5.6) The false code information shall be estimated for all the classes and subclasses defined in A.5.3.2 above. A.5.3.4 Presentation of results The results of the analysis shall be presented in a table showing the false code information ratios for each defined class and subclass of data. A.5.3.5 Interpretation of results In order that the results of the false code information analysis may be interpreted correctly and be compared against specified figures (acceptance tests) or measured figures (previous campaigns) he data sample shall be strictly controlled regarding first the distance to the neighbouring a/cs and then in accordance to : transponder performance (including aspect angle); the Mode of Flight MOF; environment (fruit, overinterrogations, TCAS).
The number of reports with incorrect and validated Mode C
Edition 0.1
Page A/47
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
A.5.4 A.5.4.1
Resolution. General According to the EUROCONTROL Radar Surveillance Standard the resolution is the capability of the sensor to discriminate between two aircraft in close proximity and to produce target reports with correct code for both. The probability of position and code detection is applicable to each individual aircraft.. Close proximity is defined for SSR as follows : slant range 2 NM; azimuth (NM) (4) 2 2 * nominal 3 dB interrogation beamwidth.
(2) 1 (3) O (deg.)
(1)
Figure A-10
1 = 2 n360 f t
For :
(A.5.7)
n (number of SSR interrogation modes) = 2; f (interrogation repetition frequency) t (antenna rotation period ) 1= 0.6 Deg;
= 240 Hz;
= 10 sec;
2 = 2 * nominal 3 dB interrogation beamwidth;
1 = 0.05 NM;
Page A/48
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
2 = 2 NM. A.5.4.2 Data classification. For the analysis of the resolution capabilities of the radar sensor the data shall be classified in accordance to : transponder performance; Mode of Flight MOF; environmental conditions (Fruits, overinterrogations, TCAS). A.5.4.3 Data analysis For the evaluation of the resolution capability of the radar sensor the probability of position and correct code detection for each individual target shall be estimated. For this the recorded data shall at first to be chained then a reference trajectory shall be reconstructed for each target inside the CMV. The reconstruction of the reference trajectory shall be done as it is described in par. A.5.2.3 above. The resolution analysis is based on sections of chains which are in close approach state - the targets are within a certain mutual separation from each another. Before the resolution analysis can take place the test cases must be isolated from the rest of the chained data set. In a multi-radar environment a simple proximity filter in x/y/time can be used to identify when two targets enter a close approach state. In a mono-radar case then Range/Azimuth/Time may be used. The object of the classification is to isolate potentially interesting test cases. Once a number of such cases have been identified then each one should be examined to determine if it is suitable for detailed analysis. All of the identified cases should normally be used for the global analysis of Position and Code information. The detection of close approach cases may use the reference trajectory or any algorithm which has the continuous state of each trajectory. Raw sensor data are not suitable for determining mutual separation of targets due to detection failures. Using this reference trajectory information an algorithm shall first sort out all pairs of trajectories having parts falling inside the close proximity area (Figure A-10 thick line) and then define the parts falling inside areas 1, 2 and 3. The algorithm shall calculate the number of expected target reports for each part of the trajectory and the total number of expected target reports for each close proximity area. At last using the chaining information the number of detected target reports inside the areas 1, 2, and 3 shall be calculated. The probability of position detection Pd and correct code detection Pcd shall be estimated for the areas 1, 2 and 3 using the following formulas: (A.5.8) The number of detected reports chained in close proximity Pd= The number of expected reports in close proximity
Edition 0.1
Page A/49
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
(A.5.9) The number of reports with correct and valid Mode A Pcd=
ModeA
The number of detected reports chained in close proximity
(A.5.10) The number of reports with correct and valid Mode C Pcd=
ModeC
The number of detected reports chained in close proximity
The probability of position detection Pd and correct code detection shall be estimated for all the classes defined in par A.5.4.2 above . A.5.4.4 Presentation of results The results of the analysis shall be presented in a table showing the Pd and Pcd for each close proximity area and for each defined subclass of data. A.5.4.5 Interpretation of results The results of the resolution analysis may be interpreted correctly and be compared against specified figures (acceptance tests) or measured figures (previous campaigns) if the data sample provides suitable patterns (i.e. target reports distributed all over the close proximity areas) and it is controlled regarding the following : transponder performance (including aspect angle); the Mode of Flight MOF; environment (fruit, overinterrogations, TCAS). In the case of site acceptance tests the close proximity areas shall be checked thoroughly. If the opportunity traffic does not provide suitable data sample, data coming from special test flights shall be used ( the same data sample shall be used for the accuracy analysis.)
Page A/50
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
A.6 A.6.1
PSR/SSR DATA COMBINING ANALYSIS General According to the EUROCONTROL Surveillance Standard PSR/SSR data combining is the capability of the radar sensor to associate at each antenna scan the target reports of the same aircraft detected by the two sensors and to combine these reports into a single target report. This capability shall be expressed by the following parameters : probability of association (Pas); false association rate (Rfas). An association is considered as false if the target reports from two unrelated targets detected by the two sensors have been associated.
A.6.2
Data classification. The resolution capabilities of the Primary and Secondary radar sensors are very different, so the data shall first to be classified in accordance to the distance to neighbouring aircraft. In this case the close proximity area shall be the union of the close proximity areas of primary and secondary sensor .That means that =2NM and =3b where b is the 3dB beamwidth of the primary antenna. Then the data shall be classified in accordance to the : transponder performance taking also into account the aspect angle ; Mode of Flight (MOF).
A.6.3
Data analysis For the evaluation of the data combining capability of the radar sensor the probability of association Pas and the false association rate Rfas shall be estimated for the classes of targets defined above. For the estimation of the overall probability of association and the overall false association rate the following formulas shall be used : (A.6.1)
Pas = The number of expected combined reports
The number of detected correct combined reports
Rfas = The number of detected combined reports
The number of detected false combined reports

(A.6.2)
NOTE Correct / false combined target report is a target report coming from correct / false association of a primary and a secondary target report.
Edition 0.1
Page A/51
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
A.6.4
Interpretation of results The results of the PSR/SSR combining analysis may be interpreted correctly and be compared against specified figures (acceptance tests) or measured figures (previous campaigns) if the data sample it is controlled regarding the distance to the neighbouring a/c and additional to the following : transponder performance (including aspect angle); the Mode of Flight MOF.
Page A/52
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
A.7 A.7.1
ON-SITE DELAY ANALYSIS General According to the EUROCONTROL Surveillance Standard the on site delay is the time between the moment a radar target for a given aircraft is detected and the moment when the corresponding report starts to be transmitted. These target reports are polished / filtered primary/secondary/combined target reports providing measured radar data after reduction of false data using mono-radar processing techniques.
A.7.2
Data classification The processing delay mainly depends on the load of the system so the data shall be classified in accordance to the load conditions.
A.7.3
Data analysis To estimate the on site processing delay the time of detection for each target and the time of transmission shall be recorded and their difference shall be calculated. The recording shall be done at the level of: azimuth change pulses (ACPs); video (receiver output); plot (plot extractor output); and filtered plot (plot combiner output). The above data shall be time stamped synchronized to a reference clock preferably GPS. The processing time for each target report (plot/filtered plot) shall be estimated for normal and for overload conditions as well as the mean values and standard deviations for the whole data sample .
A.7.4
Interpretation of results The results of the on site delay analysis may be interpreted correctly and be compared against specified figures (acceptance tests) or measured figures (previous campaigns) if the data sample it is strictly controlled regarding the load conditions.
Edition 0.1
Page A/53
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
A.8 A.8.1
AVAILABILITY ANALYSIS General Availability is the probability that a system will be available for use at a given random time or time interval. The term available for use means that the system provides services within the specified limits. The availability is time depended, and it can be categorised as follows : instantaneous availability A(t) which is the probability that the system will be available at any random time t ; mission availability A (t) which is the probability that the system will be m available at a time interval t = t2-t1 and it is expressed by the following formula;
Am =
t 2 t 1 1 t
t2
A(t ) dt
(A.8.1)
steady-state availability As(t) which is the probability that the system will be available for a very large period of time and it is expressed by the following formula :
As( ) = lim
1 t A( t ) dt t 0
(A.8.2)
For systems which are to be operated continuously as a radar system the steady state availability shall be measured and from now on will be symbolised by A and will be called simply Availability. Using theoretical models we can predict the availability of a system. For example for a single system assuming that: a) the failures and repairs follow exponential distributions; b) the failure rate of the equipment is known and equals ; and c) the repair rate of the equipment is known and equals ; the availability is given by the formula :
A=
(A.8.3)
Page A/54
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
the availability for a duplicated system in parallel configuration (one system is main the other is stand-by) as in figure A.11 is given by the formula:
2 + 2 = 2 (A.8.4) + 2 + 22
A (, ) B (, )
Figure A.11
These theoretical models are used during the design phase of a system for the prediction of the availability of the final product and during the operational life of the system to improve the availability of the system (e.g. by increasing the repair rate or decreasing the failure rate or both). According to EUROCONTROL Surveillance Standard the availability of the radar data shall be expressed by the following characteristics: maximum outage time due to any given failure fmax; cumulative outage time due to all failures over a period of one year atot; outage times due to schedule actions s. The above are illustrated in the figure A.12.
a1 Operating Non-operating s
a2
a3
a4
a5
a6
a7
f1 f2 f3 Specified operating time (e.g. one year) Figure A.12
f4
f5
f tot = fi
i =1
(A.8.5)
Edition 0.1
Page A/55
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
fmax= max{f1, f2,...,fn} (A.8.6) For the estimation of the availability of a radar sensor we shall use the following formula ;
A= Specified operating time
Actual operating time x 100

(A.8.7)
or equivalently from figure A.12 :
a x100
ii i= 1 i
a + s+ f
i =1 i =1
(A.8.8)
NOTE The term failure means failure of the sensor to provide data inside the specified limits and may be caused by a malfunction of the sensors hardware, firmware or software. The MTBF Mean Time Between Failures is defined as the actual operating time divided by the number of failures as is given by the formula :
Actual operating time MTBF= Number of failures

or equivalently from figure A.12
(A.8.9)
MTBF =
a
i =1
(A.8.10)
If we assume exponential distribution for the failures then : MTBF=1/ (A.8.11)
Reliability R is defined as the probability that the sensor will operate within the specified limits and is given by the following formula (if we make the same assumption as above ):
R=e
=e
t MTBF
(A.8.12)
The reliability is called also probability of survival Ps. From the formula A.8.12 the probability of surviving a period of time equal to MTBF is 0.37 or 37 per cent which means that the MTBF should not be considered as a failure free period.
Page A/56
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
Recommendation For the estimation of the MTBF the operating time should be chosen so as to include at least five failures to give a reasonable measure of confidence in the figure derived. A.8.2 Data analysis The credibility of the estimation of the availability of a sensor depends from the available time and the failure rate/MTBF of the equipment under test. The site acceptance tests last normally for a couple of weeks a period which is not sufficient for the measurement of the MTBF of the modern electronic equipment which have a minimum of around 1000 hours. During this period we can check only for design problems if any under extreme conditions (e.g. maximum/ minimum temperature, supply voltage variances, overload conditions etc.). This kind of test is called endurance test and depends on the equipment and the time available but it should not last less than 36 hours. The failure rate or the equivalent MTBF of an equipment varies during the life time of the equipment as it is shown in figure A.13 below. Burn-in Wearout (I) (III) (t) early 1/MTBF chance failures wearout period (II) Useful life
tb Figure A.13
tw
Period I is called burn-in period or infant stage and is characterised by a relative high failure rate which decreases rapidly towards a constant. Period II is called useful life period or operating stage or stable stage where the failure rate is essentially constant. Period III is called wearout period where the failure rate is growing rapidly . The equipment starts to age. The MTBF of the system can be checked during the warrantee period of the system which is considered as stable period and normally lasts at least for a year. This check shall be repeated regularly during the life time of the equipment. The estimation of the availability of a sensor shall be based on the recorded outage time due to any given failure of the system over a period of one year. This can be done either by the sensors monitoring and control system or by an external equipment . We can define the failure of the sensor in many different ways depending on the level of sophistication of the monitoring and
Edition 0.1
Page A/57
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
control system. One simple way is to define a failure as the non provision of target reports including field monitors for more than 2 antenna scans as it is defined in the EUROCONTROL Surveillance Standard. This definition is based on the assumption that the monitoring and control system of the sensor will switch off the sensor if the quality of the provided data is below the specified level. This is not always the case because the existing monitoring and control systems are checking a very limited number of performance parameters usually in indirect way. The monitoring system of the primary sensor usually checks indirectly : a) the Pd by checking the station parameters which are related to the detection performance such as : a.1) in the transmission path: power; noise figure. a.2) in the reception path receiver sensitivity (using test target at RF level); MTI (using moving test target). b)the alignment error by checking the position of active/passive reflectors. The monitoring system of the Secondary sensor usually checks indirectly: a) the Pd by checking : a1) in the transmission path: power. a2) in the reception path: receiver sensitivity using test target. b)the alignment error by checking the position of the remote field monitor. At present there is no available external equipment for RTQC(Real Time Quality Control) (measuring on line all radar sensor performance parameters). The monitoring of the quality of the radar information is d one at the existing systems by the controller. So for the existing systems we shall use the above described definition of failure assuming in addition that the monitoring system of the sensor is sensitive to changes of the station parameters which have an impact to the
Page A/58
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
detection and quality performance of the sensor. During the acceptance testing of the sensor the above measurements shall be supported by 24 hours visual observations of the quality of the radar information by experience controllers. Recommendation The assessment of the availability of the radar sensor should be done especially during the acceptance tests either on site by the use of RASS-S, or at the centre by the use of RASS-C or alternatively the radar data processing system which should take a sample of the radar data from each radar sensor connected to the centre. A.8.3 Interpretation of results The results of the availability analysis may be interpreted correctly and be compared against specified figures (acceptance tests) or measured figures (previous campaigns) if: the external conditions are inside the specified limits; the tuning and repair of the system is done as prescribed in the manufacturers procedures ; and the indications of the monitoring and control (if it is used) are related to the detection and quality performance of the provided radar data .
Edition 0.1
Page A/59
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
ANNEX B (INFORMATIVE) RADAR SENSOR DETAILED TECHNICAL PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS B.1 General The detailed technical performance analysis is applied during factory and site acceptance tests and after major repair or modifications during the life time of the radar sensor. In the detailed technical analysis the performance of the individual equipments composing the radar chain is assessed. Figure B.1 is a generic functional diagram which covers most different system designs and shows the different input / output interfaces which can be used for the detailed technical analysis of the radar sensor. Modern integrated systems may present practical problems for making measurements at certain interfaces. For example, a recent trend in surveillance systems is to integrate on site tracking which gives raise to the surveillance processing plot combination and data transmission functions being combined into one system element. That makes it difficult or impossible to access the interfaces PIO6, SIO6, CIO1 and CIO2 without highly specialized interface equipment. In order to avoid this kind of situation, manufacturers of equipment should be urged to provide, as much as possible, easily accessible interfaces. B.1.1 Input/output (I/O) interfaces. Reference is made to Figure B.1 and in particular to the I/O interfaces designated: PIO for I/O interfaces related to the primary radar element; SIO for I/O interfaces related to the SSR element; CIO for common I/O interfaces at radar sensor site level. In Figure B.1 the I/O interfaces are shown by a common designation. Although the input and output Interfaces may well be common points (i.e. a connector, a data bus etc.) they may be physically separated. For the sake of convenience and simplicity, an input or output interface at a certain point within a system (e.g. receiver output) has been given a common designation (e.g. PIO2 and SIO3, etc.). B.1.2 Output interfaces The output interfaces are points in the radar system where data can be output, either in analogue or digital form for: a) analysis in a radar analysis tool; b) standard measurements using normal test equipment (oscilloscope etc.); and c) recording.
Edition 0.1
Page B/1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
B.1.3
Input interfaces The input interfaces are points in the radar system where data can be injected either in analogue or digital form in order to test the system particularly for special cases including performance anomalies. The injected signal/data may be either analogue or digitally synthesized (simulated) or in the form of a recorded message.
B.1.4
Primary radar I/O interfaces a) PIOl: Radiated RF input This is the radiated RF input to the PSR system and a test input will typically be from an active reflector. This is an input-only interface. b) PIO2: Primary radar RF input interface At this point RF tests signals can be injected into the input port(s) of the PSR receiver(s). This is also an input-only interface. c) PIO3: PSR video (analogue or digital) input/output interface This point represents the output of the PSR receiver(s) where detected video can be output for recording purposes. Similarly, this point acts as an input interface for the injection of synthetic (simulated or recorded) video. According to PSR system philosophy, the video at this level may be either analogue or digital (quantized). d) PIO4: Primary radar processed video I/O interface This I/O interface represents the output of the PSR intermediate video processing of the primary radar system. The video at this point will have been subjected to processes such as MTI, MTD, CFAR, LogFTC in order to obtain usable data (analogue or digitized) for input to the primary plot extractor. At this point data can be either injected (tests, simulations, etc.) or extracted (recordings etc.). e) PIO5: Primary radar extractor video (plots) I/O interface This I/O interface represents the output of the primary plot extractor and the data is entirely in digitized form. As in the other cases, data can either be injected or extracted according to the task to be carried out. f) PIO6: Primary radar track/filtered plot I/O interface At this point, the extracted PSR plots have been subjected to a further rotation
Page B/2
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
Figure B.1 I/O Interfaces
Edition 0.1
Page B/3
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
scan to scan processing in order to eliminate false plots, and possibly to form monoradar tracks. As in the other cases data can either be injected or extracted at this point according to the task to be carried out. g) PIO7: Primary radar transmitter output This is an output-only interface. h) PIO8: Primary timing unit In most cases, this is an output-only interface. NOTE.- In modern architecture systems several intefaces operate together( e. g. PlO5, PlO6, SIO5, and ClO2, on a local area network (LAN)). B.1.5 Secondary radar I/O interfaces a) SIO1: Radiated RF input This is the radiated RF input to the SSR system and a test input will typically be from a remote field (or site) monitor. This is an input-only interface. b) SIO2: Secondary radar RF input interface At this point, RF test signals can be injected into the input port(s) of the receiver(s). This is also an input-only interface. c) SIO3: SSR video (analogue or digital) I/O interface This point represents the output of the SSR receiver(s) where detected video can be output for recording purposes. Similarly, the point acts as an input interface for the injection of synthetic (simulated or recorded) video. According to SSR system philosophy, the video at this level may be either analogue or digital (quantized). d) SIO4: Secondary radar processed video I/O interface This I/O interface represents the output of the SSR intermediate video processing of the secondary radar system. At this level the video(s) may have been subjected to such processes as: RSLS processing; OBA processing; and Video reconstitution. The data at this point may be either in analogue or digital form and provides the necessary input to the secondary plot extractor. It should be noted however that in modern SSR equipment (particularly for monopulse SSR applications), the receiver, intermediate video processing and plot extractor may be one common unit, making it more difficult for accessing data (video/plots) at this
Page B/4
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
level. At this point, data can be either injected (tests, simulations etc.) or extracted (recordings etc.). e) SIO5: Secondary radar extracted video (plots) I/O interface This I/O interface represents the output of the secondary plot extractor and the data is entirely in digitized form. As in the other cases, data can either be injected or extracted according to the task to be carried out. f) SIO6 Secondary radar surveillance processor plot/track I/O interface At this point, the extracted SSR plots have been subjected to a further processing in order to eliminate false plots, and in some instances form monoradar tracks. As in the other cases, data can either be injected or extracted at this point according to the task to be carried out. g) SIO7: Secondary radar transmitter output This is an output-only interface. h) SIO8: Secondary timing unit In many cases this unit may have an additional input for external (e.g. primary radar) synchronization. B.1.6 Common radar I/O interfaces a) CIO1: Plot combiner I/O interface At this point, the extracted PSR and SSR data have been subjected to certain combination criteria and the output at CIO1 will consist of: combined plots/tracks; SSR-only plots/tracks; PSR-only plots/tracks. In the case that the radar station is PSR or SSR-only, no plot combiner will be required. b) CIO2: Combined surveillance processor I/O interface This is a special case of the PIO6 and SIO6 I/O Interfaces and corresponds to a system where no separate PSR and/or SSR surveillance processing is carried out before plot combination. As in the other cases, data can either be injected or extracted at this point according to the task to be carried out. c) CIO3: Modulated transmitter data This interface is suited for analogue data recording. d) CIO4: output of transmission medium
Edition 0.1
Page B/5
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
At this point, however, the modulated data from the transmitter containing possible errors due to additional noise from the transmission line and other distortions, can be analysed. B.2 Analysis application The detailed technical performance analysis should be applied during: factory acceptance tests; site acceptance tests; commissioning ; post modifications. The characteristics of the equipments forming the radar chain(e.g. antenna, transmitter, receiver) that can be measured depend on the available infrastructure and test equipments. So some of the parameters can be measured only in the factory during the factory acceptance tests. The following paragraphs give a very limited information for the measurements in the factory and some guidelines for the on site measurements. B.3 B.3.1 Antenna performance analysis General The antenna performance analysis is usually dealing with the following antenna characteristics: a) antenna gain ; b) antenna polar diagrams (horizontal and vertical); c) azimuth squint and skew; d) cross-polarization, ellipticity ratio, ICR (integrated cancellation ratio); B.3.2 Test method a)Gain. The gain measurement is made during factory acceptance tests using special test sites and special test equipment and on site using special test equipment while the radar sensor is in operation. The measure-ment of the gain shall be made at the peak of the beam and shall be used for the calibration of the horizontal and vertical polar diagrams. During the on site tests only the gain of the antenna for the horizontal plane passing from the probe antenna is measured. The SIO1 and PIO1 interfaces shall be used when the system is in operation (regular checks). The SIO2 and PIO2 interfaces shall be used in the factory acceptance and site acceptance tests. The gain measurement requires a special calibrated gain antenna (usually a horn or a Yagi) and receiver.
Page B/6
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
b) Horizontal and vertical polar diagrams The horizontal polar diagram can be measured simultaneously with the gain during factory and on site tests. The vertical polar diagram normally can be measured at the manufacturers test site .On site measurement can be made for the SSR antenna using opportunity traffic and for the PSR antenna solar measurements. An indirect way, during site acceptance tests, is to deduct the VPD from the data collected during test flight for the vertical coverage . c)Azimuth squint and skew The azimuth squint and skew is the variation in azimuth and elevation of the peak of the beam with respect to the mechanical elevation of the antenna. This characteristic can be measured only during factory acceptance tests using test sites and special test equipments. d)Cross-polarization, ellipticity ratio, Intergrated Cancellation Ratio Cross polarization is the polarization component orthogonal to a reference polarization (i.e. for the SSR the reference polarization is vertical ). So for the SSR the cross polarization is the horizontal component of the field vector (in ideal situation this component should be zero). The cross polarization can be measured using two calibrated antennas (linear polarized) with orthogonal polarization planes. This measurement can be made during the factory acceptance tests or site acceptance tests. Ellipticity ratio and integrated cancellation ratio are equivalent terms and can be interchanged. These characteristics can be measured only in the factory during factory acceptance tests. B.3.3 Presentation of results The results shall be presented in form of diagrams giving the antenna gain with respect to azimuth and elevation angles. Figure B.2 is a typical example of horizontal polar diagram. B.3.4 Interpretation of results The results shall be compared against specified values during acceptance tests and against previous measurements during regular tests.
Edition 0.1
Page B/7
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
Figure B.2 Horizontal polar diagram B.4 B.4.1 Transmitter performance analysis General The transmitter performance analysis is usually dealing with the following transmitter characteristics: a) output power; b) power spectrum; c) pulse characteristics/spacing. For the measurement of the above characteristics the PIO7 and SIO7 interfaces shall be used. B.4.2 Test method a) output power The output power can be measured either as an average or as a peak value using one of the following equipments: average power meter; peak power meter; spectrum analyser; single-shot digitising oscilloscope; repetitive digitizing oscilloscope. b) power spectrum
Page B/8
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
A sample of the RF signal shall be checked for bandwidth , sidelobe level, and level of harmonics using a spectrum analyser. For SSR the Bandwidth shall be check for compliance with ICAO Annex 10 specifications. Programmable spectrum analysers can measure at the same time the following characteristics: carrier frequency; pulse repetition frequency and pulse width; duty cycle; peak power; average power. c) pulse characteristics/spacing The pulse characteristics shall be measured using an oscilloscope or spectrum analyser (for the SSR the pulse spacing shall be measured in addition)and are the following: rise time; fall time; duration; pulse repetition frequency; pulse stability (phase and amplitude especially for PSR). For the SSR the pulse space /spacing shall be checked for compliance with the specified figures in Annex 10. B.4.3 Presentation of results Not applicable. B.4.4 Interpretation of results The results shall be compared to the specified figures during acceptance tests and previous measurements during regular tests. B.5 B.5.1 Receiver/video processing performance analysis General The receiver/video processing performance analysis is dealing with the following characteristics: losses;
Edition 0.1
Page B/9
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
STC/GTC; noise figure; bandwidth; Off boresigth angle (OBA); dynamic range; minimum detectable signal MDS; filter response, improvement factor. B.5.2 Test method a) losses The losses shall be measured using a vector network analyser connected to the PIO2 and SIO2 interfaces. b) STC/GTC In the primary sensors the gain control is applied at the RF and /or IF level and is derived usually from ground clutter maps. In the secondary sensors the STC is applied at the video level. For the PSR STC/GTC measurement a rf test pulse shall be injected (a signal generator shall be connected at the PIO2 interface) when the system is in operation and the signal strength shall be recorded at the PIO4 interface. For the SSR STC/GTC measurement a video test pulse shall be injected (a signal generator shall be connected at the SIO3 interface) and the signal level shall be recorded at the SIO4 interface. c) noise figure For the measurement of the noise figure a wide-band noise source shall be connected at the PIO2 and SIO2 interfaces. The noise power at the PI03 and SIO3 shall be recorded with noise source off. Then the noise source shall switched on and the output shall increased so as the noise power at receivers output is doubled. d) bandwidth For the measurement of the bandwidth o the receiver a c-w signal f generator shall be connected at PIO2 and SIO2 and the spectrum shall be recorded at the PIO3 and SIO3 interfaces using a spectrum analyser. For the SSR the measurement shall be compared against the specified figures in ANNEX 10. e) Off Boresigth Angle (OBA) This measurement is applicable to Monopulse SSR systems only. The OBA is measured at SIO3 . BITE or test sets shall inject test signals at SIO2.
Page B/10
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
The error pattern is measured as the ratio of the log Sum pattern to the Difference pattern. f) Dynamic range For the measurement of the dynamic range of the receiver a rf test pulse shall be injected at PIO2 and SIO2 . The rf test pulse shall be increased slowly until the signal at the PIO4 and SIO4 reaches its saturation point. g) Minimum Detectable Signal (MDS) The MDS is defined either for 0db Signal to Noise at the output of the receiver and then it is called tangential sensitivity or for 3db S/N. The set up is as for the dynamic range and the MDS is the power for which S/N at the output is either 0db or 3db. h) filter response(MTI, MTD) Improvement factor. This measurement is applicable to PSR only. The MTI, MTD Filter response shall be fully investigated over the radial speed range specified for the system. The rf test pulse generator shall produce test pulses with various amplitudes and phases with respect to the transmitted pulse. The zero velocity filter shall also be checked during site acceptance tests with use of a test aircraft flying a circular pattern around the radar at a constant height. The improvement factor I is defined as the ratio of the Signal to Clutter at the input of the filter to the Signal to Clutter at the output.
I=
( S / C) o ( S / C)i
The improvement factor is measured usually during factory acceptance tests using simulated data ,but it can be measured on site (using the above formula) by injecting an rf pulse over a ground and or sea clutter area. B.5.3 Presentation of results The results shall be presented in an appropriate form e.g. attenuation versus range for STC/GTC, or Gain versus Doppler speed/frequency for MTI filter response. B.5.4 Iterpretation of results The results shall be compared against the specified values or previous measurements. B.6 B.6.1 Plot extractor performance analysis General The plot extractor performance analysis is usually dealing with the following characteristics :
Edition 0.1
Page B/11
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
Constant False Alarm Rate (CFAR) performance; extraction criteria; correlation interpolation; defruiting function; code detection/validation; resolution. B.6.2 Test method a) Constant False Alarm Rate (CFAR ) performance This characteristic is applicable only to PSR and can be measured during Factory acceptance tests. Using a hit pattern generator simulating a clutter hit pattern connected at PIO4 we can measure at the output (PIO5) the number of false plots produced. By moving a test target inside the clutter area we can measure the CFAR losses. b)extraction criteria With the same test set up as above the leading and trailing edge criteria can be tested. c) correlation interpolation With the same test set up the performance of the plot extractor to interpolate the position of the target in the presence of noise /clutter can be checked. At the output the recorded position of the test target is checked against the expected one. d) defruiting This is applicable to SSR and can be checked using a special reply generator connected at SIO4. At the output SIO5 the number of false plots created by the injected FRUITS (asynchronous replies) shall be counted. e) code detection / validation The code detection / validation can be checked using as above a reply generator or using live traffic as described in Annex A above. f) resolution The resolution can be check either using test targets or live data as described in Annex A above. B.6.3 Presentation of results Not applicable.
Page B/12
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
B.6.4
Interpretation of results The results shall be compared against specified values or previous measurements.
B.7 B.7.1
Plot filter performance analysis. General The aim of the plot filter is to reduce the number of false plots without affecting the probability of detection . The majority of the plot filters are using tracking. For the PSR sources of the false plots are the following: Moving clutter (sea, weather angel); ships and cars; interference. For the SSR the sources of false plots are the following: reflections; sidelobes; splits. Another characteristic which shall be checked is the reaction of the system to overload conditions.
B.7.2
Test method The performance of the plot filter can be checked using live traffic data and making recordings at the input PIO5/SIO5 and at the output PIO6/SIO6 or CIO1 as described in Annex A above. The overload reaction can be checked using a plot simulator .
B.7.3
Presentation of results Not applicable.
B.7.4
Interpretation of results The results shall be compared against specified figures or previous measurements.
Edition 0.1
Page B/13
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
ANNEX C ( RECOMMENDED) FLIGHT TESTING METHODS C.1 General . The radar sensor performance analysis shall be based on recorded data, coming from opportunity traffic. Special test flights shall be used, only in the following cases : when the performance parameters analysis requires special aircraft configurations ( e. g resolution check ); during the site acceptance tests ; during the site commissioning of the radar sensor ,if there is no adequate opportunity traffic . Flight testing shall use small aircraft, equipped with an approved transponder, for all radar flight tests. Small aircraft are considered to be the Beechcraft Bonanza, Cessna 182, and other aircraft of similar size which represent nearly the same reflecting surface. The Sabreliner, Jet Commander, Jetstar and other jets of similar size are also regarded as small aircraft for the purpose of radar flight checks. Aircraft selection should consider possible limitations due to aircraft range, terrain, weather conditions, etc. The flight testing aircraft shall carry a calibrated transponder for SSR power optimization and GTC curve establishment. Flight test aircraft shall provide the pilot selection of any one of the following three combinations of power output and sensitivity : 350 50 W power output and 75 1 dbm sensitivity. (Normal/Normal); 350 50 W power output and 69 1 dbm sensitivity. (Normal/Low); 80 20 W power output and 69 1 dbm sensitivity. (Low/Low); C.2 C.2.1 Flight testing procedure Introduction A Radar flight testing may be a single (special inspection) requirement to determine coverage over a new air traffic "fix" or may consist of a full radar commissioning . The number of personnel, coordination, preparation, and reporting involved between the two extremes varies widely. A commissioning flight test (or a special test following significant modifications to existing equipment) consists of three distinct parts; planning, engineering, and documentation. The engineering, or equipment, portion includes the tests necessary to ensure that the radar sensor performs according to design specification. Some test in the engineering phase should require a flight test aircraft. The documentation or flight test portion determines to what extent the
Edition 0.1
Page C/1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
operational requirements are met and establishes a radar coverage baseline. The operational requirements should be outlined in the radar sensor sitting and flight testing plan. The detailed procedures covered are devoted primarily to the flight testing phase. C.2.2 Commissioning . The objective of the commissioning is to evaluate system performance, determine and document the site coverage, and provide a baseline for the detection of future deterioration in equipment performance. Data obtained during this test shall be used as a basis for periodic comparison of radar sensor performance as well as subsequent tests. Major events of commissioning include: planning (develop technical plan); measure radar sensor performance parameters; equipment Optimisation; site Integration; flight testing (data collection & analysis); presentation of results; generate a database (baseline). C.2.3 Special tests Special tests are conducted to fulfil a particular need and may be very limited in scope. The following is an example of testing events: develop a starting baseline (as found); identify problem areas (quantity, if possible); correct the problem or recommend solutions; review performance; generate a new database. If equipment changes/modifications to commissioned sensor change the coverage pattern, document the changes in the test report. The new coverage pattern shall then become the basis for comparison during subsequent tests. Special tests include the following: C.2.3.1 Antenna Change.
Page C/2
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
The checklist, Table D1, indicates the requirements for installation of a new antenna, a new generation multiple beam antenna, or an antenna with a different radiation pattern. A flight test is not required following an antenna pedestal or rotary joint replacement if the ground measurements of the reflector position, feedhorn alignment, and antenna tilt of the replacement pedestal are satisfactory. C.2.3.2 Major Modifications (other than antenna change). This test should be confined to the parameters necessary to confirm sensors performance. The radar engineer shall determine the extent of a special test during preparation and coordination of the plan. Depending upon the extent of the modification, an analysis using radar analysis tools and targets of opportunity may satisfy the requirements. C.3 Checklist The tests required to complete a full commissioning flight test are contained in table C-1. The procedures presented here are also those to be used singly when the requirements for a special test may be satisfied with one or more of the individual tests. Those items identified with an "x" are mandatory. Engineering personnel shall evaluate the data obtained using targets of opportunity to determine if further evaluation by a special flight test aircraft is needed. The column labelled "transponder mode" denotes the proper aircraft transponder configuration for the specific test. Commis sioning Check Orientation Tilt PSR optimization STC / GTC Beam crossover false target optimization SSR optimization power SLS/ISLS Modes/Codes GTC/STC Establishment PSR/SSR Integrity Vertical Coverage Horizontal screening Airways/Route coverage standby equipment standby power PSR/SSR Antenna Change PSR SSR
same differ. same differ. transponder x x x x norm./norm. x x x x norm./norm. norm./norm. x x >> x >> x >> x
x x x x x x x x x x x x x o x x x
x x x x x x x x
x x x x x x x x x
low/low norm./low norm./low low/low low/low norm./norm. low/low norm./norm. low/ low >> norm./norm.
Table C-1 Test Checklist
Edition 0.1
Page C/3
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
x denotes mandatory test o optional - at engineering/maintenance/controller request. C.4 C.4.1 Vertical Coverage/Operational Capability Background The purpose of this test is to determine and document the primary and secondary radar sensor vertical coverage. The primary and secondary radar coverage within the fringe envelope shall be evaluated using Radar analysis tools, opportunity traffic, cooperating aircraft, or flight test aircraft. Radar data recordings and analysis of the vertical coverage test are used as a continuing database for a permanent record, and as a legal document certifying sensors performance. C.4.2 Vertical Coverage Radial The test shall be conducted on reference bearings from the radar site. The commissioning and all subsequent tests concerning sensors performance shall be conducted on the same bearings for valid comparison.. One radial shall be free of clutter, dense traffic and populated areas, and influences created by line-of-site. If the CMV includes ground/sea clutter areas at least one radial shall be flown over these areas. C.4.3 Commissioning Procedure The outer fringe shall be determined by evaluating tail-on targets and the inner fringe by nose-on targets. Aircraft reflective surface and transponder antenna characteristics vary between inbound and outbound flight;consequently, some difference in coverage can be expected. Map checkpoints, a navigation system radial, or radar vectors shall be used to remain on vertical coverage radial. All pattern altitudes described herein shall be flown as height above the radar antenna. NOTE -In order to produce a meaningful database, the flight test a/c must fly true altitudes (corrected for pressure and temperature). C.4.3.1 Commissioning Profile Refer to Figure C1 and proceed as follows: C.4.3.1.1 Fringe Envelope Check. The flight test a/c shall fly outbound from the site at 1,000 ft above the antenna to the outer fringe, up to the outer fringe to the required altitude, across the top inbound to the inner fringe, then down the inner fringe to the 1,000 ft inner fringe. Probe and score the primary and secondary fringes at 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 10, 15, 20, 25, and 30 (as required) thousand ft. Establish the ascending (outer) fringes by turning inbound and climbing to the next higher level, flying inbound at the higher level until solid primary and secondary reports are received, then turning outbound to establish the primary
Page C/4
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
and secondary at that level. Evaluate the inner fringes in the same manner, with the directions reversed. Conduct the over-all-quality and auxiliary functions test at 5,000 ft or 30,000 ft per the previous procedures. C.4.3.1.2 Coverage Within the Fringe Envelope. Engineering personnel shall use radar analysis tools and targets of opportunity to determine the coverage inside the fringe envelope, and identify the location and extent of holes and other lobing related anomalies. Coverage can be determined with analysis plots on series of recording. Limit the target reports to a 20 wedge, centred on the vertical coverage azimuth and filtered for the altitudes of concern. The SSR delay should be active during the recordings, to provide a better separation of primary and secondary target reports for independent analysis. Lobing will be evident as primary and secondary target reports, exhibiting decreasing run lengths as they enter a "hole", disappear in the null, then reappear with progressively higher run lengths as they clear the ringe on the opposite side. Include the printout plots in the facility permanent database. NOTE- "SSR delay" refers to the technique of delaying the SSR signal beyond the association window of the plot filter combiner.
Fig. C.1 Commissioning profile C.4.4 PSR Antenna Change When the PSR antenna is changed, fly the profile depicted in Figure C 2A .
Edition 0.1
Page C/5
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
a) Repeat the outer fringe checks a necessary in order to complete an overallquality and auxiliary functions tests as requested by engineering personnel. Conduct the remainder of the coverage check in the original configuration. b) Checks of additional sensors equipment configurations and additional altitudes may be conducted at the option of engineering personnel. C.4.5 SSR Antenna Change For the same type of antenna, all requirements may be completed using targets of opportunity. Comparison analysis is performed on the historic solar data, SSR parameters, and performance measurements (targets of opportunity) to ensure the same performance (commissioned) can be expected with new antenna. When the antenna is replaced with different type, or targets of opportunity are not available, checklist requirements shall be completed using a flight testing aircraft. a) Terminal SSR. Fly the profile for a primary antenna change as illustrated in Figure C 2A. b) En-route SSR. Fly the profile for a primary antenna change as illustrated in Figure C 2B.
Fig.C.2 Terminal SSR (a)
En-Route SSR (b)
C.5
Horizontal Screening
Page C/6
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
Horizontal screening shall be determined by running the radar analysis programs on pre-recorded data. Limit the data input on successive runs to azimuth sectors with a constant screening angle for each run. Compute the screening angle for any given run (azimuth sector) from the lowest coverage returns at a given range. Then, coverage at any given range beyond the screen can be predicted and a comparison drawn between values on the horizontal screening chart of actual coverage. Limit tests to elevation angles near the expected horizon.In the case that there are no opportunity traffic and depending upon local requirements, horizontal screening shall be accomplished by the following method: Using either flight test or rental aircraft, fly an orbit at an altitude and distance which corresponds to the lowest screening angle at which coverage is expected. Orbit radius of less than ten nautical miles shall not be used. DME or headings provided by the controller may be used to maintain the orbit. Select "Normal" on the aircraft transponder. MTI, if used, shall be gated to a range inside the orbit radius, except those locations where ground clutter will obscure the target unless MTI is used. If MTI must be gated outside of the orbit, the radius of the orbit should be constantly changed to avoid target cancellation due to tangential blind speed. For example, vary the pattern on a 12 NM orbit between 10 and 14 NM so as to average a 12 NM orbit. C.6 Airway/Route Coverage The airway coverage shall be checked using radar analysis programs and targets of opportunity. Targets may consist of one cooperating aircraft or a assortment of aircraft reports on a particular airway: Targets included in the output data shall be Mode C or S equipped for essential altitude information. Scoring may be accomplished either with radar analysis programs or manually. Document fix positional coverage by filtering a data run with the start/stop azimuth and high/low altitude that effectively "boxes" in the fix. Good coverage within the box constitutes adequate coverage at the position fix.In the case that there is no enough opportunity traffic the check shall be executed with the following method: Select "low" on the Flight test/rental aircraft transponder. Configured the primary radar in circular polarization. Fly the minimum coverage altitude not lower than the Minimum Obstruction Clearance Altitude (MOCA), on airway centreline. Maintain course guidance by reference to ground checkpoints, navigation system signals, or radar vectors. Fly terminal arrival/departure routes and other areas of interest identified in the flight test, via radar vectors at the minimum obstruction clearance altitude. C.7 Standby Equipment The purpose of this test is to evaluate the performance of standby equipment, and may be accomplished during pre-flight testing using targets of opportunity. Some radars have been engineered to meet reliability requirements through the use of redundant parallel units. Structure the pre-flight testing of these systems so as to thoroughly test all such redundant units. A standby antenna
Edition 0.1
Page C/7
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
(duplicate) may be installed at selected locations to provide for continued radar service in the event of antenna failure. The commissioning requirements for a standby antenna may be completed using the antenna checklist. C.8 Standby Power The purpose of this test is to evaluate radar performance on standby (engine generator or UPS -Uninterruptable Power Supply-) power and shall be conducted during pre-flight testing. Results are satisfactory when the engine generator monitor equipment detects a power without manual intervention. Conduct this test with a simulated power failure by manually switching out the incoming commercial power. C.9 C.9.1 Analysis Testing Precautions Any system deficiency or deterioration noted during inspection shall be investigated. When a system parameter does not meet the specified tolerances and cannot be adjusted within a reasonable length of time, the flight shall be discontinued until the discrepancy can be resolved. However, this does not preclude the continuation of testing, in an effort to resolve the problem.
Recommendation For the s i t e commissioning of the radar sensor data should be collected under all seasonal conditions and if applicable ,also under anomalous-propagation. C.9.2 Evaluation Continuous radar detection (one usable target report on every scan at every azimuth and all altitudes) is a difficult requirement to meet due to antenna lobing, physical limitations (line-of-sight), aircraft altitude, and antenna tilt. Therefore, expect isolated or non-recurring misses. After three or more consecutive misses in the radar pattern, investigate to determine whether a hole exists and, if so, its size. Reference is made to Figure C4 C.9.3 Lobing Lobing is caused by the summation of radar energy at a point in space. The energy components at that point may consist of both direct and reflected energy. As the reflected and direct path lengths to that point differ, the two signals arrive with a different phase relationship. With an opposite phase from a strong reflection, the out-of-phase component may cancel the direct, resulting in a coverage hole. As reflected energy is the source of all lobing problems, preventing or altering the reflected energy component is the way to minimize the problem. Lobing in a critical area can occasionally be reduced, but usually at the expense of performance in other areas.
Page C/8
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
Adjustments to the antenna tilt (primary and secondary) and secondary transmit power are the two most effective measures in combating nulls. Use care in making tilt and power changes, since either can introduce additional problems. Optimizing antenna tilt and reducing the ground radiation may be all that is required to reduce a lobing problem.
Fig.C.3 Lobing C.9.4 Probing Holes in radar detection are probed in similar manner to VOR or TACAN. The following procedures may be used a guide, refer to Figure C4. C.9.4.1 Horizontal. Fly through the area in question to determine the inner and outer limits of the hole. Vary aircraft position by 10 of radar azimuth until the lateral limits of the hole are determine. Vertical. Fly through the centre of the pattern (established in the horizontal probing procedure) at 1,000 ft increments to determine the upper and lower limits of the pattern.
C.9.4.2
Edition 0.1
Page C/9
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
Fig.C.4 Vertical and horizontal probing C.10 Documentation. The Flight test report shall consists of a detailed accounting of all coverage data obtained using participating and flight test aircraft, targets of opportunity, radar analysis tools, and all flight test reports.
Page C/10
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
ANNEX D ( RECOMENDED) METHODS TO ASSES THE RESOLUTION CAPABILITIES OF RADAR SENSOR D.1 General. The assessment of the resolution capabilities of sensor systems forms part of the performance assessment for reliability and quality. Resolution has an impact on the probability of position (PSR and SSR) and code (SSR) detection when two aircraft are in close proximity: i) PSR, see paragraph A.2.2.2. ii) SSR, see paragraph A.4.2.3. Resolution has an impact on the quality of position data (PSR and SSR) and false code detection when two aircraft are in close proximity: i) PSR, see paragraph 6.3 and A.3.3. ii) SSR, see paragraph 8.4 and A.5.4. D.2 Circumstances of testing. Resolution can be tested during the different periods of the life cycle of a sensor system. One of the following methods can be applied whereby the circumstances of testing have been taken into consideration: Purpose of test Simulated data Combination of live and simulated data Live data from test transponders Live data from traffic of opportunity Live data from test flights with (optional) support of DGPS data yes yes
FAT SAT Annual performance evaluation RTQC STCA RSS D.2.1
yes yes
yes
yes
yes yes
yes yes yes yes yes
Simulated data. Simulated data can be categorised according to the sophistication of testing: outside the antenna as environmental data;
Edition 0.1
Page D/1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
The antenna shall be turning and the data are generated from a single test site for range resolution testing and from a fixed test site in combination with a mobile site for range and azimuth resolution. Attention shall be paid to the elevation angle of the test sites. insertion at rf level through rf coupler(s); Insertion of simulated data at rf level through an rf coupler in the cable path to the antenna. The scenarios for the simulation are programmable and may be typical or specific. One or more rf units can be used whereby each of the units can play the roll of one target. The triggering of the individual units can be made synchronous or asynchronous to the radar.In the case of monopulse all three channels shall be generated.The scenarios for testing can be derived from pure test scenarios, from video during replay of recorded video, from external scenarios lproduced by SMART or ODIT. D.2.2 Combination of live and simulated data Combination of live and simulated data is best made at rf level. However simulations at video level or at plot level would allow for testing resolution capabilities from part(s) of the system, e.g. tracker-on-site or plot filter. D.2.3 Live data from test transponders Specific scenarios can be tested by making use of a fixed and a mobile test transponder installed on a test site. Both transponders shall be programmable in range but the mobile transponder shall be able to step through the range window with fixed discrete steps. The Mode C shall be encoded as to reflect the separation in range with the precision of discrete range steps. Care shall be taken with the selection of the site in order the (M)SSR replies to appear as typical. D.2.4 Live data from traffic of opportunity Resolution cases from live data shall be analysed to study the impact of resolution as one of the factors playing a role in the degradation of the reliability and the quality of sensor data, e.g. statistics on the rate of occurrence etc. By recording and replaying data at one level one might be in a position to test the performance of a system at a lower level in the processing chain, e.g. recordings at video level might allow for testing the monopulse post processing, recordings at plot level might allow for testing the plot filter functions or the local tracker for resolution. Use can be made of the field monitor by programming its delay to coincide with a major airroute. This test shall be made when the radar is not operational. D.2.5 Live data from test flights with (optional) support of DGPS data The problem with resolution tests is the dependency on data which might be degraded because of limitation of the resolution capabilities of the sensor system to be tested. Therefore a reference trajectory is required. GPS and in
Page D/2
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
particular differential GPS do provide a very good reference and is independent of the sensor itself. Precautions shall be taken to time tag the recorded sensor data with absolute time preferably derived from GPS unit. D.3 Advantages and disadvantages of the different methods applied. The advantages and disadvantages of the different methods applied are listed in the table below with regard to operational impact, capacity, duration of test, precision and the reference trajectory. D.4 Detailed description of the different methods with presentation of results. Test Flights A scenario has been conceived whereby two test aircraft are used. The scenario comprises two parts, one for testing range resolution and one for testing azimuth resolution. The use of DGPS data for the reference positions is optional. Both aircraft shall have properly installed and properly functioning transponders. D.4.1.1 Range resolution testing. Two test aircraft are instructed to fly a radial trajectory. One aircraft keeps a constant speed and heading. The other aircraft makes close approaches following the other aircraft while keeping the same heading. The distance in range between the two aircraft decreases gradually unto the moment where range resolution does not exist anymore. The second aircraft increases again the range separation until range resolution is reached again. This close approaching is repeated several times at different ranges of the radar. The test shall be performed in good visibility conditions under control of the ATC controller who stays in contact with the two pilots. The pilot of the second aircraft may report his close approach distance (as measured by instruments available in the aircraft) to the ATC controller. The test shall be performed in a sector which is cleared from traffic and at a flightlevel to guarantee good coverage. The parameters for PSR and SSR range resolution are different. Therefore both parameters have to be tested. In case of dual electronics, PSR data only shall be connected to one plot filter channel with SSR data only connected to the parallel plot filter channel. The ATC controller shall make observations on the data of both channels. D.4.1.2 Azimuth resolution testing (see figure D.1.). Two test aircraft are instructed to fly a radial trajectory. One aircraft flies with a constant speed and a constant heading. The other aircraft flies in parallel with the other aircraft within a fixed range separation and a constant offset S in NM, which however does change at regular range intervals. The offset S is selected as to permit the assessment of azimuth resolution for a given azimuth separation Dtheta, whereby measurement points become available before and after lack of resolution.
D.4.1
Edition 0.1
Page D/3
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
D.4.2
Test transponders A scenario has been conceived whereby two programmable test transponders are used for the assessment of the resolution capabilities within the total close proximity area for all the parameters to be tested.
D.5
Presentation of results All results shall be presented in resolution diagram (Drho, Dtheta). There shall be as many resolution diagrams as there are parameters to be tested, i.e. position detection, code detection, position accuracy in range, position accuracy in range, correct code detection and validation etc. The precision of the analysis depends on the method applied and the reference trajectory used.
Advantages and Disadvantages Operational impact Simulated data Combination of live and simulated data none if test is done in standby channel limited Live data from test transponder s small if careful selection of test range window small Live data from traffic of opportunity none Live data from test flights with (optional) support of DGPS data none
N/A.
Capacity
Duration of test
Huge as meant to test system for maximum capabilities Function of the precision of the resolution test zone
limited as function of the density of traffic
only for test targets available
as for normal traffic
one step of resolution diagram tested per scan
Precision
limited by simulator, e.g. 1/200 NM in range and 1 ACP in azimuth are typical controlled by simulator
Reference trajectory
high if video recording is possible, otherwise limited by LSB of plot and track messages partly controlled by simulator
medium as range separation is stored as FL information in plot/track data controlled by positioning of test transponder s
each resolution case may last several minutes; very long for a representative sample high if video recording is possible, otherwise limited by LSB of plot and track messages to be derived from data but could be derived from recorded video
as long as test flights will last
high if video recording is possible, otherwise limited by LSB of plot and track messages
DGPS data will serve as reference data for positioning within resolution diagram
Page D/4
Edition 0.1
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
Figure D.1 Azimuth Resolution testing, The azimuth resolution is measured at each interval. The second aircraft stays at a fixed offset which changes from interval to interval.
Edition 0.1
Page D/5

Euro Control Reference of RASS-S Technical

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Euro Control Reference of RASS-S Technical

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

EUROPEAN ORGANISATION FOR THE SAFETY OF AIR NAVIGATION

RADAR SENSOR PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS

Edition Edition Date Status Class

0.1 June 1997 Working Draft EATMP

EUROPEAN AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL HARMONISATION AND INTEGRATION PROGRAMME

DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION SHEET

Major Terminal Areas.

SOFTWARE(S) Word 6.0

Radar Sensor Performance Analysis

AUTHORITY SURT Chairman DIS M. Rees

NAME AND SIGNATURE

EATMP Project Leader W. Philipp

Working Draft June 1997

Radar Sensor Performance Analysis

DATE (Edition date)

REASON FOR CHANGE

SECTIONS PAGES AFFECTED

Working Draft June 1997

Radar Sensor Performance Analysis

Working Draft June 1997

Radar Sensor Performance Analysis

ANNEXES ANNEX A (RECOMMENDED) RADAR SENSOR TECHNICAL PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS

Working Draft June 1997

Radar Sensor Performance Analysis

Working Draft June 1997

Radar Sensor Performance Analysis

Working Draft June 1997

Radar Sensor Performance Analysis

Working Draft June 1997

Radar Sensor Performance Analysis

Working Draft June 1997

Radar Sensor Performance Analysis

1.2 1.2.1 1.2.2

Working Draft June 1997

Radar Sensor Performance Analysis

Working Draft June 1997

Radar Sensor Performance Analysis

Working Draft June 1997

Radar Sensor Performance Analysis

Working Draft June 1997

Radar Sensor Performance Analysis

Working Draft June 1997

Radar Sensor Performance Analysis

Working Draft June 1997

Radar Sensor Performance Analysis

Working Draft June 1997

Radar Sensor Performance Analysis

Working Draft June 1997

Radar Sensor Performance Analysis

Working Draft June 1997

Radar Sensor Performance Analysis

Working Draft June 1997

Radar Sensor Performance Analysis

Transversal modes: left expedite turn; left standard turn;

Working Draft June 1997

Radar Sensor Performance Analysis

Working Draft June 1997

Radar Sensor Performance Analysis

Working Draft June 1997

Radar Sensor Performance Analysis

Working Draft June 1997

Radar Sensor Performance Analysis

Working Draft June 1997