Decision Support for Fighter Pilots

1DAT/SENMay 4, 2006

Decision SupportDecision Supportfor Fighter Pilotsfor Fighter Pilots

Lars Rosenberg RandleffLars Rosenberg Randleff

Ph.D. studentPh.D. student

Danish Defence Research Danish Defence Research EstablishmentEstablishment

2DAT/SENMay 4, 2006

Rationale

• Numbers of threats, guidance methods, and countermeasures are increasing• 650 missile systems developed• 200-300 missile systems currently deployed

(http://missile.index.ne.jp)

• Not easy to find the best action• Takes training to do it in time• Solution depends on mission

• “The worlds best pilot as the co-pilot”• A work in progress…

3DAT/SENMay 4, 2006

Challenges

• Lack of information• Both in flight and in development

• Information may be self-contradictory• Onboard systems may be wrong

• Best solution depends on a lot of parameters• Avionics, route, scenario, inventory, …

• Should be found in real-time

4DAT/SENMay 4, 2006

Missile Guidance

Semi-active Radar

Infrared

Electro-Optical

Active Radar

Track-Via-Missile

INS/GPS

Command

Beam Rider

Anti-Radiation

5DAT/SENMay 4, 2006

Scenario

-0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5

x 104

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4x 10

4

6DAT/SENMay 4, 2006

Parameters

α

ρ

7DAT/SENMay 4, 2006

Lethality

-1 0 1 2 3 4 5

x 104

-0.5

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4x 10

4

-1 0 1 2 3 4 5

x 104

-0.5

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4x 10

4

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 5000

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

Scenario Lethality

8DAT/SENMay 4, 2006

Countermeasures

• Jammer• Emits RF radiation• Very “loud”, use

only when needed

• Towed Decoy• A towed jammer• Use once only• Limited resource

• Chaff• Forms a cloud with

a RCS comparable to that of the aircraft

• Limited resource

9DAT/SENMay 4, 2006

Reduction of Lethality (α)

10DAT/SENMay 4, 2006

Reduction of Lethality (ρ)

11DAT/SENMay 4, 2006

An Example

• α = 125°ρ = 80%

• R = Rα∙ Rρ

• RJ,α = 0.80RJ,ρ = 0.50RJ = 0.40

• RD,α = 0.75RD,ρ = 0.80RD = 0.45

• RC,α = 0.05RC,ρ = 0.60RC = 0.03

12DAT/SENMay 4, 2006

Highest Reduction

-0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5

x 104

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

x 104

None

Jammer

Chaff

Decoy

13DAT/SENMay 4, 2006

Constraints

• The towed decoy can be used a limited number of times (~3)

• Chaff can be dispensed a limited number of times (~30)

• No countermeasure should be chosen, if none is needed

14DAT/SENMay 4, 2006

Building a Mathematical Model

tot

iii

iiii

N

iiitot

LS

RRR

MTRLTPL

1

)),,,(1()(

,,

1

n

ttprod

tt

best

n

ttsum

SS

SS

SS

0

0

}{max

15DAT/SENMay 4, 2006

Decision Schedule

Jammer

Decoy

Chaff

16DAT/SENMay 4, 2006

Concluding Remarks

• Is it better to look ahead? How much?

• Can calculations be done fast enough? What should be the timeframe?

• Does uncertainty make a difference?• Scenario• Reductions

17DAT/SENMay 4, 2006

Credits

• Dr. Fred Wright, GTRI• Problem, concept

• Mr. Steen Søndergard, DDRE• Models, numbers

• Dr. Jesper Larsen, IMM/DTU• Mathematical model

18DAT/SENMay 4, 2006

Questions?