Abstract:
Method and apparatus for passive emitter location which overcomes the time to range and other restrictive limitations of passive tracking systems by combining pulse frequency, time of arrival and bearing or angle of arrival measurements to obtain a range measurement at each parameter update. No specific observer motion is required and relatively few restrictions on emitter motion are present in order to obtain an accurate determination.

Description:
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION 
     This invention relates to the passive tracking in position and velocity of pulsed radar emitters by an ESM intercept receiver system. The ESM receiver makes measurements involving the following parameters: RF carrier frequency, pulse time-of-arrival (TOA), and signal angle-of-arrival (AOA) or AOA rate of change. 
     The location of nonstationary emitters from moving observers using relative bearing measurements or frequency change measurements is well documented in the literature. For example, bearings-only passive ranging is discussed in V. J. Aidala and S. E. Hamel, &#34;Utilization of Modified Polar Coordinates for Bearing-Only Tracking,&#34; IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. AC-28, March 1983; while Doppler-only ranging is presented by Yiu-Tong Chan and Frederick L. Jardine in &#34;Target Localization and Tracking from Doppler-Shift Measurements,&#34; IEEE Journal of Ocean Engineering, vol. 15, Jul. 1990. 
     FIGS. 1a and 1b illustrate prior art bearings-only passive location. As discussed by Aidala and Hamel, the observer 100 must maneuver to obtain the range to the emitting aircraft 110. The maneuver may be a change in speed, a change in heading, or both. The track 120 illustrates a change in heading, and graph 130 in FIG. 1b indicates the resulting behavior of the range estimate 140. Convergence occurs in this example after four bearing samples 150 are made at points (1-7) 151 along the observer&#39;s track. Four initial samples 152 are required because of the four state elements that characterize the emitter&#39;s track in this planar example: position, e.g. longitude and latitude, and speed along two different directions, for example north and east. The range estimator 141 relates the bearing measurements 150 to these four quantities and refines the estimates with subsequent samples to obtain some predetermined accuracy in the track estimate, such as the range estimate to within 5% of the true range. Achieving the theoretically desired performance in practice depends heavily on the emitting aircraft flying the assumed type of track. Aidala and Hamel, for instance assume the emitter&#39;s track is of constant velocity. 
     FIGS. 2a and 2b illustrate an implementation of Doppler rate ranging as described by Chan and Jardine but modified in an obvious way to apply to the pulsed radar air-to-air tracking problem. Measurements are made of the emitter RF carrier frequency, or pulse repetition (PRF) frequency 200. These measurements are differenced at 210 to compare the frequency change between the measurement samples, numbered sequentially 220. The frequency change is due to the Doppler shift induced by the relative velocity of the two moving aircraft. This set of frequency changes can be related to the emitter&#39;s track state vector, i.e. latitude, longitude and the north and east speeds analogous to the bearings-only case. As in the bearings-only example, four inputs are required before an initial target range estimate 240 is obtained as indicated in graph 239. This means five frequency measurements are required, as opposed to four bearing measurements. Another difference between the cases is that the observer is flying a constant velocity track 250. As Chen and Jardine note, this will result in an ambiguous solution, indicated by the ghost range 241. In the air-to-air application it may be possible to eliminate the ghost range by signal amplitude comparison between antennas in different quadrants. The ghost range is also eliminated if the observer maneuvers. 
     The Doppler technique, as described by Chen and Jardine, thus suffers two of the basic limitations of bearings-only passive ranging: it takes an extended time for emitter range to be obtained from the measurements, and during this time special restrictive assumptions are required about the emitter&#39;s motion. Most commonly, (as in the bearings-only case), the emitter is assumed to be flying a constant velocity track during the time needed to range. The time period this assumption must remain in effect extends from tens of seconds to minutes depending on relative observer and emitter kinematics. 
     This constant velocity emitter requirement is a severe limitation on the usefulness of these current approaches to passive emitter location. In many tactical situations where passive location is useful emitting aircraft avoid constant velocity flight paths to make tracking difficult. Therefore the aircraft may fly a constant velocity track only for several seconds, which is a period too short for conventional passive location estimators to converge to a solution. 
     Restrictions on the observer&#39;s flight path also impose severe tactical limitations. The need to maneuver to obtain range observability for bearings-only tracking may be difficult to satisfy on initial detection of the emitter, while any delay in maneuvering can significantly extend the track estimation convergence time. Eliminating the ghost track for the constant observer velocity Doppler case may require the observer to sample signals from antennas in different quadrants sequentially, and this introduces other restrictions, such as bounding the observing aircraft&#39;s attitude changes during this sequential sampling. 
     A contrast to the limitations of passive tracking using either frequency change or bearing measurements is the operation of a tracking radar, such as the prior art radar illustrated in FIGS. 3a and 3b. By emitting pulses and measuring the time delay for the pulse return the radar obtains a direct measurement of range, rather than indirectly deriving the range after four or five measurements have been made. Also each range measurement is intrinsically more accurate than the passively derived range, even after many measurements have been made in the passive approaches. 
     Still there are restrictions and limitations in using the active radar. A significant limitation is the possibility of being passively tracked by an observer beyond the detection range of the radar. As indicated by the target range 310 in FIG. 3b, the active radar can detect a target tens of miles distant. But because an ESM intercept receiver detects the direct, and not the reflected signal, it can detect the radar at distances of hundreds of miles. This was indicated in FIGS. 1 and 2 by the emitter range of 120 nautical miles (nmi) as opposed to 20 nmi for the radar. 
     A significant restriction in using the radar illustrated in FIG. 3a to track a target is the need to steer the high gain antenna 320 (either mechanically using servo 321, or electronically) to point at the aircraft being tracked. This may restrict the trajectory of the observing aircraft, for instance in order to generate the azimuth and emitter measurements 322. This may restrict the trajectory of the observing aircraft, for instance, to essentially one in which the observer&#39;s velocity vector is pointing toward the target. In contrast, passive techniques can use an interferometer array (170, FIG. 1) to simultaneously locate multiple emitters in angle over a wide field-of-view (FOV). 
     From these considerations of the benefits and weaknesses of both active and passive tracking systems it is clear that the prior art fails to describe a passive system that can generate an accurate range measurement from a detection range of possibly hundreds of miles at each parameter update without significantly restricting either observer or emitter motion. 
     It is an therefore an object of the invention to provide means and method for utilizing signal frequency and time Doppler measurements along with bearing change measurements, all made during a single dwell, in a manner that reduces the emitter constant velocity requirement from that needed in using existing techniques. 
     It is a further object of this invention to provide means and method for eliminating ambiguous range solutions when the observer flies a constant velocity track, and to not require the observer to maneuver in order to estimate emitter range. 
     It is also an object of this invention to provide a way for obtaining a measurement of emitter range during each dwell, after an initialing first dwell. 
     A further object of the invention is to utilize the foregoing range measurements in a passive track estimator to refine the range accuracy and to predict future radar positions in a manner similar to that currently done in active radar trackers. 
     SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION 
     The foregoing and other objects are achieved according to the invention by combining pulse frequency, time of arrival (TOA) and bearing or angle of arrival (AOA) measurements to obtain a range measurement at each parameter update. No specific observer motion is required, and the restrictions on emitter motion, heretofore experienced, are reduced. 
    
    
     BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS 
     The principles of the invention will be more readily understood by reference to a description of preferred embodiments thereof given below in conjunction with the drawings which are briefly described as follows. 
     FIG. 1a is a block-schematic diagram of prior art bearings-only passive ranging system. 
     FIG. 1b is a range diagram for the FIG. 1a system resulting from the measurements taken as shown in FIG. 1a. 
     FIG. 2a is a block-schematic diagram of a prior art Doppler passive ranging system and an illustration of the relation between observer and emitter. 
     FIG. 2b is a range diagram resulting from the operation of the FIG. 2a system as there shown. 
     FIG. 3a is a block-schematic diagram of a prior art tracking radar system. 
     FIG. 3b is a range diagram resulting from typical operations of the FIG. 3a system. 
     FIG. 4a is a top level block-schematic diagram of the first preferred embodiment of a passive emitter location apparatus constructed according to the invention. 
     FIG. 4b is a chart illustrating a typical relation between emitter and observer in using the FIG. 4a system. 
     FIG. 5 is a detailed block-schematic diagram of the second preferred embodiment of a passive emitter locating apparatus according to the invention. 
     FIG. 6a illustrates an emitter track flown in a simulation using the invention. 
     FIGS. 6b-d are graphs, illustrating the results of the FIG. 6a simulation. 
    
    
     DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS 
     FIG. 4 illustrates a processor 400 combining RF carrier frequency measurements 430 with the fundamental time differences 431 t p , derived from pulse TOA measurements 433, and angle rate measurements 435 to obtain a range measurement. As indicated by the graph 405 of range versus parameter sample number (equivalently receiver dwell), as obtained from the output of 400 the range measurements are available after a second parameter update. This is in contrast to an active radar, where the range measurement is available after the first update. It will be dear from the following description how this invention utilizes changes in RF, PRF and angle to measure range, and two parameter updates, or receiver dwells, are required to initially obtain these rates. However, unlike current passive location techniques, range is measured at the second and all subsequent updates. This range is not refined with subsequent updates by processor 400, but exhibits an essentially random error with fixed statistics, analogous to the active radar range measurements. 
     The error in the passive range measurement using the invention is intrinsically larger than that of the active radar. This error depends on the system frequency measurement accuracy, as well as TOA and angle resolution measurement capability. For time resolutions of 2.5 nsec, frequency accuracies of 5 Hz and angle rates with an error no more than 0.1° per second, a 10 GHz emitter&#39;s range can be measured to a 1σ accuracy of about 6%. Although this measurement error is much larger than the error attainable with an active radar, the passive measurement can be made for emitters at much longer ranges than the active radar can detect. In contrast to conventional bearings-only and Doppler techniques, the range estimate is smoothed in a tracking filter similar to those used by active radar trackers. The tracking filter 440 takes the range and angle measurements and generates the emitter position 441 and velocity. 
     As noted above, the operations of this invention are thus seen to have more similarities to a tracking radar than to conventional passive ranging systems. The reason for this involves the manner in which the time measurements 431, frequency measurements 430, and angle rate measurements 435 are combined in the range measurement processor 400. This is shown in more detail in FIG. 5. As shown there the frequency and time interval measurements t p  are multiplied to produce the quantity 500 N c . As will be seen, this quantity provides an absolute reference that provides the basis for extracting range, since it gives a true Doppler change (501, FIG. 5) without any knowledge of emitter carrier f o  or pulse repetition 1/t po  rest frequencies. 
     The manner in which N c  does this makes use of the method and apparatus described in the applicant&#39;s commonly assigned patent application &#34;Emitter Frequency-Time Measurement by a Moving Observer Using No Navigation Inputs&#34;. For all pulsed echo radars this fundamental constant represents the number of carrier cycles that occur in the time interval t p  =1/f PRF , where f PRF  is the fundamental pulse repetition frequency. Intrinsic to this invention is the relation 501 FIG. 5 of N c  to the relative acceleration  r  along the signal&#39;s angle-of-arrival (AOA), and to changes in the carrier frequency f and fundamental pulse repetition frequency t p  : ##EQU1## All quantities in this equation are known except the relative kinematical acceleration  r , which can thus be solved for utilizing Equation 1. 
     Whereas the estimation of the constant ft p  or equivalently N c  takes place over one dwell, the estimation of the product ΔfΔt p  takes place typically over two dwells. f and t p  estimates from each dwell are stored in memory 520, and then the two sets differenced by subtracting the measurements in the (i-1) th  dwell from those in the i th . The differenced frequency is accurately approximated by ##EQU2## where r--the acceleration of the observer along the emitter DOA 
     f o  --the emitter RF frequency in the observer rest frame 
     c--speed of light 
     Δt--time seperating differenced measurements 
     and the differenced fundamental time interval is ##EQU3## The product of Equation (2a) and Equation (2b), i.e., Equation 1 or 501 FIG. 5, thus involves the fundamental constant f o  t po  =N c  which is known, rather than the unknown individual quantities f o  and t po , and hence, as noted above, the acceleration toward the emitter can be estimated by ##EQU4## 
     Range can then be measured in the Extract Range process (540, FIG. 5) using Equation 3 as follows. The radial kinematical acceleration  r  is related to range  r  by 
     
         r--rθ.sup.2 --a.sub.r                                (4) 
    
     where .sub.θ is the signal AOA rate-of-change and a r  the relative physical acceleration of the observer and emitter. Once the AOA rate is measured Equation 4 can be used with Equation 3 to measure range. In doing this there are three cases to consider based on a 4 . 
     In the important case of constant relative motion, the relative physical acceleration is zero and Equation 4 provides an exact solution for range. This case contains the special situation of a stationary emitter. Note further that when a r  =0 the ghost or ambiguous solution in the Doppler change-only approach illustrated in FIG. 2 and described by Yiu-Tong Chart and Frederick L. Jardine in their IEEE paper is eliminated, and also that range is obtained with no observer maneuver, unlike the bearings-only technique analyzed by Aidala and Hamel and illustrated in FIG. 1. 
     If the observer maneuvers during the measurements, but the target is constant velocity, then the right hand side of Equation 4, although no longer zero, is known from NAV system measurements (506 FIG. 5). Thus Equation 3 and Equation 4 once more provide an exact solution for range. 
     In contrast to these constant emitter velocity cases, emitter maneuvers represent an unknown element in the physical acceleration, and such maneuvers generate an error in the range measurement. But this error is proportional to the time over which the Doppler and AOA rate measurements are made, and so it can be controlled by specifying the correct system measurement accuracies, and thus restricting these times. 
     The range error due to measurement noise and unknown target accelerations appears as a random quantity varying from update to range update, and can be averaged out in a tracking filter that accepts as inputs the noisy range measurement and emitter relative bearing. This tracking filter generates at least target velocity as well as smoothed range. It may also, using well known estimation methods, generate estimated target accelerations. When target predicted acceleration is available, it may be fed back to the range extraction process to improve the range measurement accuracy. 
     FIG. 5 shows in greater detail how carrier frequency f, pulse repetition frequency  PRF , and angle of arrival or bearing rate measurements are combined to form the range measurement. In particular, this Figure illustrates the aspects of the f/f PRF , or equivalently fundamental constant N c , measurement relevant for this invention. 
     Essentially, pulse time-of-arrival 531 (TOA), frequency measurements 530, and signal relative bearing 532 are made during a single dwell. The relative bearing is measured by conventional phase interferometry employing at least one pair of antennas 536 and 537, between which signal phase 534 is detected 539, and from the measured phase the AOA 532 estimated. The fundamental period 533 t p  =1/f PRF  is extracted from the TOA measurements by the pulse deinterleaver 538. The t p  time difference is the greatest common divisor of all the interpulse time intervals. As discussed in the applicant&#39;s commonly assigned U.S. patent application Ser. No. 08/499,825, filed Jul. 10, 1995 entitled &#34;Emitter Frequency-Time Measurement by a Moving Observer Using No Navigation Inputs&#34;, the deinterleaver has the capabilities of the Litton Systems, Amecom Division&#39;s Advanced ADVCAP deinterleaver developed for the AN/ALQ-99 jamming system, and hence extracts t p  from the TOA measurements as part of the pulse deinterleaving process. 
     Through time synchronization via interpolation 502, as also discussed in the above-mentioned patent application &#34;Emitter Frequency-Time Measurement by a Moving Observer Using No Navigation Inputs&#34;, simultaneous carrier frequency and t p  estimates are multiplied together to form the constant 500 N c . The accuracy of this estimate can be brought to any level of refinement desired since the value being estimated is the same constant for all measurements made on a given frequency stable emitter. Hence the process 510 represents an average not just on all f/f PRF  estimates in a single dwell, but also across all dwells. 
     The parameters f, t p , and θ measured in a single dwell are stored in memory 520, along with the times 521 the measurements were made, and after the second and subsequent emitter dwell these measurement sets 523 are differenced 522 by subtracting the measurements in the previous dwell from the corresponding measurements in the current dwell. The frequency difference 503, and fundamental pulse repetition time difference 504 are interpolated 505 to generate simultaneous values which are multiplied together to obtain the basic relationship 501. This product, when combined with the estimate 500 of N c  and angle rate estimate .sub.θ (532) in a manner consistent with Equations 3 and 4 in the Extract Range process 540 generate the range measurement r. 
     When generating an accurate estimate of range, the process Extract Range uses the well known techniques of modern applied estimation theory in order to exploit the multiple records of ΔfΔt p  and .sub.θ available for a dwell-pair of parameter measurements, and also to account for measurement error correlation between N c  and ΔfΔt p . But the basis for this estimation approach is the relationship between the measured parameters and range given by ##EQU5## As discussed previously, a r  may have an unknown component due to emitter maneuvers. The component due to observer maneuvers is measured by the NAV system 506. 
     The range measurement 512 and relative bearing measurement 532 are input to the emitter tracking filter 560. This filter, employing the well known techniques established for tracking targets with an active radar (330, FIG. 3), reconstructs and smooths the target position and velocity from the noisy range and angle measurements. The tracking filter may also estimate target accelerations. When such estimates are part of the target track state vector, predicted accelerations 561 are fed back to the Extract Range process to reduce the error in the radial acceleration term a r  in Equation 5. In all cases the predicted range 562 and range rate 563 are fed back to aid in the range extraction by providing a consistency check. 
     FIGS. 6a-d illustrate performance when the tracking filter does not estimate target acceleration, i.e., prediction 561 is not available. FIG. 6a illustrates the emitter track flown in a simulation consisting of constant velocity segments interspersed with 8 g turns. The initial relative bearing 601 was 60°, and the initial range 602 was 120 nmi. Mainbeam and sidelobe detection of airborne emitters at such ranges is well within the capability of modern intercept receivers. Graph 610 in FIG. 6b shows the error in estimating the fundamental constant N c . An important feature of the error curve 611 is that it illustrates the insensitivity of this estimate to unknown maneuvers. This insensitivity arises from the cancellation properties intrinsic to the time-frequency product. 
     Graph 620 in FIG. 6c shows the range estimate output from the process Extract Range (540 FIG. 5). The range estimate curve 621 clearly indicates the increase in errors at 5 and 14 seconds due to emitter maneuvers. The range error during the maneuvers is about 16%. The error is about 4% when no maneuvers are present. 
     Even larger errors are easily reduced by a tracking filter (560, FIG. 5), as indicated by graph 630 in FIG. 6d. In contrast to conventional passive location estimators, the range estimate is available after the second dwell measurement. The range estimate 631 output from the tracking filter was determined in conjunction with the emitter velocity. As noted above, the tracking filter in this realization did not estimate target accelerations, and hence the range errors occurring in the range measurement 621 were controlled only by the system measurement accuracies. The measurement performance assumed in the simulation was: pulse time-of-arrival (TOA) measurement resolution of 2.5 nsec, frequency accuracy of 5 Hz, and angular rates measured with a resolution of 0.1° per second. The observer flew the constant velocity track 603. No observer maneuver was required to initially obtain range estimates, nor was the range measured ambiguous in any way. 
     Although the tracking filter used to generate the estimated range 631 used a state model in the filter similar to that used by active radar tracing filters, the measurement model of the statistics was different. This difference was necessary to account for the correlation between the range measurement 512 and angle input 532 arising from the range extraction process 540. The manner such correlations are accounted for is well known to those versed in the art of designing optimal estimators. 
     The principles of this invention are described hereinabove by describing preferred embodiments thereof constructed accordingly. It is to be remembered that the described embodiments may be modified or changed without departing from the invention as defined by the appended claims.