A method for evaluating attack advantages of dual aircraft cooperative guidance

Abstract

The application discloses a kind of dual-machine cooperative guidance attack advantage evaluation methods, belong to attack advantage evaluation technical field.The method comprises the following steps: establishing confrontation scene;carrying out confrontation simulation;the far boundary and the near boundary of the dual-machine cooperative attack area under the condition of dual-machine cooperative guidance are obtained by using dichotomy;the far boundary expansion amount and the near boundary reduction amount of the dual-click cooperative attack area compared with single-machine attack area are calculated;the time when both dual-machines meet the guidance condition is determined;the far boundary expansion amount of the attack area, the near boundary reduction amount of the attack area, the time when both dual-machines meet the guidance condition are used as the standard to evaluate the attack advantage of dual-machine cooperative guidance compared with single-machine guidance.The application solves the problem of evaluating the attack advantage of dual-machine cooperative guidance, and effectively reduces the complexity of the problem of evaluating the attack advantage of dual-machine cooperative guidance by taking the attack area expansion effect and the time when both dual-machines meet the guidance condition as the standard, which is convenient for analysis and engineering implementation.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention belongs to the field of attack advantage assessment technology, and more specifically relates to a method for assessing the advantage of dual-machine cooperative guided attacks. Background Technology

[0002] The assessment of the advantages of dual-aircraft coordinated guided attacks refers to evaluating the attack advantages of dual-aircraft coordinated guided operations compared to single-aircraft operations. As one of the important indicators for measuring the effectiveness of dual-aircraft coordinated guided operations, the advantages of dual-aircraft coordinated guided attacks are related to a variety of factors. Therefore, it is particularly important to find a simple and effective way to assess them.

[0003] There is currently little research on the evaluation of the advantages of dual-aircraft coordinated guided attacks. Although most existing evaluations of these advantages use multi-factor comprehensive function analysis, they are all quite complex. This invention aims to evaluate the advantages of dual-aircraft coordinated guided attacks simply and effectively by taking the attack zone expansion effect and the time it takes for both aircraft to meet the guidance conditions as the standard. Summary of the Invention

[0004] The purpose of this invention is to provide a method for evaluating the advantages of dual-machine cooperative guided attacks. This method uses the attack zone expansion effect and the time it takes for both machines to meet the guidance conditions as the standard to simply and effectively evaluate the advantages of dual-machine cooperative guided attacks.

[0005] To achieve the above objectives, the present invention employs the following technical solution: the method comprises:

[0006] Establish adversarial scenarios;

[0007] Conduct adversarial simulations;

[0008] The far and near boundaries of the dual-machine cooperative attack zone under dual-machine cooperative guidance are obtained by using the bisection method, and the time when both machines meet the guidance conditions during the process of obtaining the far and near boundaries is recorded in the simulation.

[0009] Calculate the expansion of the far boundary and the shrinkage of the near boundary of the double-strike cooperative attack zone compared to the single-strike attack zone, and determine the time when both machines meet the guidance conditions;

[0010] The attack advantage of dual-aircraft cooperative guidance compared to single-aircraft guidance is evaluated by using the expansion of the far boundary of the attack zone, the shrinkage of the near boundary of the attack zone, and the time when both aircraft meet the guidance conditions.

[0011] In one approach, the adversarial simulation is based on a motion model of a dual-aircraft formation and a target, with motion state iterations starting from an initial state.

[0012] In one approach, establishing the adversarial scenario includes: setting the initial positions of the local aircraft, friendly aircraft, and target in a dual-aircraft formation, and establishing an inertial coordinate system with the projection of the local aircraft's initial position onto the horizontal plane as the origin. Then the initial position of this machine is The initial position of the friendly machine is The initial position of the target is .

[0013] In one scheme, the bisection method for determining the far and near boundaries of the dual-aircraft cooperative attack zone under dual-aircraft cooperative guidance includes:

[0014] a) Launch missiles from this aircraft; dual-aircraft coordinated attack zone far boundary under dual-aircraft coordinated guidance. and near the boundary ;

[0015] b) A friendly aircraft launches a missile, and a dual-aircraft coordinated attack zone is launched against the far boundary under dual-aircraft coordinated guidance. and near the boundary .

[0016] In one scheme, the time during which both aircraft meet the guidance conditions during the process of determining the far and near boundaries includes:

[0017] a) Dual-machine coordinated attack zone far boundary The corresponding time when both machines meet the guidance conditions ;

[0018] b) Dual-aircraft coordinated attack zone near the boundary The corresponding time when both machines meet the guidance conditions ;

[0019] c) Dual-machine coordinated attack zone far boundary The corresponding time when both machines meet the guidance conditions ;

[0020] d) Dual-machine coordinated attack zone near the boundary The corresponding time when both machines meet the guidance conditions .

[0021] In one approach, calculating the expansion of the far boundary and the contraction of the near boundary of the double-click collaborative attack zone compared to the single-machine attack zone includes:

[0022] a) The far boundary of the single-machine attack zone is The calculation method for the expansion of the far boundary of the double-click collaborative attack zone compared to the single-machine attack zone is as follows: ;

[0023] b) The near-boundary of the single-machine attack zone is The calculation method for the near-boundary reduction of the double-click collaborative attack zone compared to the single-machine attack zone is as follows: .

[0024] In one scheme, the time method for determining that both aircraft meet the guidance conditions is as follows: .

[0025] In one approach, the evaluation of the attack advantages of dual-machine cooperative guidance compared to single-machine guidance includes:

[0026] a) Expansion of the attack zone's far boundary and near-boundary shrinkage Used to measure the strike range advantage of dual-aircraft coordinated guided combat compared to single-aircraft combat;

[0027] b) Time when both aircraft meet guidance conditions It reflects the time allowed for a single aircraft to choose to leave the battlefield or simultaneously perform other attack missions during dual-aircraft coordinated operations, and is used to measure the tactical flexibility advantage of dual-aircraft coordinated guided operations compared to single-aircraft operations.

[0028] Beneficial effects of this invention:

[0029] 1. By taking the attack zone expansion effect and the time when both aircraft meet the guidance conditions as the standard, the advantages of dual-aircraft coordinated guided attacks can be evaluated simply and effectively;

[0030] 2. The advantage assessment process is independent of the type and motion characteristics of the fighter jet and the target, and has good compatibility with different types of fighter jets and targets. It is a dual-aircraft cooperative guided attack advantage assessment method with certain scalability that is easy to analyze and implement in engineering. Attached Figure Description

[0031] Figure 1 This is a flowchart of the attack advantage evaluation process of the method of the present invention.

[0032] Figure 2 This is a diagram showing the effect of attack zone expansion obtained based on the method of this invention in a specific example. Detailed Implementation

[0033] To facilitate understanding of the present invention, a more complete description will be given below with reference to the accompanying drawings. Typical embodiments of the invention are shown in the drawings. However, the invention can be implemented in many different forms and is not limited to the embodiments described herein. Rather, these embodiments are provided so that this disclosure will be thorough and complete.

[0034] Unless otherwise defined, all technical and scientific terms used in this invention have the same meaning as commonly understood by one of ordinary skill in the art to which this invention pertains. The terminology used in this specification is for the purpose of describing particular embodiments only and is not intended to limit the invention. To facilitate understanding, the invention will now be described more fully with reference to the accompanying drawings, which illustrate exemplary embodiments of the invention. However, the invention can be implemented in many different forms and is not limited to the embodiments described herein. Rather, these embodiments are provided to make the disclosure of the invention more thorough and complete.

[0035] The overall concept of this invention is as follows: First, an adversarial scenario is established, setting the initial states of the local aircraft, friendly aircraft, and target in a dual-aircraft formation; second, adversarial simulation is conducted, using the bisection method to determine the far and near boundaries of the dual-aircraft cooperative attack zone under dual-aircraft cooperative guidance, and recording the time during which both aircraft meet the guidance conditions while determining the far and near boundaries; third, the expansion of the far boundary and the reduction of the near boundary of the dual-aircraft cooperative attack zone compared to the single-aircraft attack zone are calculated to determine the time during which both aircraft meet the guidance conditions; finally, the expansion of the far boundary of the attack zone, the reduction of the near boundary of the attack zone, and the time during which both aircraft meet the guidance conditions are used as standards to evaluate the attack advantages of dual-aircraft cooperative guidance compared to single-aircraft guidance.

[0036] like Figure 1 As shown, a method for evaluating the advantages of a dual-machine cooperative guided attack includes the following steps:

[0037] Step 1: Establish the adversarial scenario: Set the initial positions of the local aircraft, friendly aircraft, and target in the dual-aircraft formation, and establish an inertial coordinate system with the projection of the local aircraft's initial position on the horizontal plane as the origin. Then the initial position of this machine is The initial position of the friendly machine is The initial position of the target is ;

[0038] Step 2: Conduct adversarial simulation: Based on the motion model of the dual-aircraft formation and the target, the motion state is iterated from the initial state. The target's motion trajectory can be defined according to requirements, and the dual-aircraft formation tracks the target.

[0039] Step 3: Use the bisection method to determine the far and near boundaries of the dual-aircraft cooperative attack zone under dual-aircraft cooperative guidance conditions, and record the time during the simulation when both aircraft meet the guidance conditions while determining the far and near boundaries:

[0040] a) Launch missiles from the same aircraft and use the bisection method to solve for the far boundary of the dual-aircraft cooperative attack zone under dual-aircraft cooperative guidance. and near the boundary ;

[0041] b) When a friendly aircraft launches a missile, the far boundary of the dual-aircraft cooperative attack zone under dual-aircraft cooperative guidance is solved using the bisection method. and near the boundary ;

[0042] c) Record the solution for the far boundary of the dual-machine cooperative attack zone. The time during which both machines meet the guidance conditions during the process ;

[0043] d) Record the solution for the near-boundary of the dual-machine cooperative attack zone. The time during which both machines meet the guidance conditions during the process ;

[0044] e) Record the solution for the far boundary of the dual-machine cooperative attack zone. The time during which both machines meet the guidance conditions during the process ;

[0045] f) Record the solution for the near-boundary of the dual-machine cooperative attack zone. The time during which both machines meet the guidance conditions during the process .

[0046] Step 4: Calculate the expansion of the far boundary and the contraction of the near boundary of the double-target cooperative attack zone compared to the single-target attack zone, and determine the time when both targets meet the guidance conditions.

[0047] a) The far boundary of the single-machine attack zone is The calculation method for the expansion of the far boundary of the double-click collaborative attack zone compared to the single-machine attack zone is as follows: ;

[0048] b) The near-boundary of the single-machine attack zone is The calculation method for the near-boundary reduction of the double-click collaborative attack zone compared to the single-machine attack zone is as follows: ;

[0049] c) The specific method for determining the time when both aircraft meet the guidance conditions. .

[0050] Step 5: Use the expansion of the attack zone's far boundary, the contraction of the attack zone's near boundary, and the time it takes for both aircraft to meet guidance conditions as standards to evaluate the attack advantages of dual-aircraft cooperative guidance compared to single-aircraft guidance:

[0051] a) Expansion of the attack zone's far boundary and near-boundary shrinkage This reflects the improvement in effective strike range of dual-aircraft coordinated operations compared to single-aircraft operations, and is used to measure the strike range advantage of dual-aircraft coordinated guided operations compared to single-aircraft operations;

[0052] b) Time when both aircraft meet guidance conditions This reflects the time allowed during dual-aircraft coordinated operations when the aircraft can choose to disengage from the battlefield or simultaneously perform other attack missions. It is used to measure the tactical flexibility advantage of dual-aircraft coordinated guided operations compared to single-aircraft operations.

[0053] After the above steps Figure 2 The diagram illustrates the expansion of the far boundary of the attack zone and the contraction of the near boundary of the attack zone under dual-machine cooperative guidance, obtained using the method of this invention in a specific example. In this example, the initial position of the machine is... The initial position of the friendly machine is The initial position of the target is The results of the dual-machine cooperative guidance obtained based on the method of this invention, compared with the single-machine guidance, show the following: [Results omitted for brevity] Figure 2 As shown, this invention solves the problem of evaluating the advantages of dual-machine cooperative guided attacks.

[0054] Those skilled in the art will understand that all or part of the processes in the above embodiments can be implemented by a computer program instructing related hardware. The program can be stored in a computer-readable storage medium, and when executed, it can include the processes of the embodiments of the above methods. The storage medium can be a magnetic disk, optical disk, read-only memory (ROM), or random access memory (RAM), etc.

[0055] It should be understood that the above detailed description of the technical solutions of the present invention with reference to preferred embodiments is illustrative and not restrictive. Those skilled in the art can modify the technical solutions described in the embodiments or make equivalent substitutions for some of the technical features based on reading this specification; however, these modifications or substitutions do not cause the essence of the corresponding technical solutions to depart from the spirit and scope of the technical solutions of the embodiments of the present invention.

Claims

1. A method for evaluating the advantages of dual-machine cooperative guided attacks, characterized in that: The method includes: Establish adversarial scenarios; Conduct adversarial simulations; The far and near boundaries of the dual-machine cooperative attack zone under dual-machine cooperative guidance are obtained by using the bisection method, and the time when both machines meet the guidance conditions during the process of obtaining the far and near boundaries is recorded in the simulation. Calculate the expansion of the far boundary and the shrinkage of the near boundary of the dual-aircraft cooperative attack zone compared to the single-aircraft attack zone, and determine the time when both aircraft meet the guidance conditions. The attack advantage of dual-machine cooperative guidance compared to single-machine guidance is evaluated by using the expansion of the far boundary of the attack zone, the shrinkage of the near boundary of the attack zone, and the time when both machines meet the guidance conditions. The establishment of the adversarial scenario includes: setting the initial positions of the local aircraft, friendly aircraft, and target in a dual-aircraft formation, and establishing an inertial coordinate system with the projection of the local aircraft's initial position onto the horizontal plane as the origin. Then the initial position of this machine is The initial position of the friendly machine is The initial position of the target is ; The bisection method described above for determining the far and near boundaries of the dual-machine cooperative attack zone under dual-machine cooperative guidance includes: a) Launch missiles from this aircraft; dual-aircraft coordinated attack zone far boundary under dual-aircraft coordinated guidance. and near the boundary ; b) A friendly aircraft launches a missile, and a dual-aircraft coordinated attack zone is launched against the far boundary under dual-aircraft coordinated guidance. and near the boundary ; The time during which both aircraft meet the guidance conditions while determining the far and near boundaries includes: a) Dual-machine coordinated attack zone far boundary The corresponding time when both machines meet the guidance conditions ; b) Dual-aircraft coordinated attack zone near the boundary The corresponding time when both machines meet the guidance conditions ; c) Dual-machine coordinated attack zone far boundary The corresponding time when both machines meet the guidance conditions ; d) Dual-machine coordinated attack zone near the boundary The corresponding time when both machines meet the guidance conditions ; The calculation of the expansion of the far boundary and the shrinkage of the near boundary of the dual-machine cooperative attack zone compared to the single-machine attack zone includes: a) The far boundary of the single-machine attack zone is The calculation method for the expansion of the far boundary of the dual-machine collaborative attack zone compared to the single-machine attack zone is as follows: ; The near-boundary of the single-machine attack zone is The calculation method for the near-boundary reduction of the dual-machine collaborative attack zone compared to the single-machine attack zone is as follows: ; The time method for determining that both aircraft meet the guidance conditions is as follows: ; The aforementioned evaluation of the attack advantages of dual-machine cooperative guidance compared to single-machine guidance includes: a) Expansion of the attack zone's far boundary and near-boundary shrinkage Used to measure the strike range advantage of dual-aircraft coordinated guided combat compared to single-aircraft combat; Time when both aircraft meet guidance conditions It reflects the time allowed for a single aircraft to choose to leave the battlefield or simultaneously perform other attack missions during dual-aircraft coordinated operations, and is used to measure the tactical flexibility advantage of dual-aircraft coordinated guided operations compared to single-aircraft operations.

2. The method for evaluating the advantages of a dual-machine cooperative guided attack according to claim 1, characterized in that: The aforementioned adversarial simulation is based on the motion model of a dual-aircraft formation and a target, and the motion state is iterated starting from the initial state.

Images