DRFM Repeater Jamming Suppression Method Based on Joint Range-Angle Sparse Recovery and Beamforming for Distributed Array Radar

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This paper presents a DRFM repeater jamming suppression method based on joint range-angle sparse recovery and beamforming of distributed array radar. In the proposed method, near-field condition is considered and the steering vector is modified using spherical wave model, which shows great contributions of distributed array radar. The effectiveness, superiority, and performance have been demonstrated by simulations and experiments. This paper is suitable to publish in this Journal and interesting to the readers. Thus, I recommend this paper to be accepted.

Some comments are following for reference.

1)     In this paper, the spherical wave model is employed to modify the steering vector under near-field condition. However, Fresnel model is also a common model, please explain why the spherical wave model is used.

2)     In the simulation, beam patterns of the JADBF and JBSS are similar in Figure 6(a) and Figure 6(b), while the proposed method and SFTAP show significant differences. Please explain the reason.

3)     In the experiment, only a distributed array radar with 100 m aperture is mentioned. In order to understand and evaluate the performance of proposed method, please add some more information about the distributed array radar.

English writings need to be polished.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

This paper considers a important problem in radar signal processing area, i.e., suppressing DRFM repeater jamming. The authors propose to use distribtuted array to increase the spatial diversity and the develope a three step approach to suppress the jamming signal. The overall presentation is clear except some aspects, see below.

1. Specifying X(\theta_0, R_0) in the third step (beamforming step) is still not clear when the priori knowledge of the target is unknown. The author mentioned there is an iterative process to fix this issue but the reviewer did not find that. 

2. Practical array system contains unknown carlibration error, the impact of the array error on the jamming suppression should be discussed, though the real experiment justifies the practical usage of the proposed approach.

The uasge of English is fine.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

The paper is interesting and related to a significant problem.

Minor issues I noticed reading it are listed below.

Section 2.2 describes in detail an LFM-modulated pulse signal; however, in the following text, a range-compressed signal is studied - so the modulation does not matter.

In section 3 the method description relates to some fixed parameters (e.g. 6xN echo matrix) - it should be made more general when describing the method, and become fixed only when you describe the concrete experiment.

The method description (pages 6-7) is difficult to read - I suggest explaining better which operations and variables describe the model constructed when designing the system, and which describe the processing of currently received echo.

An important question that appears to be not answered in the paper is - how you recognize in practice which signal is jamming and which one is the useful one?

After eq(2) "sampling pararaph" does not seem to be a widely used term - please change.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

The reviewer's previous concerns have been addressed. 

Satisfactory.