Double-computer cooperative guidance attack advantage evaluation method

Abstract

The invention discloses a dual-computer cooperative guidance attack advantage evaluation method, and belongs to the technical field of attack advantage evaluation. A confrontation scene is established. And carrying out confrontation simulation. And solving a far boundary and a near boundary of a dual-machine cooperative attack area under the dual-machine cooperative guidance condition by using a dichotomy method. The far boundary expansion amount and the near boundary reduction amount of the double-click cooperative attack area compared with the single-machine attack area are calculated, and the time when the double machines meet the guidance conditions is determined. And the attack advantage of double-unit cooperative guidance compared with single-unit guidance is evaluated by taking the expansion amount of the far boundary of the attack area, the reduction amount of the near boundary of the attack area and the time when the double units meet the guidance conditions as standards. According to the method, the problem of evaluating the advantage of the dual-computer cooperative guidance attack is solved, the expansion effect of the attack area and the time when the dual computers jointly meet guidance conditions are regarded as standards, the complexity of evaluating the advantage of the dual-computer cooperative guidance attack is effectively reduced, and analysis and engineering implementation are facilitated.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention belongs to the technical field of attack advantage evaluation, and more specifically relates to a method for evaluating the attack advantage of dual-aircraft cooperative guidance. Background Art

[0002] Evaluating the attack advantage of dual-aircraft cooperative guidance refers to evaluating the attack advantage of dual-aircraft formation cooperative guidance compared with single-aircraft operation. As one of the important indicators for measuring the combat effectiveness of dual-aircraft cooperative guidance, the attack advantage of dual-aircraft cooperative guidance is related to multiple factors. Therefore, how to simply and effectively evaluate it becomes particularly important.

[0003] Currently, there is little research on evaluating the attack advantage of dual-aircraft cooperative guidance. Although most of the existing related advantage evaluations adopt the method of multi-factor comprehensive function analysis, they are all relatively complex. The present invention aims to simply and effectively evaluate the attack advantage of dual-aircraft cooperative guidance by regarding the expansion effect of the attack area and the time when both dual-aircraft meet the guidance conditions as criteria. Summary of the Invention

[0004] The purpose of the present invention is to provide a method for evaluating the attack advantage of dual-aircraft cooperative guidance, which simply and effectively evaluates the attack advantage of dual-aircraft cooperative guidance by regarding the expansion effect of the attack area and the time when both dual-aircraft meet the guidance conditions as criteria.

[0005] To achieve the above purpose, the present invention is implemented by adopting the following technical solutions: The method includes: Establish an adversarial scenario; Conduct adversarial simulation; Use the bisection method to obtain the far boundary and near boundary of the dual-aircraft cooperative attack area under the condition of dual-aircraft cooperative guidance, and record the time when both dual-aircraft meet the guidance conditions during the process of obtaining the far boundary and near boundary during the simulation; Calculate the expansion amount of the far boundary and the reduction amount of the near boundary of the dual-aircraft cooperative attack area compared with the single-aircraft attack area, and determine the time when both dual-aircraft meet the guidance conditions; Use the expansion amount of the far boundary of the attack area, the reduction amount of the near boundary of the attack area, and the time when both dual-aircraft meet the guidance conditions as criteria to evaluate the attack advantage of dual-aircraft cooperative guidance compared with single-aircraft guidance.

[0006] In one solution, the conduct of the adversarial simulation is based on the motion models of the dual-aircraft formation and the target, and the motion state iteration starts from the initial state.

[0007] In one solution, the establishment of the adversarial scenario includes: setting the initial postures of the own aircraft, the friendly aircraft, and the target in the dual-aircraft formation, and establishing an inertial coordinate system with the projection of the initial position of the own aircraft on the horizontal plane as the origin , then the initial position of the own aircraft is , and the initial position of the friendly aircraft is , the initial position of the target is .

[0008] In one solution, the dichotomy method for obtaining the far boundary and the near boundary of the dual - aircraft cooperative attack area in the case of dual - aircraft cooperative guidance includes: a) The local aircraft launches a missile, and the far boundary of the dual - aircraft cooperative attack area under dual - aircraft cooperative guidance and the near boundary ; b) The friendly aircraft launches a missile, and the far boundary of the dual - aircraft cooperative attack area under dual - aircraft cooperative guidance and the near boundary .

[0009] In one solution, the recording of the time when both aircraft meet the guidance conditions during the process of obtaining the far boundary and the near boundary includes: a) The time when both aircraft meet the guidance conditions corresponding to the far boundary of the dual - aircraft cooperative attack area ; ; b) The time when both aircraft meet the guidance conditions corresponding to the near boundary of the dual - aircraft cooperative attack area ; ; c) The time when both aircraft meet the guidance conditions corresponding to the far boundary of the dual - aircraft cooperative attack area ; ; d) The time when both aircraft meet the guidance conditions corresponding to the near boundary of the dual - aircraft cooperative attack area ; .

[0010] In one solution, the calculation of the expansion amount of the far boundary and the reduction amount of the near boundary of the double - aircraft cooperative attack area compared with the single - aircraft attack area includes: a) The far boundary of the single - aircraft attack area is , and the calculation method of the expansion amount of the far boundary of the double - aircraft cooperative attack area compared with the single - aircraft attack area is ; b) The near boundary of the single - aircraft attack area is , and the calculation method of the reduction amount of the near boundary of the double - aircraft cooperative attack area compared with the single - aircraft attack area is .

[0011] In one solution, the method for determining the time when both aircraft meet the guidance conditions is .

[0012] In one solution, the evaluation of the attack advantage of dual - aircraft cooperative guidance compared with single - aircraft guidance includes: a) The expansion amount of the far boundary of the attack area and the reduction amount of the near boundary Used to measure the strike range advantage of dual - aircraft cooperative guidance operation compared to single - aircraft operation; b) The time when both aircraft meet the guidance conditions It reflects the allowed time for the local aircraft to choose to break away from the battlefield or perform other attack tasks simultaneously during the dual - aircraft cooperative operation, and is used to measure the tactical flexibility advantage of dual - aircraft cooperative guidance operation compared to single - aircraft operation.

[0013] Advantages of the present invention: 1. Regarding the attack area expansion effect and the time when both aircraft meet the guidance conditions as criteria, simply and effectively evaluate the advantages of dual - aircraft cooperative guidance attack; 2. The advantage evaluation process is independent of the types and motion characteristics of the fighter jets and targets, has good compatibility with different types of fighter jets and targets, and is a method for evaluating the advantages of dual - aircraft cooperative guidance attack that is easy to analyze and implement in engineering with certain scalability. Description of the drawings

[0014] Figure 1 It is the flow chart for evaluating the attack advantages of the method of the present invention.

[0015] Figure 2 It is the effect diagram of the attack area expansion obtained based on the method of the present invention in a specific example. Detailed implementation manners

[0016] For the convenience of understanding the present invention, the present invention will be described more comprehensively below with reference to the relevant drawings. The typical embodiments of the present invention are shown in the drawings. However, the present invention can be implemented in many different forms and is not limited to the embodiments described herein. On the contrary, the purpose of providing these embodiments is to make the disclosure of the present invention more thorough and comprehensive.

[0017] Unless otherwise defined, all technical and scientific terms used in the present invention have the same meaning as commonly understood by those skilled in the technical field to which the present invention belongs. The terms used in the description of the present invention in this specification are only for the purpose of describing specific embodiments and are not intended to limit the present invention. For the convenience of understanding the present invention, the present invention will be described more comprehensively below with reference to the relevant drawings. The typical embodiments of the present invention are shown in the drawings. However, the present invention can be implemented in many different forms and is not limited to the embodiments described herein. On the contrary, the purpose of providing these embodiments is to make the disclosure of the present invention more thorough and comprehensive.

[0018] The general concept of the present invention is as follows: First, an adversarial scenario is established, and the initial postures of the own aircraft, the friendly aircraft, and the target in the two-aircraft formation are set; second, an adversarial simulation is carried out, and the bisection method is used to obtain the far boundary and the near boundary of the two-aircraft cooperative attack area under the condition of two-aircraft cooperative guidance, and the time when both aircraft meet the guidance conditions is recorded during the simulation process; third, the expansion amount of the far boundary and the reduction amount of the near boundary of the two-aircraft cooperative attack area compared with the single-aircraft attack area are calculated, and the time when both aircraft meet the guidance conditions is determined; finally, the expansion amount of the far boundary of the attack area, the reduction amount of the near boundary of the attack area, and the time when both aircraft meet the guidance conditions are used as criteria to evaluate the attack advantage of two-aircraft cooperative guidance compared with single-aircraft guidance.

[0019] As Figure 1 shown, a method for evaluating the attack advantage of two-aircraft cooperative guidance includes the following steps: Step 1: Establish an adversarial scenario: Set the initial postures of the own aircraft, the friendly aircraft, and the target in the two-aircraft formation, and establish an inertial coordinate system with the projection of the initial position of the own aircraft on the horizontal plane as the origin , then the initial position of the own aircraft is , the initial position of the friendly aircraft is , and the initial position of the target is ; Step 2: Conduct an adversarial simulation: Based on the motion models of the two-aircraft formation and the target, start iterative motion state from the initial state. The target can define the motion trajectory according to requirements, and the two-aircraft formation tracks the target.

[0020] Step 3: Use the bisection method to obtain the far boundary and the near boundary of the two-aircraft cooperative attack area under the condition of two-aircraft cooperative guidance, and record the time when both aircraft meet the guidance conditions during the process of obtaining the far boundary and the near boundary in the simulation process: a) The own aircraft launches a missile, and uses the bisection method to solve the far boundary and the near boundary of the two-aircraft cooperative attack area under two-aircraft cooperative guidance; b) The friendly aircraft launches a missile, and uses the bisection method to solve the far boundary and the near boundary of the two-aircraft cooperative attack area under two-aircraft cooperative guidance; c) Record the time when both aircraft meet the guidance conditions corresponding to the process of solving the far boundary of the two-aircraft cooperative attack area; d) Record the time when both aircraft meet the guidance conditions corresponding to the process of solving the near boundary of the two-aircraft cooperative attack area; e) Record the time when both aircraft meet the guidance conditions corresponding to the process of solving the far boundary of the two-aircraft cooperative attack area; f) Record the time when both aircraft meet the guidance conditions during the process of solving the near boundary of the two-aircraft cooperative attack area

[0021] Step 4: Calculate the increase in the far boundary and the decrease in the near boundary of the two-aircraft cooperative attack area compared to the single-aircraft attack area, and determine the time when both aircraft meet the guidance conditions: a) The far boundary of the single-aircraft attack area is , and the calculation method for the increase in the far boundary of the two-aircraft cooperative attack area compared to the single-aircraft attack area is ; b) The near boundary of the single-aircraft attack area is , and the calculation method for the decrease in the near boundary of the two-aircraft cooperative attack area compared to the single-aircraft attack area is ; c) The specific determination method for the time when both aircraft meet the guidance conditions is

[0022] Step 5: Use the increase in the far boundary of the attack area, the decrease in the near boundary of the attack area, and the time when both aircraft meet the guidance conditions as criteria to evaluate the attack advantage of two-aircraft cooperative guidance compared to single-aircraft guidance: a) The increase in the far boundary of the attack area and the decrease in the near boundary reflect the improvement effect of two-aircraft cooperative combat compared to single-aircraft combat in the effective strike range, and are used to measure the strike range advantage of two-aircraft cooperative guidance combat compared to single-aircraft combat; b) The time when both aircraft meet the guidance conditions reflects the allowed time for the aircraft to choose to leave the battlefield or perform other attack tasks simultaneously during the two-aircraft cooperative combat process, and is used to measure the tactical flexibility advantage of two-aircraft cooperative guidance combat compared to single-aircraft combat.

[0023] After the above steps, Figure 2 the result diagrams of the increase in the far boundary of the attack area and the decrease in the near boundary of the attack area obtained by the two-aircraft cooperative guidance method based on the present invention in a specific example are shown. In this example, the initial position of the aircraft is , the initial position of the friendly aircraft is , and the initial position of the target is . The results of the increase in the far boundary of the attack area and the decrease in the near boundary of the attack area obtained by the two-aircraft cooperative guidance method based on the present invention compared to the single-aircraft are as shown in Figure 2 . It can be seen that the present invention solves the problem of evaluating the attack advantage of two-aircraft cooperative guidance.

[0024] ​​​Those of ordinary skill in the art can understand that all or part of the processes in the methods of the above embodiments can be completed by instructing relevant hardware through a computer program. The program can be stored in a computer-readable storage medium. When the program is executed, it can include the processes of the embodiments of the above various methods. Among them, the storage medium can be a magnetic disk, an optical disk, a read-only memory (ROM), a random access memory (RAM), or the like.

[0025] It should be understood that the detailed description of the technical solutions of the present invention with the aid of the preferred embodiments is illustrative rather than restrictive. Those of ordinary skill in the art can modify the technical solutions recorded in each embodiment on the basis of reading the specification of the present invention, or perform equivalent replacements on some of the technical features; and these modifications or replacements do not cause the essence of the corresponding technical solutions to deviate from the spirit and scope of the technical solutions of each embodiment of the present invention.

Claims

1. A dual-aircraft coordinated guided attack advantage assessment method, characterized by: The method includes: Establish confrontation scenarios; Conduct adversarial simulations; The dichotomy method is used to obtain the far boundary and near boundary of the dual-aircraft coordinated attack area under the dual-aircraft coordinated guidance, and the time when both aircrafts meet the guidance conditions in the process of obtaining the far boundary and the near boundary is recorded during the simulation process; Calculate the expansion of the far boundary and the reduction of the near boundary of the double-shot coordinated attack area compared with the single-shot attack area, and determine the time when both aircrafts meet the guidance conditions; The expansion of the far boundary of the attack area, the reduction of the near boundary of the attack area, and the time when both aircraft meet the guidance conditions are used as standards to evaluate the attack advantage of dual-aircraft collaborative guidance compared to single-aircraft guidance.

2. The dual-aircraft coordinated guided attack advantage assessment method according to claim 1 is characterized in that: The confrontation simulation is based on the motion model of the two-aircraft formation and the target, and the motion state is iterated starting from the initial state.

3. The dual-machine coordinated guided attack advantage assessment method according to claim 1 is characterized in that: The establishment of the confrontation scenario includes: setting the initial situation of the aircraft, the friendly aircraft and the target in the two-aircraft formation, establishing an inertial coordinate system with the projection of the initial position of the aircraft on the horizontal plane as the origin , then the initial position of the machine is , the initial position of the friendly aircraft is , the initial position of the target is .

4. The dual-machine coordinated guided attack advantage assessment method according to claim 1 is characterized in that: The dichotomy method for obtaining the far boundary and near boundary of the dual-aircraft coordinated attack area under the dual-aircraft coordinated guidance condition includes: a) The aircraft launches a missile, and the two aircraft cooperate under the guidance of the two aircraft to attack the far edge of the zone and near the border ; b) A friendly aircraft launches a missile, and the two aircraft cooperate under the guidance of the two aircraft to attack the far edge of the zone and near the border .

5. The dual-machine coordinated guided attack advantage assessment method according to claim 1 is characterized in that: The recording of the time when both aircrafts meet the guidance conditions during the process of obtaining the far boundary and the near boundary includes: a) Far edge of the dual-aircraft coordinated attack zone The time when both aircrafts meet the guidance conditions ; b) Near the boundary of the dual-aircraft coordinated attack zone The time when both aircrafts meet the guidance conditions ; c) The far edge of the dual-aircraft coordinated attack zone The time when both aircrafts meet the guidance conditions ; d) The two-aircraft coordinated attack zone near the border The time when both aircrafts meet the guidance conditions .

6. A dual-machine coordinated guided attack advantage assessment method according to claim 1, characterized in that: The calculation of the far boundary expansion amount and near boundary reduction amount of the double-click coordinated attack area compared with the single-machine attack area includes: a) The far boundary of the single-machine attack zone is The calculation method of the expansion of the far boundary of the double-click coordinated attack area compared to the single-machine attack area is as follows: ; b) The single-machine attack zone near the boundary is The calculation method of the reduction of the near boundary of the double-click coordinated attack area compared to the single-machine attack area is as follows: .

7. The dual-aircraft coordinated guided attack advantage assessment method according to claim 1 is characterized in that: The method for determining the time when both aircrafts meet the guidance conditions is as follows: .

8. The dual-aircraft coordinated guided attack advantage assessment method according to claim 1 is characterized by: The evaluation of the attack advantages of dual-machine coordinated guidance compared to single-machine guidance includes: a) Expansion of the far boundary of the attack zone and near-boundary reduction It is used to measure the strike range advantage of dual-aircraft coordinated guided combat compared to single-aircraft combat; b) The time when both aircraft meet the guidance conditions It reflects the time allowed for one aircraft to choose to leave the battlefield or perform other attack tasks at the same time during dual-aircraft coordinated combat. It is used to measure the tactical flexibility advantage of dual-aircraft coordinated guided combat compared to single-aircraft combat.

Images