UNCLASSIFIED

Integrated Navigation, Guidance, and Control of

Missile Systems: 3-D Dynamic Model

Farhan A. Faruqi

Weapons Systems Division
Defence Science and Technology Organisation

DSTO-TR-2805


ABSTRACT

In this report a 3-D mathematical modelfor multi-party engagement kinematics is derived
suitable for developing, implementing and testing modern missile guidance systems. The model
developed here is suitable for both conventional and more advanced optimal intelligent guidance
schemes including those that arise out of the differential game theory. This model accommodates
changes in vehicle body attitude and other non-linear effects such as limits on lateral acceleration
and aerodynamic forces.




RELEASE LIMITATION

Approved for public release

UNCLASSIFIED

UNCLASSIFIED
Published by

Weapons Systems Division
DSTO Defence Science and Technology Organisation
PO Box 1500
Edinburgh South Australia 5111 Australia

Telephone: (08) 7389 5555
Fax: (08) 7389 6567

Commonwealth of Australia 2013
AR-015-532
February 2013




APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE

UNCLASSIFIED

UNCLASSIFIED


Integrated Navigation, Guidance, and Control of
Missile Systems: 3-D Dynamic Models


Executive Summary

In the past, linear kinematics models have been used for development and analysis of
guidance laws for missile/target engagements. These models were developed in fixed axis
system under the assumption that the engagement trajectory does not vary significantly from
the collision course geometry. While these models take into account autopilot lags and soft
acceleration limits, the guidance commands are applied in fixed axis, and ignore the fact that
the missile/target attitude may change significantly during engagement. This latter fact is
particularly relevant in cases of engagements where the target implements evasive
manoeuvres, resulting in large variations of the engagement trajectory from that of the
collision course. A linearised model is convenient for deriving guidance laws (in analytical
form), however, the study of their performance characteristics still requires a non-linear model
that incorporates changes in body attitudes and implements guidance commands in body axis
rather than the fixed axis. In this report, a 3-D mathematical model for multi-party
engagement kinematics is derived suitable for developing, implementing and testing modern
missile guidance systems. The model developed here is suitable for both conventional and
more advanced optimal intelligent guidance, particularly those based on the 'game theory'
guidance techniques. These models accommodate changes in vehicle body attitude and other
non-linear effects, such as, limits on lateral acceleration and aerodynamic forces. The model
presented in this report will be found suitable for computer simulation and analysis of multi-
party engagements.
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
Author



Dr. Farhan A. Faruqi
Weapons Systems division

Farhan A. Faruqi received B.Sc.(Hons) in Mechanical Engineering from
the University of Surrey (UK), 1968; M.Sc. in Automatic Control from
the University of Manchester Institute of Science and Technology (UK),
1970 and Ph.D from the Imperial College, London University (UK),
1973. He has over 25 years experience in the Aerospace and Defence
Industry in UK, Europe and the USA. Prior to joining DSTO in January
1999 he was an Associate Professor at QUT (Australia) 1993-98. Dr.
Faruqi is currently the Head of Intelligent Autonomous Systems,
Weapons Systems Division, DSTO. His research interests include:
Missile Navigation, Guidance and Control, Target Tracking and
Precision Pointing Systems, Strategic Defence Systems, Signal
Processing, and Optoelectronics.
____________________ ________________________________________________




UNCLASSIFIED

UNCLASSIFIED
DSTO-TR-2805
Contents

NOMENCLATURE
1. INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................... 1
2. DEVELOPMENT OF 3-D ENGAGEMENT KINEMATICS MODEL....................... 1
2.1 Translational Kinematics for Multi-Vehicle Engagement................................ 2
2.1.1 Vector/Matrix Representation .............................................................. 3
2.2 Constructing Relative Range, Range Rates, Sightline (LOS) Angles and
Rates - (Rotational Kinematics).............................................................................. 3
2.2.1 Range and Range Rates .......................................................................... 3
2.2.2 Sightline Rates.......................................................................................... 4
2.3 Vehicle Navigation Model ...................................................................................... 6
2.3.1 Application of Quaternion to Navigation............................................ 7
2.3.2 Body Incidence Angles and Flight Path Angles.................................. 8
2.3.3 Computing Body Rates ( )
i i i
r , q , p ........................................................ 9
2.4 Vehicle Autopilot Dynamics ................................................................................ 10
2.5 Aerodynamic Considerations ............................................................................... 11
3. CONVENTIONAL GUIDANCE LAWS....................................................................... 12
3.1 Proportional Navigation (PN) Guidance............................................................ 12
3.1.1 Version 1 (PN-1): ................................................................................... 12
3.1.2 Version 2 (PN-2): ................................................................................... 12
3.2 Augmented Proportional Navigation (APN) Guidance .................................. 13
4. OVERALL STATE SPACE MODEL.............................................................................. 13
5. CONCLUSIONS................................................................................................................ 14
APPENDIX A ........................................................................................................................... 16
APPENDIX B............................................................................................................................ 19
B.1 Aerodynamic Forces and Equations of Motion................................................. 19
B.2 2-D Yaw-Plane Kinematics Equations: ............................................................... 20
B.3 2-D Pitch-Plane Kinematics Equations: .............................................................. 21
B.4 Calculating the Aerodynamic Forces .................................................................. 21
B.5 Body Incidence ........................................................................................................ 22
APPENDIX C 3-D COLLISION COURSE ENGAGEMENT GEOMETRY &
COMPUTING MISSILE COLLISION COURSE HEADING................................... 24
C.1 Computing 3-DOF Collision Course Missile Heading Angles:..................... 25
C.1.1 Computing , Given (
TM
| ) ( )
TM TM T T T
, , , , V u u :.................... 25
C.1.2 Computing ( )
MT
cc | , Given ( )
TM M
, V | :......................................... 25
UNCLASSIFIED

UNCLASSIFIED
DSTO-TR-2805
C.1.3 Computing the Closing Velocity ( )
MT
CC
VC and Time-to-go
( )
go
T : ...................................................................................................... 25
C.2 Computing 2-DOF Collision Course Missile Heading Angles:..................... 27
C.2.1 Vertical Plane ( ) plane Z X Engagement:...................................... 27
C.2.2 Horizontal Plane Engagement:............................................................ 27



UNCLASSIFIED

UNCLASSIFIED
DSTO-TR-2805
Nomenclature

( ) : j , i number of interceptors (pursuers) and targets (evaders)
respectively.
( ) : z , y , x
i i i
are x , y, z-positions respectively of vehicle i in fixed axis.
( ): w , v , u
i i i
are x, y, z-velocities respectively of vehicle i in fixed axis.
( ): a , a , a
i
z
i
y
i
x
are x, y, z-accelerations respectively of vehicle i in fixed axis.
( ): z , y , x
ij ij ij
are x, y, z-positions respectively of vehicle i w.r.t j in fixed axis.
( ): w , v , u
ij ij ij
are x, y, z-velocities respectively of vehicle i w.r.t j in fixed axis.
( ): a , a , a
ij
z
ij
y
ij
x
are x, y, z-accelerations respectively of vehicle i w.r.t j in fixed axis.
( ) : a , u , x
i i i
are x ,y, z-position, velocity and acceleration vectors of vehicle i in
fixed axis.
( ): a , u , x
ij ij ij
are x, y, z - relative position, velocity and acceleration vectors of
vehicle i w.r.t j in fixed axis.
: R
ij
separation range of vehicle i w.r.t j in fixed axis.
: V
ij
c
closing velocity of vehicle i w.r.t j in fixed axis.
: ,
ij ij
u are line-of-sight angle (LOS) of vehicle i w.r.t j in Azimuth and
Elevation planes respectively.
( ): a , a , a
b
i
z
b
i
y
b
i
x
x, y, z-accelerations respectively achieved by vehicle i in body axis.
: a , a , a
b
d
i
z
b
d
i
y
b
d
i
x
|
.
|

\
|
x, y, z-accelerations respectively demanded by vehicle i in body axis.
: , ,
i i i
| u are yaw, pitch and roll body (Euler) angles respectively of the i
th

vehicle w.r.t the fixed axis.
| | : T
i
f
b
is the transformation matrix from body axis to fixed axis.
: V
i
is the velocity of vehicle i.
:
i
x
t autopilot's longitudinal time-constant for vehicle i.
: ,
i
z
i
y
t t autopilot's lateral time-constant for vehicle i.
:
ij
s
e line of sight (LOS) rotation vector for vehicles i and j.
( ) : R , Q , P
i i i i
= e body rotation vector for vehicles i as seen in fixed axis.
( ) : r , q , p
i i i
b
i
= e body rotation vector for vehicles i as seen in body axis.
: ,
b
d
i
d
i
e e demanded body rotation vector for vehicles i as seen respectively in
fixed and in body axis.

UNCLASSIFIED

UNCLASSIFIED
DSTO-TR-2805
UNCLASSIFIED





















This page is intentionally blank
UNCLASSIFIED
DSTO-TR-2805
1. Introduction
In the past [1, 2] linear kinematics models have been used for development and analysis of
guidance laws for missile/target engagements. These models were developed in fixed axis
under the assumption that the engagement trajectory does not vary significantly from the
collision course geometry. While these models take into account autopilot lags and
acceleration limits, the guidance commands are applied in fixed axis, and ignore the fact that
the missile/target attitude may change significantly during engagement. This latter fact is
particularly relevant in cases of engagements where the target implements evasive
manoeuvres, resulting in large variations of the engagement trajectory from that of the
collision course [3]. Linearised models are convenient for deriving guidance laws (in
analytical form), however, the study of their performance characteristics still requires a non-
linear model that incorporates changes in body attitudes and implements guidance
commands in body axis rather than the fixed axis.

In this report a mathematical model for multi-party engagement kinematics is derived
suitable for developing, implementing and testing modern missile guidance systems. The
model developed here is suitable for both conventional and more advanced optimal
intelligent guidance, particularly those based on the 'game theory' guidance techniques. The
model accommodates changes in vehicle body attitude and other non-linear effects such as
limits on lateral acceleration and aerodynamic forces. Body incidence is assumed to be small
and is neglected. The model presented in this report will be found suitable for computer
simulation and analysis of multi-party engagements. Sections 2 of this report considers, in
some detail, the derivation of engagement dynamics, in section 3, derivations of some of the
well known conventional guidance laws, such as, the proportional navigation (PN) and the
augmented PN (APN) are given.


2. Development of 3-D Engagement Kinematics Model

Figure 1-Vehicle Engagement Geometry
ij
x
ij
u
ij

Y
Z
X
i
u
j
u
UNCLASSIFIED
1
UNCLASSIFIED
DSTO-TR-2805
2.1 Translational Kinematics for Multi-Vehicle Engagement
A typical 2-vehicle engagement geometry is shown in Figure 1; we shall utilise this to
develop the translational kinematics differential equations that relate positions, velocities
and accelerations in x, y, z- planes of individual vehicles as well as the relative positions,
velocities and accelerations. Accordingly, we define the following variables:
(x
i i i
) : z , y , x ,y, z-positions respectively of vehicle i in fixed axis.
( ) : w , v , u
i i i
x, y, z-velocities respectively of vehicle i in fixed axis.
( ): a , a , a
i
z
i
y
i
x
x, y, z-accelerations respectively of vehicle i in fixed axis.

The above variables as well as others utilised in this report are functions of time . The
engagement kinematics (i.e. position, velocity and acceleration) involving n interceptors (often
referred to as pursuers) and m targets (referred to as the evaders)
t
( ) m n ,..., 2 , 1 i + = , in fixed
axis (e.g. inertial axis) is given by the following set of differential equations:
i i
u x
dt
d
= (2.1)
i i
v y
dt
d
= (2.2)
i i
w z
dt
d
= (2.3)
i
x i
a u
dt
d
= (2.4)
i
y i
a v
dt
d
= (2.5)
i
z i
a w
dt
d
= (2.6)

In order to develop relative kinematics equations for multiple vehicles i, j involved in the
engagement, ( ) i j ; m ,..., 2 , 1 j ; n ,..., 2 , 1 i : i = = = , we shall write the relative states:
: x x x
j i ij
= x-position of vehicle i w.r.t j in fixed axis.
: j y y
j i ij
= y-position of vehicle i w.r.t j in fixed axis.
: z z z
j i ij
= z-position of vehicle i w.r.t j in fixed axis.
: u u u
j i ij
= x-velocity of vehicle i w.r.t j in fixed axis.
: v v v
j i ij
= y-velocity of vehicle i w.r.t j in fixed axis.
: w w w
j i ij
= x-velocity of vehicle i w.r.t j in fixed axis.
: a a a
j
x
i
x
ij
x
= x-acceleration of vehicle i w.r.t j in fixed axis.
: a a a
j
y
i
y
ij
y
= y-acceleration of vehicle i w.r.t j in fixed axis.
: a a a
j
z
i
z
ij
z
= y-acceleration of vehicle i w.r.t j in fixed axis.

UNCLASSIFIED
2
UNCLASSIFIED
DSTO-TR-2805
2.1.1 Vector/Matrix Representation
It will be convenient for model development, to write equations (2.1)-(2.6), in vector notation
as follows:
i i
u x
dt
d
= (2.7)
i i
a u
dt
d
= (2.8)

Where;
| : z y x x
T
i i i i
= | is the position vector of vehicle i in fixed axis.
| : w v u u
T
i i i i
= | is the velocity vector of vehicle i in fixed axis.
| : a a a a
T
i
z
i
y
i
x i
= | is the target acceleration vector of vehicle i in fixed axis.

Corresponding differential equations for relative kinematics in vector notation, is given by:
ij ij
u x
dt
d
= (2.9)
j i ij
a a u
dt
d
= (2.10)

Where:
| : z y x x
T
ij ij ij
ij
= | position vector of vehicle i w.r.t j in fixed axis.
| : w v u u
T
ij ij ij ij
= | position vector of vehicle i w.r.t j in fixed axis.
| | : a a a a a a
j i
T
ij
z
ij
y
ij
x ij
= = acceleration vector of vehicle i w.r.t j in fixed axis.

Note: The above formulation admits consideration of engagement where one particular
vehicle (interceptor) is fired at another single vehicle (target). In other words we consider one-
against-one in a scenario consisting of many vehicles. This consideration can be extended to
one-against-many if, for example, takes on a single value and is allowed to take on a
number of different values.
i j

2.2 Constructing Relative Range, Range Rates, Sightline (LOS) Angles
and Rates - (Rotational Kinematics)
In this section, we develop rotational kinematics equations involving range and range rates,
and sight-line (LOS) angle and rates; measurements of these variables are generally obtained
directly from on-board seeker (radar or IR) or derived from on board navigation system or by
other indirect means.

2.2.1 Range and Range Rates
The separation range of vehicles i w.r.t j may be written as:
ij
R
UNCLASSIFIED
3
UNCLASSIFIED
DSTO-TR-2805
( ) ( ) ( )
2
ij
T
1
2
1
2
ij
2
ij
2
1
2
ij
2
ij
2
ij ij ij
x z r z y x R x = + = + + = =
ij
x (2.11)

Expressions for range rate may be obtained by differentiating the above equations, and is
given by:
ij
R

( )
ij
ij
T
ij
ij
ij ij ij ij ij ij
ij ij
R
u x
R
w z v y u x
R R
dt
d
=
+ +
= =

(2.12)

Another quantity that is often employed in the study of vehicle guidance is the closing
velocity which is given by:
ij
c
V
ij
ij
c
R V

= (2.13)

As noted above, the range and range rate measurements are either directly available or
indirectly computed from other available information (or estimated using e.g. a Kalman Filter-
KF). To account for errors in these values, we may write:
ij ij
R , R

ij ij ij
R R R

A + = (2.14)
ij ij ij
R R R

A + = (2.15)

Where:
: R

ij
is the estimated/measured value of the relative range.
: R

ij

is the estimated/measured value of the relative range rate.

: R
ij
A is the measurement error in relative range.
: R
ij

A is the measurement error in relative range rate.

2.2.2 Sightline Rates
The sight line rotation vector
ij
s
e (see Figure 2) is related to the relative range and
velocity
ij ij
u , x as follows:
ij
ij
s ij
x u e = (2.16)

Where:
| | :
T
ij
3
ij
2
ij
1
ij
s
e e e = e is the LOS rotation vector of vehicle i w.r.t j as defined in (as
seen in) fixed axis.
It is well known that the vector triple product which is the cross product of a vector with
the result of another cross product, is related to the dot product by the following formula
[4]: ( ) ( b . a c c . a b c b a = ). Taking the cross-product of both sides of (2.16) by
ij
x and
applying this rule, we get
UNCLASSIFIED
4
UNCLASSIFIED
DSTO-TR-2805
( )
|
.
|

\
|
e e =
|
.
|

\
|
e =
ij
s ij ij ij ij
ij
s ij
ij
s ij ij ij
. x x x . x x x u x (2.17)
Since
ij
x and
ij
s
e are mutually orthogonal, therefore 0 . x
ij
s ij
=
|
.
|

\
|
e ; hence:
( ) ( )
ij
T
ij
ij
s ij ij
ij
s ij ij
x x x . x u x e = e =

( )
( )
( )
(
(
(

=
(
(
(

(
(
(

= e
ij ij ij ij
ij ij ij ij
ij ij ij ij
ij
T
ij
ij
ij
ij
ij ij
ij ij
ij ij
ij
T
ij ij
T
ij
ij ij
ij
s
u y v x
w x u z
v z w y
x x
1
z
y
x
0 u v
u 0 w
v w 0
x x
1
x x
u x

(2.18)


Figure 2. Line of Sight Rotation

If sightline rate values are required in body frame then equation (2.18) has to be transformed
to body axis to obtain sightline rates in body axis. The measurement
ij
s

e obtained from the

seeker used to construct the guidance commands is given by:
ij
s
ij
s
ij
s
e A + e = e (2.19)

Where:
:
ij
s
e A seeker LOS rate measurement error.
The above relationships (2.11)-(2.19) will also be referred to as the seeker model.


ij
s
e
ij
x
ij
u
ij

ij
u
X
Y
Z

ij
2
e
ij
3
e
ij
1
e
UNCLASSIFIED
5
UNCLASSIFIED
DSTO-TR-2805
2.3 Vehicle Navigation Model
The vehicle navigation part of the model is concerned with developing equations that allow
the angular rotation, of the vehicle body, to be generated and subsequently computing the
elements of the transformation (direction cosine) matrix. We shall utilise the quaternion
algebra [5] to achieve this.


Figure 3. Axis System Rotation Convention

Let us define the following:
( ): a , a , a
b
i
z
b
i
y
b
i
x
x, y, z-acceleration achieved by vehicle i in its body axis.
The transformation matrix from fixed to body axis | |
i
b
f
T , for vehicle i is given by (see
Figure 3):
( ) ( ) ( )
( ) ( ) (
( ) ( ) (
(
(
(
(
(

(
(
(
(
(

u | | u | | + u |
u | | + u | | u |
u u u
=
(
(
(
(
(

i
z
i
y
i
x
i i i i i i i i i i i i
i i i i i i i i i i i i
i i i i i
b
i
z
b
i
y
b
i
x
a
a
a
c c c s s s c s s c s c
c s c c s s s s c c s s
s s c c c
a
a
a
)
)


Abbreviations s and c are used for sin and cos of angles respectively.

This equation may also be written as:
i
x
i
y
i
z
b
x
b
y
b
z

i
p
i
u

i
u
i

i
r
i

i
|
i
|


i
q
UNCLASSIFIED
6
UNCLASSIFIED
DSTO-TR-2805
| |
(
(
(
(
(

=
(
(
(
(
(

i
z
i
y
i
x
i
b
f
b
i
z
b
i
y
b
i
x
a
a
a
T
a
a
a
(2.20)

In vector/matrix notation this equation along with its companion (inverse) transformation,
may be written as:
| |
i
i
b
f
b
i
a T a = (2.21)
| |
b
i i
f
b i
a T a = (2.22)

Where:
( )
i i i
, , | u : are (Euler) angles of the i
th
vehicle w.r.t the fixed axis.
| : a a a a
T
b
i
z
b
i
y
b
i
x
b
i
= | is acceleration vector of vehicle i in its body axis.
| | | | | | : T T T
1
i
b
f
T
i
b
f
i
f
b

= = is the transformation matrix from body to fixed axis.

2.3.1 Application of Quaternion to Navigation
A fuller exposition on quaternion algebra is given in [5]; in this section the main results are
utilised for the navigation model for constructing the transformation matrix. We define the
following quantities, referred to as the quaternions, for vehicle i as follows:
2
sin
2
sin
2
sin
2
cos
2
cos
2
cos q
i i i i i i
i
1
u |
+
u |
= (2.23)
2
sin
2
sin
2
cos
2
cos
2
cos
2
sin q
i i i i i i
i
2
u |

u |
= (2.24)
2
sin
2
cos
2
sin
2
cos
2
sin
2
cos q
i i i i i i
i
3
u |
+
u |
= (2.25)
2
cos
2
sin
2
sin
2
sin
2
cos
2
cos q
i i i i i i
i
4
u |

u |
= (2.26)

It can be shown that the transformation matrix | |
i
b
f
T for the i
th
vehicle may be written as:
| |
(
(
(

=
i
33
i
31
i
23
i
22
i
21
i
13
i
12
i
11
i
b
f
t 32 t t
t t t
t t t
T (2.27)

Where: the elements of | | ( ) |
i
b
f
i
b
f
q T T = | are functions of the quaternions are given by the
following relations:
( )
2
i
4
2
i
3
2
i
2
2
i
1
i
11
q q q q t + = (2.28)
( )
i
4
i
1
i
3
i
2
i
12
q q q q 2 t + = (2.29)
UNCLASSIFIED
7
UNCLASSIFIED
DSTO-TR-2805
( )
i
3
i
1
i
4
i
2
i
13
q q q q 2 t = (2.30)
( )
i
4
i
1
i
3
i
2
i
21
q q q q 2 t = (2.31)
( )
2
i
4
2
i
3
2
i
2
2
i
1
i
22
q q q q t + = (2.32)
( )
i
2
i
1
i
4
i
3
i
23
q q q q 2 t + = (2.33)
( )
i
3
i
1
i
4
i
2
i
31
q q q q 2 t + = (2.34)
( )
i
2
i
1
i
4
i
3
i
32
q q q q 2 t = (2.35)
( )
2
i
4
2
i
3
2
i
2
2
i
1
i
33
q q q q t + = (2.36)

The time-evolution of quaternion is given by the following differential equation:
(
(
(
(
(

(
(
(
(

=
(
(
(
(
(

i
4
i
3
i
2
i
1
i i i
i i i
i i i
i i i
i
4
i
3
i
2
i
1
q
q
q
q
0 p q r
p 0 r q
q r 0 p
r q p 0
2
1
q
q
q
q
dt
d
(2.37)

In vector notation equation (2.37) may be written as:
| |
i
b
i
i
q q
dt
d
O = (2.38)

Where:
| |
(
(
(
(

= O
0 p q r
p 0 r q
q r 0 p
r q p 0
2
1
i i i
i i i
i i i
i i i
b
i

| : q q q q q
T
i
4
i
3
i
2
i
1
i
= | is the quaternion vector for vehicle i.
| : r q p
T
i i i
b
i
= e | is the rotation vector of vehicle i w.r.t to the fixed axis as seen in the
body axis (also referred to as body rate vector).

The Euler angles, in terms of the elements of the transformation matrix, may be written as:
|
|
.
|

\
|
= |

i
33
i
23
1
i
t
t
tan (2.39)
( )
i
13
1
i
t sin = u

(2.40)
|
|
.
|

\
|
=

i
11
i
12
1
i
t
t
tan (2.41)
o
i
90 = u

2.3.2 Body Incidence Angles and Flight Path Angles
he vehicle (absolute) velocity in fixed axis (which is the same as the absolute velocity in
body axis) is given by:
UNCLASSIFIED
8
UNCLASSIFIED
DSTO-TR-2805
( ) ( )
b
i
2
1
b
i
T
b
i
2
1
i
T
i
2
1
2
i
2
i
2
i i
V u u u u w v u V = |
.
|

\
|
= = + + = (2.42)

Where:
| : w v u u
T
b
i
b
i
b
i
b
i
= | is the velocity vector of vehicle i in body axis.
: V V
i
b
i
= is the vehicle velocity in body axis.

Given that the body incidence angles in pitch and yaw are ( )
i i
, | o , the flight path angles in
pitch and yaw (=angle that the velocity vector makes with the fixed axis) are respectively
and . ( )
i i
o u ( )
i i
|

Where:
:
u
w
tan
b
i
b
i 1
i

= o is the body pitch incidence angle.
:
u
v
tan
b
i
b
i 1
i

= | is the body azimuth incidence (side-slip angle).

Assuming that ( )
b
i
b
i
b
i
u w , v << thus lends justification to the assumption that ( )
i i
, | o are
small. Furthermore differentiating the expressions for ( )
i i
, | o and simplifying gives us:
|
.
|

\
|
+

= o
2
b
i
2
b
i
b
i
b
i
b
i
b
i
i
w u
w u u w
(2.43)
|
.
|

\
|
+

= |
2
b
i
2
b
i
b
i
b
i
b
i
b
i
i
v u
v u u v

(2.44)

For ( )
b
i
b
i
b
i
b
i
u u , w , v <<
)
i i
, | o
, we get ( In this report we shall assume that the incidence
angles ( and the rates are small and hence can be ignored; and the vehicle body
may be assumed to be aligned to the velocity vector.
) . 0 ,
i i
~ | o

( )
i i
, |

o

2.3.3 Computing Body Rates ( )
i i i
r , q , p
We now consider equations (A1.1)-(A1.3), from Appendix-1 for the i
th
vehicle, which
we write as:
b
i
b
i
b
i
b
i
x
rv qw u a + = (2.45)
b
i
b
i
b
i
b
i
y
pw ru v a + = (2.46)
b
i
b
i
b
i
b
i
z
qu pv w a + = (2.47)

UNCLASSIFIED
9
UNCLASSIFIED
DSTO-TR-2805
In matrix notation equations (2.45)-(2.47) may be written as:
(
(
(
(
(

(
(
(
(
(

+
(
(
(
(
(

=
(
(
(
(
(

b
i
b
i
b
i
i i
i i
i
i
b
i
b
i
b
i
b
i
y
b
i
y
b
i
x
w
v
u
0 p q
p 0 r
q r 0
w
v
u
a
a
a

(2.48)

This equation is of the form:
b
i
b
i
b
i
b
i
u u a e + = (2.49)

Note: As pointed out earlier it is assumed that the missile body is aligned with the velocity
vector (section 2.3.2); moreover if
b
i
a is regarded as the lateral acceleration acting on the
velocity vector then
b
i
b
i
b
i
u , , a e can be assumed to be mutually orthogonal. i.e.:
( ) ( ) ( ) 0 u . . a u . a
b
i
b
i
b
i
b
i
b
i
b
i
= e = e = .

Taking the cross product of equation (2.49) with
b
i
u ; applying the triple cross-product rule,
and noting the fact that ( ) 0 u .
b
i
b
i
= e , we get:
( )
b
i
b
i
b
i
b
i
b
i
b
i
b
i
b
i
b
i
b
i
b
i
b
i
u . u u u u u u u a u e + = e + = (2.50)

b
i
b
i
b
i
b
i
b
i
b
i
b
i
b
i b
i
u . u
u u
u . u
a u

= e (2.51)

For ( ) ( )
b
i
b
i
b
i
b
i
b
i
b
i
u w , v and u , w , v << , it follows that the second term on the RHS of (2.51):
( ) ( ) ( ) | |
0
u . u
u v v u w u u w v w w v
u . u
u u
T
b
i
b
i
b
i
b
i
b
i
b
i
b
i
b
i
b
i
b
i
b
i
b
i
b
i
b
i
b
i
b
i
b
i
b
i
~

=

(2.52)

( ) ( ) ( ) | |
T
b
i
T
b
i
b
i
x
b
i
b
i
y
b
i
b
i
z
b
i
b
i
x
b
i
b
i
y
b
i
b
i
z
b
i
b
i
T
b
i
b
i
b
i b
i
u u
a v a u a u a w a w a v
u u
a u

=

= e (2.53)

2.4 Vehicle Autopilot Dynamics
Assuming a first order lag for the autopilot, we may write for vehicle : i
b
d
i
x i
x
b
i
x i
x
b
i
x
a a a
dt
d
t + t = (2.54)
b
d
i
y i
y
b
i
y i
y
b
i
y
a a a
dt
d
t + t = (2.55)
b
d
i
z i
z
b
i
z i
z
b
i
z
a a a
dt
d
t + t = (2.56)

UNCLASSIFIED
10
UNCLASSIFIED
DSTO-TR-2805
In vector/matrix notation equations (2.54)-(2.56) may be written as:
| | | |
b
d
i i
b
i i
b
i
a a a
dt
d
A + A = (2.57)

Where:
:
i
x
t Vehicle i autopilot's longitudinal time-constant.
:
i
y
t Vehicle i autopilot's (lateral) yaw-plane time-constant.
:
i
z
t Vehicle i autopilot's (lateral) pitch-plane time-constant.
| |
(
(
(

t
t
t
= A
i
z
i
y
i
x
i
0 0
0 0
0 0

: a
b
d
i
x
x-acceleration demanded by vehicle i in its body axis.
: a
b
d
i
y
y-acceleration demanded by vehicle i in its body axis.
: a
b
d
i
z
z-acceleration demanded by vehicle i in its body axis.
: a a a a
T
b
d
i
z
b
d
i
y
b
d
i
x
b
d
i (

= is the demanded missile acceleration (command input) vector in

body axis.

2.5 Aerodynamic Considerations
Detailed consideration of the effects of the aerodynamic forces is contained in Appendix-1.
Generally, the longitudinal acceleration
i
i i b
d
i
x
m
D T
a
o o
= of a missile is not varied in response
to the guidance commands and may be assumed to be zero. However, the nominal values,
which define the steady state flight:
( )
u

= sin g
m
D T
a
b
i
x
, | u + = sin cos g
m
Y
a
b
i
z
and
| u + = cos cos g
m
Z
a
b
i
z
may change due to changes in flight conditions and need to be included
in the simulation model; this is shown in the block diagram Figure A.1. The variations in
lateral accelerations Y
~
m
Y
a
b
y
o =
o
= o , Z
~
m
Z
a
b
z
o =
o
= o , on the other hand provide the necessary
control effort required for guidance; the limits on these may be implemented as shown in
Appendix-1, that is:
max
y
d
i
y
b
a a s and
max
z
d
i
z
b
a a s .


UNCLASSIFIED
11
UNCLASSIFIED
DSTO-TR-2805
3. Conventional Guidance Laws
3.1 Proportional Navigation (PN) Guidance
There are at least three versions of PN guidance laws that the author is aware of; in this
section we consider two of these, which are (for interceptor i -the pursuer against a target j
the evader):

3.1.1 Version 1 (PN-1):
This implementation is based on the principle that the demanded body rate of the attacker
i is proportional to LOS rate to the target j(see Figure 1); that is:
| |
ij
s i
d
i
N e = e (3.1)

Where:
| : R Q P
T
d
i
d
i
d
i
d
i
= e | is the demanded body rotation vector of vehicle i in the fixed axis.
| | ( ): N N N diag N
i
3
i
2
i
1 i
=
0 N
i
1
=
are navigation constants attached to respective demand
channels. If the longitudinal acceleration is not possible (as is the case in most missiles) then
.

The acceleration demanded of vehicle i is given by:
| |
i
ij
s i i
d
i
d
i
u N u a e = e = (3.2)

Since the guidance commands are applied in body axis, we need to transform equation (3.2) to
body axis, thus:
| | | |
|
.
|

\
|
e =
i
ij
s i
i
b
f
b
d
i
u N T a (3.3)

Assuming that the longitudinal acceleration in response to the guidance commands is zero,
we get:
0
m
D T
a
i
i i b
d
i
x
=
o o
= (3.4)

3.1.2 Version 2 (PN-2):
This implementation is based on the principle that the demanded lateral acceleration of the
attacker i is proportional to the acceleration normal to the LOS acceleration to target j, caused
by the LOS rotation. Now, the LOS acceleration is given by:
ij
ij
s
ij
n
u a e = (3.5)

| | | |
ij
ij
s i
ij
n i
d
i
u N a N a e = =

Transforming to body axis, gives us:
UNCLASSIFIED
12
UNCLASSIFIED
DSTO-TR-2805
| | | |
|
.
|

\
|
e =
ij
ij
s i
i
b
f
b
d
i
u N T a (3.6)

Once again, assuming that the longitudinal acceleration in response to the guidance
commands is zero, we get:
0
m
D T
a
i
i i b
d
i
x
=
o o
= (3.7)
Where:
: a
ji
n
is the normal LOS acceleration.

3.2 Augmented Proportional Navigation (APN) Guidance
Finally, a variation of the PN guidance law is the APN that includes the influence of the
target acceleration, can be implemented as follows:
| | | | ( )
j
i
b
f
ij
s
b
d
i
a N T , N PNG a +
(

|
.
|

\
|
e = (3.8)

Where:
| |: N is the (target) acceleration navigation constant.
( ) : PNG is the proportional navigation guidance law given in (3.1)-(3.7)

4. Overall State Space Model
The overall non-linear state space model (e.g. for APN guidance) that can be used for
sensitivity studies and for non-linear or Monte-Carlo analysis is given below:
ij ij
u x
dt
d
= (4.1)
| |
j
b
i i
f
b ij
a a T u
dt
d
= (4.2)
ij
T
ij
ij ij
ij
s
x x
u x
= e (4.3)
| | | |
j
i
b
f
ij
s
b
d
i
a N T , N PNG a +
(

|
.
|

\
|
e = (4.4)
| | | |
b
d
i i
b
i i
b
i
a a a
dt
d
A + A = (4.5)
b
i
T
b
i
b
i
b
i b
i
u u
a u
= e (4.6)
| |
i
b
bf
i
q q
dt
d
O = (4.7)

The overall state space model that can be implemented on the computer is given in Table A.1,
and the block-diagram is shown in Figure A.1.
UNCLASSIFIED
13
UNCLASSIFIED
DSTO-TR-2805
5. Conclusions
In this report mathematical model is derived for multi-vehicle guidance, navigation and
control suitable for developing, implementing and testing modern missile guidance systems.
The model allows for incorporating changes in body attitude in addition to autopilot lags,
vehicle acceleration limits and aerodynamic effects. This model will be found suitable for
studying the performance of both the conventional and the modern guidance such as those
that arise of game theory and intelligent control theory. The following are considered to be the
main contribution of this report:
- A 3-DOF multi-vehicle engagement model is derived for the purposes of developing,
testing, and carrying out guidance performance studies,
- The model incorporates non-linear effects including large changes in vehicle body
attitude, autopilot lags, acceleration limits and aerodynamic effects,
- The model can easily be adapted for multi-run non-linear analysis of guidance
performance and for undertaking Monte-Carlo analysis.

UNCLASSIFIED
14
UNCLASSIFIED
DSTO-TR-2805
References

1. Ben-Asher, J.Z., Isaac,Y., Advances in Missile Guidance Theory, Vol. 180 of Progress in
Astronautics and Aeronautics, AIAA, 1
st
ed., 1998.
2. Zarchan, P., Tactical and Strategic Missile Guidance, Vol. 199 of Progress in Astronautics
and Aeronautics, AIAA, 2
nd
ed., 2002.
3. Faruqi F. A., Application of Differential Game Theory to Missile Guidance Problem, DSTO Report
(to be published, Dec 2011).
4. Etkin, B.,Lloyd, D.F., Dynamics of Flight, (3
rd
Ed.), John Wiley & Sons, Inc. New York, 1996.
5. Titterton, D.H, Weston, L., Strapdown Inertial Navigation Technology, book, IEE
publication, 2004



Acknowledgements

The author would like to acknowledge the contribution of Mr. Jim Repo and Mr. Arvind
Rajagopalan for their helpful suggestion and in assisting in the development of computer
simulation programming.
UNCLASSIFIED
15
UNCLASSIFIED
DSTO-TR-2805
Appendix A
Table A.1: State Space Dynamics Model for Navigation, Seeker, Guidance and Autopilot.

ALGORITHM


MODULE
NAME



1
i i
u x
dt
d
=
i i
a u
dt
d
=
j i ij
x x x =
j i ij
u u u =
j i ij
a a a =




Translational
Kinematics







2
2
1
ij
T
ij
ij
x x R |
.
|

\
|
=
ij ij ij
R R R

A + =
( )
ij
ij
T
ij
ij ij
R
u x
R R
dt
d
= =


ij ij ij
R R R

A + =
ij
ij
c
R

V

=
ij
T
ij
ij ij
ij
s
x x
u x
= e
ij
s
ij
s
ij
s
e A + e = e






Rotational
Kinematics
(Seeker Model)



3
3.1. | | | |
i
ij
s i
i
b
f
b
d
i
u

N T a e =
3.2. ( ) | | | |
j
i
i
b
f
ij
s
b
d
i
a

N q T

, N PNG a +
(

|
.
|

\
|
e =
0
m
D T
a
i
i i b
d
i
x
=
o o
=




Guidance
Laws

4
| | | |
b
d
i i
b
i i
b
i
a a a
dt
d
A + A =

Autopilot



UNCLASSIFIED
16
UNCLASSIFIED
DSTO-TR-2805
UNCLASSIFIED
17
Table A.1: (continued) State Space Dynamics Model for Navigation, Seeker, Guidance and Autopilot.

ALGORITHM


MODULE
NAME
















5
5.1. Quaternions:
2
sin
2
sin
2
sin
2
cos
2
cos
2
cos q
i i i i i i
i
1
u |
+
u |
=
2
sin
2
sin
2
cos
2
cos
2
cos
2
sin q
i i i i i i
i
2
u |

u |
=
2
sin
2
cos
2
sin
2
cos
2
sin
2
cos q
i i i i i i
i
3
u |
+
u |
=
2
cos
2
sin
2
sin
2
sin
2
cos
2
cos q
i i i i i i
i
4
u |
+
u |
=

5.2. Quaternion Evolution:
| |
i
b
i
i
q q
dt
d
O = ;
b
i
T
b
i
b
i
b
i b
i
u u
a u
= e

5.3. The Transformation Matrix:
( )
2
i
4
2
i
3
2
i
2
2
i
1
i
11
q q q q t + =
( )
i
4
i
1
i
3
i
2
i
12
q q q q 2 t + =
( )
i
3
i
1
i
4
i
2
i
13
q q q q 2 t =
( )
i
4
i
1
i
3
i
2
i
21
q q q q 2 t =
( )
2
i
4
2
i
3
2
i
2
2
i
1
i
22
q q q q t + =
( )
i
2
i
1
i
4
i
3
i
23
q q q q 2 t + =
( )
i
3
i
1
i
4
i
2
i
31
q q q q 2 t + =
( )
i
2
i
1
i
4
i
3
i
32
q q q q 2 t =
( )
2
i
4
2
i
3
2
i
2
2
i
1
i
33
q q q q t + =

| |
(
(
(

=
i
33
i
31
i
23
i
22
i
21
i
13
i
12
i
11
i
b
f
t 32 t t
t t t
t t t
T ; | | | |
T
b f
i
f
i
b
T T =

| |
b
i i
f
b i
a T a =

















Navigation
Model


UNCLASSIFIED
DSTO-TR-2805


Figure A.1: Intelligent Integrated Navigation, Guidance & Control Test Bed
UNCLASSIFIED
18
UNCLASSIFIED
DSTO-TR-2805
Appendix B
B.1 Aerodynamic Forces and Equations of Motion
For a symmetrical body( )
z y zx
I I ; 0 I = = , the equations of motion for an aerodynamic vehicle
are given by (see Figure B.1) [4]:
u = + sin g
m
X
rv qw u
b b b
(A-1.1)
| u + = + sin cos g
m
Y
pw ru v
b b b
(A-1.2)
| u + = + cos cos g
m
Z
qu pv w
b b b
(A-1.3)
( )
x x
y z
I
L
I
I I
qr p =

+ (A-1.4)
( )
y y
z x
I
M
I
I I
rp q =

+ (A-1.5)
( )
z z
x y
I
N
I
I I
pq r =

+ (A-1.6)

Where:
( ): w , v , u
b b b
are the vehicle velocities defined in body axis.
( ) : r , q , p are the body rotation rates w.r.t the fixed axis defined in the body axis.
( : Z , Y , X ) are the aerodynamic forces acting on the vehicle body defined in the body axis.
( ) : N , M , L are the aerodynamic moments acting on the vehicle body defined in the body axis.
( ): I , I , I
z y x
are the vehicle body inertias.
: m is the vehicle mass.
( : , , | u ) are respectively the body (Euler) angles w.r.t the fixed axis.

For a non-rolling vehicle ; this assumption enables us to decouple the yaw and
pitch kinematics. Equations (A-1.1)-(A1.6) give us:
0 p p = | = =
u = + sin g
m
X
rv qw u
b b b
(A-1.7)
m
Y
ru v
b b
= + (A-1.8)
u + = cos g
m
Z
qu w
b b
(A-1.9)
0 L = (A-1.10)
y
I
M
q = (A-1.11)
z
I
N
r = (A-1.12)
UNCLASSIFIED
19
UNCLASSIFIED
DSTO-TR-2805
The accelerations about the vehicle body CG is given by:
u = + = sin g
m
X
rv qw u a
b b b b
x
(A-1.13)
m
Y
ru v a
b b b
y
= + = (A-1.14)
u + = = cos g
m
Z
qu w a
b b b
z
(A-1.15)

Where: ( ): a , a , a
b
z
b
y
b
x
are the body accelerations w.r.t the fixed axis defined in the body axis.

If we consider perturbation about the nominal, we get:
( )
( ) ou u + u
o +
= o + cos sin g
m
X X
a a
b
x
b
x

( )
m
Y Y
a a
b
y
b
y
o +
= o +
( )
( ) ou u u +
o +
= o + sin cos g
m
Z Z
a a
b
z
b
z


B.2 2-D Yaw-Plane Kinematics Equations:
For 2-D yaw-plane kinematics only 0 ; 0 = ou = u (i.e. zero pitch motion), therefore, the X
and Y-plane steady state equations (in body axis) may be written as:
Y
~
m
Y
a
b
y
= = (A-1.16)
( )
( D
~
T
~
m
D T
m
X
a
b
x
=

= = ) (A-1.17)

Where we define: Y
~
m
Y
= ;
( )
( ) D
~
T
~
m
D T
m
X
=

= . Also, the total thrust is defined as:

T T T o + = , and the total drag is defined as: D D D o + = .

For nominal flight condition in the yaw-plane 0 Y = ; and the perturbation equation is given
by:
Y
~
m
Y
a
b
y
o =
o
= o (A-1.18)
( )
( D
~
T
~
m
D T
m
X
a
b
x
o o = )
o o
=
o
= o (A-1.19)

Where :
: a
b
y
o represents the body axis guidance commands (lateral acceleration) applied by the
vehicle.
UNCLASSIFIED
20
UNCLASSIFIED
DSTO-TR-2805
: a
b
x
o represents the body axis guidance commands (longitudinal acceleration) applied by the
vehicle. However, during guidance manoeuvre ( ) D
~
, T
~
o o are not directly controlled, Hence we
may assume to be zero.
b
x
a o

B.3 2-D Pitch-Plane Kinematics Equations:
Unlike the previous case, for 2-D pitch-plane kinematics 0 = u , and for steady state
conditions, we get:
u + = u + = cos g Z
~
cos g
m
Z
a
b
z
(A-1.20)
( )
( ) u = u

= u = sin g D
~
T
~
sin g
m
D T
sin g
m
X
a
b
x
(A-1.21)

The X , Z (pitch)-plane perturbation kinematics (in body axis) is given by:
Z
~
m
Z
a
b
z
o =
o
= o (A-1.22)
( )
( ) D
~
T
~
m
D T
a
b
x
o o =
o o
= o (A-1.23)

Where
: a
b
z
o represents the body axis guidance commands (lateral acceleration) applied by the
vehicle.

As in the case of the yaw-plane, during guidance ( ) D
~
, T
~
o o are not directly controlled, hence
we may assume to be zero. The reader will recognize, that in the main text of this report:
b
x
a o
x
b
i
d
x
a a o , (A-1.24)
y
b
i
d
y
a a o
z
b
i
d
z
a a o

B.4 Calculating the Aerodynamic Forces
For the purposes of the simulation under consideration we may assume that the vehicle
thrust profile ( ) t T , say as a function of time, is given; then the drag force D, which depends on
the vehicle aerodynamic configuration, is given by:
( | o |
.
|

\
|
= , C S V
2
1
D
D
2
) (A1.25)
( ) 0 C S V
2
1
Y
L
2
= | |
.
|

\
|
= (A1.26)
( ) u = o |
.
|

\
|
= cos g C S V
2
1
Z
L
2
(A1.27)
Where: the term in the bracket is the dynamic pressure; being the air density, is the body
characteristic surface area and
S
Vis the steady-state velocity. is the drag coefficient
D
C
UNCLASSIFIED
21
UNCLASSIFIED
DSTO-TR-2805


Figure B.1: Aerodynamic variables for a missile

and is the lift coefficient.
L
C ( ) | o, represent respectively the pitch- and the yaw-plane
nominal (steady-state) incidence angles. Contribution to thrust and drag due to
control deflections are small and ignored. Also:
( ) 0 C S V
2
1
Y
L
2
= o| |
.
|

\
|
= o (A1.28)
( ) ou u = oo |
.
|

\
|
= o sin g C S V
2
1
Z
L
2
(A1.29)

( ) o| oo, represent respectively the variation in pitch- and the yaw-plane incidence
angles as a result of control demands; these are assumed to be small. Note that for a
given ( ) o| oo, , , the maximum/minimum acceleration capability of a
vehicle is rated at the nominal velocity
2
V Z , Y o o
V, then the maximum/minimum acceleration
at any other velocity is given by: V
b
max
y
b
d
y
a a s ;
b
max
z
b
d
z
a a s ;Where:
2
V
V
|
.
|

\
|
=
B.5 Body Incidence
The body incidence angles ( ) | o, are given by( )
b b b
u w , v << :
b
b
b
b
1
u
w
u
w
tan ~
|
|
.
|

\
|
= o

;
b
b
b
b
1
u
v
u
v
tan ~
|
|
.
|

\
|
= | ;

|
.
|

\
|
+ + = = =
2
b
2
b
2
b i b
w v u V V ; these angles
represent the angle that the body makes w.r.t flight path or with the direction of the
UNCLASSIFIED
22
UNCLASSIFIED
DSTO-TR-2805
total velocity vector . In this report we shall assume that these angles are small and
may be ignored; in which case the body can be assumed to be aligned with the
velocity vector.
V

UNCLASSIFIED
23
UNCLASSIFIED
DSTO-TR-2805
Appendix C 3-D Collision Course Engagement
Geometry & Computing Missile Collision Course
Heading
`
X
Figure C.1: Three-DOF Collision Course Engagement Geometry.

T
u
MT
Mcc
|
Mcc
u
TM

cc
M


T

X
Y
Y
Z
Z
M
V
T
V
TM
R
( )
S Mcc
( )
TM T

M
T
P
MT
Mcc
|
T
|
Q
LOS
MT
VCcc


UNCLASSIFIED
24
UNCLASSIFIED
DSTO-TR-2805
C.1 Computing 3-DOF Collision Course Missile Heading Angles:
C.1.1 Computing ( )
TM
| , Given ( )
TM TM T T T
, , , , V u u :
The unit vector along the target body
T
ev and the unit LOS vector
TM
es may be written as:
|
T T T T T T
sin sin cos cos cos ev u u u = | (A2.1)
| |
TM TM TM TM TM TM
sin sin cos cos cos es u u u = (A2.2)

It follows from equations (A2.1), (A2.2) that:
TM T TM TM T T
TM TM T T TM TM T
sin sin sin cos sin cos
cos cos cos cos cos es , ev
u u + u u +
u u = | =
(A2.3)

Equation (A2.3), gives us:
)
`

u u + u u +
u u
= |

TM T TM TM T T
TM TM T T 1
TM
sin sin sin cos sin cos
cos cos cos cos
cos (A2.4)

Where:
:
TM
| is the angle between the target velocity vector and the target-to-missile LOS vector
measured in ( ) plane V R V
M TM T
.
: V
T
is the target velocity.
: V
M
is the target velocity.
( ) : ,
T T
u are respectively the body pitch and yaw body angles (Euler angles) w.r.t the fixed
axis.
( ) : ,
TM TM
u are respectively the target-to-missile LOS elevation and azimuth w.r.t the fixed
axis.

C.1.2 Computing ( )
MT
cc | , Given ( )
TM M
, V | :
Consideration of collision course engagement in ( ) plane R V V
MT T M
gives us:
(A2.5)
TM T
MT
M
sin V cc sin V | = |

Equation (A2.5) gives us:

)
`

| = |

TM
M
T 1
MT
sin
V
V
sin cc (A2.6)

Where:
: cc
MT
| is the angle between the missile collision course velocity vector and the target-to-
missile LOS vector measured in ( ) plane V R V
M TM T
.

C.1.3 Computing the Closing Velocity ( )
MT
CC
VC and Time-to-go ( )
go
T :
UNCLASSIFIED
25
UNCLASSIFIED
DSTO-TR-2805
We shall define:

TM T
MT
M
MT
cos V cc cos V VCcc | | = (A2.7)

Also, the target/missile range-to-go( )
TM
R is defined as:
( ) ( ) ( ) | |
2
1
2
T M
2
T M
2
T M MT
Z Z Y Y X X R + + = (A2.8)

Then:

MT
MT
go
VCcc
R
T = (A2.9)

Where:
: VCcc
MT
is the collision course relative (closing) velocity of the missile w.r.t. the target. Note
that the collision course velocity is along the range vector .
MT
R
: T
go
is time-to-go (to intercept).

2.1.4. Computing ( )
CC
M
CC
M
, u :
Now the components of the relative position vector of the missile w.r.t may be written as :

( )
( )
go T T T M M M
go TM TM MT T M
T . cos cos V cc cos cc cos V
T . cos cos VCcc X X
u u =
u =
(A2.10)


( )
( )
go T T T M M M
go TM TM MT T M
T . sin cos V cc sin cc cos V
T . sin cos VCcc Y Y
u u =
u =
(A2.11)


( )
(
go T T M M
go TM
MT
CC T M
T . sin V cc sin V
T . sin VC Z Z
u u =
u =
)
(A2.12)
Where:
:
CC
M
is the missile collision course azimuth heading, measured w.r.t the fixed axis.
:
CC
M
u is the missile collision course elevation heading, measured w.r.t the fixed axis.

Equations (A2.10), (A2.11) and (A2.12) give us:

|
|
.
|

\
|
u + u =
u
T T
M
T
TM TM
M
MT
CC
MT MT
cos cos
V
V
cos cos
V
VC
cc cos cc cos
(A2.13)


|
|
.
|

\
|
u + u =
u
T T
M
T
TM TM
M
MT
CC
MT MT
sin cos
V
V
sin cos
V
VC
cc sin cc cos
(A2.14)

UNCLASSIFIED
26
UNCLASSIFIED
DSTO-TR-2805
UNCLASSIFIED
27

|
|
.
|

\
|
u + u = u
T
M
T
TM
M
MT
CC
MT
sin
V
V
sin
V
VC
cc sin (A2.15)

Equation (A2.15) gives us:

|
|
.
|

\
|
u + u = u

T
M
T
TM
M
MT
CC
1
MT
sin
V
V
sin
V
VC
sin cc (A2.16)

Similarly equations (A2.13), (A2.14) (after some straight forward algebraic manipulation give
us:

|
|
.
|

\
|
u + u
|
|
.
|

\
|
u + u
=

T T
M
T
TM TM
M
MT
CC
T T
M
T
TM TM
M
MT
CC
1
MT
sin cos
V
V
sin cos
V
VC
sin cos
V
V
sin cos
V
VC
tan cc (A2.17)

C.2 Computing 2-DOF Collision Course Missile Heading Angles:
C.2.1 Vertical Plane ( ) plane Z X Engagement:
For this case ( ) 0
S Mcc T
= = = and ( ) ( )
S T T
u u = | , ( ) ( )
S Mcc Mcc
u u = | ; hence
utilising equation (A2.5) we get:
( ) (
)
`

u u = u u

S T
M
T 1
S Mcc
sin
V
V
sin ) (A2.18)

(
)
`

u u + u = u

S T
M
T 1
S Mcc
sin
V
V
sin ) (A2.19)

C.2.2 Horizontal Plane ( ) plane XxY Engagement:
For this case ( ) 0
S Mcc T
= u = u = u and ( ) ( )
S T T
= | , ( ) ( )
S Mcc Mcc
= | ; hence
utilising, as previously, equation (5) we get:
(
)
`

+ =

S T
M
T 1
S Mcc
sin
V
V
sin ) (A2.20)


Page classification: UNCLASSIFIED

DEFENCE SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY ORGANISATION


DOCUMENT CONTROL DATA
1. PRIVACY MARKING/CAVEAT (OF DOCUMENT)

2. TITLE


Integrated Navigation, Guidance, and Control of Missile Systems:
3-D Dynamic Model



3. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION (FOR UNCLASSIFIED REPORTS
THAT ARE LIMITED RELEASE USE (L) NEXT TO DOCUMENT
CLASSIFICATION)

Document (U)
Title (U)
Abstract (U)

4. AUTHOR(S)

Farhan A. Faruqi

5. CORPORATE AUTHOR

DSTO Defence Science and Technology Organisation
PO Box 1500
Edinburgh South Australia 5111 Australia

6a. DSTO NUMBER
DSTO-TR-2805

6b. AR NUMBER
AR-015-533
6c. TYPE OF REPORT
Technical Report
7. DOCUMENT DATE
February 2013
8. FILE NUMBER
-

9. TASK NUMBER
-
10. TASK SPONSOR
-
11. NO. OF PAGES
27
12. NO. OF REFERENCES
5
13. DSTO Publications Repository

http://dspace.dsto.defence.gov.au/dspace/

14. RELEASE AUTHORITY

Chief, Weapons Systems Division
15. SECONDARY RELEASE STATEMENT OF THIS DOCUMENT

Approved for public release


OVERSEAS ENQUIRIES OUTSIDE STATED LIMITATIONS SHOULD BE REFERRED THROUGH DOCUMENT EXCHANGE, PO BOX 1500, EDINBURGH, SA 5111
16. DELIBERATE ANNOUNCEMENT

No Limitations

17. CITATION IN OTHER DOCUMENTS Yes
18. DSTO RESEARCH LIBRARY THESAURUS

Modelling; Missile Guidance; Missile control

19. ABSTRACT
In this report a 3-D mathematical modelfor multi-party engagement kinematics is derived suitable for developing, implementing and testing
modern missile guidance systems. The model developed here is suitable for both conventional and more advanced optimal intelligent
guidance schemes including those that arise out of the differential game theory. This model accommodates changes in vehicle body attitude
and other non-linear effects such as limits on lateral acceleration and aerodynamic forces.
Page classification: UNCLASSIFIED