3AF - 6th International Conference on Missile defence
Feb. 20101
Lethality Assessment ProcessLethality Assessment ProcessByBy
Elie Levy Col. (Res.)Elie Levy Col. (Res.)President of Linkcom-TelecomPresident of Linkcom-Telecom
May 2010 - IsraelMay 2010 - Israel
unclassified
Unclassified
Lethality Assessment Process
The Problem! Validating and assessing the SSPk of an
interceptor, with high confidence level, against the various known and predicted TBM threats, for various payload types and appropriate trajectories
Backing on Flight test solution only requires a very large number of tests (3-4 digits) – unacceptable from cost and schedule aspects
Solution – wait for the presentation
Unclassified Lethality Assessment Process
Presentation topics
Objectives Definitions and typing Design Phase Arena tests Simulations (Hydro code, CFD, G&C) Hypervelocity tests (Gun, Sled) Flight Tests Kill Assessment Summary and Conclusion
Feb 20103
Feb. 2010
Unclassified Killing the CW Threat - Definitions
Capability of decreasing the threat damage to defended targets is achieved by the Lethality characteristic of the interceptor WH = PK/h. (probability of kill given hit)
The capability of evaluating the residual Lethality of the intercepted threat is the Kill Assessment characteristic of the BMDS.
The Ability to Assess the threat and its payload resides in the typing assessment capability of the BMDS In Near real time
Final Typing is done via collected residuals’ analysis
Unclassified Lethality Assessment Process
Design phase
Threat definition with “sweet spots” (SS) and payloads characterization
Interceptor Kill mechanism definition – HTK, fragmentation, enhancers
PK/hss allocation for various threat types and trajectories – Based on operational research, engineering design and simulations (G&C, divert capabilities, MD…).
PK/hss = P(Launch), P(acquisition), P(hit), P(hit sweet spot)
Feb 2010
Feb. 2010
Unclassified Killing the Threat
Killing the HE threat = Initiating its payload (Bulk and/or submunition) - HOD
Killing/neutralizing the Chemical threat = Decreasing the damage incurred by decreasing its lethality (lethal effect) below a threshold -Hard Kill = Destroying the warhead by:
- Spilling the liquid high enough, rupturing its envelope by collision/Hit - Neutralizing fuze - Activating dispersion mechanism
UnclassifiedKilling the Threat
-Mission Kill = De-routing hit point of payload/agent outside defended asset Intercept Altitude depends on: - Agent type – Persistent or volatile - Meteorological conditions (mainly wind) - Defended assets lay out - Passive defense
Feb 2010
Unclassified CW Interception process - SM
Sub-Munition
Break UpIntercept
Dispersion)Killed SM(
Wind
Ground Guided Flight
Launch Deposition
Acquisition and End Game
Chart 2 – Interceptor Flight Phases – Sub-munitions
Intact SM
Hit Area
Unclassified Lethality Assessment Process
Ground static tests Done on Warhead kill vehicle prototypes armed Environmental testing Arena test – Characterize the Interceptor warhead
status after static initiation and hit (Dispersion, penetration, Energy…)
Characterize enhancers performance Validate fusing systems
Feb 2010
Unclassified Lethality Assessment Process
Lethality Simulation – Hydrocodes Hydrocodes or wave propagation codes are
numerical tool simulating crash & impact by calculating physical processes to a sufficient degree of precision. Main aspects:
- Uses valid Mathematical basics - Needs Qualified scientists to assess the
quality of approximate solutions - Needs inputs from experiments to tune model
and material tests to characterize materials behavior under fast shock pulses (Stress and strain coefficients)
Feb. 201010
Unclassified Lethality Assessment Process
Hydrocodes elements Characteristic: - Mass, momentum and Energy conservation
equations - Nonlinear equation of state accounting for
shock wave formation and propagation - Hydrodynamic components decoupled
treatment (Euler, Lagrange) DYTRAN/PISCES, AUTODYN, LS-DYNA,
OURANOS, HEMP, ABAQUS, SOFIA(EMI), CTH, PAM-SHOCKS…
Unclassified Lethality Assessment Process
Hypervelocity tests
Gun Tests – single and dual stages Single stage powder gun –
- using adapted guns with powder
- Limited to low velocity
- Better for full scale Lethality tests Single stage Electrical or Electrothermal
(Plasma) Guns for higher velocities
Feb 2010
Unclassified Lethality Assessment Process
Hypervelocity ground test Two stage light gas gun - First stage with powder – compressing light gas (H, He) - Second stage – compressed light gas shooting a sabot with kill
vehicle toward target - Instrumentation (X-ray, Video, speed measuring devices) Constrains - Size and speed of Kill vehicle - Target limitations (static, size, explosive weight..) - Environmental conditions( Pressure, temperature) Solution – Scaling laws - Initiation formulae for HE (Energy, run to detonation, …) - Dimensional scaling for others
Unclassified Lethality Assessment Process
Hypervelocity ground test Sled test
- Full scale kill vehicle accelerated toward
target/s, using multiple staged rocket motors,
on a sled
- Instrumentation documenting interception Characteristics
- Long sled required to achieve required speed
(many miles)
- High cost and long schedule
- Environmental conditions (Altitude)
Unclassified Lethality Assessment Process
Sled Test 4/30/2003 - HOLLOMAN AIR FORCE BASE, N.M. (AFPN)
-- A 192-pound, fully instrumented Missile Defense Agency payload traveled a little more than three miles in 6.04 seconds April 29, validating Holloman's high-speed test track hypersonic upgrades and setting a world land speed record.
Air Force Materiel Command experts conducted the test in New Mexico's Tularosa Basin where Air Force officials witnessed a four-stage, rail-bound rocket sled reach Mach 8.5 or 6,416 mph. That equates to more than 31 football fields per second.
Feb 2010
Unclassified Lethality Assessment Process
Flight Tests
Flight tests with emphasis on Lethality are performed in Instrumented Missile test ranges
Appropriate Instrumented Targets (colors, Hit Grid for example) with relevant payload and Interceptors (Telemetry, Transponders, colors, TRS…) participate in this Interception Test
An elaborated test plan with emphasis on Lethality and kill assessment correlated with ground tests results is needed including flight and configuration parameters
Feb 2010
Unclassified Lethality Assessment Process
Flight Tests
Number of flight test is derived from configurations, operational research, confidence level required for SSPk assessment and ground test results
Appropriate Electromagnetic(Radars), telemetry stations, TRS and Optical Cameras in various wavelength (Visual, IR, NIR, UV…) spread according to geometry of test
Instrumented Aircraft in appropriate locations Data Analysis adapted to Kill Assessment
Feb. 2010
Unclassified Lethality Assessment Process
Kill Assessment
Kill is assessed from the Ground and Airborne Instrumentation
The Instrumentation are selected according to the threat payload
Emphasis on the estimation of the various behavior of the SSPk components
Miss distance, Hit location and post hit debris and effects are of main concern
Feb 2010
Feb 2010
Unclassified Assessing the kill & typing
Radars (Multiple bands) - Residual and debris characterization via RCS, ballistic coefficient and mapping - Doppler Range Gates filling – debris residuals expansion and density - Aerosol cloud mapping – SHF and mm Wave radar - Droplet Characterization – using multiple bands SHF/mm Wave radars
Feb 2010
Unclassified Assessing the kill & typing
Optics (Ground and Airborne Vis. And IR) - Fireballs characterization for KA - Hot Clouds characterization for Typing - Aerosol cloud signature size/shape and characterization for KA and Typing (with Active and Passive optics at various Wavelength) - Threat and residual signature and Imaging
for KA and typing
Unclassified Lethality Assessment Process
Summary and Conclusion
Lethality assessment of Kill vehicle is a studious, long and risky process
Shortcuts could lead to GIGO Various Lethality and Kill assessment
definitions were proposed An process starting from the design
phase till flight test validation was described
Feb 2010
Top Related