Missile Guidance (Lecture 1)

Dr A K Sarkar (Visiting Faculty, Aerospace Engg Dept)

DIAT Pune

Lecture Series on Missile Guidance

conducted by MILIT Pune
26-03-2019

27 March 2019 1
 Flow of Presentation

• Introduction
• Need of Guidance System
• Different Phases of Guidance
• Classical Guidance Systems
 Beam Rider
 Command Guidance (Radar based)
 Command to Line of Sight (CLOS)
 Terminal Homing Guidance (Active radar seeker)
 Proportional Navigation Guidance
 Commanded PN Guidance
 Augmented Proportional Navigation Guidance
• Practical Implementation Considerations
27 March 2019
2
Historical Perspective of Missile Guidance
oMissile: Space-traversing unmanned vehicle
Controlling flight path.

oGuided missile: operate above earth

oGuided torpedo: operate under sea

oMissiles: (Utility Type)

surface-to-surface
surface-to-air
air-to-surface
air-to-air.

oMissiles: (System Type)

Tactical
Strategic
• First World War Era

• Firtst attempt to use a pilotless plane to hit target

Took place in the United States during World War I
. Hewitt-Sperry Automatic Airplane made a number of short
test flights proving above idea (1916-17))
• Twenty pilotless aircraft, called Bugs, were produced
and successful test flight (October 1918)
• After World War I some more experiments with Bugs. This project was
dropped in 1925

• Second World War Era

• TG-2 (torpedo) and BG-1 (Missile) as variant of Bug (US, 1941)
• Most advanced German surface-to-surface missiles, the V-1, V-2
• Advancement in development of jet aircraft following the World War II
• Requirement of engagement targets beyond visual range
• Importance of surface-to-air and air-to-air missiles

• Post Second World War Era

• Upper Atmosphere Air Defence (Advents of High Altitude Rockets)

• Requirement of accurate missile guidance and accuracy
• Most important problem of research and development
Basic relevant theory on guidance known since 18th centuryies
Pure pursuit Guidance first applied to weaponn early 1940's (world war II)
Technical means for detecting targets developed
Conrolling guided missile developed.

End of war II, sophisticated 'proportional navigation (PN) ' developed

Theory of PN was first formulated in US (1943)
 Variant of PN were proved in missile (1944 or 1945) by German scientists
Presumably did not PN theory developed developed elsewhere.
PN Nonmilitary applications in space travel, extraterrestrial landing, robotics.
Dawn of control theory development (1930)

Aerospace industry important application(Control / Guidance design).

Nonlinear systems and stability analysis (need of aerospace industry) .

Control experts for many aerospace problems

Modern control (1950s)

Estimation / Observer theory (1962)

Application to Apolo space mission (1962 – 1968)

Optimal control theory development (1962 onward)

Modern Optimal Guidance law

Proportional navigation (PN) analog of proportional controller

(Special case of optimal guidance law for non maneudering target)
 Guidance, Navigation and Control

Guidance: Determine desired path from current location to target (Desired accn)

Navigation: Determine at a given time, vehicle's location, velocity and attitude

Control: Vehicle steering by tracking guidance commands, maintaining stability

Three Phases of Guidance

Boost Mid-Course Terminal

 Air-to-air Engagement

TARGET
TERMINAL
HOMING (Seeker)

FLIGHT VEHICLE
DATA
LINK
LCA

PLATFORM = Mirage2000, Mig29,

SU 30 and LCA

LAUNCH
GUIDANCE = MIDCOURSE INERTIAL (Radar) FROM LCA
TERMINAL HOMING (Seeker)
 TARGET
INTERCEPTION

MISSILE
TRAJECTORY TA
TRA

Akash Missile, (no midcourse inertial guidance)

No INS
Only radar based homing guidance

MISSILE LAUNCHER
GROUND RADAR
 Putting It All Together
Guidance of Long Range Missiles

Target Reflection

ANTENNA
BEAM

LAUNCH
CYCLE BOOST MIDCOURSE
TERMINAL
GUIDANCE
GUIDANCE
PRESS SEPARATE INITIATE INITIATE IMPACT
“LAUNCH SEMIACTIVE ACTIVE
” MODE MODE
 (R,A,E) AS RADAR MEASUREMENT
MISSILE AIRCRAFT

Radar Based Guidance

(Semi Active Mode )

RADAR
Radar Detects a wide variety of low RCS targets
(low flying fighter aircraft, UAVs).
Measurements: target velocity, range,
azimuth, elevation angles
Active Radar Seeker (Active Homing)

Imaging Infra Red Seeker

(Passive Homing)
Missile with Active Radar Seeker
Active Radar Seeker
Different Guidance Schemes
 Missiles
• Unguided
– No course corrections
– Elevation, ballistics, gravity, etc
• Guided
– Control system
– Change direction
 Main Categories of Guidance
1. Line Of Sight (LOS) Guidance

 Beam rider

 Command to Line Of Sight (CLOS)

2. Homing (reacts to target features)

– Active

– Semi-Active

– Passive

3. Pursuit Guidance
 Line Of Sight (LOS) Guidance

27 March 2019 22
27 March 2019 23
TYPICAL MISSILE
TRJECTORY
27 March 2019 26
27
Beam Rider Control Guidance

Older method of
guidance control.

Tracking
Narrow Beam
Guidance
Beam
 PLANER

ADEQUECY OF POINTMASS
MODEL
FOR GUIDANCE
POSITION EQUATIONS
27 March 2019 32
27 March 2019 33
27 March 2019 34
27 March 2019 35
27 March 2019 36
 Beam Rider Guidance

27 March 2019 37
27 March 2019 38
27 March 2019 39
 Commad to Line of Sight (CLOS)

27 March 2019 40
27 March 2019 41
27 March 2019 42
27 March 2019 43
27 March 2019 44
 Homing Guidance Control
Missile has transmitter Three Point Guidance IRR Seeker
and receiver (Missile, Target, Illuminator) Gives target visibility
Two point Guidance (M T) ( M T I) Two Point Guidance (MT)

Reflected Reflected
Waves Waves Target
Radar Characteristic
Seeker

1. Active 2. Semi-Active 3. Passive

Target illumination Target illumination by External Source of energy
(Radio, Heat, Image)
Transmitter and (Radar, Outside) Receiver in missile
Receiver within missile Receiver within missile uses target radiation
Proportional Navigation

Initial
Range
48
27 March 2019 49
27 March 2019 50
27 March 2019 51
27 March 2019 52
27 March 2019 53
27 March 2019 54
 Command Guidance (Proportional Navigation)
Three Point Guidance (Missile, Target, Radar)
Example Akash Missile

27 March 2019
 (R,A,E) AS RADAR MEASUREMENT
MISSILE AIRCRAFT

Radar Based Guidance (3 point

Guidance)

(Semi Active Mode )

RADAR
 Pursuit Guidance (Introduction)

27 March 2019 57
27 March 2019 58
 Example of PN Guidance

x_m y_m velocity theta(deg) (initial values )

0.0 15000.0 500.0 00.0
x_t y_t velocity theta(deg) (initial values )
5000.0 15000.0 300.0 00.0

Tail Chase Engagement

27 March 2019
 5000

4000

3000
r (m)

2000

1000

0
0 5 10 15 20 25
Time (sec)

-100
rdot (m/s)

-200

-300

-400
0 5 10 15 20 25
Time (sec)

27 March 2019
 Missile Latax Vs Time
accn (m/s2) missile 20

0 executed
demanded
-20

-40

-60
0 5 10 15 20 25
Time (sec)
40
executed
accn (m/s2) target

20 demanded

-20

-40
0 5 10 15 20 25
Time (sec)

Target Latax vs time

27 March 2019
 10

 (deg) of LOS -10

-20

-30 LOS Angle Vs Time

-40
0 5 10 15 20 25
Time (sec)

5
 dot (deg/s) of LOS

LOS Rate Vs Time

0

-5
0 5 10 15 20 25
Time (sec)

27 March 2019
 4
x 10
1.55
Missile
target
1.5

1.45

1.4
y (m)

1.35

1.3

1.25

1.2
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000
x (m)

Missile Target Trajectory (Miss Dist = 5 cm)

27 March 2019
 Practical Implementation Considerations (Miss Distance)

27 March 2019 64
 Measurements (Noisy Measurements from Sensor)

Sensors
Radar
Seeker

27 March 2019 65
(R,A,E) AS RADAR MEASUREMENT
MISSILE AIRCRAFT

RADAR
 ESTIMATION THEORY / SYSTEM IDENTIFICATION

Curtsey:
Dr. A.K. Ghosh
Professor & Faculty Incharge
Flight Lab.
IIT, Kanpur – 208016
Ph. (O) = +91-512-2597716
(Fax) = +91-512-2597716
 Block Schematic of Stochastic System Model

Process noise
(turbulence) Measurement
Noise

State Measurement
Inputs Equations Equations
states Outputs

Sensors Sensor model

(calibration factor,
bias error)
 Rudolf E Kalman

•Born: Budapest, Hungary, July 2018

•Alma Matter: Bachelors, Masters (MIT)
•Phd: Colombia University
•Field: Electrical / Systems Engineering
•Institutions:
Stanford University
University of Florida
Swiss Federal Institute of Technology

Passed away on July 2, 2016 (Age 86)

 Part of UF Engineering family for more than 20 years.
Kalman Filter a mathematical recursive algorithm to remove
“noise” from streams of data with increased accuracy.
Revolutionized modern automatic control, communication and
system theories
 Random EKF Estimator
Acceleration

+ x̂
Missile + Predicted State Predicted
Kinematics & Update Measurements
–

Seeker/
radar + +
Noise + Seeker /radar
Measurements

Achieved
Acceleration Autopilot & Commanded Acceleration Guidance
Actuator Law

PURSUER EVADER ENGAGEMENT SIMULATION IN CLOSE LOOP

 1000 50

xdot-error (m/s)
Estimated
xdot (m/s)

500 True
0
0

-500 -50
0 10 20 30 40 50 0 10 20 30 40 50
Time(sec) Time(sec)
500 50

ydot-error (m/s)
ydot (m/s)

0 0
Estimated
True

-500 -50
0 10 20 30 40 50 0 10 20 30 40 50
Time(sec) Time(sec)
200 50
Estimated

zdot-error (m/s)
True
zdot (m/s)

0 0

-200 -50

-400 -100
0 10 20 30 40 50 0 10 20 30 40 50
Time(sec) Time(sec)

Comparison of Estimated And True Velocity (7 ‘g’

Maneuver)
 Active Radar Seeker Data Processing
State Estimation from Noisy Seeker Data
(Range, Range Rate, Gimbal angles, LOS Rates
Application for Terminal Guidance

Active Radar Seeker

Missile with Infrared Seeker
Schematic Diagram of Pursuer-Evader Engagement
Seeker LOS rate (yaw) measurement, estimated and estimation error
27 March 2019 77
 Sarkar A K, Ananthasayanam M R, Srinivasan T, and Kar P K: Comparison of the radar and seeker modes of
78
pursuer guidance, AIAA Journal of Guidance, Control and Dynamics, Vol. 32, No. 6, pp. 1912-1920, (2009).
Pursuer evader trajectory
27 March 2019 80
27 March 2019 81
Comparison of Radar Based and Seeker Based Guidance

Miss Dist = 30 m Miss Dist = 5 m

 Conclusion

• Need of Guidance System

• Classical Guidance Systems
 Beam Rider CLOS Guidance
 Commanded PN Guidance
 PN vs APN (Homing applications)
 Pursuit Guidance (Introduction Only)
 Practical Implementation Considerations

27 March 2019
83
 Other Contributors in present research

•Mr K K Mangrulkar , (Visiting Faculty, DIAT Pune)

• Dr Debasish Ghose (Professor, Aerospace Engg, IISc)

THANK YOU FOR

PATIENT HEARING

27 March 2019 84