Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-fvjsw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-13T16:13:44.299Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Guided bomb release planning based on Monte Carlo in a distributed virtual environment

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 January 2016

Z. Wang and
J. Wang
Z. Wang*
Affiliation:
Institute of Automation, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China
J. Wang
Affiliation:
Department of Computer Technology, School of Telecommunication Engineering, Beijing Vocational College of Electronic Science and Technology, Beijing, China
*
flair@126.com
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the 'Save PDF' action button.

Air-to-ground strike has become one of main forms of modern warfare, and the guided bomb release is an important and key part of the attack. The guided bomb release planning aims to accomplish a precise target hit in enemy’s region while guarantee the pilot’s safety. We propose a robust Monte Carlo method by taking error perturbations into consideration, comparing to the traditional sequential quadratic programming method under extreme conditions. At the same time using a distributed virtual physics environment we can obtain much more detailed realism relative to the conventional simulator running on a single machine. The experimental results verify that Monte Carlo methods can improve hit probability and weapon efficiency significantly. Furthermore, the 3D visualised environment plays a very important role in training pilots, so this simulator will decrease the cost and time requirements of physical experiment that are not always compatible with strict military task.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 117 , Issue 1192 , June 2013, pp. 585 - 603
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Aeronautical Society 2013 

References

1. Command USAF Materiel. Capability requirements specification for the joint mission planning system (JMPS) auto router (AR) common capability (CC), 2004.Google Scholar
2. West, W.J. Developmental testing of a laser-guided bomb simulation, US Air Force T&E Days, 2008.Google Scholar
3. Lyach, D. Jr., Terminally guided weapon delivery system, Institution, FC, USA, 1986.Google Scholar
4. Murphy, W. J. and Young, W.L. Integrated flight/weapon control design and evaluation, Proceedings of the IEEE NAECON, 1981, (2), pp 536–543.Google Scholar
5. Nowakovski, V.M. Autonomous precision weapon delivery using synthetic array radar, USA, 1991.Google Scholar
6. Busher, R.G. and Hills, W. Weapon Delivery System, Lear Siegler, USA, 1976.Google Scholar
7. W, BM, D, WR, V, TJ. Kalman filter design and performance for an operational F-4 loran inertial weapon delivery system, Proceeding of the National Aerospace and Electrionics Conference, 1976.Google Scholar
8. Simeone, A.R. and Bean, C.M. Weapon Guidance System, LVS Corporation, 1986.Google Scholar
9. Singhal, S. and Zyda, M. Networked Virtual Environments, ACM Press, 1999.Google Scholar
10. Canterbury, M. An automated approach to distributed interactive simulation (DIS) protocol entity development, September 1995.Google Scholar
11. Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers. 1516-2000, IEEE standard for modeling and simulation high level architecture-framework and rules, IEEE, New York, USA, September 2000.Google Scholar
12. Antonello, R., Fernandes, S., Moreira, J., Cunha, P., Kamienski, C. and Sadok, D. Traffic analysis and synthetic models of second life, Multimedia Systems, 2009, 15, (1), pp 33–47.Google Scholar
13. James, K. and Mark, C. Traffic analysis of avatars in second life, NOSDAV, Braunschweig, Germany, May 2008.Google Scholar
14. Claypool, M. and Claypool, K. Latency and player actions in online games, ACM Communication, 2006, 49, (11), pp 40–45.Google Scholar
15. Hu, S.Y., Chen, J.F. and Chen, T.H. A scalable peer-to-peer network for virtual environments, IEEE Network, 2006, 20, (4), pp 22–31.Google Scholar
16. Barabasi, A.L. and Albert, R. Emergence of scaling in random networks, Science, 1999, 286, (5439), pp 509–512.Google Scholar
17. Oxford. Dictionary of Computing, Oxford University Press, 1996.Google Scholar
18. Yan, J. and Randell, B. A Systematic Classification of Cheating in Online Games, NETGAMES, Hawthorne, USA, October 2005.Google Scholar
19. Young, J-S. Profile emulations of target waypomts for mission planning systems of tactical flights, Control Conference (ASCC), 2011, pp 453–458.Google Scholar
20. Chelouah, R. and Siarry, P. Genetic and Nelder-Mead algorithms hybridized for a more accurate global optimization of continuous multiminima functions, European J Operational Research, 2003, 148, (2), pp 335–348.Google Scholar
21. McLain, T. W. and Beard, R. W. Trajectory planning for coordinated rendezvous of unmanned air vehicles, AIAA, 2000, pp 4369–4372.Google Scholar
22. Judd, K.B. and McLain, T.W. Spline-Based Path Planning for Unmanned Air Vehicles, Proceedings of Guidance Navigation and Control Conference, 2001, pp 1182–1190.Google Scholar
23. Kim, Y., Gulan, D-W. and Postlethwaite, I. Real-time path planning with limited information for autonomous unmanned air vehicles, Automatica, 2008, 44, (3), pp 696–712.Google Scholar
24. Aggarwal, S., Banavar, H. and Khandelwal, A. Accuracy in dead-recking based distributed multi-player games, Proceedings of 3rd ACM SIGCOMM Workshop on Network and System Support for Games, 2004, pp 161–165.Google Scholar
25. Scheuermann, B., Kiess, W. and Roos, M. On the time synchronization of distributed log files in networks with local broadcast media, IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, 2009, 17, (2), pp 431–444.Google Scholar
26. Zhou, S., Cai, W. and Turner, S.J. Critical causal order of events in distributed virtual environments, ACM Transactions on Multimedia Computing, Communications, and Applications, 2007, 3, (3), p 15.Google Scholar