Rspa2l PDF

EUROPEAN ORGANISATION FOR THE SAFETY OF
AIR NAVIGATION
EUROCONTROL
RADAR SENSOR
PERFORMANCE
ANALYSIS
SUR.ET1.ST03.1000-STD-01-01
Edition : 0.1
Edition Date : June 1997
Status : Working Draft
Class : 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 EDITION 0.1:
SUR.ET01.ST01-STD-01 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 CATEGORY CLASSIFICATION

Working Draft þ Executive Task þ General Public þ
Draft o Specialist Task o EATMP o
Proposed Issue o Lower Layer Task o Restricted o
Released Issue o
ELECTRONIC BACKUP
INTERNAL REFERENCE NAME : D:\TEMP\RSPA.DOC

HOST SYSTEM MEDIA SOFTWARE(S)
Microsoft Windows Type : Hard disk Word 6.0
Media Identification :
Radar Sensor Performance Analysis 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 NAME AND SIGNATURE DATE
SURT M. Rees
Chairman
DIS J. Van DOORN
EATMP
Project Leader W. Philipp
Edition 0.1 Working Draft Page iii

June 1997
DOCUMENT CHANGE RECORD
The following table records the complete history of the successive editions of the present
document.
SECTIONS
EDITION DATE REASON FOR CHANGE PAGES
AFFECTED
(Edition) (Edition date)
Page iv Working Draft Edition 0.1

June 1997
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 Working Draft Page v

June 1997
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 Working Draft Edition 0.1

June 1997
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 Working Draft Page vii

June 1997
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. Approval of the Standard
3.1 This Standard is adopted in accordance with the procedures outlined in the
Directives for EUROCONTROL Standardisation Ref OO2 - 2 - 93.
3.2 This Standard becomes effective upon adoption by the Permanent

Commission of EUROCONTROL.
4. 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. Editorial Conventions
5.1 The format of this Standard complies with the Directives for the Uniform
Drafting and Presentation of EUROCONTROL Standard Documents.
5.2 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 Working Draft Page 1

June 1997
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.
6. 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.
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 Working Draft Edition 0.1

June 1997
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Purpose
1.1.1 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.
1.1.2 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.
1.1.3 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.
1.1.4 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.
1.1.5 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.

June 1997
1.2 Scope
1.2.1 This EUROCONTROL Standard specifies the methods and procedures for the
performance analysis of the Radar Sensors used for Air Traffic Management.
1.2.2 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.
1.2.3 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).
1.2.4 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.
1.2.5 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).
1.2.6 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).

June 1997
Figure 1.1 Relationship between Airspace Types and Services, Operational

Requirements and the Surveillance Equipment.

June 1997

June 1997
2. REFERENCES
2.1 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.

June 1997
3. DEFINITIONS, SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS
3.1 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, Σ) 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

June 1997
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.

June 1997
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 half-
power 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.

June 1997
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 Interrogator-

Responsor 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.

June 1997
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:
• ρ slant range bias (at zero range);
• slant range gain ( variation of range bias proportional to range);
• θ azimuth bias.
b) random errors which are represented by standard deviations:
• ρ slant range random error;
• θ 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.

June 1997
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.

June 1997
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. MOF’s 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;

June 1997
• 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;

June 1997
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.

June 1997
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

June 1997
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.

June 1997
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 non-
existence 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 returns from ranges

beyond that associated with a basic PRF interval.
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

June 1997
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 field-
in 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.

June 1997
Figure 3.1 Horizontal Mode of flight.

June 1997
Figure 3.2 Vertical Mode of Flight

June 1997
3.2 Symbols and abbreviations
For the purposes of this EUROCONTROL Standard document, the following

are used:
ACP Azimuth Change Pulse
ATC Air Traffic Control
ATCC Air Traffic Control Centre
ATS Air Traffic Services
BITE Built-In Test Equipment
CFAR Constant False Alarm Rate
CMB Combined (PSR and SSR)
CMTP Common Medium-Term Plan
CMV Coverage Measurement Volume
DGPS Differential Global Positioning System
DPE Digital Plot Extractor
EATCHIP European Air Traffic Control Harmonization and Integration
Programme
EGNOS European Geostationary Orbit System
ERP Effective Radiated Power
ERSS EUROCONTROL Radar Surveillance Standard
FAT Factory Acceptance Tests
FRUIT False Replies Unsynchronised In Time
GNSS Global Navigation Satellite System
GTC Gain Time Control
GPS Global Positioning System (US GNSS system)
GLONASS Global Navigation Satellite System (CIS GNSS system)
HPD Horizontal Polar Diagram
ICAO International Civil Aviation Organisation
IISLS Improved Interrogation Side Lobe Suppression
IF Intermediate Frequency
IRF Interrogation Repetition Frequency
I/O Input/Output
ISLS Interrogation Sidelobe Suppression
LVA Large Vertical Aperture
MDS Minimum Detectable Signal
MOF Mode Of Flight
MTD Moving Target Detection
MTI Moving Target Indicator
MTPA Mobile Transponder Performance Analyser
MSSR Monopulse Surveillance Secondary System
OCV Operational Coverage Volume
OBA Off Boresight Angle
PAT Provisional Acceptance Tests
Pd Probability of Position Detection
Pfa Probability of False Alarm
Pcd Probability of Code Detection
Pcv Probability of Code Validation
PRF Pulse Repetition Frequency

June 1997
PRI Pulse Repetition Interval

PRP Pulse Repetition Period
PSR Primary Surveillance Radar (also 'PR')
RASS Radar Analysis Support System
RCS Radar Cross Section
RDPS Radar Data Processing System
RF Radio Frequency
RSLS Receiver Side Lobe Suppression
RSS Radar Separation Standard
RFM Remote Field Monitor
RMCS Remote Monitoring and Control System
RTQC/A Real Time Quality Control/Assessment
SAT Site Acceptance Tests
SLS Side Lobe Suppression
SPAS Sensor Performance Analysis Standard
SSR Secondary Surveillance Radar
STAT Second Time Around Target
STCA Short Term Conflict Alert
STC Sensitivity Time Control
VPD Vertical Polar Diagram
VSWR Voltage Standing Wave Ratio

June 1997
4 RADAR SENSOR PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS
4.1 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:

June 1997
Overall Technical (ANNEX A) Detailed Technical

(ANNEX B)
System System Sub-System
F.A.T. C
S.A.T. (P.A.T) C C
Commissioning C
RTQA/Maintenance C C
Problem investigation C C C
Post modifications 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. UNITS / REMARKS.
Antenna tilt Deg.
R.P.M rotations / minute.
Rotations Per Minute (Antenna)

June 1997
P.R.F Hz = 1/ sec.
Pulse repetition Frequency
Staggering ratio/pattern dimensionless/Hz.
Instrumented range NM .
M.T.I range NM (if applicable).
Beam switching azimuth-range pattern.
Power 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 UNITS / REMARKS
Antenna tilt Deg.
P.R.F Hz.
Staggering ratio / pattern dimensionless/Hz.
Instrumented range NM.
Power KWs The reading from the powermeter of the
radar or the relative indication
Mode interlace pattern 3/A,C,1.2
/ ISLS/ IISLS / RSLS / Yes(No) / Yes (No) / Yes (No).
Receiver sensitivity The relative indication from the B.I.T.E ., or
recent measurement.
Plot extractor parameters / The reading from the B.I.T.E ., or recent
status measurement.
Plot filter combiner The reading from the B.I.T.E ., or recent
parameters / status measurement.
4.3.2 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:

June 1997
Overall Technical Detailed Technical

Special Recommended Yes Yes
messages
Multilevel Recommended Recommended Yes
recordings
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 • Opportunity Traffic
Technical Performance • Opportunity Traffic,
• Special Test Flights
Detailed Technical • Opportunity Traffic,
Performance • 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.
Minimum Duration • High Density Traffic Areas (en-route or major TMA) 1
hour,
• Medium Density Traffic Areas - 2 hours,
• Low Density Traffic Areas - 4 hours
Minimum Quantity of Data • 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.
System Configuration • Normal Operational configuration for prevailing traffic
and environment.
Environment, Weather • 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 anomalous-
propagation periods (ANAPROP ).

June 1997
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:

June 1997
MaxRange
SampleSize = × 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
Thus for 47 plots per scan the duration is:
30240 60
⇒ × ≈ 150minutes
47 6
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

June 1997
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 trajectory’s
adjacent velocity components. These changes should be used in order to
compute either the trajectory’s 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.

June 1997
5. PRIMARY SENSOR DETECTION PERFORMANCE PARAMETERS

ANALYSIS
5.1 General
The detection performance parameters of a Primary(PSR) sensor are:
• Probability of target position detection;
• False target reports rate.
5.2 Probability of target position detection
5.2.1 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.
The number of detected primary & combined target reports

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.

June 1997
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.

June 1997
5.3 False target reports
5.3.1 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.

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.

June 1997
6. PRIMARY SENSOR QUALITY PERFORMANCE PARAMETERS ANALYSIS
6.1 General
The quality performance parameters of a Primary (PSR) sensor are:
• Positional accuracy;
• Resolution.
6.2 Positional accuracy.
6.2.1 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:
ρ m(t)=(1+κ)*ρ ref (t+δ t)+δ ρ +σ ρ (6.1)
θ m(t)=θ ref(t+δ t)+δ θ+σ θ
ρ m = measured slant range;
ρ ref = reference slant range;
δ ρ = slant range bias error;
σ ρ = slant range random error;
κ = slant range gain error;
θ m = measured azimuth;
θ ref = reference azimuth;
δ θ = azimuth bias;
σ θ = azimuth random error;
δ t = time stamp error;

June 1997
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 κ.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
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.

June 1997
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:
• azimuth bias;
The systematic errors shall be represented by fixed numbers.
ii) random errors:
• slant range error;

June 1997
• 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.
The interpretation of the results shall be to assess the quality of the overall
positional accuracy compared to that specified in the EUROCONTROL Radar

June 1997
6.3 Resolution.
6.3.1 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.
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
∆ρ (NM)
(3)
± p*τ
(3a)
±2τ
(2)
± 1.5 τ
(1)
O ± 1.5 θb ± 3 θb ± q*θb ∆θ (Deg.)

Figure 6.1

June 1997
τ = nominal (compressed) pulse width in NM;
τ (NM) =τ (µsec) ∗ c / 2;
θb = 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.
|2τ| ≤ ∆ρ ≤ |p*τ| (6.2)
|3θb| ≤ ∆θ ≤ |q∗ θb|
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 :
The number of detected target reports chained to trajectories in zone 3a

Pd= The number of expected target reports in zone 3a
(6.3)

June 1997
The interpretation of the results shall be to assess the quality of the resolution
capability compared to that specified in the EUROCONTROL Radar

June 1997
7. SECONDARY SENSOR DETECTION PERFORMANCE PARAMETERS

ANALYSIS
7.1 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.
7.2 Probability of target position detection.
7.2.1 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.
The number of detected secondary & combined target reports

Pd = The number of expected secondary & combined target reports
(7.1)
⊗ ⊗ ⊗ ⊗ ⊗ ⊗  ⊗ ⊗ ∅  ∅ ⊗ ⊗  ⊗  ⊕
∅
⊗ ⊗ ⊗  ⊗ ⊗ ⊗
1234-V 1234-I XXXX-V XXXX-I
Figure 7.1
The symbols used in the figure 7.1 denote the following:

June 1997
• ⊗ ≡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 it’s position may lead to erroneous interpretation of the
target’s 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.
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

June 1997
7.3 Probability of code detection .
7.3.1 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.
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.

June 1997
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.
4. The reference Mode A value must be synchronised with code changes.
If we apply the above formula for figure 7.1 Pcd = 17/23.

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.

June 1997
7.4 False / Multiple SSR target reports ratio.
7.4.1 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 HPD’s 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:

June 1997
The number of false SSR target reports (fruits, STAT) (7.5)

a) R = The number of detected secondary & combined target reports
False
(7.6)
b) The number of multiple SSR target reports
R =
Multi The number of detected secondary & combined target reports
(7.7)
b.1) The number of multiple SSR target reports from splits
R = The number of detected secondary & combined target reports
Splits
(7.8)
b.2) The number of multiple SSR target reports from reflections
Refl.
(7.9)
b.3) The number of multiple SSR target reports from sidelobes
Sidel.
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:
(ρ r-ρ f) > fruit minimum range difference = ∆ρ min
θr-θf ≤ fruit maximum azimuth difference = ∆θmax
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;

June 1997
• 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:
ρ r-ρ f -R≤ second time around maximum range difference = ∆ρ max
θr-θf ≤ second time around maximum azimuth difference = ∆θmax
The reference plot is the real plot and represents the real position of the target
see figure 7.4.
Parameter Symbol Value
fruit minimum range difference ∆ρ min 0.5 NM
second time around maximum range difference ∆ρ max 10 NM
fruit/sec. time around maximum azimuth difference ∆θmax 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:
ρ r-ρ f ≤ multipath maximum range difference = ∆ρ max
θr-θf ≤ multipath maximum azimuth difference = ∆θmax

multipath maximum range difference ∆ρ max 0.0625 NM
multipath maximum azimuth difference ∆θmax 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);
them are present);

June 1997
• the multiple should satisfy the following conditions:
∆ρ min= minimum range difference <ρ r-ρ f ≤maximum range difference = ∆ρ max
∆θmin =minimum azimuth difference<θr-θf ≤maximum azimuth difference=∆θmax
Parameters Symbol Value

reflection minimum range difference ∆ρ min 0.0625 NM
reflection maximum range difference ∆ρ max 20 NM
reflection minimum azimuth difference ∆θmin 5°
reflection maximum azimuth difference ∆θmax 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);
them are present);
• the following conditions should hold :
i) for range/ azimuth split :
split minimum range difference<ρ r-ρ f | ≤ split maximum range difference
split minimum azimuth difference <θr-θf ≤ split maximum azimuth difference

June 1997
ii) for range split:
split minimum range difference<ρ r-ρ f | ≤ split maximum range difference
0 <θr-θf ≤ split maximum azimuth difference
iii) for azimuth split:
0 <ρ r-ρ f | ≤ split maximum range difference
split minimum azimuth difference <θr-θf ≤ split maximum azimuth difference

Split minimum azimuth difference ∆θmin 0.05o
Split maximum azimuth difference ∆θmax 3.00o
Split minimum range difference ∆ρ min 0.0625 NM
Split maximum range difference ∆ρ max 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);
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:

June 1997
sidelobe minimum range difference<ρ r-ρ f | ≤ sidelobe maximum range

difference;
sidelobe minimum azimuth difference <θr-θf ≤ sidelobe maximum azimuth

difference
ii) for backlobe:
backlobe minimum range difference<ρ r-ρ f | ≤ backdelobe maximum range

difference;
backlobe minimum azimuth difference <θr-θf ≤ backdelobe maximum

azimuth difference;
iii) for ringaround :
ρ i −{ { (tN-ti )* (ρ N-ρ i ) /(tN-t1) }+ρ 1}≤ ,ringaround range tolerance
N ≥ ringaround minimum plot confirmation.
Assuming N plots in time order with ti, ρi, the time stamp and the range of the
ith plot.
Sidelobe minimum azimuth difference ∆θmin 3o
Sidelobe maximum azimuth difference ∆θmax 10o
Side/backlobe minimum range difference ∆ρ min 0.50NM
Side/backlobe maximum range difference ∆ρ max 1.00NM
Backlobe minimum azimuth difference ∆θmin 177o
Backlobe maximum azimuth difference ∆θmax 180o
Ringaround range tolerance ∆ρ 1NM
Ringaround minimum plot confirmation N 10

June 1997
Range separation (NM)
Reflections
Refl Max Rng
SP Max Rng
Back
Refl Min Rng Range Range/Az Lobe
SP Min Rng Split Split
Multipath Max Rng

Mul' Az
Path Split Side Lobe
Multipath Min Rng Ring Around
ONM
O deg Azimuth separation (degrees)

Refl Min Az Refl Max Az
Split Min Az Split MaxAz
Sidelobe Min 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.

June 1997
Figure 7.3 False Reply / plot from unwanted interrogation (Fruit).
Figure 7.4 Second Time around reply/plot.

June 1997
8. SECONDARY SENSOR QUALITY PERFORMANCE PARAMETERS

ANALYSIS
8.1 General
The quality performance parameters of a Secondary Sensor (SSR) are:
• Positional accuracy;
• False code information;
• Resolution.
8.2 Positional accuracy.
8.2.1 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:
ρ m(t)=(1+κ)*ρ ref (t+δ t)+δ ρ +σ ρ (8.1)
ρ m = measured slant range
ρ ref = reference slant range
δ ρ = slant range bias error
σ ρ = slant range random error
κ = slant range gain error
θ m = measured azimuth
θ ref = reference azimuth
δ θ = azimuth bias
σ θ = azimuth random error

June 1997
δ 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 κ - 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:
• azimuth bias;
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. Jumps are single scan events.

June 1997
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
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:

June 1997
• azimuth bias;
The systematic errors shall represented by fix numbers.
ii) random errors:
• azimuth error
The random errors shall be expressed by the standard deviation of the

iii) positional jumps
The positional jumps shall be expressed by the overall ratio of jumps as

follows:
The total number of jumps
Rj = The number of detected target reports
(8.2)
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.
The interpretation of the results shall be to assess the quality of the overall
positional accuracy compared to that specified in the EUROCONTROL Radar

June 1997
8.3 False code information
8.3.1 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

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.
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
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:
The number of reports with incorrect Mode A or/and Mode C (valid or not)
R = The number of detected secondary/combined reports chained to trajectories
Over/f
(8.3)
• for the validated false Mode A codes ratio:

June 1997
The number of reports with incorrect and validated Mode A

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 C

C f/v (8.5)
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.
The interpretation of the results shall be to assess the quality of the false code
information compared to that specified in the EUROCONTROL Radar

June 1997
8.4 Resolution.
8.4.1 General
According to the EUROCONTROL Radar Surveillance Standard “ the

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.
∆ρ (NM)
±∆ρ 2
(2) (1)
±∆ρ 1
(3)
O ±∆θ1 ±∆θ2 ∆θ (deg.)
Figure 8.1
∆θ 1 = 2∗ n∗360 f ∗ t
For:
• n (number of SSR interrogation modes) = 2
• f (interrogation repetition frequency) = 240 Hz
• t (antenna rotation period ) = 10 sec.

June 1997
• ∆θ1= 0.6 Deg.
• ∆θ2 = 2 * nominal 3 dB interrogation beamwidth.
• ∆ρ 1 = 0.05 NM
• ∆ρ 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:
The number of detected reports chained to trajectories in close proximity

Pd= The number of expected reports 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
The interpretation of the results shall be to assess the quality of the resolution
capability compared to that specified in the EUROCONTROL Radar

June 1997
9. PSR/SSR DATA COMBINING ANALYSIS
9.1 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);
9.1.2 Only aircraft flying inside the above mentioned OCV who have active SSR
transponders will be detected as combined targets.
9.2 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)
The number of detected correct combined reports

Pas = The number of expected combined reports
The number of detected false combined reports

Rfas = The number of detected 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.

June 1997
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.
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.

June 1997
10 ON-SITE DELAY ANALYSIS
10.1 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 (ACP’s);
• 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.
2. 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.
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.
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.

June 1997
11. AVAILABILITY ANALYSIS
11.1 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;
t2
1
t2 − t1 ∫t 1
Am = 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:
t
1
t →∞ ∫0
As(∞) = lim A(t )dt (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 λ;
c) the repair rate of the equipment is known and equals µ..
The availability for a single system is given by the formula:
µ
- A= (11.3)
µ+λ

June 1997
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:
µ 2 + 2λµ
Α= (11.4)
µ 2 + 2λµ + 2λ2
A (λ, µ)
B (λ, µ)
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 a2 a3 a4 a5 a6 a7
Operating
Non-operating s f1 f2 f3 f4 f5
Specified operating time
(one year)
Figure 11.2

June 1997
N
f tot = ∑ fi (11.5)
i =1
fmax= max{f1, f2,...,fn} (11.6)
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 sensor’s 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 sensor’s 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:

June 1997
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.
The interpretation of the results shall be to assess the quality of the sensor’s
availability compared to that specified in the EUROCONTROL Surveillance
Standard.

June 1997
ANNEX A (RECOMMENDED)
TECHNICAL PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS.
A.1 RADAR SENSOR PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS
A.1.1 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 Working Draft Page A/1

June 1997
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 / checks-

and 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):

Antenna tilt Deg.
Antenna polar diagrams Horizontal and vertical polar diagrams.
P.R.F Hz = 1/sec.
Instrumented range NM.
M.T.I range NM
Beam switching azimuth/range pattern.
Page A/2 Working Draft Edition 0.1

June 1997
Waveguide losses dB.

Power KWs (peak or average).
Spectrum AdBv / dBw = f (f) f in Hz.
Pulse shape AV = f ( t ).
Noise figure dB.
M.D.S dBm.
S.T.C / G.T.C AdB = f ( t )
Dynamic range dB.
M.T.I / M.T.D filters response
AdB = f ( f/v ) (v = Doppler speed f
= 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):
Antenna tilt Deg
Antenna polar diagrams Horizontal and vertical polar
uplink and downlink diagrams
R.P.M rotations / minute
P.R.F Hz = 1/ sec
Staggering ratio / pattern dimensionless / Hz
Instrumented range NM
Power / power sectorization KWs / P = F(ϑ)
Mode interlace pattern
ISLS / IISLS sectorization
RSLS Yes / No
Pulse shape / pulse spacing A = f(t) / µsec
Power spectrum P = f(f)
Receiver sensitivity dBm
Receiver dynamic range dB
Receiver bandwidth A = f(f)
Plot extractor parameters
Plot extractor performance 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

June 1997
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 ).

June 1997
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 id-
entified 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.

June 1997
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 down-
link, 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.

June 1997
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.

June 1997
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 The time would be split into discrete intervals
Plot Type Type of the plot PR/SSR/COMB
A Invalidated If the mode A code of the plot is Invalidated
A Incorrect If the mode A code of the plot is assessed to be incorrect

June 1997
A Absent If the mode A code of the plot is absent

A Garbled If the mode A code is garbled
C Invalidated If the mode C code of the plot is Invalidated
C Incorrect If the mode C code is assessed to be Incorrect
C Absent If the mode C code is Absent
C Garbled If the mode C code is garbled
C Out of Spec If the mode C code is Out of Spec (FL-12 ..FL700)
False If the plot is identified as false
Resolution State If the chain/plot occurred during a resolution incident
Resolution Distance Distance between targets in close proximity
Chain Class The classification of the chain (civil, military etc.)
Chain Length The length of chains in discrete steps
MOF The 3 Modes of Flight - Longitudinal, Transversal and
Vertical of the reference trajectory at the time of the plot
Range The range would be split into discrete steps
Azimuth The azimuth would be split into discrete steps
X The X would be split into discrete steps
Y The Y would be split into discrete steps
Mode C The mode C value would be split into discrete steps
Altitude The altitude would be split into discrete steps
Elevation Angle The elevation angle would be split into discrete steps
Visibility Class Visible, Not Visible, Undetermined, Not Applicable
Cone Of Silence The target report is in or out of the Sensor Cone of
Silence or undetermined.
Mode C Different 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
Active Transponder If the transponder is presumed to be switched on
Bad Transponder Evaluation system has unambiguously identified a
transponder error
Active Mode C If the aircraft with a transponder is sending Mode C
Mode A Group Possibly Static but defined sets of mode A codes
Multi-Radar Areas where the radar is seen by multiple radars
Segment
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 follo-
wing paragraphs. The performance parameters are divided into:
• Primary sensor performance parameters;
• Secondary sensor performance parameters;

June 1997
• 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).

June 1997
A.2 PRIMARY SENSOR DETECTION PERFORMANCE PARAMETERS

ANALYSIS
A.2.1 General
The detection performance parameters, of a Primary(PSR) sensor, are:
Probability of target position detection;
False target reports rate.
A.2.2 Probability of target position detection
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).
1
1+S/N
<Pd>=(Pfa) S =2* σ 2 (A.2.1)
Pfa ≡ the probability of false alarm ;
S ≡The signal power;
N ≡ The noise power;
σ ≡ 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 σ depends also on the aspect angle of the
target. The probability of detection is also affected by the presence of other a/c

June 1997
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
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 Range cell Azimuth cell FL cell FL Limits

size (NM) size (deg) size (FL)
En- Route 20 20 50 12 - 450
TMA 10 20 20 12 - 200
The probability of target position detection of a cell shall be calculated using the
formula :
The number of detected primary & combined target reports

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

June 1997
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
Pdj
Pdk
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 .

June 1997
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.
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.

June 1997
A.2.3 False target reports
A.2.3.1 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).

June 1997
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.

June 1997
A.3 PRIMARY SENSOR QUALITY PERFORMANCE PARAMETERS ANALYSIS
A.3.1 General
The quality performance parameters of a Primary (PSR) sensor are :
• Positional accuracy ;
• Resolution.
A.3.2 Positional accuracy.
A.3.2.1 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 :
ρ m(t)=(1+κ)*ρ ref (t+δ t)+δ ρ +σ ρ (A.3.1)
ρ m = measured slant range;
ρ ref = reference slant range;
δ ρ = slant range bias error;
σ ρ = slant range random error;
κ = slant range gain error;
θ m = measured azimuth;
θ ref = reference azimuth;
δ θ = azimuth bias;
σ θ = azimuth random error;
δ 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

June 1997
by the parameter κ.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
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 ;
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 .
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:
• σr = c/2*β*√ (S/N) (A.3.2)

June 1997
• σθ ≡0.53*θ/√ (S/N)
β ≡ rms signal bandwidth = 1/τ;
S/N ≡ signal to noise ratio;
c≡ velocity of the light;
θ ≡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).
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 :
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.
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’s under test is best. In the case of mono-
radar evaluation the earth model of the host RDPS shall be chosen.

June 1997
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 :
• azimuth bias;
The systematic errors shall be represented by fix numbers.
ii) random errors :
• azimuth error
The random errors shall be represented by the standard deviation of

the distribution they follow.
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 A-

2).
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 target’s 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.

June 1997
b) RASS-S or equivalent when multilevel recordings are used.
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 sensor’s 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.
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;
• radar cross sections(taking into account the aspect angle );
• 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.)

June 1997
A.3.3 Resolution.
A.3.3.1 General

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 τ/2
(τ ≡ the effective pulse width in meters) and in azimuth by θb (θb ≡ 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.
∆ρ (NM) (3)
±2τ
± 1.5 τ (2)
±τ (1)
(1a)
O ±θb ± 1.5 θb ± 3 θb ∆θ (Deg.)
Figure A-2
τ = nominal (compressed) pulse width in NM;

June 1997
τ (NM) =τ (µsec) ∗ c /2 ;
c = velocity of light = 3 x 108 meters/sec=161987 NM/sec
θb = nominal 3 dB beamwidth.
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;
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.
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.

June 1997
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 :
• radar cross sections(taking into account the aspect angle );
• 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.

June 1997
A.4 SECONDARY SENSOR DETECTION PERFORMANCE PARAMETERS

ANALYSIS
A.4.1 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.4.2 Probability of target position detection.
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 κN pκ (1 − p) N − κ (A.4.1)
κ =η
N ≡ number of interrogations ;
η ≡ 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.

June 1997
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 transponder’s 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
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 :
The number of detected secondary & combined target reports

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.

June 1997
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
Pdj
Pdk
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.
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 .

June 1997
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.
In order that the results of the Pd analysis may be interpreted correctly

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).

June 1997
Figure A-4 Horizontal polar diagram (SSR probability of detection)

June 1997
Figure A-5 Vertical polar diagram (SSR Probability of detection)

June 1997
Figure A-6 Tabular presentation (SSR probability of detection)

June 1997
A.4.3 Probability of code detection .
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 :
• 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

June 1997
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.
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

Mode A/CThe 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 :

June 1997
• 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
measured figures (previous campaigns)the data sample shall be controlled
regarding mainly the distance to the neighbouring a/c and additionally the :
• environmental conditions (fruit, overinterrogations, TCAS);
• Mode of Flight (MOF).

June 1997
A.4.4 False / Multiple SSR target reports ratio.
shall be classified in accordance to :
• 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

June 1997
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 Value Corresponding FPA classes

ONM 0 Multipath Min Rng
Range Precision 1 range quanta Multipath Max Rng , Split Min Rng,
Reflection Minimum Range
Antenna Beamwidth 3DB Split Max Az, Reflector Min Az,
Sidelobe Min Az
Last expected sidelobe 150 deg Sidelobe Max Az, Backlobe Min Az
Range separation (NM)
Reflections
Refl Max Rng
SP Max Rng
Back
Refl Min Rng Range Range/Az Lobe
SP Min Rng Split Split
Multipath Max Rng

Mul' Az
Path Split Side Lobe
Multipath Min Rng Ring Around
ONM
O deg Azimuth separation (degrees)

Refl Min Az Refl Max Az
Split Min Az Split MaxAz
Sidelobe Min 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)
The number of False / Multiple SSR target reports

Fal/Mul
(A.4.6)

June 1997
The number of false SSR target reports (fruit, STAT)

a) RFalse=
The number of detected secondary & combined target
reports
(A.4.7)
The number of multiple SSR target reports
b) RMulti =
reports
(A.4.8)
The number of multiple SSR target reports from splits
b.1) RSplits =
reports
(A.4.9)
The number of multiple SSR target reports from
reflections
b.2) RRefl.=
reports
(A.4.10)
The number of multiple SSR target reports from
sidelobes
b.3) RSibel.=
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.

June 1997
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 :
• Mode of Flight MOF ;
• environmental conditions (fruit, overinterrogations, TCAS).

June 1997
A.5 SECONDARY SENSOR QUALITY PERFORMANCE PARAMETERS

ANALYSIS
A.5.1 General
The quality performance parameters of a Secondary Radar Sensor

(SSR) are:
• Positional accuracy ;
• False code information ;
• Resolution .
A.5.2 Positional accuracy.
A.5.2.1 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 :
ρ m(t)=(1+κ)*ρ ref (t+δ t)+δ ρ +σ ρ (A.5.1)
ρ m = measured slant range
ρ ref = reference slant range
δ ρ = slant range bias error
σ ρ = slant range random error
κ = slant range gain error
θ m = measured azimuth
θ ref = reference azimuth
δ θ = azimuth bias
σ θ = azimuth random error
δ t = time stamp error

June 1997
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 κ.
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
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 ;
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 .
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 transponder’s antenna .
The signal to noise ratio is strongly affected if there are other a/c’s in close
proximity . So the data shall at first classified in accordance to the distance to
the neighbouring a/c’s in two major classes :
• data coming from targets in the “isolated targets” area (area 4 figure A-
10);

June 1997
• 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 :
• Mode of Flight MOF;
• environmental conditions (Fruits, overinterrogations, TCAS).
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 :
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.
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.

June 1997
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 :
• azimuth bias;
The systematic errors shall represented by fix numbers.
ii) random errors :
• azimuth error
The random errors shall be expressed by the standard deviation of the

The positional jumps shall be expressed by the overall ratio of jumps as

follows :
The total number of jumps

Rj = The number of detected target reports
(A.5.2)
The positional accuracy shall be estimated for all the classes and
subclasses defined in par A.5.2.2 above.
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.
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 sensor’s 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.

June 1997
In order that the results of the positional accuracy analysis may be

tests) or measured figures (previous campaigns) the data sample shall be
strictly controlled regarding first the distance to the neighbouring a/c’s and then
in accordance to :
• the mode of flight;

June 1997
Figure A-8 Presentation of the range and azimuth errors

June 1997
Figure A-9 Scattergraph

June 1997
A.5.3 False code information
A.5.3.1 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

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
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 :
For the estimation of the false code information only the secondary or
combined target reports used for the calculation of the probability of target
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

June 1997
The number of reports with incorrect Mode A or/and Mode C (valid or not)
R = The number of detected secondary/combined reports chained to trajectories
Over/f
(A.5.3)
• for the validated false Mode A codes ratio :
The number of reports with incorrect and validated Mode A

A f/v
(A.5.4)
• for the validated false Mode C codes ratio :
The number of reports with incorrect and validated Mode C

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.
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.
In order that the results of the false code information analysis may be
tests) or measured figures (previous campaigns) he data sample shall be
strictly controlled regarding first the distance to the neighbouring a/c’s and then
in accordance to :

June 1997
A.5.4 Resolution.
A.5.4.1 General

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.
∆ρ (NM)
(4)
±∆ρ 2
(2) (1)
±∆ρ 1
(3)
O ±∆θ1 ±∆θ2 ∆θ

(deg.)
Figure A-10
∆θ 1 = 2∗ n∗360 f ∗ t (A.5.7)
For :
• n (number of SSR interrogation modes) = 2;
• f (interrogation repetition frequency) = 240 Hz;
• t (antenna rotation period ) = 10 sec;
• ∆θ 1= 0.6 Deg;
• ∆θ 2 = 2 * nominal 3 dB interrogation beamwidth;
• ∆ρ 1 = 0.05 NM;

June 1997
• ∆ρ 2 = 2 NM.
For the analysis of the resolution capabilities of the radar sensor the
data shall be classified in accordance to :
• Mode of Flight MOF;
• environmental conditions (Fruits, overinterrogations, TCAS).
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

June 1997
(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 .
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.
The results of the resolution analysis may be interpreted correctly and

(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 :
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.)

June 1997
A.6 PSR/SSR DATA COMBINING ANALYSIS
A.6.1 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 ∆ρ =2NM and ∆θ=3θb where θb is the 3dB beamwidth of the
primary antenna.
Then the data shall be classified in accordance to the :
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)
The number of detected correct combined reports

Pas = The number of expected combined reports
The number of detected false combined reports

Rfas = The number of detected 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.

June 1997
A.6.4 Interpretation of results
The results of the PSR/SSR combining analysis may be interpreted

measured figures (previous campaigns) if the data sample it is controlled
regarding the distance to the neighbouring a/c and additional to the following :
• the Mode of Flight MOF.

June 1997
A.7 ON-SITE DELAY ANALYSIS
A.7.1 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 (ACP’s);
• 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 .
The results of the on site delay analysis may be interpreted correctly

figures (previous campaigns) if the data sample it is strictly controlled
regarding the load conditions.

June 1997
A.8 AVAILABILITY ANALYSIS
A.8.1 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 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;
t2
1
t 2 − t 1 ∫t1
Am = 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 :
1 t
t → ∞ ∫0
As(∞ ) = lim A( t ) dt (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 λ;
and c) the repair rate of the equipment is known and equals µ;
the availability is given by the formula :
µ
A= (A.8.3)
µ+λ

June 1997
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:
µ 2 + 2λµ
Α= 2 (A.8.4)
µ + 2λµ + 2λ2
A (λ, µ)
B (λ, µ)
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 a2 a3 a4 a5 a6 a7
Operating
Non-operating
s f1 f2 f3 f4 f5
Specified operating time
(e.g. one year)
Figure A.12
N
f tot = ∑ fi (A.8.5)
i =1

June 1997
fmax= max{f1, f2,...,fn} (A.8.6)
For the estimation of the availability of a radar sensor we shall use the
following formula ;
Actual operating time x 100

A= Specified operating time
(A.8.7)
or equivalently from figure A.12 :
∑ a x100
i= 1
ii
Α= 6 5
(A.8.8)
∑a + s+ ∑ f
i =1
i
i =1
i
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
sensor’s 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
(A.8.9)
or equivalently from figure A.12
∑a i
i =1
MTBF = (A.8.10)
5
If we assume exponential distribution for the failures then :
MTBF=1/λ (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 ):
−t −t
R=e λ
=e 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.

June 1997
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 Useful life

Wearout
(I) period (II)
(III)
λ(t) early chance wearout
1/MTBF failures
0 tb tw t
Figure A.13
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 sensor’s 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

June 1997
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 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

June 1997
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.
The results of the availability analysis may be interpreted correctly and

(previous campaigns) if:
• the external conditions are inside the specified limits;
• the tuning and repair of the system is done as prescribed in the

manufacturer’s 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 .

June 1997
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 Working Draft Page B/1

June 1997
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 Working Draft Edition 0.1

June 1997
Figure B.1 I/O Interfaces

June 1997
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

June 1997
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

June 1997
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 Antenna performance analysis
B.3.1 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.

June 1997
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 manufacturer’s 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.

June 1997
Figure B.2 Horizontal polar diagram
B.4 Transmitter performance analysis
B.4.1 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

June 1997
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.
Not applicable.
The results shall be compared to the specified figures during

acceptance tests and previous measurements during regular tests.
B.5 Receiver/video processing performance analysis
B.5.1 General
The receiver/video processing performance analysis is dealing with the

following characteristics:
• losses;

June 1997
• 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
receiver’s output is doubled.
d) bandwidth
For the measurement of the bandwidth of the receiver a c-w signal

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.

June 1997
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.
( S / C) o
I=
( 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.
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 Plot extractor performance analysis
B.6.1 General
The plot extractor performance analysis is usually dealing with the

following characteristics :

June 1997
• 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.
Not applicable.

June 1997
The results shall be compared against specified values or previous

measurements.
B.7 Plot filter performance analysis.
B.7.1 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 .
Not applicable.
The results shall be compared against specified figures or previous

measurements.

June 1997
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 confi-

gurations ( 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 Flight testing procedure
C.2.1 Introduction
A Radar flight testing may be a single (special inspection) requirement to de-

termine 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 Working Draft Page C/1

June 1997
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 Working Draft Edition 0.1

June 1997
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 PSR/SSR Antenna
sioning Change
PSR SSR
Check same differ. same differ. transponder
Orientation x x x x x norm./norm.
Tilt x x x x x norm./norm.
PSR optimization x x x norm./norm.
• STC / GTC x x >>
• Beam crossover x x >>
>>
• false target optimization x x
SSR optimization x x x low/low
• power x x x norm./low
• SLS/ISLS x x x norm./low
low/low
• Modes/Codes x x x
low/low
• GTC/STC Establishment x x
PSR/SSR Integrity x x x norm./norm.
Vertical Coverage x x x low/low
Horizontal screening o x x norm./norm.
Airways/Route coverage x x x low/ low
standby equipment x >>
standby power x norm./norm.
Table C-1 Test Checklist

June 1997
x denotes mandatory test
o optional - at engineering/maintenance/controller request.
C.4 Vertical Coverage/Operational Capability
C.4.1 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

June 1997
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 .

June 1997
a) Repeat the outer fringe checks a necessary in order to complete an overall-

quality 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

June 1997
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

June 1997
(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 Analysis
C.9.1 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.

June 1997
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.
C.9.4.2 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.

June 1997
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.

June 1997
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 Simu- Combination Live data from Live data Live data from
test lated of live and test from traffic test flights with
data simulated transponders of (optional)
data opportunity support of
DGPS data
FAT yes
SAT yes yes yes yes yes
Annual yes yes
performance
evaluation
RTQC yes
STCA yes yes
RSS yes yes
D.2.1 Simulated data.
Simulated data can be categorised according to the sophistication of testing:
• outside the antenna as environmental data;
Edition 0.1 Working Draft Page D/1

June 1997
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 Working Draft Edition 0.1

June 1997
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.
D.4.1 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.

June 1997
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 Simulated Combination Live data Live data from Live data from test
and data of live and from test traffic of flights with (optional)
Disadvantages simulated transponder opportunity support of DGPS data
data s
Operational N/A. none if test is small if none none
impact done in careful
standby selection of
channel test range
window
Capacity Huge as limited small limited as only for test targets
meant to function of the available
test system density of
for traffic
maximum
capabilities
Duration of test Function of as for normal one step of each as long as test flights
the traffic resolution resolution will last
precision of diagram case may last
the tested per several
resolution scan minutes; very
test zone long for a
representative
sample
Precision limited by high if video medium as high if video high if video
simulator, recording is range recording is recording is possible,
e.g. 1/200 possible, separation is possible, otherwise limited by
NM in range otherwise stored as FL otherwise LSB of plot and track
and 1 ACP limited by LSB information limited by LSB messages
in azimuth of plot and in plot/track of plot and
are typical track data track
messages messages
Reference controlled partly controlled by to be derived DGPS data will serve
trajectory by simulator controlled by positioning from data but as reference data for
simulator of test could be positioning within
transponder derived from resolution diagram
s recorded video
Page D/4 Working Draft Edition 0.1

June 1997
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.

June 1997

Rspa2l PDF

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Rspa2l PDF

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

EUROPEAN ORGANISATION FOR THE SAFETY OF

EUROPEAN AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL HARMONISATION AND

EWP DELIVERABLE REFERENCE NUMBER

PROGRAMME REFERENCE INDEX EDITION 0.1:

SUR.ET01.ST01-STD-01 EDITION DATE :

CONTACT PERSON : S. Adamopoulos TEL : 3259 UNIT : SUR

DOCUMENT STATUS AND TYPE

STATUS CATEGORY CLASSIFICATION

INTERNAL REFERENCE NAME : D:\TEMP\RSPA.DOC

AUTHORITY NAME AND SIGNATURE DATE

DIS J. Van DOORN

Project Leader W. Philipp

Edition 0.1 Working Draft Page iii

DOCUMENT CHANGE RECORD

Page iv Working Draft Edition 0.1

DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION SHEET ............................................................................... ii

DOCUMENT APPROVAL ...................................................................................................... iii

DOCUMENT CHANGE RECORD ........................................................................................iv

1.1 Purpose .......................................................................................................................... 3

1.2 Scope .......................................................................................................................... 4

3. DEFINITIONS, SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS ......................................................... 8

4. RADAR SENSOR PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS............................................................. 25

5. PRIMARY SENSOR DETECTION PERFORMANCE PARAMETERS ANALYSIS....... 32

6. PRIMARY SENSOR QUALITY PERFORMANCE PARAMETERS ANALYSIS............. 35

Edition 0.1 Working Draft Page v

6.2 Positional accuracy. ....................................................................................................... 35

7. SECONDARY SENSOR DETECTION PERFORMANCE PARAMETERS ANALYSIS 42

8. SECONDARY SENSOR QUALITY PERFORMANCE PARAMETERS ANALYSIS...... 54

9. PSR/SSR DATA COMBINING ANALYSIS ...................................................................... 62

10 ON-SITE DELAY ANALYSIS ........................................................................................... 63

10.1 General ........................................................................................................................ 63

10.2 Data analysis................................................................................................................. 63

11. AVAILABILITY ANALYSIS............................................................................................... 65

Page vi Working Draft Edition 0.1

Edition 0.1 Working Draft Page vii

This Standard has been developed and is maintained by the Surveillance

2. EATCHIP Work Programme Document

This Standard is identified as deliverable O1 in the EATCHIP Work Programme

3. Approval of the Standard

3.2 This Standard becomes effective upon adoption by the Permanent

4. Technical Corrigenda and Amendments

Normative Elements have been printed in light face roman text;

Edition 0.1 Working Draft Page 1

5.4 Any information which is essential to the understanding of a particular indent

6. Relationship to other Standard Documents

This Standard is related to the EUROCONTROL Standard for Radar

7. Status of Annexes to This Document

The underlined version of this Standard Document is in the English language.

Page 2 Working Draft Edition 0.1

1.1.1 This document constitutes the EUROCONTROL Standard concerning the

The EUROCONTROL Standard for Radar Surveillance specifies common

1.1.4 In accordance with the ECAC En-Route Strategy, comprehensive Radar

Edition 0.1 Working Draft Page 3

1.2.6 Recommended methods and procedures for the technical performance

Page 4 Working Draft Edition 0.1

Figure 1.1 Relationship between Airspace Types and Services, Operational

Edition 0.1 Working Draft Page 5

Page 6 Working Draft Edition 0.1

At the time of publication of this EUROCONTROL Standard Document, the

In the case of conflict between the requirements of this EUROCONTROL

• EUROCONTROL Standard for Radar Surveillance in En-Route Airspace

• ICAO Annex 5 : Units of Measurement to be used in Air and Ground

• ICAO Annex 10 : Aeronautical Telecommunications - Volume 1 4th Edition,