![\"\"](\"https:\/\/midradar.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/08\/Ground-Surveillance-Radar1.webp\")
Radar de vigil\u00e2ncia terrestre: alcance, especifica\u00e7\u00f5es e funcionamento<\/p><\/div>\n
What a Ground Surveillance Radar Actually Measures<\/h2>\n
A ground surveillance radar (GSR) sends out a beam, listens for the reflection, and uses the Doppler shift in that reflection to separate a moving target from static clutter \u2014 trees, waves, buildings, rain. The system then reports a track: position, speed, heading, and (on newer units) a classification of what the target likely is.<\/p>\n
That last part is where procurement conversations usually start. A radar rated to “detect at 25 km” is not making one claim \u2014 it’s making three, because a person, a car, and a fishing boat reflect radar energy very differently. Midradar’s RDG series publishes range separately for each of those categories rather than a single headline number, which is the detail worth checking before comparing any two radars on paper.<\/p>\n
How the RDG Series Detects and Classifies Targets<\/h2>\n
The RDG line uses 1-D AESA (active electronically scanned array) or DBF (digital beamforming) architecture in X-band or Ku-band, depending on model. AESA lets the beam steer electronically instead of mechanically rotating, which is part of why several RDG models hold range accuracy of 5 m or better.<\/p>\n
Two processing layers matter for procurement decisions:<\/p>\n
- \n
- Adaptive clutter suppression filters out recurring background motion \u2014 swaying trees, wave action, passing traffic on a road outside the protected zone \u2014 before it reaches the tracking stage.<\/li>\n
- Track-before-detect (TBD) correlates weak returns across multiple scans, which is what lets a radar hold onto a low-RCS target like a person or a small boat instead of losing it in noise on a single sweep.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
Radar-EO slew-to-cue is a separate integration layer, not a radar-only feature: once the RDG unit has a track, it can hand target bearing to an electro-optical camera so an operator gets visual confirmation instead of a blip on a map. That pairing is common in perimeter and coastal deployments but is a system-level design choice, not something the radar does in isolation.<\/p>\n
Detection Range by Target Type<\/h2>\n
Range figures below come from Midradar’s published RDG datasheets. RCS (radar cross-section) values are noted where the manufacturer specifies them \u2014 this matters because “vehicle” and “small boat” are grouped under one figure in most of the line, and the actual object you need to detect may sit above or below that assumption.<\/p>\n
\n\n
\n Modelo<\/td>\n Band \/ Architecture<\/td>\n Large Vessel \/ General<\/td>\n Vehicle \/ Small Boat<\/td>\n Pessoal<\/td>\n Azimuth<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n MR-RDG50K<\/a><\/td>\n X-band, 1-D AESA<\/td>\n \u226550 km<\/td>\n \u226525 km<\/td>\n \u226515 km<\/td>\n 90\u00b0 (7\u00b0 elevation)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n MR-RDG20K<\/a><\/td>\n X-band, 1-D AESA<\/td>\n \u226525 km<\/td>\n \u226515 km<\/td>\n \u226510 km<\/td>\n 95\u00b0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n MR-RDG07K<\/a><\/td>\n X-band AESA, 9.55\u20139.75 GHz<\/td>\n \u226525 km (RCS 10 m\u00b2)<\/td>\n \u226515 km (RCS 5 m\u00b2)<\/td>\n \u226510 km (RCS 0.5 m\u00b2)<\/td>\n 90\u00b0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n MR-RDG06K<\/a><\/td>\n X-band, compact 1-D AESA<\/td>\n \u226516 km<\/td>\n \u22658 km<\/td>\n \u22655 km<\/td>\n \u2014<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n MR-RDG03K<\/a><\/td>\n Ku-band, DBF multibeam<\/td>\n \u226510 km<\/td>\n \u22656 km<\/td>\n \u22653 km<\/td>\n \u2014<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n MR-RDG03-4R<\/a><\/td>\n Ku-band, 4-face DBF<\/td>\n \u226510 km<\/td>\n \u22656 km<\/td>\n \u22653 km<\/td>\n 90\u00b0\/face, 360\u00b0 assembled*<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n *Midradar’s own product page for the MR-RDG03-4R lists azimuth as 90\u00b0 in one table and 360\u00b0 in another, without stating whether the second figure is the four-face assembled system or a per-face value. Ask for the current signed datasheet before using this number in a proposal \u2014 it’s the kind of gap that turns into a change order after installation, not before.<\/p>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/midradar.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/08\/Ground-Surveillance-Radar2.webp\")
Radar de vigil\u00e2ncia terrestre: alcance, especifica\u00e7\u00f5es e funcionamento<\/p><\/div>\n
Accuracy, Power, and Environmental Ratings<\/h2>\n
Range gets the attention, but three other columns decide whether a radar survives a real site:<\/p>\n
\n\n
\n Modelo<\/td>\n Precis\u00e3o de alcance<\/td>\n Precis\u00e3o do \u00e2ngulo<\/td>\n Track Capacity<\/td>\n Pot\u00eancia<\/td>\n IP Rating<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n MR-RDG50K<\/td>\n \u22645 m<\/td>\n \u22640,25\u00b0<\/td>\n \u2265200<\/td>\n \u2264200 W<\/td>\n IP67<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n MR-RDG20K<\/td>\n \u22645 m<\/td>\n \u22640.4\u00b0<\/td>\n \u2265200<\/td>\n \u2264140 W<\/td>\n IP67<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n MR-RDG07K<\/td>\n \u22645 m<\/td>\n \u22640.4\u00b0<\/td>\n \u2265200<\/td>\n 20 W transmit \/ \u2264140 W total<\/td>\n IP67<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n MR-RDG06K<\/td>\n Not published<\/td>\n Not published<\/td>\n Not published<\/td>\n \u226475 W<\/td>\n IP67<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n MR-RDG03K<\/td>\n Not published<\/td>\n Not published<\/td>\n \u2265100<\/td>\n \u226485 W<\/td>\n IP67<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n MR-RDG03-4R<\/td>\n Not published<\/td>\n Not published<\/td>\n Not published<\/td>\n Not published<\/td>\n Not published<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n All RDG models share a company-wide operating range of -40\u00b0C to +55\u00b0C. The MR-RDG06K also publishes a blind zone of \u226450 m and a unit weight of \u22645 kg \u2014 figures the other five models in the line don’t disclose on their public pages, which matters if your site has a dead zone right at the base of the mast or a weight limit on the mounting structure.<\/p>\n
Choosing a Model for Your Site: A Working Method<\/h2>\n
- \n
- Map the perimeter or coastline distance you need covered, then match it against the “large vessel \/ general” column, not the personnel column \u2014 that’s the figure vendors usually lead with, and it overstates what you’ll get on a human-sized target.<\/li>\n
- Identify your smallest target class.If personnel detection at the fence line is the actual requirement, filter on the personnel-range column first and treat everything else as secondary.<\/li>\n
- Check azimuth coverage against your mounting plan.A 90\u201395\u00b0 radar needs multiple units or a rotating mount for full-perimeter coverage; four-face DBF units are built for wider coverage from one mast, but confirm the per-face vs. assembled figure as noted above.<\/li>\n
- Confirm power budget against your site’s DC or solar supply, especially for remote coastal or border masts where a 200 W draw versus a 75 W draw changes your panel and battery sizing.<\/li>\n
- Request the specific certification and blind-zone figures your model is missingfrom Midradar directly \u2014 the public datasheets don’t carry per-model certificate numbers or blind-zone data for most of the line, so this step isn’t optional if a bid requires it.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n
A Common Mistake: Comparing One Range Number Across Vendors<\/h2>\n
Procurement teams often shortlist radars by lining up a single “max range” figure from each vendor’s homepage. That comparison breaks down for two reasons. First, published maximum ranges are frequently a single flagship figure rather than a per-target breakdown \u2014 one long-range system markets a flat <cite index=”4-1″>45 km detection distance for land, sea, and aerial targets combined<\/cite>, while another vendor’s line advertises <cite index=”5-1″>a 20 km to 80 km band covering both ground and low-flying aerial targets together<\/cite> without separating personnel from vehicles. Second, range itself is not a fixed property of the radar \u2014 it scales with antenna height and target size the way a taller vantage point extends line of sight, so <cite index=”6-1″>a radar with a roughly three-meter antenna might detect a truck at seven kilometers but fail to pick up a person at the same distance because of the size difference<\/cite>. Compared with that kind of single-figure marketing, the RDG series’ practice of publishing separate ranges for large vessel, vehicle\/small boat, and personnel targets is the more useful starting point for an apples-to-apples shortlist \u2014 but it still needs the RCS assumption behind each number, which only the MR-RDG07K states explicitly on its public page.<\/p>\n
Foliage, buildings, and terrain along the line of sight remain a separate problem that no range spec captures: clutter and false alarms from obstructions are a known limitation across ground surveillance radar generally, not a Midradar-specific one, and adaptive clutter suppression reduces but does not eliminate that effect.<\/p>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/midradar.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/08\/Ground-Surveillance-Radar3.webp\")
Radar de vigil\u00e2ncia terrestre: alcance, especifica\u00e7\u00f5es e funcionamento<\/p><\/div>\n
Integration: Protocols and Platform Connectivity<\/h2>\n
RDG-series radars connect through GB\/T 28181 and ONVIF for video\/security platform integration, plus RTSP streaming, RESTful APIs, and SDKs for custom software work. If you’re bidding this into an existing VMS, command-and-control platform, or access control system, the integration question isn’t whether it connects \u2014 GB\/T 28181 and ONVIF are widely supported protocols in the security industry \u2014 it’s which specific fields (track ID, classification confidence, GPS coordinates) your target platform actually consumes from the radar’s data stream. That’s a conversation to have with the platform vendor and Midradar together, not something either side can answer alone.<\/p>\n
Trade-offs Worth Weighing Before You Spec It<\/h2>\n
The RDG line’s strength is the per-target-type range breakdown most competitors don’t publish, plus a shared -40\u00b0C to +55\u00b0C rating and IP67 housing across the models that disclose it. The gaps are specific enough to plan around rather than vague enough to dismiss: three of the six models (MR-RDG06K, MR-RDG03K, MR-RDG03-4R) don’t publish range accuracy, angle accuracy, or track capacity on their public pages, the MR-RDG03-4R has a documented azimuth ambiguity between two of its own spec tables, and none of the six list a per-model certification number \u2014 only the company-level ISO 9001:2015, CE, and National High-Tech Enterprise designations are public. None of that blocks a deployment, but it does mean the missing numbers need to come from a signed datasheet or direct quote request before they go into a bid, not from the product page alone.<\/p>\n
<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Ground surveillance radar range by target type, explained with Midradar’s RDG-series specs \u2014 X-band vs Ku-band, azimuth coverage, accuracy, and how to shortlist a model.<\/p>","protected":false},"featured_media":3324,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","class_list":["post-3323","news","type-news","status-publish","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","news_category-blog"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/midradar.com\/pt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/news\/3323","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/midradar.com\/pt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/news"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/midradar.com\/pt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/news"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/midradar.com\/pt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3323"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/midradar.com\/pt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/3324"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/midradar.com\/pt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3323"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}