EP0314721B1 - Alignment process for gun fire control device and gun fire control device for implementation of the process - Google Patents

Abstract

A process and a device for detecting and correcting errors of alignment between gun fire control devices and weapons installations have the following characteristics: target measurement sensors (B) are arranged on guns (G3) with servo-controlled carriages and the line of sight of the measurement sensor is aligned with the line of fire of the gun; the guns, together with their target measurement sensor are aligned on a common measurement target (Z) by a target tracking device (T2); the difference between the position of the measurement target and the position of the line of sight of the target measurement sensor is recorded in the target measurement sensor of the gun controlled by the target tracking device; this difference is evaluated and taken into account by the servo-control of the gun in the correction of control signals emitted during firing.

Description

The invention is in the field of error measurement and error compensation and relates to a method for determining and correcting errors from mechanical tolerance deviations or changes in the mountings of fire control and weapon systems and their beddings, with the purpose of achieving a precise mutual alignment of fire control and Weapon systems.

The interaction of fire control systems among themselves, between fire control systems and weapon systems controlled by them, and between weapon systems among themselves, which systems are (must) coordinate in relation to one another, is generally impaired by so-called alignment errors. Alignment errors are errors that contain a deviation from a defined (common) geometry, regardless of whether these errors occur during installation or after installation due to changes in the base, as can be the case with ships, for example.

Alignment errors caused by mechanical inaccuracies must first be measured to correct them, then corrected and possibly subsequently measured again and possibly corrected to detect time-dependent errors. The aim of the invention is to provide an alignment method with a simple method that can be used as often as required to determine the deviations and to correct them for the purpose of correcting alignment errors. It should also be possible with the method according to the invention to also detect and correct time-dependent errors (slow changes).

Ultimately, the aim of the invention is to be able to measure system deviations from a defined (ideal) geometry and to provide the values obtained for the calculation of the control variables for the carriage servos and to use them in shooting operation.

This aim is achieved by the invention defined in the characterizing part of method claim 1 and device claim 9.

The invention is derived from the following idea: It is known that mechanically caused alignment errors of the components of inertial navigation devices can not only be corrected mechanically (adjusted, adjusted), but also in a computationally compensatory procedure. For this purpose, the mechanical errors determined by measurement, for example the deviation from the ideal orthogonality of the main axes, as self-parameters, which are something like "personal" error sizes, are directly linked to control and / or regulation data and in real-time processing by means of compensating control corrected. The fault data inherent in a mechanical device are given to it, for example in the form of a protocol, and can be used directly in terms of calculation. This type of procedure is known and is used in conjunction with the "strapdown inertial navigation" technique, which means "tied inertial navigation technology".

A corresponding application to the bedding of the devices of fire control systems and weapon systems on a battleship is known from GB-A-2112965.

Furthermore, a so-called zero test is known from the Flab artillery, in which the alignment of guns and aiming devices is checked for a common target with the exclusion of dynamic compensations (lead) and ballistic influences.

US-A-3955292 shows an application to practice shooting without ammunition. The guns of an anti-aircraft battery are tracked by a target tracking device without reserve. The target is provided with a special reflector for the laser beams. A laser transmitter / receiver mounted on the gun and aligned with the shooting axis emits pulses and receives reflected pulses. The device makes it possible to determine theoretical hits. However, an angle measurement is not provided and therefore no quantitative information about the orientation of the devices is possible.

If a zero test is now carried out on the same measurement target with two devices provided with measuring devices, a deviation is observed for each measurement, which contains device and system errors, e.g. assembly errors. The zero test thus determines an observable overall error composed of different error components. For the application according to the invention, a zero test is understood to be a number of measurements in different spatial directions. The alignment error vector, the scalar components of which are the various device and system errors taken into account, can then be calculated from the deviations determined.

It is now important that for the subsequent discussion of an exemplary embodiment of the measurement and control method according to the invention, a clear distinction is made between shooting operation and measurement operation (that is, the implementation of the measurement method). During shooting, the values obtained from the measuring process are used to track the gun carriages by taking them into account in the normal ballistic and geometric calculations. The measuring mode, however, ignores all ballistic aspects and deals only with the geometry of the measuring axes in space, ie their mutual relationship and their deviations from the desired geometry. Deviations are thus determined in the measuring operation, and from this the sought alignment error vector is calculated and made available for the final use in the control of the mountings during the shooting operation.

The procedure on a battleship is explained below as a concrete example of the application of the invention.

All fire control devices and guns mounted on the carriage and placed in the bedding as well as the bedding itself have normal mechanical tolerances.

Part 1 of the procedure:

Fire control devices and guns are manufactured with economically viable, normal tolerances and precisely measured before installation on the bedding surfaces, if possible at the place of manufacture. Mechanical adjustment devices are not to be provided. The normal mechanical tolerances (specifications) result in deviations from the desired geometry that are too great with regard to the required precision. However, from now on, the precisely measured deviations should be able to be taken into account electronically (using a computer), both in measuring and in shooting.

Part 2 of the procedure:

After installing the fire control devices and guns in their beddings on the ship, e.g. still in the dock, taking the known measurement results into account, the alignment measurements, i.e. the determination of the positions of the bedding in relation to each other with the usual measuring accuracy (i.e. alignment measurements that measure the original rough position of approx. one angular degree with a measuring accuracy of approx. 2 angular minutes). From now on, the results of these alignment measurements will also be taken into account in the measuring and shooting operation.

Part 3 of the procedure: (part of the measuring operation according to the invention)

The subsequent fine measurement in measurement mode is independent of the ship's position and can be carried out at sea. All devices involved have target measurement sensors which, taking into account the results of parts 1 and 2, measure a common measurement target in different positions relative to the devices. From a sufficient number of positional deviations determined in different directions, the remaining inaccuracies not recorded in the measurement from part 2 are determined with a measuring accuracy of a few tenths of an angular minute in a kind of regression or error compensation calculation and from then on are also taken into account in measuring and shooting operation.

Repeated execution of part 3, among other things, enables slow changes in the ship's geometry, which also lead to alignment errors, to be determined and corrected. These changes arise, for example, from loading and unloading the ship and are usually reversible. Permanent changes due to external influences such as accruing, bumping, strong shocks, but also normal aging can be determined and taken into account. With the method according to the invention, it is possible to maintain a high level of precision in the fire control throughout the entire life of the ship. The particular advantage of this measurement mode is that it can be carried out on the high seas without, as is usually the case in Part 2, decommissioning the ship.

As already mentioned at the beginning, all mechanically produced parts such as the installation device and bedding have mechanical tolerances, but they no longer determine the accuracy of this system during shooting operation, since alignment (error) data obtained in (fine) measuring mode are stored in the fire control computer so that they can be used from then on Consider calculations of coordinates. They have a real-time correcting effect on misalignment and can be remeasured from time to time and adjusted to the changing dimensions of a ship.

Of course, not all mechanical dimensions and their tolerances are of equal importance with regard to the alignment accuracy, whereby it should also be noted that the one workpieces are very light within very tight tolerances can be manufactured, others, however, only with great effort or not at all.

In general, three groups of workpieces can be distinguished, characterized by the influence of their tolerances on the system quality:

• 1. nicht negativ beeinflussen. In diesen Fällen sind die masslichen Abweichungen vernachlässigbar;
• 2. zwar beeinträchtigen, jedoch nicht so stark, dass eine spezielle Berücksichtigung im einzelnen notwendig wäre. Es ergeben sich Ungenauigkeiten, welchen als statistische Grössen Rechnung getragen wird;
• 3. in unzulässigen Mass beeinträchtigen. In diesen Fällen werden Eigenparameter ermittelt durch Messungen, welche die nötige Genauigkeit aufweisen. Die Parameter werden als Dimension berücksichtigt.

Workpieces with dimensions whose manufacturing tolerances are such that they are the system quality

• 1. do not influence negatively. In these cases, the significant deviations are negligible;
• 2. adversely affect, but not so much that a special consideration would be necessary in detail. There are inaccuracies which are taken into account as statistical values;
• 3. impair to an impermissible degree. In these cases, eigen parameters are determined by measurements that have the necessary accuracy. The parameters are considered as dimensions.

These considerations apply not only to individual workpieces, but also to assembled individual parts (assemblies), whereby the measurement in the case of group 3 takes place over everything.

The assembly devices, for example the mount of a fire control device (sensor) or a weapon system (effector). are also manufactured with the usual tolerances and then measured (still in the factory) and the own parameters determined. For this purpose, highly precise measuring equipment is used so that the results obtained and therefore the parameters are within the required overall tolerances. A gain in precision is easier to achieve by measuring the dimensions and taking them into account than by narrow manufacturing tolerances and assembly instructions. The evaluation of the zero test measurements should be limited to as few parameters as possible. It follows that as many own parameters as possible are determined beforehand with sufficient accuracy - still in the factory. In this way, the time-invariant system parameters can be treated.

The geometry of the superstructures on the ship, however, i.e. the alignment of the assembly devices with each other changes over time or only occasionally. It contains the parameters which indicate the relationship between the individual bodywork devices and that of the bodybuilding devices to the ship, for example orientations, inclinations or inclinations etc. They are monitored with the aid of the method according to the invention and the deviations which occur over time are compensated accordingly .

After installing the fire control devices and guns in the bedding on the ship, the usual alignment work is carried out with clinometers, theodolites and so on, and a measurement of the rough position according to part 2 is carried out.

For the subsequent fine measurement according to Part 3, essentially a set of zero test measurements, taking into account the results of the factory measurement and the rough position measurement, a common measurement target is measured by all sensors of the bodywork device, independent of the ship coordinates. These measurements result in e.g. Deviations from the common target observable on the gun, which are the result of the remaining alignment errors, taking into account the parameters measured so far.

A peculiarity of the method can also be seen in the fact that, in addition to determining the parameters, an assessment of the system quality is possible. For this purpose, the residual errors resulting from e.g. deviations observed on the gun after application of the results from part 3 still remain, calculated and statistically evaluated. The residual errors are a consequence of the fact that on the one hand only the most important, but not all, parameters are estimated and taken into account, and on the other hand that the measuring equipment is not ideal. Statistical criteria for the system quality are derived from the remaining errors.

For fine measurement with the help of a zero test, the tracking sensors of the fire control devices and TV cameras arranged on the guns are used as measuring equipment. The guns can of course also be provided with other sensors (for example lasers); however, it is important that the line of sight of the selected sensor is in a precisely known, preferably determined by the factory measurements, fixed position to the line of fire of the associated gun, for example in parallel. The common measurement target is now measured with these sensors, ie the deviations in the position of the measurement target as measured by the various sensors in relation to one another are determined. For this purpose, the target measurement sensor of the target tracking device can determine the position of the common measurement target and readjust the associated gun. In the target measuring sensor of the gun the position between the target and the sight line is immediately visible. However, the gun can also be equipped with directional means and independently pursue the common measurement target and determine its position; that is, it is a target tracking device itself. The storage between independent target tracking devices results from the difference between the measured locations of the measurement target.

A preferred embodiment of a target measurement sensor for a gun is a TV camera with a fixed focal length and depth of field to infinity (fixed focus TV camera) and with a two-dimensional arrangement of light-sensitive recording cells in the image plane, for example so-called charge coupled devices (CCD array). Such a camera has the advantage of high dimensional accuracy without using a control device. The image captured in this way can be scaled and calibrated. A front lens can be used to focus on targets in the close range (less than 100 m).

The storage measurement is advantageously carried out by measuring a calibrated television image from a camera of the type mentioned above. For this purpose, the camera's line of sight, which is in a fixed, known direction to the firing line or sensor line - for example parallel to it - is marked by a Crosshair marked. A mark is also shown, which can be positioned with the aid of a joystick or similar means for moving a pointer onto a screen (mouse, trackball, pointer deflection keys). These marks are generated in terms of circuitry when evaluating images from a CCD and are not only shown on the monitor during playback, so that the dimensional accuracy is guaranteed.

In the zero test, the target now generally appears on the monitor image with a certain amount of crosshairs to be registered. Registration is done by positioning the marker on the target and then pressing a key switch; the current file, which is known from the brand generator, is saved.

The quality of the measurement depends on the "visibility" of the measurement target for the various sensors used in the system. If, for example, the target is tracked with radar means and measured in a TV image from a gun camera, it is important that the center of gravity of the target is known and visible in the TV image. Just like that When using IR sensors, the aim should be that the IR focus is defined. Suitable targets include Lüneburglinsen, radar angle mirrors with heating and lighting, etc.

Fig. 1

zeigt in skizzenhafter Darstellung die gegenseitige Vernetzung von Sensoren und Effektoren bezüglich ihrer Lage und

Fig. 2

zeigt die Problematik der mechanischen Fehlausrichtung.

Fig. 3

zeigt eine Einzelbeobachtung bei der Feinmessung gemäss Erfindung und

Fig. 4

A/B zeigen einerseits das Resultat der Einzelbeobachtung gemäss Figur 3 und andererseits die Darstellung des Resultats eines ganzen Satzes von Beobachtungen einer Feinmessung.

Fig. 5

zeigt eine schematische Darstellung für Verfahrensdetails.

The procedure according to the invention is explained with the aid of the following figures in an exemplary embodiment.

Fig. 1

shows in a sketchy representation the mutual networking of sensors and effectors with regard to their position and

Fig. 2

shows the problem of mechanical misalignment.

Fig. 3

shows a single observation in the fine measurement according to the invention and

Fig. 4

A / B show on the one hand the result of the individual observation according to FIG. 3 and on the other hand the representation of the result of an entire set of observations of a fine measurement.

Fig. 5

shows a schematic representation for process details.

First, the procedure according to Part 3 is briefly discussed using the example of a battleship in a nifty overview. A radar reflecting or for the sensors (FLIR, laser) "visible" target body is guided as a common measuring target, for example by means of a helicopter at different heights around the ship at sea and constantly measured by the target tracking sensor. The distance is preferably chosen to be approximately 1.5 km, the elevation preferably varies between 5 and 70 degrees. The measurement target must be placed in different positions relative to the ship. This can be done, for example, by means of a helicopter, which carries the target body Z on an approximately 80 m long suspension cable 12. Starting at a height of approx. 150 m, the helicopter circles the ship, with one or more target tracking sensors tracking and measuring the target. This process continues at ever greater heights, with the measurement target being constantly measured. In the case of the measurement between the aiming device with radar (tracking radar) and the gun, the guns, controlled by the aiming devices, are aimed at the same measurement target, which is observed and displayed by the TV cameras assigned to the guns. The measurement values resulting from the different measurement angles are comparison values between two sensors in each case. The computer determines the alignment errors, for example between radar sensor axes and gun sensor axes. The alignment error vector can be determined more and more precisely and continuously taken into account by means of a recursion calculation that is constantly running or a repeated regression calculation. The errors remaining from the rough alignment according to part 2 are eliminated. The deviations can be shown in a diagram.

With this or by displaying code numbers, one has constant control of the improvement in precision. According to the determined value for the aforementioned system quality, a suspected, time-independent error, for example, can also be checked for its actual time independence, since the all-round target measurements can be repeated at any time intervals.

Further details on the invention result from the following consideration with reference to the figures.

Figure 1 shows a setup of three sensor groups G, T and R. These are a search radar R, two aiming devices (tracking radar) T1, T2 and three computer-controlled guns G1, G2 and G3. All of these construction devices are in their beddings and are roughly aligned mechanically. Possible alignment errors are on the one hand the tilt angles Tx, Ty, Tz, small inclination angles of the bedding with respect to the ship coordinate system around the axes x or y or z, as shown in a schematic representation for different devices in FIG. 2, on the other hand the small twists of the coordinate system of the upper mount compared to the ideal coordinate system, originating from eg Residual errors from the measurements according to part 1 of the procedure.

With each all-round target measurement, one or more alignment error vectors B11 (gun 1 to aiming device 1), B12 (gun 1 to aiming device 2), B21, B22, B31, B32, A1 (aiming device 1 to circular search radar), A2 (aiming device 2 to search radar). The measurements of the data sets from which the alignment error vectors are calculated can be nested in time. A specific alignment error vector, for example B12, results for the gun 1, for example, in the tilt with respect to T2 and the zero offset in elevation of the sensor sight line.

The procedure for determining an alignment error vector is now explained using a single gun-aiming device relationship.

This is shown schematically in an example in FIG. 3, in which a gun G3 with a TV sensor B, a straightening device T2 that controls the gun by means of control data and a helicopter 10 with a measurement target Z attached to the suspension cable 12, for example, are shown. The two attachments, the aiming device and the gun, are on deck S in their beddings and, as I said, are roughly aligned mechanically. This rough location was measured with the usual accuracy according to part 2 of the procedure and has been taken into account since then. The own parameters of the mountings, which are measured as precisely as possible (part 1 of the procedure), are known and also included.

The straightening device T2 controls the gun G3 via data or signal lines 11. With this arrangement, the alignment error vector B32 according to FIG. 1 is determined.

Based on the target data determined by the aiming device and taking into account all previously known parameters, the sensor sight line of the gun (not the firing line) is automatically aimed as best as possible at the target. The cross point of the crosshair points in the direction in which the measurement target is expected. The measurement target in its actual position is generally be visible with a certain offset d from the cross point of the crosshair, in Fig. 4A in a schematic representation e.g. in the upper left quadrant of the picture. This immediately visible position error is the result of all kinds of system errors, such as mechanical tolerances, residual errors in the rough position measurement, target tracking errors, etc. The deviations between the gun line of sight, represented by the crosshairs, and the measurement target are recorded at intervals of a few seconds and together with the target data of the Stored target continuously moved in space by aligning a measuring mark with the measuring target image using the joystick and initiating storage of the data by pressing a trigger button. The data set of measurements recorded in this way can be e.g. as illustrated in FIG. 4B with 8 measuring points.

Each new measurement value is immediately included in the calculation of the alignment error vector. With increasing number of Measured values from different directions of the measurement target relative to the aiming device and the gun converge the components of the alignment error vector. A statistical evaluation of the data set enables an indication of the quality of the result.

After completing a series of measurements, when the alignment error vector has been determined with sufficient accuracy, it is added to the previous value and the new value is used from then on, both in measuring and in shooting operation.

Such a procedure for, for example, determining the alignment error vector B32 is shown in FIG. A directional device T2, a gun G3 with TV sensor and a data processing system (fire control computer) DV are connected as shown. From a hierarchical perspective, the computer is the data manager and data converter for the straightening device T2. The aiming device itself supplies target data for one or more guns.

• A- ist die Zieldatenaufbereitung des Richtgeräts. Von dort wird die Zielposition gemeldet;
• B- ist im wesentlichen die Geschützsteuerung. Sie berücksichtigt u.a. die verschiedenen Parallaxen zwischen dem Sensor des Richtgeräts, dem Geschützsensor (TV) und dem Messziel sowie den aus I (weiter unten) gewonnenen Ausrichtfehlervektor zwischen den Lafetten des Richtgeräts T2 und des Geschützes G3;
• C- ermittelt den Geschütz-Datensatz, d.h. die Seiten- und Höhenwinkel;
• D- enthält die Messungen der Zielabweichung (Messziel/Fadenkreuz, Fig. 4);
• E- berechnet als Teil der Datenverarbeitunganlage mit Hilfe eines Programms laufend den Ausrichtfehlervektor aus den gesammelten Abweichungsdaten und Richtungen im Verlauf der Messungen (Messablauf während der Rundummessung);
• F- berechnet die Restfehler, deren Standardabweichungen und Mittelwerte sowie die Konvergenz der Messreihe;
• G- Stellt die verschiedenen Ergebnisse dar und ermöglicht die Abschätzung der durch die Korrektur erreichbaren Verbesserung;
• H- stellt die angewendeten Korrekturen in Form einer chronologischen Auflistung dar, wobei die neuen Ergebnisse die alten ergänzen. Die Darstellung dient als Benützerhilfsmlttel und kann für weitere Analysen protokolliert werden;
• I- speichert den wirksamen Ausrichtfehlervektor. Während des Messvorgangs werden (ständig) die vorhandenen alten Daten verwendet (alt bedeutet bisher ermittelter Ausrichtfehlervektor). Nach Abschluss des Messvorgangs wird der berechnete, neue Ausrichtfehlervektor, der z.B. infolge Schiffsdeformation seit der letzten Ermittlung ungleich null ist, zum bisher verwendeten Ausrichtfehlervektor kumuliert. Der kumulierte, neue Ausrichtfehlervektor B32 wird zu B zurückgeführt zur künftigen Verwendung im Mess- und Schiessbetrieb.

The different blocks in the flowchart are labeled from A to I and mean the following or work as follows:

• A- is the target data preparation of the straightener. The target position is reported from there;
• B- is essentially gun control. It takes into account, among other things, the different parallaxes between the sensor of the aiming device, the gun sensor (TV) and the target, and the alignment error vector obtained from I (below) between the mountings of the aiming device T2 and the gun G3;
• C- determines the gun record, ie the side and elevation angles;
• D- contains the measurements of the target deviation (target / crosshair, Fig. 4);
• As part of the data processing system, E- continuously calculates the alignment error vector from the collected deviation data and directions in the course of the measurements using a program (measurement sequence during the all-round measurement);
• F- calculates the residual errors, their standard deviations and mean values as well as the convergence of the series of measurements;
• G- represents the various results and enables the improvement achievable by the correction to be estimated;
• H- shows the corrections applied in the form of a chronological list, with the new results supplementing the old ones. The illustration serves as a user aid and can be logged for further analysis;
• I- stores the effective alignment error vector. The existing old data are used (continuously) during the measuring process (old means the alignment error vector determined up to now). After completion of the measuring process, the calculated new alignment error vector, which has not been zero, for example due to ship deformation since the last determination, is cumulated to the alignment error vector previously used. The accumulated, new alignment error vector B32 is returned to B for future use in measuring and shooting operations.

In principle, the same procedure is used to determine the alignment error vector A2 between the search radar R and the directional device T2, only the search radar only evaluates the side angle here. For this purpose, the measured value can be recorded automatically, since both devices track the measurement target independently of one another and deliver target data.

Claims (14)

1. Process for the correction of alignment errors between carriages and thereon arranged units of gun fire control systems and weapon installations, utilizing equipment correction values ex factory and measuring values of a rough position of installed equipment, which has been measured with the gun fire control systems and the gun installations in their inoperative state, and their consideration in servo controls of the carriages, characterised by the following process stages:

   a: Installation of target measuring sensors for target angle determination (B, TV) on guns with servo-controlled carriages (G1, G2, G3) and alignment of the target-measuring sensor line of sight with the firing line of the gun;

   b: alignment of guns (G1, G2, G3) with target measuring sensors (B, TV) by means of a target tracking unit (T1, T2) and target tracking units (R, T1, T2) to a common measuring target (Z);

   c: detection of the difference (d) between the position of the measuring target (Z) and the position of the target measuring sensor line of sight in the target measuring sensor (B, TV) of the gun (G1, G2, G3) which is controlled by the target tracking unit (T1, T2), and detection of the difference between the position of the measuring target (Z) as detected by the target tracking unit (T1, T2) and that detected by an additional target tracking unit (R, T1, T2);
   or

   b': alignment of guns (G1, G2, G3) with target measuring sensors and aiming devices and of target tracking units (R, T1, T2) to a common measuring target (Z);

   c': detection of the difference between the position of the measuring target (Z) as detected by the target measuring sensor and the aiming device of a gun (G1, G2, G3) or of another target tracking unit (R, T1, T2) and that detected by the target measuring sensor and aiming device of an additional gun (G1, G2, G3) or of another target tracking device (R, T1, T2);

   d: evaluation of said difference in position and establishment of an alignment error vector (Aj, Bij; i=1,2,3, j=1,2) for taking into account in the gun servo control;

   e: correction of control signals which occur in firing operations by means of an alignment error vector (Aj, Bij; i=1,2,3, j=1,2).
2. Process according to claim 1, characterised in that the detection of a plurality of spatially arranged measuring positions of the measuring target (Z) are provided for determining the alignment error vector (Aj, Bij, i=1,2,3, j=1,2) of a gun (G1, G2, G3).
3. Process according to claim 2, characterised in that substantially equidistant lateral angles and/or elevations are selected for the measuring target positions relative to the gun to be aligned (G1, G2, G3).
4. Process according to claim 2 or 3, characterised in that there is a relative movement between the measuring target (Z) and the gun installation to be measured.
5. Process according to one of claims 2 to 4, characterised in that the measuring target (Z) is guided in space in specified paths.
6. Process according to claim 5, characterised in that the measuring target (Z) is guided through space by a helicopter (10̸).
7. Process according to one of claims 1 to 6, characterised in that, for the purpose of measuring the gun fire control systems and gun installations, each gun (G1, G2, G3) is aimed by each aiming unit (T1. T2) at the common measuring target (Z).
8. Process according to one of claims 2 to 7, characterised in that the evaluation of the position deviation measurements includes a residual error analysis which delivers a quality value for each pairing of guns.
9. Device for guns (G1, G2, G3) and target tracking devices (R, T1, T2) which are equipped with gun fire control systems and gun installations, for correcting alignment errors between carriages and equipment arranged thereon with a known rough position, which has been measured with the gun fire control systems and the gun installations in their inoperative state, and with storage and computer means for taking correcting value into account in servo controls of the carriages, characterised by

   a: target measuring sensors for detection of the target angle (B, TV), on guns (G1, G2, G3) with servo-controlled carriages, their target measuring sensor line of sight being aligned at a precisely known angle to the firing line of the gun (G1, G2, G3);

   b: target tracking devices (T1, T2) and thereto effectively connected servo-controlled guns (G1, G2, G3) with their target measuring sensors (B, TV) for detection of a common measuring target (Z) and for alignment of the gun (G1, G2, G3) with the measuring target (Z);
   or

   b': target tracking devices (R, T1, T2) and guns (G1, G2, G3) equipped with target measuring sensors and aiming means for detection of a common measuring target (Z);

   c: means for the detection of a difference (d) between the position of the line of sight and the measuring target (Z) in the target measuring sensor (B, TV) of a gun (G1, G2, G3) which is servo-controlled by a target tracking device (T1, T2), and means for the detection of a difference between the position of the measuring target (Z), as detected by the target measuring sensor and aiming means of a gun (G1, G2, G3) or of another target aiming device (R, T1, T2), and the one detected by the target measuring sensor and aiming means of an additional gun (G1, G2, G3) or of another target tracking device (R, T1, T2);

   d: computer facilities (DV) for the evaluation of position differences (d) and for processing an alignment error vector (Aj, Bij; i=1,2,3, j=1,2) to be taken into account in the servo-control of the gun.

   e: computer facilities for the correction of control signals which occur in firing operations by means of an alignment error vector (Aj, Bij; i=1,2,3, j=1,2).
10. Device according to claim 9,characterised in that a fixed focus TV camera with CCD imaging element is used as target measuring sensor (TV).
11. Device according to claim 9, characterised in that position differences (d) are entered by repositioning a mark in the indicator of the target measuring sensor (B, TV) towards the target (Z), in which respect the repositioning is carried out via movement devices on the operators panel, and the entry is carried out by key depression.
12. Device according to claim 9, characterised in that the measuring target (Z) can be reached by the different types of target measuring sensors of all units and can be arbitrarily moved and directed in space.
13. Device according to claim 12, characterised in that the measuring target (Z) has a large radar reflecting cross-section, the centre of which is defined and optically visible.
14. Device according to claim 12 or 13, characterised in that the measuring target (Z) has a defined, optically visible infrared centre.

Images