Ordnance – Mounts – Training mechanisms
Reexamination Certificate
2002-11-22
2004-10-19
Tudor, Harold J. (Department: 3641)
Ordnance
Mounts
Training mechanisms
C089S041050, C089S041170
Reexamination Certificate
active
06805036
ABSTRACT:
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
The present invention relates to a method and device for judging the aiming errors of a weapon system, which has a fire control device for tracking a target, a weapon having a weapon barrel, aiming means for aiming the weapon barrel, and a data processing facility having software.
Methods and devices of this type are used for the purpose of judging the aiming precision of weapon systems, which are used to combat rapidly moving targets, generally flying targets.
Such weapons systems include a fire control device and one or more guns assigned to the fire control device. The fire control device is intended for the purpose of detecting a target, acquiring it, and tracking it. During tracking of the target, measurements are performed almost continuously, i.e., at measurement instants lying very near one another in time, in order to establish the location of the target for each measurement instant. A data processing facility assigned to the weapon system retrospectively calculates the movement state of the target from the results of these measurements, this movement state understood to include at least one empirical travel/time function, one empirical speed/time function, and one acceleration/time function of the target. Furthermore, the computer unit calculates the future movement state of the target on the basis of the travel/time function, the speed/time function, and the acceleration/time function. This is an extrapolation, i.e., the actual future movement state of the target is not calculated, but rather the movement state which the target will presumably have and which is also referred to as the expected movement state of the target. In particular a due instant and an associated due position, at which the target is expected at the due instant, are calculated. The due position is determined in such a way that a shell which is fired at a specific firing instant by the weapon arrives at the due position at the due instant or, expressed simply, hits the target at the due position. The due position determined in this way is therefore the expected meeting point. In connection with this, the data processing unit also calculates an aiming point for the weapon and/or for the weapon barrel, at which the weapon barrel must be aimed in the firing instant, and/or an azimuth and an elevation which the weapon barrel must have in the firing instant. In this calculation, which is referred to as a lead calculation, the relative positions of the fire control device and the weapon, the internal and external ballistics, and delays, which result during the functioning of the system, are taken into consideration. Obviously, the firing instant, in which the weapon barrel must be aimed at the aiming point, is before the due instant, in which the target will be located at the due position.
In order to judge the serviceability of the weapon system, the aiming precision of the weapon system, which largely determines the accuracy performance, is tested. In this case, it is essentially checked whether the procedures between the tracking of the target and the firing of a shell run as planned, specifically in such a way that the target and shell are located at the due position in the due instant, or at least in its close surroundings. Various methods are known for determining aiming errors. However, really appropriate judgment of the accuracy performance of a weapon system is only possible if the combating of a target is actually performed or is simulated in a way close to reality.
Precise judgment of the aiming precision and/or precise determination of aiming errors may be performed, for example, by actually firing at a target and determining the angular and/or distance deviation of the shell from the target during its flight. However, the judgment of the aiming precision and/or the accuracy performance is restricted to a relatively narrow time window during shelling and does not provide any points of reference about possible hits during the remaining span of time in which the target may be combated by the weapon used. A manipulated target and/or practice target is used as the target, which is to behave at least approximately like the real targets which the weapon system is intended to combat. Such manipulated targets are unmanned. Self-flying manipulated targets, which are remote-controlled, are known, as are non-flying manipulated targets, which are, for example, pulled by a towing aircraft. Live ammunition or practice ammunition may be used as ammunition. The deviation may be established in two different ways: either the travel/time curves of both the manipulated target and shell are determined and the deviation of the shell from the manipulated target is established therefrom; for this purpose, for example, the localized region in which the manipulated target and the shell meet may be imaged in the time period in which this impact occurs and the deviation may be determined therefrom. Or, sensors are attached to the manipulated target, which react to shells flying by. The great disadvantage of this method is that it is very complicated and costly. Independently of whether self-flying or towed manipulated targets are used, these manipulated targets themselves are necessary, as well as either additional devices for establishing and measuring the flight paths and for evaluating the measurement values established in this case, or devices for processing the signals made available by the sensors. The use of unmanned, flying, remote-controlled manipulated targets requires additional terrestrial devices for remote control of these manipulated targets. The totality of the devices required is, in any case, as indicated above, costly to provide and complicated to operate; typically, these devices may only be operated by specialized personnel and require an infrastructure which is only available at fixed firing ranges, but not in the field. In addition, there is always the danger of damaging or destroying the manipulated targets, which may not be avoided and should not be avoided, since hitting the manipulated target documents precisely the good aiming precision which is sought.
While in the method described above, manipulated targets are used as targets and real flight paths actually flown through by shells are assigned for the judgment, in the method described in the following, known as “zero test”, real targets or manipulated targets may be used as desired; the flight paths of the shells are optically simulated, the simulated beams only corresponding to the simulated shell flight paths at their starting and ending points. The zero test only verifies whether the tracking of the target by the fire control device and the aiming of the weapon barrel controlled by the fire control device at the target runs without errors, but the actual lead calculation is not checked.
For the zero test, the tracking of the target is performed as usual by the fire control device. The weapon barrel is continuously tracked on the target in such a way that it is continuously aimed at the target. The target is not fired upon, but rather a video camera mounted on the weapon barrel records images of the target. These images are displayed immediately or later. The aiming line, i.e., a line in the extension of the weapon barrel axis, is represented in the visualized images by a mark. The aiming error appears as a deviation of the image of the target from this mark. The target, which may be a real target in the zero test, is therefore not fired upon using shells, but rather the shelling is simulated in a way by optical beams; however, during the simulation a beam is recorded and visualized which runs not from the weapon to the target, but from the target to the weapon, this, however, being unimportant for the method. During the zero test, the weapon is directly tracked on the target, i.e., azimuth and elevation are such that for perfect aiming precision, the weapon barrel is aimed directly at the target; during visualization of the images of the video camera, the target is always on the mark. Since in reality the a
McCormick Paulding & Huber LLP
Oerlikon Contraves AG
Sukman Gabriel S.
Tudor Harold J.
LandOfFree
Method and device for judging the aiming error of a weapon... does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this patent.
If you have personal experience with Method and device for judging the aiming error of a weapon..., we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and Method and device for judging the aiming error of a weapon... will most certainly appreciate the feedback.
Profile ID: LFUS-PAI-O-3330345