Advertisement

Autonomous Air Defense Effectors Deployment Algorithms for Modeling and Simulation Purposes

  • Jan FarlikEmail author
  • Miroslav Kratky
  • Simona Simkova
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11472)

Abstract

At present, the development of information technologies leads to a significant development of simulation technologies and modeling possibilities. In the area of air defense, it is mainly about the algorithmization of the command and control processes together with the development of the possibilities of modeling and simulation of an air targets engagement process, e.g. the process of guiding the missile against a target. The process of destroying the target itself, however, is preceded by many activities, of which the modeling has been very difficult for a long time before. One of these activities is the process of deploying air defense systems to fulfill their purpose, i.e. to ensure the continuous coverage of a territory by their weapon systems. Ability to describe this process in simulations gives the possibility for future implementation not only in the complex simulators but also for use in real command and control systems for the needs of subordinate elements autonomous tasking. This article describes one option of such process algorithmization. This method has been used in the Department of Air Defence Systems tactical ground air defense simulator for the autonomous deployment of available effectors on the battlefield.

Keywords

Air defense Deployment modeling Decision making modeling Simulator 

References

  1. 1.
    Frantis, P.: Big data in the air force - process, use and understand for safety. In: 33rd Digital Avionics Systems Conference, pp. 8C2:1–8C2:6. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc., Colorado Springs (2014)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kristalova, D., et al.: Geographical data and algorithms usable for decision-making process. In: Hodicky, J. (ed.) MESAS 2016. LNCS, vol. 9991, pp. 226–241. Springer, Cham (2016).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-47605-6_19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Stodola, P., Mazal, J.: Tactical decision support system to aid commanders in their decision-making. In: Hodicky, J. (ed.) MESAS 2016. LNCS, vol. 9991, pp. 396–406. Springer, Cham (2016).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-47605-6_32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Stodola, P., Nohel, J., Mazal, J.: Model of optimal maneuver used in tactical decision support system. In: Methods and Models in Automation & Robotics (MMAR 2016), pp. 1240–1245. West Pomeranian University of Technology in Szczecin, Szczecin (2016)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Frantis, P.: Visualization of common operational picture. In: WIT Transactions on Engineering Sciences, pp. 347–354, WITPress, United States (2014)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hamtil, I., Sebela, M., Stefek, A.: Radar information creation with use of a simulation environment. IET Radar Sonar Navig. 7(4), 333–341 (2013). ISSN 1751-8784CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Horizon. In Wikipedia: the free encyclopedia, Wikimedia Foundation, San Francisco (2001). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horizon. 31 July 2018
  8. 8.
    Young, A.: Distance to the Horizon. Distance to the Horizon (2018). https://aty.sdsu.edu/explain/atmos_refr/horizon.html. 31 July 2018
  9. 9.
    Farlik, J.: Simulation of surface-to-air missile units - cluster design. In: IEEE International Conference on Military Technology Proceeding, ICMT 2015, pp. 647–652. University of Defence, Brno (2015)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Farlik, J., Kratky, M., Hamtil, I.: The Air defence missile system effective coverage determination using computer simulation. In: International Conference on Military Technology Proceeding, ICMT 2015, pp. 669–673. Brno, University of Defence (2015)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Farlik, J., Stary, V., Casar, J.: Simplification of missile effective coverage zone in air defence simulations. In: Proceedings of the 2017 International Conference on Military Technologies (ICMT), pp. 733–737. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc., Piscataway (2017). ISBN 978-1-5386-1988-9Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Farlik, J., Tesar, F.: Aspects of the surface-to-air missile systems modelling and simulation. In: Mazal, J. (ed.) MESAS 2017. LNCS, vol. 10756, pp. 324–339. Springer, Cham (2018).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-76072-8_23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Farlik, J.: Conceptual operational architecture of the air force simulator: simulation of air defense operations. In: International Conference on Military Technology Proceeding, ICMT 2015, pp. 675–679. University of Defence, Brno (2015). ISBN 978-80-7231-976-3Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hodicky, J.: Modelling and simulation in the autonomous systems’ domain – current status and way ahead. In: Hodicky, J. (ed.) MESAS 2015. LNCS, vol. 9055, pp. 17–23. Springer, Cham (2015).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-22383-4_2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hodicky, J., Prochazka, D.: Challenges in the implementation of autonomous systems into the battlefield. In: Proceedings of the 2017 International Conference on Military Technologies (ICMT), pp. 743–747. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc., Piscataway (2017). ISBN 978-1-5386-1988-9Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hodicky, J.: Autonomous systems operationalization gaps overcome by modelling and simulation. In: Hodicky, J. (ed.) MESAS 2016. LNCS, vol. 9991, pp. 40–47. Springer, Cham (2016).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-47605-6_4CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Air DefenceUniversity of DefenceBrnoCzech Republic

Personalised recommendations