I

Defence Scielx:e JoW1lal, Vo147~ No 3, July 1997. W. 317-326

~ 1997, DESIDOC
I

Simulation

.of Fighter

Aircraft

Performance
p .S.
Aeronautical

Development

Weapon

Syste~s

for

Design

&

Evaluation

Subramanyam
Agency,

Ban~alore-560

017

ABSTRACT
Simulation fonns an ~ssential toel in the system design a 00 perfonnance evaluation of fighter
aircraft .JIeapon systems. The various guidance strategies used for weapons like guns. missiles. bombs
in the air-to-air or air-to-giound
missions. for aiding the pilot for an effective delivery have been
studied through extensive 4ff-Iine and pilot-in-loop
simulation. The pilot workload analysis carried
out in tlie high fidelity cockpit simulator at the Aeronautical
Development Agency .Bangalore.
provides the system designer an effective means to tune the various subsystems for better perfonnance.
The paper focuses on all these aspects to bring out the importance
aircraft weapon systein design.

of simulation

in the overall fighter

I

mission, the pilot plays a pivotal tole. This means

NOMEN,cLATURE

design .of a complex

A.

Leadjangle

vector

Va
Vm

LCA true airspeed

I
Bullet muzzle vellocity

VI

Target velocity

Present ~ange to target

Rf

Bullet

(I)

Line of sigl\t angular

To

Initial

Tf

Time df fight

machine

and

system corlsisting

man-machine

of man,

interface.

Hence,

modelling and simulation are essential to carry out

the

vect~r

design

of

such

weapon

systems

and

subsequently their performance evaluat~<?nthrough

pilot-in-loop

studies.

d\stance travelled
rate

time

This

paper

systelm of a fighter
(pilot-in-loop)

of bullet

dV/dt Target ac~eleration

vqctor

describes

the ~esign
aircraft

the

aircraft.

simulation

Off-line

weapon

systems
models,

weapon

and real-time

studies' which are used in

and performance

Mathematical

typical

evaluation
of fighter
I
are brought
out.

block

diagrams

and

I.
numerical

techniques

touched upon briefly.

used

in

simulation

Computation

of the errors of

a weapon system in terms of its subsystem

discussed
simullllion
Agency

for
III
(ADA)

a
Ihe

particular

case.

Acronlluliclll

used in the design

are

errors is

Pilot-in-loop
Development
and evaluation

of weapon systems --is Idescribed.

ROCdved
03 January1991
317

DFF SO J, VOL 47, NO 3, JULY 1997

2.

MATIIEMATICAL
M()J)I~LS,
NUMERICAL
TECIINIQUES
NATURE
OF SIMULATION

2.1 Mathematical

model

by

like

off-line

simulation,
pilot-in-loop
real-time simylation,
sensitivity analysis, etc. Simulation of weapon
systems involves the model of sensors, control and
guidance computation sys.tems, data latencies,
display symbol dynamics,
etc. In addition,
modeJIing the pilot for off-line analysis is also
important.
2.2

Numerical

benchmark

tor

the

rcal-time

simulation.!

t2.3.2
PiJot-in-,Loop ReaJ-1Ime Simulation
f
l)ifol-in-loop
rcal-time simulation, is used for

Models

requirements

pilot-in-loop

Mathematical
models form the base of
simulation.
The complexity
and structure of
mathematical models are to be decided upon based
on the purpose of simulation. The mod'els are
influenced

is

&

evaluating
the pilot-vehicle
here is on pilol
workload

interface.
Emphasis
analysis
during
the
I
mission, related to weapon delivery. The severity
of pilot
workloa~
adversely
irfluences
the
performanc,
of the weapon system. The pilot
workload
i~ influenced
by the operations
of the
IPilot

in the cockpit

and dynal'nics

of the weapon

sy~tem. The reaction of the pilot to\a threat scenario

,and the tim'e taken for action to m~et the threat are
t
o
ensured through pilot-;n-loop
simulation.
With the
multi~le roles the fighier aircraft have to perform,
feedback of pilot worklo~d analysis to the overall
system design is mandatoJ-y for efficient
delivery
of the weapon system. Hence, th~ simulation

Techniques

Selection bf appropriate numerical techniques

is also very ~mportant. Weapon systems being
dynamic in nature demand solution of non-linear

demands

differential equations which have to be solved

simultaneously. The time constants of various
elements of the system may bel widely varying. In
such situations', the accuracy of solution and the
available computational time influence the method
of solution, selection of different integration step

3.

sizes, etc.

a high fidelity

cockpit

envirpnment

weapon system dynamicsl.

I
FIGHTER

,
WEAPO~

AIRCRAFT

SIMULATION

SYSTEM
I

3.1 DescriptiTn
To suppo~t the pilot in making an effective
delivery of th~ weapons, the 'aircraft is equipped
with various selnsors like radars, inertial navigation
. d uta sensors, I
'
systems,
air
ra d IO
a tlmeters,
.,
aser
I

2.3 System Design

System design and performance evaluhtion of
fighter weapon system are carried out through two
modes of simulation.
2.3.1

Off-Line

Simulation

, r
,
Off-line
simulation
is normally
used during
the critical design phase wherein accuracy of the
results

and

sensitivity

analysis

assume

prime

importance. Mathematical
models which form the
backbone of simulation,
accommodate most of the
parameters
which
influence
the system.
This
analysis is augmented by including the pilot model
and evaluating the performance of the design. The
off-line
318

simulation

model

along

with

the

pilot

and

rangers, Infrared's~arch
and track sys,em, etc. The
measurements and the processed outputs from these
units are acquired by the mission computer and
,
processed to generate the cockpit display symbols
I
for steering the aircraft
and commands
to the
weapon system for preparation
and delivery. The
pilot
steers t,he aircraft
on the basis of these
symbols, makes decisions to deliver the weapon on
the basis of the information
provided to him on
,
various cockpit displays and fi,nally commands the
release

of

weapon.

weapon

system is a pilot-in-~oop

system which

at fhe

correct

has to be designed

dynamic
r~sponses acceptable
typical block diagram iof fighter
shown in Fig. r .

instant.

feedback

The

control

for accuracy

and

to the pilot.
A
weapon system is

i SUBRAMANYAM

STORES

: SIMULA110N

AIRCRAFf

WFAPON

SYSTEMS

WEAPON FUNCTIONS
COMPUTERS

MANAGEMENT

SYSTEM

SENSORS
.RADARS

FIGHTER- TARGET

.SAFETY

AIR-TO-AIR MISSION
C~OSE COMBAT
MISSILE BEYOND
VISUAL RANGE,
MISSILES, GUNS

.SEQUENCING

WEAPON

OF FIGHTER

RELEASE
SYSTEM

.LASER

RELATIVE

RANGER

.INS

KINEMATICS

.RADIO

AlTIMETER

.INFRARED

SENSOR

AIR- TO-GROUND
MISSION
BOMBS, GUNS,

.GUNS

ROCKETS,MI~SILES
AIR-TO-SEA MISSION
MISSILES'

.ROCKETS
.MISSILES
.BOMBS

COCKPIT

DISPLAYS

.HUD

PILOT,

TARGET

.MFD'S

STEERING

,AIRCRAFT

FLIGHT

FLIGHTo

Figure

3.2

Air-to-A

I. Block

diagram

or fighter

ir M ission

aircrar~

which

weapon

system

are'released

from

'the

aircraft

at a specified

time inter,:,al between ~hem, The CfTL

3.2.1

Gunnery

The
problem

connecting

gen~ral
is

to

air-to-,air

fire

gunnery

projectiles
I

at

fire

a moving

a fixed

number

is a line

of blJl11et positions

corresponding to a set of predetermined bullet

flight times (Fig, 2(a. The trace ofbullet.points is

control
target

from a moving platform' (like the LCA) so las to

score hits on the target. The ,un fire c6ntrol system

mechanised in HUD. These positions are displayed

as a synthetic trajectory that enables the pilot to

provides the pilCj>t with head-1,1p display (HVD) to

steer the aircraft and fire the gun at the cCj>rrecttime. ,

observe the relationship

1\vo popular

me\hods

of gun fire control

systebs

using b\Jllet ballistics taking into consideration the

\
Contin~ous

Computatiqn

of

TrAcer

aircraft velocities, body rates, normal acceleration,

Line

etc.

Concept

A snapshoot giunsight mo~e is incorporated,

that the gun

can

be used

situations

1n which

transient

target

Continuous

there

trucking

Computation'
.,

conccpt (Fig.

and the target as if he had been firing

continuously. The bullet positions are computed by

are described here. 1

3.2.1.1

bullet

between the path of the

tor

highl.y

are

relatively

dynamic

opportunities.
of

Tracer

Line

2) compu~es. positions

so

short
Thel
(CCTL)

of

bullets

Real-time
solving

displaying
animation
periodicity

computation

non-linear

of bullet

differential

the tri1CCr li'ne on HOD

is

nol

at which

out. Therefore,

positions

equations

by
for

Vr'ith smooth

feasible
because
of high
I
these tasks have to be carried

the focus is on developing

empirical
3}9

DFJ" sa

'to.
Ii'

t1

t2
I

J, VOL 47, NO 3, JULY 1997

tJ
-I

~j
\

,..\~c~~~

~C\O~'(
GU~
-~

HORIZON
.!--

SHELL

--8!SHELL

t1

1 --1-

--

SHELL

~
1--

t2

t'J
,

to:

ORIGIN OF COMPUTATIONS, FICTITIOUS

SHELL 1 FIRING TIME
t 1 = t~+
At:
FICTITIOUS SHELL 2,3
t2 = tb+ 2At : FIRING TIMES
tJ = tb+ 3At : FICTITIOUS SHELL 4

A,B,C

: PROJECTIONS
OF SHELL 1 ,2,3
POSITIONS
IN AIRCRAFT
SYMMETRY PLANE AT TIME tJ I

FIRING TIME

~.B~C1 :

Figure

2. Tracer

line generation

PROJECTIONS
OF SHELL
, .2.3 POSITION~
IN THE
PLANE PERPENblCULAR
TO
AIRCRAFT SYMMETRY PLANE
AT, tJ I

principle

relations

which

enable faster computations

of

the correct

time.

bullet positions to generate the guidance cues on

evolved

the

HUD and assist in issuing the firing commands at

extensive

320

on

The empitical

basis

of

the

results

relationships
obtained

are
from

off-line

simula,tion

,studies.

The

~
TRAJECTORY

GR~
DROP

Figure 3. LCOS solution polygon

analysis.

DFF sa J, VOL 47, NO 3, JULY 1997

simplified

case

encounters,

lead angle computation

evolved.
cvllllllllcd
fidelity

of

planar

head-on/tail

chase
,

algorithms

are

These algorithms
will be subsequently
ill l)il()I-ill-I()op
Nillllll,llioll
Ilavill~ Iligll
cockpit

nnd LCA

target manoeuvres

will

flying

4l1ulitics.

V.lrious

llle

IIUD

empirical

be tried out.

Performance of the weapon systems under

various parameter perturbations is a very important
input to the sys,em designer during the design
process. Sensitivity of system performance to the
inaccuracies in ~arameters like velocity of the
target/aircraft, height, fighter-target range, etc. is
being studied.
Air-to-Air
The

missiles

LCA

Missiles
darries
...

two

motion,

based

of

In an air-to-air close combat role. with missile

as the weapon. the pilot nee.ds real-time decision
support (i.e. symbology in HUD) for launching the
missile.
which would ensure the best I kill
probability with the given aircraft system. weapon
capability
and the operational
situation
encountered.
Simulation helps to evolve guidance, systems
that assist the pilot in steering the aircraft to arrive
at the best launch success range for a missile iq a
given encounter. The simulation package considers
the target parameters (i.e. closing speed. direction.
manoeuvrability).
weapon
characteristics
(aerodynamic. propulsion. guidance. control and
structural limits). the launch parameters (launch
velocity and direction of launch). relative geometry
between the interceptor and the target aircraft. and
a host of other parameters.
As mentioned earlier. with multiple tasks the
onboard computer performs. solving the equations
of motion for generating the firing envelopes in
real-time is not feasible and the need for an
empirical relationship again becomes critical. The
best launch success range is depicted to the pilot in

These

from

I empirical

based on the larp;e dntnilllerception

trajeclory
I

package

for

on Ipoint

mass '.equations

including

the I models

ge~erating

firing

envelopes

~issile

of

target

of

propulsion,

for various I encounter

geometries.
Sensitivity
of launch success ranges
and kill probability
to the e'lcounter para~eter like
relative

position

and

Empirical

equations

computing

the launch

velqcities

I are 'bein'g

3.2.2.2

is

determined.

generated

success ranges wit~

encounter

parameters.
I

air-to-air

for combat purposes.

derived

aerodynamics,
guidance an~ IR seeker has been
developed,
This has been " used extensively
in

for

respect

Beyond

vIsual Range Missile

1
medium. range target' interception,

For

3.2.2.1 Close Combat Missile

322

simulation

to dominant
types

envclupe'.

relationSihips.

interception

3.2.1.3 Sensitivity analysis

firing

relationships
ate evolved
bllNes of Illi~sile-lllrget
,
I '
SIII1U ullons.
I

3.2.2

us

fighter

aircraft

cahies a be(ond

the

visual range (BVR)

air-to-air
missilel with all-weather
capabilities.
A
,
dual mode guidance consisting
of a mid-course
phase

and a terminal

missile.

The

inertial

phase

is adoptJd

for

system

provides

navigation

the

guidance

in the mid-course,

updates

from

the fighter

ph'ase with two or three

aircraft.

Once the active

radar seeker takes over in the terminal

missile
to

homes o~ to the designated

the: 'missile

from

the

aircraft

in

the

a(e esse,ntial

because

of

the

phase

incapability

of the missile

the target

modelling

motion

and simulation

to study the effec.iveness

and to evolve! guidance
and autonomous
3.3

Air-to-Ground

target. Updates

fighter

mid-cou~se
about

phase, the

guidanqe
I

to get the information

in this' phase. Extensive
I
wor~ is being ~.arried out
of BVR

missile

combats

schemes for pre-guidance

phases.

Weap~n

Syste"m

The air-to-ground weapons a~e required to

deliver weapons using visual and blind attack
techniques
against predesignpted,
in-flight
designated or undesignated targets'. The algorithms
employed
in air-to-ground
nl.ission include
computation of weapon trajectories, ,positioning of

Su:aRAMANYAM

-"--

~;:::

,: SIMULA1l0N

OF FIGI-n"ER AIRCRAFT

SYSTEMS

on HOD is such that the bomb range computed is

found equal to or greater than the target range. This
is the CCRP mode r~lease authorisation.

-=

WEAroN

-1-P

P: POINT OF REi.FJ.SE
AU11-IORISA1l ON

--1-

Figure 4. Div,e toss mbde

display

symbols

on Hub,

generation

of release

authorisation
cues correspCj)nding Ito the weapon
time to go, release at thejcJrrect
instant, etc.
j
The fighter aircraft I has a wide spectrum of
air-to-ground
low-drag
bombs,

etc.

attack

bombs,

'weapons,

rt?tarded bombs,

laser-guided

'lWo

including

modes

bombs,
I

of

delivery

weapons are discussed

of

Modelling

rockets,

runaway

air-to-ground

A computational scheme for determining the

instant of issue of authorisation in the CCRP mode
has been developed. The scheme has two parts, one
for determining the aircraft position relative to the
target location based on the sensor information.
The other part determines whether the weapon can
reach the designated target if the dive-toss
manoeuvre is initiated from the current position.

denial

dive-toss
from

missiles,

a certain

Continuously

the

here.
Computed

In the continuouslyj

Impact

computed

time

at

commences

Point

impact

point

(CCIP) moQe, continuous prediction of the weapon

impact point is I accomplished
primarily
through
trajecto~y

irtegration.

the corresponding
include th~ effects

The weapon

trajectory

impact
p<Dint
of npn-standhrd

and

comput~tion
atmosphere,

weapon characteristics,
gravitatipnal
var\ations,
coriolis accelerati(jn,
winds and w1nd shear effects
with variable time steps. These c~mputations
are
used to position

the reticle on HdD to enable the

I
pilot to st~er the fighter to the correct heading and
issue

the

time. The

*elease
(

command

algorit~ms

evaluated on the cockpit

3.3.2

at the

I will

I b'e

correct

instant

simulated

environment

simulator.

mode,

aircraft
which

the

out for a

the aircraft
up before

is a finite

which

dives

releasing

time delay between

pilot

is

given

release

and the time at which he actually

J
his pull-up. During this time delay, the

would

have traversed

is taken into account.

the weapon

is carried

wherein

level and pulls

the \weapon. There

air-to-ground

authorisation
3.3.1.

and simulation

attack

is calculated

bomb Itrajectory

a certain

distance

The release height for

and from

is computed

this height

the

the bomb

fall

along

axis. The current information

in terms of latitude
and longitude of the fighter aircraft is transformed
into the bomb fall axis through a set of coordinate
transformations
and -all computations
are done in
this frame. The impact point is again transformed
int9

the

local

transformations.

frame

by

reverse

set

of

of

and

3.4 Error
The
aircraft

Analysis
weapon

delivery

normally

syste"11 of

consists

of

the fighter

~ensors,

display

systems,
weapon
ejection
system
computational
systems. All these I equipment
certain inaccuracies
total system error
Simulation

and
have

which contribute
towards the
or the impact
point errors.

is an essential

tool to arrive at the total

system error and helps the designer to fine-tune

design by layin~

down tolerances.

;Monte Ca~lo simulation

simulation
parameters

software
of

hi,s

is carried

by specify~ng

system

inaccuracies

out on the

the statistical
to

obtain
323

DFF sa

J, VOL 47, NO 3, JULY 1997

t

ps.

ADS

11

Ts,

Pr,

Jj

WIND

M,

TUNNEU

s,

l.:u.

D,

ORAG

--"-~~-

MA(.;II <.;UMI'UIAIIUN

VENDOR
-('!!~E~!:!;J!j-Q~!

~ )
1
,

VEFF-BFP

FLIGHT

MISS

IN~

DISTANCE

y EFF.BFP
(ACROSS)

IMPACT
hEFF-BFP,

ADSI
RADARI

~-

LASER
(HEIGHT
COMPUTATION)

RADALT

BEST
ESTIMATION
of
AIRCRAFT
TO TARGET
HEIGHT I&

(8,

<I>,x)oRIENTATION

LEGENDS
Ps -STATIC

TARGETTING

PRES~URE

V -VELOCITY

Pr -TOTAL

PRESS~RE

h -HEIGHT

Ts -STATIC

TEMP~RATURE

1 .IFLIGHT

'Y -ANGLE

OF ATtACK

R -, DOWN

I
J

~ -SIDESLIPANpLE
M -MAss,

ORIENTATION
OF
INS, RADAR, HUD,
LASER RANGER
LDP,
ROCKET, GUN
EYEPOINT

~AI~~

h.EFF-BFP

DOWNRANGE
I HARMONISATIONI

POINT
COMPUTAT
ION

PATH ANGLE
RANGE

ERROR

(8, 01>,x).JAR~

COMPUTA
TION

S -REF

SURFACE

Cs -COEFF
MACH-

(elcl.x),-IPITCH.~OLLYAW
.,

MACH

AREA

OF DRAG

EJE -EJECTof
1
Ox. By. Bz -CRANGE

NUMBER

D -DRAG

IN X, Y.Z

(LbCATION)
.
-AIRCRAFT
TO TARGET

AIr
EF~-BFP-

EFFECTIVE

BOMB

I FALL PLANE
Figure

statistical
errors.

parameters

regarding

s. Computational

the impact

point
\

now AGWAAS

9ua}ities.
functions

This

evaluation

particular system in terms of its 3(1 variations and

computes the final system error. This air-to-ground
weapon aiming performance analysis software
(AGWAAS) package is being 'used extensively and
suitable modifications are being carried out to use
this for any weapon delivery system. Conceptual
block diagram for carrying out the air-to-ground
error analysis, is depicted in Fig. 5.

and associated

COCKPIT

ENVIRONMENT

FACILITY

The cockpit environment facility (CEF) at

ADA is a high fidelity cocfpit with LCA flying
324

performs

three

major

in the process of design and performance

A software has been developed for analysing

the impact point errors of the fighter aircraft
air-to-ground weapon delivery system. The database of this software accepts the inaccuracies of a

facility

of the fighter 'aircraft weapon system.

I.
Firstly, the pilot-in-loop
simulation
is carried out
I
wherein the algorithms ,of a]1 the weapon systems
are validat~d

The
sections

by integrating

them with the avionics

systell1 functionality.
,
algorithms
deFcribed

for different

process of integl1ation

"1issions

,.
in

the

earlier

are presently

in the

with the CEF. This exercise

provides

various

inputs to the des~igner by carefully

studying

the pilot workload.

Based on the response

of the pilot in the selected co'mbat mode, further

tuning or redesign is carried " o~t. Secondly, the
different

symbologies

evaluated

by the pilot.

of

delivery-CCTL,

et~.-needs

displaye.d

on

HUD

Ench of the different

L,tOS"

to have different

CCIP,
symbologies

get

modes
CCRP,
to be

SUBRA~NYAM

: SIMULA110N

ETHERNET

OF FIGHTER

AIRCRAFf

WEAPON

SYSTEMS

B~

INS.

PC

GRAPHICS
WORKSTATION
FOR
.HUD & OWl

INS
COMPUTER

(/)
a5

SVG.
SOUND

PC
&

VOICE

COMPUTER

MC-

PC

MISSION

<

DBM .PC

MGMT

DATABUS

WEAPON

.VOICE
WARNINGS

MONITORING

FUNCTIONS

~II
w
fXi

.ENGINE
SOUND

15536-

~l
a: II
~

SGU

I.

PC
MFK.

bISP~Y

PC

FSP

PC

SYMBOL

FLIGHT

[MANAGEMENT
STORES

MUL TI.FUNCTION

GENERATION,CQMPUTER
I.

BUS

DISPLAY

~LANS

SYSTEM

WEAPON

COMPUTER

FUNCTION

.HORIZONTAL
SITUATION
I

INDICATOR

i.

ATTITUDE

INDICATOR

SELECTION

.MISSION
DATA
MANAGEMENT

Figure

placed on HUD.

the

functionality

a~

function

fidelity

These symbologies

considering
ergonomic~

6. High

mbde
a

of

loop
forms

cockpit

and

system.
the third

of the CEF. Functionalitr

of the higH fidelit~

block

environment

ADA for weapon system

Fig. 6.
I

environment

are derived

delivery

closed

of the cockpit

cockpit

evaluat~on
I

facility

for weapon

by

man,

machine

its

closed .loop

The
major

diagram
facility

at

is shown

in

CONCLUSION
I
The

Ipaper
j

aspects of

system

improve

the

is specially

as a

emphasised.

ilir-to-ground

with. The importance

out pilot

interface

The

error sources on the total system

f<1r a typical

carry

man-machine

mission

of the high fidelity

workload
weapon

analysis
system

is dealt
cockpit

to

to validate

and

performance

is

out elaborately.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

highlights

modelling

the

various

important

and tsimulation

related to the desi~n,

4evelopment

of weapon

systems

qf

importande

of

developme~t

and

impact of various
error

brought
s.

system evaluation

a fighter

modelling

of a complex

and

and validation
aircraft.

simulation

system

The

activities
The
in

the

consisting

of

author

programe
the

Director

Avionics

(ADA),
information

expresses
(LCA)

and

Bangalore,
required

his

and

Weapon

for

thanks

all the
,
System
I

providipg

for writing

to

scientists

the
of

Directorate

the

relevant

this paper.
I

325

DEF sa I, VOL 47, ,NO 3, JULY 1997

ConlrJhIllor

Shrl PS Subramanyam obtained his BE (Mech) from Regional Ellgineering College, Warangal, in
1973 and ME (Aeronautics) from Indian Institute of Sciencp, Bangalore.' in 1975. HIejoined DRDO
at the Defence Research & Development Laboratory (DRDL), Hyderabad, wherlt he worked on
flight

control

development

systems, missile
for real-time

guidance

systems, hardware-in-loop

embedded systems. Currently,

simulatioJ

and software

he is wol1king at th'e Aeronautical

Development Agency'(ADA),
Bangalore, in the area. of navigational and guidance system design,
weapon systems modelling and simulation, and weap?n systems algorithm and high fidelity cockpit
environment simulator development.
,

326