ADAO95 118 NAVAL POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL MONTEREY CA FIB 16/4.

1
TACTICAL MISSILE CONCEPTUAL OESIGN.(U)
SEP 80 D R REDMON

EEEIhEEIII
UNCLASSIFIED NL

'4

IImIIIIIIIIIu
*mIIIuuuIIuuu
EIEEEEIIEEEIIE
EEEEIIIIIEEEEE
EIEIIEEEEEEEEE
NAVAL POSTGRADUATE SCHO cg
Monterey, California

THESIS
TACTICAL MISSILE CONCEPTUAL DESIGN

by

Danny Ray Redmon

September 1980

Thesis Advisor: G.H. Lindsey

Approved for public release; distribution unlimited.

81 2 13 0J4"
 UNCLASSIFIED
SECURITY CLASSIICATIO No TWIS n rWllifm Dice
Ea aleesd)

REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE 8REAo IsTRucWNs

REPORT NUwm 2. GOVT ACCEISION NO. 3. NICIPIEN T* CATALOG wMUMlEN

TI TL. (andIS&"#*#f II. Type OF RIEPORT & PEIOo CovERED

Engineer's Thesis
TACTICAL MISSILE CONCEPTUAL DESIGN September 1980
a. PI PoMING OlG. REPNORT HUNGE

7. AUTIONlo) I. CONTRACT Of GRANT NUwgSEN(e)

Danny Ray Redmon

S. PIERORMING ORGANIZATION NME AND AOO ISS 10. PROGRAM PROJECT.
IMI.91Il[NT. TASIC
AREA A WORK UNIT NUMBIRS
Naval Postgraduate School
Monterey, California 93940
OD. 5S.PO*. .AT9
11 CONTRO LING OFFIE NAME AN

Naval Postgraduate School _' '!SeDtembes 298

Monterey, California 93940 31 6 RAGE& -
14 NowITORING AGENCY NAMIE & AOOffSStII Mfle101 11m Cm.aat01ng Offie) IS. SECURITY CLASS. (el e,, f

Naval Postgraduate School Unclassified

Monerey, California 93940 . DCCLASSIFICATION/DowwGnAimr
toC IOULI[

16. OISTRIBuTION STATEMENT (of this Report)

Approved for public release; distribution unlimited.

i. OISTIBUTION STATEMINT (of Ph- obarret atefet IN Bleak 20. Id"fOrmlmi Rslp..t

I. SUPPLEIENTARY NOTES

1S. KEY WOROS (CoIstgram an roers* aide of Rinesoss and Iddtefll b bleak ammbee)
Missile design, Conceptual design, Missile aerodynamics

IJAS LIACT (Cotmmu 0 reveres @#do of "**ssayp mod fdonelor bp bidsiS mmbee
This thesis presents the theory necessary for the conceptual design
of a tactical missile. The design process begins with the well known
linear aerodynamic theory for initial sizing and later includes non-
linear effects to determine the final design of the missile. Where
theory does not apply, empirical methods are presented which are
known to give accurate results. An air-to-air missile is designed
for a specific threat as an example which immediately follows the
development of the theory for each section. Several small digital
DD ~ 1473 EOITION OF I.NOV ,,OUo,UNCLTASSFIE
UNCLASSIFIED
DD ,00, S/N ( SECURITY'CLASSIPICATION OF THIS PAGE (en Date eot"f
 UNCLA SIFIED
4M CL*SI*FSC"1Y,.Sa@* ~
ftao n oeSat

cmuter programs are presented and used for analysis of specific

areas of the design. One large program (AER0l) is used for
determining the aerodynamic coefficients
of the final desig~r,

Accessiton For

NT-7 C '
n-'

DD Forr 14T3
-jk1 UNCLASSIFIED
2-S,60 5UCUNITV CLAMPICAT16% 00wO9 phozmh" ee ieftd)
 Approved for public release; distribution unlimited
II
Tactical Missile Conceptual Design

by
Danny Ray Redmon
Lieutenant, United States Navy
B.S., Purdue University, 1974

Submitted in partial fulfillment of the

requirements for the degree of

AERONAUTICAL ENGINEER

from the

NAVAL POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL

September 1980

Author

•Approved by: I Thesis Advisor

Second Reader

Ctairn - ep~artment ofAeronautics

Dean of Science and Engineering

3
 ABSTRACT

This thesis presents the theory necessary for the concep-

tual design of a tactical missile. The design process begins

with the well known linear aerodynamic theory for initial sizing

and later includes nonlinear effects to determine the final

design of the missile. Where theory does not apply, empirical

methods are presented which are known to give accurate results.

An air-to-air missile is designed for a specific threat as

an example which immediately follows the development of the

theory for each section. Several small digital computer pro-

grams are presented and used for analysis of specific areas

of the design. One large program (AEROI) is used for deter-

mining the aerodynamic coefficients of the final design.

4
f4
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page
I. INTRODUCTION ....... .................. 18
II. PROBLEM DEFINITION ..... ............... . 19

A. THREAT ANALYSIS ..... ................. 19

1. Operational Requirements .. ........ . 19
2. Design Example (Operational

Requirements) ... ............ .. 20

3. Scenario ...... ................ 20

4. Design Example (Scenario) ......... 22
B. HISTORICAL SURVEY .... ................ 22
C. LAUNCH PLATFORMS AND PHYSICAL CONSTRAINTS 25

D. MISSION PROFILES AND PERFORMANCE

OBJECTIVES ...... ................. 27

1. Design Example (Mission Profile) . . . 28

a. Semi-Active Homing Missile ..... 29

b. Active Homing Missile .......... 31

III. GUIDANCE LAW SELECTION .... ............. . 35

A. PURSUIT GUIDANCE .... .............. . 35

B. LINE-OF-SIGHT GUIDANCE ... .......... .. 37

C. PROPORTIONAL GUIDANCE ... .............-. 37

D. COMPARISON OF GUIDANCE LAWS ............. 38

E. PURSUIT GUIDANCE (DETAILED ANALYSIS) . . . 48

F. LINE-OF-SIGHT GUIDANCE (DETAILED

ANALYSIS) ........................... 51

5
 Page

1. Example I (Non-maneuvering

Crossing Target) ... ............ . 58

2. Example II (Effect of VM ) ........... 61

3. Example III (Manuevering Target) 65

G. PROPORTIONAL GUIDANCE (DETAILED ANALYSIS) 68

1. Example IV (Non-maneuvering

Crossing Target) ... ............ . 72

2. Example V (Crossing Maneuvering

Target) ..... .................... 77

3. Example VI (Effect of k) ... ........ 81

H. DESIGN EXAMPLE (GUIDANCE LAW SELECTION) . .. 85

IV. SIZING THE DIAMETER ..... ................. 92

A. THE RADAR RANGE EQUATION .. .. 93

...........

B. ACTIVE RADAR HOMING ... ................ 95

1. Example ...... ................... 97

C. SEMI-ACTIVE HOMING ..... ............. .101

D. DESIGN EXAMPLE (ANTENNA SIZING) ... ....... 102

E. INFRARED SEEKERS ..... .............. .102

1. Planck's Law .... ............. 103

2. Emissivity ..... ............... .104

3. Energy into a Hemisphere ... ........ .108

4. Targets ..... ................... 109

a. Self-Emission ... .............. 110

b. Reflection ...... ............. 110

5. Target Temperature ..... ........... 110

a. Example I .... ................. 111

6
 Page

b. Example II ... ................. 112

6. Simple IR System ... ............ 113
7. Detectors ..... .............. .... 114

8. Idealized Range ... ................ 117

a. Example (Idealized Range) ......... 118

F. WARHEAD SIZING ..... ............... .119

1. Target Vulnerability ... .......... 120

2. Conditional Kill Probability ........ .121

3. Sizing the Warhead Radius ........ 124

V. BASELINE DEFINITION ..... ............... 134

A. CONTROL CONCEPTS .... ................ 134

1. Wing Control .................... 135

2. Canard Control ... .............. 136

3. Tail Control .... ............ .. 136

B. GROSS WEIGHT AND CENTER OF GRAVITY ..... ... 137

C. DESIGN EXAMPLE (BASELINE DEFINITION) . . . 143

VI. LINEAR AERODYNAMICS .... .............. . 147

A. MISSILE DRAG ..... ............... .. 147

1. Supersonic Skin Friction .. ........
... 148
2. Supersonic Wave Drag .... . o......... 149

3. Base Pressure Drag ... .......... .. 153

4. Induced Drag ..... ............. .. 154

B. DESIGN EXAMPLE (ZERO LIFT DRAG CALCULATION). 154

C. MISSILE LIFT CURVE SLOPE ... .......... .156

D. MISSILE PITCHING MOMENT . .............. 161

E. WEIGHT AND CENTER OF GRAVITY VARIATIONS 163

7
 Page

VII. LIFTING SURFACE DESIGN............ 164

A. WING PLACEMENT .... .............. . 164

B. MANEUVER LOAD FACTOR .... ............ 165

1. Design Example (Maneuver Load

Factor) ..... ................. 168

C. TAIL SIZING ..... ................. 169

D. WING PLANFORM ..... ................. 170

1. Effect of Taper Ratio and Leading

Edge Sweep .... .............. . 170

2. Example ..... .................. 174
3. Effect of Varying Aspect Ratio . . . 174

4. Design Example (Wing Planform) . . . 179

5. Design Example (Canard Planform) . . 181

E. DESIGN EXAMPLE (REVISION OF ZERO LIFT DRAG

AND LIFT CURVE SLOPE .... ............ 185

VIII. PROPULSION REQUIREMENTS ... .............. 187

A. BOOSTER INITIAL SIZING .. .......... . 187

B. SUSTAINER INITIAL SIZING .. ......... . 191

C. ROCKET MOTOR CHAMBER PRESSURE ........ . 193

D. TYPICAL PROPELLANTS .... ............ 196

E. DESIGN EXAMPLE (BOOSTER) .. ......... .. 199

F. DESIGN EXAMPLE (SUSTAINER).. ....... .. 201

G. REDUCING ROCKET MOTOR LENGTH .. ...... 203

1. Design Example (Resizing for

Propulsion) ..... .............. 205

 Page

H. DESIGN EXAMPLE (CHAMBER PRESSURE) .... 205

I. DESIGN EXAMPLE (SIZING THE NOZZLE) ..... 207

J. TAIL SIZING ...... ............... 208

IX. NONLINEAR AERODYNAMICS AND AERO1 ............ 212

A. VISCOUS CROSS-FLOW ... ................ 212

B. TOTAL MISSILE LIFT ... ................ 218

C. DRAG CHARACTERISTICS OF A MISSILE ...... .. 220

1. Zero Lift Drag ... ................ 221

a. Subsonic ..................... 221

(1) Body Drag .. .............. 221

(2) Wing Drag .. .............. 222

(3) Tail Drag .. .............. 222

b. Transonic .... ............. . 222

c. Supersonic ... ................ 224

2. Induced Drag ..... ............... 229

3. Total Drag ..... ................. 229

D. PITCHING MOMENT CHARACTERISTICS ....... . 231

1. Body ...... .................... 231

2. Wing (Fixed Surface) .............. 231

3. Tail (Control Surface) ............. 239

E. AERO DESCRIPTION .... ............. . 240

1. Verification of AERO1 .. ......... . 242

a. NASA TN D-6996 .. .............. 242

b. NASA TM X-2367 .. .............. 247

c. NASA TM X-2780 and NASA TM X-2289 . 247

F. COMPONENT WEIGHTS .... ............. . 258

9
 Page

9 G. DESIGN EXAMPLE (FINAL ANALYSIS) .... .. 262

X. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ........ .. 283

AERO COMPUTER PROGRAM LISTING ... ............ . 265

LIST OF REFERENCES ....... .................. 314

INITIAL DISTRIBUTION LIST ..... ............ .. 316

10
 LIST OF TABLES

Page
(2-I) Historical Data .... ............... . 24
(3-I) Guidance Law Trends for Air Targets .•. •.46
(3-11) Line-of-Sight Computer Program ....... . 56
(3-111) Example I Output .... ................. 59

(3-IV) Example II Output .... .............. . 62

(3-V) Example III Output .... ................ 66
(3-VI) Proportional Guidance Computer Program ... 75

(3-VII) Example V Output .... .............. . 78

(3-VIII) Example VI Output .... .............. . 82

(3-IX) Design Example Output ... ............ .. 89

(8-I) Typical Propellant Properties .. ........ . 198

(9-I) Input Data ....... .................. 244
(9-Il) Output Data ...... ................. . 246

(9-II) AEROl Input ....... ............. .. 263

(9-IV) AERO1 Output ....... ............... 264

(9-V) AEROl Output ...... ................... 268

11

S 1 *4 . ...... . . .. .. . .
 LIST OF FIGURES
Page

(2-1) RAM-K Fighter ....... ................. 21

(2-2) Weight Limitations ..... ............... .. 26
(3-1a) Pursuit Guidance ...... ............... .. 36
(3-1b) Beam Rider Guidance ..... ............. . 36
(3-ic) Proportional Guidance ... ............. . 36

(3-2) Target Heading Sensitivity .... ........... .40

(3-3) Target Speed Sensitivity ..... ........... .41
(3-4) Target Acceleration Sensitivity ... ......... 42

(3-5) Angle Bias Sensitivity ... ............... 43

(3-6) Noise Sensitivity ..... ............... 44
(3-7) Wind Gust Sensitivity .... ................ 45

(3-8) Miss Distance Sensitivity to Missile

Acceleration Limit ..... .............. .. 47

(3-9) Pursuit Geometry ....... .............. 48

(3-10) Line-of-Sight Geometry ..... ............. .51
(3-11) Non-maneuvering Crossing Geometry ........... 58
(3-12) Non-maneuvering Crossing Target .. .......... 60
(3-13) Crossing Target Geometry ..... ........... .. 61
(3-14) Effect of VM on the Encounter .......... .. 64
(3-15) Maneuvering Target ..... ............... .65
(3-16) Effect of a 7 g Maneuver Upon the Encounter 67
(3-17) Proportional Guidance Geometry .. ......... .68
(3-18) Non-maneuvering Target ..... ............. .72

12
 Page

(3-19) Crossing Maneuvering Target ... ........... 77

(3-20) Trajectories of Crossing, Maneuvering

Intercept ........ .................. 80

(3-21) Initial Geometry ..... .................. 81
(3-22) Effect of Varying k .... ............. .... 84
(3-23) Head-On Scenario ..... .................. 86

(3-24) Crossing Scenario .... ................ 87

(3-25) Obilique Scenario ...... .............. . 88

(3-26) Selection of Navigation Constant ........... 90

(4-1) Required Antenna Size ..... .............. 98

(4-2) Atmospheric Absorption .... .............. 100

(4-3) Black-Body Spectral Radiant Emittance ...... .. 105

(4-4) Actual Spectral Radiant Emittance .. ....... .106

(4-5) Radiant Emittance of a Body ... .......... .107

(4-6) Energy Emitted into a Hemisphere ............ 108

(4-7) Simple IR System ..... .................. 113
(4-8) Simple Chopper ...... ................... 116
(4-9) Preamp Input ...... .................... 116
(4-10) Encounter Geometry .... .................. 119

(4-11) Static Encounter ..... .................. 122

(4-12) Warhead ........ .................... 125

(4-13) PD versus rw ... ............... ....... 129
(4-14) Effect of Initial Velocity on Warhead Radius .. 132

(4-15) Hollow Warhead ..... ................ . 133

13
 Page

(5-1) Control Configurations ... ................ 134

(5-2) Generic SRAAM Configuration ... ......... 139

(5-3) Generic MRAAM Configuration .. ........... 140

(5-4) Generic LRAAM Configuration .... .......... .141

(5-5) Generic SAM Configuration ..................142

(5-6) Lifting Surface ...... ............... . 144

(5-7) Baseline Missile ..... .................. 146

(6-1) Hemispherical Nose Wave Drag .. ........... 151

(6-2) Double-Wedge Wing ...... ............... .152

(6-3) Base Pressure Areas ...... ............. .153

(6-4) Wing-Body-Tail Lift ..... .............. .156

(6-5) Linear Lift Interference Factors ............ 158

(6-6) Wing Leading Edge ...... ............... .159

(6-7) Forces Acting on the Missile .............. 162

(7-1) Sustained Maneuver of a Missile ........... 165

(7-2) Planform Geometry ..... ............... .170

(7-3) Theoretical Lift Curve Slope .............. 171

(7-4) Theoretical Lift Curve Slope .. ........... 172

(7-5) Effect of X on Drag ..... ............. 175

(7-6) Effect of X on Lift Curve Slope .. ........ .176

(7-7) Lift Drag Function .... ............. . 178

(7-8) Wing Lift Drag Function .... ............ .. 182

(7-9) Canard Lift Drag Function .... ........... .. 184

(7-10) Design with "Optimum" Wings ... .......... . 186

(8-1) Forces Acting on the Missile .......... .... 188

(8-2) Nozzle Geometry ..... ................. 209

14
 Page

t (8-3) Missile Design ................. 210

(9-1) Relative Contributions of Linear and
Nonlinear Terms ...... ............... .213

(9-2) Cross-flow Drag Coefficient .. .......... . 214

(9-3) Cross-flow Drag Proportionality Constant 216

(9-4) Drag Coefficient for a Flat Plate

Normal to the Flow .... .................. 219

(9-5) Transonic Wave Drag for Ogival and

Blunted Conical Forebodies .. ......... . . 225

(9-6) Transonic C for Unswept Wings ........ 226

(9-7) Ratio of CCDW for Various L/D to CDW

C for

Hemisphere ...... ................. .. 227

(9-8) Wave Drag of Pcinted Conical Nose ........ ... 230

(9-9) Mean Base Pressure Curve ... ............. 233

(9-10) Wing Center of Pressure (Subsonic) .......... 234

(9-11) Wing Center of Pressure (Supersonic) ....... 235

(9-12) Body Center of Pressure ..... . .. ...... .236

(9-13) Body Center of Pressure .... ............ .237

(9-14) Body Center of Pressure ... ........... .. 238

(9-15) AEROl Input Data ..... ................ 243

(9-16) Body Alone Normal Force .... ............ .248
(9-17) Body Alone Moment ..... ............... .249

(9-18) Body Alone Axial Force ... ................ 25Q,

(9-19) Tail Body Lift Force .... ................ 251

(9-20) Tail Body Drag Force .... ................ 252

15
 Page

(9-22) Wing Body Normal. Force ............. 254

(9-23) Wing Body Moment...................255

(9-24) Complete Missile Lift Force. .. ........ 256

(9-25) Complete Missile Drag..............257

(9-26) Aero Surface Weight...............259

(9-27) Final Design....................260

(9-28) Static Stability.................266

16
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The author wishes to express his sincere appreciation to

the faculty of the Aeronautical Engineering Department of the

Naval Postgraduate School. The broad subject area of this

thesis required the help of experts in several areas for which

the help of all concerned is appreciated.

The author is particularly indebted and grateful to his

thesis advisor, Professor G.H. Lindsey, whose counsel and

assistance enabled him to express the concepts in this thesis

in a meaningful manner.

Finally I would like to thank my wife, Peggy, for her help,

patience, and love, without which, this thesis would not have

been possible.

17
t
I. INTRODUCTION

This study was made to present a method for the conceptual

design of tactical missiles. The starting point for the design

was a recently completed report by General Dynamics, Convair

Division entitled Rapid Approach to Missile Synthesis (RAMS). A

procedure was then developed more akin to aircraft design and

which bears little resemblance to RAMS and which uses basic

equations to size components rather than nomograms and table

look-up. The procedure starts with a threat description and

proceeds with the formulation of performance objectives and

a conceptual design of a tactical missile to counter the threat.

The design is not unique, but as will be shown, is a compromise

of parameters to give one possible solution to the design prob-

lem; therefore, the point design arrived at is not necessarily

the optimum design for the presented threat. An attempt is

made to find the optimum performance within specific areas of

the design process.

Throughout this study the theory involved is explained and

specific examples are worked. A complete design example is

worked out in detail. It is an air-to-air missile designed to

counter the new Soviet RAM-K fighter aircraft. This example

is worked in each section immediately following the develop-

ment of the theory for that specific area.

18
 II. PROBLEM DEFINITION

A. THREAT ANALYSIS

1. Operational Requirements

The design of a new missile is usually in response to

an operational requirement which arises as the result of one

! of the following: (1) A new technology provides the means to

design a more effective missile to meet a current threat. An

example of this might be an advance in material science, which

allows higher inlet turbine temperatures for a turbojet engine;

therefore, allowing higher missile flight speeds. (2) Intelli-

gence indicates a new threat for which existing missiles are

not effective. (3) Operational reports indicate a current mis-

sile is inadequate against a current threat.

Regardless of how the operational requirement is derived,

a statement of the threat is required before the design process

can proceed. Experience has proven that one missile cannot be

designed to meet all types of threats without seriously com-

promising performance or effectiveness. This can be illustrated

with the design of the warhead. A contact fuze, shaped charge

warhead designed to penetrate and kill hard targets such as

tanks, would not be effective against a highly maneuverable

aircraft for which the expected miss distance is several feet.

For this reason the design of a missile must start with a de-

tailed analysis of the threat. The more detailed this analysis

is, the more effective the final design can be.

19
 2. Design Example (Operational Requirement)

A design example will be used as a continuous thread

throughout this thesis to demonstrate applications of the theory.

An air-to-air missile will be designed to counter the new class

of Soviet fighter, which is in the advanced development stage

at the Ramenskoye Experimentation Center. The fighter, as des-

cribed in Aviation Week [l, 2 ]has been designated the RAM-K. The

RAM-K is a twin engine fighter with variable geometry inlets and

swing wings. The aircraft bears a resemblance to both the F-14

and F-15. It is expected to be the recipient of a new look

down, shoot down radar and the 40 km range AA-X-9 missile. The

following unclassified dimensions and performance data are avail-

able on the RAM-K:

Wing span 40 ft

Overall length 64 ft

Gross weight 6q000 lbs

Maximum speed M=2.5

Service ceiling 60,000 ft

Figure (2-1) is a drawing of the RAM-K.

3. Scenario

The scenario within which the missile is expected to

operate should also be described. If the normal mode of operation

of the threat is not known, an attempt should be made to define

the most demanding scenario that can be expected. For a defen-

sive weapon the most challenging incoming threat will normally

be a head-on encounter. The threat profile may vary from a high

level attack with a terminal dive to a low level attack with a

20
RAM-K

Fighter.
Figure (21.RAM-K
21
terminal pop-up maneuver. In the case of the AS-6 (Kingfish)
t!
two modes of attack can be expected. In such a case both pro-
files must be evaluated to determine the most demanding in

terms of missile performance objectives. For an offensive sys-

tem, such as an air-to-air missile designed to intercept and

destroy an enemy fighter before it launches its weapons, the

scenarios analyzed should include all possible encounter

geometries.

4. Design Example (Scenario)

The scenario for the above threat would likely be an

intercept situation in defense of the fleet high value unit.

The scenario is taken to be a head-on encounter with the missile

and the target at the same altitude. Since the combat specifi-

cations of an aircraft are normally given at 10,000 ft., this is

taken as the scenario altitude.

B. HISTORICAL SURVEY
Missile design is an iterative process, and the first time

through the design loop many assumptions have to be made con-

cerning component sizes and weights. One method of approach

at the early stage is to employ historical data of existing mis-

sile sizes and weights; since justifications for these parameters

were made duirng their design processes. An example of the use

of historical data in determining the initial missile length

can be made with the length to diameter ratio. The length to

diameter ratios of existing missiles of the same class as that

22
being designed are collected, and an average is computed. The
diameter of the design is fixed by one of three driving factors

(propulsion, warhead, or guidance). From the average length to

diameter ratio the initial missile length is then estimated.

From this historical data, initial choices based on the experi-

ence of others can be made for many of the missile parameters.

These parameters define a baseline missile, which is the initial

configuration from which design iterations and refinements can

be made.
Since missiles are designed for
specific missions, speci-

fic parameters such as length and diameter are of little value

in comparing missiles. Dimensionless ratios such as length to

diameter, L/D, ratio and aspect ratio, AR, are more meaningful

when relating missiles. Some parameters which are useful in

defining the baseline missile are listed below:

L/D = Length to diameter ratio

L n/D = Nose length to diameter ratio

ARw = Aspect ratio of the wing

AR t = Aspect ratio of the tail

W/S = Weight to lifting surface area ratio

Vt = Stlt/(Srefdre f ) Tail volume coefficient

WG/Wwh = Gross weight to warhead weight ratio

The tail volume coefficient, V t , is a dimensionless para-

meter used to initially size the tail. For a tail control mis-

sile, it is a measure of the relative control effectiveness when

comparing missiles. For a wing control missile it is a relative

measure of stability.

23
 CN r, NN
m o q 0r

LA
co

U U
10 C%0

4.)

00 Ln 0 CUl) !

en Ul N t.0 Ln N Ho

-l LO
-- a -D v r-w

o 40

b., 0 H 0 0 - %D

NA 0 L0 CN

0 0 Ln l N o N 0 ON

s-I .D m 11 N .0 .. .
N- H - H-
-I N-
rIr H-

N
0 0 0 N

0 0 La 0 M >1 0 04 1

H NH H H

5-24
 A complete historical survey should not be limited to
t the parameters listed here. Any dimensionless parameter which

will add information about the proposed design should be inclu-

ded for completeness.

Table 2-I is an example of a collection of such para-

meters for existing air-to-air missiles l,

I1. In this table

the subscript, c, is used to indicate a canard control surface.

C. LAUNCH PLATFORMS AND PHYSICAL CONSTRAINTS

The problem definition must also include a description of

the intended launch platform for the missile. The aircraft or

shipboard launcher from which the missile will be launched will
fix many design features of the missile. For instance the most
important consideration in the problem definition phase is any

physical constraints imposed by the launcher. Since it is not

normally feasible, economically to design a launcher to fit the

missile, most new missiles must fit existing launchers. In the

case of shipboard launchers there will be a maximum length and

diameter and a maximum launch weight which can be accomodated.

For the case of an air launched missile, there will be a

maximum weight, and the dimensions may also be limited due to

the performance requirements of the aircraft.

For the air-to-air missile design example of this study,

the launch platforms will be the F-16 and F I8A. Figure (2-2),
which is from Interavia[4,51shows the pylon weight limitations

for these aircraft. From these figures it can be seen that the
maximum launch weight for this design is limited to 2500 pounds

by the pylon limitations of the F-18A.

25

i ,
t Load Carrying Capability of F-18A

Load Carrying Capability of F-16

250/9.0
3500/5.5 250/9.0
2200/5.5 2500/5.5

Figure (2-2). Weight Limitations.

26

--
D. MISSION PROFILES AND PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVES

The mission profile of a missile consists of dividing the

flight into fundamental segments which consist of a single func-

tion, such as boost to cruise speed and altitude, cruise to

the target, and terminal homing phases. The mission profile

will vary from missile to missile. For a cruise missile it

may consist of a series of pop-up maneuvers and low level cruises.

For a short range missile, the profile may be entirely terminal

homing. The Mach number and altitude are specified at the begin-
ning and end of each mission segment, as well as the range

covered by each segment. The range covered by a segment can be

considered in one of two ways. If the segment is short, such

as the terminal phase, the distance along the intended flight

path is considered. For longer range missiles, the distance over

the ground is of importance. The mission profile must be defined

during the problem definition phase in order to specify missile

performance objectives.

The mission profile of a missile normally consists of a

boost, cruise (mid-course) and terminal phase. The boost phase

accelerates the missile to its flight speed. This acceleration

may be large for a surface-to-air missile which must be acceler-

ated from rest to a high supersonic speed or it may be small for

an air launched missile which has the speed advantage of the air-

craft from which it is launched.

The cruise segment, or mid-course phase, primarily is used

to deliver the missile to a point in space where the seeker can

27
acquire the target. The range and speed of the cruise segment
is then a function of the required stand-off distance for the
target.

The terminal phase is somewhat more difficult to analyze.

If the target maintains constant heading and velocity the flight

path of the missile may be modeled by circular arc segments. This

method will give approximate values of range. If the target

maneuvers, the missile must follow and the range and speed require-

ments become more complicated.

In determining the range and speed requirements, all expected

encounter geometries should be analyzed. The most demanding

encounter will then fix the performance objectives. The most

demanding speed requirement, in terms of maintaining a minimum

stand-off distance, will normally be a head-on encounter. Al-

though the required missile speed and range are determined in

this section, the missile velocity may be varied later in the
design process due to guidance considerations.

1. Design Example (Mission Profile)

From the threat defined above, the ideal situation would

be to obtain a fire control solution and launch such that the

minimum separation distance between the launch aircraft and the

target is 40 km. This can be accomplished in one of two ways.

The launch aircraft can fire a semi-active homing missile at

such a range and speed that intercept occurs before the minimum

range is reached, or an active homing missile can be fired, and

once missile lock-on is achieved, the launch aircraft can maneu-

ver to maintain the minimum separation distance.

28
 The active radar homing missile would decrease the

launch range and the range required of the missile, which will

lessen the constaints on the launch aircraft. The terminal por-

tion of the engagement is a functicnof the guidance law and will

be determined in Chapter 3.

Two cases are investigated to determine the effect on

the range requirement of the missile when a minimum separation

distance from the target to the missile of 40 km is maintained.

The first case is a semi-active homing missile, for which the

launch aircraft must maintain a closing course until intercept.

The secone case is an active homing missile which has a lock-on

range of 10 km. The launch aircraft may then maneuver to main-

tain a separation distance.

a. Case 1: Semi-active homing missile

VL -__ -
VM
----- _ '-- -. 4-
VT

RLTM

R= Range at which the missile is launched

ML = 1.5 = Launch Mach number

MM = 2.5 = Missile Cruise Mach number

a = Speed of sound

V = M a = 1.5a = Launch speed

L L
VT = MTa = 2.5a = Target speed

V = M Ma = 2.5a = Missile speed

29
 The instantaneous range from the missile to the target is

given by, RMT

RMT = 0 = (VM + VT)t (i)

The instantaneous range from launch aircraft to the target

is given by, RLT

RLT = R0 - (VL + VT)t (2)

If the target does not maneuver, intercept will occur at

tf, when RMT = 0

S- R 0 - (VM + V T )tf
RR
tf R0 R0
tf=vT.V = 5a

If the launch aircraft is at the minimum separation distance,

RLT = 40 km, when intercept occurs.

40 km = R 0 - (VL + VT)tf

substituting for VLVT and tf

R
40 km = R- (1.5 + 2. 5)a(- -)
5a

Solving for R 0
R 0 = 200 km = Launch range

30

. ........0
 The range required of the missile is then, RM.

RM VMt f = 100 km = 53.96 nmiles

If the missile speed is increased to MM = 3.0, then

R = 148.15 k and,

= 80.81 km = 43.61 nmiles.

b. Case 2: Active Homing Missile

The lock-on range is a function of the seeker in the

missile and will be covered later in this thesis. If it is

assumed that the launch aircraft must maintain its course until

lock-on occurs at a range of RLO, the problem can still be solved.

The geometry is the same as in Case 1. Instead of following a

constant course until intercept, the launch aircraft must now

only maintain a closing course until RMT = RO. Then from

equation (1)

RMT = R0 - (VM + VT)tfl

Solving for tfl

t RO-RLO
tfl = (VM+VT)

If at the time of target lock-on, tfl, the target

and launch aircraft are at the minimum separation distance,

RLT - Rmin' from equation (2),

31

L • . .
'Flo

= R0
RLT Rin = - (VL + VT)tfl

Inserting for tfl,

Rmi n -- 0 (VLL +VT ) (RoRLO)/(VM+VT )

Solving for R0 ,

TV+V T
Rmi VT) R0

For the same geometry and relative speeds of the

first case, with MM = 3.0,

RO -R0
tfl = 5.5a

A reasonable value of lock-on range is 10 km. This

will be shown later in the guidance section of the study. The
time to lock-on then becomes,

=0R 0-10
-I
tfl = 5.5a

From equation (3), R 0 then becomes, R= 118.52 km . The missile

range to lock-on is then, RMI ,

RM VMtfl = 59.19 km

32
 If the target does not maneuver the time from lock-

on to intercept becomes, tf 2 '

t RLO
tf2 = (VM+VT)

and the missile range from lock-on to intercept becomes,

RM 2 = VMtf 2 = 5.45 km

The total missile range is then the sum of the two,

= + = 64.64 km = 34.88 nmiles

As can be seen from the above analysis, both the

detection range of the target and the required missile range are

decreased significantly when an active homing missile is used.

On the other hand, it must also be remembered that the complexity

and cost of the missile will be increased as a result of choosing

an active radar seeker. For the design example in this study,

an active radar seeker is chosen; therefore, the maximum range

requirement will be 35 nmiles at a speed of MM = 3.0, however,

this missile velocity is tentative until a guidance analysis

is complete.

From the preceding analysis the mission profile is

determined. It must be kept in mind that the mission profile

may be changed during the design process to meet other design

objectives. The following profile assumes both the target and

launch aircraft at the same altitude.

33
 BOOST CRUISE TERMINAL
HOMING

tSEGMENT Mbegin hbegin Mend hend RANGE

(1) Boost 1.5 10,000 ft 3.0 10,000 ft

(2) Cruise 3.0 10,000 ft 3.0 10,000 ft 29.6 nmiles

(3) Terminal 3.0 10,000 ft 3.0 10,000 ft 5.4 nmiles

34
 III. GUIDANCE LAW SELECTION

Although the specifics of the guidance system is beyond the

scope of conceptual design, the selection of a guidance law is

necessary for initial calculations. The warhead design depends

on the expected miss distance between the missile and the target
and the lifting surface area depends on the maneuvering require-

ments of the missile. Both the miss distance and maximum acceler-

ation required are functions of the missile guidance law.

The guidance law for a missile is the analytical formulation
used by the guidance system to convert sensed target information
into missile steering commands. Three general guidance laws are

used. Most others can be forced to fit into one of these cate-

gories. These are:

1) Pursuit Guidance
2) Line-of-Sight Guidance

3) Proportional Guidance

A. PURSUIT GUIDANCE

A pursuit guidance law is illustrated in Figure (3-1a) and

is one in which the missile velocity vector is always directed
toward the target. The target and the missile velocity vectors
must therefore be sensed; so this type of guidance normally
assumes an on-board tracker. The missile may have a separate

mid-course guidance package to increase range, but target lock-

on initiates the pursuit guidance for the terminal homing phase.

35
 Figure (3-1a). Pursuit guidance.

Figure (3-1b). Beam rider guidance.

Figure (3-1c). Proportional guidance.

36

S..-
For this reason it has the advantage of launch-and-forget at

lock-on. Since the signal processing is limited to looking and

pointing, the avionics are relatively simple and usually on-

board the missile. An option for this type of guidance would

be to include a lead angle to accomodate faster moving targets.

B. LINE-OF-SIGHT GUIDANCE

Line-of-sight guidance is used in a beam rider missile. This

guidance scheme is illustrated in Figure (3-1b) and requires that

the missile remain on a line (beam) joining the target and a

control point. The target tracker is located at the control

point; therefore, avoiding the necessity of an on-board tracker.

Because of this, a dedicated fire control system is needed from

launch to intercept. The range of this type of guidance is

normally less than with the other types. A speed advantage is

required for line-of-sight guidance since no lead angle is incor-

porated. The main advantage of this type of guidance is the

simple avionics required to maintain the missile in the beam.

C. PROPORTIONAL GUIDANCE

A proportional guidance law is one in which the rate of change

of the missile heading is made proportional to the rate of change

of the line-of-sight between the missile and the target. This

is illustrated in Figure (3-1c). Since the guidance law antici-

pates the target's future position, it can attain a higher degree

of responsiveness than other guidance laws. In proportional gui-

dance the rate of change of the line-of-sight must be sensed

37
on-board the missile. Because of this requirement, and the need

to provide anticipated steering commands, the avionics required

are the most complex of the three guidance systems.

D. COMPARISON OF GUIDANCE LAWS

In early design considerations two parameters of interest

are acceleration required of the missile and the miss distance
attainable. Of the three guidance laws only the proportional
law can respond to fast maneuvering targets. Since the missile

must stay in the line-of-sight for a beam rider system, any tar-

get maneuver will cause large excursions in the missile flight

path, resulting in large normal accelerations. The pursuit gui-

dance law causes similar large excursions near intercept due

to the velocity vector always pointing at the target.

Several system parameters affect the miss distance attain-

able with a particular guidance law. An excellent source on

the effects of these parameters is an article written by Dr.

Robert Goodsteint6].The parameters studied for their effect on

miss distance were:

1) Sensor Bias Angle

2) Noise

3) Target Heading

4) Target Acceleration

5) Target Speed

6) Wind Gusts
The results have been reproduced and are included in Figures (3-2)

through (3-7). Table 3-I provides overall guidance in the selection

38
of a guidance law and is also reproduced from the above reference.

A first glance would indicate that proportional guidance is a

proper choice for all cases. It must be kept in mind, though,

that cost and simplicity are also driving factors in the design

process. Furthermore, it can be seen that, while proportional

guidance with a high gain has good performance against maneuvering

targets, any noise in the system will highly degrade this perfor-

mance. For this reason another guidance law may be desired, or

a compromise in the gain selection may have to be made in which

some performance is given up in order to deal with a noisy system.

A reasonable range of proportionality constants that gives good

performance against both maneuvering targets and noisy systems

is k = 2 to k = 6.

Once a guidance law is selected, a more detailed analysis has

to be performed to determine if the maximum acceleration required

of that particular guidance system is within the attainable

maneuverability limits for the missile. The maximum acceleration

required, in turn, determines the lifting surface area needed.

A good estimate of maximum acceleration, which keeps the miss

distance less than 50 feet, is to set it equal to three times

the target acceleration plus ten.

a = 3a t + 10

Figure (3-8) shows the miss distance sensitivity to target

acceleration.

39
 4)4
4-4 0
0- 04
Ow 0
I 4.4

00
.f-

b-I

zD 0

40-
 ..-I
I J
4J 44 4
PI 0
0wc

I.- awe

z Mgt:.
Li 0
(n LLI
Li
w
a.
a. w
LI

LI

oo

(1-4d) 3NWSia ssiw

41
 $4 t0 w
0* S: 41 0 4J

CL .,-I 04 )4)

LI
U))
I-1 -j

a: m:
4)
sLj
0

I---

a- CD c
L1i 3NIiasi

42:
 41

0
ri 00
02 0
0

La U
-1 A
H0

wd -

U) Z

g.4 -.

w 0
Li wi

z U)

A I

(±4) 33NISia SSIW

43
 -,4 41
4-.) r.4)r4044 4
0 0)4J 0 9:4

4-0w0 0 zr
P4Uu 4z U a

LI w

U) 'U)

0
0 z
z

IVo
(14) 33NW.Sia ssiw

44
 4IJ

0
-4
124
L4.4 4J.J

o * 4'., .-

LI

UL U

1-445
 E-4 $
0 0

H~0 W-4 to

- 04 4J
(1 -ill
44 Ch4 l

E-4

0 0 00)0 04
o >) 0 0>10 0 >) 0

414
.r44 r-4
1 40 0
1.4 0 0
-H 44.-H 5. --

46
.4.
- f - -

04

474
E. PURSUIT GUIDANCE (DETAILED ANALYSIS)

As stated previously, a pursuit guidance law requires the

missile velocity vector to always point at the target. For

this reason the missile always ends up in a tail chase situation,

with the maximum acceleration occurring at the end of the

encounter. From this description the maximum acceleration of the

missile can be determined.

VT

/
/
/
/
v /
VM
0M Reference
Direction

Figure (3-9). Pursuit geometry.

From Figure (3-9) the time rate of change of the range, R, is

_-
=vTcos B- vM

also B = -VT sin B/R

or
d~- T sin B

48
 d8 = - VT dt
sin (1)
sin B

dt = VT dR M (2)
VTCos -VM

Substituting equation (2) into equation (1) gives,

dB VT dR - VM
= -R (V cos -V) Letting k V
T M T

(cos B - k) dB = _dR (3)

sin7- R

Integrating equation (3) yields,

XnR = kZn(tan 2.) - Zn(sin B) + Znc

2 1

PnR = kn [c
a
l tsin 8/2

By trigonometric identity,

k
(tan 8/2)
k (sin B)
(l+cos B) k

Therefore,

= CLc (sin 8 )k
k
-l ]
ZnR=n I (1+cos 8 )

and
k - 1
c1 (sin B)

(l+cos 8 )k
From the initial condition = 0 when R = RO,

0 )k
R 0lI+cosa8
= (sin 0)k-i

R=R I 0o sin$ -
=0 lO
+cosa/ sinT 0

Substituting the above equation for R into the equation for

= -V t sin6/R

= Vt /l+cos8 )k (sin6) 2-k

-R%0 l+cso) (sin$)l-k

The missile acceleration can be expressed as a normal and a

tangential component,

VM n + VM t

The normal component is am, where,

am = VM

VMVT I+cos k sin - B 2-k

am = - 0 I +cos B sin 0 -k

The terminal acceleration for a pursuit guidance law will occur

at the end of the encounter (- - 0). From the above expression

50
 the terminal acceleration can be evaluated

am = 0, for 1 < k < 2

am = sine for k= 2
m R ~\ o / 0

am = for k > 2

Since pursuit guidance always ends up ina tail chase situation,

the missile will never intercept if k < 1 . Thus, for pursuit

guidance operating againsta non-maneuvering target, the velocity

ratio should be between one and two. These results indicate

this guidance system would not be effective against air targets;

therefore, results for a maneuvering target were not pursued.

F. LINE-OF-SIGHT GUIDANCE (DETAILED ANALYSIS)

/
Reference
Direction

Figure (3-10). Line-of-sight geometry.

51

....
.. . . . . . . .... .... .. .| if ... ...
_ . . . . . .....t.. .... , .. ... ..
.... . . .... ... ....
 Figure (3-10) illustrates the geometry used to derive

the beam rider equations of motion. The basic concept of beam

rider guidance is that the missile is maintained in the line-of-

sight of the target and a control point. This can be expressed

in an equation as follows:

V T sin a t V M sin a
rt rm

where, rt = range from point 0 to the target

rm = range from point 0 to the missile

From equaton (1)

rtVM sin a = r V sin at (2)

t M m mT

As in the case of pursuit guidance, the missile and target acceler-

ations can be divided into normal and tangential components. If

the target is limited to contant g turns, and the normal component

of missile acceleration is of interest; then,

V =V = 0
T M

Differentiating equation (2) with respect to time yields,

rtVMtmsin a + rt VMMma cos a m =r mTt

V T sin a t + VTtt
T t cosa

Solving for &m

;m rtVMCosa [rm VT sin a t + r VT a cos a t rt VM sin am ]

52
From the original figure,

rt VT cos t

m V cos a m

Also

a -t+ -- 6t - t +

em= am + - ;m = am +

The target and missile accelerations (normal components) become,

a t = VT 6t

am = vM em

Collecting equations;

;t = at/Vt

$= VT sin at/rt

&t =t Ot

rt = VT cos at

rm VM cos a m

a r V T sin at + rm V T t c
Cos at
M rtvM Coam

- rt VM sin am]

m am+
53
am = M ;m
 The above equations are the equations of motion which describe
the target and missile trajectories. These equations cannot be
solved analytically except for highly specialized cases. The com-
plete set of equations can be solved using a numerical integra-
tion technique. If Euler's one step method is used, the algorithm
is as follows;

Ci+l) = 0t(i) + At et(i)

t (i+l) (i) + At (i)

r (i+l) = r (i) + At (i)

r
at ( = rt (i) + At r (i)
a)t

rm(i) + At r
-m(i+l) (i)

ON) m(i) + At &m(i)

o (i+l) - 0 i) +i At e (t)
m m m

With initial conditions;

rt(0) =r

rm (0) 0
~(o) = €

cim(0) = 0

mm
Ii at(0) = 54

t(0)
The target and missile positions can be expressed as follows;

xm(i+l) = Xm(i) + At VM cos m(i)

Ym(i+l) = Ym(i) + At VM sin em(i)

xt(i+l) = xt(i) + At VT cos at(i)

yt(i+l) = yt(i) + At VT sin et(i)

Where

x m(0) = Ym (0) = 0

yt(0)-- ro cos

Yt(0) = r0 sin %

The above equations have been programmed on the HP 9830 com-

puter. Table 3-I is a listing of this program. The program

asks the user for the initial conditions and the target acceler-

ation. It also asks for the integration step increment, At.

It should be kept in mind when using the program that the error

involved in integrating is of order At. The output is a plot of

missile and target trajectories as well as the missile maximum

acceleration and time of flight. Three examples follow which

demonstrate possible uses of the program. (Note: All angles

are input in radians.)

55
 TABLE 3-I

10 FRINT "THIS F'PROGR.A ETERHI.-ES THE AC CELF.RATI, OOV

D1
2'0 PRINT "A BERM RIDER MISSILE FrND F'Li-'TS THE TRH.JECTORF',
30 PRINT
40 PF.INT "INPUT TIME INCR:FEMENT FOR INTEGRATION''
50 INPUT Dl
E DIr :: 2 50 :Y E 2550 1: 2[0 ]3 25'01r , 5rQ5i
]
70 FRINT " IHPUT INITI AL TAFRGET RANGE"
80 INPUT R1
90 PRINT "INPUT TARGET SPEED"
100 INPUT ,,'1
110 PRINT "INF'UT MISSILE' SPEED"
120 INPUT V2
130 PRINT "INPUT INITIAL LINE OF SIGHT ANGLE"
140 INPUT P1
150 FRINT "IHPIT rI .5; LE LPHA"
10 INPUT A2
170 PRINT "INPUT TA RGET ALFHA
10:. I NPUT A1l
190 PR I NT "INPUT HIS -ILE THETA"
2 0 I NPU11T T2
210 PRINT "I NPUT TARGET THETA
22 INPUT TI
230 PRINT "INPLIT TARGET AC:C:ELERATION"
240 INPLIT ill
250 1=1
260 R2=0
265 RE i ]=R
270 A E I=0
280 :::: I =0
290 YCEI ]=0
3,00 IJ[ I ] = 1* :-S P1'
310 YE I I=R 1*!31 N P1
320 AE I ]=0
330 PRINT " :N: r1 ::T YT
395 PRINT "DO YOU WANT A PRINT OF THE OLUTPIJT, 0="ES1 =HO"
396 INPUT T9
397 IF T9=1 THEN 410
400 PRINT ,::[ I ],0 I ,UE I ],'E I
410 I=I+1
420 T:3=G1/1V
430 P:3=VI *SIN(AI R1
440 A3=T3-P3
450 R3= V I*O"; ,: AI
460 R4=',V2*COS (A 2:,
461 D6=R4 ,*,'1*SIN ( I
462 D7=R2*',.' 1 *A:--,* C , 10::,
463 DT=-R3*V2*S I N ,.2 2
464 r9=R1*V2*COS::A2)::

56
 TABLE 3-Il (cont)

465 A4= (lE-+DT+[D..'t r 4

466 T4=F4+F
470 T1=TI+Dl*T1T
480 P 1=P'I +DI! ;F+D :"
4'70 A 1=R1+DI*f13
475 RI=RI+DI*RI
4 'S6 R 2 = R..22+]D 1 * .4
500 A2=A2+DI*A4
10 T2=T2+DIT.4
520 KC I ]=Y2*T4
5.30l IF ARB','F I ] :. :' i[3 1-1 1]1 THEI-I 60
54i A=[ I I
E.0 0 T2=:2+PI
510 RE I ]=R1-R2
620 :-:C I = :: I - I I + D1* C: T
-:30 C I =" I-I I +-D 1" T2
6 4.i II[ I ]=II I - 1 ]+i11 *." 1 : T I",
5, I I I - i + 1 *' ' 1*
I I FT
6 IF E I 1>0 THEN 397
t,5 TSrl*( I-1)
670 PR I NT I NPUT MINIMUl 'Al.'.:
AIE"
80 1 IiPIJT E6
690 PR INT "I NFi.TP IT::.::
EHUM. :: 'ALUE
v
700 INPUT,
710 PRINT "I NF'UT ,IHIiI riw 'AFIUE"
720 INPUT X6
730G PR I NT "I NPIJ T I rE ''ALIE
L::.::
740 INPUT ',"7
S00 SCALE E :.:7,", %, 7
:310 PP I NT "HA A:.:1 ' E EEN DF N 0 =E'., 1
820 INPUT Fl
:330 IF F1=0 THEN :':14
84CiI "lR:.:I S: 0, X', '. 10
850 I ,N'10
:360 PE ,i
870 FORL11 TI:' I
8:30 PLOTL, I C 1
890 NET W
900 PEN
910 FOR 3_1 TO I
920 PLOT LCS3 IC
930 NEXT S
940 PEN
950 PRINT
951 PRIT I
952 1F A I I I-lI THEN 954
953 P=AIT1-11
954 PPRINT "THE HA:: IHHA.C:ELEF:ATC- IS M ER:
EI"NE
I" : 3E
960 PRINT "THE TIME TO INTERCEPT IS T5 -E"
1000 STOP

57
 1. Example I (Non-maneuvering Crossing Target)
%\at
0 VT

Figure (3-11). Non-maneuvering crossing geometry.

r 0 = 359 meters

I = 109.570 = 1.9124 rad

to = 17.570 = .3067 rad

e = 109.570 = 1.9124 rad

m0 0
0 = -91.0= 01.5882 rad

at = 0

VM = 373 m/sec

VT = 221 m/sec

Table 3-111 is the computer output. As indicated the missile

maximum acceleration is,

a = -459.25 m/sec/sec = -46.86 g's

58
 TABLE 3-I1

I NPUT T I ME I NC E tIE HT F 0 R I NTE GF AT I0 H

INPUT INITIAL TARGET RANGE
INPUT TARGET SPEED
I NPUT M I S;I LE SPEED
INPUT I NITIAL LINE OF !:,I'.HT ANGLE
IHPUT MISSILE ALPHA
IHPUT TARGET ALPHA
INPUT MISSILE THETA
INPUT TARGET THETA
INFLUT TARGET ACCELERAT ION
'' t ::::
T YT
D' ","FIU WANT A PR I NT OF rHE UTI..TFI0IT ='-'E!;: IH O
¢i -1 -120.24 734 :-,.-564?5
-5. 15494716 17.9234101, -119.73012',3 341..5926479
-9 .174 99767 6.1:30 1 !1 -99.
-'?44 ".....
9 7 8
-12. 11"318 1 4 550171 -8.66141514 2494
-- 9 73"8. 113 5036 -7 -. . 127163 1 .6011062
-14.5820543 1 .751727 '1 - 67. 27104 1 4 .. 725
-14.147569-2 110 5 .05 "'5'.-' :3.5'8, 277 4118
-12. 629971 61 128.9848380 -46.5-24052:3 :36i 1. 6 09 5E4E
-10. 0574058 147. 4, -35.'996526 4 4.457174
-6.46499644: 165.7572973
. -2 .4553-0005
.2W2.18
-.......3,028_,052.
-. 41 - 18 :'
*1I • ,3838:2156
44 -4:..
14.9209'?4745
'-19 4i 17,,"I -~16 ,1003'
1
:3..614079:320 20'1 .6,5,5844
. .. -4.:30,65'9436:3 :374 =.954175S':
...
10.00;::,880 6:'',: 219'. 1760013 &' 14 -W 7 .. 7 ..
2 & 903,,28e,.. ..

25.2615359. 1240
27.164.291 4 .9623 42
:34.1774632 269.'6706019 :7.750155 28.298-78
4:3.4.' 1099 25.7537. :7 48. ." "169 4. 349 9
53 .5 .......
5:;301 4464555,: 58.819520683 ::4 9710 2
64 t41
194 316 745131 69. 303587327 :!-?,"., 4 4
75.41315987 331 .65 8318 9.. 88 4201 . . ':28
87,1213 4'4 167'746:3 9'0',42 -'4 414 .99 1
9.28.7,1 .., -1 0 12:325 10 ".9563 '1 4'' 1 570
111. 374 ...-41571
9. 1 ."1'8 6 1'.. ....
124. 449199 :'7. 466197 1220256:362 411.91804
138.1671:393 400.5175836 13"598 414 41624
151.8104937 41:3.;--29::3 14 .094:3414 4-1: .660:315
I NFUT MINI MUM V"ALIE
I NF'UT MARX::::
I MIJr : 'X
'ALUE
INPUT riI NI MlM '.'VALUE
INPUT MA::.:: I MUM Y '-"AL U E
HAS A::.:: I S BEEN DRAWN6, 0= ES, 1 =NC'

THE MAX IrurM AC::ELERAT I I'

,; -459. 2526072 METERS.SECSEC.
THE TIME TO INTER::EPT P3 1. 3 SEC

59

21
 4)

4-))

41
r4r-
0.
ot
0l 00

aa)

44)
4-,1
4)> '-4-'

$4

'U A 4 Ln
Ln
t) qv m
qr N C4 P4 yI
r41

caa

$4-

4.4'

600
The large acceleration is typical of line-of-sight due to the

missile requirement to stay in the beam. The trajectories are

plotted in Figure (3-12).

2. Example II (Effect of VM )

This example is presented to study the effect of missile

velocity on a crossing target (non-maneuvering).

a
t

/
/
/
/
VM/

=m

Figure (3-13). Crossing target geometry.

The initial conditions are as follows;

r 0 = 4000 m

= 450 = .7854 rad

e = 450 = .7854 rad
m0

ato0
t = 1350 = 2.3562 rad
0
0 = 1800 = 3.1416 rad
to0
VT = 200 m/sec
61
 TABLE 3-IV

TH I S PROGRAM DETERM INES. THE ACCELARAT ION OF

A BEAM RIDER MISSILE AND FL'.:TS THE TRAJECTOPY

I NPUT TI ME I NC:RE MENT FOR I NTEGRAT I ON

I NPUT INITIAL TARGET RANGE
INPUT TARGET SPEED
INPUT MISSILE SPEED = YO,7/$1c
I NPUT INITIAL LINE OF SIiGHT ANGLE
INPUlT MISSILE ALPHA
INPUT TARGET ALPHA
INPUT MISSILE THETA
INPUT TARGET THETA
INPU1T TARGET AC'CELERATIOH
l
'e.:', M .,T Y
DO YO11 WANT A PR I NT OF THE OUTPUT i YES, 1=NO
I NPUT M I N I MUM :.L:11ALUE
INPUT MA,-.: IMUM ::.: LALU1E
I NPUT MINI MUM 'C 'ALUE
I NPUT MAX::: IMUM r ''ALUE
HAS A' I S BEEN DIA WN., 1=NO
I=YES

THE MAXIMUM ACC:ELERATIiN IS 5. 03129545 METErSSEC:SEC

THE TIME TO I NTERCEPT I S SEC

THIS PROGRAM DETERMINE.: THE ACCELARAT ON OF

A BEAM RIDER MIS5SILE AND PLOTS THE TRAJECTORY

INPUT TIME INCREMENT FOR INTEGRATION

INPUT INITIAL TARGET RAhGE
INPUT TARGET SPEED
INPUT MISSILE SPEED =CO '/IS-C
INPUT INITIAL LINE OF S IGHT ANGLE
INPUT MISSILE ALPHA
INPUT TARGET ALPHA
INPUT MISSILE THETA
INPUT TARGET THETA
INPUT TAR GET AI:CELER RTION
XT i'T
DO YOU WANT A PRINT OF THE OLUTPUT. i=rO
o=cES,
INPUT MINIMUM VAVALUE
INPUT MAX:IMUM ::'eVALJE
INPUT r I NIMUM V
'ALUE
I NPUT MA:'IMUM Y ''ALUE
HAS A::IS BEEN DRAWN, .="YES, l=NO

THE MAXI'MUM ACC:ELERFATIN IS 72,777416 METERS"SEC.SEC:

THE TIME TO INTERCEPT IS 5,6 SEC

62
 TABLE 3-IV (cont)

THI,- PR.OiGRAM DETERMIINES THE AC:CELARATION OF

A BEAM RIfDER iI SSILE ANtIl PLOTS THE TRAJECTORY

INPUT TIME INCREMEHT FOR iNTEGRATI ON

I NPUT INITI AL TARGET RANE
INPUT TARGET SPEED
INPUT MISSILE SPEED 800 /sEC
ILPUT INITIAL LINE OF SIGHT AHI]LE
INPUT MISSILE ALPHA
INPUT TARGET FiLPHA
I NPUT MISSILE THETA
INPLIT TRrGET THETA
I NPUT TARGET ACCELERATIION
M YM T
:::: ]"T
D0 1:IU WANT A PR INT OF THE OUTPUT Ci='ES1 1.=NO
INPUT MINIMU1M IJP1 V-ALUIJE
I NPUT ri I MUM X VALUE
I NPUT P1MINH:I MUM : VALUE
INPUT MAX I MUM ''ALIE
HAS A:IS BEEN DRAN: O=fESI =r40

THE MAXIMUM ACCELERATION is 57.22 71

5l8 METERS-SEC SEC
THE TIME TO INTERCEPT IS 4.4 SEC

63

...
......
..
 4~)

0 x
.4J

o 41
.,Ir- 0
w N 0J
00

co 44
.- I 0
$4N

0/U 00
C4 -W

IVe c0L r-4 O

4JI

S 008=64
The program was run three times for a missile velocities of

400, 600, and 800 m/sec. Table 3-IV contains the program out-

puts and Figure (3-14) is the plot of the trajectories. As

can be seen from the output, the missile maximum acceleration

increases with increasing missile speed. For example,

VM/VT = 2 gives the smallest acceleration, although the maximum

acceleration for VM/VT = 4 is not exceedingly large for this

scenario.
3. Example III (Maneuvering target)

In this example the effect of a target maneuver is inves-

tigated. If at the time of launch the target initiates a 7 g

(68.6 m/sec/sec) turn, the following encounter would result:

at
40
VT 0t

|0

0 0

Figure (3-15). Maneuvering target.

65
 TABLE 3-V

THI, PROGRAFM DETERMINES THE ACCELFRATION OF

A BEAM RIDER MISSILE AND PLOTS THE TRAJEC ORY

I NPUT TIME INCREMEHT FOR INTEGRATION

INPUT INITIAL TARGET RANGE
INPUT TARGET SPEED
I NPUT MI SS L E SP EE D
I NPLIT I NIT IAL LI NE OF SI GHT ANGLE
INHP UT M*ISSILE ALPHA
INPUT TARGET ALPHA
INPUT MISSILE THETA
INPUT TARGET THETA
I NPUT TARGET AC:CELERATI ON
7,..,MY,
N,.' T 7T
DO YO:IU WANT A PR I NT 'F THE OUTPUT i=ES, I=1NC
INPUT MINIMUM Y ALUE
I N P UT MrI:::: MUM %'
VALUE
INPUT I I M Ur1 ',,,'FLUE
I NPUT rF iA.'IrUri Y 'ALUE
HAS AIIS BEEN DRAWN, 0=-ES1 =NO

THE MA::-.:I HUM Al*CCELERAT I[ON -IS':' ~ . E S: :

E? E3'ETERS.*3
N2
THE TIME TI: INTERCEPT IS 5. 5 EC

66
 In

4-j

04
0

44)
0
4 0

0 40

41-

.0

'.4

0 C4

rt-.

$4a
o4)-

4J a
674.
The initial conditions are;

r = 10000 m VT = 821.436 m/sec

= 900 = 1.5708 rad VM = 985.723 m/sec

8 =90 = 1.5708 rad

a = -180 °
~to
et = -9 00
6t 0 0I
at = 68.60 m/sec/sec

From the output (Table 3-V), notice the large missile acceler-

ation required (211.55 m/sec/sec) to intercept a maneuvering

target. The trajectories are plotted in Figure (3-16).

G. PROPORTIONAL GUIDANCE (DETAILED ANALYSIS)

VT

$M LO_
/T

Reference
Direction

//

Figure (3-17). Proportional guidance geometry.

68
K,
 Proportional guidance automatically establishes a lead angle
and reacts to a changing line-of-sight. The basic guidance law
used equates the rate of change of the missile heading to a
constant times the rate of change of the line-of-sight. From
the above figure this law can be expressed as,

From the figure, the rate of change of the line-of-sight, a, is

given by,
VT sin at - VM sin 8m
r

As in the case of pursuit and line-of-sight guidance, the para-

meter of interest here is the normal acceleration; therefore, the
missile and target tangential accelerations are assumed to be
zero. In this case,

am = VM 8m

at = VT 8t

From the guidance law,

am =V M k

and

amr VM k(VT sin t - M sin )

69
Since VM = Vt = 0, the time derivative of this equation is,

ram + r am = k m (Vt t cos t- Vm m cos 8m ) ] (I)

From the original figure,

m m

m
in m
in
k
k

Also,
t t

t et k

Making these substitutions, equation (1) becomes,

S -a + VM [ VT t M)cos VM ( l- ) Co s 8 itn

Since,
am =V M 8m

at =V T t

r am = -a r + k v M a t cos $t k V s a m cos Bm

a m (VT cos Ot VM cos m)

70
From Figure (3-17),

= VT Cos t VM Cos m

r am = -2 am r + k VMa t Cos t k VM am cos m

a- kVacst
kVa Cos$
k am[2r +k VCOS6 ]
a
m r r M m

Collecting equations;

r = VT cos at - V M cos m

T t t

6m =;m -a

m mk

m6=ka

The above equations are the equations of motion for a missile

using proportional navigation assuming constant missile and
target speeds. As with the line-of-sight equations, the motion
is quite complex. The equations cannot be solved analytically
except for special cases. One such case will be investigated
here. That is for a non-maneuvering crossing target.

71

,....
 1. Example IV (Non-Maneuvering Crossing Target)

V
(at 0)

V I
M

Figure (3-18). Non-maneuvering target.

For this case, r = -VM cos am from equation (1)

a, m m
am = M!~ [2 - k2 1
r
a (k-2)
am r

tna m = (k-2) knr + Aic 1

ifa = a at r = r0

k-2
a a (L0)

From this equation,

if k > 2 a- 0 as r-p0

72
 if k =2 a = a0 = constant

if k < 2 a as r- 0

From the above example it can be realized that the pro-

portionality constant, k, must be greater than two. A more

general analysis of the equations of motion can be obtained by

solving the equations numerically. The same Euler's one step

method is used here with initial conditions, at t = 0,

am (0)
m = a m0

r(0) = 0

at(0) = t0

Bin(0) = 8MO

a(0) a0

8 (0) = 8
m mo
et(O) = to

The algorithm used is as follows:

r(i+l) = r(i) + At r(i)

a (i+l) = a (i) + At &(i)
am m m

a(i+l) = a(i) + At ;(i)

e (i+l) = e (i) + At Me(i)

73
 t (i+l) = t (i) + At t (i)

(i+l) = BM(i) + At Bm(i)

m m m

ot(i+l) = Bt(i) + At t(i)

The trajectory of the missile and target can be deter-

mined assuming the missile is at the origin at t = 0. From the

original figure the missile and target positions are given by,

xm(i+l) = xm(i) + At VM cos 0m(i)

Ym(i+l) =Ym(i) + AtVM sin rM(i)

xt(i+l) = yt(i) + At VT Cos ot(i)

yt(i+l) = t(i) + At VT sin et(i)

With initial conditions,

Xm(0) = ym(0) = 0

xt(0) = r 0 cos a0

Yt(0) = r 0 sin a0

Evaluating the missile initial acceleration can be more complicated.

One procedure which is both realistic and of interest is to have

the missile and target on a constant bearing - decreasing range

course (at = 0) when the target initiates a constant g turn at

t = 0. In this case am(0) = 0 and the subsequent motion can be

found.

74
 TABLE 3-VI

10 PR I NT "THIS PRO R ,'MF 114 THE INFi'.T,,lt

20 FRI NT " I .- ISSLE ACCELERATI ON FOR F"
-0 PINT "PROFRTIONAL HA'' I'IFiTION '":'TE "
:35 FRINT
.. I :5 50 1 ' 250
, 1 U 2,5 "E250 ]
38 DIMM K250 ] T[ 250 I RE 250 1
40 PR I NT "INPLIT TIHE I RNEt-1E1T1
50 INPUT DI
60 PR I NT " INPUT HA'I FITICO iCONSTNF.T"
:I
70 INPUT K
80 PRINT "INPUT MISS33ILE ','ELOC IT"i ..
9 i INPUT ,,'l
1 00n PR I NT "I NF'UT TF.'IGET ''EL':C I TY
1l INPUT 'V2
1i
120 PRINT "INPUT TARGET AlC.:CELERFiTIOH"
1:3 I NFUT il
140 PRI NT - I NF'UT I NI 1 AL i I -SILE FiC,:EL.ERiTION"
150 INPUT AiC 12
160 PRINT "INPUT INITIFL RRANGE"
170 INPUT RE 1]
180 PRINT "INPUT E:ETi- TAR RGET"
200 INPUT B1
210 PR INT "INPUT BETH MI.SILE"
220 INPUT B2
30 PRINT "INPUT THETA TFRGET"
240 INPUT TI
250. PRINT "INPUT THETF rIZ-;SILE"
26 "6 INPUT T2
27 PR I NT "INPUT IGIIA
28V INPUT S1
29 C I~l
295 PRINT " IIS.-ILE PIT I TRGET
ir FO ;IT"
296 PRINT
'i2 "
297 PR IN T " :1
30i0 ',:E I ]=0
310 YE I ]=0
320 U[ I]=R[ i *COSl SI >
330 VE I ]=RE 1 IN :1 :,
N*S
340 PR I NT "DO 'OU IWANT A FRI NT OF THE OUTPUT 0=''ES, I=HO
345 INPUT .!
350 IF Ql=: THEN :365
360 PRINT XEI],Y[I],U[ I],',[ I]
365 I=I+i
370 XE I ]=X. I-i ]+1 1*C0 , :T2. * 1
3:80 Y[I I I=YE I- 1+1 I*D 11 N T2'.)
390 U[ I 3=U1 I-I ]+V2*D 1*COSi::TI)
400 VE I ]=V[ I-I ]+D1 *V'2'*S IN:TI:'
410 R2=',2*COS (B1:'-', *COS (:
420 A8=K*YI*A1*COS(B 1/REI-1]

75

• .. . t '
 TABLE 3-VI (cont)

4:" R0 = I I ]* : -. FR- K*'' 1 r '.-I,:C E:2 . : . -'I I I

440 R:;=F'-R9
445 T[ I ]= 1-1 :I*r1
450 S 2 TN EIE21 1 *,::I NK 2 : R I - I
460 T,-,=Hi 1
470 T9=K'S2
480 B:3=TS-$2
490 B4=T9-'2
500 RE I] =R I-I 1+DI*R2
510FI R I ]=A[ I- I +D1* :-
520 .1=S 1+D 2
5:- 0 TI=TI+DI*T8
540I T2=T+DI*T9
550 S 1=6 +D IE
-
560I 6,2:=B2+DI1 .'4
570 IF E I A-IRI- I THEM O.00
580 ZI1=Fi[I]I
600 IF RE 1 3:'o THEN '350
.0 1 I F FB' : A I 1) <l K CE I -1 1:, TH EHI '
602 Z1=[ I-I]
00:3 Z2=TE I I
618 PRINT
619 PRINT
620 PRINT "RX '.U,'IMUM S.
SSLE RCC IS"2" METER.,"EC .. SEC
640 PR I NT "i 3- ILE TIME OF FLIGHT EC"
700 PR I NT I NPUT MI N li 11N';..'ALUE OF
710 INPUT Xi6
720 PRINT "INPUT N :.:'IrI ',,'ALUE OF
7:30 INPUT X.7
740F PRINT " INPUT MIN IM UN YLUE OF 7"
750 INPUT Y6
760 PR I NT " I NPUT R::.:N I UN..I,','AiL UE OF "
770 INPUT Y7
780 SCALE X6, X'7, 'E-5 6 ,
790 PR I NT "H R'' E T HE A: IS: EE N DRFi N 7,E' 1 =Nf "OI
791 INPUT Fl
792 IF F1=0 THEN 3:30
800 ,.IX 0 , .X7 10
810 YFiXIS 0,Y7."10
833 PEN
840 FOR .J=l TO I
850 PLOT X:J], YE J]
860 NEXT J
870 PEN
880 FOR W=I TO I
890 PLOT U W], 'E IN
900 NE:XT N
910 PEN
1000 STOP

76
 The above algorithm was programmed on the HP 9830 computer.
The listing is included in Table 3-VI. The inputs and output
of the program are the same as the line-of-sight guidance pro-
gram. Several examples follow which demonstrates the use of the
program.
2. Example V (Crossing Maneuvering Target)

at = 16.0 g's

t
Bm

V 0

Figure (3-19). Crossing maneuvering target.

VM = 373 m/sec t0 = 17.57 0° = 0.3067 rad

V T = 221 m/sec at = -91.00 = -1.5882 tad

a t = 156.8 m/sec/sec $M0 = -38.0 ° = -0.6632 rad

r 0 = 359 m G o = 109.570 = 1.9124 rad

em 0 = 71.57 ° 1.2491 rad

The output is listed in Table 3-VII. An important aspect of this

problem is the maximum acceleration required (202.92 m/sec/sec).

77
 TABLE 3-VII

THIS PF.OGRAM FINDS THE MA: IUiiMN

riI,7!:-:SI LE ACCELERAT I UON FOR A
PF.FpORT I r'ONAL NA'V I GAT I ON SYSTEM

INPUT TIME INCR:EMENT

I NF'IT NA'' IIAT I i-iN I:INSTANT
I NPUT MI SS I L E ' 'E LC C:I TY
I NPIT TARGET 'v'ELOC:I T'Y'
INPUT TARGET AC:ELERATI ON
I NPIT IN IT I AL rl I.;I LE ACC:ELERAT I ON
INPUT INITIAL RANGE
INPUT BETA TARGET
I NFUT BETA MI 'ILE 1
INPUT THETA TARGET
INPUT THETA MISSILE
I NPUT S I GMA
I- : I L E P OSI T TlRGET FSI T

x1 Y X Y2
DO YFI WANT A F RINT OF THE OUiTP I ] H="i E- I=N 0
S -. 20 2644734 38.256495
5.. , -"--.. 17. 6- 26 3,004 0-' h., Z41.592647'9
11 '"'9942 4077P6626 -9'9 207217 4 .003306
1 7 5006490 53.142 4 -::'' 9.049 , 4 4 748777
23. '21064114 70.8966911 -78', 929 005.24 ,:_,111620I'.
1,48.
,28.8586.0473 :.:67091421 -6 :S,.,472:'4.77 6 35,.60361
34. 44056825 106 465974'9 -5 9.1919'3143 63. 7461642
3 995057982 124.2 844 -.' 600063-45 369,-. 22:805
45.38038997 14. 1..55.14 -40 20,1377 3 5.09,9462
50.71944940 15.4. 63 - -1 . 0 29999:', ,-8 :3 8 1 ,,- A4
0 7...
55.95494106 177.8950225 -22.075171 9-95 --:F.7
,-
61.07184968 195.82934 13-'5" :44 46940:36
66.0530711 213.301 172 -4.8.82 1242 41 .5619976
70.:-:795637:3 231.8 1646' t . 34206794 40 95065'9
75.5:3054295 249.877218 7 11.28436 4'.6260903
06'-
79.9.371892 267. 987705 18.9547 40457863:3
4.21557618 286. 1512'2-2.3,4548 4:. 7 SE.:
88. 20169238 :304.370331 --.- 2948387 441. 7465
91.91709127 :322. 646~4989- 4.213H32044-09.997191:8
95.33662288 :340. 9803.2.4 4 .. '..174 45 5 4, 1:39
'-',
98.435361:32 :359.37102. .1'4" 4.1:36283
101..1890086 377.816.-8 " .3 .,4. 4,.." 4:.556
0 :7.300458
10:3.5742899 396.31:35.251 . .-, ,1
4.4 471242815
105.5693244 414.8 5611: 6.2 1..2"8 4,.,.9'06917
107. 15:39546 4:33.43969 40141184 506.3 656426
108310167 452. 053203
H .491326-46- 516.9847926,S
109-0215.46 470. 6896263 82. 56143878 927. 2610316
109. 274269 489.379062 86.26462715 =".720304
109.058,142 507. 96-: 17 89. 59623167 0.034 '0
108-:3634271 526.62. . 92.55206 558.8551496
107. 1824200l
'
545.2:36263 95. 12839268 59.6~ 006142
- 105.510104
1*5. .... ' 5643.21113
1 ."t =6 97.,32198776
" -. 58.4:306946
10:3.3425418 582.:34:7'41 99.13008494 591,'-:31762
1 .67169 600..79:32657 100. 550409 2
78
 TABLE 3-VII (cont)

XI MUM MISSI LE AFC:: I1

MAR - 2 1 3S9 'IETEPS..E:...":
MISSILE TIME OF FLIGHT I 1.7 -EC:
INPUT M INIMUMl VALUE OF '
INPUT MA>'IMUM ',,,'ALLIE OF
INFIT MINIMUM ',,VALUE OF
INPUT MAXIMUM ',,ALLIE OF
HAVE THE R:,:I'S BEEN DF.:AWf: = ES =(:

79
 wi

4)
E

r
0
4J
414

>10

00

E-4 \l
U)
0
0 40
0 LO0
o-4

08

-4

5.480
The same problem was run for line-of-sight guidance with no

target acceleration in Example I. The maximum acceleration

was 459.25 m/sec/sec. This points out the advantage of pro-
portional navigation over line-of-sight guidance. Figure (3-20)

is a plot of the trajectories.

3. Example VI (Effect of k)

This example demonstrates the effect of varying the pro-

portionality constant, k. The scenario is as follows.

._
/
. _
/ at 0-
/ 7 g turn
/ .
/

VM
m0

Figure (3-21). Initial geometry.

Vt = 208m/sec

V = 413 m/sec

at = 68.60 m/sec/sec

°
Ot0 = -1 0 6 = -1.85 rad

80 = - 29 =-.5061 rad

81
 TABLE 3-VIII

INPUT TIME IN:REMENT

INPUT NAV IGATION CO:NSTANT =3
INPUT MI SSILE 'ELOC I TY
I NPUT TARGET 'ELOCII TY
I NPUT TARGET ACCELERATION
I NPUT INITIAL MI;S I LE ACCELERATION
I NPUT INITIAL RAHGE
INPUT BETA TARGET
INPUT BETA Mi 5S ILE
INPUT THETA TARGET
I NPUT THETA iISLE
INPUT SIGMA
MISSILE PO0,S1T TARGET POSIT
Xl Y~1 72",
11C0U WANT A PR I NT 0F THE OUTPUT c'=YES, 1=NO

MAXIMILIM MISSILE ACC :IS '52 1471

' CSE',SE METERS
MISSILE TIME OF FLIGHT IS
INPUT MINIMUM ',,'ALUE 1 'F
I NPUT rAM:: I MiUM VALUE 0 F
INPUT MI11NIMUr ''ALUE 0F
INPUT MA>',IMUM VALUE 0F Y
HAVE THE A::.:: IS EBEE H DRAW [.1 :=E': IH C

THIS PROGRAM FINDS THE M:.: I MUM

MISSILE ACCELERATION FOR A
PROPORTIONAL NA' IGAT I ON SYSTEM

INPUT TIME I1NCREMENT

I NPUT NAVIGATION CO'NSTANT 9
I NFUT MISSI1LE ''ELITY I7
INPUT TARGET 'VELOLC I T'
INPUT TARGET A:CELERATION
I NPUT INITIAL MISSILE ACCELERATION
INPUT INITIAL RANGE
INPUT BETA TARGET
INPUT BETA MISSILE
INPUT THETA TARGET
INPUT THETA MISSILE
I NPUT S I GMA
MISSILE POSIT TARGET POSIT

DO YOU WANT A PRINT OF THE OUTPUT, O=YES, 1=NO

MA.:: IMUM MISSILE AC: £S 71.11: .33' 197

1'0ETERS.."SEC EC
MISSILE TIME OF FLIGHT IS 3. SEC.

82
 TABLE 3-VIII (cont)

THIS PROGRAM FINDS THE MA::: INUM

MISSILE ACCELERATION FOR A
PROPORTIONAL NAVIGATION SYSTEM

INPUT TIME INCREMENT

I NPIT N IFIGAT' T 10 NSTAT
CI T
I HPIT M-I S I L E ''ELOC I TY
INPUT TARGET 'ELOCIT
INPUT TARGET ACCELERATION
INPUT INITI AL MIS:SILE AC:ELERATION
INPUT INITIAL RANGE
INPLIT BETA TARGET
I NPUT BETA MISSILE
INPUT THETA TARGET
INPUT THETA MISSILE
INPUT S IGMA
MISS ILE POiS IT TA R G E T F'I'-; I T
xi':',X2 'Y2

DO YOU WANT A FR I NT OF THE OUTPUT 0=ESs14

MA.XIMUM M"ISI'.LE ACC IS 65,.357724S ilETERS.SEC.EC

MISSILE TIME OF FLIG HT IS :K 2 SEC
I NP U T MI N IMLM ' 'FL U E i F
INFUT IM::U::
MIL1
',,'ALUE OF
INFUT MI N I MUMU'ALUE OF
INPUT iAXI:.,IMUM VALUE OF ",
HA'E THE AXIS BEEN DRAWN9 0=YES I=NlO

83
 '-4

00 .4.
0

o
U

.444

,,
.444

4J Jlo
~0
00 I 4-

E-4H 844

C14 44

C)0 0
oq I, m N Ic-
4J

41-

.484
 0 = 48.6 ° = .8483 4ad
m0 0
t0 = -28.4 4956 rad

00 = 77.60 = 1.3544 rad

The problem was run for k = 3,4, and 5.

Table 3-VIII is the output. It can be seen that the

effect of increasing the proportionality constant is to decrease

the maximum acceleration required. Figure (3-22) is a plot of

the trajectories.

H. DESIGN EXAMPLE (GUIDANCE LAW SELECTION)

From the examples given in this chapter, it can be seen that

a missile designed to encounter a highly maneuverable target,

such as a fighter, requires a proportional guidance law to limit

the maximum acceleration required of the missile. To select

the proportionality constant, it was assumed that the threat

could maintain a constant 7g turn at Mt = 1.5 and an altitude

of 10,000 feet.
Three cases were investigated, (1) A head-on encounter with

the target initiating a turn at 10,000 meters range, (2) A

crossing encounter in which the target turns into the missile at

10,000 meters range, and (3) An oblique, closing encounter in

which the target turns into the missile. The scenario and
computer outputs are shown in Figures (3-23), (3-24), and (3-25).

From this analysis the crossing encounter requires the largest

acceleration (263.2 m/sec/sec).

For the crossing scenario then, the missile speed was varied

and the results indicated that as the speed increased the maximum
*85
 V V
it

Vm = 821 m/sec (M = 2.5) am = 0

Vt = 492 m/sec (M = 1.5) = 1800

ro = 10,000 M 0

e ==0
m 0 0
k=
4
= 1800
t0

THIf; PROGRAM FIND:: THE MA::.:: I MUM

MI;SS ILE ACCELERATION FOR A
FR''ORTIOiAN L 4 A',,'IGRT IO TE

I NPUT TI ME I NC:REMENT
IHPUT NA'' I GAT I ON CLNE;:TANT
E L 0C:I T","
I NIUT r-1--31 L E ',J
INFUT TAR"GET ',,'ELC: I T',"
INPUT TARGET AI::C:ELERATION
INPUT INITIAL MISSILE ACCELERATI'ON
I NPUT INITIAL RANGE
INPUT BETA TARGET
INPUT BETA MISSILE
IIPINT THETA TARGET
INPUT THETA MISSILE
INPUT SI GMA
MISSILE POSIT TARGET POSIT
"1X1 ::-.'
2 Y2
Df0 yLU WAN T A FR I NT 1F THE CIUT UT' 0 =","E'_;S
1='IN

MAX I'MUM ri 11 LE ACL::: IS 126. V; 191994 MIE TE RS 'SE. EEC

I 331 LE TI ME OF FL I GHT IS
IS 9 S E:
I NPIUT MINI MUM VALUE OF

Figure (3-23). Head-on scenario.

86
 g turn
v
t

S= 0
= 10,000 m t
Vt = 492 m/sec e = 73.80

v = 821 m/sec 2=
-1200

= -46.20 k =4

PROGRAM FINDS THE NFl:::',IMU i

THI ,S
MISSILE ACCELERATION FOP. A
PROPORTIONAL NA',,'I GAT I ON S STE
INPUT TIME INCREMf1ENT
I NPUT N ', I GAT I ON CONSTANT
I NPUT MISSILE ,ELO: I T'Y
I NPUT TARGET 'vELOCI TY
INPIJT TARGET ACCELERATION
INPIJT INITIAL HISSILE ACCELERATION
INPUT INITIAL RANGE
INPUT BETA TARGET
INPUT BETA MISSILE
INPUT THETA TARGET
INPUT THETA MISSILE
INPUT SIGMA
MISSILE POS IT TARGET POSIT

DO ' OU WANT A P RI NT OF THE OUTPUT 1

.O= YE '.-i 0'N

'I::.UIrMUM MISSILE ACC IS 26. 1995227 M1ETERS SE SE

MISSILE TIME OF FLIGHT IS :::.8 SECr
INPIUT MINIMUM VALUE OF ',

Figure (3-24). Crossing scenario.

87
 *v

4
= ~e
m o ......- -- --

Vt = 492 m/sec t 1350

V = 821 m/sec 0 =53.90

8 =1350 m0

0
= 53.9 0
mo0
k= 4
r= 10,000 m

THIS PF'F.OGRAM FI NIS THE MA':.:,I MUM

MISSILE ACCELERATION FOR A1
PROPORTIONAL NA'IGATIONtI SS'.",TEM
INPUT TIME INCREMENT
INPUT NA''IGATION CONSTANT
INPUT MISSILE 'ELOCIT""
INPUT TARGET VELOCITY
INPUT TARGET ACCELERATION
I NPIIT INITIAL MISSILE AC'CELERATIOH
INPUT INITIAL RANGE
INPUT BETA TARGET
INPUT BETA MISSILE
INPUT THETA TARGET
INPUT THETA MISSILE
INPUT SIGMA
MISSILE POSIT TARGET POSIT
',
'',
1rl"i :::,2""
DO OU WANT A PRINT OF THE OIJTPUT, = ES. 1=NO

MAX I MUM M ISI LE ACC: I -156. 9795962 M EE RS.. EC.: .

MISSILE TIME OF FLIGHT IS :3.8S EC.'
I NPUT MII IMM 'ALIE OF

Figure (3-25). oblique scenario.

88
 TABLE 3-IX

INFUT TIME IN:REMENT

INPUFT 1.H1V I.GATION C'ONSTAHT
INPUT "I ':-; SI L E '-.'E.L0 1T M .0
INPUT TARGET ,ELiC:IiTY
I NPUT TARGET ACCELERATION
I FTUT IN IT I AL 'I ._; LE ACC:ELE.FAT I ON
INPUT INITIAL RANGE
INPUT BETA TARGET
INPUT BETA MISSILE
INPUT THETA TARGET
INPUT THETA M"IS'.S:';ILE
I NPUT .I GriA
N IS,. I L E PO' IT TA R G ET P 0:1:_
IT

D iYlU WANT ARPRIINT OF THE -'I T'UT O='ES. I =1=

;- "MAi::.: I MJ i I5.31:
rI_ r I 5 2.:
LE ACCF . 5'
.:,
..." 5M T P .. E .S
MIS
IL 4 14 5
1 ,.- 5... -, E T E R. ..:E
1'1 SLED..."'.
Er
MISSILE TIME OF FLIGHT IS 10.3 sEC
INPUT MI 'ALUE OF ::.:,
VirIUI

THIS POGRAM FIHDS THE MA> IMUfl

MISSILE AC:ELERAT I ON FOR A
PF.ROPORT I ONAL NA',' I GAT ION .sSTEM

INPUT TIME INCREMENT

I NF'UT NA I GAT I ON CONSTA3NT
I NPUT r ISS IL E ',,'E
L C:I TY -
f,, -3.0
INPUT TARGET ''ELOCIT","
INPUT TARGET ACCELERATION
INPIT INITIAL MISSILE AIC:.ELERATI':N
INPUT INITIAL RANGE
INPUT BETA TARGET
INPUT BETA MISSILE
INPUT THETA TARGET
INPIJT THETA MISSILE
INPUT SIGMA
MISSILE POSIT TAFGET POSIT
x i.: IT1.... '

DO YOU WANT A FR INT OF THE OUTPUT9 O ="ES 1 =NC,

MA:::, IIUM MISI LE AC:C IS 2 48.23':::583 ri ETERS E. -S C

MISSILE TIME OF FLIGHT IS 7.8 SEC
INPUT MINIMUM '-AL-IE OF

nIE F:I 89
 -44

U)i
0

U) 0
en -4

0 z 4.)

fn _4

SE Z 0
0 z
z- 0

0
I- s a:,

rX4

CM 0 v m

(SS)NOIlUM3130OW XUW

90
acceleration decreased. The results for MM = 2.0 and MM = 3.0
are shown in Table 3-IX. This result indicates the desirablity
of retaining the missile Mach number originally selected.
For the crossing case and a missile speed of MM = 3.0, the
proportionality constant was then varied from k = 2 to k = 6.
The results are plotted in Figure (3-26). If the maximum
acceleration is limited to 31 g's (3at + 10), the required pro-
portionality constant is k = 3.75. This is well within the
desirable range of 2 - 6 indicated earlier.
From this analysis the required performance objectives are:

M m = 3.0

k = 3.75

(am )max = 31 g's

91

S-- -
 IV. SIZING THE DIAMETER

The missile diameter is determined by one of three driving

factors. For relatively short range missiles the diameter will
be fixed by either the warhead or the seeker requirements. As
might be expected, for longer range missiles the diameter will
more likely be fixed by either the warhead or the seeker require-
ments. As might be expected, for longer range missiles the
diameter will more likely be fixed by the propulsion require-
ments in order to prevent excessive propulsion system lengths.
An initial estimate of the missile diameter must be made at
this point in order to proceed with the design. The initial
seeker requirement can be determined from a knowledge of the
lock-on range requirement found in Chapter 2. The warhead
necessary to inflict a "kill" can also be estimated from infor-
mation about the target and characteristic explosives. The
propulsion requirement cannot be determined because of the lack
of any aerodynamic drag or weight information at this point. For-
this reason the missile diameter will be now sized for seeker
or warhead requirements. The missile propulsion requirements
will be determined later in the design process, and it may be
necessary at that time to resize the missile to meet these pro-
pulsion requirements.
Selection of the type of seeker depends upon the operational
arena of the missile. The seeker of a shoulder fired, battle-
field missile would not be the optimum seeker of a shipboard

92
missile where antenna and component sizes are not limiting

factors. All types of guidance use some portion of the electro-

magnetic spectrum. The three primary areas of use are the

electro-optical, infrared, and radio frequencies. The milli-

meter wave section of the spectrum is also of current interest

in the design of missiles due to small component size and will

also be discussed. The following table lists some of the major

advantages and disadvantages of the three.

Advantages Disadvantages

Optical Target resolution (de- Bad weather degrades

tail) Night use degrades
Real time information
Three dimension effect

Infrared Improved resolution Attenuation due to

over RF aerosols and atmosphere

RF Longest range Larger components

Least absorption and
attenuation

A. THE RADAR RANGE EQUATION

An omnidirectional antenna is one that radiates power in all

directions equally. If the power radiated by an antenna is Pt,

the power density at a distance Rt from the source is given by,

2
Power density = Pt/(4r Rt)

47 Rt = area of a sphere of radius Rt

Since antennas are normally directive instead of omnidirectional,

most of the power is radiated in a particular direction. The

93
gain, Gt, is a measure of the increased power from a directive

antenna as compared to an omnidirectional antenna. Therefore the

power density from a directive antenna can be expressed as,

PtGt
Power density = 2
4 7 Rt

This is the power density which arrives at the target. The tar-

get intercepts a portion of this energy and reradiates it in the

opposite direction. The radar cross section, a, is a measure of

the effective area of the target. The power radiated by the

target is Pecho'

~echo=
P ~P t G t U
echo - 41 Rt 2

This energy propagates as if it were radiated by an omni-

directional antenna. Therefore if the receiving antenna is a

distance, Rr, away the power density at the receiver is

Pt Gt a
(Power density) r = ( t2 2
(41TRt )(47R

If the energy is intercepted by the receiving antenna, which has

an effective area as seen by the returned energy of Ar; then the

power received by the radar , Pr, is

94
 Pt Gt c A
r
Rt2 ) 2)(1
(4r Rt 2(4 Rr

This is the simplest form of the ra'dar equation and can be used

to determine the size of antenna required.

B. ACTIVE RADAR HOMING

Active homing is the method of missile guidance in which the

radar transmitter and receiver are located on-board the missile.

In this case the same antenna is used for both transmitting and

receiving. The radar equation then becomes,

Pt Gt At
r (4 22

where, Rt = R r = R and Ar = At

The minimum power for which the target can be detected, Pmin' is

a function of many variables. A full development of this term

can be found in reference (8).

Pmin = k TO B n N 0)min

Boltzmans constant is k = 1.38 x 10- 2 3 joule/ k. The value of

kT 0 at room temperature is 4 x 10- 21 watt/cps of bandwidth. The

bandwidth, Bn , noise figure, Fn , and minimum signal to noise

ratio, (S0 /N 0 ) mi are all functions of the receiver. Typical

95
 SEP 80 D R REDNONCONCEPTUAL MONTEREY F/G 16/4.1
TACTICAL MISSILE CA
DESIGN,(U)
SCHOOL
A A095 11B NAVAL POSTGRADUATE

2IIIIII.
UNCLASSIFIED
NL

mEEEEElhEEE
I4
umuuuuulullu
I
-EEEEElllEllE
*mIIIIIIIIIIII
EIIIIIEIIEIIEE
IEIIIIIIIEEII_
 values are listed below.
t
B = 1 MHz
n

F n = 7.5 db = 2.37 (for crystal mixer)

(S0 /N 0 ) = 14.7 db = 5.43 (for probability of detection,

PD= 0.9 and probability of false alarm,

Pfa = 1/15 minutes)

The above values give Pmin = 5.15 x 10- 1 4 watts. This is the

value which will be used throughout this section.

From antenna theory the gain is related to the effective

antenna area by,

G= X2A

The maximum radar range can then be shown to be

[ 4max
X2 Pmin

Equation (1) for radar range does not include any system losses.
It also does not include the statistical nature of several of

the parameters. Because of these assumptions the actual range

of a radar may be as small as one-half of what the radar range

equation predicts for laboratory conditions. For this reason,

twice the required range should be used when using the above

equation.

96
 1. Example

* The AN/APQ-153 is the airborne attack radar system used

on the F-5E aircraft. The following parameters apply to this

radar.

f0 = 8-10 GHz

= C/f 0 = 3 x 108 m/sec 0333 m

9 x 109 /sec

c = speed of electromagnetic propagation

8
= 3 x 10 m/sec

Pt = 80 kW

Antenna = Parabolic dish 30.5 x 40.6 cm

m
At = 0.12383

for a target of 1 square meter of radar cross-section,

R = 36.16 km = 19.5 nmiles

For the case of an active homing radar, the size of the

transmitting and receiving antenna is the parameter of interest.
The antenna size may very well drive the design diameter of the

missile. The antenna diameter can be expressed as follows.

/ 2
R max 4
At [4w X2 P min
At= Pt

[4* X2 Pmin 1/2

Let
C _ Pt a (2)

then 7d t 2 2
At 4 C--- max
2 C 2
dt _
9
therefore
d2 4C
t7th Rma x r f r , =t Rmax
97
 C-12

F.n

00
~ \\ Z

z -

(S3HONI) 83.L3wuia INN31LNU

98
Equation (2) has been plotted in Figure (4-1) for various

values of the transmitter frequency. From this plot and a know-

ledge of the maximum lock-on range required, the antenna size

can be determined.

From equation (2) and Figure (4-1) there are two obvious

ways to decrease the antenna size required. (1) Increasing fre-

quency is the best way to reduce antenna and electronic component

sizes. The current trend is toward higher frequencies. (Milli-

meter waves.) One problem is that the equations developed in

this section do not include atmospheric attenuation. For fre-

quencies above about 30 GHz the absoprtion due to atmospheric

gases increases. This is shown on Figure (4-2). As indicated

on this figure there are "windows" where the attenuation is less.

These "windows" occur at frequencies of 34 GHZ, 94 GHz, 140 GHz,

and 220 GHz. These are the frequencies where most of the cur-

rent research and development is going on. As the frequency in-

creases, the wavelength approaches the size of rain droplets.

For this reason,radar performance is greatly reduced in inclement

weather. (2) Increasing transmitter power will also decrease

the size of antenna necessary. The limiting factor in this area

is the lack of high power sources. In the millimeter range the

available power from current traveling wave tubes is 50-100

watts. Increasing power is obviously confined to size and weight

limitations of missile components.

99
 bc. ,I I I 1 1 " , I I 1 1I 1

100

C
I I
oCo /i

Frequency, Gc

!/

Figure (4-2). Atmospheric Absorption (8].

100
C. SEMI-ACTIVE HOMING

The advantage of semi-active homing is obvious when the radar

range equation is investigated. From equation (1),

2 Rr 2 = Pt Gt Ar
R
min

In the above equation the missile range from the target is R r

The transmitting and receiving antennas are at different ranges

and have different characteristics in this case. As before,

4w At
Gt = 4 2"

therefore,
2 P t At Ar a
2R
47 A2 p
min

The main advantage is in the transmitter characteristics. Since

the transmitter is not located in the missile, it is not normally

limited in size and weight requirements. In the above equation

if a transmitter power and standoff range, Rt, is chosen the

receiving antenna can be sized for a maximum homing range, Rma x #

of the missile.
1. Example

Pt = 100 km

Rt = 100 nmiles

f0 = 10 GHz
m
At = 4
14
5.15
=-min x 10 - W
101
 Rmax (nmiles) drr_____
(in)

10 5.8

20 11.6

50 29.1

It can be seen from comparing these numbers to those of Figure

(4-1) that the required antenna size is less than one half of

that required for an active homing radar of the same frequency.

D. DESIGN EXAMPLE (ANTENNA SIZING)

An active radar was assumed in Chapter 2 to decrease the

required missile range. The lock-on range was 10,000 m or

5.4 nmiles. As stated earlier, twice this number should be used

for determining antenna size. From Figure (1) for a range of

10.8 nmiles, and a transmitter power of 10 kW at f0 = 20 GHz,

the required antenna size is d = 10 inches.

E. INFRARED SEEKERS

In the design of missile seekers two parameters of primary

importance are range and size. The idealized range for an infra-

red tracker relates these two factors. The idealized range is

the range at which the signal-to-noise ratio is unity and is

given by,

0=rD*T a TIR Da 2 1 J(1)

1/2

4 fAd

102
 Typical value

D* 1010
Specific detectivity
Transmission through
atmosphere Ta 0-1.0

Transmission through
IR optics TIR 0-1.0

Aperture diameter Da
J l03
Radiant intensity
3
Receiver bandwidth Af 10

Sensitive area of -1 2
detector Ad 106 -10 cm

The derivation of equation (1) and its use are the subjects of

this section. Some references (9) may give the above equation

in terms of the Noise Equivalent Intensity, NEI.

1/2
R0 =

where If Ad
NEI = D, A a T a TIR

1. Planck's Law

The radiant emittance of a body is a measure of the radiant

power per unit area emitted from the surface.

W watt/cm 2 (2)
A

The spectral radiant emittance is the radiant emittance per unit

wavelength interval,

103
 X a-T
=W watt/cm 2

= micron = 10- 6 meters.

Planck's law gives the blackbody spectral radiant emittance as

a function of wavelength and temperature,

2
2 7 h5 c 1
(W)BB x
X exp (hc/XkT)-i

-34
h = Planck's constant = 6.6238 x 10 Joule-sec

c = speed of light = 3 x 108 m/sec

X = wavelength

k = Boltzmann's constant = 1.38 x 10- 23 Joule/ K

T = Absolute temperature, 0K

Figure (4-3) shows equation (3) for various absolute tempera-

tures. As can be seen the wavelength at which maximum radiant

emittance occurs varies with temperature. This maximum occurs

at a wavelength given by Wien's displacement law, Xa

max

Xmax T = 2897.8 0K

2. Emissivity

Actual bodies do not emit radiation according to Planck's

law. A more typical plot of radiant emittance is shown in

Figure (4-4). Spectral emissivity, C., is defined as the ratio

of the actual spectral radiant emittance to the blackbody spectral

radiant emittance,
WX
A BB 104
 10

rU

4
4J
0
4-)

0.1 1.0 10 100 1000

Figure (4-3). Spectral radiant emittance.

105
 WABB

Figure (4-4). Actual spectral radiant emittance.

As shown in the above figure, E,, may vary with wavelength. A

grey body is defined as one which has constant spectral emissivity,

= E: = constant

IR systems normally use filters to limit the accepted

radiation to a specific wavelength band. The radiant emittance

of a body between wavelengths X1 and X 2 becomes,

x2
W f C(wx) dX
1BB

In Figure (4-5) the surface at the orgin emits a total

energy WA into a hemisphere normal to A.

The radiance is defined as the radiant power per unit

solid angle per unit projected area,

N a2 P1 a aP
Radiance coseaA = cose 30 A

106
 z/
/
Solid angle 0

• y

Figure (4-5). Radiant emittance of a body.

From equation (2)

N- W 2
N cos8
1 watts/steradian cm

The radiant intensity is defined as the radiant power per unit

solid angle from a point source.

Radiant intensity = J = L watt/steradian

The following is a summary of the definitions of radiant energy

quantities,

W = radiant emittance, watts/cm 2

J = radiant intensity, watts/steradian

2
N = radiance, watts/steradian-cm

107
From the definitions the relationship between W, J and N are,

W = 7tN = 7 J/A

From the above definitions and Figure (4-5) the energy into solid

angle, 0l is,

NA Q cos
1 e= 7T
a2
1
A cos e

The energy into solid angle Q 2 is given by,

NA2 Q A
2 7r 2

3. Energy into a Hemisphere

From the definition of radiance and the radiant emittance,

the radiance in terms of the radiant emittance can be found,

N =
coseaA5s0
z

N ap
1 ?W
N = )- rsin~do

Figure (4-6). Energy emitted into a hemisphere.

108

- -.
From Figure (4-6) the incremental solid angle is

d = r sined r d6 sined0d
r2

If the above surface, A t , is considered a Lambertian surface,

the radiance, N, is independent of the direction of radiation.

dW = cos eN dQ

dW = cos eN sin ed d

The total radiant emittance into a hemisphere above the surface

is then,
2Tr -Tr/2
W= f f N cos 6 sine d d
0 0

2 2
W= 2T N
Il sin
el0

W 7 N

4. Targets

Infrared targets include a wide variety of radiation

sources. The radiance of most bodies can be divided into that

due to self-emission and that due to reflection of incident

radiation,

N =N e + N r

The relative magnitude of these contributions depends on a number

of factors and varies from target to target and operating

environment.
109

........
.......... ... ___.. I
_i_____...._fiSH_________
 a. Self-emission.

Self-emission, also referred to as thermal emission,

depends primarily on the temperature of the body and the emis-

sivity. The most often used appraoch is to consider the body as

a grey body which emits radiation according to the Stefan-

Boltzmann law.
EaT 4 2
Ne = watts/steradian-cm

- 1 2 watts/cm2 ( K) 4
where a = 5.67 x 10

This term is the total radiance (over all wavelengths) and is

not the same as used previously.

b. Reflection.

Radiance due to reflectance depends on the illumi-

nating source. This source may be the sun, active, or semi-

active sources. It is obvious that at night for a passive

infrared system, the radiance due to reflection is not a con-

tributing factor. For this reason only the radiance due to self-

emission is considered in this section.

5. Target Temperature

Since the self-emittance of a target depends on the

temperature of the target, a method for determining this tem-

perature is needed. The temperature of an aerial target varies

depending on the aspect of the target. The propulsion system

has hot surfaces such as the nozzle and exhaust plumes. There

may also be hot surfaces due to aerodynamic heating and/or

solar radiation.

110
 Air breathing engines normally have exhaust plumes

ranging from 600 to 1000 K. Rockets typically have much hotter

plumes. The flame temperatures for liquid propellants range

from 2500 to 7500°K. Solid propellants flame temperatures range

from 1700 to 3500 0 K. The plume temperature can be estimated

from the relation.

T T
flame -01 - 1 + _-I_ Me 22
TplumeT e 2

where T = stagnation temperature

0
T = static temperature
e

M = Mach number at the nozzle exit

e

a. Example I

For a flame temperature of 2700 K and an exit Mach

number of 3.0 the plume temperature can be found,

l u me
TTp '= 1+1;Ie2
Tflame 1270.6 0 K
2 e

For many missile encounters the exhaust plume may

be shielded from the infrared sensor. For a head-on encounter

the temperature of interest is the skin temperature of the target.

This temperature is due to aerodynamic heating and is a function

of the target speed and the target material. One approach to

finding this temperature is through the use of the recovery

111
 factor, which requires some knowledge of the material of the
ttarget. The recovery factor, r, of a material is defined as

follows:

Tsurface T ambient
T stagnation - Tambient

The skin temperature of the target then becomes,

Tsurface = Tambient + r (Tstag T amb )

The stagnation temperature is found from the relation,

T T ~(1+ XZ:lM 2 )
Tstag = amb 2

The Mach number, M, is that of the target and the specific heat

ratio, y, is for air.

b. Example II

A target flying at M = 2.5 where the ambient temper-

ature is 300°K has a recovery factor of 0.75.

Tstag = 5750K

T surface = 581 0 K

This is the temperature used, along with the emissivity of the

target, to find the radiant emittance of the target from

equation (4).

112

L ,
 6. Simple IR System

Detector

IR

Target filter
A t , E, T chopper preamp
Lens
R

Figure (4-7). Simple IR system.

Figure (4-7), above, shows a simple IR system and a

target at a range R. If the system is sensitive to radiation

in the 3 to 5 micron region the radiant emittance becomes,

x 2=5
W f £(W) dX
i=3 BB
5

W=E2f
L 7rhc 21
x5 exp(hc/ kT)-lI
3 X

The above integral is best evaluated on the computer. If the

ambient temperature and target speed is known, the skin temper-

ature of the target can be determined.

113
 The radiance from the target then becomes,
t
N
= w
W-

7r

If Figure (4-7), the solid angle of the aperture as seen from

A
the target is, 0 = Aaa

R2

The power seen at the detector surface is then,

IR Power = N 0 A t

The above formula assumes no attenuation by the atmosphere or

the IR system optics. This attenuation is significant in actual

IR systems. These factors are normally accounted for through

the use of atmospheric and IR optics transmission coefficients.

T = transmission of the atmosphere

T = transmission of the IR optics

IR
The total power at the detector then becomes,

T TIR A t A
IR aW (5)
2
TR

7. Detectors
Detectors are devices which are radiation transducers.

It's purpose is to change the incoming radiant power to an

electrical signal, which can then be amplified. Detectors can

be divided into two main categories. (1) Thermal detectors -

The responsive element of a thermal detector is sensitive to

114
temperature changes brought about by the incident radiation.

(2) Photodectectors - Responsive elements of photodetctors are

sensitive to the number of incident photons.

Detectors also are made up of windows, apertures and

Dewar flasks. The window restricts the bandwidth to which the

detector is sensitive. The aperture may limit the field of vie-

in order to limit photon noise. The Dewar flask cools the

detector which improves the detectivity.

Detectivity of a detector is defined as,

D = signal/noise = S/N (6)

input power P

The specific detectivity is

D*= D [Af Ad] 1/2 (7)

Af = Bandwidth
A = Sensitive area of detector

For a tracking system the bandwidth is that of the preamplifier

in Figure (4-7). The input to the preamplifier is proportional

to the incoming IR energy, which has been modulated to give tar-

get resolution from the background and provide line-of-sight

information.

A simple chopper is shown in Figure (4-8). It consists

of an opaque material which has a wedge cut-out of angle a. The

rotation causes the input from a point source to be modulated,

115
 W

Figure (4-8). Simple Chopper.

while that of the background is not. The input signal to the

preamplifier would look like Figure (4-9). The frequency content
of the signal in Figure (4-9) can be found from a Fourier Analysis.

If the pulses are assumed to be sinusoidal of period T, the

optimum bandwidth is, 3

Af =
Tw
s

Target__

Background
T

21
ws

Figure (4-9). Preamp input.

116
 The specific detectivity is characteristic of the

t detector used. Reference [91 is an excellent source of infor-

mation on operational detectors.

8. Idealized Range
Equation (5) is,

W
T IR 2 A t A a
P Ta T
aR

From equations (6)and (7) this becomes,

2

D* S/N r R
[AfA]1/ 2 T T A A W
dA a IR t a

The idealized range, where the signal to noise ratio is unity, is

D*T T A W A
2= a Ad]
[Af IR 1/2 a
0

To simplify this equation the radiant intensity is given by,

At W

Since the parameter of interest in mis~ile design is the aperture

nD a
diameters A a it is replaced with 4 so that,

D* T T IR D 2

4 VAf Ad

1/2
Ad
R 24
D
a [D* Ta TIR J
IT

117

S4
 a. Example (Idealized Range)
From example II a target flying at M = 2.5 has a skin

temperature of 581 0 K. If this target has a presented area of

1 m 2 , the detector size needed to detect the target at a range

of 10,000 m can be determined. From Wien's displacement law the

maximum radiation occurs at,

Xmax = 4.99 U

If the system is designed to accept radiation from 3 to 5 microns,

and the emissivity of the target is 0.7.

W 2 rhc5 2 1 dX
A exp(hc/ XkT)-l

If this equation is integrated on the computer, the radiant

emittance becomes,

W = 1410 watts/m

The radiant intensity becomes,

At W
t -448.82 watts
.Tr

Typical values of the parameters in the idealized range equation

are (9)

T = 0.75
a
TIR =0.95

Af = 1000 cps

Ad = 1 cm
I/ 2
D* = 1 x 101 0 (cps) cm/watt
118
Substituting these values into the idealized range equation gives,

D a = 0.0355 m = 1.4 in.

As can be seen the size of the IR seeker is relatively small

compared to other seekers. The above analysis is for the

"idealized" range. Attenuation of IR radiation can be quite

high thereby increasing the seeker size required.

F. WARHEAD SIZING

The conditional kill probability of a missile is the prob-

ability that the target is destroyed given that the warhead is

delivered to a point in space and the fuze detonates the war-

head at a miss distance r.

rm

'iSolid angle, £2

Figure (4-10). Encounter geometry.

119
The fragment distribution, D(O), is the number of fragments per

unit solid angle, Q. The total number of fragments within the

cone is,

N = D(f)Q

The fragment density, p, is the number of fragments per unit of

area normal to the path.

N D(fl
A A

however,

A
2
r

and

P D( ) = D(O)sin2 (8)
r= r 2
-

1. Target Vulnerability
The vulnerability of aircraft or missile components is

normally determined experimentally. Fragments of a specified

size are fired at the component, and the damage is assessed to

determine if the fragment would cause a kill. If a large num-

ber of fragments are fired, the ratio of killing fragments to

hits can be determined. This ratio is defined as the probability

that given a hit a kill will result, = K Assuming the

HK/H

distribution of hits is uniform over the target,

A
P v
K/H A ( 9)
p 120
 A
p = presented area of target

A v = vulnerable area of target

As would be expected, PK/H' depends greatly upon the

encounter geometry. It will be dependent upon the aspect of

the aircraft, and also depends upon the type of kill specified.

If the target is assumed to be a spherical target, the prob-

ability of kill given a hit can be assumed constant.

2. Conditional Kill Probability

The fragment density is given by equation (8). From

this density expression, the average number of hits, a, on the

vulnerable area of the target is,

a =D()sin2 2 A
v
rm

It is customary to assume that the distribution of hits on the

presented area follows a Poisson distribution. The conditional

kill probability then becomes,

PD = 1 - e - a (10)

= D( )s i n 2 Av]
PD 1 - exp

The above expression depends upon the fragment distribution,

D(V). If the warhead casing is scored such that it produces N

fragments of uniform size and mass, m, the problem is simplified

by formulating an alternate expression for a.

121
 2 + 2r tan
w m

rm

--

Figure (4-11). Static encounter. 4

The warhead-target encounter geometry is shown in

Figure (4-11). As shown the area of the fragment ring depends

on the miss distance, rm. The area of the ring is given by, Af.

Af = 2t r (Z + 2r tan 8)

If the N fragments are distributed evenly in Af, the number of

fragments per unit area is

N N
Af 2n rm (z + 2r tan )

The average number of hits on a vulnerable component is then,

a =pAv 122

v
From equation (9), A V = PK/H Ap

Therefore, a = p PK/H Ap

a= 2 N PK/H 2Ap
rm (w+ rM tan 8)

If in Figure (4-11), the average target width into the paper is

given by W, the presented area is,

AP = W(X.
w+ 2r tan
Ap = (w m

The average number of hits is then,

W
aI =TN 2 PK/H1
r (i
m

The distance at which the target just fills the fragment ring

is the critical miss distance, and the maximum distance for

which a I applies. This is found by setting

L = + 2r tan 8
w c

From which
L - k
w
rc =
2 tan8

If the miss distance in Figure (4-11) is such that the entire

target is always presented to the fragment ring; i.e., rm > rcl

the presented area becomes,
A =WL
p
123
The average number of hits then becomes, a

N PK/H W L
aI rm+( 2r tan s) (12)
mw m

3. Sizing the Warhead Radius

The parameter of interest in this chapter is the diameter

of the warhead required to achieve a specified kill probability.

The development thus far is the conditional probability of kill,

P D' It has been assumed that the guidance system delivers the
warhead to the point of interest, and the fuze detonates the

warhead at this point. Since only the conditional probability

of kill is determined, the purpose of this section will be to

maximize PD or to find the warhead diameter which sets P = 1.

From the threat to be encountered, the target presented

area, Ap, and the vulnerability, PK/H' can be determined. Also

from an alaysis of the threat, the siz e and impact velocity of

the fragments necessary to kill the target can be determined.

The initial velocity required to obtain the impact velocity is

a function of the explosive used and the charge to mass ratio,

C/M.

C Mass of explosive/unit length

M Mass of warhead casing/unit length

The initial velocity is given by Gurney's equation,

V. = 1+C/M 1/2 (13)

i l+C/2M I

124
 Gurney's constant, / for various explosives are given below (11].

Explosive Density, kg/m 3 V7, m/sec

TNT 1590 2316.5

RDX 1650 2834.6

HMX 1840 3118.1

PETN 1730 2834.6

Tetryl 1620 2500.0

Composition B 1680 2682.2

Octol 1800 2895.6

From equation (13), the charge to mass ratio necessary to attain

the specified initial velocity can be determined.

2 /2E
C Vi
M -V i /2(2E)

rc

!r
t

Figure (4-12). Warhead.

125
From Figure (4-12), C/M can be expressed as,

2
C Trr e Pe
M Orw2 - 2
PC
Ce

where

Pe = explosive density

PC = casing density

r2
C re 2 e
M (re+t)2 _ re2 Pc

2
C re Pe
M 2r t + t 2
Pc

If t < < r
e

C r Pe Pe re
M 2ret Pc P 2t

Pe (rw - t)
M PC C
2t = -(14)

From equation (14) the casing thickness in terms of the war-

head radius can be determined.

rw
t= CPe+
2 Pe

126
With the casing thickness fixed as a function of warhead radius

the number of fragments, N, can be determined. In order to

achieve the desired velocities of fragments, it is essential

to have enough length for the diameter. An acceptable length

to diameter ratio for a cylindrical warhead is from two to three.

Most air-to-air missiles have a length to diameter ratio of 2.5.

For this analysis a value of 2.5 is used.

The warhead casing volume is then given by, Vc ,

Vc = 2wrt w

Vc = 2
wOrtr

The mass of the casing is, m c'

m = 1Offtr 2p
c w c

The total number of fragments, N, is obtained by dividing the

case mass by the individual fragment mass.

m 10 7tr 2p
N = w c
m m

From the equation (11) or (12) the average number of hits can

be determined as a function of warhead radius

5trw PcPK/H W
I mr m

5trw 2 PP K/HWL
aii =
mrm(Z w+ 2 rmtan8)

127
The conditional probability of kill can be determined now for a

given warhead radius using equation (10).

a. Design Example (Effect of radius on P )

If the above equations are programmed for the con-

ditions listed below, a plot of the conditional probability of

kill versus warhead radius can be obtained.

Threat: RAM-K
L = 19.51 m

w = 6.10 m

PK/H = .10

Fragments:

m = 105 grains = 0.0068 kg

V. = 2133.6 m/sec

PC = 7000 kg/m
= 20 degrees

Explosive: Composition B

Pe = 1680 kg/m

Miss distance: rm = 50 ft = 15.24 m

Figure (4-13) is a plot of the output. From this

figure it can be seen that a warhead radius of r = .06 m is

required to achieve a conditional kill probability, PD = 1.0.

Therefore the missile diameter required for warhead considera-

tions is, d = 4.72 inches.

The warhead radius also varies with the required

initial velocity. From the equations for charge to mass ratio

128
 r-I

rA 0

C11 $4

oo

ow

"129
and casing thickness the radius required to achieve a specified

kill probability can be determined.

Since,
r
t w
2 C PC
2M P-+1
e

and

Vi 2 /2E
S 2
- V. /2(2E)
1

the average number of hits becomes,

5 pc 3
P K/H Wr w

a1 [ Vi2/2E C + mr

[2 <1- Vi2/2(2E pe m

The above equation assumes rm < r

Letting

[ 52 c PK/H

[2 (Vi 2- / Vli/2
2E 1])
(2E)) Pe
f + mr

the probability of kill becomes,

2
-br
PD = l-e w (15)

If the conditional probability of kill is selected as P= 0.999,

equation (15) can be solved for the warhead radius.

130
 '60 78 1/13
r ( 6.90 (16)

The initial velocity, Vi, required to achieve a target kill is

a function of the miss distance, fragment size, expected en-

counter altitude and target characteristics. For this simple

analysis the effect of initial velocity on warhead radius will

be studied. The effect of varying the initial velocity in

equation (16) is plotted in Figure (4-14). The results were

determined for various explosives to show their effect on the

warhead radius. If an initial velocity of 7000 ft/sec is chosen

with Composition B as the explosive the required warhead radius

is 2.6 inches.

From this analysis the warhead weight can be found. The

casing thickness is given by,

t .115 rw (from required C/M)

£ =5r
w w

Therefore, the explosive weight is

2
We = 7r(r
w - t) £w Pe

We = 5.9530 kg

The casing weight becomes,

2 2
Wc = (rr - rre 2)w Pc

Wc = 6.8651 kg

131
 E-44

U 0

L6. 0
)- >

M r4

LI

M4

snaaawH
MHOND~I-

132LWL
The total warhead weight becomes,

WWH = 12.8181 kg = 28.26 Zb

The required diameter for the radar antenna was 10 inches

and exceeds that required for the warhead. If the warhead is

made hollow and kept at the same weight, equation (14) can be

reformulated to give

C [(rw - t) 2 - i2 Pe
M [2rwt - t 2 ] c

The hollow portion of the warhead is then found from

We (rw2 2
Pe

Figure (4-15) is the resulting warhead.

r. = 2.76 in
1

t = .12 in

Figure (4-15). Hollow warhead.

133
 V. BASELINE DEFINITION

A. CONTROL CONCEPTS
The lifting and control surfaces of a missile may be of

monowing, triwing or cruciform configuration. Figure (5-1) shows

these three arrangements.

Monowing Triwing Cruciform

Figure (5-1). Control configurations.

The monowing arrangement is typical of most cruise missiles,

which require long range and low drag. For this type of arrange-
ment the missile must bank to orient the lift vector for a maneuver.

Because of this, the monowing missile is not as rapid in maneu-

vering as the cruciform configuration, which can produce lift

in any direction instantaneously. The cruciform control also

has identical pitch and yaw characteristics which results in

a simpler control system. The triwing configuration is used

very seldom for conventional missiles. It can be shown that

134

A_
the triwing missile requires larger wing size; therefore, there

is little drag savings even though there is one less wing

than with the cruciform missile (101. From this discussion it

can be seen why the cruciform configuration is the most com-

monly used for tactical missiles of short or medium range.

The positions of the lifting surfaces, on the missile body

depends on the method of control used for the missile. There

are three conventional methods of control for tactical missiles.

These are; 1) Wing control; 2) Tail control; 3) Canard

control.

1. Wing Control
Wing control missiles normally have large movable wings

located slightly behind the missile center of gravity. Because

of the small moment arm the wing surface must be relatively

large to provide control effectiveness. As would be expected,

larger activators are required for moving the wings. A positive

deflection of the wings causes a positive normal force; there-

fore, the missile reacts almost instantaneously; thus making

wing control the fastest reacting method of control. Because of

the smaller moment arm, the resulting smaller pitching moment

and instantaneous lift result in smaller angles of attack. This

feature makes wing control missiles attractive for applications

where theincidence angle must be kept small. Air breathing

applications often use wing control because of inlet perfor-

mance degradation at higher angles of attack. This type of

control is also good for fixed seekers.

135
 2. Canard Control

required to provide control effectiveness. Lift on the missile

Response is slower than wing control because of the need to

pitch the missile to an angle of attack before lift is developed.

Higher angles of attack are needed to generate the required lift.

One advantage of this type of control is convenience of packaging.

Since the controls and avionics are forward of the propulsion

system, the need for connectors is elminated. For stability

reasons the wing of a canard control missile must be located

farther aft than a conventional wing-tail configuration. The

zero lift drag is normally lower than wing control missiles

due to smaller surfaces.

3. Tail Control

Like the case of canard control, a tail control missile

has the movable surface as far from the center of gravity as

possible. This also results in a larger moment arm and there-

fore smaller surface required. Control deflection is the oppo-

site of that for canard or wing control since a negative control

deflection results in a pitching moment that pitches the nose

up and therefore a positive lift on the main lifting surface (wing).

Tail control is normally the slowest method of control. One

advantage is that the flight controls are at the end of the

136

/I
 missile requiring the propulsion system to be located forward
tof other types of control. This results in less center of gravity

movement as the propellant grain burns. This becomes a definite

advantage for longer range missiles.

B. GROSS WEIGHT AND CENTER OF GRAVITY

Since the component weights and their precise locations can-

not be determined at this point in the design process, some

method of estimating the total weight and center of gravity is

needed. There are two approaches commonly used to find the gross

weight of missiles in the conceptual design phase. One is throulgh

the use of the historical data discussed in Chapter 2. Since

the warhead weight is known, an estimate of the gross weight

is now,

WG = ( G WW
H)VG

Another method, which is used extensively in the design of

aircraft, is the use of regression formulas to find gross weight

or component weights in terms of parameters that are known early

in the design. Reference (7) has derived such a formula for the

gross weight of a missile. It is,

1 3 (D)1.14
W =K(L)2.

KG = Constant to be determined (1)

L = Total missile length (inches)

D = Missile diameter (inches)

137
 The constant KG in equation (1) is derived from a baseline

9 (generic) missile. In this case

~(WG)
G baseline
KG =
G (L)2.13 (D)1.14
baseline baseline

The accuracy of a regression formula such as equation (1) depends

upon how close the synthesized missile is to the baseline for

which K G was determined. If the parameters used vary more than

20 percent, the accuracy of the regression equation decreases

rapidly; therefore, if the parameters length and diameter vary

significantly from those of the baseline, equation (1) may give

an erroneous estimate of the gross weight. As an aid in deter-

mining the gross weight, the following values of KG were derived

from data given in reference [7].

Missile Figure KG
SRAAM (5-2) .00128

MRAAM (5-3) .00118

LRAAM (5-4) .00093

SAM (5-5) .00108

Figures (5-2), (5-3), (5-4), and (5-5) show the generic missiles

from which these values were derived.

The center of gravity of the baseline missile for this section

is taken to be 60 percent of the total length. At this point

sufficient information has been developed to define the baseline

missile from which design iterations will be made. The lifting

138
 "44

0-0
L0L

1394
 -4

020

to

co

1401
 .44

ell

ma4

rX-

141
 00-

00

00

0 0

40 4

to
"4n

1 In
070
co)

C4

1424
surface planform for the baseline is taken as a delta planform.

As will be shown later, this wing planform will be very close to

an optimum wing.

C. DESIGN EXAMPLE (BASELINE DEFINITION)

The threat for which this missile is designed is a highly

maneuverable fighter. For this threat a canard control, cruci-

form configuration is chosen. The rationale is that this configur-

ation will provide the fast response necessary at minimum drag.

The diameter was fixed at 10 inches due to antenna considerations

in Chapter 3. From historical data in Chapter 2,

L = (L) D = (15.89) 10 = 158.9 inches

D
LN
LN = (-!) D = 22.3 inches
N D

The MRAAM of Figure (5-3) is used as a generic missile for

selecting KG. Inserting length and diameter into equation (1),

the first estimate of gross weight becomes,

WG = .00118 (158.9)2.13 (10) 1.14 = 794.83 lb

The total lifting surface required is then, from historical

average,

s =W S
(W (F-)(9.3
1
AVG G .09

2
S = 9.02 ft

143
Since the canard to wing area ratio is known from historical

data,

Sc/S w = 0.20
2
SW = 7.52 ft

2
Sc = S -S w = 1.50 ft

Lifting surfaces (delta planform). From historical data,

ARW = 1.61

AR = 3.74
c

b/2A

C
r

Figure (5-6). Lifting surface.

Wing: (b)w =/ARW SW 3.48 ft

(C) W =2 S/b =4.32 ft

Canard:

(b)(b)
c = A= c 2.37 ft.

(Cr) = 1.27 ft.

144
The baseline missile is now defined. The canards are placed

as far forward as possible. The wings are placed as far aft

as possible to ensure the center of pressure is behind the

center of gravity. The exact location of the wings will be

modified in the next chapter. Figure (5-7) is a drawing of

the baseline missile.

145
 InI
r-4

.,'4

-4
r-4

146n

14
 VI. LINEAR AERODYNAMICS

The total drag on the missile is used to size the propul-

sion needed for the cruise segment of flight. The wing size
depends upon the maximum lift required by the missile. The

wing and tail are normally placed to provide minimum drag during

cruise or a certain stability margin at launch. To make any

of the above calculations, values of the aerodynamic coefficients

are needed. This chapter presents the background aerodynamic

theory necessary for these initial calculations. The theory

used is linear aerodynamic theory and slender body theory, from

which simple calculations can be made. Where linear theory did

not apply, an attempt was made to find existing empirical expre-

sions, which yield results accurate enough for initial calcula-

tions. The full nonlinear theory will be presented in Chapter 9.

The reference area for all coefficients in this report is the

missile maximum cross sectional area. The reference length is

the maximum missile diameter.

A. MISSILE DRAG
The total drag of a missile consists of zero lift drag, CD
D0
and induced drag, CD.
1

CD C +C ()

The zero lift drag can be found from a component build up method

in which the contributions due to the nose, body and lifting

surfaces are added together to obtain the total zero lift drag.

147
 Care must be taken to reference the appropriate areas when
9 using this method. The total is then multiplied by 1.25 to

account for interference effects and variations in skin roughness

[121.

CD 0 = 1.25 [(CD0) + (CD0 ) B + (CD 0 ) + (CD0) ] (2)

The method used to find the components drag depends upon the

speed regime in which the missile is operating. Since this

report is concerned primarily with supersonic tactical missiles,

supersonic zero lift drag will be discussed here. The component

supersonic zero lift drag can be divided into skin friction,

CDf, and wave drag, CD .

fW

(CD0) = (CDf) + (CDw)

1. Supersonic Skin Friction

The flow over a body traveling at supersonic speeds is

likely to be turbulent; so the incompressible skin friction co-

efficient is given by,

455
Cf = (l 1 R2.58 (3)
S (lOgl0 Re l

The Reynolds number in equation (3) is based upon the cruise

altitude and speed and upon the characteristic length for the

148
component being determined. The Reynolds number is given by.

VM x
Re =1 P
Re

where x = LN, the length of the nose

LCB, the length of the body without the nose

(c), the mean aerodynamic chord

The compressibility correction to equation (3) is,

Cf = C f (i + 0.15 MM2 ) -0.58

From equation (4) the skin friction drag coefficient for each
component can be found when referenced to the appropriate area.

(Swetd
(CD ) N = (C f) wetted
N Sref

(SwettedB
(CD ) = (Cf) B
f B Sref
B

The lifting surface skin friction drag is determined in a similar

manner. Care must be taken to include all surfaces in the

wetted area calculation for the lifting surfaces.

2. Supersonic Wave Drag

The supersonic wave drag consists of components contri-

buted by the nose and lifting surface. Nose wave drag depends

on the shape of the nose, and the most common nose shapes are

149
 conical, ogival and hemispherical. Reference [10] lists

9empirical formulas for finding the form(wave) drag of various

nose shapes at zero angle of attack.

(1) Conical; C = (0.083 + 0.097/M 2) (a/10)1.69

a = tan 2D Nose semi-vertex angle (Degs)

LN =

The center of pressure for a conical nose is at the centroid of

the nose planform or two thirds the length of the nose.

1 /D) 2- 6
(2) Ogival; C = P -2[196(L
DW 28(M + 18) (LN/D)2

P = (C ) for conical nose

The center of pressure for an ogive noise is,

Cp 1 50(M + 18) + 7M2 P (5M - 18)

IN 240(M + 18) + 7M2P (4M - 3)

The semi-vertix angle for an ogive is twice the equivalent cone

angle.

(3) Hemispherical; The drag on a hemispherical nose is extremely

high compared to other nose shapes, and is difficult to

estimate. An initial estimate of the wave drag can be

found from Figure (6-1).

150
 Ln

4 -

1 .
C Q

151
 The wave drag due to the lifting surfaces can be found

using the methods of reference [12]. For a double wedge air-

foil with sharp leading edges as shown in Figure (6-2), the

wave drag is given by the following formulas:

(1) Supersonic leading edge,

C B t2 SW
DW B c Sref

(2) Subsonic leading edge,

C B cot A ()2 SW
DW LE Sref

Figure (6-2). Double wedge wing [123.

where B = A = leading edge sweep

B _ xt/c LE

2 SW = planform area

152
 3. Base Pressure Drag

The drag contribution of the blunt base for non-boattailed

bodies is given in reference [41 as,

(72)1.14(-1 )2. 8
2B 1B= [2yMM- .]

This term assumes no jet thrust from the base of the missile,
or that the missile is operating in the power off condition.

This term is not included in equation (2), which is not a bad

assumption for powered flight where the nozzle exit area is

approximately equal to the base area of the missile. For the

case where the nozzle exit area is much less than the base

area as in Figure (3), the base pressure contribution should be

included.

/i

Figure (6-3). Base pressure areas [10].

153
Ii
In this case the base drag is,

Sb
CAB =C AB S
ref

Sb = shaded area of Figure (6-3)

4. Induced Drag
The induced drag on a missile is the drag due to lift.

This drag is caused by the component of the lift vector in the

drag direction. For supersonic flow the induced drag is given

by,

CDi1 1 C
C Na 2

where; =

L q Sre f

The lift curve slope, CN.' will be developed later in this chapter.

B. DESIGN EXAMPLE (ZERO-LIFT DRAG CALCULATION)

The thickness to chord ratio of the wing and tail have not

yet been determined; however, it is desirable to construct the

lifting surface as thin as structurally possible to minimize the

wave drag. Since structures have not been covered the minimum

thickness to chord ratio is estimated at 3 percent. The flight

andgeometric conditions determined thus far are;

154
 h = 10,000 ft LN = 1.8583

MM = 3 .0
LCB = 11.3833

Sref =0.5454 (C)w = 2.8816

(t/c)W= (t/c)cf0.03 ( )C = 0.8467

SW = 7.52 ft

SC = 1.50 ft

From these conditions the following table can be constructed.

Nose Afterbody Wings Canards

x 1.8583 11.3833 2.8816 0.8467

Swetted 3.3394 29.8014 15.0400 3.0000

R 2.984 18.282 4.6280 1.360
e
Cfi 0.0025 0.0020 0.0024 0.0029
Cf 0.0015 0.0012 0.0015 0.0017
C 0.0095 0.0652 0.0827 0.0187

C 0.1545 0.0400 0.0050

DW
CD 0.1640 0.0652 0.1227 0.0237

The zero lift drag for the wings and canards in the above table
take into account that there are two sets of wings (4 panels).

The total missile zero lift drag then becomes,

D= 1.25 (CD)+ (CD0 ) + (C + (CD)]

0D0 N 0 AB 0 W C

C = 0.4695

155
 C. MISSILE LIFT CURVE SLOPE

• N ." B (W) I' ______

B (B)
(T)

L(B) TB

Figure (6-4). Wing-body-tail lift [13].

For the purposes of this section lift on a wing-body-tail

combination can be taken as the sum of the components in Figure

(6-4). These consist of,

LN= lift on the nose

L W(B) = lift on the wing in the presence of the body

L - additional lift on the body due to the presence

B(W) of the wing

L T(B) = lift on the tail in the presence of the body

L = additional lift on the body due to the presence

(T) of the tail

The lift of only the wing-body combination can be defined as, LC ,

where,
Lc KC w (5)

156
The lift of the wing alone, LW, is that obtained from thin

airfoil theory or experiment considering the exposed area only.

The constant K C in equation (5) is defined as

KC = K B ( ) + K (B
W
C (B) (B)

From this equation, KB is the ratio of the additional

(w)
body lift in the presence of the wing to the wing alone lift for

zero control deflection, 6 = 0.

B K -
= (W) )B(W)
B
(W) LW (CLa)
LaW I

=L
W (B) - (CLa)w(B)

(B) LW (CLa ) 0

The interference factors, KB and KW have been deter-

(W) (B)
mined from slender body theory for wing-body combinations.

Figure (6-5) isa plot of these values. The wing alone lift
curve slope, (CL) is determined from thin airfoil theory or

experiment. The lift curve slope of delta wings with super-

sonic leading edges is given by,

CL
4 2
where = M-k <

For subsonic leading edges this becomes.

= 27rtane/tanp k >

La E8

157
2.0

1.8

1.6

1.2

1.0

_____OR______
0.8

0.6

0.4_______

K____OR K__ST
0.2

0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0

(r/b)w OR (r/b)T

Figure (6-5). Interference factors [12].

158
Where E is the elliptic integral of the second kind for

Vi - (tanc/tanjz)

Figure (6) shows the Mach angle U and sweep angle, e.

\N

Supersonic LE Subsonic LE

Figure (6-6). Wing leading edge.

The lift of the nose is that obtained from slender body

theory. For small angles of attack

(CNa) = 2/rad.
N

The tail-body combination lift is determined in the same

manner as the wing. The above equations are defined for the case
where the incidence angle is zero and the angle of attack, (a),

159
is varied. Analogous terms can be defined for the case where

the angle of attack is zero and the incidence angle (6) is varied,

LB L B (CL
(C L
k = (T) =( B(T)
(T) LT L T

L (C )
kT T (B) =(B) T
T(B) LT (CLa) T

The interference factors k and k were also found

B (T)T (B)
from slender body theory and are plotted in Figure (6.5).

From the above defnitions the total missile lift curve slope
can be found. If the analysis is for small angles of attack

so that LZN.

(cm
(N) =
(NN
(N) N + (W(B)
(N) ( (N)B(W)
B +W (N)T (B) + (N)B(T)

in coefficient form,
CN q Sreg - (CN ) Nq Sre f + (CN ) q SW + (CN ) q SW
N W~s ) (W)

+ (CN) qT ST + (CN) qT ST
T(B) B(T)

If the downwash is neglected so that qT = q, and the above

equation is differentiated with respect to angle of attack,

160
 SW SW
(C) =(C) + (C ) -- + (C ) W
NaCM NNN N W( Sref Na B Sref
(B) (W)

+ (CN) T+ (CN ST
T(B) ref B(T) ref

From the definition of theinterference factors.

(CN (CNa) +(CN) + KB )

CM N W (B) (W) ref

+ (C) (K +K B ST (6)
N T T(B) B(T) ref

If the tail is the control surface, a similar development for

the control effectiveness, CN6 yields.

(CN ) = (CNa)T (kT + B ST

CM (B) (T) ref

D. MISSILE PITCHING MOMENT

From Figure (6-7) the moment about the center of gravity

can be found. The centroid of the wing is the location of the

center of pressure of a wing alone in supersonic flow. The

effect of the wing-body combination is to move the center of

pressure aft and as can be seen in Figure (6-7) the center of

pressure for the additional lift on the body due to the presence

of the wing is aft of this location. Reference [131 has an

161
 SNW(B)
(B)

NN

t NB (N) NB(T)

xN mXT(B)
W
' B(W)
x T
x B (T)

Figure (6-7). Forces Acting on the Missile.

excellent discussion on how to find these centers of pressure.

For the purpose of this chapter, which is initial sizing and

placement of the lifting surfaces, the center of pressure for

both of these forces, NW and N is taken as the centroid

(B) B(w)
of the wing planform. With this assumption, the moment about

the center of gravity is,

(M)CM = N XN N B ( W)
(B)
W + ) xW + (NT ( B ) + NB(T) xT

Following the same development as for CN

C + (es
C (K + K ) SW
Na N W W(B) B(W) W
rSef

xT ST
+ (CNg) (KT (B +
H S (7)
T (B) B
(T)ef

162
 Also if the tail is the control surface.
St
xT ST
M = (CNa) (kT + k ) (-) (--)
T (B) (T) Sref

Ome must be careful in defining the moment arms in the

above equationz. If a nose up pitching moment is developed in

Figure (6-7), the moment arm is positive. Conversely, a nega-

tive moment arm means a nose down pitching moment is developed.

E. WEIGHT AND CENTER OF GRAVITY VARIATIONS

From the preceding sections of this chapter, it can be seen

that the analysis is normally for one point in the flight pro-

file. Since the launch condition has been defined, the tail

sizing can be accomplished for this initial condition. The

variation of missile weight and center of gravity is due to

propellant burning. For a solid propellant this variation can

be quite large. Since no information is available on the pro-

pellant at this point in the design, the following guidelines

will serve for initial calculations. For air-to-air missiles

the propellant is approximately 35 percent of the launch weight.

The center of gravity travel is 5 percent of the length. For

surface-to-air missiles which must be boosted to flight speed,

the propellant weight can be taken to be 48 percent of the

launch weight with a corresponding center of gravity travel of

approximately 8 percent of the length. These are initial approxi-

mations taken from historical data and can be refined later in

the design process.

163
 VII. LIFTING SURFACE DESIGN

From the analysis of wing lift and drag in Chapter 6, it can

be seen that the performance of a wing will vary with planform.

Up to this point the lifting surfaces have been considered delta

planforms with zero taper ratio. This is not necessarily the

optimum planform since it was taken from a historical average

and does not apply to a specific missile. This chapter deals with

the sizing, placement and planform definition of the missile.

A. WING PLACEMENT

The wing placement on the missile depends upon the type of

control used. For canard control the wing (aft surface) is nor-

mally fixed as far aft as possible for stability purposes. For

a wing control or tail control missile, where the wing is near

the center of gravity, the wing placement becomes more critical

and depends upon the stability margin required. Since the drag

during the cruise segment includes the drag due to lift, one

method to minimize drag would be to place the wing such that

zero lift is produced on the tail during cruise. The moment about

the center of gravity is zero for trimmed flight, thus equation

(7) yields, for (CN) =0.

T

(C N) xN Sref
XW (C ) S (K +
W W (B) B

164

en0
 B. MANEUVER LOAD FACTOR

9 Regardless of the type of missile being designed, it will be

required to maneuver in order to intercept its intended target.

For an air-to-air or surface-to-air missile the level of this

maneuver may be quite large. The maneuver load factor required

was found in Chapter 3. The maximum maneuver the missile can

sustain depends upon the maximum trimmed normal force the missile

can develop.

L = nW

Figure (7-1). Sustained maneuver of a missile.

From Figure (7-1) the force developed by a missile in a con-

stant acceleration turn is

L = nW
(1)
n = maneuver load factor

165

77
 Small angles of attack are assumed for which the lift and
normal force are approximately equal. This approximation is
good for angles of attack of up to 10 degrees, and above this
value of maximum trimmed angle of attack the linear theory
becomes inaccurate. With this assumption for now, equation (1)
becomes,

L = N = nW

(CN)a q Sref = nW (2)

(CNa) f nq
required (a)max qSref

Equation (2) gives the lift-curve slope required to develop

the required normal force at a trimmed angle of attack, (a)max
The lift curve slope developed is given by equation (6) in Chapter
6.

(CNa) =(CNa) + (CNa) (KW + KB SW

CM N W (B) (W) ref
(3)

+ (CN)(K T ()--+ K B
(B) + (T) Sref

As discussed earlier the values of the interference factors

depend upon the wing planform. Typical values of (KW + KB
(B) (W)
and (KT + KB are from 1.5 to 2.0. As a conservative
(B) (T)
estimate a value of 1.5 is assumed. Equation (3) then becomes,
SW ST
(CN) = (CN) + 1.5 (CN) We + 1.5 (CN) Se (4)
Na CM NN W ref a T ref

166
Selecting supersonic leading edges,

(CN) = (C) 4/
W Na T

Therefore

+
Na CM =(Cu)N
(C) 6 (SW + ST)
Sref

If the complete missile lift-curve slope is set equal to the

required lift-curve slope, the lifting surface area required to

maintain the maneuver load factor can be found, using equation (4).

Sref
S
(Sw + S T =[C -(CN)
(CNa) 6
req req N

Let
(S + ST )
req
K = (SW + ST) bsln
baseline

If the same ratio of wing to control surface area is kept to

minimize stability perturbations, the new wing and tail area are,

SW= K(SW) baseline

SW = K(S W
T T baseline
ST = K(S T) baseline

The above analysis assumes a linear variation of C which is

good for small angles of attack. A more precise analysis will

be performed in Chapter 9. The above analysis should be performed

at the expected encounter conditions.

167
 1. Design Example (Maneuver Load Factor)
Since a canard control was chosen for the design example
the canard and wing position are fixed as fqr forward and aft
as possible. The analysis is done for a conservative Mach number
of 2.5 after the missile has slowed from its cruise velocity due
to the maneuver. From previous results,

n = 31 gls

(S + SC ) = 9.02 ft2
W C baseline

WG = 794.83 lbs

If the missile is required to maneuver at one-half its powered

range, and the propellant weight is 35 percent of the launch
weight, the maneuver weight becomes

W = 655.73 lbs

The dynamic pressure for MM = 2.5 and at 10,000 feet altitude is

1 VM2
q=2
2
q = 6369.84 lbs ft

The required lift-curve slope becomes for (a x) = 10 degrees

= .1745 rad.

(CNs) = 33.5311 per rad.

req

The required lifting surface area is;

(Sw + S) = (33.5311-2] Sr 6.57 ft

req
168
Therefore K = 0.7284

The required wing and canard sizes to achieve the maneuver are;

2
SW = (7.52) (.7284) = 5.48 ft
2
SC = (1.50) (.7284) = 1.09 ft

C. TAIL SIZING
For a wing-tail combination, the primary concern in the

sizing of the tail is the static stability of the missile. The

missile becomes more stable as the mission proceeds, since the

center of gravity moves forward as the propellant burns. As

the missile becomes more stable, control of the missile becomes

sensitive. If the tail is sized for zero static stability at

launch, the missile control will remain more effective during

flight. This is the best condition possible without the use of

some form of stability augmentation system at launch. Therefore,

at launch CNa = 0.

0= (C+)N+(~a SS K KB
N w ref (B) (W)
(5)
+ )
) xT
+ (CN T (KT
T ref (B) B(T)

With the lifting surface area fixed due to the maneuver load
factor, the tail can be sized to satisfy equation (5). As can
be seen the position depends highly on the moment arms that the

lift forces act through. Since the missile length has not been

fixed at this point in the design and may vary due to propulsion

requirements, this analysis will be completed later.

169
D. WING PLANFORM
The wing planform is specified by the leading edge sweep,
ALE, taper ratio, X, aspect ratio, AR and planform area SW . The
planform area was fixed due to maneuvering requirements in a
previous section. This section is concerned with defining the
remaining planform parameters. Figure (7-2) is the wing plan-
form and the equations used to define these parameters.

AR = b 2 /s

c LE ct2/Cr
s

ICCr = b(1+X)

2 _ l, 2
I x+

tc tan A
LE
e , b

Figure (7-2). Planform geometry.

The value of the lift-curve slope used previously was derived

from linear theory and is applicable only to simple planforms.
For the purpose of this section, which will include low aspect
ratio wings with supersonic and subsonic leading edges, Figures
(7-3) and (7-4) are used. These figures have been corrected for
3-D effects.
1. Effect of Taper Ratio and Leading Edge Sweep
The lift and drag characteristics of the wing are the
primary parameters of interest. The objective inwing design is

170
 6-6

T 44 ALE (CNg) theory.-

-4
Ipef rad) 7 =

C .3 (per rad)

T- N5A (CNa) theory2

a ~TAN A LE
TAN ALE0

L
7171

6)1
 5 5
TAN ALE (CNa) theory-- .4

3 7-TAN A (cN~t heory1 -

-- ( )thrIL-

0 - ! ; 1 - -!
6-------------------------------------0

TAN A LE
TAN ALE

7172

a.. 6
is to obtain maximum lift with minimum drag. It will be shown

that these objectives are usually conflicting; therefore, some

compromise, or optimum, planform must be found. From Chapter 6

the equations for the drag of a wing in supersonic flow are found.

The skin friction drag depends upon the mean geometric chord.

Equation (3) in Chapter 6 indicates a larger mean geometric

chord would result in less skin friction drag for a fixed area.

The mean geometric chord can be expressed in terms of taper

ratio as follows,

2
- 2 2s (i+X+X
3 9(1+X) l+X

= V 1+ )J

This equation leads to a zero taper ratio to maximize c and

reduce skin friction if the surface area and aspect ratio were

fixed. The wave drag is constant for supersonic leading edges,

and decreases when the leading edge goes subsonic or the leading

edge is behind the mach line. The lift capabilities also de-

crease as the leading edge goes subsonic.

As stated earlier this leads to conflicting performance since

the objective is to minimize drag while maximizing lift. At

this point an example best illustrates the results of varying

taper ratio and leading edge sweep. The lift -curve slope is

derived using the methods of reference (1). Figures (7-3) and

(7-4) are from reference (12] and are used to find the supersonic

linear lift corrected for 3-D flow effects. The drag methods

of Chapter 5 are used to determine the drag characteristics.

173
 2. Example

For a fixed wing area of 4 ft2 and an aspect ratio of

2 the lift curve slope and drag were determined for a flight
Mach number of M= 2. This Mach number corresponds to a sonic
leading edge sweep of 600. The wing leading edge sweep was
varied from zero to 750 for taper ratios of 0, 1/2 and 1. The
results are plotted in Figures (7-5) and (7-6).
From this example certain generalizations can be made,
From Figure (7-5) it can be seen that the drag is relatively
insensitive to taper ratio. There is a reduction in drag for
increased leading edge sweep. For this example there is approxi-
mately a 6 percent drag reduction for every five degree increase
beyond the sonic value. Figure (7-6) indicates that the effect
of decreasing the taper ratio is to delay the drop in the lift
curve slope of the wing. From this example a general guideline
would be to fix the leading edge sweep 5 degrees beyond the sonic

value and the taper ratio at zero. This would provide a 6 per-
cent reduction of wave drag while maintaining the maximum lifting

capabilities of the wing.

3. Effect of Varying Aspect Ratio
The result of increasing aspect ratio is an increase in
the lift-curve slope of the wing (121. The aspect ratio is
given by,
AR = b2 /s

For a zero taper ratio wing this becomes;

AR = 2b/c (6)
174
 CN4

00

4 144

U) 0
gw ~

40
Ll
4-a

LI

r34

iiii i

175
 00

-4 4-4

'44

ION

-w Ic

176
From equation (6) it can be seen that increasing aspect ratio

results in a corresponding increase in wing span for a given

root chord. Missiles are normally span limited, due to launcher
constraints; therefore, there is a maximum span which can be
accomodated. The drag of the wing again is in conflict with
the lift since increasing aspect ratio decreases the mean geo-
metric chord for a given spanand therefore increases skin fric-
tion drag. A compromise wing AR must be found which considers
both the lift and the drag characteristics. For a discussion
of optimum aspect ratio, the following functions are defined
for convenience:

F = F 1 + F 2 =Lift-drag function (7)

CD 0 =Normalized drag
function
1 (CD0)
0 max
_1/Ce
F2 - I/(CN) Normalized lift function
N min

From equation (7) if F is plotted over the allowable

range of aspect ratio, a minimum value of the lift-drag function
fixes the desired aspect ratio. This aspect ratio corresponds
to minimizing the drag function, Fl , while maximizing the lift
function, F2 . For convenience the abscissa is plotted as c/c(max)
as shown in Figure (7-7).
From Figure (7-7) the optimum mean geometric chord cor-

responds to point A.

177
 F

I
I I

0B 1.0
c/c (max)

Figure (7-7). Lift-drag function.

maxA max

The aspect ratio is then given by

3-

b = 2s/c r

AR = b2/s

As mentioned earlier a missile is normally span limited. The

plot of the lift-drag function F is normally fairly flat on the

left, or for c/C(max) approaching zero. For this reason point

B may be chosen as the optimum since F varies very little up

178
to this region. Point B corresponds to increased chord and
decreased span.

4. Design Example (Wing Planform)

From the previous analysis the following parameters were

defined.

MM = 3.0
2
SW = 5.48 ft

If the leading edge sweep is fixed 5 degrees behind the mach

line.

= sini 19.50

ALE = 95- = 75.50

X= 0

The planform table becomes

AR b c c KW(B) KB(W)

2.0 3.31 3.31 2.21 1.17 .26

1.5 2.87 3.82 2.55 1.19 .30

1.0 2.34 4.68 3.12 1.22 .35

.75 2.03 5.40 3.60 1.24 .40

.50 1.66 6.62 4.41 1.29 .48

.25 1.17 9.36 6.24 1.36 .62

The wave drag is constant and is given by,

SW
C Dw = 4 cot ALE ()2 Sref
C = .0094
D7W

179
AR CD f CD0 AR tan ALE tan ALE w (B)+K B(W)
(CN(KW )

2.0 .0303 .0397 7.73 .73 2.1137

1.5 .0296 .0390 5.80 .73 1.9845

1.0 .0288 .0382 3.87 .53 1.8271

.75 .0282 .0376 2.90 .73 1.7813

.50 .0274 .0368 1.93 .73 1.4809

.25 .0260 .0354 .97 .73 .7937

AR C/Cmax F1 F2 F

2.0 .35 1.0000 .3755 1.3755

1.5 .41 .9824 .3999 1.3823

1.0 .50 .9622 .4344 1.3966

.75 .58 .9471 .4456 1.3927

.50 .70 .9270 .5360 1.4630

.25 1.00 .8917 1.0000 1.8917

From Figure (7-8) it can be seen that the lift-drag

function remains relatively constant up to C/m = .58. Since

max
the object is to make the span as small as possible this point

is taken. The wing planform becomes,

180
 C = .58 cmax = 3.62 ft = 43.44 in

C = 5.43 ft = 65.16 in
b = 2.02 ft = 24.24 in
c = 3.90 ft = 46.80 in

AR = 0.74

5. Design Example (For Canard Planform)

From pr~vious analysis and development, the following

parameters have been defined:

M = 3.0

S c = 1.09 ft2

(t/c) = 0.03
C

If the leading edge sweep is set 5 degrees behind the sonic

value and the taper ratio is set to zero, the following planform

table results.

aLE= 75.50

X= 0

AR b cr c 'W(B) KB(W)
2.5 1.63 1.34 .89 1.29 .52
2.0 1.48 1.47 .98 1.31 .55

1.5 1.28 1.70 1.14 1.35 .59

1.0 1.04 2.10 1.40 1.47 .76

.5 .74 2.94 1.96 1.51 .90

.25 .52 4.19 2.79 1.59 1.02

181
44

B44

900

4I

44I
.1-I
B' r-I

182*
 AR C D fC D0 ARtan ,E tanA C N(k)
-f 0 tanALE _ _ _

2.5 .0069 .0087 9.67 .73

2.0 .0067 .0085 7.73 .73 2.7900

1.5 .0067 .0085 5.80 .73 3.6339

1.0 .0064 .0082 .3.87 .73 2.5952
.5 .0061 .0079 1.93 .73 2.0880
.25 .0058 .0076 .97 .73 1.0124

AR C/Cma F1 F F

2.0 .35 1.0000 .3628 1.3628

1.5 .41 1.000 .3844 1.3844

1.0 .50 .9647 .3901 1.3557

.5 .70 .9294 .4849 1.4143
.25 1.00 .8941 1.0000 1.8941

From Figure (7-9) it is seen that there is a minimum of

the lift-drag function at c/Z a = 0.5. The optimum canard is

then,

C=0.5 C ma 1.40 ft =16.80 in

cr 2.09 ft =25.08 in

b.= 1.04 ft =12.48 in

AR = 0.99

c = 2.01 ft =24.12 in

183
 0

6.-44
4

4-I

4
r4

1844
 E. DESIGN EXAMPLE (REVISION OF ZERO LIFT-DRAG AND LIFT-CURVE

SLOPE)
Wing: c = 3.62 ft

cf = .0014

(CD0) = .0750
0W
O
Canard: c = 1.40 ft
c = .0016

(CD ) = .0166
Oc
Body: (CD) = .2292
B

The complete missile C including the interference factor

of 1.25, is now 0.4010. From the previous calculation of the

baseline zero lift-drag coefficient, the drag has been reduced

by 14.6 percent.

From equation (6) in Chapter 6 the lift-curve slope is now

CNa = 25.17/rad

Figure (7-10) is the missile design to this point.

185

Ii -"
 Ln 0
r- 0
LA
(N

.1-I

M
0! 4)
Ico

.1-I

LAI 0

'.4

rT4

(N

186
 VIII. PROPULSION REQUIREMENTS

The following discussion presents a method for preliminary

sizing of a solid rocket motor for a boost-sustain trajectory
of an air launched or a surface launched tactical missile. The
analysis consists of sizing the booster from incremental velo-
city considerations and sizing, the sustainer for the maximum
range required at the operational altitude. The method assumes
a constant acceleration boost and a constant altitude cruise.

A. BOOSTER INITIAL SIZING

Since the control system cannot respond properly while in
the boost phase of flight, it becomes important to make the boost
time as short as possible. The limiting factor for boost time
is the maximum axial acceleration the airframe and components
can withstand. This maximum acceleration is normally around
30 g . The boost time then becomes,

fV 2

tb = a
V1

For constant acceleration,

V-V 1 AV
tb =--l. (1)
a a

The incremental velocity during boost, AVB , can be derived

from the equations of motion.

187
 a
/
T

I I I, w
/L

Figure (8-1). Forces acting on the missile.

If during the boost phase the thrust, drag and launch angle are

considered constant, the axial acceleration of the missile is

constant and may be written as:

m dV = T - D - W sin Y

dV = g( )dt - g sin y dt

If the launch velocity is V 1 and the velocity at the end of

boost is V 2 '
V2 ftb t
dV g( )dt f b g sin y dt (2)
V 0 0

The vehicle weight in equation (2) is a function of time. If the

propellant weight is given by Wp, and the propellant grain burn

is linear with time, the missile weight can be expressed as,

188
 w =wL - w (tt)
L Ptb

where WL = Launch weight.

Equation (2) then becomes,

t t -wbdtt
VB = V2 - V 1 = g(T - D) W bt t) -g sin L t
B 2 0 (W~Ltb- pt

Integrating the first term yields,

AB A g(T Wp
W
- D)tb nn L
W bi b
p )tL g
g sin ¥L
y tb

Since the empty weight is given by

WE = WL - Wp

The incremental velocity can be written as

g(T - D)tb W
B AV- Wp -I'-gsnyt sinL
n WE tb (3)

A first estimate of propellant weight can be made if the drag is

assumed zero in equation (3), and Isp = Ttb/W

AVB = g Isp Zn WE g sin yL tb (4)

B sp WE

In the above expression the specific impulse, I , is charac-

teristic of the propellant chosen and can be found from histori-

cal data, or a specific propellant value may be used.

189
 WL
Equation (4) can then be solved for and the first esti-
WE
mate of propellant weight, WP, can be found as follows,

WE
Wp = WL(l -WL-
P L L

With the propellant weight and specific impulse known, the

total impulse and average thrust required for boost can be found.

T sp p

tb

With the thrust known and an average value of drag assumed,

equation (3) can be iterated for an improved estimate of the pro-

pellant weight needed.

The final result is used to calculate the booster combustor

volume and length.

VVBB=W
= p/ppu
/PA

where np = volumetric packing factor

LB = 4VB/UDc 2

The combustor diameter is limited by the missile maximum

diameter and is a design choice. The propellant density, pp

and volumetric packing factor, np, are determined from histori-

cal data or given for a specific propellant.

190
B. SUSTAINER INITIAL SIZING
The sustainer thrust required to maintain cruise is the
driving factor in the sustainer motor sizing. For initial sizing
purposes, a level, constant velocity cruise segment is assumed.
In this analysis the thrust required is equal to the aerodynamic
drag developed by the missile. The performance requirements
determine the maximum range, operating altitude, and velocity of
the missile. From these requirements the sustainer burn time,
ts can be determined.

ts = VM B

where S = distance traveled during boost.

Since sustainer thrust is equal to drag, Ts = D, the total

impulse required becomes,

(I) Dt
S s

The sustainer nozzle is sized for the operational altitude

of the missile. The thrust coefficient, CFd, can be expressed as;

CFd = CdA (+1 1[ (c I

The constant, Cd, is the nozzle efficiency and has been
determined from historical data to be 0.96. The nozzle half

angle correction, X, is given by;

191
 F/6 16/4.1
TACTICAL MISSILE CONCEPTUAL CA
DESIGN,(U)
SCHOOL MONTEREY
AAO95 118 NAVAL POSTGRADUATE

EEEEEEEE
7
UNCLASSIFIED NL

umuuuuuuuuu
4

I
omuuumuuumo
mhEEEmhohhohE
I-mmhhhmhhhl
EEmhEmhEEEEEEI
 S= (1 + cos a)/2

where a is the nozzle half angle. A nominal value used in many

designs is 150. Larger values of a give significant non-axial

flow components in the nozzle. Values less than 150 give large

nozzle lengths and therefore contribute to excessive missile

weights. The combustion chamber pressure is also a design choice.

A lower usable value of P c is 200 psia for sustainers and 500 psi

for boosters. The chamber pressure cannot exceed the maximum

expected operating pressure of the missile (MEOP).

The thrust of the sustainer can be expressed as a function

of the thrust coefficient, chamber pressure, PC' and throat area,

At . The throat area required to deliver the required sustainer

thrust can be determined from

T = C P A
s Fd C t

The nozzle area ratio is a function of the pressure ratio

P0/Pc, where P 0 is the ambient pressure if the nozzle expands

the flow fully.

y+l
A 2 -+1 ]2 ("yl)
Ae M ) Ilf + ( 2 M2]
t e

Y
where P0 [1+ ( ) Me2] Y-1
C
192
From the previous equation the exit area can be determined.

From the throat and exit diameters, the nozzle length is found

by

D e -D t
L = e t
n 2 tan a

At this point in the design the nozzle exit area and length
should be checked to see if they exceed any specifications on

the missile; i.e., the nozzle exit area must be less than the

base area of the missile.

Finally, the delivered specific impulse is typical of the

propellant chosen for the sustainer. The propellant weight is

then,

p sp

The sustainer combustor volume and length are then determined

in the same manner as the booster. The equations concerning

the sustainer nozzle also apply to the booster nozzle with the

appropriate booster areas, pressures and thrust substituted.

C. ROCKET MOTOR CHAMBER PRESSURE

As indicated earlier the delivered thrust increases with

increasing chamber pressure, Pc; however, the wall thickness

in the rocket motor depends upon the expected operating pressure

within the chamber. If the wall thickness is t inches, and the

yield stress of the casing material is ayI it can be shown that

the thickness required of the motor casing is given by,

193
 P r
t = max (5)

where r is the chamber radius, and Pmax is the maximum chamber

pressure, which is taken to be 1.2 P c to allow for variations

within the propellant. From equation (5) the weight of the motor

casing can be determined if the casing is cylindrical and

t< <r

Wc Pc Vc = 2nrZtP

Substituting for t
2.41Tr 2 ZP P
W ca= a c (6)
y

The specific impulse of the rocket motor is given by.

V.
F- 1/2
P0I
Isp -1 =.-gc12 2gc
9c Y-1 R T[ 1 (-)c (7)

From equations (6) and (7), it can be seen that a compromise

must be made in selecting the chamber pressure; since increasing

Pc increases the specific impulse but also increases the casing

weight. An attempt must be made to find an optimum operating

pressure.
If the rocket motor weight consists of the nozzle, propellant

and casing,

WM = WN + Wp + W c (8)

194
 and the total impulse, which is constant is given by,

I = Ttb = Isp Wp

The optimum chamber pressure can be found by minimizing the

weight and maximizing the impulse.

dM d ( WM
dpc p I p
4sp

differentiating yields,

1 ( ) WM d(1/I sp 0
Isp dpc p Wp c (9)

1 d (WM) WM dI
Isp dpc p WpIsp 2 dpc

From equation (8)

WM We W(
p Wp p 1

Substituting equation (10) into equation (9),

dWc WdW W N dW WM d

dp W Ip 0
W dpc W dp
p dc Wp ~c Wp c p sp dpc

195
Substituting equations (12) and (13) into equation (11)

Y-1
2.4p c W WpRTQ Po Y
P ay gc Ispe PC (PC

2
Substituting for gc Isp in the above equationyields,

y-1 1 2.4 (pc) 0 (14)

LPC (1

If a propellant and casing material are chosen, equation (14)

can be solved for the chamber pressures, pC' which minimizes

WM/ One interesting feature of equation (14) is that there
.
M a
is a minimum yield strength to density ration -Z that will yield
PC

a usable chamber pressure, furthermore this optimization yields

a very shallow minimum. Therefore, if the thrust or exit dia-

meter requires an increase in pc the penalty paid in additional

casing weight will be small.

D. TYPICAL PROPELLANTS
From the preceding discussion it can be seen that some know-

ledge of propellants to be used in the rocket motor is needed.

The thrust developed by a rocket motor depends directly upon the

pressure in the chamber.

T = CF AT PC

196
Since

_ I T
sp sp

dW+ w + sW sp d 0
dP c W dP c Isp dpc
sp

From equation (8)

WC + WN = WM - Wp

Substituting for W + WN

dW W dI
rpcC IsSP
p dp cCp =

From equation (6)

dW c 2.4rrr2 xcPc

Since

W = Trr 2 P

dW c 2.4p c WP
dPc p ay (12)
C P y

from equation (3)

di s RT (PO 7
-=
-)(13)
Sc = g sp P
197
Because of this relationship, high pressures are needed for the

boost phase, and relatively low pressure are needed for the sus-
tain phase of flight. The pressure developed in a rocket motor
chamber is a function of the burn rate and burn surface area of

the propellant. In order to provide more burn area for the boost
phase, the grain normally has an internal star perforation; while

a sustain motor is normally an end burning grain of solid cross-

section. The volumetric loading of a rocket motor is defined as

the ratio of the propellant volume to the rocket motor chamber

volume.

Grain volume
p Chamber volume

Due to erosive burning effects the volumetric loading of a booster

is normally limited to less than 0.9. For efficient packing

the ratio varies from 0.7 to 0.9. The volumetric loading of an

end burning sustainer engine is normally 1.0. The range of

propellant characteristics is shown in Table (8-I).

TABLE (8-I). Typical Propellant Properties (14,15].

Sustainer Booster
Isp (sec) 180-210 210-260
p (lbm/in3) .059-.062 .062-.065

y 1.24 - 1.27 1.22 - 1.26

n 1.00 0.85
P

198
 E. DESIGN-EXAMPLE (BOOSTER)

tFrom the previous analysis the launch speed is M = 1.5, and

the cruise speed is M = 3.0 at an altitude of 10,000 feet. The

boost incremental velocity is then,

AV B = 1616.10 ft/sec

If the maximum acceleration during boost is a constant 30 gs

(assume sea level g c ) , the time of burn is,

1616.10 ft/sec 2
30(32.2 ft/sec

tb = 1.67 sec

From equation (4) with yL = 0

n WT
WE, gAVB
Isp_
E gI 5

Assume I sp 250 sec from Table (I)

sw L

Z - = 0.2008
n WE
WE
W =WL ( W--
p WL

For WL = 794.83

W = 144.57 ,bm
p

199
The thrust provided is
IsP w = 21,642 bf
(T)b tb

Since the missile flies essentially at zero angle of

attack during boost, the drag at the end of boost is,

D = (CD0) q Sref

D = 2006 Zbf

Therefore if an average drag of 1000 lbs is assumed, equation (3)

can be used to find a new WL/WE

ZW L AVB W
n WE g(T , D)th

WL
WE .2270
WE

w = 161.40 kb

This gives a thrust of 24,162 lbs. One more iteration of

equation (4) gives,

w = 159.46 Ib

(T)s = 23,872 Lbf

200
Continued iteration of equation (4) does not change the pro-

pellant weight.

From Table (I); pp = .062 bm/in 3

n = .85

The booster volume then becomes

in 3
VB = 3025.81

Allowing one-half inch for structure, the booster length becomes.

LB B 42.69 inches
TrD
c

F. DESIGN EXAMPLE (SUSTAINER)

The maximum range of the missile was determined to be 35 nmiles.

R = 212,800 ft

The distance traveled during boost is

SB = V M t

V1 + V 2
=- 2 - 2424.15 ft/sec

SB = 4048.33 ft

Therefore, at a cruise Mach number of 3.0, the sustainer time

of burn is

t=s 64.59 sec.

201
 The cruise drag consists of zero-lift drag and induced drag.

The lift coefficient of the missile minus the booster is;

W
CL = Sre f

CL = 0.1270

From Chapter 6

% CDo + CL /CNa

CD = .4016

The cruise drag then becomes

D = 2009 Zbf

The total impulse required is then;

(IT)s = Dt = 129,761 kb - sec

From Table (1) the specific impulse is 210 sec; therefore,

the weight of propellant needed for cruise is

(I T
p s =
(W) Is s = 618 £bm

The volume required is

3
V = 9967.7 in
S

202
 The sustainer length becomes,

t L = 7
4VS
= 140.62 inches
7TD
c

The total rocket motor length is, L

LRM = LB + LS

LM = 183.31 in

The rocket motor alone exeeds the total length of the base-

line missile. This will lead to large length to diameter ratios

for the entire missile; therefore, the rocket motor length must

be decreased. That is the subject of the next section.

G. REDUCING ROCKET MOTOR LENGTH

If the rocket motor length of the last section leads to

excessive length to diameter ratios for the missile, the motor

length must be decreased. This may be accomplished in one of
two ways: (1) If the mission profile has a long cruise segment,

the cruise altitude may be increased thereby decreasing the drag

and the total impulse required. (2) If the cruise altitude

cannot be varied, the missile diameter must be resized for pro-

pulsion considerations. In this design example option (2) will

be selected.

The missile length can be expressed as

L =L n + LG + L c LWH LRM (15)

203
 L n = Nose length

LG = Guidance section length

L c = Control section length

L H = Warhead section length

LM = Rocket motor length

The nose and warhead sections have been previously defined.

Since the propellant weight for the range requirement is known,

the diameter necessary can be determined if a maximum missile

length is specified. The drag will increase slightly due to the

increased diameter but the total impulse, and therefore the pro-

pellant weight, will change only slightly.

The rocket motor length can be expressed in terms of the

diameter by
4W
LRM =pp-D

Equation (15) then becomes

=L 4Wp c
+ Lc
n G c WH pp7D2

The guidance and the control sections are each normally about

10 percent of the missile length.

L LWH 4W
(L) (-)D + lL + .lL + (-) D + 2
D pp7rD

+ - .8LD 2 +
(16)
PT4

204
As mentioned in Chapter 2 the missile is normally designed for

an existing launcher. This launcher will have a maximum length

that it can accomodate, Lmax' If this value is substituted into

equation (16), the required diameter can be found.

1. Design Example (Resizing for Propulsion)

From previous analysis; L /D = 2.23

n
LwH/D = 2.50

The propellant weight from before was, W = 777.46 lbs. If

the maximum length of the missile is taken as 210 inches, equa-

tion (16) becomes,

4.73D 3 - 168D 2 + 15,467.08 = 0.0

The required diameter is then,

(D) 11.75 inches

req

Allowing 0.25 in for structure, the missile diameter becomes

12 inches. From the equations for the rocket motor lengths,

Lb = 26.62 in
LS 90.47 in

LRM= 117.09 in

H. DESIGN EXAMPLE (CHAMBER PRESSURE)

From equation (14), the strength to density ratio can be

solved for in terms of c

205
 -- 1
min p

If the minimum usable chamber pressure is P = 500 psi, and

using the propellant previously selected.

y = 1.24

pp = .062

P 0 = 10.11

the minimum strength to density required can be found.

(-Z) = 225,542.87 in
PC
min

Inconnel 718 is a common metal used in combustion chambers

and has the following properties [41:

ay = 180,000 psi
3
PC = .2662 bm/in

= 676,183 > (-X)

PC min

The cqtimum chamber pressure is then fro-n equation (14)

PC = 1132.55 psi

The rocket motor chamber wall thickness is given by equation (5)

as

206
 r
Pmax

ay
t =0.05 inches

The wall weight is given by equation (2)

W c = 2Tr r2 .Mtpc

Wc = 59.5 Zbm

I. DESIGN EXAMPLE (SIZING THE NOZZLE)

For initial analysis it is assumed that the flow is fully

expanded, in a nozzle with a half angle of 15 degrees. With

the chamber pressure of 1132.55 psi the thrust coefficient at

altitude is

C CdX 2Y
2 )Y- 1 P
CFd d - C)
1-1

CF 2.3023

The throat area and diameter then become

=T .2
At = T-t c = 9.1552 in
CFd

dt = 3.4142 in

207
From isentropic tables for p 0/P = .0089

dt A1/2
dt. A1
-A) = .3342
e

The exit diameter becomes,

de = 10.22 in

The nozzle length for a 15 degree half angle is,

Zn = 12.70 in

The nozzle is shown in Figure (8-2). Figure (8-3) is the design

with resized diameter and length for propulsion and the optimum

wings determined in Chapter 7.

J. TAIL SIZING

As mentioned in Chapter 7 the tail (canard) sizing is accom-

plished for zero static stability at launch. Now that the missile

length has been fixed, the canard can be sized. Figure (8-3)

is a drawing of the design to this point. The total lifting sur-

face required is

2
SW + Sc = 6.57 ft

if k = /S (16)

From equation (5) in Chapter 7, for C = 0

208
 H
.4

00
I1

III

co

n.
20

200

.., .
..
..
..
....
...
- , ..
....
......
......
,u ...........
. . ...
...........
..
.......
.. "I -41-l
 (v)

0
-en

'-44

00

4 01
41-

2102
 0 (C NS ) N + (CN) KW +KB
W ref (B) (W)

(17)
S
+ (C)C xC (K + KB
C ref C(B) (C)

Equations (16) and (17) above can be solved for SW and k.

2
SW = 4.70 ft

k = 0.40

Therefore, S = 1.87
c

If the same aspect ratio as found in Chapter 7 is used, the wing

and canard planforms become,

Wing: bw = 1.86 ft Canard: b c = 1.36 ft

(c ) = 5.05 ft (cr) = 2.75 ft

w rc

(c)w = 3.60 ft (c)c = 2.63 ft

211
 IX. NONLINEAR AERODYNAMICS AND AERO1

As mentioned in Chpater 5 the analysis thus far has been for

one speed and small angles of attack. The aerodynamics change

dramatically from subsonic to supersonic flow and with increasing

angle of attack. This chapter presents the methods used primarily

by USAF Stability and Control DATCOM .and covers all configura-

tions and flight speeds. As will be shown, the method becomes

very involved and therefore lends itself to programming on a

digital computer.
The lifting characteristics of both wings and bodies become

nonlinear as the missile angle of attack increases above 100.

Up to this point in the thesis development only the linear

contribution has been considered. For large angles of attack,

the nonlinear term, which is due to flow separation, must be

considered. The relative effect of these terms on the normal

force and pitching moment coefficients is shown in Figure (9-1).

A. VISCOUS CROSS-FLOW
As can be seen in Figure (9-1), at large angles of attack

the forces acting are primarily nonlinear. The nonlinear term

is normally described through the use of the viscous cross-flow

coefficient, Cd
c
f
Cd = v S = planform area.
dc nSp1

212
rl-7

lg
,--- . .
-

Mh
of n..r o
crs

-4
1 .2
I - T-- I -- -

of linea and nonlinear

(91)
Figure.'. Reltiv cotrbtin

For infniel .a.n

long circula cylnde, thevisou.,.ss

40 60 0 I00 ,20 i40 160 80

20

Figure (9-1). Relative contributions of linear and nonlinear

terms [191.

cross-
For an infinitely long circular cylinder, the viscous

flow force per unit length is

experimentally
The viscous cross-flow coefficient is determined
number.
and is a function of normal Mach number and Reynolds
as a function
Figure (9-2) gives the cross-flow drag coefficient
m
of cross-flow Mach number.

213
 C4

C'4

a.)

0
cc 0j
X0
0'

4-4

LL.

CC

C11)

CD4

214
 M n = MM sina

R en = Re sina

V n = V M sin a

Since in real flow there is spillage around the ends of a finite

length cylinder, the drag is less than that for an infinite, 2-D

cylinder. The cross-flow drag proportionality constant, n, is

the ratio of the drag coefficient of a finite cylinder to the

drag coefficient of an infinite cylinder.

Cd
n = (C c
d
c 2-D

The proportionality constant is also determined experimentally

and is given in Figure (9-3). Notice that the cross-flow drag

proportionality constant approaches one as the length to dia-

meter ratio becomes large, or the 2-D situation is approached.

The viscous cross-flow force per unit length for a finite

cylinder then becomes

pV 2
f = 2rnC n (2)
v dc 2

Since
2Pn PVM 2 .i2 .2
- 2 si = q sina

equation (2) becomes,

fv = 2nCdcq r sin

215
 cn1

00

-A 04
- U.

I 0

anton

21
The viscous contribution to the normal force acting on the cylinder

then becomes

F 2nC d sin 2 a
(C) v = c rdx
q Sref Sref

For a uniform cylinder,

S
(CN ) = n Cs 2a

V Cc ref

If this force is added to the term predicted by slender body

potential theory, the total normal force acting on the body can

be found. Reference [19] gives this total force as;

Sb 2 a S 2
(CN ) = r sin a cos f + n C d sin a
N Sre c Sref

Similar terms can be developed for the wing and tail since
they also exhibit nonlinear behavior at high angles of attack.

Care must be taken to separate the lift of Chapter 5 into the

lift acting on the wing panel and the additional lift on the body

before the cross-flow term is applied. The nonlinear cross-flow

component of wing lift is caused by flow separation and the for-

mation of vortices on the upper surface of the wing. This

viscous term is given by, CN
W(V)

= C sin a W
C NW(v)
n Sref

Where C d is the cross-flow drag coefficient for a flat plate and

n
is given in Figure (9-4).

217
B. TOTAL MISSILE LIFT

The remainder of this chapter is a summary of references (17]

and [18]. With the addition of the force due to viscous cross-

flow, the total lift on the body becomes

C (C) + c+ CN
N N B NB(W) +
B B(T)-a B(T)-6

where,
(C ) = linear and nonlinear lift force on the body
NB
C = additional lift on the body due to the wing
CN = additional lift on the body due to the tail
NB(T) -a
(due to angle of attack)

C NB(T) -8
= additional lift on the body due to the tail

(due to control deflection)

The additional lift on the body in the presence of the wing and
tail can be found as described in Chapter 6.

The wing lift is now composed of a linear and a nonlinear

component and becomes

NW N W(B) NW(V)
SW
C = K. ()sine + Cd .i22 SW
SW
CNW KW(B) (CN4v)W Sref n ref

The tail lift is found in a similar manner only with the

additional term for any control surface deflection, 6.

NT N
NT CT(B)-
N CN T(B)-6 NT(V)

218
 '-4

0
-4
44-

0
41
_ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

-4

.41

co-44

Z
(.4

u 0
'44

(44

'U

C4-

219~
Notice that the linear terms in the above equations are multiplied
by sine instead of a as in Chapter 6. The linear theory from
which the Chapter 6 equations were derived assumes small angles

of attack and therefore sinaza . This is not true at higher

angles of attack and is therefore included here.

The total normal force then becomes, CN

CN CNCB +CN
CW +CN
CT +CL.
C1

The last term, CL. is the lift-loss due to downwash and is given
1
by

(CL) (CLa) [KW(B sina +k W (B) inI i (b - r)T S W

CL =
L1 27 ART (fw - rw) Sref

where, i = interference factor

f = votex location
w

the above terms are found by the methods of reference [131.

C. DRAG CHARACTERISTICS OF A MISSILE

The total drag acting on a missile is the sum of the zero-

lift drag and the induced drag (due to angle of attack and/or

control surface deflection). The zero lift drag of bodies and

wings is highly dependent on the missile speed.

Three speed regimes are normally considered.

220
t Subsonic - 0 <MM < .8
Transonic - .8 < MM < 1.2

Supersonic-- M > 1.2

Because of the empirical nature of the formulas for zero-lift

drag, the procedures followed are essentially those of DATCOM [161.

1. Zero Lift Drag

a. Subsonic
At subsonic speeds the zero-lift drag consists of

skin friction (incompressible) and pressure drag. The pressure

drag at subsonic speeds is usually small compared to the drag

due to skin friction. The entire zero-lift drag of a missile

at subsonic speeds is given by;

C =C + C + C
D0 DOB DOW DOT

Where the components are the body, wing and tail contributions.
(1) Body drag, CD 0. The body zero-lift drag is

given by;
(Sw t

1.02 C 1+ 1.5 7 Wet B

C
D fBf f3 F f Sref +CAB

where C is found by the methods of Chapter 5.

AB
The first term is the skin friction contribution and the

next two terms are the pressure contributions. f is the body

fineness ratio and is given by;

L
D

221

S i
 (2) Wing drag, CD The wing zero-lift drag is

given by,

[+ (=C 00( t)4 ] (Swet)w

Do CWf
w cSref

t)
(SWeWe is the entire wetted area of the wings. The thickness

to chord ratio is given by (t/c).

(3) Tail drag, CD T . The tail zero-lift drag is

given by,

4] •(S

DOT T c ref

The above analysis assumes fully turbulent flow along all sur-

faces. CfC and C are the local average skin friction

f CfB
Cfi T
coefficients based on the local Reynolds number, R e .

The reference lengths are the body length and

wing/tail mean aerodynamic chords. The skin friction coefficient

is then given by

S4.55
Cf R 2.58
(logl Re

b. Transonic

The total transonic zero-lift drag is composed of

skin-friction drag, transonic wave drag, pressure drag and

base pressure drag. The compressible skin friction drag is

found by using a correction factor on the incompressible co-

efficient, Cf found for subsonic flow. The compressibility

222
correction is found by the methods of Chapter 6. The skin
friction drag then becomes

(SWet )B
C
Sref B
= 1.02 Cf
DfB c

The subsonic pressure drag is the same as before

CD = 1.02 C 1.5 + 7 B
pB B Lf f - Sref

The above equation applies for Mach numbers in the range of

.8 to 1.0. The pressure drag then decreases linearly to zero

at a Mach number of 1.2. The transonic wave drag CDr B is deter-

mined using Figure (9-5), which is a function of nose fineness

ratio LN/D.

The total transonic zero-lift drag of the body then becomes

SN
C = CD + CDp B + CD Sre- + CN
A
DOB Df DVB ref B

where SN is the cross sectional area at the nose-body junction.

The total transonic zero-lift drag of the aerodynamic surfaces

is composed of the skin friction drag and a drag increment,

ACD , which is the transonic wave drag.

Experimental results show little increase in the viscous

drag of aerodynamic surfaces from the subsonic to the transonic

regimes; therefore the skin friction and pressure drag is the

same as for subsonic flow and is given by

223
9C D0 W =
=Cf 1l+ 2(L) + 3.0(L)4
c
SWet
S ref

The wave drag of the aerodynamic surfaces if found from

Figure (9-6) and is a function of L, AR and M. For swept wings

the Mach number used in Figure (9-6) is given by,

1/ 2
M' = M [cosA c/41

The transonic wave drag increment is then given by

AC = AC DI (cos Ac/4] 2.5 Sw

Dow OW ref

where AC D is obtained from Figure (9-6). The tail zero-lift

drag is found inthe same manner as the wing. The total zero-lift

drag (transonic) is then given by;

C C + C + AC + C + ACDT
D0 DOB DoOW Dow DOT DO

c. Supersonic
The supersonic zero-lift drag of a missile is deter-

mined empirically by assuming a parabolic variation of C with

Mach number between 1.2 and 3.0. The resulting equation is for

the entire missile and is given by

CD = CD' - 1.7209 (CD" - CD) + 1.5708 (CD" - C ') J

0 Do 0 D o 0 D

224
 1.0

0.4

0.2 \ m _____

0.0 1
0 1 23 4 S67
L N/D

Figure (9-5). Transonic wave drag for ogival and blunted

conical forebodies (18].

225
 0

4-44

ww

U)

2262
 e

,.-0

0
44

0
0

41
'4.

0
z U)
lo
'U

o0
C€, '- 0.

227
where

C' = (C)
DO o M=l1.2
D 0m 1
CD'" = (CD0
CIP ( D ) 0m 3.0

C ' is determined by using the methods for transonic flow.

The magnitude of the supersonic wave drag is highly

dependent upon the nose shape. For this reason two methods

are used to determine C D" .

0
Method I: This method is for blunted ogives, pointed ogives and

blunted cones. In this method

For LN/D 5 CD" = CD'

N/ 0
For L N/D> 8.0 CD" = (CD + CD w
0 0 M = .8

+ ACDOT
+ CAB

The above values are determined from the methods of transonic

flow.

For LN/D = .5 to 8.0

C " = K1 C '
00

K 1 in the above equation is derived empirically and is given in

Figure (9-7).

Method II: This method is for pointed conical noses. In this

method C " is determined by

228
 C" = (C ) + CD0 W + ACD0 + (CDv) + CA
M .8 OT M 3 B

The first three terms in the above equation are found by transonic

flow methods. The forebody wave drag, CDN, for M = 3.0 is found

using Figure (9-8). The nose semi-vertex angle, eN, is the same

as a in Chapter 6. In all flow regimes the base pressure drag

is found as in Chapter 6.

2. Induced Drag

The induced drag due to angle of attack depends upon the

flight regime the missile is in. For M < .85 and AR > 3.0 the

induced drag is,

Cc
= (CL )2
L
Di - ARe

where e is the Oswald efficiency factor a 0.7.

The tactical missile normally has an aspect ratio of less than

3.0. For all flight speeds with AR < 3.0 the induced drag is

C =C
D. L tana

The component induced drag coefficients are found in the same

manner as above using component lift coefficients.

3. Total Drag

From the zero-lift drag and induced drag the missile

total drag becomes,

CD D+ CD

229
 o

0o
0
O
C14

44
oc 0

C-4

m C2. CD

230
D. PITCHING MOMENT CHARACTERISTICS

The pitching moment of a missile is equal to the sum of

the pitching moments due to lift and drag forces acting on the

body, wings and tails. If only small angles of attack are of

interest, the pitching moment is due primarily to the lift

forces. The methods presented here are for all angles of attack.

1. Body
The body alone pitching moment about its center of gravity

is given from slender body theory and viscous cross-flow theory

as

CB
V -S (L -xS
S B Lref
VB B Sref - XcG)f
I .2 a
sin a cos T2c+ n Cd
p_ )(xcGLref
Sref L
-p
)sin
2

S = Planform area
p
xp = Centroid of planform area

V B = Body volume

S B = Base area

With CM given the center of pressure of the body becomes

cLe xG LC ref
(XPB re CNB
(x = C M)
B__ Lre

2. Wing (Fixed Surface)

The center of pressure location for the wing must be

found before the pitching moment can be specified. The

center of pressure of the various lift components are found

by the method of Pitts, Nielsen and Mattri [13]. The lift

231
components are the same as in the lift section. The center
of pressure of the lift on the wing in the presence of the

body, (x)W is found from Figure (9-10) if the flow is

subsonic and Figure (9-11) if the flow is supersonic.

The center of pressure of the additional lift on the body

in the presence of the wing, (x) ' is found using Figure

(9-12) if the flow is subsonic. If the flow is supersonic
the center of pressure is found from Figure (9-13) or Figure

(9-14) depending on the parameters;

1
SAR(l + )( + E-)

X = taper ratio

m = co + A
LE

If the center of pressure reference is moved to the nose, the

following expressions result.

(x ( - ) (C) + x
cp W(B) cr W(B) r w

(x O(
(W)
pcp B) (Cr + w

CCC.

(xcp ()
(x) ACDw-
cp W(B) " W/a

232
1 04

Ca

Sm

'-A

Co IV
Ci*

233I
 0.6

NO MID CHORD SWEEP

0 0.4
A"-0.0
A - 0.5

I0.2

0.0
0.8
NO' TRAILING EDGE SWEEP

0.6 A
-- ,A- 0.0

0 0.4 /'0o

A-1.0

0.2

0.0 8
0 2 4 6
E FFECTI VE ASPECT RATIO, 3AR

Figure (9-10). Wing center of pressure

(subsonic) [18].

234
t ~0.6...
NO MID CHORD SWEEP

OA
04 A 0 ....

0.2

0.0
0.8
NO TRkALING EDGE SWEEP
A.,0.0

A- 0.5
0.6
: fA - 1.0

0.4

0.2

0.0
0 2 4 6
EFFECTIVE ASPECT RATIO, .AAR

Figure (9-11). Wing center of pressure

(supersonic) [181.
235
 0.4
0____.
r/b - 0.6
r/b-0.4
0.3 r/b- 0.2
r/b - 0.0
" 0.2
0 0.I ',0.

0.0
0.4
0.5 r
0.3 r/b - 0.6
r/b - 0.0
0 0.2

0.0
0.4

,-1.0
,, 0.3

o 0.2

_____ 0.1

0.0
0 2 4 6 8

EFFECTIVE ASPECT RATIO, JAR

Figure (9-12). Body center of pressure [18].

236
 0.6
0.

0.5 r/b - 0.6

------- -r/b-O.4

Ca 0.4 r/b -0.2

03
r/b - 0.0
Iw~tj. 0.2

0.1

0.0
0.4 A_____
r.ib - 0.6
_______A -0.4
-i
0_ __._ _ _ _ rA - 0.2

Ixj11U- rib- 0.0

0.2

Ix 1 j 0.1

0.0
0.3

Im~ 0.2

0.1

Ise
0.0
0 2 4 6 8

EFFECTIVE ASPECT RATIO, OAR

Figure (9-13). Body center of pressure [18].

237
 S1.2
CA -0.2
o 0.81
m _ __ ___ __r/b 0.0
~~Ix~ 0.4

S 1.2 r/b - 0.2

cz 0.8 000

r/b -0.0
IMI 0.4

0.0

2.0

Ix 1.2

S0.8

0.0 2 4 68
EFFECTIVE ASPECT RATIO, IAR

Figure (9-14). Body center of pressure [18].

238
 From the above figure the entire pitching moment about

the nose of the missile due to the forces acting on the wing is,

Xcq(B) )

CMw = C+ CL)Cosa + sinal(

ref
Lw(B) w(v) a-C

+ (CL Cosca] L p B (W))

LB(W) Lref

The viscous lift, CL and lift-loss due to downwash,

L (v)
CL. are not shown in the figure but are the same forces as
found in the lift section. These forces are assumed to be

CW(B) •
acting through the center of pressure, (xcp)

An average center of pressure of the wing due to all forces

I (x
cp) W
:
acting on it can now be found as

C(CL
CI
MWL ref
+w CL.)
Lre
cosa +
A
WC sina
DW-e

where

CLw CLw(B) + CLB(w) + CLw(v)

3. Tail (Control Surface)

The tail pitching moment about the nose of the missile

is found in the same way except now a control surface deflec-

tion must be included. The equations now become

239

L ....... Mumma
 CM =[(CL +CL + CL )cosa + C +
T T(B) T (v) T (B)-6

(xC
(AC + AC )sina] ( T(B)
DT e DT- 6 ref

(xcp
+ [CL B(T) ]C ( C BCT))
CLB(T)-6 Lref

M ref
(x )
= (CL + C cs a + C + (AC +
AC )sina
T-ct T-6 T-a T-6

where,

C =C +CL
LT- CL T(B) LB(T) L T(V)

CLT-6 = LT(B)-6 CLB(T)-6

The wing and tail pitching moments above were found about
the nose of the missile. Transferring the pitching moments

about the center of gravity the complete missile pitching

moment becomes

C= CMB c)MT
+ CMW xc xp)W + C G-(x cPw
(x cp)
)T T

E. AERO DESCRIPTION

It can be seen from the preceding description of the aero-

dynamics of a missile, that the process of obtaining a complete

240
description of the aerodynamic coefficients becomes an involved

task. This was the justification for initially using linear

aerodynamics. To complete an analysis a fast method of pre-

dicting the static aerodynamic characteristics is needed.

The method needs to include both linear and nonlinear contri-

butions as well as interference factors and must be applicable

to all speed regimes. This analysis lends itself to program-

ming on a digital computer. AEROI is a modification of the

program AEROCF which was developed at the Naval Air Development

Center by Mr. F.A. Kuster, Jr. [17]. The program is essentially

as written except for calculation of planform areas and centroids.

The program was also modified for use on the Naval Postgraduate

School CP/CMS system.

AEROlconsists of a main program and three subroutines. The

inputs to the program are the geometric characteristics of the

missile, the flight conditions, engine and inlet type and the

protuberance drag. The output consists of the aerodynamic co-

efficients for lift, drag and moment. The component contribution

to these coefficients are also given. The component and overall

center of pressure are also determined.

Subroutine GEOSUB; This subroutine calculates the missile

wetted area and the Reynolds number per foot based on the flight

altitude.

Subroutine CLASUB; This subroutine calculates the aerodynamic

surface lift-curve slopes.

241
 Subroutine CATSUB; This subroutine calculates center of

pressure locations, cross-flow drag coefficients, and interference

factors.

Main Program; The main program assumes the control surface

is the tail. This is regardless of the method of control (Wing,

Tail, Canard). Because of this, care must be taken to input the

right data for the tail. For instance, if the missile is a wing

control missile, the wing data is input as the tail and the

tail data as the wing. Figure (9-15) and Table (9-I) give a

complete listing of the input data. Table (9-II) is a list of

the output data. Appendix A is a listing of the program as modi-

fied for use on the Naval Postgraduate School IBM 360 computer.
1. Verification of AERO

Before using the program an attempt was made to verify

its prediction techniques and find any pitfalls in its use. To

accomplish this the program was run for various configurations

for which experimental data were available, and the results were

compared. The comparisons are shown in Figures (9-16) to (9-25)

from references [19] - [22] which are NASA technical notes and

memoranda which report results of wind tunnel tests for various

body-wing-tail combinations. In Figures (9-16) to (9-25) the

solid lines are AERO predictions.

a. NASA TN D-6996
This technical note presents a method of predicting

aerodynamic characteristics for bodies alone at angles of attack

from 0 to 180 degrees. Several nose-bodycanbinations are given.

242
0
UE-4

E--4

0 0

Cl)1
UI
Lf

0
0

243
 TABLE (9-I)

Input Data

Variable Name Format Meaning

1 ICSC 12 Type of control (wing,
tail, canard)
2 INOSE 12 Nose shape (ellipsoidal,
cone, ogive)
3 IDT 12 Number of control surface
deflections
4 IM 12 Numer of Mach numbers
5 IAL 12 Number of angles of attack
6 NBODY 12 Number of configurations
7 ISWPW 12 Wing shape (delta,nondelta)

8 IAFBW 12 Missile body after wing

9 IWEPW 12 Leading edge sweep indicator

10 NWING 12 Number of wings

11 ISWPT 12 Tail shape (delta,nondelta)

12 IAFBT 12 Missile body after tail

13 ISWEPT 12 Leading edge sweep indicator
14 NTAIL 12 Number of tails
15 XLAMW F10.5 Wing taper ratio
16 CLAMW F10.5 Wing leading edge sweep

17 BW F10.5 Wing span

18 CROOTW F10.5 Wing root chard

19 SW F10.5 Wing exposed area

20 XMACW F10.5 Wing mean geometric chord

21 XWING F10.5 Distance to wing leading

edge

244
Variable Name Format Meaning

22 TOVCW F10.5 Wing thickness to chord ratio

23 XLAMT F10.5 Tail taper ratio

24 CLAMT F10.5 Tail leading edge sweep

25 BT F10.5 Tail span
26 CROOTT F10.5 Tail root chord

27 ST F10.5 Tail exposed area

28 XMACT F10.5 Tail mean geometric chord

29 XTAIL F10.5 Distance to tail leading

edge

30 TOVCT F10.5 Tail thickness to chord ratio

31 HT F10.5 Altitude

32 D F10.5 body diameter

33 XL F10.5 Body length

34 XLNOSE F10.5 Nose length

35 XCG F10.5 Center of gravity location

36 AREA F10.5 Reference area

37 XREF F10.5 Reference length

38 ENGINE F10.5 Engine code

39 INLET F10.5 Inlet code

40 BETA F10.5 Boattail angle

41 DBASE F10.5 Base diameter

42 DJET F10.5 Nozzle exit diameter

43 XLABOD F10.5 Boattail length

44 CDPROT F10.5 Proturberance drag

coefficient

245
 TABLE (9-11)
Output Data

Variable Name Meaning

AL Angle of attack

CLTOT Total coefficient of lift

CDTOT Total coefficient of drag

CLWP Wing panel coefficient of lift

CLBW Additional lift on body due to

wing coefficient
CLTP Tail panel coefficient of lift

CLBT Additional lift on body due to

tail coefficient
CLB Body alone lift coefficient

CDI Induced drag coefficient

CNWP Wing panel normal force coefficient

CNTP Tail panel normal force coefficient

CLTD Coefficient of lift due to tail

deflection
CDTD Coefficient of drag due to tail
deflection

CN Total normal force coefficient

CA Total axial force coefficient

XCPW Wing center of pressure

XCPT Tail center of pressure

XCP Total missile center of pressure

CM Total pitching moment about center

of gravity

246
Figures (9-16) to (9-18) compare the coefficients predicted by

AERO1 with those obtained for body number 9 in the NASA report.
The normal force coefficient is predicted well throughout the

range. The moment and axial force trends are predicted by the
program but large errors exist throughout the range of angles

of attack.

b. NASA TM X-2367
This technical memorandum investigates the aero-

dynamic characteristics of various cruciform body-wing combina-

tions. The coefficients for this configuration agree very well

with experimental values up to 10 degrees angle of attack. Beyond

this value the lift and moment coefficients predicted by AERO

exceed the experimental values by as much as 10 percent. Al-

though the exact cause of this error was not investigated, it may

be partially explained by the nose shape of the body. The nose

is a combination ogive and cone. For purposes of AERO it was
assumed an ogive. The greater presented area of the ogive would

contribute to a higher CL and Cm through the cross-flow terms in

these coefficients. Figures (9-19) through (9-21) compare the

predicted with the experimentally determined coefficients for
the wing-tail configuration of this reference at M = .9.

c. NASA TM X-2780 and NASA TM X-2289

These technical memoranda investigate the aerodynamics

of a delta wing missile using tail control and a tail-less cruci-

form missile. As shown in Figures (9-22) to (9-25) there is

excellent agreenent between the experimental values of the aero-

dynamic coefficients and those predicted by AEROI.

247
 Sol

CD Bil

7 0
cr..

z a

BICT

Jaz

248
 fla t 0

0 >1
I-. 0

a: J
in a
S 5*' 0

-08I

249
 4-4

x
CaD

C-a

I- VI

Id 0

rX4

* 6fr

16J

250
 x a:

X: 0
4-I

cr.~
S 3

r-4

Lm
weW

251J
 al

SS

e I: -4

Cc 0
44
20

04r34
a

Ia

x252
t

* io

h2
S'- 0
m

I as It-
00

En
Cu - z
z
o4
0

Li

I-

r 253
 0

CD Y.

LL.4
00

cLi.
En z C0

z '

04

- NO

254
 saz

-91.

to
cu c

a: .

z Q)

255
$4

CUU

00

NN

0)
Cu,

-L A. -
x pi

256L
 -j-

2572
F. COMPONENT WEIGHTS

As with the gross weight, the component weights can be

determined through the use of parametric regression equations.

If the dimensions of the components are known, the following

formulas can be used to determine the component weights (7].

Aero Surface Weight

The weight of one wing panel is given by,

5 6
WAS = 6.77483 (EAS) 1.02 (ARAS) (1)

EAS Exposed are of one panel, ft 2

ARAS Aspect ratio of one panel

Body Structure Weight

WBS = .0604 (LBs) (DBS ) 1.77 (2)

LBS Length of body to be covered by

structure. This does not include

the rocket motor unless a separate

structure surrounds the motor

casing. (inches)

DBS Diameter of body structure

(inches)

Internal Systems Weight

W = .00485 (WG)'74 (Ls 1 .00 (Ds)'42 (3)

WG Gross weight of the missile

258
 Lis Length of subsystem (inches)

DS
isDiameter of missile (inches)

In the above equation, the internal system includes guidance,

avionics and control.

1. Design Example (Component Sizing)

If the guidance and the control sections are kept at

10 percent of the total length, and the remaining components

are as sized previously, the design is as shown in Figure (9-27).

Since these components are considered internal systems, their

weights can be determined from equation (3).

Wt = .00485 (1809)-7 (.IL) (12.5)42

Wcont = Wguid = 83.64 lb

The wing and canard weights are found using equation (1) and

Figure (9-26).

ARAS EAS
' =b/2 AS
E
AS
Z

Figure (9-26). Aero surface weight.

259
 rZ.4

-II

260
The wing weight is four times the weight of one panel.

WW = 43.42 lb

Similarly the canard weight is

W c = 9.88 lb

If the entire body is covered by structure, the body structure

weight becomes

64 17
Wst = .0604 (232)" (12.5)1.77

Wst = 172.38 lb

The following component table can now be constructed.

Component Length (in) Weight (ibs) Center of Gravity (in)

Control 23.2 83.64 39.48

Guidance 23.2 83.64 62.68

Warhead 31.25 28.26 89.91

Sustainer 87.51 618.92 149.29

Booster 26.31 159.46 206.20

Motor Casing 113.82 59.50 162.44

Wings 43.42 211.40

Canards 9.88 44.08

Structure 232.00 172.38 116.00

261
The complete missile weight is then 1264.62 lbs.

The center of gravity from the above table is

XcG = 139.44 in

The center of gravity at the end of boost is

(xG)= 129.85 in
cG

G. DESIGN EXAMPLE (FINAL ANALYSIS)

From the design parameters so far, a complete description

of the missile can be determined. Figure (9-27) is a drawing

of the missile. The launch conditions for the missile were

specified as,

MM = 1.5

h = 10,000 ft

WG = 1264.62

XcG = 139.44 in

From these conditions the input data for AER01 is shown in

Table (9-11). The format is the same as that of the output of

AER01 and is printed as a check to ensure that the input data

was entered properly. The output is shown in Table (9-IV).

Figure (9-28) is a plot of the coefficient of moment versus angle

of attack for the launch condition and for the beginning of

cruise. The center of gravity has moved forward approximately

10 inches for the beginning of cruise so that the stability has

262
 - Go

C4

aD tj 0

o oe 0 L.

~c
C*

o 0

C4 V4 LM
P- CD

10 C4-

CD LL. a

CL a a0 0
E- go U nC

CC

Im (-
0? 0 0; C

0U C f44 4
0: 0^ aA %Z

.~~ i a

H~~ 0 2,

~z1263
 14-40 4 .0~.j4 -n 4

3'. La ~ 34 rs. 0'

C%
4 4 0 ~
4 C%-4 4 C4

14 0 4 4 -4 14 A4

6%0~0 E

M-4 -4441^ - W

I- co, C0 0 04* C Q4

- ~@
c CO O C CO4'0 C

- 4%44%4%%4%4%%C%4

6-4 %
W4 f0A.~

4 J ~ ~ -o=.. CD 4 ICC.4 "t0% "

4.)C4
0) 0000000000=,.
m

r- LM0 00 2W 0mt C4a

=0=0000 000
oI
.4~~i 000000

- '0 -4~ 4 f4%4PM

-. U
00 000 0T0 o r
i c
~ COOcc

0 4 24%30.'C
 .0 . . .. .~ 0. . ..

o)a 0 Cm 0CD a 0 9 -C4C4W

I

CDC.
LA C L 0 go94 m n

,A~a.C4.C . . 4

ago Go cc cc 0010000 ca

Z 1

(A La LC LIP F. M%%
V%am to W%

V%
ND.. N N
Q LnC4 C4

C)i
0 CD 00PM t w n

CDO CD
LD 0 LA Nm CD4
N2 LAD

0 040 0 04 CD CD LA CD D t

0 C4 *CC Nt=

C)000000 000 Q

Le 0 6t 4C ." a(
P--000 F- -3-"
0 0TamC4
0

-J 00 00 0000 4W00

00 DC1D
0 D*#C
00 0 CC

0. 0

2 ON 0 * C2C0 - CmCD0C

IN

40

o! 9. vaCD00 LAP0 3,n C44Do LL

4 04 NT *%
N* N0 *00 N4 LAC

U OO00NNNN ED

U, O o 0%A.* w

0U
C;
OOO OON W N. 091

w, w 00C

265N
44
0

.e.,4

"4J

-4J

16.

won

266
increased as indicated in this figure. The performance objective
from the beginning of the design was to provide a 31 g maneuver
capability. Table (9- V) shows the output of AERO1 for Mach
numbers of 1.5 to 3.0 and control deflections of 0.0 to 30 degrees.
From this output the trimmed normal force can be found and the
corresponding load factor is then,

CNTR q Sref
w

The following values of maneuver load factor were found using

AEROl.

M CNT R q(lb/ft ) n(g's) 6 req

2.5 18.80 6369 85.00 10 deg.

2.0 24.50 4076 70.99 10 deg.
1.5 12.00 2293 19.56 10 deg.

As indicated in the above table, the missile meets the maneuvering

specifications of the operational requirements.

267
 o~~~
at -'l%9
0: ~~ 4 o:

.40 4 N4 -,
r4 -4 -

.. 4 N4 C4 14 1t4 N N

cc)( 0000 Go coo* 00 a*

P4 -4444.4.-4 m4

r-i- N 1= 0 0 CD
N CD Q

Q. CD C.

CL 0040c - 71 n WS. C.4 " .4

U0Um a9 a40 -'N.

I at LoF,

0 2 C 2 4 . N3

0~~P 00 " 000804

C- Z mf.%m
0000000000C C C C C c

C;C

10 0 d .2 ! '"

000~~000 4 4

26N
 .o.~ .~ .X . .t .* .~ ..

to-
C
.C- 4 o "I. 00 Or
x rtUto Go M t* C3 Q -i 0

co zo La o r, F.to to C

V. C4 . . .C~

.. . . . . . . . . .

3: r 8 11 r- r4- .4.r1.4.4
r

Go co co Go c o 000
cc I

-V to go w.IoI CD C4
IS%

O
coC 0
AP AW0 00. FN
z rCs N W w~It0 P Co V

V444cC U . t,4 S
C4 1-4- (
C0- o 0 C3U to C2
O

C N2

C; c;,=; r 4.4 4

C U4

0. r40c 4CD=U ^u
-
C. ; C ; 4 ICit at0

... 4 L4.A kn "N Nt

N 4. 0 0.4004 4 c4 N4

0 W%

- w c c4iU Gip%o-
C;C ;c
C.) 0O 0 0-o ~ t

Q0CD a0 04-N .
I0 N

0 r A 0 MUnF
o - on
m. e%# CDCc ~ ONf r ~ UJ. I1
0 ~
40.-*CO.4UtO0O;
C; r4..................

0004I
CC; VS A

U 269
 "N Q. r- AL. ;rP-

-6

0. POr- - OJrmw-w
T V - -

a.0
** w . c4 -4

w tos~9% 9%A % 9% LA LA V c

U~ ~O ~
. 00 c 0-

LAW%
WP4 109
w~ 010o

c 10C
I-~p
WlVUulul -T

I- 9%111IANC0LA PA

I-~~r O0A 4D4c4 % L w%

U09s
n4wum' w- 09m014 * N2
61%%A % U10m*0 ,0 c0

0 4 14 wE c

. G w0 0D p

*D
Q r 4L "va N0

_j 6% al 0U r 4i
m I- 0oL

LU

r40 f4 -w.4 N N

3 NON 2094A 1
 r, Q3 P. ton . T N-4 P
O -4 -N1 .4 . 4 .4 -

C4 N4- r4 00
&' P

CL

C0i C4 (4 C4 . . .

**. *
... * . . . .

Ca4

0 0z CD m N 000 cc 000
. ..
00
r4 4O Q4 PA Q0 CD=CA

4 C4CN .440
;C .W
4 014 N

CL
o _N .W ' 10 N:0001W
.4

0%
00 C4 L l3^ 0

MI m LAP- W q&ANW
C, 10 NN4. 4% 0C 1
C; C;0 0 C C2 4 -4 C-4
D C

0. C 4- - t- CDaC

Z' 0
1 *0 0al00 PAUt
fn

04 Nl NI" P AAP

0. 4.N-coo
"O rC~o" PA0 L

a CDC0 0 -- 4 44N 04

*d W

CD
-~r LA M F. e4 cm0
Ca N
r00-.4 A. 10 n
. . .. . . .

a* %- U 0r 0 N
* I

I- *02710011 I

-- ----
77-77-7--
 o* Q 0D S0 -4 FM 00U

Cd 0- rr04 DLi f-4

w00m.Fd..4C PM Ui

t- . . . . .n.s
0T
zr 4r -T -T .5V
-T :r

cc C cyl
Cd Jr Pd .4 aCd

to CD 'a 5%
-:1 % % %
0:5 5

Q~ N% .D CD Q Q CD S

I. 4i 0.- C =5 C D =%0 C3 03

000. 1 1 C PS * :S C00
Q =.Dmc C 14

I.- 000000000^ coL 0 T %d

W%In1 cUDC

00 0 00
lPMwr 0 CDr

000 00 .4.
C" C"Cd0 cU 1 n

0 0 0 0.0 C 13 C4 (4 C;

I CD

ko0 ta PA Q c o-rP., 94

= 4 CD-4"N0 A 00 0 0 " -5

I -

00 0 4.4 4 S 5
^C4L 0A"F
ZU l 000
- 0iL 01 . ".
4
Q~~~~~~~ 0c40004 D m0 Q C
1. 40OP~ C;
*0-e. cc -u 2 to0A .*t

.40 Cd 4 LM 54l~5%C
WN
.. 40.Cd5%5S550 0

CO
.- Q
Q VI -4USU55.P- U. U
4
C,
-j.........C

41
4
I-- a5%5C272 '
 o 4 c" a*0 m0 LAO
= Ta
a N- IS V..Iar= N LA

Ca
PA LA L LA
o co N4
rP

co 0 a P00
P IsPN l %- Dn4
CL

00 00m
A C-4 C4-4 LA4 N4C4

PA0 PA LA 10000 coS0

co 0o0oc

3z IS IS IS IzISI ISI PS ISr

-- q-- r-4 -4 . 4r4 r4

4
a aa a; ;
LA o -
C0.

LA Lo Ln o LAO :rr- M~

-0 Go N C-4in I
to Is

wo aLW a-t

Ca u
to r0F
0 t%r 00 GoamA
0-
.- I a:aaa 0!01

0! Ct
C- -- CD IS ISS
0?S 000
4

000 04.4.44-4 A

em

00
4M L OC 4
u0.4 UAN 0

oa V4

n 04 PA W%*OPn A to,-4.4 (

- C V% O cm 0 N N LA

CCa

P0
1 QPL 000 -114 LA ci
000 NA CDC%%-4 IS
000 ta ~ N
a*LOtoV *-C

I 0 0
r~~~c PAa*C
C4 . CAPL.4
".wAtoP L c" 10
C' N PaLA AII
C;..................
4

Ca0 00 00073C
 l- - 4 L L" 04 04 In1 t %f

x~ 4 Vtoa 00 al .4l IN

cc 00 0 . U'I
14 W%t4

x %C W to D o
a'P%
C4 C4C4
C4 C4 C4C4 4
CL W -gr v ;r 4- W ZP :r w

000coQ00,000O0C40000000L

I
U 1 1 1 171% nI10! It

LO000% 001 e t 1 % CD r-
z . 00
-% C4 W%&A 010F

4= =~ l00 c 2 2 D40 4
Z; CO'C; C; c- C; C; U'l 0

cn . .0' U
L%-T 4 000
m
co

000C0 ! ot04 0 0 1
4= CD C.=Q D 4D

Z- to co " W%WNr. cc

CL r% Q 0000-T0Vo C-41^I

U-A01
-: - n 0n 4 w w -

CD CD0 0.r 4 1%

C3 0

6 BA

NU40C4 G404CD CDl

- ~ 4 % ~0 ( 01N
C4 .wm r4rtm i
1- CIS00-4 in^emL
U

C3 LM

Ic e nC (AC"00

-T ~ O LO~

w ' ."A .44-1 - P,. 14

t4-1 0 L; W ~f1.: 00 0 0

2xC: 1
U ~ ~
00 ~00 00 r 0

0 274
 V4 0 P.. U4 .2z C4 to44

9~~ 0. 4
P*.. p.,4A

cc o c cc CO CO
00 CO cc c

ULi 04 r. Cs FA
i% 0 00C -4

U' SCD CD 0q 14 Us 00 " W%

C) 00W% atal T o ;a %

C ~C-4 f^'
- ^ tA r- Q
am a%440

0 N P'0 '
CD 0' C, C2~CQI

Co: o *CC

- C4 iQ sq 4 0 0 C20 NC

00 C4 1-000 W00

Coto WNr
C- CON;OsI
I. N 4~ 0 C 0

0.0

1c 14 4 14 4 N N W; ii' w:

1-4 D W r n L Na C
u a DQ0IUC ;C ;C , C

C2 f

-7 w4P00 0 0% a '.
.-00J" N to a m04 <
C.) coC 4C *D

~
U ~
0 4 ~4 0
C 000

P k-oC4 2 0 0 l tsO 40 0
I C-

r4 0000000000 CI

u AI.

27540s5CO 4Cd .

J6 0 W O ~ i
 00 i -V 4a 1^ C(4

%Is2 pn Cp -4 S4r 0 .S -V

-4 C4s 4 C4C4 -4 -4 C4-4

000 Go
cc c ooca go

C.

a. r* r. s0 W M -4WM

00 000;
C; 00 c, 400 's

I
cc C3 cS s
T I CD am.
cS. "S. Ps

LA CD4-4-4-^ 4 -4 -T cc -4

P.- I CDO CD *( 0 CD0 CD0

CoCo C2 (00 P,

00C~ 0 Q4 CD4 i C o CD CD
0 CO

00 CCS 0 1 00 = C 0
C 1

0 3 00
00 0400

CL00 000000&A C"00 -

00000001000

C4 Q 4C MP%oC.c -
ci C30
D o0 0i4 W%

l000Vc0100-cc4M-f

000.in.5W00e4
ma".

U m CD w "4IC 0L

.21 -006M0W r4 Z

w 40t - .v m J

c; iO04UiC4 9.;00 10.01

*Now
 CL 01 . 0! ~1 02(

x V^ 0 4 C.4201

C.,

04.

00 PIN-- - -f
.22..C; I -V t4 1 : 0

U% r-0 4. C-4
-. .

C.0000000000 I

00 000 000^P LOW

C-1, . .-

C; o UC

CN LM P. -1 -4
C., ;C ;C

tA co

FA VA W ~-4 N

0 ffNt CPcc0(4 -V
LL ..

14 W. itV0^ ^U
4 oI - 0
nW1 0

le 14. 0 I; .; 0
G.
eO OOOO0 0 c4

2077
 =C4 N L^ 0 M~ aOm LA

A 4 C" n W% T OPS
L 00r

"-v r4 C4 C. C C C

4*oALcooMoo
COW ~Coc

ton (4 (4 '4 aN (4 m

Ca.- . Go*n n
P**

W O0 C C C- Q0 O

PMC--4 4 c o ,--T 4

9L ULL NI C*
A 42, 4M0
I- r IT- C IM cc &A

at 14 Nl & Aw S CIO
NIA Cr
cN
r- P P * C" C C-4C
ta

w. c ccP N iAn %vc

QC COOC COO
I0
C r. P : 1 U-

CC

CPOU

P- C; fWU

LZ r A VW L 4
ONto0

oM C 4 cc No
to No
4n

OlP
9. cc a oP 4'0W LAvNA L
CCOAP C -0 W q4 C 0

V%0 Lo o C-4 SLQC VC

COac
L C

. . . . . . . . ..
CCC4
D C4.v
Wm f -e %a

2780
 p4t. N
"~ 4 m41 -4v4 - 4

% LAC- 0 w . V~ InC
40
CL

WaC

PM to c0 fA " 4I % W ..4
rnP PS 0: -: n~ 1: Nl 0:

0 40 Go 00 O n vp I

O N Wi-ton
W% P. C, CD
o 10
I..- ~P
GcoC PS P, %.0
w40uLA r

-J .
e4C -4 0 a% P.0 0i-

C.cal
Q. LA. N0 6% .4 P- W :r W% C4
= 1 N.I': :PSO t 0 C
C2 Q4 4-a e 4C
0.I N N N i i

0. InC. P nt1: i i N
-0 0 4NM 0 P-4 r-4C 0

x C4

o 2 t, G Cm r*
0000 C; C; C; '1C

J
CL o0 0 00LA o V4 t
I.-0 .II ~ * P

- ~ 0 0 C)

Ca
0 00 C rG C4 C4.a

0. ;C; CNOCON V:

I- I"C o %D QCh tzC4C

w U

_j C 000;.*n 0 C

Ca OCOC'SCC.CC C
21 I I
o 279

Ak-
 LA go %0 C" to Z M to a

U pm A A NIV"' P

4~ " N.CoOV
t C. C4C

~
0001%N0VI~to
CD0-4C CII4P to 0

*... . a. . ..

CIA0cc00000%0040fm0000
C4 1%
to. 0S ,I P
Jr to. P5

.C2.

.fl
Fit .9. cm . 1: n5

u CD0 CDQaQ u4

m C" 40ct V% -a- PA P.

0 - IN D CD-4 - C4 M .
00.4~~~I.11 "
Q W 4 LA .. :r *. .4o 1.

c eoaoaooaato

C. kog o .C

ao oaoo
4""% % t0
.. . . . . .$

N0 P 4 0N*wO14 a P
UU

a C; C; c; C; I~t

U 000a-
-IF 00 6,co
PA
i
M

.. .
(a a~ooa-4.4VI% C

280
 -C 0 O1. tO 0!

cc Oton
00C.F Ost C"

N%.
.. . . . .. . .
x .0toW%
10 0L % f% *

cc 00 cccc 0 @0 0 00 cc cc
C*

.r cmr % 47 4 GAI& t N
0
.lS n Sn r1 C n at0W:

N 0r94 tod
fn-n W *a 4n0

0.4 N In
N..V%P^40C

Ln 4

U v%000
toto, 0 DF

CP 0 -Sn01r- 5 AF
I-Ct09t*4 * G- N09

.. 1 CIA9%
cr. 9%9%
-V m to 0%

C;C
P. rI 4 nr
N.0C- N
CDCDCD0

C; - 4c;
14 r. -I.

a . v &n LM F.. 0 .0 0%n .4

M c C;%*9 s~S 0
4
0
f^ C a 0-s4 P w

-C54Vt( o4-
V4 P"
281
 vXULt M N w0 &A F^ w PM.*

fU 400 MU%*-4 Q
C- - L -.- .

a 0. 0.-i4% 440 o. N 00a

CLr.. u e
pnCW Ur
nM 1
I(0 0 0a ~ O

a04004 Q 40VtOcm D

0. Vt0at*0mN4 L
I. .r aw k nU na
VtV~40
0 C 2, c 0 0

C; C;CNC C ; ; ;:;C

0. ***w(DOC

-4: Ne =0 n0 P

400 UN Go LM4Ut AN l4
LA
%40
co O-t 2o4

4C

4t 404 1t Vtl.* n t0 Vt
nt

U N01 t *
w~ 0%# $J
C.P.
CD '01N,-

VU . r.wC . V

.-. . 0. . . NO. . .
e4 A00ttr
w 044 0

28
 X. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This thesis has presented the methods and general procedures

for the conceptual design of tactical missiles. As mentioned,
this is not necessarily the best design. Now that the design
procedure has been attempted once, the reason for this is readily
seen. The process is one of continuous compromise. As was shown
in Chapter 7, the optimum wing for lift is not the best wing
for minimizing drag. We also saw in Chapter 8 that increasing
chamber pressure increases thrust at the expense of increased
weight. This thesis has tried to point out some of these areas
of compromise and present methods to deal with them.
Areas which were not covered which need to be investigated
in conceptual design are.structures, radar cross-section and cost.
With the increased emphasis on survivability and the decreasing
budget, it becomes increasingly important to define the effects
of these areas on design early in the process.
The complexity of the design process and the need to obtain
timely and accurate information have made it ideally suited for
the digital computer. The AEROCF program used in this thesis
is part of a large scale computer program (MISSYN) which con-
sists of rrodules for each section of the design analysis.
With a good understanding of the theory and methods used in
missile design, the computer aided design program with graphics
capability gives the designer the capacity to make intelligent

283
design interations and almost instantaneously see the effect
of the change on all areas of design. A limited example of
this can be seen in the use of AERO1. A change in the per-
formance requirements for maneuver capability would require
a redesign of the lifting surfaces. A change in the lifting
surface design would change the drag characteristics of the
missile and thereforethe propulsion requirements. The AEROl
program coupled with a similar propulsion module would allow
the designer to make the changes and instantly see the penalty
or savings in propellant weight.
One pass at the design has been accomplished in this thesis.
As was seen throughout the process, decisions in one area
affect the design in others. For this reason the design
process becomes an iterative one. The final design of the
first iteration isthe baseline missile for the second itera-
tion and the design is started again. By making several
passes through the loop, the solution converges on the final
design.

284
 0%ON*l o-o N1t~r o 4 4no- odm4no-

000000000-if.-0000000000000000

44 4 3.%e4i
44 44 4

L6- C Q0Le

L.S- 4X. _j
) a

af.-0 -. ~W - -
IC 9LU -J CM*
4.Cj!U
W- Qd 0
bO1-Ma X
OW 0

-0 - WAJ .U 4
le-ox.0 .4 -4wI

Zjewrx"6W .0- 0 4

3P4L)Z7N .- 4Z - .
NX39X -4 LUCO 0 ftn
,*4I .4 09 j 0I

4zmc .43- <~0 4. LA.

Xr..33Z
94"" -10- 0 -U

4V.J x QU* m1~(D 0%)~ 4i 4-

4OL"00 Z 40ll- - M r CAJ c4 . U
,-4 w'4-ObZ .. JO-44 t t )( Ln
.:C;LWU-3* J4%0. . ft. Z-.
CL N- C r0 (N ft _; I-l - L 0
.Cu0C m0 a- 00LW .- 0 - It -t %. xn 1-40
lS .V)1-t-N *O)(- N4 In
P. InM
f-- WW
wd W> ft. N(I-4 P--J.4 .4 .42 3W.4 c
I. 0.XN-eZ 4.0g 0 f" Ln N g-0- 0 .. i -1 I 0%N
00R'3U91-L3 CC.. O4 0
kA 001 I'.. 0 om * DL 1 UN~2-
*
M)4..I~n0.4to( 4c1- Nt 0 o0 NNInn + M- 4 - 0 I = Wt0 * F- l
W*=Cqcxww 3a,-s 0 (n 0 An- P-- f-. +4C5 Lnoc-. 0
- 39nd -lfzj~ *. tnO-
. n-' * * In *

W)ujxt""> .0- aceIn00 - InIAN 4 -414 -40g-Q -- 000

0>4-. ONO 4 .mi%.S%%.3-e cc 4fLM .4* 0 . $NO
X,"-UXI-3Wu -.- -Luc . u39-E-SO
C -0 .. C-4 .- S4... ) N-4
Lu L4~ -um0I-o..o tn I in ZI*OMN*q(flO4 1.4.4.O 4Wm%.o0-
N 1
I~UNI~~~~0 .414J u4p- Ico- I * 0'. 0-0 '*0on$- 1 0%
m-0~.%.x4c32 3 eZnI- oW )If4n W.OJ
DtWo * 0*%i I nNO'tx-ftn
I--. LJA) S.j eJ)!4-j .J~tn~r 11 t=LnM LJ 110 0.-Ml 0-44A n 0%0-
% -SN OMS 1474.-d
=InZZ 0 - 39xzx -XX . I 4N qr11Z 111NZIcb ON ONN11--t- < In~o 1 s4o
02201-33MMoQ *0
-N 11 11 U-CI0 .3.3-l-3-C-CZOZ-A
0* O% S-f0

.4Nf%~I-N00000 N-.r00' 0tn '

O~tS~s~n'0 - 0- 0-0-"- -. m (740
0
.4 n m tnint
IAAIn . n o n LA n

285
 4444 4<4 4 44< 14<44444 4 4444<4

LU-if-

-ON ftMl

4U -4 a0J
In U.L) U. Q
4 . WI- ft~
j $.- CCw :X
4. -.- )(.J _.j

LU 49 V4-)3CNW *-

j J 034 .J C
LU 49 JNI_J.Jo 43
M. I- -j30)(xz JC
zZ IGD0 - oLI UuL
z beduw~N _4)C
0o Z cl: _j NJ-JZ -3c
6-d aw .30x.*t.4 4-
o e LUmc
a. 0P433) Ccem

0 0L U. c -,33xJ(%J -
* 0 0 jI-.C4 4
M)
Q C 4Z0.I xj40.-c
~-I.-<0
4znzo .O-
*4 LU LU w.ltUt..tj3 - 0 wX
cc >_ c - .4uj>xc. 004
(3 11 .LL.00 .z 0O>-I
40 0 .4 0 % _41.j aZI'-ob" 0)(
at
CL. *
0r X
%%. 0',3-1.Z3 CC1-
I-Co.CLN'-z < 9.0a -
- 0 0 LU C0x .33. COL N 4
~ AZ 0 cc ..JCIMUoXN .3-:V -44

x 0 0 w 3-.~ e N ~ -4-.
In I W. CoqlLu:RI.-u.3cz a.. X( *N4 -N
.=~I..-Imoxfl
S- .44) .4w-efl> *0 *

WW- A**%b. 0 4ZX -0. Wu J.Pvtl-o--.0> - CC.0 ) 0-0 >r4 .0 knom

.w 1--c' &OLww 00 *MN fj:"I I. ONO. < *N 0O4 0.a
-*a.I- -.-. OOXO- - .- 4)( * XI-03xI-.3W0 -.- .- 44 I <
.%-
Oxo(7%r-*Z0-'0 D..- CO- N LU uLVnZ .0301-0.-.0- +-..0 *
OLUCY e-40eC .OXNNWUO *.fl-I ZZLu04N4Lnwwow00 w ~410
waN Zufl3. 4
I ~ *w$..No
-I 1 L34AX) -_.J Unie flA in). I 0 U4....w-
Q~~4*f) s'-.wI-4I-(..I-4-ZZ )V)ZZ .. 39XZs-XXC)( UNJZII0~dX LU
%0 *0 OCfLaNIOLU49LU4 4CLUWJ4 40.a 0Z0C3I-:3C. .o0 .>-40-,%J)CU IIVANO
9%0004. Ii 10 I.Z0~I4> Z .- iWf~lL

Fo 0 N 0 ("0 N M4-*@4C- 4
00 0 0 -0 -4 _r
I00 a ' -d,% d
00 0 0 -4
co
Go ~ Goco 0u

286
 OOOO00000000000000000000000000000000+

* 0

* -
C0.4~
14 o ~
* CIO *r*
* * r--idc .*
*4 .0
ecc ?4 At N
*N *
0%. P. corc
tn* C* *% ON 4o
04 N(7 N (10 (
* 0(~ 0 * 4. c
Pi- 0* t4 *
dmp
<M~t ** MP W I*
Cie ca.4 Cfl:I
cc
*NI9 ~ .4- .0
Coo-.4 Co* - CO +4o c
P.* + * + OCc.i 14
o* ad ix~ 494
o .-
a, Ci .O
coc 04
0 LnOD r-- N 0N
Nof t* * 4 .a.c N
00* 00% *00O' 0 C4 0

0*I In o I. * f4lo.m n6nn Il N ~- N -Y

ND, 4 i I 4f CIO 9 * 91 AN l N 0n No O

00 - --
OIL 0D*N 0* + OCN . N + N
49-
- -C t-4 *** 0 Ci 0* 4O 040o . SW m I--r
e u,.ogtOt%.04 %P-* P.ce4i W-9 c *0N N 1 e .1 o
&0* mac O'44 p-4ca CO**O ~ a - -J 0(J N
00n M- 0*4- -4* GO0** I-N* N 4t -* G m %
& .- or *0-mc N0C* OLA4 ~ M NI *? ~4 , 9~
&Z - it *COO ~ .00' 0 N 00 N- 00O1 00
34
00. 141 ' *
tAJ0 o I oftI. o( of o 0 NCol~-M r I00% NC4Iof I N I emofd 0
" EMCWO 0*U'
< 4* OF *Pe~
IW% U'.1.. 4IA i I NW q A -4 .W0I
34
It%WW-4
X * .4-4 *C4 N -< *up . 4 ON- fU'. N0 - %ON
AA.CC *(.LL..'0 *40
L 00 NN+O os OU. 0*0 90.O0.4fOL-C
* * -OP- * N.0J
'.00.0O 000s' a4 a4 00 00 0 *0 NO. '4". * fl0

44 .0 N .. U'
m. r L0 lot.0
-~ 0*o . -N M4 Lm~ n 4P-z
* U*0 un*-..~ -4 '~ N04 NN NN4 N NNN

O0.0.tN4 4~P.~O0.0P- 0N5287 0

 F/6B6/.
TACTICAL MISSILE CONCEPTUAL MONTEREY CA
OESIGN,(U)
SCHOOL
80 POSTGRADUATE

;uuIuIuIIIuuI
ADAO95 118 'NAVAL
SEP 0 R REDMON
UNCLASSIFIEO ML

IImuuuuuuuuuu
I~lr:Tp
4,-

00000000000000000000000000000
C"49 C"0

In cei +04c
* <0JO0

M* .Ir00%0

4*0-4 0

oe c iv04 +

cc *+4* *N

N49 e4oo
C" ~ A4 co-)Co-

49+0-< *+0CO+ N 0 -oc

CON en -.*PNN.
1 t 0'mInI NU 001 0 -4
*.c -u L)%O* g.. I,*3 ob 00'o flc
-. +t~ -PN* * P.c 0o (N-'.0 O (
44ece 0' *
4.44cce 0 0 04 .00 0-W Z4cL
oko M4O* -l4c.jI 6* COW P-N t 0.-4 a &* -4
*4* IVL-I 0*J * <* .-- 3 9 4% 0-0.O
-N .4 * %01*-M*N 0J+ a * 3C +0** .-4tA0 iVDl
N0 I I 4m4cn14 I Z 04 wnzn IAZni- .01, NIJrCO
-4N~
*.I-~.t*.J .JNIA.* 3490 2* 31-40 - -IC
comNP .40 4Z.J03 it4 - u -- cj 40..
4,3 I 04 Jtn0 - -ft. m 11
oN X I -90440na.j.11 N iIUL.dMMWb-4X If ZICb--Z0UN39It CO
X N~ J'..Z-. gg0NZO-Zw- 11 . .JIIt - .
40w 9C -C 49 ggm:334
o4 is - I to~mq .. J)--tI ~JMO
.J .POU..JOU.. 9MEU. ONJLJ .DJ.L~CCACJ LLC-1tL)J LLLLJUJ1LCZ

N 000 -a0 0Nri 0 0'0-00 0N-.

0' M m C" 00
Iniii 0 N e00M nO0-%400%

288
 rNNN N NNNN NNNNN NNNNN N NNNN N NNNN NNNNN NN NN

a ow

-0 l' _i

I-0 LU 49 f
U.I.. IA. ob LJ
-.- ~W lX
Ut. 0+- X.J _j I

C.3CWNUZ v- Q .
-J 4,34 -o C
.JNb-..J-Jo 41
_imoxxz JW
oLLczI- * bo
be-d)=MN -4w

IcI.I
bdo .4 . o0

CIXX L:
_j sN...LJZ .19

39 X4-W N-.z 4 *

.j OLA.00 s3- CO.

NN ~L.J4 N N0~~*
I'-~ ~~~~~ 333MI
)-Z 04 e- sI04-
CCC.N3OI

0 .4~~j~4 0'n LJ.J34>U -3C

0CUUJN. N. % ... J =-scow '.Jw U-Z4.9

Oh.4 0-44 390,i4 4> 3bjI LZZU V.43qd w 64
WW co o NC @fXtz-t4xaW4
39 + tIn c cxt -j t-C
3C N
Cc%* J.'IN NNN -cr.Nb U>- - orUc 46
I.- mm o~- 0 N -3 l-Q I- 4
0 C33CJCL*O r4j74 00 .rZ 39L 0 U .#zWIoAC
0 N 396-40
c~u-4 4W Z LLJqCN qA000e

a L.4x-J.W.X<Q oc -Ot-jxwo299
 Icc --
xwcc a-ec 4w -ea--t~c -. acc x ceCCCW

9UJUUUULL jUUAUU~LLLULLU UJUJJJLULULLLLULLLULjjmjiu

<qc0ONX4490X4N4.I-o-4('.OP

%n G* WN 4q 0
Q% <

NCO N.4 -4 -0-- 0 x.% % co

~e-
+ Co co4 oOZ< * 4 aV 0
Cy W%*N %* IXU. -4 ..1 ox
.!No0- C3 U0~L40 49 0 1fl4-N
-*4 0a -% %Nk90o 1.- u +. 4i
* 0%-4 -'0 0-4 <4 M-'ca U ca to 0
-4-.4l I 4% -.dc J+ *-4 C - .-Iu LU Q)
004-N NN I OX
0 ft 0 - C 4c
N w- gzs + 0.. -
0 so 0-4 4.. 0 i.- 4 CZ
OI "%%. .%ccZ -Q X -OC .4
.4.-4* %N * i J. *1 4
4-i~ 0--+ N* 0 )C UN .. j
*93+%- 4*
+~ 4
+ 0-4 X(
cc* cc-4 -ir'
N *-cc*
4
4 Oft. +
I D* W - -~1 *0CD *
*dW -N- 0 ;0 1 Ne 0 NO .-N
:;4~Z 1* -0 - "'U 0- *3U *...1-3
Zim* 0"-* Zl. Vc woe -co c * 4 * 4m
At%% ol) -0 PO-.i 4W cr * d -1 a,
s--t.~ u*
VI Mf + 4m%%-d ox~ Um( X - 0
4.. -N*- -W I I + s-4- -1 1 u
1~4 4-4- * CY- N-0 0 .~- coJ
fLn4-. 04 *~Cab 40 -'6* *3z ONOI.:-! 3c
.- N %- 4~
-d -441*~ ccC I Q0O '94
~4*N -4co - I -1 06-*I-- j utneac M4~le
cc%.. ON
M' 0 4uje- < X %6 *% wx 0
-. % - CO
9*~ 4
+~ -j- 0*-u U
Q4.N 0 *Z 3c-*(1%~
* 0* *~N
!X*'- CO% 0..J) 4 .. J-Accc 40***
-C
X.-4-40 1 Ox - -- -4q.e.4-.- N
~~%0 .- * 4 U * Q<W W.JU40---4*
00 Wi W-i 00%4-oKj 4
z~~-
*'~ rWOW aw * uJ0UJ04 01-4 -
4* I --. * .- 4.-4 %.UN. Lfl,.J fto DC- N-6 a
)(ON* N -- -N -40zo *%. 01* 0%I
ft-%U
*4.-6N * 04 N.-0% 0, ..Cl "W0 L- - 0l-I -4mc 4 w
o;PW0*
OD* * .-I4
04"
..
0* 03
0.-co N-4.jg I *cc .-4 0 cW4C* +44 01-4
ca - 0 0 +O N,.4w. -fl.. WO-J-' *I- M-4
-4 W'0 .* Of- .. Ntl .0'tj . * I + -4Wj cocl* 0-4WU 0%fn -d
4-*NCO * .4 .4%*OCC r"'-47%x N 0.- *N 0 *CC +U-I-.Wo *O% -4
O*'* +01 tp w~ I*a.I O~N+- X*vo M-W 6%%cQu%- in* 0.
.N%*0 OOO0N a04cwN N(" 04 49*- .. * W4-044~* O'r4 Wi
-4Q%*N 0%v %-U'% of-- *.JN* (Y C..4 e .B-.% 4-I 0*49 NCM0%c
Un..
Mtn* 4O'* -6%-400% ("0O* 4b .. O3491-z" 0 + -4O,.i-.j * 0%J *V
t-.if*-co go O.S.P 0, 1%- - piWU.J-944 X4...Zox-4 mi X
&l4.CO-i- 4-~ ClwW40N *0% 9--4 0.- 07- QODOI.J I40-co+<U I - -44c
... 4~0 -4* *- 0 P'--i CD C144<0 .- UACO ..JW4+3-JeOO 0- -4J
I. ON-i-4' 90 0 1 ")-m+ to 4. Q I J.O ~
I-Cj4uu%' )O .40-. . 0-0
4m~* 0+-t"N *-.--4 .-41 -4* 100C Z~OL JI I-4 WUU
CI% *MN 0* * -% on 4O-4UCC
I CL +U 0I-%.* 00CO--0c $CON:I CO+

X- I A ON # %W. I#+
5 Q N 55
-I4W ( I I lc- A A---
Go
mI% NN M~N II"4j~w.u is 11,i0N4d UIIOIN'.AIOJ0
COC *CON* GO* NCO* I
W:ZWWI-W3~ +213R4O-~-~4

N iN .A 4-iN ..
qNmV .-
e - -ON 4
.-
,a ON .4 w 01-4.4 N N4. -I
N ?-r ~N
P. N mM )%0%0%-
at 0%04 00 Q 0NM'0 NNN m
0 a, )%a

290
AW W W W W W W LJLUUULJJUJIt!LUULLJUJUJJUJJUJUJLLLLU

0000 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 004C00 0040 0090

Ix 40 44 44 444
oo .C- * - x.

LI ~ +. 0
0 -. 0U -40 z.. +4
o- *x 4O + cub -C N
'-I *. c4..~ _j M 4
*4-c *e - w-* *N **
N0cg ... (o I
* Q *-4- y cc (A In

S4 0'-e O.4
*- *J
N OD 0O
o .. _ w L.'
+ f o00 C9N4 N41
coq<* K'-.0 * (D - ..
4-4* M b-d 4XI. 1- N-1.o 0 yN
* t iO N.. * 0 *
(v
LI*0
4K-c COco
-1 04 ce + *
4 caJ 0-4(.
X. 0 - I 0+ I
-JOLI -4- 4 0-4 N 4 i00IM
0 * *- -c N 0 0~ N_
4
o i- o 0 NuJ'- W-t OD I0e - N-4
0 44d * e*O4< %,* 0 C4 71 - MCC -
u Cox - t**_ 0-I 6 0 04A0 O%.0t
w 1-0 0 G-4...J-1- 00? 0 * 4 at 0 j0 *0 0%
4-.0- W I-...i4.4WN
wu N OUN * M_* _jNf
-50*-W -0-0 004. e 04 I 01- * + *.-c
o 'n.4 s~if NON~ NMI NSt- 0 1 0 0 C1

0%01 -AMD 04*

-I -00 omp d 4J .*- 0
%. I- 4-0-4 J0.a J0 4 ON 4J
0CW tAO~ -0
ILA U.*- w wN 04 X *-0 0 .4N03 1 N-4 N 0
.WX 4 I do C0(. oneI Coax oix * *O I. t 4
* z~~iK N * 0 - 4.CW O 'ot - q+ elm I7-o -4 * 0C40
N%40- 4. 0 % -dw *OoK- qa-c a O.I 0 -- Nm,40 - .
* 0ecc < NIx
l-4 * 00N N NW N00L.
n -- N
*u 00. N - I~
I~..J Ol I* is4 + +4% +
~~~~O 0- OZ..JUI .- 4-. 14- OOOP- I*0 4 . J * 0
44 -0-0 1 %+ --4UI- 40 -4Ntt 00 0--w- OL- *%t*
L 4 0- NM1
qeioc 4- *.0 -*-io 004 0. N * .- M .

0 1. 110 WQ * x NONL
I- 4
NWOW* 0 N-4 w
NK - * ON
*I-0 -0 N 0wi osi... si. * 1 X .4J4 0 )( *0C*3MOC
-c4 *oX40 4.
CC*CItfl* ff I- D CD00 .JK1-0
OCON'0K4- U0~ zcfr4IXNKU0 fQ
3dx.dN* 0'w 4l 04 0..0LLW
itnu. CD: C00LL-'DI~4w' ww. ~ 4
w0' .
1- **Q * I- - %.-W.. I 0N .J N- I 0."<..J N*-4 X( N
0,x ~ .*vON
~
4-4*IAO ~ ~ ~~ + ~ ~ -4 0 N4~ aO ccI40.%
*24*I- N% *-.41I-0 ONO.t in M0 4 fl c 0% a
-4 N M(.
SNl
N,-. 0NN4 . *-400 00 0 ccI 0 001 -.- 4W .40
*440 4.~~ 4 N - N NN N40 NN ~4-N. N N -NN

~- .J -4I+44'~ I e ; * +91
mm 44OOt 0%, WW

0000000000000000000000000

+ C
T0000000000000000000000000

I.- cc o
Ix o 0 c

(AI*Q . * 4 )c

%. *4 0rn4 ~
* 0 4i *40

4A * 0 4
49 + NO 0o +0O -
-' . -- + * 9X N N-
40 --
SO 0 -
(mI*x* 0
N 04 * *~;II 0a%. . 0 10
%0 0'0% -N 0* NN + -N n Of
- - t - N - -4 S.4 -N 4
X
N * - mo ** S.. c 0 4O( a I - *
OZ- -
O'0Nc" xin .J 4.4N
**f
z + uNZ * J -C4O- s%to -M-
01
0 4 0 mU- WOW4.%4* 0 & I) N4xV?--
c" * -410 AX*~ X +0 O c 4froo
Jc -e
N-f in NU n %. 4.
J% No N N -0 - I -0*
- N 0 a5 0 +~ N eS m * 4.0 LU *UUU
0* 00d0 o X
1NIn *c .4 0at -o N I e i I
4*a9 0 *0094* 1*-9M+F
0N0 ' 1 * ZOIJ
N %., 4400O
-NONMOMOM 4r4N 4.Nc *044-0- N 4 tcqNq% i Ist
o 1NN
W4 *
ONt-jI 1NI -ION
S f
0-414 t I
11N 1 r 11
*ow Inj 1-
NW1M
toN.. fN
*~~~~~~o10.%' N'4 ~*N.o -O(n4.
- '00 0 0 I '-' 0 NNo0 0 -00
a 0(9
-0 0-
tno at
.4 m N- Io K- -4 NN
Nt.t *0 N -N *
1 -4-4 04 N
4~N(* -4 NI
00 Nn m MM4N 0 6t
*1 N NN. N N NNN.~ ~0 N NNN N N N NN N NI--

WI~
X .. N.DNO~-L)N * 4 *.En .N2N924.
 4444 44 444<C4<<4 4414494 <44444444444
I.-

J 41b;
V2 (A 0"
4K ..X. w w IZZ
-
cc %j 0 W * Z(
OM 0 M3l X LA ..JX(L)s-
C13 w 4c 0 . -UO

<0 LA.- QCI W.%

IL
.1 - ccW 3( (D M (.-.O)
u-e-I- X..J J. a Q IA 0.t 0
oed.0 oz 41b- ( wo '43 . .
tntiAI-%J - UYI am 0433
ZO-QM.CLW *-( * N Mmmu
.. N3 4-~c 0- x Ino* 4Z.-4
.j 3. 1-3-MJ-J(D 43C a 1-fto-. tn
o _Ji~cxz -im WI Q)3 lAx .XX
*JL - OWU0.IU.L.) tn Z*X4
-
-4 4ce31- - ONO 0 04. %.I' mi .
I 4 g.-LJTN "4x( Z I- ft%x -4 -X
49 4 CN..J.JZ -3C X IAIaC w O%
C- .Jmmx'-v- 4m-d X 0 b .o~Lo
4 *1 04 MA 4C0
cw0 Xe Itpw"43 WN
- IA -)Iw2 .1- 1- 1-u"-) in.-.-. - (ANX
41
N -%IAfl3X ft WLU X -u.) - Mtn
4NOJ-.o-4 w.j ox-4 %0 N4qp'C3Zxc
*M JN...
a O... a &Z 6. 3- .OuLnu.z
-j.J.3-X.54c
*. WU)( .j Uz .iL .4ctn
I 42c3 .21- 40 . X >0 )C,-og.4(.
'0
C .- WU3 0.2Z N 1-)( XT-4'00
* .- 4.:If>((. 004 S. =Itl IAA a .
41L
41-U.00 -Z co- O..3xz a(
0a4
Q Z ft0 MOQ.j *Z WI.- a- X(3"I04 3c
** -mxN.Z 4 MO UZ * 0 a
-4 0IAC -33 - t30L 0 obd x clN0
*1 X..J-dOUXN -:Cf- = 3X1Aul .. j3
M1 ft $-.> CL Nyfl4 N U~ZIA .3Z0.U
a OWN01--w 3M.w a >* IALOMZ
"4 4f43-03 c.. l
IAa X 0 0 '-.3 "no)
2 4moz 0'.4(Af <W4 * --X - .tj))s.
44 -. n2432- .U.0. 0 . * tntx-.O'?)
ir.Jt~fl-.juX o, 343 M 41I- in ftl-s.IA ft%00
x )( )(n U>~ M.- cc4In LLU. &A M .44
+ >S. ONO. 4..-
we - s.-= X(N Mlt )
* X-IJ3-3W0U -I-- - 0-04 ON Ita.xo-.xxON
."4U.fAX -(J301-00-0 Inin4* "ufn 9-%DC M
-ZWU)4NIWW0w 00 a 00 wp.U.IAZx %.m X( -
N41N*y:w 4.3.43 0 . * . . *O14oN'--w4"4'0% .f4-
N S" on- o UOX
J -- I UiJe 111111pp 11 11 P1PP ftP t l-=
04 NZZ (AZZ ... 3o
qbmNNO0NN1P1P.P--Ul. 1--- .qn
0-0--w Zoop..330. Mom 0. Pp3333 em %4<-cc44444W 164X
P-Pi0-P I .- = W&2IW-2OIXX.2
1 it0 pIULUW2222222 CieX2220car
h ZO-0 2224c e4wz.jX
ooo0owz -. 00 Kilfl
zooo -4.4 MW MX MW MCC0000 =0 -000 U.-4

F- cc
-l~m~n -.4N000000 "4-4 000 -
N NN 4tmN4-N N 4uA4 4t
0000--- 0 -4-4N N
mmmmmm m m
QU

293
 4b0 0 00 0 0 0 00 0 0 00 00ft0 0 0 00 0 0 0

m ft 0

Mtn0. G. t-I

P-03 I.- I.ZN

.- ( 6- - 0 9 a
cxt &A N Li

Li)X - X 0. 0"j

x -1
04 &i (49 P"- -
nxui 410W 1- 0 LL c-41
X04 -1 -4 CL 0 w Z4%
0.I M4 0- W z z
-* )(tn %t I- cIl 9 3
-~ w - I t -4 z -
LInt P* z x. - 3
Mo- f u . .4 0 n0 0 a W
4)Ctfl 04 f" j N1- I- U-
04nZ X. lb .i0
0 f^ Cie 4e
ce 4c
X1.-Jlb W-9-
* - 0 in -
Iaw 0w 0 a 0 <
lJM(W 04- J~~~ 04 U..
w 0 0 0 4 Nj0 0 a
O= -t -I--.N 0.( 0 x x4 U. ta >
*
0" s 0 b4-.9- LC a tA 0 m t A m UA k n
O4 aw. 1-4- 4. L) z. t 0l Z in LZ Z
w m 0 L
&XOf .M- .94. 4H - . U 3
W- 00 M - 10
w.- CL m IL CL~ CL Cc Zx
T(14tOwmv)n- 0 -w 0-" 0 4
inG *.f.Joe.0
M4OMO .*.
oS w 0 l-o -J0 0 I- 0.

TO.-.
.-. W .9. 4 0 0 0 0 0 U

C.a-4n X. ...
wa-a 0 0 In Z U.OWLOU.OU.OL~cL

ey N mm( (no- .4-. 0 0 0 L 00L 0 U0 LU 0 0 0C4

U~ MCI
.. j9- 9..
0 Ow 0 0~0O O0Z0 00

-iZ .I- 0.0

%0. . 0.4 00 0. 0. 0.34 Z03

.-. .X Z..J-.
.0. 2~ 0 2 94 Z- 00 i~
MW =WO WWW00 00 00 00 000000000000000000

0O~aoOQ~O'0O0oO~00-44-44.-44~4-.--4tNNNNNN

N C5 M0 a
if z U.1
I- I.

1.0 10- . 2
ZLU 0 -J 1D Q
0f 4 -

CL 0
Ill r 0
LLU.Ce L-l U. 0 0
'0M 0 - 0 3c1 0
f.) C

0 .
ad LI aZ j 0c 0 a 0 (
40j j 0 .J
1 )- 4
P" a. x LL 0 a 4
3C -i tn z i - %a I- LI z 9- - UN x -M
4 CL 4. cc 7U, 4 3 .
.
I.- Ill-Z
UZOM L I- m l' Mj I- =1 I.-

W7 Z 0 wg~
I mm LU-Z~
Z wo 0 UM 4r
= 0-
14010 0 w IA0-4- 03 -J 0 39-00.0

0-%n01 .4 f VW0-0~044 00- 630f.J -0 4*40 - -00-4f00- OCD-4

00 0.4 "09-09-0 0.4 O09 -4 0--0-4 O

00A In -4 .00 .. 0- .00 .00.-s- '00 .00 .00 00 '0'4

-'Clow .. X W- 'NW 0 N - .N a4 4 .NW-4
W 10..-4 %0A-1 %0A.-4 '0-4*.t

.%.-. ~ 4 ... %. **%- * '4 %~. S*s.4* %295..'.0 -

 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwu wwccWCWwwwwwwwwww
cc c

(fl -U - -

w 0 0 0- z

44 0 a- WU 0.n
Ni I.- Q 3e (L

- U If 2N U
wL -L -
4 U 0 W 4 z c
w I- CL 0 W -
a W Z 0 0 . 0 (A LU
0 0
a.. 12a 0 0 1
a~ wL0t 0 ;D a 0" J W ( 0
W% M , A 1- in 4 -0 4 L U n CL U '
L In m U.. a 3 0 In I.aAI t -i 4n

CL 2L39 0L 0L - e. I-
C 0 L UL_
z0 LU0 Uz %.. 2T Lo 0z 0 zo70 zoo Uj z
0.." 40 010 0 0In0 04
00. OZ-%O
f Z-o
0 0- O
-O Oft 0- f00 0.0 In0w4C-.

CF-0aY. 0 0. 0CF--
oC0.1- 0-0 - 0.Y~* 0.-4f 0<310.-4 0.3
- o< 01 0
CD 4 *AA h4 C a(Ma"
&U40 4AP6wA.. 4 W- a-AW 0 - O-LALU 4 C,.'. alU..C 9-

cc--00 .004 00 .00 000-

- co00 co00 cc-.00 00
~~~ ~**~.
*%. ~ ~ ~4*
~ ~~- ~ %% ~ ~
**~4S*p45 ~ ~ ~ '_ ~ **4
N0. '0_4

29
 00000000000000000 000 00000000000000

~L

LLU 1
Li LU

LL U
a 0 x-

ae at 4A * a
LLt n .1 c LUz
LU (wo c LU l- - 0LU
l 4 -j I U. 0 I- wo
-. LZ C3 49 0U 6.4U
x aj I--* U L2 x x
LU C9 z 00 Lu - j- LU
49
"W 2U LL < 4 gg LI0 ...
0 LU1
9- t0
LU i 4 L
- 0 C, LU LUcC)c
0 L 0 -.
LU a )0 L6 0. 9- u
0 (.3i a U u - 0 L4. W
o
1,- a LU
A 0 0 U.0
2 LZ 0 0 - 0 4 %
i LA 0 in .1 L L w LU U in 04'%
0wA C1
090 00 0 O 0 0 O- 0.
0 Z 0UZW0 Z ZO C O090ZOD bUn LU-Z0 UO 7
09- 0nowfO 0O.004~
U-4 UI -0 4f S.u-4Z IAJ.Wtft 4A ftA IA0
4 04- 0 IA
.004- -4 -- ,)
CIO- 0- V00.4-09C0.-0Z0CO4O<CW- - 0~0-O4

oo 0e
M.0 ~ 0-
~
mLUMt CCnN
-t ~l in
to
MI
4
r
LO 0 0 () O 004 40Zv O
(IM.WW t V..
Pa.4 c,49

cc.00 .00 .00 .00 004 .00 .00 .00 4004 .00 004
* .4% 4
%. .. 4 .*- ~4 0' * 0 .. ~ '0-4 0 4 10-. 4 0-.4

~92 - 9 ~ 0 Z 0 ~ 2 0 9 -0297
%"D00004 00000004 0000 000000Ol~000v00D00%00Q00 0000a

- 0.

N0o 1.: .o
X 0~ 3J 040.
.4L .4 Z C
X- 0. x. . 0000Coc
x N )( N a .0000
.L 0 . P- aZ
10 34 N I- a 4o-r
3.
C9 3 0 I -ti
3C Q 16 0O 00000
-~~~ 0 %0~N
L.000
a 3C 0 CL
W 0
t* 2c 0 bf
In cc CO l 3I 0 ZU . 0%0104
)o- 3Qo
ft N LUk U 1 1-oooO
n- 'A M at %0000
0 CO x CO X LL -
.0...
cc 4W ; jI 0..w.a
cc _ t* x LU. 3U 4A- -0 0.-4N1<
-C
*- Nj Ct
W9 3 W II I 0000>
- -0..0 < _j -1 (A.0000- 09

ui L &I. v .-
w~~~w . -Nf
- 0e I--ft 4 X 4 ~3 L M4 cocoa

.- d O-Ofn wu .
- j ..j i 0 cc .4 .00000
4 CO 1-0 0 N x 4A 10- 16- CC -C00 00
01-0 m 0. . X3 0.0 a -4 0W r'*
M . - 0ft1
0 1-OON1til- 31:C 10- ZN wU 0 0 IDom0
04-90 0 0.-P- wU CC UL O .1 :3 -.
j 0 x 0.-iNcM4
In0tn U '1-1- lA. U. < LuXU Z 10 :000000O
t%~CI o.
CL UN S. - t>
* wU I~- .00000
1-N Z 0-~0 o CL $-,0%0%0,0 0
1.- 0 1- 0- -N ft I- wU Z C3CCN..
1- MCI- m -4.1J .3 3 1- a ft Z I-.-WONNNN
0.0 .- I.- u m. & & a. 0 1, O-.-4NfM 0
0 Zoo 7001--- U0 m 3 X L0 0If00 z 00000 L
SU 0 0f £f) 1- > 2 -wwno

I.- a% ft..4 0 >-4 a . ft a j

O~4.) .% .X@( Q.(L.. 0(-044d.-@
OO 0- 0 Cy
00-4 s-00-4 -C00J--400040 CO0-4 0- LIO 0%.- .00.O-4 40-NM..* In' u W
* ....
.*.4 .ahN,.G..IN-g N.-4-400M mo ~0 *1%.4 0 .'%.4.O000WL1- WU

* Nl N . Z * 00
IP.-Z-1-- 0
.91.1-w<WIf 4u<WUL0W00000 -m if...J..J U.z
1I-X0-d0-.OZJZ ZZZZZZzZZZZ0'o-41-"01--4..N.t*1- 11 ejor.4-4

o000Zto.J0u'J

40- 0407 00
'0-6 Q0-4 LutS.' '0

298
WWWWIUUJWWWWWWWAJLJLLUJWJLWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWUWWWWWUWW w

CV.-

OU-

N mN-
;0.

NN a
0 .NNO

C -m 3X

m 4 -.
L 3-S.

a- 0* - Nu
Zl * -U VC
.JO *.0 U. 4 .0 f1a.f
C
X0 -0 0 m U..a30
Ne-s N-j si 7) C;O
*0 *- 0- IIJ)
* I* Ci U Nl,---
0 0*.. ..10 x Ia-f

.J0 . w 0 u xU 4 LUa
M<X(A N. .JM 0 . 0.
* * ac II- I l-a-orU
oA +U).3 12. *0- V7I- LO L . L-4X 4~

0*w-*ZOU 0> *AFO, WW ->.UL

N- N900 0-'s.- -0- a - > I. - a ~ w4-x

0
-y 0* 00 -*fll
0M O 2 coi *x ii Xbt-x
ii.5- -3q i - a. a f
N. t*UozqO*-'00 0.j~zxJ .-o 0so- .0- 4 a. a 0-4J(~

* '0Z-IZ-.JN..JMOU+.0*XP%-+ tA -u4 w4A4 OUN -I win-.>"OwwJ.O=Xi-Z 00

LU .0 0% J)(0)(49zx *00 -. '0)( 91..10 0%..-40 X%~OS%.4*~
%--4N~cU 00
VnN0%5) if X-C. I Wccif; NOy.* + 40iof0.-0O.4s-d(- 11 Ax-e-..eJft uNI~n
0%* 11 It ZO-..J 11IXWJ%, Z~OI.g- O4 II-4-1-q-U
11'W
1---.L
Z..J..JO0Ns..4)C- 1>-Joa em. *>-J- ouw4 Owc 0LU.4 (W04044o4x< lo-l-
0X I-00-40011 -000)(i,- if14%11 m .~ ItI-~
II -0ZZxxx aN ZZ
1it ZOOccZiIOO0MII
-. ZZ ZIIZJ-j 4 e-sg
",x 0sc4zl jl1 .~xcox . Ma

X)(4X)(<* 44)sC<XX 4UU0003..ccUccoXL>O4U.U.u. w..0%cL

IA 00 040 00 00-' 4N 0
LA '0 0 o 100 r-0 000 0
0% 40-o -to 000 N
0"00 00 (00 'frLnum c

299
 OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOMO

N 1
NN NN NN M ~ 4~a
aO' '
0000000000000 00000000000a000000

WWW WW W0W WW WWW WW WW WWW>WWWW WVWWW WW WW

4 44Q4 4 4 44c4w4 44t tN-tC

P- %0 ()%% 1 a 0 01,)"i Ot-

tm 0 - ft f . 004b * S0
+ 10 (10ao 0 0 090N Na-P4
co %0 o - m L t . 60040
P- 0 0% 0.* U L+-4 P4 I
F-.tnft t .40 1 Ce 0%(-N O~ (4
cc N3 -0 b % 4 - 07
-00 X o ,%04 No 4q

-4-

-f4

1 JJw
* Cf 114 *1

00 0 0 0-0

o -4 0)(l 0 0 00 4 00" 440

00" -0 '0 '0 00 10 .. I'0 4% N N

00 * '-4 400 4300

 cc 0

144b 444 44 4

O-C w<

4J 4

. 40 :m

44:r *% 44N

mm 4 n - 00 O-4f
M.J ft C4 0 10cc b.
CCle- 0C - 09 ** 4
+* 49

* +.J* * *0 C4 030 Z
Uo 340 3- - 4 0 wW '
coa "c
.J*d - W N 0 UiA) -m *XXWM
XX .iI ww>4 0 * 33 04g NN *NNN>
+* - .. Jx f- 4 NN N4%% CY-i 00 .- J.J A.
z0~~ +~-t UJ< - -x 3 * Ni-~
.ftw9 O -%+
knot 4Z
<NIuo.> 1.0 w mm~Q-JON
,0OX x +JO 0K- Zcc V .-LJJ> 03 ~&**L 4ab* 43rx
00 (A 11 90 13X < -C1,. 11U - OF49 CI- 1 X NN :3 114
1~
I **LO i* wm% 14A*03 3

%CIO -r 0* t
~ WU~ 4 ( 0 0 3(l

~ 334
3 eN J 1. ~301%
N
 00000000000000000000000-00------0007770

~w

- U
ui0

w %..

u Cf-(m
4 4 4
_j I-CO.
_.pa- %uCC
4~A
- In -

401- 0JL 00
Wl 4.* I-%
lot
0%
00 4
uJ a 0 j~ 2'W-0

00 ~U-" j *U
l-I
440)
mJ -I-. O -0 W *4.
Cl - J-c
Otl3 * *+ I-0 .. ~
ujo ~wu * 4.A- X4

4* If- - 4.C
+ a-I
*.J--i-uoffidU XI- -- I . -
I-4U*t4 n. 4 04.01 OZ JDD~

9-01 _A
oa 4 V)Jw> -ie 4Qdflm U...J 0 - L4 em4 -0 *IM

I- ~ -. 2 ~ - .1W * OO

4~U 1- 0 CI%. IN1-

'
_r O w I *00 00 20 .

a, Z . 00 .. 1- -l-- * 04 M/L

~ %.
%* ~
10 %01 -- -(.4J4

*4*- .' X~'*~XU-U>-. ~4.4 -. 13024~~

 0O00aD0000000000000
a00D00000co G0000C a000000000000.4w

40<444 44 44 44 44C4 44<44

10
4t
14
V% +

+ LU
ca N

00 N 4A

+ A
0) 4 4 C c

N~ S w
o do * Z0

- 0 0~
a~ 0 *
-*4 t. CI * .Ja *
N r0* ( .4Z M
Q% t 1 0 C
*M-6 0 - 01
* 0.4 1Mney* %.
I" %o Z r* n -0C 4 * a 0 .
O4- x d M~ -op
a -
~ f" MN .4 U0 0'0<
01 - -J4 ~ 0 -4 4 *4 NX ; l
41tW-
M* N 41 a* % 4 0
0%Nn jG- m 0 -4 N- w
J% Oz
a Dl* 6 4 ("0 w 0 NO.* 4 0d
Me* -m4- 0 C) zC (3r-* x CI0
* 4% r0 -4 4"1LL 0 l X *.~U.
O10 0
-# 0 I W- *ZUO * N
% t- 0O *
04acr o~ 0 4
oo4 p 0 N - -Ow41O 0.-i a4
-4' 0a0ffla 000%00 %0 . 0.e W* +> .4 0 .4 O4 0
1+" m +Mbi' COOa % -. * NnW4-.4.- ,4.4
- -t
W Odza-4( 1 r..4 CMN -0 41 avO.XUJ.~-1 MN .4I N-41
X 0 X *OX'- M1 I It -JfUX
B. - 'LCO 0 0 1o 0
N M.-N . 0 M 11 '0 Ot- 11'0 4- X 1W 1l- I - 1 .Cat4C.4
0. u1 u -4c.4c 9 00
N N .4.4*420.
(ILWCI-i it M z 1zQ
cc. .- N(M NN * -4 0 .4 -4" 41n
.4(4' 'CM 10 Ol00M%4 I - toS 0 P4 -4 .44 -. 4 20
mm I-.
mm mm mmm mU M41 -4 4 J 1' P0- %0%0 1
O~d C. ~. .4A 4O MO 0-4w .X* -4W rW t~ r.

~0'Md~0
.- 4.0~ .000' 03~ 44 4> 4.0 ~ 0 04 i

14M1I C 41 0..0 4QL0~)- -*-1l-..4r-..A-O-N

 00000000000000000004000000000V 000Col000
N- o C4

a* Ccc -

* a - -%t* N
N~ 0 0-ofl0a
Naa
qlt4* t 4f 9f a; .

LU LU LU 40UD r
-0~~~ 4o c o. %4 +
* wOa OOa' C- -+. co0. W
*
*~~
A F-*
~ ~W~ A * SjL*OCOL
M *0 w i
OPMI- r-t00 0 + 0

a.J l O-Nun *- 0.0 -0 0 C. f

U CY ow 0 u IA OU ; -0 -40 0
OO1
c..1 *c -i+.r . I I r I 1C0 N 4c o '0o
aI to 04 t + 4 Iw 4 %m P44 tn .00 m4Mm I-
0.40 ao 400M a 4-
1%0 -0 -0 00. 0* 9 0 *
'0 'fl 0
N* -me% r4c -0 -V 00 tm...'-0% 00N
I0 ** W%W acoON loooo M *0
0*
G*L%- ej . P*
I-c i M-)J40a000Ion.
*Lc *G-. -o. A0 0 0-4 0-N oe
0UD" 0 IC 9004 t~ I* . '.0 00000-N0 0-0- 000
qN Qc -w0-
4l-c *- 0~L r1W " - 0-4~00
0-f 4 01199
UJ9,00 N1 N C O 1N 0I 110If0N~
N' 1. k-O
0 11CXI0 1 f 0 L CO

Oa %a o eeB 0. .til O'U

Wo.. 0 a 4 Na
.449( ..
Jf 41N- w4l'..d0 r- MI MCI
I0 aO 0- . -60
*0 0 40 41* 11i4w
- I-N. lk-tft M*r 11--O W o o 00 go

0-4 0 0 U* 0~N 304 M -0 01. 0* *

 00000000000000000000 00000000 Coco 0...-

N0 0 0

* t. L) 0

oa. 0 10 0

00 Go
A in 0
Mn 0 Il 0

r- 0 0 C5 04. N LU w LU
* 0 Me 9 0O ."U 0a4 m 0 ccdo o
- 0 N+ N me (ono + x t
4' ' "W
0 +4. o 00 a f1 + 00G a0 c0 4+0* * CO*
aN %0 .4Ny CO- % N 0 ta '0Oa Ifl
oNN Of" 0 0in N a P..N 00 0 ODOMAinUINN 0M
I.- 00c - *CO
0 cc
O -i I-. *-t* 0- q $.- Na0%. Col.. - 0 .-
o K
1 f-
z -
-.
1
0
0 k0
llcoi
s.- 0-O
+ ~ ot
I -4.
.
04 .4d
o
ft-4
noiAc
N oo am OKL
or O-n 00 0 XMIn- lAM AM ow
Colo 0o 00Kco cc0 014 o..tLn * OU ODQ O-L)
M
O..O ac - 00 a M O a W
000 a. 6"M 1- 01 FI
N
0
-4w
NO
%Ow
fl-*
.-4
w
-WM.4
*inMM
an
ln
N
P -
'0a
P-
.
0 I
UM
Ft M
0
?.
0-*
-. An-~
MN~
Al.-
AmgAto.-
IAb-
Go** 0An e Q
OW 8 < I- 0
O 'a4% ON 0 f-A I tO . 406. -0 -0 00
%W00% eu-I *0 ANN *iM 09
' or M-Al q*. gin Q0% 00 o00a .0
in
I-P- I~.-O 1-In NM-6 4-i I.- 1.-i -440 1-* I-N 06 L stu %Om..
(p00 0 9000.-40000 * 9000000(-40C000 *.00..D400.00 * iiwnw~l

r a0
co 1.40Kwx
1N 03
K II01.40KW 01ar00 Or NO
c K .403a o0 Go v44 " 004
Ti C0.4 N C04 It
04' 40Mf amn amn MON ON ON ON NO.4 0.4 0-4 -1..4 J..,4 1-...1--

041404-01-01-44104104,4-0 4-01-0 -0-01-01-0

U.DCLCo.OAdO0c WO UWU0u O LWUWU0u

in *0.4 Mn M 0- N i 4t inC-N Min O-

*0NMn i'of-
-' -SNN N ^ Nenon~ iq
n (In (n44),*- r *toln tniiA0niAA
0o 0000o O0000
0o 0z 0ct CC 000 0 vow M0 M0 00

305
 0000000000000000000000000000
U_(
0--4. NN N NN m 4W ~ .4 ~t4*4 IUI
ooooooooooooeooo~oeooooeooNooocc~
-444---44-4444---444---4---444---4444---4-~444- 4-L-4--44-

%a4444444*

.- *Ci 0(6(
cc'
weI
co0 1.- .4c *40 (

z 00n 4 C c

u a* Ou.e

LU UL.U. *vU.%-I
I.LU- Om~

0- o P-0 (Cl' +
4U (4*L 0.. 0 ofc 0u. N
co Q ..* ot
4 -( -C
,Df 0- 'to Q +K .4 qxc "tc
O* Z %W* .00 r .- (4U, % JXM N 901.
06. 4 *
00 0' 0 6-0 Go N N X*Qn t(
O%*It " m U0 U40 -4 %0 0.-4 Z**f 0*
-~ 10.4a ** -4* OO - a d 40.Xf 0Q '.0t 30
Coc o CI 0 c* ZL 9> 0 -N a -0o -. m 04f~yi
01 b UJ Cc to. 0- O N r 0Moc
m~u -
WN% b 00 *- L 0 Jj *w-* 0 4 % 10 9(M- I
CD 4 +0 P-* cc0 % b9 ea-a -W04 L
004t *-4C W P.. -00WU t0- -4 -
*CC m3 494
-40 OZ U3t3~-ON % N- ON* 0-
#I o00U.J I- 0=40.00 ,O%3C7 .0s-4 OOZC. .0~
ln c~cc0LOC
-A-4 O40 CU10 2'0%- O -4 N KKC- -4"MK C%
P- P- 30tj l 0- 0 U '.4 Il' 04 -% 40 tl -4C0IlI
coot CUOM * *0 fr- ON..W;;ON qL'f.. aN if
0~ u or-K ~. L.)6110 - 00 '0. - 0 uw~l 1.tOu~0 *
'0 "Wo NM * 4U~lm A.O! - 6 wuma
-z~M-.1
OLCU CC~mcc i~*00
CCU.. 0N . N O' t0e0*

Ig004 I- 0 *- L4O .f*- .0 4 . .0104 -~ a04*f1 It

0In. 4l *U P-N ZO*4. .4 (,^ NN -.4 It _rI 4 t
00 fr--
P- *- 04o"104N44 ~ 44r- F_ 4. 4
-00444 .OZ U3p-0 oN.W.AN 0 N- Ndm- miA.0P-I .

*u .000
0 * -4Z0,00 06 03~'40 0~- O.O

LM~A0(0WNOO00 ~ O~".N*f-(-."C~lZA
 t 0000000000000000000000000 00000000coo0

ul

I 0A 00 O ~ O0 O10O 0 0
eootzO oooocooooooooeoooooooooo4--
-4~o-4--40-4 U- 4 4 q -o if--- a 4 c fl o1

_. 33 0%x IA N .t - l ,

a* m P-N I
44o * in * -
MPG'u- aoU1* cc Z* *0 cc
41%N.- 4a m O -c m Na
-. 0
04Z +.4wo 0* wo 0 .400p
- * woo 0 .M m 0 b. 9cW -
o00I-d mi.40 341u ...J 41l. .4n
fl w...
s ,(

ow U N 01 f 0 0 V.z
&A et"0AN03O OfO-tC*%:Q U0 U 1 00-t 0. _
fooce- it I- X- " Di 1 w_ 0

0xz z 41 0-

rt~ - tnnw.
-t- tA 0
41 (i %01 440 I%- *r
I-.4aa * ~ ~ 00- 4. 00-4.0

'C~s..O-
N ~ 00 I 0..307.
 0 00 0 0 N N N NNCie
N0IA0

(9- 0% *4
*LO * -* -
IA* O- 0 0rcf
N~ U.* U.J

+** i *odX
0C * CI OM- C
o Pou.+oLLnrceL

C) LAJ.C
- 4w 4f ' 0ODl
cl% *U. 0 0oo + u "-
*wU
0 0A O

co * A* *,* . 0*oy ' .- ,

F-UC OWM0U.'r U.*r-*if0 b
a
0b >LI1m* .i* .DI ** **
coO O* *oot0 mc-0
.0'Uj..( L)
r- > * * Ifrlgc* mI * I* . -l Zz fJ O
I"XN~ 00 -N Let9LJ- 000jt A f c I *
M4 N0 * woo%. * C *ls U' u z Mt
Ow 4-4wI- N- O&M &A 10 1 0 0 0 04 .
0 *l 4 L-*** NN. *
r-p z z UUU-.

I I-o*.1 sa IIIQ O***- 1 0' U -. wCO ciAo

0 - 0 L)1-0** 191 x11x1 -11xo U 11 1N It Z11~'

X" *N N 11004)'
It.tfl
N~~'.
*~~.0-4N*
as"*-*p--
VAOC 000N0fiW-0-do WOWN'COZ00O 0NCU60 000000*O.WOO
fl

%OH tn w m .4O()*%
I 0 I - NO9 Ln~~ lo r--i0L S . I tmT
00-0 0 a 0 -~.40 Oi. i~n 0 gg LisQ Ql
II o Qtn
u -~u-.d

3080
0O40
.- 00 0,OsOOOOOOOOOOCDOOG=40WOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOO
N . -po.p.-444.d.dw- O N.44.
4 4 44.
OO5
%OM
A-

Wfr44 ~ *

I= I* tn. % c

mot clew I
ar *4 *a:C I-.
0*L - a* N

WO* Ago41.

(4
0 0 -. q -W 04 I I
I L6 +I
LICo- +~~

ce* eceCe31 A.4400. -I-X

a 0 cO* z - U
a * *rQ z4Z41-4 + *1414
0r (1000 I I. Q N

+ 1 ?-Ma 1- 4 L * NN4
*O-C 40 0% 3 I *
31:0 -J. ofl 3 -0=00% 0 Q
6-;N 08 a 4z 04@" a I 4c *.
eAa
cc Q Z%00-
I LI .44
O UQW I *zo N'C a*-'-44. -

*Q4.4I. Mo )* %J o- -n3Omr a3(7 Nx N*W M

N ..J MVUU-aa4 49 0 4 -GOQ* **.4%

MI. * e.Lfl 44tflj0 - 0% W W a 3I O O--4-

ca4- If .0 If0x x t~ - f0aV4VN-C~w- .44
II0lW
,ODO
U
04 1I1
10X1- .-
-
110LLX0 if Fa
39Q--%%*qO OfL* Z
I..4-3NLI4Q nILI 0L Zu-NI4 Z *a NM
~0 O3I0 U.- 00j <WOW '-0' 11 - )

OnEA-0 M..J NO.Q--

.4S*
U~Ii~(lL0.J*-a. 4%0%044 0 fl 0 %e / * ~

Ze..04j**a s~*0 ~ *'309

 cc I~
- - - x

* 00000000000000000000000000000000000

* N

- Ix
31: X q

4 -9

I*
Cos

N
-00

* 4* N J-o
N*UO. * Ut
* N 46 - c * *.4bU c
0 -- J
39* +- 1-N-39 0-+ my*
Lnw n -0 -J-U3L aL-
-(L)C L
~
CD ~ aowlIN
* M4U
b~--
4X~lk- xy a000 040 O

--
(1 c oo D 0L

30
 44444.144

W Z -J--< MJ-W 0
My'-P
r-4 - uj O

01 4- -ulC 0
-0 w1
b-0 *-.0 *
UCCa N-*c% 1Z1+
aL 0 4. _

4I-..1U-PN+ * MC a+ CD4u-ULNCU Q o

0 N of 0
41100<490/) 4
03"
Off NOW)a
N N a0 if MO
*M ZZ..4~J.J ~~# 0'1Q0ofN-~

NO%'. *- 0*l-o -N *IX AJ4 4 0~u

11-0 '0' 3lrr *W- mm w* zi IZ + 0
0% 04. Oao .- i%-i % ()() 040*N

* OO 00'WN *' ZIO*+*.311.J

 I-I

> -i

*f4nA +

*0 Z.wt4 j Q
Po. 04...J..J4 4-

+~ 4*. Q IAtii

JK4 o*N**NN 0
0 *0 0 oi 0 U4UJJJx-i

M It. 1-444 ~
4 Y 0% 1.-JOO
0%I

312J~t~~

~ne~c N43* *zA3

ccccOOOa ac:m tOOa accOtw e wcOcOc eOOO aacatOeorowozowato wo atcc icoooooccoa
LUJLJoLJUUJLoU-~uo% 0UUL)UUJ
.or-LL
U QL O-4NL Or-coo O-4NLJUWULUU
r-coO'OLUJULJ
-4-4-4-4-4-4--4-4-4-4-4-44-4~4-4-4-4< - * 4 44 - 9 -. -~ -- ~ 4-.

X N a

co a co

4. 2 .
3. z
3 co Om
+z a. tu 1o
SL 0U.
* 0. 0u I'if

4Auc U i0..
0. U (U~ 0
U a-l. fti
a. + cI- OL-

*- m UX 41 9U.
* S C U. 0. -f
(:)
:a JUX L> 0
-J0 z (Lu..4 *-10 c"
no U . ma. U. e

-J + OCL ce *w
4cI- N *. 3 0. 0.1011
az ,0 Lc 0 z L U.
O~-w Q -0 (I f 0
LUI^~aa. 0%m% Y %U 4' t ~ - ti.."0c a
A3
9. fnL 9ZO L 0)0
- 49 44
(A M-to' Y' . co1- 0 u u. 1 .U. 0 0 ~ 't
cco 0% a 04 ~- O%x 0% 0% + -a.
uV4 1-O 0.. n rx
a6U 0% 0% ; .1 CO*'- . -4 a- -40.0+ -LJD *t - r
~* ft w It4 44. 0. .U' -J -) ~Z. OO- 4 - 0 o6
LaU 0'. M ONO -4 U bO4
1'u, <UM 0-r- .C 06 + N0
Ow 0m Q 0)%WO ~0 0 x ZNN -
*.u..J 0Nu.,-- OXCN
IL 000403-4 7C 0% 0% *
0a+ WULD a 0'.4
N0r4 tfl.-A-4
Clo 0 (7 -. CL - G -4 ca Mot- O1-)C)( *%.J.- -4Lu
0-IA
bmw~ L-4 "%UNXNO .Z- .0
OL) .* 9 um)-, 15,-c: Ib-3 m :%-
11
Z11 I-_CX3 113 I$ -- UXOI-O- * .. J *I- z -O-sZ>zclz-.'x
woof^ RIA vaIWtJWN 11 m 1111tAl 1 A if 11 (.DZ.' -4p140tmi(4.W4 r
aLZ a. CL M. 03-0.3 a. MM
a -i- va-JfZ~-W...aZ~ZZ Z-W'-Oo
-JUQUQLLQu.UU..Uu..UU XXZ -UO.JOW0 o 0WOXO(U.O0WU.LL-Z

o N-44 mm4 UN r-Wao -0N1 NO0 a (%

1- 000 0'o - %0%
0'o0% 0 m m 0 0 a 0 0O
000 m)%a a O0000. 00 00 a 0 am
44 -4%
4 .- p-w4 LM 10 .0 .0 M4 Lm

313
 REFERENCES
1. Specifications, Soviet Aircraft, Aviation Week and Space
Technology, V. 112, No. 9, p. 116, 3 March 1980.
2. New Soviet Fighters Detailed, Military Electronics and
Countermeasures, V. 6, No. 5, p. 67-69, May 1980.
3. All the Worlds Missiles, General Dynamics, Pamona Division.

4. Michael Brown, F-16 Programme Heads for December First

Flight, Interavia, V. XXXI, p. 104-106, February 1976.

5. Philip Geddes, Two Versions of the F-18 in Hot Competition,

Interavia, V. XXXIV, p. 351-356, April 1979.

6. Advisory Group for Aerospace Research and Development

Lecture Series No. 52, Guidance Law Applicability for
Missile Closing, by Dr. Robert Goodstein, May 1972.

7. Rapid Approach for Missile Synthesis, Rochet Synthesis

Handbook, General Dynamics, Convair Division, November 1979.

8. Merril I. Skolnik, Introduction to Radar Systems, McGraw-

Hill Book Company, 1962.

9. William L. Wolfe, Handbook of Military Infrared Technology,

Office of Naval Research, Department of the Navy, Washington,
D.C., 1965.

10. S.S. Chin, Missile Configuration Design, McGraw-Hill Book

Company, 1961.
11. Marvin E. Bachman, Terminal Ballistics, Naval Weapons Center,
Research Department, February 1976.

12. Leland M. Nicolai, Fundamentals of Aircraft Design, Domicone

Printing Services, 1975.

13. NACA Report 1307, Lift and Center of Pressure of Wing-Body-

Tail Combinations at Subsonic, Transonic, and Supersonic
Speeds, by William C. Pitts, Jack N. Nielsen, and George
E. Kaattari, 1959.
14. Unpublished Notes on Rocket Propulsion, by Professor D.
Netzer, September, 1980.
15. Naval Weapons Center Technical Memorandum 2953, Preliminary
Solid Rocket Motor Design Techniques, by H. Platzek, p. 15,
December 1975.

314
16. D.E. Hoak, U.S. Air Force Stability and Control Handbook
(DATCOM), AF Flight Dynamics Laboratory, April 1976.

17. Naval Air Development Center Report No. 74023-30, A Digital

Com~uter Method for Predicting Static Aerodynamic Character-
istics of Typical Missile Configurations, by F.A. Kuster, Jr.,
29 January 1974.
18. Naval Ship Research and Development Center Report 3645, A
Method for Predicting the Static Aerodynamic Characteristics
of Typical Missile Configurations for Angles of Attack to
180 Degrees, by Bernard F. Saffell, Jr., Millard L. Howard,
and Eugene N. Brook, Jr., March 1971.
19. NASA Technical Note D-6996, Prediction of Static Aerodynamic
Characteristics for Space-Shuttle-Like and Other Bodies at
Angles of Attack From 0 to 180 Degrees, by Leland H.
Jorgensen, January 1973.
20. NASA Technical Memorandum X-3309, Experimental Aerodynamic
Characteristics for Slender Bodies with Thin Wings at Angles
of Attack from 0 to 58 Degrees and Mach numbers from 0.6 to
2.0., by Leland H. Jorgensen and Michael H. Howell, January
19 76.

21. NASA Technical Memorandum X-2780, Aerodynamic Characteristics

at Mach 0.60 to 4.63 of Two Cruciform Missile Models, One
Having Trapezoidal Wings with Canard Controls and the Other
Having Delta Wings with Tail Controls, by William A. Corlett
and Dorothy T. Howell, July 1973.

22. NASA Technical Memorandum X-2367, Longitudinal Aerodynamic

Characteristics at Mach 1.50 to 4.63 of a Missile Model
Employing Various Canards and A Trailing-Edge Flap Control,
by Charles D. Trescot, Jr., October 1971.
23. Unpublished Notes on Weapons System Design, by Professor
A. Fuhs, September 1980.

315
 INITIAL DISTRIBUTION LIST
No. of Copies

1. Defense Technical Information Center 2

Cameron Station
Alexandria, Virginia 22314

2. Library, Code 0142 2

Naval Postgraduate School
Monterey, California 93940

3. Department Chairman, Code 67 1

Department of Aeronautical Engineering
Naval Postgraduate School
Monterey, California 93940

4. Professor G.H. Lindsey, Code 67Li 1

Department of Aeronautical Engineering
Naval Postgraduate School
Monterey, California 93940

5. Captain K. Hatjianastasiou, 1
Salonas 147
Kauithea
Athens, GREECE
6. Lieutenant Danny R. Redmon 1
925 Skylark
Ontario, California 91761

316