AD NUMBER CLASSIFICATION CHANGESof the pitch and yaw torques, and the normal and longitudinal...

UNCLASSIFIED

AD NUMBERAD517147

CLASSIFICATION CHANGES

TO: unclassified

FROM: confidential

LIMITATION CHANGES

TO:

Approved for public release, distributionunlimited

FROM:

Distribution limited to U.S. Gov't.agencies only; Test and Evaluation; Jul71. Other requests for this document mustbe referred to Director, Naval ResearchLab., Washington, D.C. 20390. NOFORN.

AUTHORITYNRL ltr, 22 Aug 2002; NRL ltr, 22 Aug 2002

THIS PAGE IS UNCLASSIFIED

UNCLASSIFIED

AD NUMBER

AD517147

CLASSIFICATION CHANGES

TO

confidential

FROM

secret

AUTHORITY

31 Jul 1983, per document marking, DoDD5200.10

THIS PAGE IS UNCLASSIFIED

,NRL M raum Rtri 22..

F-4B and F-8 Flare. EffectivenessAlgainst the ATOLL Missife (AA-2)

(Unclassified Title]

" . TOOiHMAN AND C. LOUOHMILLiR

4irborne Radar BranchRadar Division

"* July 1971ýW 16' D D C

SPECIAL HANDLING REQUIRCI C EP U7NOT RELEASABLE TO FOREIGN NATIONALS

Sy

~~AS~~ThD DD DR 520.1

NAVAL I$ARI LABORATORY

8ECRETNOFORNDowngraded at 12 year intevm :k:,,.'. Not autom& y declmM ....

,b SAW somet UJL oWmcil to* rW emd y 197 1. ObI Daomb Jilt 1 ON TEom

NO, 1.2380

- NOFORN

82CURMT

Thim docuaent cotains intormation affecting the natiovad*Mm ct the Unit Stales within the meanig of the Epi-omp Lawso, Td 13, U.S.C., Sections 793 amd 794. T7Sor revelation of its contents in any nm er to anuidorized person is prohibited by law.

SECRET- NOFORN

! 'ISECRET

Memorandum

Subject: F-4B and F-8 Flare Effectiveness Against the ATOLLS•;- (AA-2) 1•

Background

(S) The ATOLL is the most frequently observed air-to-air missilein Communist controlled countries such as North Vietnam. It is anaccurate copy of the early Sidewinder and data which permit its accuratesimulation are readily available. Previous studies have indicated thelimited effectiveness of aircraft maneuver as a countermeasure. Thisstudy is an extension of an effort to find effective countermeasuresagainst ATOLL.

Findings

(S) Existing infrared flares have substantial ATOLL countermeasurecapability. The primary effectiveness of the flare lies in developinglarge miss distances, although a significant part of its effectivenessis due to early detonation of the warhead by the infrared activatedfuse.

(S) Some areas of ATOLL capability remain despite the use of theflare.

R&D Implications

(S) The flare considered in this study was generally but not in-variably effective. Further study is needed to completely determinethe effectiveness of flares in realistic tactical situations. Since,in most cases, the effectiveness of the flare depended upon the timingof its ejection, enemy aircraft and/or missile detectors Will berequired. Parametric studies of flare luminosity, burn time, luminosity-time variations, ejection direction, ejection velocity, and flare dragvariations could yield design information for significantly moreeffective flares.

Recommended Action

(S) Studies of luminosity time history modification and drag

reduction should be pursued in order to optimize flares within spaceand weight limitations. An investigation of the requirements forattack sensing and flare control should also be initiated,.

Clair M. Loughmiller

Head, Tactical Analysis Section

Afrborne Radar Branch•14IS DOcOMEN1 CUNIAINS INUHMPIIUN A•FELUINU IML MAHIU5

DEFENUE OF THE UNITED STATES WITHIN THE MEANING O THE SECRET

-SPIONAPE LAWS, TITLE Is, U. S. C. NVI' 793 AND 79.

TS TRANSMISSION OR THE RIVQ~AI10t 0 IIS UIJNIENTS INWNY MANNER TO AN UNAUTHORIZED PERSON IS PROHIBITED BY LAW,"

SO.12380

2' 0

*J

SECRET

Table of Contents

(Unclassified) I'

Abstract 1Problem Status iAuthorizationTable of ContentsI. Introduction 1II. Simulation 1

A. General Description 1B. Flare Model 2

1, Aerodynamics 22. Radiant Intensity and Size 2

C. Two Target Seeker Model 31. Introduction 32. Image Size 33. Radial Modulation Efficiency 44. Sector Modulation Efficiency 55. Two-Target Interactions 6

• • .. D. Fume-Warhead Model8

1. Fuze 82. Warhead Blast 9

III. Flare Effectiveness9A. Gensral 9vB. Predetonation Effect 10C. Decoy Effect 11D. Holes 12E. Ejection Direction 13

IV. Conclusions 13V. Recommendations 14

References 15Acknowledgements 16Distribution List 17

it SECRET

LiT LA, , . '' * -* , .*&T -

SECRET

Abstract

(Secret)

The effectiveness of flares as a countermeasure for the ATOLLmissile was investigated for the F-4B and F-8 aircraft. Many differentflare ejection times fir each value of missile launch range, launchaspect angle, target maneuver, and ejection direction were examined bydigital simulation. Although in most cases the flare affectivelycounters the ATOLL, many cases required that the flare, to be effective,had to be ejected within a narrow time interval.

Problem Status

(Unclassified)

This is a final report on flare effectiveness. Work on other,countermeasures in continuing.

Authorization

NRL Problem 53D01-03

A05-5333647/652- 1/53190000

A05- 536-318/652- l/W3312-0O-00

SECRET

SECRET

I. Introduction

(S) This study is part of a larger effort to determine the effec-Livenb vL am!U L'it: "'.m~sor tc th -..- -

missile (AA-2). Two earlier reports (1, 2) deal with the effectivenessof maneuvers by the F-4B and F-8 aircraft as countermeasures to theATOLL. Since maneuver alone was found to be only partly effective,flares were selected as the next most readily available technique todefeat ATOLL.

(S) The introduction of the flare into the overall study requiredseveral additions to the computer simulation used to evaluate ATOLLperformance. Besides addition of the dynamic and luminosity character-istics of the flare, the missile seeker model had to be revised tohandle the second "target" (flare). The passive infrared fuze of theATOLL also required that the simulation include the possibility of theflare actuating the fuze before the missile reached the target. Theseadditions and modifications to the simulation are described below.

11. Simulation

A. General Description

(U) The simulation is a 5-degree-of-freedom force and momentmodel of the ATOLL missile. Beginning with the initial missile/targetkinematics, tracking error and proportional navigational commands arecalculated. The navigational commands are used as inputs to calculatethe response of the torque servo-command system. Canard deflection andthe dynamic conditions of the taissile Are the basis for the calculationof the pitch and yaw torques, and the normal and longitudinal forces.These torques and forces are integrated to determine the missile tra-jectory. This mathematical model is described in detail i•n (1) except

for the wo-tar~t/seeker model which to described later in thisreo.

(U) The ATOLL targets (U.S. aircraft) are modeled more simply.Their maneuver response is simulated by an SO°/sec roll rate and a one-second ramp to change lift. Thrust and drag are calculated to providerealistic slowdo~hcharacteristics. A maximum lift coefficient curveis used to determine maneuver limits. The aerodynamic and infraredcharacteristics of the F-4B and F-8 aircraft used for this study arefound in (1, 2).

(U) The flare is modeled by assigning to it a drag coefficient,an initial position, and -a velocity which art then integrated toprovide its trajectory. The flare radiant intensity is a function ofaltitude, speed, and time after launch. The detailed description ofthe flare follows.

SECRET

ISECRET

B. Flare Model

1. Aerodynamics(U) The flare modeled in this study is intand&A -n ho

similar to the MK 46. However, very early data on the MK 46 were used,so the characteristics may not be a good description of that flare.

(C) Since the conventional flare has no thrust, its onlysignificant aerodynamic characteristic is drag. This drag is quitecomplex, however, because of the asymmetry, lack of stabilization, sizeand mass changes, and the burning process. Since theoretical calcula-tion seemed impracticable, a simple empirical idea was used. Theterminal velocity of the MK 46 at 10,000 ft altitude was observed tobe about 100 ft/sec. Since the gravitational force equals the dragat terminal velocity,

Mg -1/2e Sf2 C D

where m is the mass of the flare, g is the acceleration due to gravity,, is the air density, vf is the speed of the flare, s is the referencearea of the flare, and CD is the drag coefficient of the flare. Aftersubstituting for the observed terminal velocity and transposing, Eq. 1becomes:

D- .2&~. -3.67 ft /slug 2)Vf

Equation 2 is sufficient to describe the trajectory of the flare usingNewton's Laws of Motion. Figure 1 shows some sample results using thisapproach.

(C) Since the simulation keeps track of the position,velocity, and orientation of the target aircraft' and the location of theALE-29 flare dispenser is known, it is possible to calculate the trajectoryof the flare. It is assumed that the flare is ejected at 80 ft/sec.

(C) Two ALE-29's are located on each side of the F4-Bnear the tail as shown in Fig. 2. They eject flares somewhat abovethe horizontal of the aircraft. The ALE-29 on the F-8, shown in Fig.3, ejects the flare downward from the aircraft.

2. Radiant Intensity and Size

(S) The radiant intensity of a flare is a function of itsignition delay, altitude, and speed. As shown in Fig. 4, the simula-tion provides a nominal ignition delay of 100 ms after ejection.

2 SECRET

SECRET

The static radiant intensity of the flare in the ATOLL bandpass isassumed to be 900 watts/str at 10 K ft altitude and 600 watts/str at35 K ft. A linear extrapolation is used for other altitudes.

(C) The effects of speed on flare radiant intensity we'edeveloped in a somewhat arbitrary manner, but have proven Lo be a fairapproximation of reality (3). The equation used is

Radiant intensity w (static radiant intensity 1 - . 1

Radiant intensity as a function.of time and altitude is shown an Fig. 4.

(C) The angular size of a target is an important factor indetermining the tracking signal in the ATOLL seeker. It is second inimportance only to the radiant intensity of the flare. Motion picturesof a burning MK 46 led to the estimate that the effective diameter of

the flare is one foot. The effects of target size upon the seeker areincluded in the following description of the two-target/seeker model.

C. Two-Target Seeker Model

1. Introduction

(U) The ATOLL seeker model explained in (C) was based onmeasured values of seeker tracking rate as a function of trackingerror for a single source, After consideration of the manner in whichthe ATOLL's checkerboard reticle develops tracking information, itbecomes clear this model cannot be extrapolated to multi-target situ-ations, The natural assumption that the seeker will track some centerof radiant intensity is seen to be incorrect from the following obser-vation. When two targets of equal radiant intensity fall into twoadjacent annuli of the reticle, as shown in Fig. 5, they produce nonet signal on the photocell as the reticle spins and therefore notracking signal. The seeker model which follows accounts for suchsituations and also the effects of target size.

2. Image size

(S) The image size of a target on the ATOLL reticle is afunction of the target size, the range, and the tracking error of theseeker. The apparent angular size of the target produces a propor-tionally sized image. However, spherical aberration in the seekerproduces a minimum size image whose size increases as tracking errorincreases. Since the optics collimate at infinity, the image of a targetat a finite range is spread due to focusing off the plane of the reticle.

3 SECRET

SECRET

The formula used for the image size, developed for the Sidewinder IA(AIM-9B) in (4), was simplified by taking the image shape to be circularrather than elliptical. Similarly, the target shape was simplified tobe a circie with the same area as the projected target tailpipe.Generally, a tailpipe appears to be elliptical, but at realistic attackangles off the tail it may be assumed to be circular. The formula forimage size becomes

de 0O.46 f 22 ea, 0.00247 + 0.052E + 7.683Ef + + R - f

I e

where aI is the image radius in inches,E is the tracking error.inradians, r is the object radius in inches, R is the object range ininches and f is the ATOLL focal length in inches.

ie

3. Radial Modulation Efficiency

(U) When an image lies in more than one annulus of thereticle "checkerboard," the energy in one annulus produces a signalwhich cancels some of the signal from an adjacent annulus. Thisfeature was designed to reduce the effect of large objects, such asclouds, by arranging to cancel most of the energy from these largeobjects. Thus, to find the net tracking signal caused by a target,

jthe various cancellations must be calculated. To facilitate compu- '

tations, it is assumed that the image energy is uniformly distributedalong the diameter of the image which, if extended, would go throughthe center of the reticle as shown in Fig. 6.

(C) Looking at Fig. 6, and assuming a uniform distributionof energy along the image diameter, the fraction of the total energywhich produces the net photocell signal may be found by alternatelyadding and subtracting the energy in the segments of the annuli. Thisvalue, when divided by the total diameter, gives F, the radial effi-ciency factor,

15 di•+ , ... -" (-1)n d

n 1F 2 a 3)

where d is the image diameter segment in annulus n. There are 15modulation annuli on the ATOLL reticle. Any part of the image whichfalls off the reticle is ignored in the numerator of Eq. 3 but not inthe denominator. Similarly, any part of the image which lies in thesemicircle of the reticle opposite the image center (i.e., any part of

SECRET

SECRET

the image diameter on the opposite side of the reticle center from theimage center) is also ignored in the numerator but included in thedenominator. Later the sign of the numerator of Eq. 3 (before theabsolute v*alii int-*-at 4o .n,. _=d t .-.- J -ccmlz 1,rL:tCLt!e~e

of 2 targets.

4. Sector Modulation Efficiency

(U) Just as large images spread over more than one annulusand lose tracking effectiveness thereby, so also do they lose effec-tiveness by spreading over more than one sector of the reticle. Lookingat the larger image in Fig. 7A, it is clear that at all times a signi-ficant part of this image is prevented from reaching the photocell. Onthe assumption that the sectors are rectangles, the large target ofFig. 7A produces a peak energy through the reticle of 617. of its totalenergy. In contrast, if the same energy were cencentrated in the small

target of Fig. 7A, 100% of the peak energy would reach the reticle overa substantial part of the reticle chopping cycle. Thus a sector effi-ciency factor, E, is used in the simulation to determine the trackingeffectiveness of each image.

(S) A formula, given in (4) for images which cover up toone sector width in radius (e.g., large image in Fig. 7A), has beenextrapolated to allow for any target size.

Ew(l.O- O.O858R - 0.207R.2 R2where

R R modulo2m2 m

and2a

Rm

where Rm is the diameter of the image in sector widths and h is theangular width of the sectors in radians. A plot of E as a function of

. is given in Fij. 7B. The approximation for is consistent withe other approximations made in the seeker modTe and breaks down only

for large targets near the center of the reticle.

(U) It may benoted that in Eq. 4, E - 0 for Rm - 2,whereas intuitive analysis of the large image Fig. 7A leads to E > 0.Thus Eq. 4 is conservative when Rm is near 2, 4, 6, etc.

SECRET

.. ~!I'. V ' ..~VV¼,, ,,..-.&A. .. C.t~rl~i.~C~C,¶yit

SECRET

5. Two-Target Interactions

seeker will track the center of energy of the targets. This simulation[does so also, but only after the targets' signals have been modified toaccounL for the mutual interference of the target signals in the seekerphotocell. An infrared target in the ATOLL field of view is transformedby the spinning reticle and photocell into an alternating electricalsignal having 6 cycles during half of the reticle spin cycle and intod.c. for the other half of the cycle. In general, when two r- atoretargets are present, the 6 cycle modulations of the targets will over-lap and interfere as shown in Fig. 8. The loss of signal ia the over-lap zone and the duration of the overlap can be calculated to providea basis for assigning effective target center angles as well as effec-tive target amplitudes.

(C) First it is necessary to calculate the extent of theinterference in the overlap zone. The target modulations produced bythe reticle are not necessarily sinusoidal. They more often resemble

square wave (i.e., small and/or distant target). For this reason(and for simplicity), Eq. 5 is based on square waves. The "weight,"

WI, of each target is

Sl El FI)

11 5)I S E F + S2 E2 F2 + N

where N is the noise power and the subscripts refer to the two targets.The weight, WI, in the overlap zone is given by

W I Wl+n n21 n + W1 - nln2W2

where n equals + 1 depending on whether the numerator of F 1 is positiveor negahve, & is the angle of a modulation sector (S uff/12), and therelative phase of the two square waves,

--~~ t<.-'2) mod•[

(C) With W1, , W W AND01 the angular width of the over-

lap zone, 0

1 2the apparent angle shift of each target may be calculated (it is thesame for each target). All 6 cycles of target modulation are not

6 SECRET

-I..

SECRET

equally important (4). In fact, the 7r radians of modulation must beweighted by the sin function from 0 to fl. aiira

9 A "h'-. -IT radians of modulation, including a reduction for interference.Figure 9B shows the tracking effectiveness weighting and Fig. 9C theresultant of Fig. 9A and Fig. 9B. The center of energy in Fig. 9C isthe effective target direction in the tracking system whereas in a non-interfering situation it would be the middle of the modulation, 17/2.The formula for the shift in effective target tracking center,A0 , is:

WI

"sin 1 - - cos o - - 2 )coI, )01 01 ~~ (l W1.+.W PIRR

where IR, the effective energy reduction factor for both targets, isgiven by

W! -11+ cos 0, + (I - cos 01) 7)

Finally, the effective target angle,OAZ , is:

It should be noted that the interference of two targets tends toincrease the angle between the effective target tracking vectors. Thesolid vectors in Fig. 10 represent the effective tracking vector foreach target in the absence of the other target. The dashed and primedvectors represent what happens when mutual interference is taken intoconsideration. In general there is a shift in resultant direction aswell as a reduction in tracking rate (represented by the length of thevectors). Tracking rate calculations are given next. Using the inter-ference reduction ratio, the effective tracking energy for each target" ." is :

Si.iFiIa 9)

The resultant effective seeker tracking in azimuth and elevation is"obtained by:

Sa 1 'R (SI B F s uin l + S2 E2 F2 sin 02 )

and Se I (S F 1 coo, +S E F

Thus, the resultant tracking direction, OR' and the resultant trackingrate, VI, are:

7 SECRET

SECRET

OR arctan 12)so

2 2

aV I +pmax (I (S1 Elpl+ S2E2P2) + N)Y1 IR SI 11,17 ~2T2 2) + N R

13)

where KP (X) is defined in (1).

(U) Many simplifications have been made in developing this

tha ter wllbesustntalerrors agieinttsof time orcertin eomtris, he verge rro shuldbe ow.Further work is

bendeveloped.

D. Fuze -Warhead Model

1. uzo

(5) The ATpLL has a passive infrared fuze. it is a fixed,forward cone, fuze at 76 'from the missile axis with a fixed forwardconie guard, chiannl a,4t 450 from the .missilelaxis. This guard channelp~ro"nt th isl rom f usno on. distant objicts by requiring the,guard ch~ne us to occur no more than 25 me before a fusing channel J

I.pVlc., The si. ualation'calculates the times at which the glare and thetailpioie'p Itoduce guard And fuze channel pulses, and from these times,deteirmiies' whe h warhead will explode. it is assumed that if thef lare or t~i'lpips is close enough -to satisfy the 25 m~llisecond oni-terioh,-it has enough. energy 'to trigger the fuse.

(C) The following technique was used to determine accuratefuzing times. As, the simulation proceeds along the missile trajectory,it tests the position of the flare and the tailpipe with respect to theposition of the missile. When either the flare or the tailpipe passesthrough the fuse'aone, the simulation selects either the time 6orte-sponding to the present position or to the last calculated position,whichever is closer'ini time to the instant at which the flar. or tail-pipe entered the fuse cone. At that point, the orientation of themissile body, the missile velocity and the target velocity are assumedconstant (for fuzing time calculations only). The time until fuzing,tf, is given by the following vector equation.

8 SECRET

SECRET

where VT is the tarlet velocity, V is the missile velocity,1 is themissile body axis, R is the missile-to-target range vector and 8 isthe cone anale. This equation In OUAdraic 4n At-.. hia- rh .t. w4 t•A4h

the smallest absolute value should be selected. V

2. Warhead Blast

(S) No conventional lethality study is done here, but twocriteria of flare success are used. If the warhead fragments haveexpanded more than 25 feet to reach the velocity vector of the target,or if they do not intersect the target path between the tail and the

nose (i.e., pass behind or ahead) of the target, the flare is considereda success.

(S) The warhead ignites 5 me after fuzing. This delay isadded to the time of fuzing. From this point the warhead fragmentsexpand in a ring at 6,050 ft/sec between the 800 and 880 forward coneswith respect to the missile X-axis. This rate of expansion is assumedconstant until the ring intersects the target flight path. The placethe ring intersects the target X-axis is then used to determine whetherthe target yes hit. The expansion distance of the fragments is thedistance from the fragment ring to the current missile position whenthe ring intersects the path of the target. The expansion distance isused to estimate warhead lethality. The detonation of the warhead by 4A flare ejected shortly before missile impact is,& major factor infiaer'efectiveness.

III, Flare Effectiveness

A. General

(U) This effectiveness study is exploratory in nature ratherthan definitive. Only a few situations are examined, some exhaustively,most siperficially. Also, although the assumed flare characteristicswere intended to represent the KR 46 flare, more recent measurementsindicate that the MK 46 has considerably more IR energy output than usedin this model. This study points outcsome of the problems of utilizinga flare against the ATOLL.

(U) This study uses individual simulated missile flights fordata. The results of these flights are summarized in the "data plots"of Figs. 11-44. Each data plot is for a given altitude, missile launchspeed, target speed, missile launch range, and target maneuver. Eachplot is a polar plot in a horizontal plane through the target. Theangle coordinate is the missile aspect angle at launch and the radialcoordinate is missile-to-tarSet range at the time a flare is ejected

9 SECRET

SECRET

or the time before missile launch that the flare is ejected. Thesummary plots in Figs. 45-56 are based on the data plots. The formatof the summary plots is similar to the data plots except the flareelectinn tirmn (cA.. ...a-' in summarized in blocks, and the radialcoordinate is missile launch range.

B. Predetonation Effect

(S) The fuze in the ATOLL can be actuated by flares causingthe warhead to detonate prematurely, thus significantly reducinglethality, even though parts of the missile may still strike its target.The condition for premature detonation is that the missile pass closeto the flare. This can happen in two ways. First, if the flare isejected while the missile is several thousand feet away, the missilemay track the flare instead of the target and come close to the flare.This decoy action will be discussed later. Secondly, if the flare isejected so that its trajectory is through the rather limited zone wherethe ATOLL must make its terminal approach, the missile and flare willcome close together. While current flare dispensers are not designedto do this, they do have significant capability in this area. Theredoes not appear to be a problem in making a flare which radiates enoughenergy to activate a fuze by the time the flare falls behind the target.

(B) To find the potential effectiveness of predetonation ofthe warhead, the question is asked, "How close can we allow the ATOLLto come and still eject a flare which will detonate the warhead behindour aircraft?" The answer is "as close as 100 feet" for some cases.For example, Fig. 46 shows that when a missile is launched at a rangeof 5000 ft and at an aspect angle of 1700, a flare (from the left handejector) ejected when the missile has closed to 100 ft will explode thewarhead behind the aircraft. The same figure shows that if the launchrange is reduced to 3000 ft, the flare should be released when themissile is no closer than 200 ft. This ts not surprising, since theminimum missile range at which a flare is effective is simply thatrange which allows the flare sufficient time to get behind the targetand for the missile to fuze and explode before it gets to the target.This distance is a function of how fast the missile is closing on thetarget - the faster the missile, the longer the distance must be.Since the shortest launch ranges result in the fastest missiles attarget intercept, they also result in the longest ranges for flare pre-detonation effectiveness. Figure 54 illustrates this effect very well.

(S) This phenomenon leads to the following argument: Sincethe maximum missile ranges for flare ejection occur at the minimummissile launch ranges, and since the greatest minimum flare ejectionrange under the conditions in this study is 500 ft (Fig. 53), then ifthe flare is ejected when the missile is at a range of 500 ft,the missile will always be defeated. Unfortunately, this nimple

10 SECRET

I

SECRET

solution does not work. First, Fig. 55 shows that the minimum missilerange for successful flare ejection has increased for increased missileiaunch range to 1100 it (and higher in other cases). Here Lhe MitLc isfar enough from the missile trajectory that the lower missile speedproduces a fuse pulse which occurs too long after the guard pulse tocause fuzing. (Host of these situations occur when the target ismaneuvering.) Secondly, in the case where ATOLL is launched 200 offthe tail and at 600k, ft launch range as shown on Fig. 51, there is only

an instant at a ranle 250 ft when the flare will cause predetonation.In this case, 500 ft is too long a range for flare ejection. No solu-tion to the problem of when to elect the flare for 100%. predetonationeffectiveness has been discovered.

(S) The flare ejection control problem does not seem to haveany simple answer. Even if the 500 ft ejection range worked perfectly,or if any range was considered to be adequately effective, it seemsunlikely that a pilot could see the missile then or accurately gaugeits range if he could. Thus some form of radar sensor would be requiredto detect the missile and measure its range. Such a sensor could ini-tiate the deployment of chaff as well as flares to counter active radaror optically futed missiles as well as the ATOLL.

(C) The detonation of the ATOLL warhead does not immediatelycause the missile to disintegrate. Rather the seeker/control sectionand the motor/tail section often continue intact along the missiletrajectory. Thus, although no warhead fragment may strike the targetwhen the flare predetonates the warhead, one or both of these missilesections may. The probability of significant damage from these piecesseems low and-is ignored in this study.

C. Decoy Effect

(S) The ordinary application of an infrared flare is to decoythe missile from the target to the flare. This study shows that thiscan be done effectively over a wide range of conditions. In this partof the report, in addition to discussing how well the flare performs asa decoy, the requirements for atcuracy in the time of flare ejectionand the requirements on the length of flare burn time are discussed.

(C) The required accuracy for the time of flare ejection isdetermined by the length of the time interval during which a flareejection would effectively counter the ATOLL. This interval of successmay start before missile launch. If a series of flares were ejectedat this interval, ATOLL would be ineffective. This is generally im-practicable, since the aircraft cannot carry the required large numberof flares. For this reason, the study did not consider multiple flares.Therefore the time intervals of success which are determined define themagnitude of the problem, but not a solution.

11 SECRET

..

SECRET

(S) One of the most significant facts about the effectivedecoy time intervals is that they all include the missile launch time.Althnuah tho fnftavilnu mAy uApi, frew. 1. t- i.r A a, Aa4n.%.i4"a ii, #.ikntactical conditions, a flare ejected precisely at missile launch always

did decoy the ATOLL. However, in 2 of the 39 intervals which were cal-culated, if a flare were ejected 0.1 second after missile launch, itwould fail. These cases are shown in Fig. 50, 6000 feet launch range,100 off the tail and Fig. 52, 3000 feet launch range, 100 off the tail.Thus a missile launch detector should prove very effective if used toautomatically eject a flare. If a missile launch detector could ejecta flare within 2 seconds after the ATOLL motor is ignited, the flarewould be successful in 87% of the cases on Figs. 49-52.

(S) The ejection intervals of success vary substantially, butthe principal variation is due to missile launch range. As would bee the longer the missile flight time, the longer the time avail-able fnr successful flare ejection. Generally the intervals are about3 seconds for minimum missile launch ranges, and about 9 seconds formaximum launch ranges. While these intervals are occasionally muchshorter ,than the missile launch range would indicate, a radar sensorthat automatically ejected flares at intervals dependent upon therange to the attacker would be effective if the pilot (or the radar)_Pcan top the flare ejections when the attacker is not in ATOLL launch

•'• •" •";': 'zone."

(9) The required burn time for a flare is important, since the...si of a flare is fixed by available dispensers and burn time istraded off with infrared output. Current flares have adequate infraredoutput in the ATOLL band *n relation to the infrared output of aircraftengines at military power. Two criteria for required flare burn timeare calculated. Oneof these criteria is quite conservative and re-quires the flare to burn until the missile passes it, while the othercriterion only requires that the target be out of the missile's fieldof view. •The data shown in Figs. 49-52 with respect to these two cri-teria, are tle longest times of all the successful flares. Thus ashorter burn time might prove almost as effective. In only 2 of the39 data points did the requirement that the flare burn until the missilepassed the flare exceed the 0.5 a burn of the simulated flare. The lessstringent requirement that the flare burn until the target is out ofthe field of view produces a maximm burn time of 5.7 for all 39 cases.Other less stringent criteria, which might allow a reduction of burntime, seem reasonable and worthy of further investigation.

D. Holes

(S) There are regions along the trajectory of the missile wherea flare is ineffective. These regions interlace with regions where theflare is effective. These "holes" in flare performance are not random,

12 SECRET

SECRET

but may be too complex to calculate in an airborne environment. Theyareatlv enmpliate thA fl~arA Piec4 nn nnntrnl nrnhblm. l•T h•hr athidv inzrequired to determine whether these holes can be eliminated by flare ordispenser modification, predicted by an airborne countermeasures control Idevice, or simply ignored and lumped with the random effects.

E. Election Direction

(S) Th8 F-4B aircraft has 2 ALE-29 flare ejectors which ejectflares about 37 above the horizontal plane of the aircraft on eitherside of the fuselage. A comparison of the effectiveness of these twodispensers, shown in Fig. 50 for a non-maneuvering F-4B, shows a large(3 to 1) loss in effectiveness when the flare is ejected on the oppositeside from that which the ATOLL is approaching. No trend is apparent inthe maneuvering F-4B data shown in Fig. 52 where the flares are ejectedeither up or inside the turn due to the 700 bank angle required for a

K 3-g turn. Either direction appears about as effective as ejectiontoward the missile in the non-maneuvering case.

(S) The data in Figs. 47 and 51 for the F-8 aircraft, wherethe flare is ejected downward from the aircraft, indicate no signifi-cant differences in flare effectiveness due to maneuver. Neither isthere a significant difference between the F-4B and the F-8 in overall"flare effectiveness.

IV. Conclusions

(1)(S) Currently available infrared flares (MK 46) provide theF-4B and F-8 aircraft with substantial protection against the ATOLLwhen they are operating without afterburner.

(2)(S) An automatic missile launch detector coupled to a flareejection control is needed to fully titilize the capability of the flare.

(3)(S) Flare effectiveness is complex and difficult to predictwith simple models.

(4)(S) The direction of flare ejection is a significant factor inflare effectiveness.

13 SECRET

SECRET

V. Recoinendatione

(1)(S) Since infrared flares are an effective countermeasure tofl~%MiL, LAIWUS4Up44*Jt U

(2)(S) The potential of infrared flares as countermeasure to 1ATOLL should be further investigated.

(3)(U) The requirements for a rear-looking sensor for aircraftand missile detection and for automatic countermeasures control shouldbe investigated.

especially those with potential effectiveness against a minimum range

missile launch.

14 SECRET

SECRET

References

(Titles Unclassified) 11(1) H. Toothman, C. Luughmiller, and R. Lister, "The Effect of F-4B

Maneuvers on ATOLL (AA-2) Performance," NRL Memorandum Report 1989,

Secret-Noforn, Feb. 1969.

(2) H. Toothman and C. Loughmiller, "The Effect of F-8 Maneuvers onATOLL (AA-2) Performance," NRL Memorandum Report 2170,Secret-Noforn.

(3) E. Ralsen, "Effects of Wind and Altitude on the Behavior of Infra-red Decoy Flares," Proceedings of the Sixth Symposium on InfraredCountermeasures, Volume 2, Secret-Noforn, April 1967.

(4) W. C. Fittgerald and R. E. Lawrence, "Sidewinder Optical Systems,"NAVWEPS Report 8524, Secret, March 1965.

15 SECRET

I I I "

MW.

m

SECRET *A •t.,,. .,•..1l =A aa, naa-

t (Unclassified)

The authors acknowledge the following people for their help ingetting the work done. The authors assume full responsibility for theaccuracy of this report.

Westinghouue Aerospace DivisionArthur Harvey for the realization of the model in computer languageHoward Noble for the reduction of the dataElmen Quesinberry for the work in modeling the flare and seeker

NWCCLGeorge Handler for supplying flare information

N"LJacquiline Imes and Richard Lister for preparing the figures

1E

!I

16 SECRET

........................................

SECRET

it Distribution List

(unc lassifteci)

CNO OP-506G 1OP-724D 1OP-72402 1OP-07T 1

NAVAIRSYSCOM AIR-53365C 5AIR-5363 IAIR-360C IAIR-5333CE IAIR-53221 1AIR-53631F 1

CNM PM-73 10323A 1

NWC-CL G. Handler IK. Powers 1W. Younkin 1

NMC 5230 15311 1

NRL 5117 1

NAD, Crane 1000 1NOt,-WO E. Dayhoff 1

R. Hebbert .

Airtronics/SWL G. Morn 1

Westinghouse Aerospace Division E. C. Quesinberry 1Friendship AirportBaltimore, Md.

Defense Documentation Center 2Attn TIPDR

17 SECRET

SECRET

ji'

00 0 I

o oo

00o 00 I

IIii It i

SE CR ET18

S. . .¥ ,

CONFIDENTIAL

t14

4A

0

19 CONFIDENTIAL

F IICONFIDENTrAL

I

0

I-, I I

".4

20 CONFIDENTIAL

SCONFIDENTIAL

SII..C I

I I®

\. \

I N I

\\ ,

(A j~lll/lIl ! -I l~

I 1CNIETA

• 'i; :i • • .•, • " , -• ' • • •' '• •' ' '• •' '• ' •' " • .. .. .. .' ... . . ".. . .. ' ... . . .. .. ".. .. ..."' • " • •" " • " "• • " • • ': " ' " " " " :• " " ' ' ' " • • ' • • " • " ' ' • " • ' ," • : " '" :"I ',

I,, .,:

• ii ii ii ii ii~ ~ ~ ~~~~~* ii i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i

- 0

CONFIDENTIAL

PIA~. 5 -TWO TARGETS WITH NO TRACKING (U)

22 CONFIDENTIAL

UNCLASSIFIED

IMAGE

DIAMETER

FIG. 6 -RADIAL EFFICIENCY DIAGRAM (U)

23 UNCLASSIFIED

iI

UNCLASSIFIED

A. RET ICLE AND TARGET PICTURE

ioo

0 1 2 3 4TARGET IMAGE RADIUS WIDTH OF SECTOR

B. SECTOR EFFICIENCY FACTOR VS. IMAGE SIZE

FIG. 7 - RETICLE MODULATION EFFICIENCY MODEL (U)

24 UNCLASSIFIED

.,,,."A

UNCLASSIFIED

* TARGET 1

A. TARGET 1 SIGNAL

TARGET 2ICENTER

v v 2w

B. TARGET 2 SIGNAL

C. RESU.LTANT SIGNAL

FIG. 8 -TARGET INTERFERENCE IN THE PHOTOCELL (U)

25 UNC~LASSIFIED

UNCLASSIFIED

II0 7/2

B. 'WEIGHTING FUNCTION FOR TRACKING EFFECTIVENESS

0 T/2

C. RESULTING SHIFT OF CENTER OF TRACKING, 40

FIG. 8 CENTER OF ENERGY SHIFT (U)

26 UNCLASSIFIED

SECRET

T2I

000 .40 Ti

.1'

RIT ICE CENTER

FIG. 10 -VECTORS REPRESENT T1ýACKING RATES (U)

27 SECRET

SECRET

ALTITUDE - 5,000 FTSPREDETONATION SUCCESS lAUNCH RANGE - 3,000 FT

0 FLARE FAILURE LAUNCH SPEED - M 0.9TARGET SPEED - M 0.9NO MANEUVER

RELEASE RANGE (FT x 103)3 2 1 0

180

170 0

160••

130 120 110 100 90°

FIG. 11 - FLARE STUCCESS VERSUS FLARE EJECTION TIME (S)

28 SECRET

I

SECRET

)( DECOY SUCCESS F-8ALTITUDE 5,000 FTA PREDETONATION SUCCESS LAUNCH RANGE - 5,000 FT

0 FLARE FAILURE LAUNCH SPEED - M 0.9TARGET SPEED = M 0.9NO MANEUVER

RELEASE RANGE (FT x 303)3 2. 0

S150 ;

140 __

130° i20° 110 100° 90 0

FIG. 12 - FLARE SUCCESS VERSUS FLARE EJECTION TIME (S)

29 SECR ET

•.',.

SECRET

•i xDE.COY SUCCESS F-8ALTITUDE 5,000 FT

t• PREDETONATION SUCCESS LAUNCH RANGE - 3,000 TIFLAUNCH SPEED - M 0.9

0 O FLARE FAILURE TARGET SPEED - M 0.93g TURN

RELEASE RANGE (FT 10 ),.. ,3 2 1 o0,

180

170°0

.160

130 120 110 100 90

FIG. 13 FLARE SUCCESS VERSUS FLARE EJECTION TIME (S)

30 SECRET

I "

1* •:• ,• . 4 '•. 1.... . . . . ..

SECRET

F-8S)< ~~DECOY SUCCESS F8,ALTITUDE - 5,000 FT

A PREDETONATION SUCCESS LAUNCH RANGE - 5,000 FTLAUNCH SPEED - M 0.9TARGET SPEED - M 0.93g TURN

RELEASE RANGE (FT x 10 r

3 2 10

IS170 L

IS

030 120

,130 12o 110 100 90


L 31 SFCRET

SECRET

F-8'•i )<DECOY SUCCESSF- :)DEYSCSALTITUDE - 15,000 FTA PREDETONATION SUCCESS LAUNCH RANGE - 3,000 FT


TIME BEFORE LAUNCH (SECs RELEASE RANGE (FT x 10

1800

so 1700

160 0

140 130 1200 110' 100' 90°


32 SECRET

SECRET

X DCOYSUCESSALTITLDE -15,000 FTSPREDETONATION SUCCESS LAUNCH RANGE - 6,000 IT

0 FLARE FAILURE LAUNCH SPEED -M 1.2TARGET SPEED -M 0.9NO MANEUVER

TIME BEFORE LAUNCH (SEC.J RELEASE RANGE (FT x 103)4 3 2 1 6420

16000-

1500

150140 0 130 0 120 01.10 0100 0900

FIG. 16 -FLARE SUCCESS VERSUS FLARE EJECTION TIME (S)

33 SECRET

I SECRET'~P.DETOY AI SUCCESS ALTITUDE -15,000 FT

PREDTONTIONSUCESSLAUNCH RANGE -7,000 FT


TIME BEFORE j3LAUNCH (SEC .) RELEASE RANGE (FT x 103)

183 2 1 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 le

170

1600

150 1400 130 0 120 0 110 0 100 0 90 0


34 SECRET

SECRET

ALTITUDE - 15,000 FTA PREDETONATION SUCCESS LAUNCH RANGE - 8,000 FT

0 FLARE FAILURE LAUNCH SPEED - M 1. 2TARGET SPEED - M 0.9NO MANEUVERI.

TIME BEFORE LAUNCH (SEC.) RELEASE RANGE (FT x 10 34 3 2 1 3 2 0

1804 ,-O --X--X->X--•, -X

170

* 160 I'

130 120 110 100 90


SECRET

SECRET

X DECOY SUCCESS C1-0 ALTITUDE 15,000 FT& PREDETONATION SUCCESS LAUNCH RANGE - 3,000 FT0 FLARE FAILURE LAUNCH SPEED - M 1.2

TARGET SPEED - M 0.93g TURN

TIME BEFORE LAUNiCH (SEC) RELEASE RANGE (Fr x10314 3 2 1 3 2 10

13 12-010 10 9

170"

160°

150•/ /

140¢ . _

130° 120°0 110° 0i00°0 90°0


36 SECRET

SECRET

X DECOY SUCCESS F-8SPREDETONATION SUCCESS ALTITUDE 15,oo FT0 LR FIUELAUNCH RANGE -• 6,000 FT •SFLARE FAILURE LAUNCH SPEED - 14 1.2TARGET SPEED M 0.9Sg TURtN

TIl4E BEFORE LAU2C! RELEASE RANGE (FT x 103)4 3 1 6 5 4 3 2180X

1 7 0 0 ""

0I• \ '160

* 140

1300 120 1 o0 0 CO0


! 37

SSECRET

SECRET

X DECOY SUCCESS F-8ALTITUDE " 15,000 FT

A• PREDETONATION SUCCESS LAUNCH RANGE - 8,000 FT

0 FLARE FAILURE LAUNCH SPEED - M 1.2TARGET SPEED - M 0.93g TURN

a3TIME BEFORE LAUNCH (SEC.) I RELEASE RANGE (FT x 103)

3 2 1 a 4 2

170

150

140° 130 120 110 100 90 go0


'Il

38 SECRET "A

"""

SECRET

XDECOY SUCCESS F-Si. XDECO SUCESSALTITUDE "=30,000 FT

PREDETONATION SUCCESS LAUNCH RANGE - 4,000 Fl

0 FLARE FAILURE LAUNCH SPEED - M 1.2TARGET SPEED M 0.9NO MANEUVER

3RELEASE RANGE (FT x 10)3 2 1 0

1800 . --

170

1501o 0

150° 10• •

130 120 110 100 go,

FIG. 22 -FLARE SUCCESS VERSUS FLARE EJECTION TIMEF (8)

SECRET

SECRET

t -o

A rEcol Sucub ALTITUDE - 30,000 Pr". PREDETONATION SUCCESS LAUNCH RANGE - 8,000 lT

O FLARE FAILURE LAUNCH SPEED - M 1.2TARGET SPEED - M 0.9NO MANEUVER "

RELEASE RANGE (YT x 103)3 2 0

S170

160°0

j/130 120 110 100 90


40 SECRET

L

SECRET

suCESF-8

" ALTITUDE 30,000 rr

LAUNCH RANGE- - 12,000 FT6• PREDETONATION SUCCESS LAUNCH ANEE - 1.2,00Y

LAUNCH SPEED - 1.2 0

0 FLARE FAILURE TARGET SPEED - K 0.9

NO MANEUVER

3

RELEASE RANGE (FT x 103)

±0 0

170 0

,,. ' 160°

130 1 00 90g

FIG. 24 - FLARE SUCCESS VERSUS FLARr EJECTION TIME (S)

41 SECRET 3iL..

SECRET

Y,/-F- S

)(! DECOY SUCChSSS -ALTITUDE - 30,000 FT ,

S.... PREDETONATION SUCCESS LAUNCH RANGE - 4,000 FT0•) FLARE FAILURE LAUNCH SPEED - M 1.2

TARGET SPEED = M 0.9"3g TURN

RELEASE RANGE (FT x 10 3

180

0I:' 170° 0

16u~ 0•

0 I

130° 1200 110° 10Q° 900


42 SECRET

L-

* SECRET

>PECOI. SUCCESS ALTITUDE - 30,000 FT

A PREDETONATION SUCCESS LAUNCH RANGE- 8,000 FTLAUNCH SPEED : M 1.2

0 FLARE FAILURE TARGET SPEED - M 0.93g TURN

3RELEASE RANGE (FT x 10 )

" ~~180°0

:!,• ~170°0 i

IS160'

140

130 1200 110 100o 90°


43 SECRET

SECR~ET

DECO SUCES F-ALTITUDE m30,000 FT~,~PREDETONATION SUCCESS LAUPCH RANGE - 12,000 rr

0 FLARE FAILURELANH PD K1.TARGET SPEED -M 0.93g TURN A

3[RELEASE RANGE (FT 10)

140 0_

130 0 120 0 110 0 100 9000


44 SECRET

If! SECRET

SECETRELEASE RANGE (FT x 1)

0 3 2

IS170

15,0 ISO1400 130 120 110 100 90

RIGHT FLAREF-413

) DECOY SUCCESS ALTITUDE " 5,000 FTPREDETONATION SUCCESS LAUNCH RANGE - 3,000 FT

LAUNCH SPEED - M 0.90 FLARE FAILURE TARGET SPEED - M 0.9

NO MANEUVER

RELEASE RANGE (FT x 103)1800 3 2 1 0

170

1600

150' 0 .. 0 0 01400 130 120 110 100 90

LEFT FLARE

FIG. 28 - FLARE SUCCESS VERSUS FLARE EJECTION TIME (s)

45 SECRET

"7 1

SECRET


1800

170 .

04

150 0°

RIGHT FLARE

F-4B)( DECOY SUCCESS ALTITUDE " 5,000 FT

DTSLAUNCH RANGE - 5,000 FTS , PREDETONATION SUCCESS LUC PE .LAUNCH SPEED " U 0.9FLARE FAILURE TARGET SPEED - M 0.9

NO MANEUVER

3!RELEASE RANGE (FT x 103)

3 2 1

180

1700 .160

*i

140 130 120 110 100 90O

TEFT FLARE

FIG.29 - FLARE SUCCESS VERSUS FLARE EJECTION TIME (S)

46 SECRET

S ESSECRET RELEASE RANGE (FT x 103)j•3 2 10

100

IYI

1600

150140 130 120 110 110 90

RIGHT FLARE

F-4BX DECOY SUCCESS ALTITUDE 5,000 FT

LAUNCH RANGE - 3,000 FTZ PREDETONATION SUCCESS LAUNCH SPEED - X 0.90 FLARE FAILURE TARGET SPEED - X 0.9

3g TURN


3 2 1 0

1700

160

150 ,_ _140 130 120 110 100° 900

LEFT FLARE


47 SECRET

SECRETRELEASE RANGE (FT x 103)3 2 0 '

1800 2

170

1500140 130' 120 110 100 90

RIGHT FLAREF-4B

X, DECOY SUCCESS ALTITUDE - 5,000 FTD LAUNCH RANGE - 5,000 FTbd 4PREDETONATION SUCCESS LAUNCH SPEED - M 0. 9


RELEASE RANGE (FT x10•3 2 10180 0 *

160o•/ °

150 .. /140 1300 12010o16-0

LEFT FLARE

.•FIG. 31 FLARE SUCCESS VERSUS FLARE EJECTION TIME (s)S48 SECRET

SECRETITIME BEFORE LAUNCH (SEC.)l RLAEANE(TX134 3 2 1 2 1 0

iso 0 P t~~1704

:, ~160'

1500 .40 130 120 110 100° 90°

RIGHT FLARE

DECOY SUCCESS F-40

ALTITUDE - 15,000 FT

A PREDETONATION SUCCESS LAUNCH RANGE - 3#000 FT

O FLARE FAILURE LAUNCH SPEED - M 1.2TARGET SPEED - M 0.9NO MANEUVER

TIME BEFORE LAUNCH (SEC.)I RELEASE RANGE (FT x l0o)4 3 2 1 3 2 1 0

1700

1600

1500 0140 130 YOO 1100 100 90

LEFT FLARE


49 SECRET

S~I

SECRET3TIME BEFORE LAUNCH (SEC.) RELEASE RANGE (FT 10

4 3 2 1 4 2 0100 KS |TIA I __L----- •-r•. /09--

170

160

150 0 0 0140 130° 120° 110 100 900

RIGHT FLARE

SDECOY SUCCESS F-4BALTITUDE -15,000 FT "6 PREDETONATION SUCCESS LAUNCH RANGE - 6,000 FT

0 FLARE FAILURE LAUNC SPEED - M.1.2TARGET SPEED - M 0.9NO MANEUVER

TIME BEFORE LAUNCH (SEC.)/ RELEASE RANGE (FT x 30)

4 3 2 1 6 4 2 01800

170

1600

1400 1300 1200 11 00 0

LEFT FLARE


50 SECRET

SECRETTIME BEFORE R

LAUNCH (SEC. RELEASE RANGE (FT x 103 2 1 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

1500

1400 130 1200 1100 1000 900

RIGHT FLARE i=•. > DECY SUCESSF-lB

>( DCOYSUCESSALTITUDE 15,000 FTtA PREDETONATION SUCCESS LAUNCH RANGE 7, •000 FT0 FLARE FAILURE LAUNCH SPEED = Id 1.2

TARGET SPEED '' I 0,9NO MANEUVER

3

LUcTIME (ScBEFORE) RELEASE RANGE (FT x 10 )

180

17001600 0

0

0

1500

140 130 120 110 100 90LEFT FLARE

FIG, 34 - FLARE SUCCESSVERSUS FLARE EJECLTIONDIME 15,(0)0

TIME BSFCRETREES RANG (F 10

LAUNCHq (SC.

F It

SECRETTIME BEFORE LAUNCH . RELEASE RANGE (Fr x 103)

4 3 2 1 1 6 4 2180o X-X-x-x-

170

160

1500 1400 1300 1200 1100 1000 90°

RIGHT FLAREDECOY SUCCESS F-4B 4

ALTITUDE " 15,000 FT

A PREDETONATION SUCCESS LAUNCH RANGE - 8,000 FT0FLARE FAILURE LAUNCH SPEED - M 1.20

TARGET SPEED - M 0.9NO MANEUVER

TIME BEFORE I 13LAUNCH (SEC.) RELEASE RANGE (FT x 103)

2 1 8 6 4 2 0

Lou -

170

1500 1400 1300 1200 1100 1000 900

LEFT FLARE

FIG. 35 FLARE SUCCESS VERSUS FLARE EJECTION TIME (S) I52 SECRET

, . + ,, , ., . + , ,, . :(, -

SECRET

TINE BEFORE LAUNCH (SI2.) RELLA• ILAWi M 1034 3 2 1 3 2 1 0

I I;. 170¢

1v160° 0

150' 0 -1400 1300 1200 1100 1000 900

RIGHT FLARE

F-4BX DECOY SUCCESS ALTITUDE - 15,000 FT'A PREDETONATION SUCCESS LAUNCH RANGE - 3,000 FTl

LAUNCH SPEED - M 1.20 FLARE FAILURE TARGET SPEED - M 0.9

3g TURN

TIME BEFORE LAUNCH (SEC.) RELEASE RANGE (FT x 1034 3 2 1 2 1 0

1800 --x-- ,,--.-- A--

170

160

1500 140 130 10

LEFT FLARE


53 SECRET

TIME BEFORE LAUNCH (SEC.) I RELEASE RANGE (FT x 103)

4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2

1700 -00

160

1500 1400 1300 1200 1100 000 9 0

RIGHT FLAR3

F-4B( DECOY SUCCESS ALTITUDE - 15,000 FTA PREDETONATION SUCCESS LAUNCH RANGE - 6,000 PT

R ALAUNCH SPEED - M 1.20 FLARE FAILURE TARGET SPEED - M 0.9

3g TURN

3TIME BEFORE LAUNCH (SEC.) RELEASE RANGE (FT x 103)

4 3 2 1 40 1 2 1 018 0° -- /'' "' "

LEFT! FLAREt

FIG. 37 - FLARE SUCCESS VERSUS FLARE EJECTION TXME (S)

oS•CIT

Lit.

SECRET

TIME BEFOSI LAUNCH (55C.1 RLZASE RANGE (FT x 103)4 3 2 1 a 6 4 2 0

r1170

160

1500 140° 130' 120 110 100° 900

RIGHT FLAREF-4B

) DECOY SUCCESS ALTITUDE - 15,000 FTLAUNCH RANGE - 8,000 FTSPREDETONATION SUCCESS LAUNCH SPEED - M 1.2


TIME BEFORE LAUNCH (SEC.) RELEASE RANGE (FT x 10230 4 3 2 1 64

170 0

160

1500 1400 130 1200 110 1 00° 900

LEFT FLARE


55 SECRET

RELEASE RANGE (FT x10 3)

3 2 1 0180[

17001

1600

150~140° 130 120 110 100 90

RIGHT FLARE

)( DECOY SUCCESS F-4BA PREDETONATION SUCCESS ALTITUDE 30,000 FTW

LAUNCH RANGE - 4,000 FT0 FLARE FAILURE LAUNCH SPEED - M 1.2


3RELEASE RANGE (FT x 103)3 2 1 0

1800

1700

160/

1500 1400 1300 120 -110 10 900

LEFT FLARE


56 SECRET

SECRET

RELEASE RANGE (FT , 103)

1800

~16

50'140 130 120 110 100 90

RIGHT FLARE

>< DECOY SUCCESS F-4BA PREDETONATION SUCCESS ALTITUDE - 30,000 Fr

LAUNCH RANGE - 8,000 )'T0 FLARE FAILURE LAUNCH SPEED - M 1.2


RELEASE RANGE (FT x10)3 2 10

1700

160

1501.40 130 120 ]10 100 ° 40

LEFT FLARE

FIG. 40 - FLARE SUCCESS VERSUS FLARE EJECTION T);ME (S)

57 SECRET

I.t

. RELEASE RANGE (FT x 03

3 2 0

180

05o 0 .

140 130 120 110 1000 900

RIGHT FLARE

F-4B

DECOY SUCCESS ALTITUDE = 30,000 FT

A PREDETONATION SUCCESS LAUNCH RANGE - 12,000 FT

o FLARE FAILURE TARGET SPEED - M 0.9

NO MANEUVER

RELEASE RANJAE (FT x 103)312 1 2180°'•

170

160•

1500140 130 120 110 100 90

LEFT FLARE


58 SECRET

SECRET RELEASE RANGE (FT x 1x3)

3 2 1 )

'80\

1700

160°

140 130 120 110 100 900

RIGHT FLARE

F-4BDECOY SUCCESS ALTITUDE 30,000 FT

SPREDETONATION SUCCESS LAUNCH RANGE - 4,000 FT !LAUNCH SPEED - M 1.2 .,O FLARE FAILURE TARGET SPEED -M 0.9 •

RELEASE RANGE (FT 103)

3 2 10

0

1700

160

0-150 1400 130 120 110 1 100° 900

LEFT FLARE


59 SECRET

SECRETRELEASE RANGE (FT x 103)

3 2 1 0180] -•A

170 0

f0160 :

150'_ _ ,140 1300 12010 100 900

RIGHT FLARE

DECOY SUCCESS F-4BALTITUDE = 30,000 FTSPREDETONATION SUCCESS LAUNCH RANGE -8,000 FT :

O FLARE FAILURE LAUNCH SPEED - M 1.2TARGET SPEED - M 0.93g TURN

RELEASE RANGE (FT x 10 33 2 1 ý

180 1!S 1700

160

15001400 1300 120° 1100 1000 900

LEFT FLARE


60 SECRET

SECRET 3RELEASE RANGE (FT x 103)

3 2 1 0

170

160C:•

150 1400 1300 1200 1100 1000 900

RIGHT FLARE

F-4B) DECOY SUCCESS ALTITUDE - 30,000 FTA PREDETONATION SUCCESS LAUNCH RANGE - 12,000 FT

LAUNCH SPEED - M 1.20 FLARE FAILURE TARGET SPEED = M 0.9

3g TURNI. 3RELEASE RANGE (FT x 103)

S3 2 1 0

180 .

170 0

160 • )

150 140 130° 120 1100 1000 900

LEFT FLARE


61 SECRET

SECRET

4 (L

&> W

.1LOL U. 4

u--

Ln <

A <

w w w JJ I-- d t

Li

ILb>

0 * Cob 0d1~ ~ 6 SECRE

SECRET0

Cc mI L3/ (

j WA

ww

Ix w

6! SECRET

II I L4

SECRET 0

J0 <(Az

L! WI <N U.

W' wWf

0 w 0

I- 0

-j LU

zLd

LLILU

LL

v 0

0 m

64

SECRET0

0: U

uI W zI

0Jw

w V)

J zww w r w

Li~

Lii

Ac w

(r

SECRET

65

.... . ......- , .......-.. . ...

SECRETIww

Uoj a~J W i-in cc ILfVu.c

V2 w )

or , 40 -

o- a w w-c

LI)

43hi W) v 'n L

6'~ic -d uto Ujw C 00

46 , 6 6

fq +00 (4

S LiL

w in

i6SSEa d

SECRET 0

0, a* v - 1 -19 3 d j

,c.:wwt La

I% r O wj ýr't0-K

J : I J M M0

67 M alJe

SECRET

(n w n

Wi 4 j- 4 I-jlw Ww j

uld ~ Wi Li (

Wini W CL

ULLL

4W 2 w , =U W-)0w 02 iu. a-2 ~Wi C

wI-i 2. w..i0

42 z ý. i 1- 0

IaJ 0 H41 '

*00Ii *Oc 0

Ld

LL

0- IniIt

SECRET 'z WX

0 WW M <

ww j LU Uj 19 wU. x w

Oba

F0 - to

-IWU WAI toC#-~ u wO lrx t uu.

<~Fq'f ItIfq.~ /

LL~- (a~ U U

*w WW2MU uOJ* 9o~ 0

_ _ _ _ _ _3 1*

wto SO x we-Ow3 q

69 SECRET c V

CY~ ~ ~ ?n*.n

A.1--~ -1111

SECRET0

ZU

w

LL I W

quw w w

<J <

-J V

if)

z

Lii

i uiLiii

IDr

LL

700

-~ - >1 1. -*Ito

I, ~SECRET0

w~ w 0

LL.*e~ $I W w

W -

>z I- A

Ix V)

w Ld

w w-i wI>I71u

I -SECRET

ZUnAJ W 0

UUl

,I--. 4 *

mi z

..

cpoW~ (A~ w

Iz -j -JL

w*-

-!~

zi

I,' wzw

w

(D

0 K)

000

CD72 SECRET

SERESECRET(Page 74 is Blank)

0

IL wIL0 W

WUWJ

wi -W w w1k z

C9

ww

(U. Jw ILI w

CY w

o, 0 ' 010 SCRE

w In

SECRET-NOFORNSecurity Classification

jDOCUMENT CONTROL DATA -R& D

rS"cutil, Cldassification of fill.f, body of abstract and Indoxind annotatlion mniu. be entered who" the overall report i. classified.)

1. ORIGNA INGACTIVITY eCOrporstea uthor)12.RP TSEUIYC A F AIO

Naa R~esearch Laboratory Ca. RErSECURIT

a. REPORT OTITE Y.TTLNO AE b O PR

Ca, B COTANT OR 8 FLARE EFECIE.S CAGAINSTORTHERATORT UMEISSIE) A2 U

A~E Pioble Dýton1n- hseo03oniun polmS. PRJET NO.II (First4/521/3900 name Memdande Reportl 2297nme

6-S, TE REPORT DATEa74. TOTALother numACer. OF* may eease

DsrbtoliietoU. oenetgeceonytetadeauto;July 1971.s

On. SUPLONTRACORYGAN NOT On. PORGNSTORNG MEPLITAR ATBIERIT

reesal toJET A0-oreign 5-13900 natonls Deprmernt u oftepr Na9y~a, AAaTRACT WashinstonW3D.C. 2036

The efeciens ofHE REares ass a coutemeaur forer thet ATOL missilegwas

Direcibtion weeixmined by digita siermulatin Althiesoughyi most cases tevfluareon effe197-Otively coqunstsefrs thes AToLLmany castes required tha the flaretor beva efetierchadt

beleasbeted worighna narrwtimels interval.f heav

DD, ABSTRAC7T (PAES)E5CREETNT)

i/nvestigatedS0 fo hSBadF8arrft aydfeetfaeeectiony Cltiflestfor

ea..........................h vau of misl lanhrne.anhapc nleagtmnueadeeto

r SECRET-NOFORN

Security qlss tic.to

KEYW0040 LINK A LINK Is LINK C

ROLlE WT ROLE[ WT ROLE[ WT

Flare effectiveness

Countermeasures

ATOLL missile AA-2

F -4B and F-8 aircraft

DDI ,'.1473 (BACKV 76 S-CRT-NOFORN(PAGE, 2 ) Security Classlfication

Naval Research LaboratoryTechnical Library

Research Reports Section

DATE: August 22, 2002

FROM: Mary Templeman, Code 5227

TO: Code 5300 Paul Hughes

CC: Tina Smallwood, Code 1221.1/, e/tSUBJ: Review of NRL Reports

Dear Sir/Madam:z

Please review NRL Memo Reports 2139,2150,2170,2297,2360,2425,2426 and 2429 for:

~Possible Distribution Statement

Possible Change in Classification

T nk you,

Ck,,

Mary Temple n(202)767-3425marytý[email protected]. navy.mi I

The subect report can oe:

SChanged to Distribution A (Unlimited)

Changed to Classification

EL Other:

Sig9nature Date

§ Si natur

Page: 1 Document Name: untitled

-- 1 OF 1-- 1 - AD NUMBER: 517147-- 2- FIELDS AND GROUPS: 1/3.3, 17/4.4,19/1.1-- 3- ENTRY CLASSIFICATION: UNCLASSIFIED-- 5- CORPORATE AUTHOR: NAVAL RESEARCH LAB WASHINGTON D C-- 6 - UNCLASSIFIED TITLE: F-4B AND F-8 FLARE EFFECTIVENESS AGAINST-- THE ATOLL MISSILE (AA-2).-- 8- TITLE CLASSIFICATION: UNCLASSIFIED-- 9 - DESCRIPTIVE NOTE: FINAL REPT.,--10 - PERSONAL AUTHORS: TOOTHMAN,HAROLD ;LOUGHMILLER,CLAIR M.;--11 - RPORT DATE: JUL 1971--12- PAGINATION: 80P MEDIA COST: $ 7.00 PRICE CODE: AA--14- REPORT NUMBER: NRL-MR-2297--16- PROJECT NUMBER: A05-536-318/652-1/W3312-00-00, NRL-53D01-03--20- REPORT CLASSIFICATION: CONFIDENTIAL--22 - LIMITATIONS (ALPHA): DISTRIBUTION LIMITED TO U.S. GOV'T.-- AGENCIES ONLY; TEST AND EVALUATION; JUL 71. OTHER REQUESTS FOR THIS-- DOCUMENT MUST BE REFERRED TO DIRECTOR, NAVAL RESEARCH LAB.,-- WASHINGTON, D. C. 20390.--23 - DESCRIPTORS: (*AIRCRAFT FLARES, AIR TO AIR MISSILES),-- EFFECTIVENESS, SIMULATION--24- DESCRIPTOR CLASSIFICATION: UNCLASSIFIED--29 - INITIAL INVENTORY: 2

--32 - REGRADE CATEGORY: C--33- LIMITATION CODES: 3--34- SOURCE SERIES: F--35- SOURCE CODE: 251950--36- ITEM LOCATION: DTIC--38- DECLASSIFICATION DATE: OADR--40- GEOPOLITICAL CODE: 1100--41 - TYPE CODE: N--43 - IAC DOCUMENT TYPE:--49 - AUTHORITY FOR CHANGE: S TO C GP-3

APPROVED FOR PUBLICRELEASE - DISTRIBUTION

UNLIMITED

Date: 9/4/03 Time: 9:20:11AM

AD NUMBER CLASSIFICATION CHANGESof the pitch and yaw torques, and the normal and longitudinal...

Documents

Transcript of AD NUMBER CLASSIFICATION CHANGESof the pitch and yaw torques, and the normal and longitudinal...