Publications

An analytical study is performed to determine the effects of ATCRBS P2 pulses as interference to DABS uplink transmissions. These effects constitute a major component of all uplink error-producing mechanisms that are anticipated to occur in DABS operation. The study is fomulated in a way that includes effects of both receiver noise and P2 pulse interference, where the interference can be received from any of a number of different transmitters at different distances from the receiving aircraft. The model includes the randomness associated with whether or not a particular DABS signal is overlapped by any interference pulse, and also the conditional randomness of error production given that an overlap does occur. In fact, a major portion of the study is the determination of the conditional error probability given the occurrence of an overlap with stated signal-to-interference ratio and stated signal-to-noise ratio. The results are given as the probability of a "miss," where a "miss" is the event that at least one of the bits in the DABS data block is demodulated in error. The study is carried out for both DPSK and PAM which are the two modulation options being considered in the DABS design. Results are given both as general formulas and as evaluations of these fomulas in various specific cases. In these evaluations, the interference environment is based on ATCRBS interrogator locations, transmitter powers, and repetition frequencies as listed in ECAC's IFF Master File. The numerical results are presented graphically to display the dependence on signal level, noise level, and geographical location between Boston and Washington, D.C. A concept referred to as "effective interference tolerance" is introduced, and numerical evaluations are presented to indicate the accuracy of this concept.

The performance of three candidate modulation schemes for DABS is analyzed in this report and a comparison on the basis of probability of error per bit is made. The three types of modulation are PAM, DPSK, and FSK. The results show that, at a given level of interference and signal-to-noise ratio, DPSK and FSK have a lower P(e)/bit than PAM and this difference is significant in most cases. In addition to P(e)/bit, however, the choice of modulation and message format depends on the capacity required, bandwidth occupancy, and cost of implementation. This list consideration is especially important with regard to the transponder.