This paper presents the nonstationary nonmaneuvering target interception with all possible desired impact angles in a two-dimensional (2D) aerial engagement scenario, where the target can move in any direction. The paper also considers the field-of-view (FOV) constraint for designing the guidance law so that the target is always visible while following the missile trajectory in the entire engagement time, which makes it feasible for real world applications. The guidance law is based on the pure proportional navigation (PPN) to achieve any impact angle of the entire angular spectrum. The proposed guidance law is then simulated for intercepting a nonstationary nonmaneuvering target using a kinematic model of a missile to demonstrate the efficacy of the presented scheme. A comparison with the related work existing in the literature has also been added to establish the superiority of the present work.
BrysonAHoYC. Applied optimal control. Waltham, MA: Blaisdell, 1969, pp. 148–167.
2.
ZarchanP. Tactical and strategic missile guidance. 6th ed.VA: American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Vol. 227, 2012, pp. 14–18.
3.
ShneydorNA. Missile guidance and pursuit: kinematics, dynamics and control. Woodhead Publishing, 1998, pp. 101–127.
4.
KimMGriderKV. Terminal guidance for impact attitude angle constrained flight trajectories. IEEE Trans Aerosp Electron Syst1973; AES-9(6): 852–859.
5.
RyooCKChoHTahkMJ. Optimal guidance laws with terminal impact angle constraint. J Guid Control Dyn2005; 28(4): 724–732.
6.
TsalikRShimaT. Optimal guidance around circular trajectories for impact-angle interception. J Guid Control Dyn2016; 39(6): 1278–1291.
7.
LuPDomanDBSchiermanJD. Adaptive terminal guidance for hypervelocity impact in specified direction. J Guid Control Dyn2006; 29(2): 269–278.
8.
RatnooAGhoseD. Impact angle constrained interception of stationary targets. J Guid Control Dyn2008; 31(6): 1817–1822.
9.
ParkBGKimTHTahkMJ. Optimal impact angle control guidance law considering the seeker’s field-of-view limits. Proc Inst Mech Eng G J Aerosp Eng2013; 227(8): 1347–1364.
10.
ErerKSMerttopçuogluO. Indirect impact-angle-control against stationary targets using biased pure proportional navigation. J Guid Control Dyn2012; 35(2): 700–704.
11.
TekinRErerKS. Switched-gain guidance for impact angle control under physical constraints. J Guid Control Dyn2014; 38(2): 205–216.
12.
KimTHParkBGTahkMJ. Bias-shaping method for biased proportional navigation with terminal-angle constraint. J Guid Control Dyn2013; 36(6): 1810–1816.
13.
RatnooA. Analysis of two-stage proportional navigation with heading constraints. J Guid Control Dyn2015; 39(1): 156–164.
14.
GhoshSYakimenkoOADavisDT, et al.Unmanned aerial vehicle guidance for an all-aspect approach to a stationary point. J Guid Control Dyn2017; 40(11): 2871–2888.
15.
RanjanAHotaSSinghNK. Three-stage proportional navigation for intercepting stationary targets with impact angle constraints. In: 2019 Sixth Indian Control Conference, IIT Hyderabad, India, 18–20 December 2019. pp. 379–384.
16.
IdanMGolanOMGuelmanM. Optimal planar interception with terminal constraints. J Guid Control Dyn1995; 18(6): 1273–1279.
17.
RatnooAGhoseD. Impact angle constrained guidance against nonstationary nonmaneuvering targets. J Guid Control Dyn2010; 33(1): 269–275.
18.
GopalanARatnooAGhoseD. Time-optimal guidance for lateral interception of moving targets. J Guid Control Dyn2016; 38(12): 510–525.
19.
KimHGKimHJ. All-aspect guidance with impact angle constraint against unknown target maneuver. IEEE Trans Aerosp Electron Syst2018; 55(2): 830–845.
20.
WangXZhangYWuH. Sliding mode control based impact angle control guidance considering the seekers field-of-view constraint. ISA Trans2016; 61: 49–59.
21.
ParkBGKwonHHKimYH, et al.Composite guidance scheme for impact angle control against a nonmaneuvering moving target. J Guid Control Dyn2016; 39(5): 1129–1136.
22.
ParkBGKimTHTahkMJ. Biased PNG with terminal-angle constraint for intercepting nonmaneuvering targets under physical constraints. IEEE Trans Aerosp Electron Syst2017; 53(3): 1562–1572.
23.
ZhangHTangSGuoJ, et al.A two-phased guidance law for impact angle control with seeker’s field-of-view limit. Int J Aerospace Eng2018; 2018: 1–13.
24.
SharmaYRRatnooA. A new guidance law for look-angle constrained interception of moving targets. In: 2019 27th Mediterranean Conference on Control and Automation (MED). Akko, Israel, 1–4 July 2019. pp. 130–135.
25.
SinghNKHotaS. Moving target interception guidance law for any impact angle with field-of-view constraint. In: 2021 AIAA Scitech Forum, Virtual event, 11–15 and 19-21 January 2021. DOI:10.2514/6.2021-1462.
26.
ZhimingZYaoX. Polynomial guidance law for impact angle control with a seeker look angle limit. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part G J Aerosp Eng2020; 234(3): 857–870.
27.
ChoNKimY. Modified pure proportional navigation guidance law for impact time control. J Guid Control Dyn2016; 39(4): 852–872.
28.
LeeSChoNKimY. Impact-time-control guidance strategy with a composite structure considering the seeker’s field-of-view constraint. J Guid Control Dyn2020; 43(8): 1566–1574.
29.
TekinRErerKS. Impact time and angle control against moving targets with look angle shaping. J Guid Control Dyn2020; 43(5): 1020–1025.
30.
GuelmanM. A qualitative study of proportional navigation. IEEE Trans Aerosp Electron Syst1971; AES-7(4): 637–643.
