Mpar Trade Studies: Mark Weber
This document was uploaded by user and they confirmed that they have the permission to share it. If you are author or own the copyright of this book, please report to us by using this DMCA report form. Report DMCA
Overview
Download & View Mpar Trade Studies: Mark Weber as PDF for free.
More details
- Words: 1,834
- Pages: 22
MPAR Trade Studies
Mark Weber 12 October 2007
MIT Lincoln Laboratory 2007 ICNS-1 MEW 5/2/2007
Lincoln Laboratory ATC Program History 1970
1980
1990
Discrete Address Beacon System
Mode S
Surveillance and Communications Microwave Landing System Beacon Collision Avoidance System TCAS Moving Target Detector
Communication, Navigation and Surveillance
ASR-9
Mode S Surface Comms
Automation
Weather
2000
UAS
Airport Surface Detection Equipment SLEP Proc. Augmentation Card
Parallel Runway Monitor GPS Applications Runway Status Lights ADS-B Airport Surface GCNSS/SWIM Traffic Automation Terminal ATC Automation NASA ATM Research
Storm Turbulence Terminal Doppler Weather Radar SLEP ASR-9 Wind Shear Processor NEXRAD Enhancements Multi Function Phased Array Radar Integrated Terminal Weather System Aviation Weather Research Wake Vortex Corridor Integrated Weather System
MIT Lincoln Laboratory 2007 ICNS-2 MEW 5/2/2007
National Air Surveillance Infrastructure Future
Today ASR-9 ASR-9
ASR-8 ASR-8
ARSR-1/2 ARSR-1/2
ASR-11 ASR-11
ARSR-3 ARSR-3
NEXRAD NEXRAD
ADS-B
ARSR-4 ARSR-4
TDWR TDWR
FAA transition to Automatic Dependent Surveillance Broadcast (ADS-B) dictates that the nation re-think its overall surveillance architecture. Needs:
MPAR
Weather (national scale and at airports) ADS-B integrity verification and backup Airspace situational awareness for homeland security 2007 ICNS-3 MEW 5/2/2007
MIT Lincoln Laboratory
Today’s Operational Radar Capabilities Function
Maximum Range for Detection of 1m2 Target
Terminal Area Aircraft Surveillance (ASR-9/11) En Route Aircraft Surveillance (ARSR-4) Airport Weather (TDWR)
60 nmi
205 nmi
Required Coverage Range
60 nm
250 nm
Altitude
20,000'
60,000'
Angular Resol. Az El
Nationwide Weather (NEXRAD) 225 nmi
250 nmi
20,000'
50,000'
Waveform*
>18 pulses PRI ~ 0.001 sec
5 sec
1.4°
>10 pulses 2.0° PRI ~ 0.001 sec
12 sec
1°
~50 pulses 0.5° PRI ~ 0.001 sec
180 sec
1°
~50 pulses PRI ~ 0.001 sec
>240 sec
1.4°
212 nmi 60 nmi
Scan Period
5
o
1°
Weather surveillance drives requirements for radar power and aperture size Aircraft surveillance functions can be provided “for free” if necessary airspace coverage and update rates can be achieved Active array radar an obvious approach, but only if less expensive and/or more capable than “conventional” alternatives 2007 ICNS-4 MEW 5/2/2007
MIT Lincoln Laboratory
Outline •
Perspectives on operational needs
•
A specific MPAR concept
•
Summary
2007 ICNS-5 MEW 5/2/2007
MIT Lincoln Laboratory
Key Questions • What are the operational driver’s for the “next generation” ground weather radar network?
– Improved low altitude coverage, particularly at airports? – Volume scan update rate? – Capability to observe low-cross section phenomena (e.g clear air boundary winds)? – High integrity measurements, devoid of clutter, out-of-trip returns, velocity aliasing, etc.?
• What are requirements for the ADS-B backup system? • Are additional non-cooperative aircraft surveillance capabilities needed to maintain airspace security?
2007 ICNS-6 MEW 5/2/2007
MIT Lincoln Laboratory
U.S. Airport “Weather” Radars
Current WSR-88D network does not provide the near-airport low altitude coverage or update rate (30 – 60 sec) needed by terminal ATC
2007 ICNS-7 MEW 5/2/2007
MIT Lincoln Laboratory
Airport Weather Radar Alternatives Analysis
Airport
Over ARENA TDWR
ASR-9
NEXRAD
ADW
97 93
85 59
82 90
ATL
96 89
83 61
94 97
BNA
98 96
82 69
92 83
BOS
97 94
92 95
86 96
BWI
98 95
85 63
10 10
CLE
98 96
91 91
97 95
CLT
99 98
84 56
0 0
CMH
100 100
87 72
10 10
CVG
99 99
89 77
10 10
DAL
97 91
43 40
82 75
DAY
98 95
88 73
67 14
DCA
98 95
86 64
88 98
Wind Shear Detection Probability
2007 ICNS-8 MEW 5/2/2007
TDWR
NEXRAD
ASR-9
Airplane
Lidar LLWAS
Sensors Considered Without TDWR
With TDWR
ITWS “Terminal Winds” Accuracy MIT Lincoln Laboratory
Preliminary Findings •
Easy to make the case for high capability airport weather radar at pacing airports (e.g. NYC, ORD, ATL, DFW, ....) – Large delay aversion benefits associated with high quality measurements of adverse winds and precipitation (>$10M per year per airport)
•
Business case for “TDWR-like” capability at smaller airports less convincing – Alternative solutions may provide adequate safety margin – Weather related delay benefits small
•
Implications for MPAR – Scalability key to realizing cost-effective solutions – Airport-specific integrated observation system configurations will be appropriate in some cases (e.g. western U.S. “dry sites”)
2007 ICNS-9 MEW 5/2/2007
MIT Lincoln Laboratory
ADS-B Backup Separation Services Map
2007 ICNS-10 MEW 5/2/2007
Airspace Type Separation Airspace Type Separation En Route SSR 5 nm En Route SSR 5 nm
Altitude Altitude Yes Beacon
Range Range 250 nm 200 nm
Coverage Area Coverage Area 2,820,000 nm22 2,820,000 nm
Terminal SSR Terminal SSR PSR Terminal PSR No coverage No coverage
Beacon No Yes Pilot
60 nm 60 nm 40 40nm nm
314,000 nm2 2 661,000 314,000 nm nm22 661,000 nm
3 nm 3 nm nm 3
MIT Lincoln Laboratory
Required Surveillance Performance (RSP) Methodology
2007 ICNS-11 MEW 5/2/2007
MIT Lincoln Laboratory
RSP Derived from En Route Radar Capabilities* Currently Acceptable (sliding window SSR) Registration Errors Range Errors
Location Bias
200’ uniform any direction
Azimuth Bias
± 0.3° uniform
Radar Bias
± 30’ uniform
Radar Jitter
σ = 25’ Gaussian σ = 0.230°
σ = 0.068°
Azimuth Error
Azimuth Jitter
Data Quant. (CD2 format)
Range
760’ (1/8 NM)
Azimuth
0.088° (1 ACP)
Uncorrelated* Sensor Scan
Time Error
10-12 sec
Transponder Error
Range Error (ATCRBS)
± 250’ uniform σ = 144’
RSP Analysis
Location Error
σ = 1.0 NM
σ ≈ 0.30 NM
Separation Errors (at 200 NM @ 600 kts)
σ = 0.8 NM
σ = 0.25 NM
90% < ± 1.4 NM 99% < ± 2.4 NM 99.9% < ± 3.3 NM
90% < ± 0.43 NM 99% < ± 0.76 NM 99.9% < ± 1.02 NM
*Only applies for multiple sensors
2007 ICNS-12 MEW 5/2/2007
Latest Technology (monopulse SSR)
*Supports 5 nmi separation MIT Lincoln Laboratory
RSP Derived from Terminal Radar Capabilities* Currently Acceptable (sliding window SSR) Registration Errors Range Errors
Intermediate (primary radar)
Location Bias
200’ uniform any direction
Azimuth Bias
± 0.3° uniform
Radar Bias
± 30’ uniform
Latest Technology (monopulse SSR)
Radar Jitter
σ = 25’ Gaussian
σ = 275’ Gaussian
σ = 25’ Gaussian
Azimuth Error
Azimuth Jitter
σ = 0.230°
σ = 0.160°
σ = 0.068°
Data Quant. (CD2 format)
Range
95’ (1/64 NM)
Azimuth
0.088° (1 ACP)
Uncorrelated* Sensor Scan
Time Error
4-5 sec
Transponder Error
Range Error (ATCRBS)
± 250’ uniform σ = 144’
N/A
± 250’ uniform σ = 144’
RSP Analysis
Location Error
σ = 0.20 NM
σ ≈ 0.15 NM
σ ≈ 0.10 NM
Separation Errors (at specified range @ 250 kts)
σ = 0.16 NM at 40 nm
σ = 0.12 NM at 40 nm
σ = 0.08 NM at 60 nm
90% < ± 0.28 NM 99% < ± 0.49 NM 99.9% < ± 0.65 NM
90% < ± 0.20 NM 99% < ± 0.35 NM 99.9% < ± 0.46 NM
90% < ± 0.13 NM 99% < ± 0.23 NM 99.9% < ± 0.32 NM
*Only applies for multiple sensors 2007 ICNS-13 MEW 5/2/2007
*Supports 3 nmi separation MIT Lincoln Laboratory
MPAR RSP Analysis
20:1 Monopulse
4.4° antenna beamwidth meets Terminal RSP Separation Error 4.6° antenna beamwidth meets En Route RSP Separation Error 2007 ICNS-14 MEW 5/2/2007
MIT Lincoln Laboratory
Enhanced Regional Situation Awareness System Elements SENSORS
Wide Area
FAA Radars And Data Bases
Mode-S RCVR
3-D
NORAD TADIL-J
Elevated Sentinel Radars
Visual
Ground Based Sentinel Radars
Hi-Res EO Sites
Hi-Perf EO/IR and Warning Systems
FUSION
Redundant Networks
• Lincoln facilities provided infrastructure for rapid system development Evidence Accrual and Decision Support
Primary Facility Fusion and Aggregation
– Radar and camera sites – FAA data feeds and fusion – Network connectivity
• Lincoln developed Integrated Air Picture, Decision Support, ID, and Visual Warning deployed for operational use in NCR
USERS
Redundant Networks
Fan-out to Multiple Users
Air Situation Decision Support Display and Camera Control 2007 ICNS-15 MEW 5/2/2007
Portable Air Situation Display
MIT Lincoln Laboratory
Lincoln Perspectives on Role of FAA Surveillance Systems •
Current primary/secondary radars “as is” will provide an essential backbone to homeland air picture and decision support system
•
Enhancement recommendations – “Network compatible interface” – External access to unfiltered target detections (amplitude, Doppler velocity, …) – Target height information would be very valuable
•
DoD/DHS will deploy ancillary sensor as necessary to meet specific operational needs
2007 ICNS-16 MEW 5/2/2007
MIT Lincoln Laboratory
Outline •
Perspectives on operational needs
•
A specific MPAR concept
•
Summary
2007 ICNS-17 MEW 5/2/2007
MIT Lincoln Laboratory
Concept MPAR Parameters Aircraft Surveillance
•
Diameter: 8m TR elements/face: 20,000 Dual polarization Beamwidth: 0.7° (broadside) 1.0° (@ 45°) Gain: > 46 dB
•
Weather Surveillance
2007 ICNS-18 MEW 5/2/2007
Transmit/Receive Modules Wavelength: Bandwidth/channel: Frequency channels: Pulse length: Peak power/element:
Non cooperative target tracking and characterization
334 MPARS required to duplicate today’s airspace coverage. Half of these are scaled “Terminal MPARS”
Active Array (planar, 4 faces)
•
10 cm (2.7–2.9 GHz) 1 MHz 3 30 µ s 2W
Architecture Overlapped subarray Number of subarrays: 300–400 Maximum concurrent beams: ~160
MIT Lincoln Laboratory
Concept MPAR Capability Summary • Airspace coverage equal to today’s operational radar networks. • Angular resolution, minimum detectible reflectivity and volume scan update rate equal or exceed today’s operational weather radars –
Ancillary benefits from improved data integrity and cross-beam wind measurement
• Can easily support 3-5 nmi separation standards required for ADS-B backup • Can provide non-cooperative aircraft surveillance data of significantly higher quality that today’s surveillance radars – –
2007 ICNS-19 MEW 5/2/2007
Altitude information Substantially lower minimum RCS threshold
MIT Lincoln Laboratory
2W Dual Mode T/R Module Parts Costs
Item Quantity HPA 2 SP2T 3 LNA 1 BPF 1 Diplx 1 Vect Mod 3 Load 1 Board 1
Unit Cost $2.37 $4.00 $1.69 $3.00 v $1.50 $2.14 $2.00 $20.00
Total Cost $4.74 $12.00 $1.69 $3.00 $1.50 $6.42 $2.00 $20.00
Total = $51.35
• •
Parts costs driven by SP2T switches and multi-layer PC board fabrication Packaging / test costs not included
2007 ICNS-20 MEW 5/2/2007
MIT Lincoln Laboratory
Preliminary Parts Cost Estimates Equivalent Cost per Element - Parts Only
Component
Pre-Prototype
Full Scale MPAR
Antenna Element
$1.25
$1.25
T/R Module
$115.00*
$51.00**
Power, Timing and Control
$18.00
$18.00
Digital Transceiver
$12.50
$6.25
Analog Beamformer
$186.00***
$55.00****
Digital Beamformer
$18.00
$8.00
Mechanical/Packaging
$105.00
$25.00
Totals:
$455.75
$164.50
* Assumes 8W module incl RF board with sequential polarization ** Assumes 2W module and sequential polarization (updated 18 Sept 2007) *** Assumes standard beamformer in azimuth **** Assumes hybrid tile/brick architecture with RFIC overlapped subarray beamformer
2007 ICNS-21 MEW 5/2/2007
MIT Lincoln Laboratory
Summary •
As a community, we are making substantial progress in exposing requirements for the Next Generation surveillance radar network – Multifunction, active array (MPAR) approach continues to be a leading candidate
•
Low cost is the key to success of MPAR – ‘Commercial’ approach needed to achieve extremely low cost goals
•
We are ready to solicit input from industry on specific design concepts and cost
•
Need to sell concept to policy makers – Compelling operational application demonstration – Business case substantiating agency cost savings
2007 ICNS-22 MEW 5/2/2007
MIT Lincoln Laboratory
Mark Weber 12 October 2007
MIT Lincoln Laboratory 2007 ICNS-1 MEW 5/2/2007
Lincoln Laboratory ATC Program History 1970
1980
1990
Discrete Address Beacon System
Mode S
Surveillance and Communications Microwave Landing System Beacon Collision Avoidance System TCAS Moving Target Detector
Communication, Navigation and Surveillance
ASR-9
Mode S Surface Comms
Automation
Weather
2000
UAS
Airport Surface Detection Equipment SLEP Proc. Augmentation Card
Parallel Runway Monitor GPS Applications Runway Status Lights ADS-B Airport Surface GCNSS/SWIM Traffic Automation Terminal ATC Automation NASA ATM Research
Storm Turbulence Terminal Doppler Weather Radar SLEP ASR-9 Wind Shear Processor NEXRAD Enhancements Multi Function Phased Array Radar Integrated Terminal Weather System Aviation Weather Research Wake Vortex Corridor Integrated Weather System
MIT Lincoln Laboratory 2007 ICNS-2 MEW 5/2/2007
National Air Surveillance Infrastructure Future
Today ASR-9 ASR-9
ASR-8 ASR-8
ARSR-1/2 ARSR-1/2
ASR-11 ASR-11
ARSR-3 ARSR-3
NEXRAD NEXRAD
ADS-B
ARSR-4 ARSR-4
TDWR TDWR
FAA transition to Automatic Dependent Surveillance Broadcast (ADS-B) dictates that the nation re-think its overall surveillance architecture. Needs:
MPAR
Weather (national scale and at airports) ADS-B integrity verification and backup Airspace situational awareness for homeland security 2007 ICNS-3 MEW 5/2/2007
MIT Lincoln Laboratory
Today’s Operational Radar Capabilities Function
Maximum Range for Detection of 1m2 Target
Terminal Area Aircraft Surveillance (ASR-9/11) En Route Aircraft Surveillance (ARSR-4) Airport Weather (TDWR)
60 nmi
205 nmi
Required Coverage Range
60 nm
250 nm
Altitude
20,000'
60,000'
Angular Resol. Az El
Nationwide Weather (NEXRAD) 225 nmi
250 nmi
20,000'
50,000'
Waveform*
>18 pulses PRI ~ 0.001 sec
5 sec
1.4°
>10 pulses 2.0° PRI ~ 0.001 sec
12 sec
1°
~50 pulses 0.5° PRI ~ 0.001 sec
180 sec
1°
~50 pulses PRI ~ 0.001 sec
>240 sec
1.4°
212 nmi 60 nmi
Scan Period
5
o
1°
Weather surveillance drives requirements for radar power and aperture size Aircraft surveillance functions can be provided “for free” if necessary airspace coverage and update rates can be achieved Active array radar an obvious approach, but only if less expensive and/or more capable than “conventional” alternatives 2007 ICNS-4 MEW 5/2/2007
MIT Lincoln Laboratory
Outline •
Perspectives on operational needs
•
A specific MPAR concept
•
Summary
2007 ICNS-5 MEW 5/2/2007
MIT Lincoln Laboratory
Key Questions • What are the operational driver’s for the “next generation” ground weather radar network?
– Improved low altitude coverage, particularly at airports? – Volume scan update rate? – Capability to observe low-cross section phenomena (e.g clear air boundary winds)? – High integrity measurements, devoid of clutter, out-of-trip returns, velocity aliasing, etc.?
• What are requirements for the ADS-B backup system? • Are additional non-cooperative aircraft surveillance capabilities needed to maintain airspace security?
2007 ICNS-6 MEW 5/2/2007
MIT Lincoln Laboratory
U.S. Airport “Weather” Radars
Current WSR-88D network does not provide the near-airport low altitude coverage or update rate (30 – 60 sec) needed by terminal ATC
2007 ICNS-7 MEW 5/2/2007
MIT Lincoln Laboratory
Airport Weather Radar Alternatives Analysis
Airport
Over ARENA TDWR
ASR-9
NEXRAD
ADW
97 93
85 59
82 90
ATL
96 89
83 61
94 97
BNA
98 96
82 69
92 83
BOS
97 94
92 95
86 96
BWI
98 95
85 63
10 10
CLE
98 96
91 91
97 95
CLT
99 98
84 56
0 0
CMH
100 100
87 72
10 10
CVG
99 99
89 77
10 10
DAL
97 91
43 40
82 75
DAY
98 95
88 73
67 14
DCA
98 95
86 64
88 98
Wind Shear Detection Probability
2007 ICNS-8 MEW 5/2/2007
TDWR
NEXRAD
ASR-9
Airplane
Lidar LLWAS
Sensors Considered Without TDWR
With TDWR
ITWS “Terminal Winds” Accuracy MIT Lincoln Laboratory
Preliminary Findings •
Easy to make the case for high capability airport weather radar at pacing airports (e.g. NYC, ORD, ATL, DFW, ....) – Large delay aversion benefits associated with high quality measurements of adverse winds and precipitation (>$10M per year per airport)
•
Business case for “TDWR-like” capability at smaller airports less convincing – Alternative solutions may provide adequate safety margin – Weather related delay benefits small
•
Implications for MPAR – Scalability key to realizing cost-effective solutions – Airport-specific integrated observation system configurations will be appropriate in some cases (e.g. western U.S. “dry sites”)
2007 ICNS-9 MEW 5/2/2007
MIT Lincoln Laboratory
ADS-B Backup Separation Services Map
2007 ICNS-10 MEW 5/2/2007
Airspace Type Separation Airspace Type Separation En Route SSR 5 nm En Route SSR 5 nm
Altitude Altitude Yes Beacon
Range Range 250 nm 200 nm
Coverage Area Coverage Area 2,820,000 nm22 2,820,000 nm
Terminal SSR Terminal SSR PSR Terminal PSR No coverage No coverage
Beacon No Yes Pilot
60 nm 60 nm 40 40nm nm
314,000 nm2 2 661,000 314,000 nm nm22 661,000 nm
3 nm 3 nm nm 3
MIT Lincoln Laboratory
Required Surveillance Performance (RSP) Methodology
2007 ICNS-11 MEW 5/2/2007
MIT Lincoln Laboratory
RSP Derived from En Route Radar Capabilities* Currently Acceptable (sliding window SSR) Registration Errors Range Errors
Location Bias
200’ uniform any direction
Azimuth Bias
± 0.3° uniform
Radar Bias
± 30’ uniform
Radar Jitter
σ = 25’ Gaussian σ = 0.230°
σ = 0.068°
Azimuth Error
Azimuth Jitter
Data Quant. (CD2 format)
Range
760’ (1/8 NM)
Azimuth
0.088° (1 ACP)
Uncorrelated* Sensor Scan
Time Error
10-12 sec
Transponder Error
Range Error (ATCRBS)
± 250’ uniform σ = 144’
RSP Analysis
Location Error
σ = 1.0 NM
σ ≈ 0.30 NM
Separation Errors (at 200 NM @ 600 kts)
σ = 0.8 NM
σ = 0.25 NM
90% < ± 1.4 NM 99% < ± 2.4 NM 99.9% < ± 3.3 NM
90% < ± 0.43 NM 99% < ± 0.76 NM 99.9% < ± 1.02 NM
*Only applies for multiple sensors
2007 ICNS-12 MEW 5/2/2007
Latest Technology (monopulse SSR)
*Supports 5 nmi separation MIT Lincoln Laboratory
RSP Derived from Terminal Radar Capabilities* Currently Acceptable (sliding window SSR) Registration Errors Range Errors
Intermediate (primary radar)
Location Bias
200’ uniform any direction
Azimuth Bias
± 0.3° uniform
Radar Bias
± 30’ uniform
Latest Technology (monopulse SSR)
Radar Jitter
σ = 25’ Gaussian
σ = 275’ Gaussian
σ = 25’ Gaussian
Azimuth Error
Azimuth Jitter
σ = 0.230°
σ = 0.160°
σ = 0.068°
Data Quant. (CD2 format)
Range
95’ (1/64 NM)
Azimuth
0.088° (1 ACP)
Uncorrelated* Sensor Scan
Time Error
4-5 sec
Transponder Error
Range Error (ATCRBS)
± 250’ uniform σ = 144’
N/A
± 250’ uniform σ = 144’
RSP Analysis
Location Error
σ = 0.20 NM
σ ≈ 0.15 NM
σ ≈ 0.10 NM
Separation Errors (at specified range @ 250 kts)
σ = 0.16 NM at 40 nm
σ = 0.12 NM at 40 nm
σ = 0.08 NM at 60 nm
90% < ± 0.28 NM 99% < ± 0.49 NM 99.9% < ± 0.65 NM
90% < ± 0.20 NM 99% < ± 0.35 NM 99.9% < ± 0.46 NM
90% < ± 0.13 NM 99% < ± 0.23 NM 99.9% < ± 0.32 NM
*Only applies for multiple sensors 2007 ICNS-13 MEW 5/2/2007
*Supports 3 nmi separation MIT Lincoln Laboratory
MPAR RSP Analysis
20:1 Monopulse
4.4° antenna beamwidth meets Terminal RSP Separation Error 4.6° antenna beamwidth meets En Route RSP Separation Error 2007 ICNS-14 MEW 5/2/2007
MIT Lincoln Laboratory
Enhanced Regional Situation Awareness System Elements SENSORS
Wide Area
FAA Radars And Data Bases
Mode-S RCVR
3-D
NORAD TADIL-J
Elevated Sentinel Radars
Visual
Ground Based Sentinel Radars
Hi-Res EO Sites
Hi-Perf EO/IR and Warning Systems
FUSION
Redundant Networks
• Lincoln facilities provided infrastructure for rapid system development Evidence Accrual and Decision Support
Primary Facility Fusion and Aggregation
– Radar and camera sites – FAA data feeds and fusion – Network connectivity
• Lincoln developed Integrated Air Picture, Decision Support, ID, and Visual Warning deployed for operational use in NCR
USERS
Redundant Networks
Fan-out to Multiple Users
Air Situation Decision Support Display and Camera Control 2007 ICNS-15 MEW 5/2/2007
Portable Air Situation Display
MIT Lincoln Laboratory
Lincoln Perspectives on Role of FAA Surveillance Systems •
Current primary/secondary radars “as is” will provide an essential backbone to homeland air picture and decision support system
•
Enhancement recommendations – “Network compatible interface” – External access to unfiltered target detections (amplitude, Doppler velocity, …) – Target height information would be very valuable
•
DoD/DHS will deploy ancillary sensor as necessary to meet specific operational needs
2007 ICNS-16 MEW 5/2/2007
MIT Lincoln Laboratory
Outline •
Perspectives on operational needs
•
A specific MPAR concept
•
Summary
2007 ICNS-17 MEW 5/2/2007
MIT Lincoln Laboratory
Concept MPAR Parameters Aircraft Surveillance
•
Diameter: 8m TR elements/face: 20,000 Dual polarization Beamwidth: 0.7° (broadside) 1.0° (@ 45°) Gain: > 46 dB
•
Weather Surveillance
2007 ICNS-18 MEW 5/2/2007
Transmit/Receive Modules Wavelength: Bandwidth/channel: Frequency channels: Pulse length: Peak power/element:
Non cooperative target tracking and characterization
334 MPARS required to duplicate today’s airspace coverage. Half of these are scaled “Terminal MPARS”
Active Array (planar, 4 faces)
•
10 cm (2.7–2.9 GHz) 1 MHz 3 30 µ s 2W
Architecture Overlapped subarray Number of subarrays: 300–400 Maximum concurrent beams: ~160
MIT Lincoln Laboratory
Concept MPAR Capability Summary • Airspace coverage equal to today’s operational radar networks. • Angular resolution, minimum detectible reflectivity and volume scan update rate equal or exceed today’s operational weather radars –
Ancillary benefits from improved data integrity and cross-beam wind measurement
• Can easily support 3-5 nmi separation standards required for ADS-B backup • Can provide non-cooperative aircraft surveillance data of significantly higher quality that today’s surveillance radars – –
2007 ICNS-19 MEW 5/2/2007
Altitude information Substantially lower minimum RCS threshold
MIT Lincoln Laboratory
2W Dual Mode T/R Module Parts Costs
Item Quantity HPA 2 SP2T 3 LNA 1 BPF 1 Diplx 1 Vect Mod 3 Load 1 Board 1
Unit Cost $2.37 $4.00 $1.69 $3.00 v $1.50 $2.14 $2.00 $20.00
Total Cost $4.74 $12.00 $1.69 $3.00 $1.50 $6.42 $2.00 $20.00
Total = $51.35
• •
Parts costs driven by SP2T switches and multi-layer PC board fabrication Packaging / test costs not included
2007 ICNS-20 MEW 5/2/2007
MIT Lincoln Laboratory
Preliminary Parts Cost Estimates Equivalent Cost per Element - Parts Only
Component
Pre-Prototype
Full Scale MPAR
Antenna Element
$1.25
$1.25
T/R Module
$115.00*
$51.00**
Power, Timing and Control
$18.00
$18.00
Digital Transceiver
$12.50
$6.25
Analog Beamformer
$186.00***
$55.00****
Digital Beamformer
$18.00
$8.00
Mechanical/Packaging
$105.00
$25.00
Totals:
$455.75
$164.50
* Assumes 8W module incl RF board with sequential polarization ** Assumes 2W module and sequential polarization (updated 18 Sept 2007) *** Assumes standard beamformer in azimuth **** Assumes hybrid tile/brick architecture with RFIC overlapped subarray beamformer
2007 ICNS-21 MEW 5/2/2007
MIT Lincoln Laboratory
Summary •
As a community, we are making substantial progress in exposing requirements for the Next Generation surveillance radar network – Multifunction, active array (MPAR) approach continues to be a leading candidate
•
Low cost is the key to success of MPAR – ‘Commercial’ approach needed to achieve extremely low cost goals
•
We are ready to solicit input from industry on specific design concepts and cost
•
Need to sell concept to policy makers – Compelling operational application demonstration – Business case substantiating agency cost savings
2007 ICNS-22 MEW 5/2/2007
MIT Lincoln Laboratory
Related Documents
Mpar Trade Studies: Mark Weber
June 2020 6
Trade Mark Rules
December 2019 4
Weber
June 2020 12
Weber
October 2019 23
A Trademark Or Trade Mark
May 2020 4
Weber Carburettors
May 2020 3More Documents from ""
4. Buyer Service
June 2020 27
C Language Programmings
July 2020 20
Indian Upsc Examination Overview
June 2020 15
Check Against Delivery
June 2020 20