The present invention relates to packaging and dispensing sub-munitions.
Current approaches to beach and surf zone mine clearance depend on the dispensing of large numbers of sub-munitions from a parent munition (e.g., a missile, etc.). The mine clearance mission requires a uniform distribution of sub-munitions, such as “darts,” over the target area. The dispersal pattern is affected by many factors, including the angle of attack, velocity, and rotational rate of the parent vehicle, the aerodynamic design of the darts, dart collision, and the different aerodynamic regimes that exist in the vicinity of the parent munition.
It has been recognized that it is particularly effective, for mine clearance operations, to deploy darts in a simple geometric pattern called a circular delta grid (“CDG”) pattern. In a CDG pattern, nodes form an equilateral triangle (delta), with a circular perimeter. In the context of mine clearance and sub-munitions, the CDG pattern is a pattern in which the nearest three sub-munitions form an equilateral triangle and collectively all projectiles form a circle of tightest coverage, the radius of which is determined by the total number of darts in the payload.
Although the desirability of deploying the darts in a CDG pattern is recognized, there is an issue as to how to package the darts in a cylindrical payload space such that, when dispensed, the “darts” emerge and impact in the CDG pattern. In fact, the problem is complicated by the fact that typically, there will be multiple stacks of darts within the payload space.
The invention provides the solution to the packaging issue posed above.
The illustrative embodiment of the present invention is a packaging method. Consider a payload cylinder that receives a number, S, of layers of projectiles, such as the counter-mine darts disclosed in U.S. Provisional Patent Application 60,985,516, filed Nov. 5, 2007 and incorporated by reference herein. Each layer includes the same number, N, of projectiles.
Assume one of the layers is centered (i.e., co-axial) with the payload cylinder. Beginning from the center of an equilateral triangle, define three 120-degree sectors. The inventor has determined that if N is of the form (3p×4Q), then by off-setting the remaining (S-1) layers in certain ways, the total of number of projectiles (i.e., N×S) generates a CDG pattern upon dispersion.
There are two arrangements that satisfy the requirement for the CDG pattern. One arrangement comprises three layers and the other arrangement comprises four layers. Based on a 1-unit spacing between adjacent projectiles in a given layer, the spacing between adjacent projectiles over the three-layer pattern is 1/(31/2) units and the spacing between adjacent projectiles over the four-layer pattern in ½ units. Multiple groupings of three-layer bunches or four-layer bunches can be contained within a payload cylinder in accordance with the formula: S=3p×4q, wherein p and q are integers.
In some embodiments, delays are artificially created so that the radial distances of the sub-munitions are as designed.
The illustrative embodiment provides what is believed to be the only solution to this packaging/dispensing problem. The solution also indicates how to integrate the payload geometric configuration with other design considerations.
Recasting the illustrative embodiment of the present invention as a dispersion pattern rather than a packaging pattern, as in the sequential “filling into the middles,” an alternative concept of operations for mine clearance is obtained. That is, for a target-defeat mission that employs sub-munitions, the radius of coverage can be established at a relatively large value. The “middle” is filled (i.e., the projectile dispersion density is increased by increasing the number of layers of sub-munitions), only after an attempt to hit/kill fails. This conserves the number of payload rounds, sorties, etc., that are required. This is feasible, of course, only if the target is not moving, as is the case in most mine clearance operations.
The present invention provides a way to pack sub-munitions, such as counter-mine darts, in a parent munition such that they when impact a target area, they do so in a circular delta grid (CDG) pattern. Only certain packing arrangements will yield a CDG pattern on deployment of the sub-munitions.
As in indicated in the Summary section, layers can be stacked only in groups of three or four to achieve a CDG pattern on dispersal.
Assuming a unit distance between adjacent sub-munitions in any given layer, the three-layer stack provides a distance of 1/(31/2) units. In other words, if the unit spacing is 1 meter between adjacent sub-munitions in any given layer, the spacing between adjacent sub-munitions in the impact grid (assuming no dispersal) is about 0.58 meters. The spacing between sub-munitions at impact (assuming no dispersal) is referred to in this description and the appended claims as “impact spacing.”
Thus,
Notwithstanding the fact that one “three-layer” stack or one “four-layer” stack of sub-munitions will provide the desired CDG pattern, two such stacks will not. In fact, the inventor has discovered that to yield the desired impact pattern, the number of layers of sub-munitions within a canister must obey the relation:
S=3p×4q, wherein p and q are integers [1]
Canisters must include either three-layer stacks or four-layer stacks. The “3” in expression [1] refers to three-layer stacks and the “4” refers to four-layer stacks. So, if a munitions canister includes three-layer stacks, then q=0, so that S=3p×1. Likewise, if a munitions canister includes four-layer stacks, then p=0, so that S=1×4q.
The allowed arrangements can therefore be viewed as being “recursive.” That is, allowed arrangements (i.e., permissible total number of layers) for three-layer stacks are:
3p=3 (p=1), which is one, three-layer stack;
3p=9 (p=2), which is three, three-layer stacks;
3p=27 (p=3), which is nine (3×3), three-layer stacks; and so forth.
Similarly, the allowed arrangements for four-layer stacks are:
4q=4 (q=1), which is one, four-layer stack;
4q=16 (q=2), which is four, four-layer stacks;
4q=64 (q=3), which is sixteen (4×4), four-layer stacks; and so forth.
The packaging approach described above leads to a methodology for mine clearance, embodied as method 700 depicted in
In accordance with operation 702 of the method, the spacing between adjacent sub-munitions (in a layer) is selected. A sortie is conducted, as per operation 704, and a “battle damage assessment” or BDA is performed in operation 706.
If there are no further targets, then the method terminates at operation 714. If, on the other hand, targets remain, a decision is made as to whether the munitions coverage should be altered based on the BDA. If the BDA indicates that coverage is acceptable, then a subsequent sortie is then conducted.
If the BDA indicates that coverage is unacceptable, a decision is made, in accordance with operation 712, to increase the density of coverage. This can be done by decreasing the spacing between sub-munitions (if possible) or, alternatively, by increasing the layers of sub-munitions in the parent munition in accordance with the packaging methodology previously presented. After altering the packaging density, a subsequent sortie is conducted.
It is to be understood that the disclosure teaches just one example of the illustrative embodiment and that many variations of the invention can easily be devised by those skilled in the art after reading this disclosure and that the scope of the present invention is to be determined by the following claims.
This case claims priority of U.S. Provisional Patent Application 60/911,416, which was filed on Apr. 12, 2007 and is incorporated by reference herein.
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
60911416 | Apr 2007 | US |