On the Performance of Flying Ad-hoc Networks

(FANETs) with Directional Antennas

M.Asghar Khan1,3, Ijaz Mansoor Qureshi2, Inam Ullah Khan3,Adnan Nasim1, Usman Javed1, and Wasif Khan1

1
Department of Electrical Engineering,Hamdard Universty Islamabad,Pakistan
2
Department of Electrical Engineering, Air Universty Islamabad,Pakistan
3
Department of Electronic Engineering, ISRAUniversty Islamabad,Pakistan

Emails: khayyam2302@gmail.com, imqureshi@mail.au.edu.pk, inamullahkhan05@gmail.com, engr.adnannasim@gmail.com,

usijaved@gmail.com, wasif_16@yahoo.com

Abstract-The Flying Ad-hoc Networks (FANETs) is relatively a
new research area that governs the autonomous movement of
multiple and small-sized unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs).
Compared to the traditional ad-hoc networks, FANETs are more
efficient in completing their task in catastrophic situations to
deliver data communication services from the height. However,
type of the mission and sensitivity of the application requires an
adaptive, efficient, and scalable communication network for data
transmission among the UAVs. Such network are challenged by
the high mobility and frequent topology changes, resulting
connectivity loss problem. In this context, the UAVs in FANETs
have been deployed with omnidirectional antennas, which leads
to restrict the overall performance of the network. Alternately,
directional antennas have the potential to enhance the
transmission range, spatial reuse, and capacity of the network
effectively. Nevertheless, these benefits also bring some unique
challenges, particularly for the MAC layer. In order to overcome
such constraints, we propose a new directional antennas based
medium access control (MAC) protocol to adapt the FANETs
architecture. The idea is to use multiple directional antennas on a
single UAV with IEEE 802.11 protocol. The design goal is to
improve the overall performance of the network and to provide
solutions to some of the unique challenges of using directional
antennas. The integrated solution is modeled in OPNET and
evaluated for throughput, end-to-end delay, and retransmission
attempts. The simulation results authenticate that the proposed
IEEE 802.11-based directional antennas protocol could
significantly increase the performance of FANETs as compared
to omnidirectional antennas.
Keywords—ad-hoc networks, FANETs, directional antennas;
MAC, OPNET, UAVs.
I. INTRODUCTION
can fly autonomously to provide data communication services
for large area without central infrastructure. Examples of such
scenarios include regions where topology of the network does
not permit them to deploy base stations in a less amount of
time. Owning to the versatility and flexibility, the practice of
FANETs has opened new horizons for highly sensitive
military and commercial applications such as disaster
management [2], searching operations [3], reconnaissance
missions [4], handling wildfire [5], ad-hoc networks relay [6,
7], wind assessment [8], civil security [9], agricultural purpose
[10].On one side, in situation of hazardous events when
traditional communications infrastructure are not available,
FANETs can offer a quickly deployable, autonomous, and
cost-effective network for real-time data communications. On
the other side, it brings some unique design challenges due to
the high mobility and variation in distance between the flying
nodes.
The typical speed of a UAV in 3D space varies from 30-460
km/h, resulting connectivity loss problem in FANETs.
Additionally, the agile flight states of a UAV also impose
grave performance erosion in relation of throughput and delay.
Some of these problems can be eliminated with the
deployment of appropriate antenna type and suitable
communication protocols at the MAC layer. Two types of
antennas can be set up for FANETs applications: directional
and omnidirectional. In FANETs architecture, as the UAVs
change their location more often and omnidirectional antennas
have the potential to receive and transmit signals in all
direction without knowing the exact location’s information.
However, the spatial reuse and transmission range of the

W ITH the recent developments in both electronics and

wireless communication technologies, the functions and
role of UAVs has unlocked the way for the construction of
FANETs [1]. The UAVs hereby are equipped with sensors that
network will stay restricted. Alternately, directional antennas
have the potential to offers numerous advantages over
omnidirectional antennas such as larger transmission range
and spatial reuse, because of focusing the total RF energy in a

978-1-5386-6594-7/18/$31.00 ©2018 IEEE

specific direction. However, these benefits arise some unique
challenges particularly for the MAC layer.
The MAC layer protocols have a thorough impact on how
successfully data can be transferred between the UAVs. The
MAC layer protocols are also liable for coordinating among
the UAVs for the access of the active UAVs to the network
resources. Therefore, a suitable MAC protocol is required to
make optimum use of directional antennas. The current MAC
protocol such as 802.11 standard suites is modified only for
omnidirectional antennas. Due to the high mobility and
frequent topology changes of the UAVs, location estimation
and sharing this information with the other UAVs are the key
concerns about directed based MAC protocol. The key impact
of this research article is to suggest a new MAC protocol to
adapt the FANETs architecture while using directional
antennas.
The remaining article is arranged as follows. The previous
work that is done in the area of directional antennas for
FANETs is summarized in section II. In section III, some
common challenges regarding directional antennas
deployment are discussed. In section IV, our proposed
directional MAC protocol is presented followed by the
solutions to some of the controversial problems of using
directional antennas in section V. We model our simulation
environment using OPNET simulator and performance
analysis are also provided in section VI. Simulation results of
the proposed scheme are detailed in section VII. Lastly, the
paper is concluded in section VIII.
II. RELATED WORK
There are various research articles in the field of directional
antennas that has only focused traditional VANETs and
MANETs. In the context of FANETs, research is still in its
early stages. Erdem Ulukan and Özgür Gürbüz proposed an
angular MAC (AN-MAC) protocol with directional beams to
enhance the performance of the network [11]. Adaptive MAC
protocol scheme is suggested for UAV networks with
directional antennas in [12]. In this scheme, the authors found
that the adaptive directional MAC protocol can enhance the
network performance by combining the external parameters
with directionality of the antennas. Similarly, AMAC_UAV is
proposed in [13]. In this scheme, each UAV in the ad-hoc
UAV communication networks is considered to be equipped
with both directional and omnidirectional antennas. In this
model, UAV has a choice to send packets through directional
antenna or with omnidirectional antenna. Normally,
AMAC_UAV sends Control packets (CTS, RTS and ACK)
using omnidirectional antennas while data packets are sent
using directional antennas. It is observed that AMAC_UAV
scheme can increase network performance considering end-to-
end delay and throughput as a network performance
parameters. Directional antenna-based meshed-tree algorithm
have proposed by Huba and Shenoy in [14]. This specific
algorithm provide robust and scalable solution by integrating
scheduling and clustering for MAC layer using directional
antenna. Meshed-tree algorithm can handle network and MAC
layer with a single algorithm and can remarkably enhance
packet delivery rate and reduce end-to-end delay. In [15], it is
analyzed that directional antennas can drastically modify
spatial reuse and network capability of FANETs. Samil, T. and
Bekmezci, I. in [16] explored the challenges and opportunities
of utilizing directional antennas for FANETs and presented
some design procedures. Medjo Me Biomo, Thomas Kunz and
St-Hilaire defined DA-FANETs [17].The UAVs hereby were
equipped with directional antennas. DA-FANETs mechanism
results better network performance in respect of packet deliver
ratio (PDR) and Latency. In addition, the authors also
analyzed that the directional antenna allow to cover large area
and to increase transmission range with the same number of
nodes.
III. CHALLENGES OF DIRECTIONAL ANTENNAS
DEPLOYMENT IN FANETS
The FANETs are adapted to expand the communication
range and data aggregation capabilities nowadays. We suggest
the utilization of directional antennas to converge all of the RF
energy in a particular direction to extend the transmission
range. The longer transmission range leads to lower number of
hop count, and hence latency performance of the network can
be improved particularly in the real-time FANETs applications.
In addition, our approach leads greater bandwidth utilization
and lesser interference. Although, directional antennas have
multiple advantages when they come with a prize, but it also
brings some unique challenges, particularly for the MAC layer.
We summarize some of the common challenges with
directional antenna in this section that still need to be addressed
. More explicitly, these problems include the hidden and
exposed terminal problems, the head-of-line blocking and
deafness problems, that is described in details as follows.
A. The Hidden Terminal Problem
The problem befalls as a result of the possibility when the
nodes try to initiate a simultaneous transmission with the
receiver, without knowing the on-going transmission [18]. In
such scenario, packets collision occur at the receiver as shown
in “Fig.1.” Both mobile node A and mobile node C, are in the
range of mobile node B. on the other hand, node C and node A
cannot “see” each other and are supposed to be hidden nodes.
Packet collision happens in this case, when node C and node A
unknowingly start transmitting packets simultaneously to node
B. As a consequence of this specific problem, data loss occurs.
B. The Exposed Terminal Problem
The problem happens when two simultaneous
communication are not permissible between the nodes
[19].Take “Fig.2”, as an example, node B wished to transmit
to A, while node C wished to transmit to node D at the same
time. Technically, there is no problem because nodes A and D
will receive only one signal simultaneously. According to the
figure, the problem arises if node B senses the signal of C and
waits until the medium is free before transmitting their
packets. Efficiency of the network reduces with exposed
terminal problem in wireless ad-hoc communication networks.
Fig.1. Hidden Terminal Problem
Fig.2. Exposed Terminal Problem
C. The Head of Line Blocking (HOL) Problem
The HOL problem arises due to the prioritized “FIFO”
queues for packets transmission on the channel [20]. This
effects happens because there might be possibility that the
channel is to be free in one direction but busy in the other
direction. If at the top of the queue a packet is blocked, it stops
further packets transmission even though if their direction is
available for transmission. Examine the circumstances as
shown in “Fig.3,” where node A is engage in communication
with mobile nodes B, D, and E. If node A’s queue has packets
for nodes B, D and E expect the transmission sequentially.
Mobile nodes B and C are tied up in data transmission and
node A has to wait until and unless B and C finish their data
communication. In this case, node A could plan packets for
node E and node D instead of waiting for node B.
D. The Deafness Problem
A node that uses directional antenna in wireless ad-hoc
networks is generally considered as “deaf” for all the other
communicating nodes except the one through which the beam
is formed in the direction [21]. Deafness problem is originated
when a transmitting UAV continually tries to connect with the
receiving UAV, which at the moment focuses on a different
antenna beam with another node. The back off interval is
doubled due to each unsuccessful attempt and hence degrading
network performance. Consider “Fig.4,” where mobile node
A, wishes to connect with node B for data communication, but
it has beam formed its antenna towards node C. In this
scenario node B is considered “deaf” to node A. Deafness
problems degrade network capacity in respect of end-to-
end delay and unfair assignment of network resources [22].
Fig.3. Head of Line Blocking Problem
Fig.4. Deafness Problem
IV. PROPOSED DIRECTIONAL ANTENNAS BASED MAC
PROTOCOL FOR FANETS
Directional antenna is not available in OPNET by default;
therefore, we have to design our own. This simulation tool has
antenna pattern editor where we can design directional
antennas of our own choice. Our implementation includes the
standard 802.11g DCF MAC protocol with directional
antennas. The 802.11g standard is a superset of 802.11b and
was developed to offer higher data rates from 11Mbps to 54
Mbps. It is operating in the 2.4 GHz and employs (CSMA/CA)
as a key technique in WLAN medium access control (MAC)
layer with distributed coordinated function (DCF).
The performance of the FANETs is subjected to several
factors such as high mobility, high altitude, distance variation
between the nodes and fluctuations in link quality. In our
proposed scheme, we assumed that the distance among the two
UAVs would not go outside the directional antenna
transmission range. Moreover, with the help of RTS/CTS
messages, a medium access table is constructed to track not
only the location of the destinations UAVs but also all the
neighboring UAVs. Details about our proposed directional
based MAC protocols are presented below.
A. UAV Station Model
UAV station model is designed in such a way that every
UAV in the network is fitted out with six directional antennas
around 3600. GPS and IMU are also installed externally in our
proposed scheme to constantly monitor and update the
positions and locations of neighboring UAVs in MAC table.
The 802.11g standard will use RTS and CTS packets to
reserve the medium for packets exchange.
B. Antenna Model
It is a distinguished fact that directional antenna can center
more energy on a desired direction. In our proposed scheme,
we model N=6 separate directional antennas that cover 360o
collectively as shown in “Fig.5”, where each antenna will have
a beam width of 60o.We need 6 separate RF modules and 1
MAC chip in order to implement our proposed protocol as
depicted in “Fig.6”.In the proposed methodology, we used the
Friis transmission in “equation (1)”, to derive the antenna
parameters.
(1)
Where: Pt = the transmitted power, Pr = the received power,
Gr and Gt is the receiver and transmitter’s gain respectively,
R=the transmission range and λ=the wavelength. In OPNET
simulator, “setting the parameters as follows will result in a
transmission range of 1000 m”: Pr = -95dBm, Pt = 0.005 W,
Frequency=2.4 GHz and Gr = Gt = 0dBm.
C. Mobility Model
The mobility model used in our proposed study is Random
Waypoint Mobility Model [23].The RPGM model simulates
random movement of a group of multiple UAVs with a
reference point to accomplish a common goal. In our proposed
methodology the backbone UAV of each group is positioned
at the reference point upon which the speed, direction, and
altitude of member UAVs depend. At each step point, the
location of UAVs is updated according to the backbone UAV.
Fig.5. Beams configuration of directional antennas with beam width of 600
Fig.6. MAC integration with directional antennas
D. Basic Protocol Operation
Suppose UAV_A requests to transmit a data packet to
UAV_C as exemplified in “Fig.7”.Two messages will be
initiated before data transmissions, called request-to-send
(RTS) and clear-to-send (CTS). In our scheme, these messages
will also contain the duration of data transmission, location
and orientation information along with the antennas beam
number of the UAVs. In this context, UAV_A sends the RTS
packets in all 6 directions. Once, the UAV_C receives RTS
packet it will sense the channel for (SIFS) interval. If the
channel is available, it will send back the CTS message and
update the target information table. The neighboring UAVs
will also be aware of data packet exchange between the two
UAVs. Each UAV reads the receiver address for the intended
destination and marks the maximum power received beam.
The UAVs other than the destination’s UAV will block their
own beam in that direction for a specific amount of time by
DNAV, which is discussed in section E. Similarly,
communication between UAV_D and UAV_B is possible in
the same basic structure simultaneously by spatial division
multiple access (SDMA) as illustrated in “Fig.8.”
E. Target Information Table
Directional antennas efficiently requires the knowledge of
the exact localities of the communicating nodes for
information exchange. In this context, each UAV frequently
maintains a target information table whenever it receives a
frame. The specific UAV add the address of the sending UAV,
frame, and antenna beam it arrived on. This is done at MAC
layer where MAC protocol provides the exact location of the
adjacent UAVs in every GPS update interval sequence by
utilizing directional antenna.
Fig.7. Sample topology with 6 directional antennas on single UAV

Fig.8. Sample FANETs topology achieving SDMA
F. Directional Network Allocation Vector (DNAV)
Physical and virtual carrier sensing are the two sensing
mechanisms in 802.11. Virtual carrier sensing is performed
with the help of NAV. The directional version of NAV is
called DNAV, which retain only those channels which is in the
range of direction of other UAVs.
V. SOLUTION TO COMMON PROBLEMS RELATED TO
DIRECTIONAL ANTENNAS
In this section, we describe solution to some of the common
problems with directional antennas.
A. Solution to Hidden Terminal Problem
RTS/CTS packets are communicated in the 802.11 DCF
protocol to resolve this problem using carrier-sensing
mechanism. Nevertheless, it does not completely mitigate
hidden terminal problem. In our case, the RTS packet from the
transmitting UAV and CTS packet from the receiving UAV
are transmitted directionally. Each node forms a DNAV table
to store the latest updates about the available antenna beams.
In our proposed MAC protocol, the DNAV is coordinated with
the target information table of neighboring UAVs.
B. Solution to Exposed Terminal Problem
This problem is overcome with the help of directional (per
sector) NAV times in our proposed MAC protocol. Only those
sectors will be blocked for transmission that takes the
accidental RTS/CTS for the duration of neighboring
transmission.
C. Solution to Head of Line (HOL) Blocking Problem
To solve the concerned problem, we amend the queuing
field to allow the transmission of those packets having least
wait time. A packet is planned for transmission with minimum
wait time depend on the information present in the DNAV.
D. Solution to Deafness Problem
The deafness problem with directional antennas for
FANETs can be mitigated by describing a novel control
packet. This packet allows a busy receiver in response to a
source unmanned aerial vehicle for a specific amount of time.
VI. SIMULATION ENVIRONMENT AND PERFORMANCE
EVALUATION
We used OPNET Modeler 14.5 for the simulation and
modeling of our proposed directional antenna MAC protocol.
This simulation tool provides an antenna pattern editor where
we can model the directionality and gain of an antenna. We
modified the node model for omnidirectional antenna and
directional antennas to implement our new MAC protocol as
shown in “Fig.9,” and “Fig.10,” respectively. The node model
of directional antennas provide all the necessary interfaces to
work with 6 individual directional antennas. In this model,
every UAV has 60o beam width, which enables them to cover
360o by 6 antennas. The UAVs can sense the signal level on all
the beams and select the best beam for the destination UAV.
The UAVs other than the destination block their own beam.
The data rate to be 54 Mbps for all the UAVs in IEEE 802.11g
standard. The rest of the parameters are summarized in Table 1
for further details.
The performance evaluation is done on the bases of
throughput, end-to-end delay, and retransmission
attempts which will be presented in details as follows.
A. Throughput (bits/sec)
The average data rate of successful data packets from source
to destination over a communication link in a unit period of
time is called throughput. Mathematically, throughput can be
calculated from equation 2 as given below:
(2)
Where N assumed to be the number of successful packets
transferred, S is the size of packet and T is the time duration.
Higher throughput is the requirement and characteristic of any
network.
B. End-to-End Delay (sec)
The average time required for a packet to be transmitted
from the source UAV to destination UAV across the network.
End-to-end delay comprises processing, queuing, and
propagation delay of the link in a network. Mathematically, it
can be shown as below in “equation 3”:
(3)
Where N represent the total number of packets delivered,
Tt =Transmission time, Rt =Retransmission time, Bt =Buffer
time and Prt =Processing time.
C. Retransmission Attempts (packets)
The retransmission attempts mean that the number of retries
to transmit a packet successfully. Retransmission attempts
impact the available bandwidth of a link in wireless networks.
 TABLE I VII. SIMULATION RESULTS AND ANALYSIS
SIMULATION PARAMETERS
“Fig 11a, 11b,” “Fig 12a, 12b,” and “Fig.13a, 13b,”
Parameter Value illustrates the performance of FANETs for omnidirectional
Area Dimensions 1000m x 1000m and directional antennas. In the graphs, x-axis indicates
Number of Nodes 40 simulation time and y-axis specifies the throughput in bits per
Directional Gain 10 dBi second, delay in seconds and retransmission attempts of
Physical Characteristics IEEE 802.11g packets respectively. Our simulation results point out that the
Frequency 2.4 GHz proposed directional-based MAC protocols can provide
Application Simple source significant improvements in the FANETs performance
Packet Interval (s) Exponential (1) particularly in the throughput, end-to-end delay, and
Packet Size(byte) 1024 retransmission attempts. We observed that when the UAVs
Simulation Time 20 minutes moves away and the distance between the connected nodes is
Nodes Type Mobile large while using omnidirectional antennas, the performance
Nodes altitude 25 m of the network degraded. Additionally, when using
Speed of Nodes 60 m/s omnidirectional antennas each UAV in the same BSS (Basic
Reception Power Threshold -95 dBm Service Set) has to wait for other UAVs to finish their
Transmission Power 0.005 W communication before transmitting frames. Whereas, our
proposed directional based MAC protocol enables each UAV
to use the same channel simultaneously for data transmission
in the same basic service set (BSS) with others. Moreover, a
UAV attempts to transmit a packet for each failed transmission
until and unless it receives ACK from the receiving node or
when the maximum retransmission limit is reached.

Fig.11a. Throughput using omnidirectional based MAC protocol

Fig.9. Designing of Node Model equipped with omnidirectional antenna in

OPNET

Fig.11b. End-to-End delay using omnidirectional based MAC protocol

Fig.10. Designing of Node Model equipped with 6 directional antennas in Fig.12a. Throughput using directional based MAC protocol
OPNET

Fig.12b. End-to-End delay using directional based MAC protocol
Fig.13a. Retransmission attempts using omnidirectional based MAC protocol
Fig.13b. Retransmission attempts using directional based MAC protocol
VIII. CONCLUSIONS
The spatial reusability and transmission range of a
communication network equipped with directional antennas is
greater than that of the omnidirectional antennas. All of these
features leads to boost the overall performance of the network.
It can also be very advantageous for FANETs, where the
distance between the flying nodes is larger than that of the
traditional MANETs and VANETs nodes, particularly in real
time applications where end-to-end delay and throughput is
one of the most important design factors.
From the simulation results, we found that our proposed
directional-based MAC protocol can make noticeable
improvements to the performance of the FANETs in terms of
throughput, end-to-end delay, and retransmission attempts.
The proposed scheme also integrate directionality of the
antenna with CSMA and SDMA by enabling each UAV to use
the same channel simultaneously in the same BSS with other
UAVs. The results we obtained are promising, however we
intend to improve the network performance using directional
antennas by including various varying network topologies and
scenarios for different types of FANETs applications.
REFERENCES
[1] M.A Khan, I M Qureshi, A.Safi, Inam Ullah ,“Flying Ad-Hoc Networks
(FANETs): A Review of Communication architectures, and Routing
protocols” First International Conference on Latest trends in Electrical
Engineering and Computing Technologies (INTELLECT) 2017.
[2] M.Erdelj, E.Natalizio, K.R. Chowdhury and I.F Akyildiz, “Help from
the sky:Leveraging UAVs for disaster management,” IEEE Pervasive
Computing ,vol.16, Issue: 1, March 2017 .
[3] J. George, P.B. Sujit and J. Sousa, “Search strategies for multiple UAV
search and destroy missions,” Journal of Intelligent and Robotics
Systems 61 ,2011, pp.355–367.
[4] Z. Sun, P. Wang, M.C. Vuran, M. Al-Rodhaan, A. Al-Dhelaan and I.F.
Akyildiz, “BorderSense: border patrol through advanced wireless
sensor networks,” Ad Hoc Networks 9 (3) 2011 ,pp. 468–477.
[5] C. Barrado, R. Messeguer, J. Lopez, E. Pastor, E. Santamaria and P.
Royo, “Wildfire monitoring using a mixed air-ground mobile network,”
IEEE Pervasive Computing 9 (4) 2010,pp. 24–32.
[6] E.P. de Freitas, T. Heimfarth, I.F. Netto, C.E. Lino, C.E. Pereira, A.M.
Ferreira, F.R. Wagner and T. Larsson, “UAV relay network to support
WSN connectivity,” ICUMT, IEEE, 2010, pp. 309–314.
[7] F. Jiang and A.L. Swindlehurst,“Dynamic UAV relay positioning for the
ground-to-air uplink,” IEEE Globecom Workshops, 2010.
[8] A. Cho, J. Kim, S. Lee and C. Kee, “Wind estimation and airspeed
calibration using a UAV with a single-antenna GPS receiver and pitot
tube,” IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems 47
,2011 ,pp.109–117.
[9] I. Maza, F. Caballero, J. Capitan, J.R. Martinez-De-Dios and A. Ollero,
“Experimental results in multi-UAV coordination for disaster
management and civil security applications,”Journal of Intelligent and
Robotics Systems 61 (1–4) ,2011 ,pp.563–585.
[10] H. Xiang and L. Tian, “Development of a low-cost agricultural remote
sensing system based on an autonomous unmanned aerial vehicle,”
Biosystems Engineering 108 (2) 2011,pp.174–190.
[11] Ulukan E., & Gurbuz O., “Using switched beam smart antennas in
wireless ad hoc networks with angular MAC protocol,” In Proceedings
Mediterranean ad hoc netwoking worshop (MEDHOCNET), June 2004.
[12] A.I. Alshbatat, L. Dong, Adaptive MAC protocol for UAV 1478
communication networks using directional antennas, in: 1479
Proceedings of International Conference on Networking, Sensing 1480
and Control (ICNSC), 2010, pp. 598–603.
[13] A. I. Alshbatat and L. Dong, “Performance analysis of mobile ad hoc
unmanned aerial vehicle communication networks with directional
antennas,” International Journal of Aerospace Engineering, vol. 2010,
2011.
[14] W. Huba, N. Shenoy, Airborne surveillance networks with directional
antennas, in: ICNS 2012, The Eighth International Conference on
Networking and Services, 2012, pp. 1–7.
[15] Temel, S., Bekmezci, I., "Scalability analysis of Flying Ad Hoc
Networks (FANETs): A directional antenna approach", Turkish Air
Force Acad., Istanbul, Turkey, 10.1109/BlackSeaCom.2014.6849036,
185- 187, 2014.
[16] Samil, T. and Bekmezci, I. “Utilization of Directional Antennas in
Flying Ad Hoc networks: Challenges and Design Guidelines,” In
Wireless Network Performance Enhancement via Directional Antennas:
Models, Protocols, and Systems; Matyjas, J.D., Hu, F., Kumar, S., Eds.;
CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2015; pp. 365–380.
[17] Jean-Deniel Medjo Me Biomo,Thomas Kunz, Marc St-Hilairi,
“Directional antennas in FANETs:A performance analysis of routing
protocols,” International Conference on Selected Topics in Mobile and
Wireless Networking (MoWNeT), Avignon, France, 2017.
[18] Y.-B. Ko and N. H. Vaidya, “Medium access control protocols using
directional antennas in ad hoc networks ”, in IEEE INFOCOM, Vol. 1,
pp. 13 – 21, 2000.
[19] Dai H-N, Ng K-W, Li M, Wu M-Y, “An overview of using directional
antennas in wireless networks”, International Journal of Communication
Systems 2013; 26(4):pp.413–448.
[20] V. Kolar, S. Tilak, and N. B. Abu-Ghazaleh, 2004. Avoiding head of
line blocking in directional antenna, In IEEE International Conference
on Local Computer Networks (LCN), Zurich, Switzerland, pp. 385–392.
[21] R. R. Choudhury and N. H. Vaidya. Deafness: A MAC problem in ad
hoc networks when using directional antennas. Technical report,
Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Network Protocols
(ICNP), October 2004.
[22] H. Gossain, C. Cordeiro, D. Cavalcanti, and D. P. Agrawal, 2004, “The
deafness problems and solutions in wireless ad hoc networks using
directional antennas,” In IEEE Global Telecommunications Conference
(GLOBECOM) Workshops, pp. 108–114.
[23] Hong, X, Gerla, M, Pei, G. A group mobility model for ad hoc wireless
networks. In: Proceedings of the 2nd ACM international workshop on
modeling, analysis and simulation of wireless and mobile systems
(MSWiM ’99), Seattle, WA, 20 August 1999, pp.53–60. New
York: IEEE.