c. W.

Davis III

The Airborne Seeker Test Bed

The Airborne Seeker Test Bed is a recently operational instrumentation system

containing a closed-loop tracking, semi-active seeker with the capability to record high-
fidelity signals pertaining to radar seeker phenomenology, target scattering character-
istics, electronic countermeasures, and acquisition and tracking performance. The
unique capabilities of the test bed will be used to collect data and develop computer
models for evaluating and predicting missile performance. Test bed data will be used
to evaluate the susceptibility of U.S. aircraft to missile attack, and to explore new
directions for future systems. The test bed is also designed to support the development
of advanced seekers and new electronic counter-countermeasure techniques, and to
demonstrate their capabilities in flight.

Major problems in missile seeker design are systems. Specific features have been designed
target-detection sensitivity and the effects of and incorporated into the test bed to support the
ground clutter and modem electronic counter- development of techniques for electronic
measures (ECM). The low radar cross section of counter-countermeasures (ECCM), and to
weapons such as cruise missiles and future demonstrate those techniques in flight.
fighter and bomber aircraft, as well as the ability The seeker is the system on the missile that
of modem targets to fly at low altitudes, makes performs the on-board target sensing for flight
the missile intercept problems even more diffi- gUidance, with the ultimate purpose of bringing
cult. In addition, the effectiveness of certain the intercepting missile's warhead within a le-
modem countermeasures at degrading missile thal radius ofthe target. Because ofadvances in
performance is not well understood. These prob- radar cross-section reduction techniques and
lems combine to present stressing challenges to ECM, future seekers will face increasingly so-
current missile defenses. phisticated threats. In fact, the advent of low
Lincoln Laboratory has undertaken a signifi- radar ~ross-section air vehicles has made
cant effort to help solve these seeker problems, countermeasures more attractive because the
with the initial emphasis on radar-guided mis- radiated power necessary to mask a vehicle's
siles. The central element in this effort is the radar return has decreased to the point where
Airborne Seeker Test Bed, a flyinginstrumenta- small countermeasure devices are now
tion system that carries a closed-loop tracking practical.
seeker and also records high-fidelity signals re- Future radar seekers will require higher
lated to radar phenomenology (clutter, multi- sensitivity and more effective clutter rejection.
path), target scattering characteristics (bistatic These seekers will probably incorporate dual
radar cross section, scintillation statistics, polarization sensors and multispectral sensors,
angle glint), ECM, and overall seeker acquisition such as a combination of infrared and radar.
and tracking performance. The purpose behind The future enhancements will help discriminate
the development ofthese capabilities is to collect and reject false targets, including decoys. As a
data and to develop computer models that will consequence, the burden of decision making on
assist in the design of future seekers and in the board the seeker will increase, as will the asso-
prediction of missile performance. Measured ciated compleXity in signal processing. The
data from the test bed will be used to evaluate system architecture ofthe Airborne Seeker Test
the susceptibility of U.S. aircraft to missile at- Bed was selected to address this set of seeker
tack and to investigate new concepts for future problems.

The Lincoln Laboratory Journal, Volume 3. Number 2 (1990) 203

Davis - The Airborne Seeker Test Bed

Seeker Performance Issues ever, because the accelerations of target

maneuvering smear the signal and make
The ability of a rriissile to intercept a target is the integration ineffective beyond a cer-
often limited by seeker sensitivity. ground-clut- tain period.
ter rejection, or ECM immunity. The specific Significant performance gains are difficult to
waveform used by the seeker, which provides achieve, as indicated in the first three categories
varying degrees of resolution in Doppler fre- listed above. Even the gains created by a longer
quency and range, also has performance impli- signal integration period could be insufficient
cations. These subjects are reviewed in the for future low cross-section targets. A possible
following paragraphs. solution to the sensitivity problem is to launch
the missile and gUide it remotely by a powerful
Seeker Sensitivity command-guidance system out to a range close
enough for the seeker to detect the target. The
Low cross-section targets tax the capabilities
command-guidance radar would be a larger
of intercepting missiles by requiring them to be
system that could solve the sensitivity problem
more sensitive to target detection in the pres-
by increasing transmitter power and/or an-
ence of natural thermal noise. The following
tenna gain. The seeker in these systems would
methods can increase the sensitivity ofa missile
need the capability to acquire the target autono-
system:
mously, since the command gUidance may be
1. Increase transmitter power. For example,
unable to put the seeker onto the target directly.
doubling the transmitter power would in-
Whatever missile system architecture is con-
crease the free-space detection range by a
sidered, the seeker performance implications of
factor of 1.2 on a given target.
the low cross-section threat, and concepts for
2. Increase transmitter and/or receiver an-
possible improvements, provide a significant
tenna gains. Doubling the dimensions of
challenge.
one of the antennas would increase the
free-space detection range by a factor of
Ground Clutter
1.4 on a given target. In practice, the
narrow diameter of a missile restricts Even ifthe seeker possesses enough sensitiv-
antenna size, which also restricts achiev- ity. the ground clutter can limit performance by
able antenna gain. Typical air-to-air masking the target return. Figure 1 illustrates
missile seeker antennas are 5 to 7 in the clutter environment as viewed by the mis-
in diameter; similar antennas for sur- sile. The specific case shown is for a semi-active
face-to-air missiles range from 9 to 16 in. surface-to-air missile with continuous-wave
3. Lower the receiver noisejl.oor. Current sys- (CW) illumination (see the box titled "Radar-
tems have noise floors within 4 to 10 dB of Guided Missiles" for a definition of missile
theoretical limits. A 3-dB improvement types). For outbound targets (the tail chase
(which is a challenge to achieve) would in- scenario), ground clutter seen through the an-
crease the free-space detection range by a tenna sidelobes directly obscures the target
factor of 1.2 on a given target. return. For inbound targets, the target return
4. Increase the received signal integration pe- competes with the noise sidebands from the
riod. A longer signal integration period missile's receiver oscillators (and other system-
would reduce the effect of thermal noise. specific sources), which spill into what would
Faster signal processing could lead to in- have been a clutter-free portion of the Doppler
tegration periods up to 10 times longer spectrum. The level of these noise sidebands is
than current systems. an increase in inte- proportional to the strongest signal (usually
gration that could extend the free-space main-beam clutter) in the receiver. If the target
detection range by a factor of 1.8. The is high enough in Doppler frequency (which cor-
benefits of integration are limited. how- responds to a high missile-to-target closing ve-

204 The Lincoln Laboratory Journal. Volume 3. Number 2 (l990)

 Davis - The Airborne Seeker Test Bed

locity), the target will appear in a region of the an idiosyncratic Achilles' heel in the threat
spectrum where the noise sidebands have system. For example, a missile that relies on
reached a floor level. In low-clutter situations three consecutive signal bursts to perform tar-
this floor level is the thermal noise floor of the get-angle measurement can be confused by a
receiver. distorted or amplified signal sent by the target
Figure 1 indicates that the missile is more every third burst. The idiosyncratic techniques
capable of intercepting targets in the incoming generally exploit some vulnerable characteris-
target region than in the outgoing target region. tic of the victim's receiver architecture, signal
Therefore, air vehicle designers must generally processing technique, or control logic
emphasize lowering the nose cross section to (and consequently require a knowledge of the
enhance a vehicle's ability to penetrate radar characteristic). These ECM techniques are gen-
defenses. erally classified, since the enemy can eliminate
Signal integration reduces the effective level the specific vulnerability if the weakness being
ofthe noise sidebands, with respect to the target exploited is known.
signal, and reduces the sidelobe clutter. The Other more fundamental techniques are dif-
seeker designer further combats the effects of ficult to overcome, even if the enemy has knowl-
clutter by attempting to achieve low sidelobes on edge of them. A decoy deployed by the target, for
the antenna and high oscillator stability (low- example, can be an actual radar target, physi-
noise sidebands) in the receiver. cally separated from the true target. Since the
decoy is a real target, the seeker cannot elimi-
Electronic Countermeasures
nate it by a simple change in processing al-
gorithm. We must devise a more compli-
Many categories of ECM currently exist. cated method to discriminate the true target
Certain ECM techniques are designed to exploit from the decoy. In addition to expendable or

Missile

Radar
Antenna Target
Outbound
....:::::Siii~Llnbound

/
Inbound
Target

Doppler Frequency

Fig. 1-Received clutter spectrum for a semi-active missile. The clutter return spreads out in Doppler
frequency; clutter approached by the missile has a positive Doppler, clutter directly beneath the missile
has zero Doppler, and clutter behind the missile has a negative Doppler. Incoming targets appear at a
higher Doppler frequency than any clutter; outbound targets have a Doppler frequency that appears in
the sidelobe clutter region.

The Lincoln Laboratory Joumal. Volume 3. Number 2 (1990) 205

Davis - The Airborne Seeker Test Bed

Radar-Guided Missiles

Radar-guided missiles exist in aperture. the radar on a missile is of the missile intercept can be ar-
four basic categories: command not as powerful as a ground- ranged to minimize the effects of
guided. active homin<1. semi-ac- based or aircraft-mounted radar. clutter. The missile antenna may
tive homin<1, and passive homing. To achieve long ranges on low be looking down at the earth. but
A missile system can be designed cross-section tar<1ets. active the earth is shielded from the
to use each of these methods in homin<1 must be combined with illuminator by intervening ter-
combination. For example. a sys- other means such as command rain. A further advantage of the
tem can have command gUidance gUidance to get the missile within semi-active architecture is that
for most of the missile fly-out. homing range to the tar<1et. Active electronic countermeasures in-
followed by semi-active homing in missiles have the attractive fea- tended to frustrate the missile are
the terminal phase of fli<1ht. tures of fve-and-jorget. which often directed back toward the
A command-guided missile can increase the fIre power of a radar source. The missile is not
has neither a radar transmitter given fire control system. Adisad- radiating. so the tar<1et will not
nor a radar receiver on board. A vantage of active missile seekers know the missile's location and
separate radar (usually ground is higher cost. since a radar may not be able tojam the missile
based) tracks both the tar<1et and transmitter is reqUired in the seeker.
the outgoing missile and com- missile. Figure A also indicates the ex-
putes the trajectory chan<1es A high proportion of the istence of a rear reference signal.
needed to <1uide the missile to its world's radar missile inventories For a semi-active seeker to sup-
tar<1et. These flight commands use a semi-active architecture. a port coherent si<1nal proceSSing
are communicated to the missile scheme in which the missile car- (such as Doppler llitering) the
by a data link. The accuracy ofthe ries only a radar receiver. not a missile must either carry a stable
missile intercept is limited by the transmitter (see Fi<1. A). The radar frequency re~rence or have a
precision with which the radar transmitter that illuminates the receiver dedicated to listening to
can determine the target and target is in a separate unit that is the direct si<1naI from the illumi-
missile locations. This precision either Q'round based or airborne. nator (the rear receiver).
degrades as the range to the This architecture has several A passive homing seeker
intercept increases. leadin<1 to advantages. Delivering sufficient gUides itself by radio emissions
larger miss distances. Command radar energy to a target at long from the tar<1et. These emissions
<1uidance may be necessary when ran<1es requires high transmitter are from the target's own radar or
other modes of missile <1uidance power and hi<1h-gain antennas other on-board radiating sensors.
are inadequate because of clut- (thus requirin<1 a large antenna The advantages of passive hom-
ter. jamming. or missile receiver aperture). both of which are diffI- ing are that it does not require a
sensitivity problems. Many for- cult to achieve on a missile con- separate illumination radar and it
eign missiles employ command- strained in wei<1ht and volume. operates qUietly (a powerful illu-
gUidance modes because a com- Stronger illumination is more mination signal recognized by the
mand-<1uided missile does not easily provided by a Q'round- target is a warning of the immi-
require a complex on-board based system or. to a lesser ex- nent arrival of a missile). A disad-
seeker system. tent. by a fIghter aircraft. This vantage is that the passive seeker
Missile homing gUidance is advantage is especially important depends on the presence of target
needed to achieve a smaller miss when the target has a low radar emissions durin<1 homing. and
distance. which is especially return. which requires hi<1her il- these emissions are not con-
important for air-to-air missiles luminator powers to achieve tar- trolled by the missile system.
that carry small warheads. An get detection. Another disadvantage is that the
active missile carries its own Another advantage of the seeker must operate with a vari-
radar. complete with transmitter semi-active approach illustrated ety ofdifferentwaveforms that are
and receiver (e.g .. the U.S in Fig. A is that for surface-to-air specific to particular targets. and
AMRAAM). Because of a small missiles. which use a ground- these waveforms are not optimal
payload capacity and antenna based illuminator. the geometry for missile homin<1.

towed decoys. other fundamental techniques of target angle, and terrain bounce jam-
include wavefront distortion (known as cross- ming, in which a brightly illuminated
eye), for corrupting the seeker's measurement spot on the ground is created to draw the

206 The Lincoln Laboratory Joumal. Volume 3. Number 2 (I 990)

 Davis - The Airborne Seeker Test Bed

Illumination
Radar
Illuminated
Terrain
t
Clutter
Horizon

Fig. A-A semi-active intercept scenario. The missile homes in on the reflections ofthe illuminatorsignal
off the target. If the intercept occurs beyond the illuminator's clutter horizon, the missile will benefit from
a reduction of ground clutter.

missile away from its target. technique that diminishes both the mainlobe
These fundamental, or robust, countermea- clutter and sidelobe clutter. The pulsed wave-
sures are not as implementation-specific as the form design is ultimately a compromise between
idiosyncratic type of ECM described above. target Doppler frequency ambigUities and target
Because of their fundamental nature, robust range ambigUities. The measured Doppler fre-
countermeasures can be investigated generi- quency and range values are offset from their
cally; that is, experiments can be performed that absolute values by integer multiples of an
do not require specific military ECM hardware. ambigUity interval. The size of the ambigUity
A principal challenge for future seeker designers interval is determined by the pulse-repetition
is to devise schemes for dealing with these fun- frequency. The larger the unambiguous range
damental types of ECM. interval, the smaller the unambiguous Doppler
interval, and vice versa. The use of multiple
Waveform Selection pulse-repetition frequencies is reqUired to re-
solve these ambigUities.
Most semi-active missiles operate with CWor A pulsed waveform is more difficult for a
interrupted-CW illumination. These waveforms semi-active missile to process because the
allow the use of Doppler filtering to separate receiver must synchronize itself with the
target and clutter. The CW waveforms provide range-gate timing. The U.S. Patriot missile ex-
the seeker with no range information on the emplifies one method for achieving this syn-
target; the Doppler frequency uniquely deter- chronization by sending the received signal
mines the relative velocity of the target. back to the illuminator at the ground (the
A pulsed waveform coupled with a range- source of the timing) for target processing,
gated receiver is used to introduce additional rather than performing the necessary pro-
separation of target and clutter in the range cessing on board. Despite this complexity,
dimension. Figure 2 illustrates the reduction in however, future seekers will probably in-
clutter that can be achieved by range gating, a corporate pulsed waveforms and range-

The Lincoln Laboratory Joumal. Volume 3. Number 2 (J 990) 207

Davis - The Airborne Seeker Test Bed

(a) Clutter Geometry Signal Spectrum

(Plan View)

Sidelobe Frequency
Clutter Area
at Target
Doppler

(b) Clutter Geometry Signal Spectrum

(Plan View) for Selected Range Gate

Frequency

Fig. 2-A comparison ofthe clutter resolution ofcontinuous-wave (CW) andpulsed waveforms. (a) For the
C W waveform, different Dopplerbins in the clutterspectrum divide the terrain into strips ofconstant Doppler
frequency (called isodops). The area ofground in one of these strips multiplied by the antenna gains and
clutter reflectivity value determines the strength of the clutter signal in that Doppler bin. (b) In a pulsed-
Doppler waveform, consecutive signal samples represent clutter returns for different ranges from the
seeker. When coupled with the resolution provided by Doppler binning, the clutter level in a given range-
Doppler cell is generally reduced in comparison to CW methods because the ground area in a cell is less.

gated receivers to reduce clutter problems. The test bed instrumentation was de-
signed with enough sensitivity for the
Airborne Seeker Test Bed study of low cross-section targets. It pro-
vides dynamic in-flight dual-polarized
Figure 3 shows the Lincoln Laboratory Air- measurements of the target radar cross
borne Seeker Test Bed that was designed to section, scintillation (amplitude fluctua-
support investigations into the problems de- tions) , and glint (an interference effect that
scribed in the previous section. Direct appli- induces large angle-measurement errors),
cations of the test bed are in the following all measured at transmitter and receiver
areas: angles representative of missile intercept
1. Target radar cross-section measurement. geometries.
208 The Lincoln Laboratory Joumal. Volume 3. Number 2 (1990)
 Davis - The Airborne seeker Test Bed

2. Bistatic clutter database measurement. A generated by selected ECM. These mea-

dual-polarized database of bistatic (differ- surements directly characterize the ECM
ent angles to the transmitter and receiver) signals. and the measured data can also be
ground clutter can be developed for sites of used as input to seeker system simula-
interest and used in clutter modeling. tions that predict the ECM effect on the
Clutter measurements also support live- modeled missile system.
firing tests by helping to select the firing ge- 5. ECCM algorithm development. Another use
ometries. for the ECM signal data is to look for dis-
3. Measurement oj operational scenarios oj criminants. or signal features that can be
targets in clutter. Target and test bed flight used to separate false signals from the true
paths are chosen to simulate realistic in- target. New ECCM algorithms will be devel-
tercept trajectories for evaluating target oped and tested on the measured ECM
detectability and trackability. data. These algorithms can then be tested
4. ECM evaluation. The test bed has a high- in real time on the test bed dUring a simu-
fidelity capability to measure the signals lated intercept.

FUR (8-12/lm)

Fig. 3-Principal elements of the Airborne Seeker Test Bed on the Falcon 20 aircraft. The principalsensor, a large X-band
dual-polarized monopulse antenna, is supported by a large number of instrumentation channels and a high-speed
recorder. A Forward Looking Infrared Sensor (FUR) provides an angle reference on targetposition for use with the radar
data. A wing-mounted C-band radar locates the target and directs the other sensors.

The Lincoln Laboratory Journal. Volume 3. Number 2 (1990) 209

Davis - The Airborne Seeker Test Bed

The data obtained through the five activities achieved on the test bed by extending the inte-
listed above will be applied to the development of gration time; in fact, Doppler resolutions more
computer models of seeker performance, from than five times finer than those of a missile are
phenomenology models (clutter, target radar practical. Note that the target spectrum is not
cross-section dynamics) to missile fly-out mod- affected by test bed speed, and the limits on
els with six degrees of freedom. From these target integration time due to target acceleration
models we will extrapolate measured results to apply without scaling.
terrains other than military test ranges and These important improvements in perfor-
evaluate the performance of new concepts for mance have been implemented so that the mea-
future missile systems. sured data will be more precise than the data
The test bed represents a captive-cany con- available to a practical missile system. To model
cept (the box titled "Methods for Evaluating existing systems the test bed data will be de-
Missile Performance" reviews missile perform- graded to match the performance of the system
ance categories). A principal advantage of a being studied. The original unspoiled data are
captive-carry experiment is that it allows opera- important both to the phenomenology studies
tion in the actual real-world environment and (clutter and target signature) and to illustrate
offers the possibility of repeatable trajectories achievable seeker performance.
and systematic profiling. A specific advantage of
the Airborne Seeker Test Bed is that using a Overview oJ Test Bed Hardware
dedicated passenger jet (instead of pod- mount-
ing the sensor equipment on a military jet) of- Figure 3 shows the major elements of the
fers room for high-fidelity instrumentation and Airborne SeekerTest Bed. The principal payload
recording with operator interaction. of the Airborne Seeker Test Bed is the Instru-
Whenever possible, the elements of the test mentation Head (IH), which is an X-band serni-
bed instrumentation were designed for better active radar receiver configured as a missile
performance than the corresponding elements seeker. The principal sensor of the IH is a large
of an actual missile. This level of performance is dual-polarized antenna mounted on a modified
possible because of the advantages offered by HAWK seeker gimbal. Behind the antenna are a
the test bed platform. The nose-mounted pri- large number of instrumented channels. Ray-
mary antenna allows the use of a hemispherical theon Missile Systems Division in Tewksbury,
radome that minimizes polarization and angle Mass., served as subcontractor on the IH and
measurement distortion, and facilitates a large the Forward Looking Infrared System (FUR)
antenna aperture to provide increased sensitiv- discussed later in the paper.
ity. The benign vibration environment provided The IH receiver was designed to accommo-
by the jet platform supports better reference date a variety of different waveform types, rang-
oscillator stability to improve the clutter rejec- ing from CW waveforms to experimental range-
tion performance. Signal integration can occur gated (pulsed) waveforms. This capability
over longer time periods, which further in- makes the IH compatible with existing illumina-
creases the sensitivity and clutter rejection of tors such as the HAWK High Power Illuminator
the system. (HPI), the AWG-9 (on the F-14 fighter), and the
The slower speed of the test bed leads to a APG-63 and APG-70 (on the F-15 fighter), as
compressed clutter spectrum because the Dop- well as experimental and simulator radars.
pler spread of ground clutter is proportional to The Georgia Tech Research Institute (GTRI)
the aircraft velocity. The velocity ofthe Falcon 20 constructed an experimental radar called
is 2.5 times slower than the velocity of a typical the Waveform Simulator for use with the test
missile. For the number of Doppler cells across bed, and it can generate every waveform
the clutter to be comparable to a missile, the usable by the IH. A separate radio data link
Doppler resolution in the test bed must be 2.5 from the illuminator synchronizes the
times finer than in the missile. This resolution is IH receiver when the test bed is used with

210 The Lincoln Laboratory Journal. Volume 3. Number 2 () 990)

 Davis - The Airborne Seeker Test Bed

Methods for Evaluating

Missile Performance

Live Firing belly of a piloted aircraft. Close hom antennas in the chamber
approximations to real inter- repre ent clutter and tar<fet.
An actual missile intercept ofa cepts can be flown. and increased Actual measured signals
tar<fet is performed in a live firing. instrumentation over a live firin<f (from a captive carry or live
a type of test that realistically is potentially available. Cap- firin<f can be u ed. but the in-
evaluates a missile by recording tive-carry flights can also oper- teraction of the eeker and the
true missile dynamics. A typical ate against manned tar<fet . This environment is necessarily limit-
missile research and develop- approach offer the possibility ed. This type of test relies on
ment program can involve 100 of more exhaustive testing in the accuracy of the assumptions
missile firings. The tests are lim- more varied environments. com- made in the software model.
ited. however. because only a few pared to live firing. and it is Thi approach is useful in exer-
locations are available for live fir- especially useful in the develop- ci in<f and evaluating specific
ings. and the amount of data col- ment of lar<fe databa es (e. <f.. functions of the seeker hard-
lected can be limited by telemetry round clutter). Captive-carry ware and software.
constraints. Also. for obviou also permits the evaluation of
safety reasons. live fuin<fs are not ECM and ECCM technique in Computer Simulation
performed again t manned tar- situ.
<fets. which prevents this type of Computer simulation is the
evaluation of missile susceptibil- most flexible analysis technique
ity for new aircraft. Live firing is Hardware-in-the-Loop because it can be extrapolated
also prohibitively expensive to do Simulations to cases that have not or can
on more than a few geometries. not be tested. It is also likely to
Becau e ofthe limitations and ex- Thi evaluation method uses a prOVide the least fidelity of
pense. computer modelin<f is bench setup to inject Signals into the listed methods because the
important in the desi<fn of te t selected hardware components of results depend on the ac-
scenarios to ensure that the live a missile. Software simulation se- curacy of assumptions used
firing yield the mo t useful data. quences the signals and hard- in the software model. The vali-
ware through a missile-intercept dity of a computer simulation is
Captive Carry time line. This approach can be as enhanced <freatly by infusions of
elaborate as placing a complete the data and experience gained
Captive-carry experiments seeker with antenna in an an- from the captive-carry and live-
carry a missile under the Wing or echoic chamber, where radiatin<f fuin<f tests.

experimental interrupted iUuminators that der the nose is currently empty and available
periodically send brief bursts of illumination for another optical sensor.
energy.
In addition to the IH, the test bed carries a
Forward Sensor Antenna
C-band Beacon Tracking Radar (BTR) under
the wing. The BTR tracks a transponder on The forward sensor antenna, which is the
the target aircraft and provides target-angle, principal sensor of the IH, is a large (I6-in
range, and range-rate information in real time diameter) X-band dual-polarized monopulse
to the other sensors on the test bed, so antenna. Figure 4 shows how the antenna
that those other sensors can be tuned to the tar- was constructed as a sandwich, with an off-the-
get signal even if they haven't yet detected shelf slotted waveguide array that senses the
the target. Another test bed sensor mounted vertical polarization. An array of microstrip di-
under the nose is an 8-to-I2-,um-band infrared poles with a microstrip feed layer embedded
imaging device (the FUR) that provides preci- beneath it senses the horizontal polarization.
sion angle data on the target. A second pod un- Figure 5 is a photograph of the forward sensor

The Lincoln Laboratory Joumal. Volume 3. Number 2 (1990) 211

Davis - The Airborne Seeker Test Bed

.......
.........
•.••....•.
............
............
.............
. . . ... :......
........... ..............
........-.•••...
40 em
..............
..............
, •.•......-
............
..........
.........
.......

Mierostrip Mierostrip Slotted H &V

Dipoles Feed WavegulC!e Monopulse
(HPOL) Network (VPOL) Networks

Fig. 4- The construction of the Instrumentation Head (IH) antenna. A standard slotted waveguide array (for vertical
polarization) has a microstrip feed network and an array of microstrip dipoles (for horizontal polarization) layered on top of
it. Two monopulse combiners, one for each polarization, are fastened to the back side of the antenna.

antenna mounted on the nose of the Falcon 20. subtracting signals from the upper and
The signals from the vertically and horizon- lower halves of the antenna.
tally polarized antenna elements are calibrated 4. Diagonal difference beam. This component
in gain and phase and combined to determine is not used in normal monopulse tracking,
the unique polarization state of the incoming but it rounds out the complete set oflinear
signal. The ability to make polarimetric mea- combinations of the four antenna quad-
surements of target, clutter, and ECM signals is rants.
a key feature of the IH. The complete set of four signals yields all of
Most modem missile seekers employ mono- the information available from the antenna (the
pulse tracking in which the measurement of set of four signals represents four equations in
target angle is made by comparing signal levels four unknowns). In addition to monopulse pro-
received simultaneously by differently shaped cessing, signal processing schemes related to
antenna beams. The forward sensor antenna ECCM can be explored by using the full set of
is composed of four separate quadrants that calibrated monopulse signals. The four mono-
are combined to form the signals for four mono- pulse components in each of two polariza-
pulse components. These monopulse compo- tions (vertical and horizontal) result in eight
nents are signal channels simultaneously available to
1. Sum beam. This beam pattern is the nor- the receiver.
mal pencil beam associated with a high-
gain antenna. It results from adding the Instrumentation Head Receiver
signals from all four quadrants of the an-
tenna. Figure 6 shows a block diagram that illus-
2. Azimuth difference beam. This beam pat- trates some of the high-level features of the IH
tern yields a null signal when the target receiver, and Table 1 summarizes the speci-
is centered left to right. It results from fications of the IH receiver. The top half of
subtracting signals from the left and Fig. 6 illustrates one of the eight forward sen-
right halves of the antenna. sor antenna channels. This channel splits
3. Elevation difference beam. This beam pat- into two paths: one with a wideband filter that
tern yields a null signal when the target captures the entire clutter Doppler spec-
is centered top to bottom. It results from trum, and one with a narrowband filter center-

212 The Lincoln Laboratory Journal. Volume 3. Number 2 (1990)

 Davis - The Airborne Seeker Test Bed

ed on the target. The narrowband filter rejects used. In either configuration the vertical and
the clutter signals to improve the fidelity of horizontal polarization signals are recorded in
the recorded target signature. With a pulsed the rear receiver. These two rear channels,
waveform, three independently controllable along with the eight forward channels, make a
range gates are in each of the narrowband total of 10 wideband channels in the IH.
channels, and a split gate channel (in the
monopulse sum channels only) provides a range The Forward Looking
tracking-error signal. The IH has a total of 26 Infrared Sensor
narrowband channels.
The bottom half of Fig. 6 illustrates the rear The role of the FUR in the test bed is to
receiver that receives the direct path signal from provide a precision angle reference to the target
the illuminator via the rear antenna in the tail of to compare with the radar data from the IH (Fig.
the aircraft. The signal passes through fre- 7). In particular, the pointing direction of the RF
quency-locked and phase-locked loops to pro- seeker can be superimposed on the target image
vide the stable frequency reference to mix down to indicate the effects ofECM. The FUR forms a
the front channels. The oscillator used for this 1V-compatible image from light in the infrared
function is from the AIM-7 Sparrow missile, and band (thermal radiation) with wavelengths of 8
the rear loop design is similar to the Sparrow to 12 JIm. The particular infrared device we use
narrowband rear receiver. was manufactured by Kollmorgen and was in-
If problems related to missiles that carry tended for security surveillance (for example. in
their own on-board frequency reference need in- prison perimeter security). It was selected as a
vestigation. the rear loop can be bypassed low-cost infrared sensor for angle measurement
and a separate fixed local oscillator can be on the test bed. Because it was not designed as

Fig. 5- The Falcon 20 nose unit is shown with the radome removed, which reveals the dual-
polarizedX-band antenna. The right podholds the FUR sensor (behind the orange zinc sulfide
window). The left pod is currently empty and available for a future payload.

The Lincoln Laboratory Journal. Volume 3. Number 2 (1990) 213

Davis - The Airborne Seeker Test Bed

Doppler Voltage-Controlled Oscillator (9 Narrowband

Channel (26)
4 & 10 kHz
Bandwidth

Wideband or Videoband
Instrumentation Channel (8)
Local 56 & 923-kHz Bandwidth
Oscillator
Wideband or Videoband
Channel (2)
56 & 923-kHz Bandwidth

Fig. 6-A diagram of the IH receiver. The upper half of the diagram shows one of the
eight forward sensor channels. The incoming signal is split into a wideband (clutter)
channel and a set ofnarrowband (target) channels. The lower halfof the diagram shows
the rear receiver that locks onto the illumination signal to provide the frequency
reference for tuning the front receivers.

an instrumentation system, no precise calibra- Mounting the FUR in a gyro-stabilized gimbal

tion of the infrared signal intensity is provided in the nose of the aircraft provides excellent
by the FUR. Under appropriate conditions this image stability; the gimbal allows the FUR to
FUR is capable of detecting small aircraft tar- point in the same direction as the radar an-
gets at ranges on the order of 30 km. tenna. A hot-spot tracker has been added to the
FUR to keep the gimbal pointed at the target.
The FUR usually will not acquire the target until
the latter portion of the intercept, a limitation
that is acceptable in the test bed application
because the precision angle information is most
important during the last phases of the inter-
cept. Angle errors are less important to a seeker
earlier in the intercept because the missile still
has time at longer ranges to correct tracking
errors.

Beacon Tracking Radar

Figure 8 shows the Beacon Tracking Radar
Fig. 7- The Forward Looking Infrared Sensor. The tele- (BTR) that serves as a reference radar for the
scope mirroris visible at the front ofthe sensor; the structure seeker test bed. The BTR, which was designed
behind it is the scanner that generates a TV format raster.
The FUR field of view is 4.5° by 3.5°. The sensor as and constructed by the Sierra Nevada Corpora-
mounted has an angular accuracy of 1 mrad (0.06°). tion in Reno. Nev.. is used to direct other on-

214 The Lincoln Laboratory Journal. Volume 3. Number 2 (J 990)

 Davis - The Airborne Seeker Test Bed

Table 1. Specifications for Instrumentation Head Receiver

Item Requirement

Frequency 9750-to-10,050 MHz inclusive

Signal waveforms Continuous wave (CW) and pulsed

Pulsewidth (min) 0.78ps
PRF 20 kHz to 400 kHz

Maximum signals (at antenna port)

Operating
Front -10 dBm
Rear OdBm
Survivable
Front +60 dBm PK +30 dBm AVG
Rear +30 dBm PK +20 dBm AVG

Polarization of rear sensor and

forward sensor Horizontal (H) & vertical (V)

Oscillator stability
Noise sidebands
<15 kHz Microwave LO dominant
15 kHz to 3 MHz -80 dBclkHz
Discrete sidebands
<15 kHz -(80 + 20 log f/15) dBc
f = frequency separation in kHz
15 kHz to 3 MHz -80 dBc

System noise figure

Forward sensor $; 8 dB
Rear sensor $;15 dB

Receiver bandwidth
Narrowband 4 kHz & 10 kHz
Wideband 56 kHz
Videoband 923 kHz

Coherent processing interval (Cpr)

For data collection 50 ms
For auto track 0.5 to 16 ms

Channel-to-channel tracking accuracy

(after calibration)
Gain 0.5 dB (1a)
Phase 3.0° rms

Absolute amplitude error

(including calibration) <±1.0dB

IR adjunct sensor
Gimbal limits ± 50° pitch; ± 40° yaw
Angle accuracy (static positioning) $; 1.0 mrad rms

The Lincoln Laboratory Journal. Volume 3. Number 2 (1990) 215

Davis - The Airborne Seeker Test Bed

Fig. 8- The Beacon Tracking Radar (BTR). This C-band radar tracks a transponderplaced on
the target aircraft or at a ground reference point. The BTR records target angle, range, and
range rate, which are used to aim the other test bed sensors. Valid data collection therefore
begins before the other systems have acquired the target.

board sensors to the target location in angle, to acquisition by the other sensors, but only if
range, and range rate. It can locate a target prior the target has a beacon, or radio repeater, that

MUX/
Avionics
Formatter Recorder

VME-VME
Link Control
Sensor Console
Chassis Chassis Panel
Aircraft
Computer

Beacon
IR/EO
Tracker

Fig. 9-A block diagram ofthe principal test bedcomputer systems. The seekercomputer (shown in red) directly
controls the IH (Doppler tuning, gain controls, track processing, and gimbal control). The aircraft computer
(shown in blue) coordinates and records sensor reports, and represents the primary operator interface for
controlling the test bed systems.

216 The Lincoln Laboratory Journal, Volume 3, Number 2 (J 990)

 Davis - The Airborne Seeker Test Bed

sends back a strong signal in response to the allows high data rates to be supported in
BTR interrogations. Because this signal is at a bursts. The data multiplexer can also support
different frequency (C-band) from the other test an additional DCRSi recorder.
bed sensors, signal interference does not occur. Figure 11 is a photograph of the operator's
The BTR is designed to locate the target at a control panel. The operator can see full signal
typical initial range of30 km. The BTR is housed spectra in real time and make decisions
in a standard AST-4 pod and weighs210lbs; the throughout the intercept. Events dUring a target
other pod is empty and is used for aerodynamic intercept happen quickly, and not enough time
balance. is available for an operator to type commands on
a computer keyboard. Consequently. specific
Computers and Data Recording software functions are tied to single button
presses on the control panel. For example, in
Figure 9 is a block diagram of the primary an ECM mission the operator might press a but-
computers of the test bed. The red area in the ton to force a reacquisition in response to
figure indicates the digital system associated information shown on the screen.
with the IH. This system, called the seeker Mter a data collection mission, a software
computer, is responsible for receiver gain system implemented on Sun workstations ac-
control, Doppler tUning, antenna gimbal con- cesses and processes the data from the test
trol, and performance of the closed-loop target bed. A single intercept flight pass can generate
tracking. The blue area in the figure is the 700 MB of data, which can consist of 10 wide-
aircraft computer that controls the test bed sys- band channels, 26 narrowband channels. and
tems. It coordinates and records the sensor a variety of sensor reports from both on board
reports (IH, FLIR, BTR, inertial navigation sys- and off board the test bed. A sophisticated ar-
tem. and global positioning system) and chitecture has been developed to allow an an-
provides the primary operator interface for alyst qUick and convenient access to a desired
the test bed. portion of the data. The analyst can then
The computers are multitasking multi-CPU define processing operations on the data to gen-
systems based on Motorola 68020 CPUs in a erate the desired data products. A quick-look
VME bus. Most of the system software is pro- capability for checking data quality, gener-
grammed in the C language. The signal proces- ating signal spectra. and observing ECM ef-
sor is fully software programmable; the seeker fects is available in the field. Full data calibra-
and aircraft computer chassis have room to tion and processing is performed back at the
accommodate hardware enhancements and a Laboratory. The analysis team at Lincoln Lab-
second signal processor. These features are oratory provides continuity of the knowledge
included to support future additions and modi- base over the life of the project.
fications to the test bed.
The bulk of the radar data from the IH does Falcon 20
not enter the computers; it is passed to the high-
speed recorder by a custom data multiplexer The Dassault Falcon 20 aircraft is a medium-
developed by TEK Microsystems of Burlington, sized business jet designed to carry nine pas-
Mass. Figure 10 shows the data flow paths sengers. Two major external modifications were
supported by the data multiplexer. The high- made to the aircraft: wing hard points were
speed data recorder is an Ampex DCRSi rotary- added to support pods (a factory kit was avail-
head cassette recorder that can support data able), and the nose was modified to support the
rates up to 13.3 MB/sec. Since the data rate new radome. the two optics pods. and the in-
from the IH can reach 50 MB/sec in some creased weight. The Falcon 20 airframe is rated
modes. the data multiplexer can be pro- for speeds up to 0.88 Mach, but the combina-
grammed to optimize the recording. which tion of engine performance and the increased

The Lincoln Laboratory Journal. Volume 3. Number 2 (1990) 217

Davis - The Airborne Seeker Test Bed

recording and coordinates with the ground

4 Mb/sec
crew.
51 Mb/sec 3.3Mb/sec

10 Wide- 26 Narrow- Test Intercept Mission

band band
x2 (I,Q) This section describes data from a typical
@ 192 kHz target intercept experiment. At the time of this
@ 1.28 MHz @ 64 kHz writing we are doing our initial testing and
calibration, and have not yet collected data on
any military aircraft. Although the experiment
described here was designed to verifY system
performance, it illustrates many of the capabili-
Buffer Memory Buffer Memory ties of the Airborne Seeker Test Bed.
10 x 128 K Word 26 x4 K Word In the test-range environment, two racetrack
I T trajectories are set up-one for the target and
I I one for the test bed-to provide the desired track
Tape Bus crossing angle. (See Figure 13.) Ground control-
Controller Controller lers assist in getting the aircraft into suitable
Data Multiplexer
initial positions. As the test bed enters the
straight leg of the intercept trajectory, the BTR
acquires the target. From this point in the test,
the other test bed sensors can be directed by
the BTR.
The measurements described below were
Recorder
performed in civilian airspace over New Hamp-
shire and Massachusetts, rather than at a test
Fig. 10-A block diagram of the data multiplexer. The range. No ground controllers were involved
multiplexer is the interface between data generated by the (other than the local control towers that the
IH and the Ampex tape recorder. Operating modes exist for pilots reported to periodically), and the pilots
continuous recording or periodic snapshots of selected
channels. used landmarks to set up the trajectories.
The experiment was configured as a simu-
drag ofthe external modifications limits speed to lated head-on intercept with the test bed 170 m
0.73 Mach dUring level flight. above the altitude of the target. The target used
Figure 12 illustrates the layout of equipment in the experiment was a Beechcraft Bonanza, a
in the Falcon 20 aircraft. The inertial navigation small single-engine propeller-driven aircraft.
system, which is mounted in the nose on a rigid The test bed velocity was kept low (180 kts, or
plate, produces aircraft roll, pitch, and heading 91 m/sec) to extend data recording and to sim-
readings that provide a reference for the IH plifY pilot procedures in these initial exercises.
antenna mount. An auxiliary power unit in the The GTRI Waveform Simulator radar built
tail provides a dedicated 15 kVA of electrical to support the test bed provided a vertically
power to the project. A freon cooling system polarized CW illumination waveform.
installed in the tail of the aircraft handles the The signals in the following figures were re-
increased heat load generated by the project ceived by the forward sensor antenna through
equipment. the monopulse sum beams. Since the illumi-
Three test bed operators fly in the cabin along nator is vertically polarized, signals re-
with the two pilots. One operator controls the ceived through the vertical antenna channels
overall system through the computer con- are called copolarized. Signals from the hori-
sole, the second operator controls the FUR zontal antenna channels are called cross-
system, and the third operator monitors signal polarized.

218 The Lincoln Laboralory Journal. Volume 3. Number 2 (1990)

 Davis - The Airborne Seeker Test Bed

Fig. 11-The operator control panel. The upper-left screen displays re-
ceived Doppler spectra; the upper-right screen lists target track-file infor-
mation. The center screen displays system status and the aim point of the
gimballed sensors. The buttons on the lowerpanel control the stages ofan
intercept (data recording, sensoracquisition andreacquisition), and initiate
mission-specific functions under software control.

Figure 14 shows a plot ofthe received Doppler drop in its Doppler frequency as the test
spectra as a function of time. These data are bed flies past is clearly evident in the figure
taken from the wideband vertically polarized at approximately 50 sec.
monopulse sum channel. Signal intensity is Figure 15 shows a single Doppler spectrum
color coded as indicated; yellow represents the taken from the narrowband copolarized (verti-
strongest signals. The wide bright band in the cal) monopulse sum channel at 33 sec into the
center corresponds to the ground clutter seen run. The received signal is integrated for 64
by the forward sensor antenna. This signal stays msec, which when processed with a Kaiser-
at a relatively constant Doppler frequency Bessel windowing function yields a Doppler
until the end of the trajectory, when the test resolution of40 Hz. The Doppler frequency ofthe
bed flies beyond the strong clutter sources. As central target line is slightly over 10kHz, which
the test bed flies over a clutter source, its corresponds to a closing velocity of 315 kts (160
Doppler frequency decreases. The narrow Dop- m/sec) between test bed and target. We can see
pler line to the right of the clutter is the in- certain characteristics of the Bonanza target
coming Bonanza aircraft. The characteristic surrounding the central Doppler line (the skin
The Lincoln Laboratory Journal. Volume 3, Number 2 (J 990) 219
Davis - The Airborne Seeker Test Bed

Forward
Sensor

Fig. 12-Layout of equipment in the Falcon 20. The inertial measurement unit in the nose determines the roll, pitch,
and heading values of the test bed as well as its position in space. Most of the system electronics are in the racks
along the left side of the aircraft. The auxiliary power unit in the tail provides the electrical power for all of the project
equipment.

return). The broadened region of Doppler side- appear on jet aircraft targets if the engine tur-
bands is due to propeller modulation of the bine blades are visible.
radar signals; this broadening is also visible in Figure 16 shows the signal strength of the
the spectra of Fig. 14. Similar modulations Bonanza skin return dUring the first 50 seconds
of the fly-by. The signals for the copolarized
(V-pol) returns and cross-polarized (H-pol) re-
" --- , turns were measured simultaneously dUring

t
North
+
./
././
././
./
././ '\
\

I
\
I
the fly-by. The copolarized signal tends to
dominate, but the cross-polarized return is fre-
quently seen to be stronger.
././././ ~/ Figure 17, which shows the instantane-
ous polarization state of the target over a brief
t
.
Illuminator
/./ Tar et
g interval of time, is another representa-

~ ,,-,
~ / \
• 7 -, '\
tion of the radar cross-section data. The
coordinates shown are a rectangular pro-
II '\./
' ./ \
\ jection of the Poincare polarization sphere,
I I which has left-hand circular (LHC) polari-
\ I zation at the north pole, right-hand cir-
'\ , Airborne Seeker Test Bed ./ /
"--------------,, cular (RHC) polarization at the south pole,
+ and a range of elliptical polarizations in be-
Ground Tracking Stations
tween. The linear polarizations at various
rotation angles are represented around the
Fig. 13-The flight-path geometry for a simulated intercept.
The testbed flies radially outbound from the illuminator. The
equator. If the Bonanza did not depolarize the
racetrack path of the target is oriented to yield the desired incident vertically polarized signal, we would
crossing angle between test bed and target. Ground con- see the return signal clustered at V-pol, indi-
trollers direct both aircraft to cause the intercept to occur at cated by the large dot in the center of the figure.
a selected location. The test bed is 170 m higher than the
target for safety reasons and for providing a look-down The various scattering centers on the aircraft
geometry. distort the incident polarization, however, and

220 The Lincoln Laboratory Journal. Volume 3. Number 2 (1990)

 Davis - The Airborne Seeker Test Bed

102
90
E'-..:120
(()
~
Q; -130
~
o
U
Q)
60 Q..

.!E.- ~ -140
Q)
E
·w>u
i= £. -150
30
-160
8 10 12 14 16
Frequency above Rear Reference (kHz)
Fig. 15-Measured Doppler spectrum in the narrowband
o monopulse sum channel for the copolarized return signal,
o 2 4 6 8 10 12 at a point corresponding to 33 sec in Fig. 14. The Bonanza
Frequency (kHz) return appears at 10kHz. The character of the propeller
modulations is clearly evident as the widely spread base
region around the central skin line. The narrowband plots
were processed to a Doppler resolution of 40 Hz.

-80 -100 -120 -140 -160 -180 these individual contributions combine with
various phase shifts to yield the complicated
Amplitude (dBm)
behavior shown.
Fig. 14-The received Doppler spectra as they evolved in For comparison, Fig. 18 shows the corre-
time during the intercept. The legend shows signal intensity
encoded as color. The brightstripe at 5 kHz is ground clutter
sponding polarization return with the antenna
seen through the sidelobes of the IH antenna. The target main beam centered on clutter (this measure-
signal is visible as the narrow stripe at 10kHz. The test bed ment was made separately from the Bonanza
passes the target at approximately 50 sec, when the target intercept). Note that the clutter depolarizes the
Doppler rapidly falls off. The figure also shows a spreading
of the target Doppler spectrum because of signal modula- V-pol illumination signal significantly, but the
tions caused by the propeller on the Bonanza aircraft. data are distributed and clustered differently

-110

E -120
(()
~
Q; -130
~
0
Q..
"0
Q) -140
·wu>
Q)
a:: -150
Cross-Polarized

-160
0 10 20 30 40 50
Time (sec)

Fig. 16-A plot of the signal strength (in dB below a milliwatt) of the target skin return versus time for
both the copolarized and cross-polarized components. Even though the illuminating signal is vertically
polarized, the signal scattered by the target is dominated by the vertical component only half the time.

The Lincoln Laboratory Journal. Volume 3. Number 2 (1990) 221

Davis - The Airbome Seeker Test Bed

90 ;-.:H Vi-- ---,H H V H

.... ..
..:-,-
I , LHC 9 0 , - - - - - - . - - - , 1 - - - - - - - - - , LHC

.• ... ,.....- :.' . ..

.- . .. .\.:.
~
OJ
<1l
.-
.....
.
•
... ,. .
..
.',. -
..• • •••••• # •• .. .1
:"" ... -..-._.1·
.,. ,
-- . ...:
~~
v- ~..
~ ••••• ~:
.-fl't:..,".. ~
".':.. _..-. . c
':\.,...I.'.
.~.
~ ~ 01--:-"
..,..• ~.I\".
• ••
'Je
..•... ._ Linear
• ••

~:::l
0
.-.. Linear ._ •....(e : .. ....,

.- I.- _:..... .: ....

~
....,.-'
;.:. .. ...-..:...
-'-t... .. , _......':
.-g •• . . ..- . . l' . , '
~ . . . ~.~ ••• ' " , " ' . . .
~
... .a.", ~:. .
_.. . e...
::::J
()
.=
• •
..... -,...~
~....
0 o· .: .._ .. . . .:
-90 L...-~ ._ 10·_·
• ....I:..- -----' RHC -90 L-- • I •
---L.---''--=---_ _-----' RHC
-180 0 180 -180 0 180
Orientation (deg) Orientation (deg)

Fig. 17-The true polarization state of the target return is Fig. 18-The polarization state of an interval of clutter data
derived from the amplitude and phase of the received plotted on a rectangular representation of the Poincare
vertical and horizontal polarized signal components. The sphere. Even though the received polarization is diffusely
polarization state is plotted here on a rectangular represen- distributed, it clusters around the center dot that indicates
tation of the Poincare sphere. The equator of this sphere is the vertical polarization of the illumination signal.
the locus of linear polarizations that range from horizontal
on the left to vertical in the middle to horizontal on the right.
Up and down excursions on the plot represent increasing
high-fidelity data in a repeatable and systematic
ellipticity in the received polarization, with left-hand circular measurement program makes the test bed espe-
(LHC) polarization at the north pole (the top edge of the cially valuable for investigating advanced seeker
graph), and right-hand circular (RHC) polarization at the concepts and electronic countermeasures and
south pole (the bottom edge ofthe graph). The receivedpo-
larization, though fairly random, forms two distinct clusters, for developing signal processing schemes to
one around vertical polarization and one around horizontal defeat countermeasures. Though only in the air
polarization. The center dot indicates the vertical polariza- for a few weeks as ofthis wri ling, the test bed has
tion of the illumination signal.
already demonstrated the basic functionality
required for its mission, from the proper per-
from those of the target returns of Fig. 17. formance of all sensor systems, operating
Figure 19 shows an FUR image of the Bo- modes, and data recording to the execution of
nanza as it appeared at a range of 0.8 km. For clutter and target intercept measurements.
most of an intercept the target aircraft is un- In the near future the Airborne Seeker Test
resolved; it appears as a single pixel on the Bed will operate at White Sands Missile Range in
video screen. At this close range, the Bonanza a variety of tests involving clutter, target, and
outline is seen as dark (cool) against the warm- ECM measurements, with ground-based and
er earth background. The bright spot on the airborne illuminators. A database of bistatic
nose of the aircraft is the exposed hot engine. desert clutter will be collected and compared to
A computer-generated cross hair superim- results from other clutter measurements made
posed on the FUR video indicates the radar at the same locations. Bistatic target radar
aim point obtained from the IH. The motion cross-section measurements will be collected on
of the cross hair provides a visual indication a T-38 aircraft both to demonstrate test bed
of the dynamic behavior of the radar track and capabilities and to perfect flight procedures.
is useful for demonstrating the degree of ECM Both ground-based and airborne illuminators
angle deception. In Fig. 19 the cross hair to the will be used in the clutter and target measure-
left of the Bonanza aircraft shows where the IH ments. Intercepts will be performed on aircraft
was positioned at the time, and is shown only eqUipped with angle-deception ECM to investi-
for illustration. gate the jamming characteristics and identitY
possible discriminants.
Summary After the tests at White Sands a number of
tests are planned with other air vehicles of Air
Lincoln Laboratory's Airborne Seeker Test Force interest to investigate their specific vul-
Bed represents a powerful tool for investigating nerabilities to missile seekers. Long-term plans
missile seeker performance. The ability to collect for the test bed include the development and

222 TIle Lincoln Laboratory Joumal. Volume 3. Number 2 (J 990)

 Davis - The Airbome Seeker Test Bed

Fig. 19-A FUR image of the target Bonanza aircraft, taken near the end of the intercept at a range of 0.8 km. The hot
engine parts appear as a positive contrast (brighter) against the earth background, while the body and wings ofthe aircraft
appear as a negative contrast (darker) against the warm earth. A computer-generated cross hair superimposed on the
FUR video indicates the aim point of the IH radar.

demonstration of advanced ECCM algorithms. support is currently being continued into the
the addition of other sensors. and the flying of operational phase by Lt. Col. Phil Soucy of the
advanced-concept brass-board seekers. Air Force.
A complex project necessarily relies on the
Acknowledgments
hard work and careful attention of a large group
The Airborne Seeker Test Bed was developed of people. Their tireless help has been and
under the joint sponsorship ofthe Air Force and continues to be essential to the success of
the Army. I would specifically like to acknowl- the project. Many people have been involved
edge Dr. David L. Briggs of Lincoln Laboratory in the test bed development. including numer-
and Lt. Col. James P. Hogarty of the Air Force. ous Raytheon contributors. I will mention only
the originators of the seeker test bed concept. the principal members of the Airborne .Seeker
Colonel Hogarty and Joseph Durham of the Test Bed subcontractor teams: Raytheon pro-
Army Missile and Space Intelligence Command gram manager Victor Weisenbloom. Larry
provided the sponsorship necessary to make Durfee, and Tom Clougher. all of the Raytheon
this project a reality. Program direction and Missile Systems Division; Andy Reddig of TEK

The Lincoln Laboratory Journal. Volume 3. Number 2 (1990) 223

Davis - The Airbome Seeker Test Bed

Microsystems; and George Clary and Stan Jim Clarke. Al Shaver. David Bruce. Dan
McDonald of the Sierra Nevada Corp. Sparrell. Dave Kohr. Pete Szymansky. Cynthia
The Lincoln Laooratory personnel who have Eldridge. and Lucy Smiley; engineers Dick
seen the test bed into first flight are Group Simard. Mark Green. and John Parkins; tech-
Leaders Dr. Lewis Thurman and Dennis nical assistants Al Davis. John Allen. Bob
Keane; system engineers Louis Hebert. Paul Cavanaugh. and Dick Thibodeau; pilots
Juodawlkis. Dr. Randy Avent. and Dr. Al Charlie Magnarelli and Mike Radoslovich;
Hearn; software developers Ken Gregson. and chief mechanic Bob Murray.

CURTIS W. DAVIS III is the

Assistant Leader of the Air
Defense Techniques Group.
He received his B.S.. M.S.,
and Ph.D. degrees from the
Ohio State University. where
he worked on impulse radar
for underground probing.
While at Oillo State he built ultrawideband measurement
systems. designed antennas. and mathematically modeled
radar performance. Since joining Lincoln Laboratory in
1979 Curt has been involved in the instrumentation and
performance analyses of air defense radar systems. His
activities have included adding computer recording capabil-
ity to an X-band ground-clutter measurement radar: the
design. construction, and operation ofa helicopter-mounted
field -strength measuremen t system for multipath profiling;
development ofmultipath modeHng algOrithms; and various
radar system analysis activities. Curt was responsible for
defining the basic architecture and specifications oftheNr-
borne Seeker Test Bed system. and he serves as the test
bed's project engineer.

224 The Lincoln Laboratory Joumal. Volume 3. Number 2 (1990)