A Novel Strategy to Compensate the Effects of

Platform Motion on a Moving DRFM Jammer

Hassan Javed and Muhammad Rehan Khalid
Centres of Excellence in Science & Applied Technologies (CESAT)
Islamabad, Pakistan
2021 International Bhurban Conference on Applied Sciences and Technologies (IBCAST) | 978-1-6654-0516-4/21/$31.00 ©2021 IEEE | DOI: 10.1109/IBCAST51254.2021.9393219

Email: hassanjavedsatti@gmail.com, mrehan@mcs.edu.pk

Abstract—Digital Radio Frequency Memory (DRFM) is the
core of any electronic jamming system. It is a high-speed
sampling digital memory in which the radar signal itself is
stored, modulated with jamming signals and then retransmitted
to the threat. The signal transmitted back by the DRFM-
based jammer is a simple replica of the original signal with
some parameters manipulated. The DRFM capability is essential
for jamming pulsed doppler radars. One of the open research
problems in DRFM jammer design is the relative motion between
radar, DRFM jammer and platform (an aircraft), and its effects
on jammer’s performance. It has been investigated that in
case of relative motion between DRFM jammer and targeted
radar, pulse width (PW) and pulse repetition interval (PRI)
variation i.e., shrinkage or expansion will be observed depending
upon direction of motion. This variation in PW and PRI is
proportional to relative velocity, acceleration and jamming time
of the DRFM jammer. In this paper, the effects of radial motion
on a moving DRFM jammer are presented, and an efficient
strategy is proposed to tackle them in the stand-in jamming
(SIJ) scenario. MATLAB simulations and Verilog implementation
of the proposed strategy is carried out to certify the analytical
model. PW and PRI variation are employed as the principal
performance metrics to quantify the proposed approach, by
leveraging timing diagram analysis and PPI radar display.
Index Terms—DRFM, Radar, Relative motion, PRI, Jamming
time, Motion compensation
I. I NTRODUCTION
The Digital RF Memory (DRFM) is a key component in
modern radar jamming systems [1]. Based on the DRFM
device, the jammer has the ability to generate false targets with
all the qualities typical of the true targets specified. Hence,
such jamming is liable to be detected as target and makes
radar systems unable to search or track properly. Consequently,
the real targets can be protected and the jamming purpose is
effectively achieved [2].
A DRFM jammer receives radar pulses and repeats them
after some intelligent manipulations in order to deceive the
radar by introducing false targets [3, 4]. It is an ever growing
research field and a formidable challenge for DRFM jammer
designers to interpret how real the fake target is. Different
techniques are proposed in the literature to either jam target
radar using excessive noise power (though not effective against
modern radars) or saturate radar processor with tens of false
targets. These false targets should be as close to the real one as
possible, so as the radar processor cannot distinguish between
real and fake targets.
From deployment point of view, DRFM jammer can be
operated in two configurations. First one is the parallel recep-
tion of incoming radar pulses and transmission of jamming
pulses in parallel. However, this configuration is difficult for
small platforms due to close proximity of receive and transmit
antennas. In the second configuration, DRFM jammer receives
incoming radar pulses, stores them in built-in memory, process
them for parameters estimation and then using the estimated
parameters, transmit back jamming pulses when receive chain
is off. This configuration is more practical, but it has its own
associated challenges [5]-[7].
One of these many challenges is the relative radial motions
of radar, jammer and platform [8]-[11]. As the jammer has to
utilize the already estimated parameters of radar for generation
of jamming pulses, the jammer’s controller has to incorporate
the relative motion’s effects along with estimated parameters.
In [12], the authors focus on the estimation of a high-velocity
target’s motion parameters for a modulated frequency stepped
radar. In [13], the authors perform analysis of phase array
radar system on a moving platform. Motion compensation for
high-frequency surface wave radar on a floating platform is
studied in [15]. However, the computation consumption of the
these algorithms in literature is quite large, so it is difficult to
implement them in real time. Furthermore, motion compen-
sation due to the relative motion between radar, jammer and
platform still remains an open issue of research.
In this work, a robust framework is proposed to confront
the effects of radial motion in the stand-in jamming (SIJ)
scenario. A compact mathematical model of the proposed
strategy is constructed, and simulations are conducted to
certify the analytical model. PW and PRI are employed as
the principal performance metrics to quantify the performance
of the proposed approach. The visual realization of motion
compensation is demonstrated by leveraging timing diagram
analysis, data matrix conception and plan position indicator
(PPI) radar display.
The rest of the paper is organized as: The overall prob-
lem formulation of the jamming scenario, and comprehen-
sive mathematical model is presented in section II. Section
III presents different simulation parameters and assumptions.
Moreover, it illustrates different simulation results, compar-
isons and thorough analysis to validate the proposed approach.
Finally, concluding remarks are expressed in section IV.

978-0-7381-0535-2/21/$31.00 ©2021 IEEE

Proceedings of 2021 18th International Bhurban Conference on Applied Sciences & Technology (IBCAST) 956
Islamabad, Pakistan, 12 – 16 January, 2021
Authorized licensed use limited to: Viettel Group. Downloaded on September 29,2021 at 09:37:44 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 TABLE I
II. P ROBLEM F ORMULATION N OTATION
In this paper, stand-in jamming scenario is considered,
which is depicted in fig. 1. The main body could be an Symbol Description
aircraft which needs to be protected from radar tracking. The am Acceleration of main body
aj Acceleration of jammer
jammer could be a UAV, or another aircraft. In this scenario,
vm Velocity of main body
both main body and jammer are moving towards the radar
vj Velocity of jammer
with their respective velocities vm and vj , and respective
∆v Velocity difference between main body
accelerations am and aj . It has been assumed that the ESM
& jammer
platform is on Jammer unit. Jammer unit receives the radar
T OAm Time of arrival of 1st radar pulse on main body
signal while operating in the ELINT mode, and then transmits
T OAj Time of arrival of 1st radar pulse on jammer
back jamming signal while operating in the jamming mode.
t Jamming time
P RIr Actual estimated radar PRI (updated after motion
motion compensation in ELINT mode)
d1 Distance between radar and jammer
d2 Distance between radar and main body
d Distance between jammer and main body

(vj − vm )t + (aj − am )t2

T OAm = T OAj + (4)
c
Hence, new pulses will strike on the main body at

(vj − vm )t + (aj − am )t2

Fig. 1. Stand-in jamming scenario (tm )comp = T OAj + +
c

As the jammer (besides the main body) is moving towards am 2

(vm )i t + 2 t
the radar and the receive unit is off, the jammer cannot n(P RIr ) − (5)
c
measure the exact T OA of each striking radar pulse during
jamming mode. This means the generated signal must incor- Eq (5) represents the the time when subsequent pulses strike
porate two different motions i.e., the main body, after incorporating motion compensation.
• The radial motion of main body towards the radar The terms vj − vm and aj − am account for velocity and
• The relative radial motion between jammer and main acceleration compensation, when both the main body and
body jammer are moving towards the radar. Based on this analytic
model, PW and PRI variation i.e., shrinkage or expansion
Table 1 shows different notations used throughout the will be observed depending upon direction of motion. This
mathematical modeling of the jamming scenario under con- variation in PW and PRI is proportional to relative velocity,
sideration. acceleration and jamming time of the DRFM jammer. The
In most of the cases, the velocity of both platforms will not visual realization of motion compensation is demonstrated in
be equal i.e., section III by leveraging timing diagram analysis, data matrix
conception and plan position indicator (PPI) radar display.
vm = vj − ∆v (1)
III. S IMULATION R ESULTS AND A NALYSIS
At jammer, if first pulse strikes at T OAj , the subsequent A. Simulation Parameters
pulses will strike the jammer at
Table 2 illustrates different simulation parameters. The dis-
aj 2
(vj )i t + 2 t
tance between main body and jammer is set to 60 km. The
tj = T OAj + n(P RIr ) − (2) main body is assumed to be accelerating with an acceleration
c
of 2g m/s2 , while jammer is not accelerating. Both the main
Similarly, new pulses will strike on the main body at
body and jammer are assumed to move with a nominal speed
(vm )i t + am 2 of 500 knots i.e., 900 km/h. The main body changes its
2 t
tm = T OAm + n(P RIr ) − (3) velocity, and its final velocity is set to 2000 km/h. Since
c
jammer is not accelerating, it moves with a constant velocity
As we measure T OA in Jammer only, T OAm should be of 900 km/h.
computed using T OAj

Proceedings of 2021 18th International Bhurban Conference on Applied Sciences & Technology (IBCAST) 957
Islamabad, Pakistan, 12 – 16 January, 2021
Authorized licensed use limited to: Viettel Group. Downloaded on September 29,2021 at 09:37:44 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 TABLE II
S IMULATION SETTINGS (f) Predicted pulses at main body without motion com-
pensation
Parameter Specification (g) Predicted pulses at main body after motion compen-
Sampling frequency 3 G samples/s sation
Carrier frequency 8 Hz
In this timing diagram, following color coding is observed:
Jamming time 1 min
Pulse width 1 µs Black: For pulses transmitted by radar
PRF 1 KHz Red: For pulses striking at jammer
Maximum range 120 km Green: For pulses striking at main body
Initial target position 70 km It is a scaled model of what will be the effect of PRI
Distance between jammer & main body 60 km
variation and motion compensation, when both main body
Initial velocity of main body 900 km/h
and jammer are approaching towards the radar. Clearly, it is
Initial velocity of jammer 900 km/h
visible that PRI contraction will be witnessed.
Final velocity of main body 2000 km/h
Final velocity of jammer 900 km/h Fig. 3 presents a conceptual visualization of the data matrix
Acceleration of main body 20 m/s2 representing fast time and slow time processing. Each square
Acceleration of jammer 0 m/s2 box characterizes a range bin, and its width signifies the
pulse width P W . Each row represents the pulse repetition
interval P RI, and all rows (PRIs) cumulatively form coherent
B. Simulation Results processing interval CP I. For this example, 10 range bin are
considered for visual understanding of the data matrix. In fig.
Fig. 4 shows the detailed timing diagram of the scenario to 3, red square represents the original target, and yellow one
highlight the nature of pulses at jammer and main body, in indicates the fake target in a particular range bin. Initially,
both stationary and moving states. d1 represents the distance original and fake targets are in the 7th and 10th range bins
between radar and jammer, and d2 represents the distance respectively.
between radar and main body.
Fig. 3 (a) shows the setup of scenario when both original
and fake targets are stationary. In fig. 3 (b), original target
is moving towards the radar (7th to 5th range bin), while
the fake target is stationary at one location i.e., in the 10th
range bin. Fig. 3 (c) shows that original target is moving
further towards the radar (now in 3rd range bin from 7th
one), while the fake target is stationary at same location. It
is evident that both targets are not synchronized, so motion
compensation needs to be incorporated. After employing mo-
tion compensation, both the original and fake targets become
synchronized i.e., both move towards the radar as indicated by
their respective range bins.
Fig. 3 (d) shows the similar scenario setup when both
original and fake targets are stationary. In fig. 3 (e), original
target is moving towards the radar (7th to 5th range bin),
while the fake target is also moving towards the radar (10th to
8th range bin) after the application of motion compensation.
Fig. 3 (f) shows that original target is moving further towards
the radar (as in fig. 3 (b) scenario), while the fake target is also
moving further towards the radar (10th to 6th range bin) after
applying motion compensation. After motion compensation,
Fig. 2. Timing diagram of the scenario both the original and fake targets become synchronized i.e.,
both move towards the radar as indicated by their correspond-
The labels (a) to (g) represent ing range bins.
(a) Pulses transmitted by radar Fig. 4 presents radar pulse position indicator (PPI) display
(b) Pulses strike at stationary jammer for different target positions. It provides a 2D display of the
(c) Pulses strike at stationary main body airspace around the radar site. The distance out from the center
(d) Pulses strike at moving jammer with velocity vj of the display indicates range, and the angle around the display
and acceleration aj is azimuth to the target. In fig. 4, maximum range is assumed
(e) Pulses strike at moving main body with acceleration to be 120 Km. Moreover, original target is represented by red
am and velocity vm , such that vm < vj circle, while fake target is represented by yellow circle.

Proceedings of 2021 18th International Bhurban Conference on Applied Sciences & Technology (IBCAST) 958
Islamabad, Pakistan, 12 – 16 January, 2021
Authorized licensed use limited to: Viettel Group. Downloaded on September 29,2021 at 09:37:44 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Fig. 3. Visualization of data matrix before & after motion compensation (a) Original and fake targets are stationary (b) Only original target is moving (c)
Again only original target is moving (d) Original and fake targets are stationary (e) Both original & fake targets are moving towards the radar (f) Both original
& fake targets are moving further towards the radar

Fig. 4 (a) shows the PPI radar display when both original
and fake targets are stationary. Initially, original target is set at
70 km, and fake target at 80 km. In fig. 4 (b), original target is
moving towards the radar (70 to 60 km), while the fake target
is stationary at one location i.e., 80 km. Fig. 4 (c) shows that
original target is moving further towards the radar (now at 47
km), while the fake target is stationary at same location. It
is clearly evident that both targets are not synchronized, so
motion compensation needs to be incorporated. After motion
compensation, both the original and fake targets become
synchronized i.e., both move towards the radar as indicated
by position of targets in the radar display.
Fig. 4 (d) shows the PPI setup of scenario when both
original and fake targets are stationary at 70 km and 80 km
respectively. In fig. 4 (e), original target is moving towards
the radar (70 to 60 km), while the fake target is also moving
towards the radar (80 to 70 km) after employing motion
compensation. Fig. 4 (f) shows that original target is moving
further towards the radar (60 to 47 km), while the fake target
is also moving further towards the radar (70 to 60 km) after
incorporating motion compensation. After motion compensa-
tion, both the original and fake targets become synchronized
i.e., move towards the radar as indicated by their respective
positions in the PPI radar display.
On the similar lines, other scenarios can be considered and
formulated. For instance, when the main body and jammer
are moving away from the radar, PRI expansion will be ob-
served in the timing diagram. Similarly, the effects of motion
compensation can be visualized by exploiting the data matrix,
and executing the PPI radar display for different scenarios.
IV. C ONCLUSION
This paper portrays the analysis of relative motion between
radar, DRFM jammer and platform (an aircraft), and its
effects on jammer’s performance. It has been investigated
that in case of relative motion between DRFM jammer and
targeted radar, pulse width (PW) and pulse repetition interval
(PRI) variation i.e., shrinkage or expansion will be observed
depending upon direction of motion. This variation in PW
and PRI is proportional to relative velocity, acceleration and
jamming time of the DRFM jammer. In this paper, an efficient
strategy is proposed to tackle the effects of radial motion in the
stand-in jamming (SIJ) scenario. MATLAB simulations and
Verilog implementation of the proposed strategy is carried out
to certify the analytical model. PW and PRI are employed as
the principal performance metrics to quantify the performance
of the proposed approach. The visual realization of motion
compensation is demonstrated by leveraging timing diagram
analysis, data matrix conception and plan position indicator
(PPI) radar display.
R EFERENCES
[1] S. D. Berger, “Digital radio frequency memory linear range gate stealer
spectrum,” IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems, vol.
39, no. 2, pp. 725-735, 2003.

Proceedings of 2021 18th International Bhurban Conference on Applied Sciences & Technology (IBCAST) 959
Islamabad, Pakistan, 12 – 16 January, 2021
Authorized licensed use limited to: Viettel Group. Downloaded on September 29,2021 at 09:37:44 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Fig. 4. Radar PPI display before & after motion compensation (a) Original and fake targets are stationary (b) Only original target is moving (c) Again only
original target is moving (d) Original and fake targets are stationary (e) Both original & fake targets are moving towards the radar (f) Both original & fake
targets are moving further towards the radar

[2] S. J. Roome, “Digital radio frequency memory,” Electronics & Commu-
nications Engineering Journal, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 147 - 153, 1990.
[3] C. E. Cook and H. S. Marsh, “The phase performance of digital radio
frequency memories (DRFMs),” Advanced A-D and D-A Conversion
Techniques and their Applications, pp. 18-23, 1994.
[4] Y. S. Murthy, Applications of digital RF memory systems, Orlando, FL,
USA, 1994.
[5] M. J. Sparrow and J. Cikalo, ECM techniques to counter pulse compres-
sion radar, US7081846, Jul. 2006.
[6] J. Zhang, D. Zhu, G. Zhang, “New Anti-velocity Deception Jamming
Technique using Pulses with Adaptive Initial Phases,” IEEE Transactions
on Aerospace Electronic Systems, vol. 49, pp. 1290-1300, 2013.
[7] S. R. Park , I. Nam and S. Noh, “Modeling and Simulation for the Inves-
tigation of Radar Responses to Electronic Attacks in EW Environments,”
Hindawi Journal of Security and Comm. Networks, pp. 1-13, 2018.
[8] B. Liu and W. Chang, “Range Alignment and Motion Compensation for
Missile-Borne Frequency Stepped Chirp Radar,” Progress in Electromag-
netics Research (PIER), vol. 136, pp. 523-542, 2013.
[9] Y. M. Liu, H. D. Meng, H. Zhang and X. Q. Wang, “Motion compensation
of moving targets for high range resolution stepped-frequency radar,”
International Journal of Sensors, no. 8, pp. 3429-3437, 2008.
[10] G. Li, H. D. Meng, X. G. Xia and Y. N. Peng, “Range and velocity
estimation of moving targets using multiple stepped-frequency pulse
trains,” International Journal of Sensors, no. 8, pp. 1343-1350, 2008.
[11] R. Tao, N. Zhang and Y. Wang, “Analysing and compensating the effects
of range and Doppler frequency migrations in LFM pulse compression
radar,” IET Radar Sonar and Navigation, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 12-22, 2011.
[12] L. Jing, L. X. Guo and W. Wu, “Application of waveform entropy
method for motion compensation to MMW costas frequency hopped
radar,” Journal of Infrared and Millimeter Wave, vol. 22, no. 4, 303-pp.
306, 2003.
[13] H. X. Sun, Z. Liu and Y. H. Cao, “Estimation of a high-velocity target’s
motion parameters for a modulated frequency stepped radar,” Journal of
Xidian University, vol. 38, no. 1, pp. 136-141, 2011.
[14] J. Wang, R. Dizaji and A. M. Ponsford, “An analysis of phase array radar
system on a moving platform,” Proceedings of the IEEE International
Radar Conference, Arlington, USA, May 2005.
[15] E. W. Gill et al., “Motion compensation for high-frequency surface wave
radar on a floating platform,” IET Sonar, Radar and Navigation, vol. 12,
no. 1, pp. 37-45, 2018.

Proceedings of 2021 18th International Bhurban Conference on Applied Sciences & Technology (IBCAST) 960
Islamabad, Pakistan, 12 – 16 January, 2021
Authorized licensed use limited to: Viettel Group. Downloaded on September 29,2021 at 09:37:44 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.