Yesterday I saw an AGM-28 Hound Dog cruise missile and was informed it could not be jammed because it relied on an inertial guidance system. If I understand this right it was therefore a hybrid of perceptual control and “open loop”/model-based/hopeful systems. At the high level it’s the latter, and it uses conventional control systems in the details to accomplish this model-following.
I have not looked for test results regarding accuracy but that might be interesting. It suggests an approach toward comparative testing, too.
According to Wikipedia, this was a Cold War (1959-1960s) air-to-ground missile for defending B-52s from Soviet ground-to-air defense missiles, with an ‘astro-inertial’ guidance system, q.v.
The ‘inertial’ part I understand to be a negative-feedback control system for stability in a ballistic missile and as a frame of reference for steering a cruise missile, and even some steering in a ballistic missile (which, consequently, is not entirely ballistic). The ‘astro’ part does celestial navigation computations with reference to stars and a celestial map to confirm or determine actual location. I presume that the target is specified as navigation coordinates.
Yesterday I saw an AGM-28 Hound Dog cruise missile and was informed it could not be jammed because it relied on an inertial guidance system. If I understand this right it was therefore a hybrid of perceptual control and “open loop”/model-based/hopeful systems. At the high level it’s the latter, and it uses conventional control systems in the details to accomplish this model-following.
I have not looked for test results regarding accuracy but that might be interesting. It suggests an approach toward comparative testing, too.