• Infrared and Laser Engineering
  • Vol. 50, Issue 8, 20210006 (2021)
Chuanliang Li1, Taorui Li1、*, and Chaozhe Wang2
Author Affiliations
  • 1Aviation Maintenance Sergeant School, Air Force Engineering University, Xinyang 464000, China
  • 2Aeronautics Engineering Institute, Air Force Engineering University, Xi’an 710038, China
  • show less
    DOI: 10.3788/IRLA20210006 Cite this Article
    Chuanliang Li, Taorui Li, Chaozhe Wang. Influence of parameters of decoy on jamming effectiveness of surface source infrared decoy[J]. Infrared and Laser Engineering, 2021, 50(8): 20210006 Copy Citation Text show less
    Thought of decoy jamming evaluation
    Fig. 1. Thought of decoy jamming evaluation
    Optimization algorithm of anti-interference recognition
    Fig. 2. Optimization algorithm of anti-interference recognition
    Infrared radiation intensity of xOy plane
    Fig. 3. Infrared radiation intensity of xOy plane
    Infrared radiation intensity of yOz plane
    Fig. 4. Infrared radiation intensity of yOz plane
    Infrared radiation intensity of xOz plane
    Fig. 5. Infrared radiation intensity of xOz plane
    Force schematic diagram of foil
    Fig. 6. Force schematic diagram of foil
    Combustion optimization algorithm
    Fig. 7. Combustion optimization algorithm
    45° sequency gray image
    Fig. 8. 45° sequency gray image
    75° sequency gray image
    Fig. 9. 75° sequency gray image
    Angle characteristics curve of surface source decoy
    Fig. 10. Angle characteristics curve of surface source decoy
    Infrared countermeasure sequences at different altitudes
    Fig. 11. Infrared countermeasure sequences at different altitudes
    Infrared countermeasure sequences at different speeds
    Fig. 12. Infrared countermeasure sequences at different speeds
    Launch angle/(°)25457590
    Miss target/time 5000 m1206164423281506
    Miss probability in simulation40.2%54.8%77.6%50.2%
    Miss probability in reality--≥75%≥45%
    Error--3.5%11.6%
    Miss target/time 8000 m146415452 0371431
    Miss probability in simulation48.8%51.5%67.9%47.7%
    Miss probability in reality--≥62%≥45%
    Error--9.0%4.3%
    Miss target/time 11000 m1308157522171596
    Miss probability in simulation43.6%52.5%73.9%53.2%
    Miss probability in reality--≥70%≥50%
    Error--5.6%6.4%
    Table 1. Interference success rate at different height and the speed of 0.75 Ma
    Launch angle/(°)25457590
    Miss target/time 0.5 Ma115816291 9621314
    Miss probability in simulation38.6%54.3%65.4%43.8%
    Miss probability in reality--≥60%≥42%
    Error--4.0%4.7%
    Miss target/time 0.75 Ma1122145523401413
    Miss probability in simulation37.4%48.5%78.0%47.1%
    Miss probability in reality--≥75%≥45%
    Error--4.3%4.6%
    Miss target/time 0.9 Ma124517762 0011158
    Miss probability in simulation41.5%59.2%66.7%38.6%
    Miss probability in reality--≥65%≥35%
    Error--2.6%10.3%
    Table 2. Interference success rate at different speed and the height of 8000 m
    Chuanliang Li, Taorui Li, Chaozhe Wang. Influence of parameters of decoy on jamming effectiveness of surface source infrared decoy[J]. Infrared and Laser Engineering, 2021, 50(8): 20210006
    Download Citation