Integrated Probabilistic Engagement Modeling and Guidance Accuracy Optimization for Launch and Lethal Zone Construction

9 views

Authors

  • Trinh Anh Minh Academy of Military Science and Technology
  • Vuong Anh Trung Air Defence-Air Force Academy
  • Nguyen Bich Van Institute for Artificial Intelligence, VNU University of Engineering and Technology
  • Pham Ngoc Van Le Quy Don Technical University
  • Nguyen Quang Vinh (Corresponding Author) Academy of Military Science and Technology

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.54939/1859-1043.j.mst.112.2026.38-46

Keywords:

Launch zone; Lethal zone; Probability of kill; Missile simulation; Weapon effectiveness.

Abstract

This paper develops a unified probabilistic framework for missile–target engagement assessment integrating kinematic reachability, fragment-based lethality modeling, and stochastic terminal guidance uncertainty. Closed-form approximations for expected kill probability are derived under Rayleigh-distributed miss distance. Analytical asymptotic analysis reveals an exponential dependence of engagement effectiveness on inverse-squared guidance accuracy. A deterministic lethal-radius model is compared with the proposed probabilistic formulation, demonstrating significant overestimation by traditional methods. An optimization problem is formulated to determine the minimum required terminal guidance accuracy ensuring a prescribed kill probability threshold. The results provide quantitative design constraints for guidance and control system development.

References

[1]. Zarchan, Paul. “Tactical and strategic missile guidance”. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc., (2012).

[2]. Lloyd, Richard. “Conventional warhead systems physics and engineering design”. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc., (1998).

[3]. Moon, Sei-Hoon. “Weapon effectiveness and the shapes of damage functions”. Defence technology, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 617-632, (2021).

[4]. Gao, Bo, Li-Jun Qiu, and Yue-Ting Yao. “Research on kill probability for single air-defense missile”. Dandao Xuebao(Journal of Ballistics), vol. 23, no. 4, pp. 52-55, (2011).

[5]. Shneydor, Neryahu A. “Missile guidance and pursuit: kinematics, dynamics and control”. Elsevier, (1998).

[6]. Ha, Le Hai, Nguyen Quang Vinh, and Nguyen Tang Cuong. “Dynamics of Self-guided Rocket Control with the optimal Angle Coordinate System Combined with Measuring Target Parameters for Frequency Modulated Continuous Wave Radar”. Intelligent Computing in Engineering: Select Proceedings of RICE 2019. Singapore: Springer Singapore, pp. 951-962, (2020).

[7]. Dantas, Joao PA, et al. “PoKER: a probability of kill estimation rate model for air-to-air missiles using machine learning on stochastic targets”. The Journal of Defense Modeling and Simulation, (2025). DOI: 10.1177/15485129241309675.

[8]. Gyue-jeong, Lee, Yong-hwan Kim, and Daeyoung Choi. “Predictive Factor Analysis of Air-to-Air Engagement Outcomes Using Air Combat Manoeuvring Instrumentation Data”. Defence Science Journal, vol. 75, no. 1, pp. 35-43, (2025).

[9]. Adams, Stephen, et al. “Probabilistic Models for Military Kill Chains”. Systems, vol. 13, no. 10, pp. 924, (2025).

[10]. Schneider, Marc, and Walter Fichter. “Many-vs-Many Missile Guidance via Virtual Targets”. arXiv preprint arXiv:2511.02526, (2025).

[11]. Mudrik, Liraz, and Yaakov Oshman. “Bang-Bang Evasion: Its Stochastic Optimality and a Terminal-Set-Based Implementation”. arXiv preprint arXiv:2511.21633, (2025).

Downloads

Published

25-06-2026

How to Cite

[1]
M. Trịnh Anh, Vuong Anh Trung, Nguyen Bich Van, Pham Ngoc Van, and Nguyen Quang Vinh, “Integrated Probabilistic Engagement Modeling and Guidance Accuracy Optimization for Launch and Lethal Zone Construction”, J. Mil. Sci. Technol., vol. 112, no. 112, pp. 38–46, Jun. 2026.

Issue

Section

Electronics & Automation