EP0547391A1 - Method for increasing the success probability for an anti-aircraft defence system using remote-controlled scattering projectiles - Google Patents

Abstract

A weapon system having at least one fire control apparatus and one gun uses a projectile which can be exploded remotely for missile defence. This allows the hit probability to be increased, but the defence success is called into question as a result of the low density of the projectile fragments. The method uses a projectile whose fragments are concentrated onto a ring (10) which expands in the form of a conical outline. The projectile is given a personality on firing. The surveying of the target continues while the projectile is flying, as a result of which the most probable location in the previously calculated impact point is continuously known more precisely. The explosion command is signalled to the projectile as late as possible. It is always possible to bring about a hit with high probability. As a result of the relatively high density of the fragments which are concentrated onto the ring (10), the defence is provided with an increased success probability. <IMAGE>

Description

The invention is in the field of missile defense by means of cannon projectiles and relates to a method for increasing the probability of success by deliberately disassembling a specially designed projectile.

Missiles are unmanned aerial objects such as missiles, guided missiles, projectiles, drones. The spectrum of possible movements of such objects is very diverse. The means to combat them are correspondingly varied; they range from simple anti-aircraft guns to complex air-to-air weapons with homing heads. Systems for combating and destroying enemy missiles by means of projectiles, which are at stake, essentially comprise at least one cannon for firing the projectiles and a fire control device for measuring the movement of the missile and for calculating the direction of fire and the time of the fire initiation. An automatic fire control system is essential to combat fast and agile missiles, i.e. the target is pursued - in this case the missile - and the direction of the shot is calculated on the basis of the results of the measurement and the cannon is continuously readjusted. If desired, the time and duration of the burst of fire can also take place automatically when the fire barrier is lifted.

The general problem of air defense or missile defense is to bring a sufficiently large destruction potential in good time to the current location of the object to be defended and to make it effective there. In the simplest case, the potential for destruction is the moving mass of a ballistic projectile, that is to say kinetic energy. For it to take effect, the projectile or at least one Part of it hit the target. Another option is an explosive device. This carries an explosive, i.e. bound chemical energy, which detonates in the event of a direct hit or with the help of a proximity fuse if the target is approached sufficiently and exerts its destructive effect through heat radiation and pressure waves. The defense task, however, is to render the object harmless, i.e. to destroy it, to lead it away from the dangerous course or to damage it in such a way that it can no longer fulfill its purpose. Of course, where the object is hit (or at what distance the charge detonates) and how the destructive energy is transmitted plays a role. A smooth bullet through a stabilizing sheet of the object is a hit, but has no significant effect, just like a precisely placed load of the finest shot pellets, none of which can penetrate the shell of the object.

• aus der Zielvermessung ist die Zielbahn für den Zeitraum der Geschossflugdauer bekannt;
• aus Kenntnis der Ballistik ist die Flugbahn des Geschosses für eine gegebene Abgangsrichtung bekannt;
• aus der Feuerleitrechnung auf Grund der obigen Angaben sind die Ansteuerdaten für die Kanone für einen Treffer bekannt, und
• nach Abgabe des Schusses sind der vorausichtliche Treffpunkt zwischen Geschoss und Ziel im Raum und der Treffzeitpunkt bekannt.

The design of the ammunition and the consideration of the probability of destruction on the object for different hit positions are to be included in the considerations for missile defense. First of all, however, it is assumed that the hit problem of the defense is basically solved:

• the target path is known from the target measurement for the period of the storey flight duration;
• from knowledge of ballistics, the trajectory of the projectile is known for a given direction of departure;
• the control data for the cannon for a hit are known from the fire control calculation based on the above information, and
• after the shot has been fired, the probable meeting point between the floor and the target in the room and the meeting time are known.

In reality, target and floor will hardly be found at the calculated meeting point at the same time. The calculation is based on extrapolations that naturally have uncertainties. The Uncertainty of the location of the projectile at the calculated hit time results in particular from the directional errors and the scattering of the cannon, the scattering of the initial speed of the projectile and the external ballistic disturbances, such as the wind. The uncertainty of the location of the target at the calculated hit time results from the limited measurement accuracy when tracking the target, the inherent variance of the prediction algorithm and the target maneuvers not recorded in the meantime. There is therefore the problem of the inadequate probability of being hit and destroyed as a result of these uncertainties, in short the unsatisfactory probability of success for the missile defense, which must be increased with suitable measures.

A known measure to increase the likelihood of success consists in tempering the floor. Immediately upon firing, the projectile is tempered, that is, it is impressed with a time after which it is exploded or disassembled. Such a projectile acts through the fragments or the pressure waves of the explosive, which are distributed within a cone in the room. The time of the decomposition is chosen so that the fragments or the pressure waves cover the area of uncertainty of the target's stay at the calculated hit time. The imprinted time is the calculated floor flight time to the ideal meeting point minus the advance time. The latter can be constant or can be calculated in an optimized manner based on the current conditions.

The described method has the disadvantage that the available destruction potential must be distributed over the relatively large area of the target uncertainty zone, which reduces the impact of a hit. An improvement in this regard is achieved with a projectile with a proximity fuse. Commonly is the relative speed the target to the floor, determined by Doppler measurement. It is ignited when the relative speed that falls near the target falls below a predetermined value. A direct hit is not anticipated. As a rule, the projectile is disassembled closer to the object than with the templating process, which results in a higher probability of destruction. The proximity fuse, however, requires measurement and signal processing on the floor.

Another possibility for improvement is to program the projectile in flight. After the shot, the target is measured further. This makes it increasingly possible to determine where it will be at the calculated meeting time. This in turn can be used to determine which temp is optimal. If the projectile is equipped with a receiving device and designed in such a way that it is not only tempo- rated to a mean value when shooting, but can also be individualized, then each individual projectile can be individually informed in flight when it should disassemble. DE-A-2348365 describes a weapon system that can affect the detonator of a projectile in flight. It includes a pulse transmitter that can transmit data to the detonator on the floor via a transmitting antenna. The detonator on the floor has, among other things, an electronic receiver device for this data. The data contains the individual address, which means that only one particular detonator is addressed at a time, and correction values for a running counter. The detonation occurs when a certain counter reading is reached. By correcting the counter reading, the ignition timing can thus be advanced or postponed. This procedure results in a smaller target uncertainty zone and an adjusted advance in time. If, however, it turns out that the target and the projectile will cross each other at a relatively large distance, there is no other option than to disassemble the projectile early, so that fragments can still reach the target. The The destruction potential of these few fragments will then hardly be sufficient to render the target harmless.

There is therefore the task of finding a method which increases the probability of success for the defense of a missile by means of a collapsible projectile.

The object is achieved by the characterizing features in claim 1.

The method is based on a projectile, the fragments of which are concentrated on a cone shell when dismantled, for example according to EP-A-0 328 877, but with a remote-controlled detonator. The target is measured further after the projectile has been shot down. Towards the predicted meeting time, the location of the destination is then increasingly known. It will generally not match what was originally calculated. The dismantling order will be communicated to the projectile in flight as late as possible. The time of disassembly is chosen so that the fragments diverging in the cone shell hit the target on the new target path. The projectile dismantling thus acts as a one-off redirection of the projectile trajectory by half the opening angle of the cone for part of the projectile mass. This has the great advantage that the existing destructive potential remains more concentrated than in the conventional temp. Projectile and in the proximity fuse. An active measurement from the floor, as inevitable with the latter, is not necessary.

Figur 1

zeigt summarisch die Anlage für die Flugkörperabwehr.

Figur 2

skizziert in perspektivischer Darstellung die Verhältnisse für die Flugkörper-Abwehr mittels eines tempierten Geschosses (Stand der Technik)

Figur 3

skizziert die nämlichen Verhältnisse für das erfindungsgemässe Verfahren

Figur 4

zeigt die unterschiedlichen Dichteverteilungen zweier Geschosse zu zwei verschiednen Zeitpunkten.

The invention is illustrated by four figures.

Figure 1

shows the missile defense system in summary.

Figure 2

outlines in perspective the situation for missile defense by means of a tempered projectile (state of the art)

Figure 3

outlines the same conditions for the method according to the invention

Figure 4

shows the different density distributions of two floors at two different times.

The starting point, roughly in the manner shown in FIG. 1, is a system 30 for combating missiles 31 by means of projectiles 32, with at least one fire control device 33 and at least one gun 34. In principle, the aim is to launch the missile 31 with the cannon 35 fired floor 32 to hit directly. The fire control device 33 continuously measures the target, ie the path 1 of the missile 31. Together with the knowledge of the type of the missile 31 and thus its maneuverability, the expected trajectory 1 of the target is determined from this in the near future. On the other hand, the ballistics of the projectile 32 used in conjunction with the cannon 35 are known. The trajectory 3 of the projectile 32 can thus be specified for a predetermined firing direction. Furthermore, it can now also be determined at what time the projectile 32 must be fired in which direction so that the target trajectory 1 and the projectile trajectory 3 intersect and both the projectile 32 'and the target 31' are located in this intersection 11 at the same time. Usually, the cannon 35 is continuously directed by the automatic fire control system so that a projectile 32 can be fired at any time and then takes the desired trajectory. For this purpose, the fire control device 33 and the gun 34 are combined in one device or connected to one another via the necessary lines 36.

This known ideal case of successful air defense is outlined in FIG. The calculated target trajectory 1 is symbolized by a directional straight line, the calculated projectile trajectory 3 by a similar straight line. The two lanes intersect at meeting point 11, which is calculated according to the calculation Should meet target and floor at meeting time t3. It is a mixed representation of spatial and temporal elements. The projectile trajectory 3, for example, shows the points in space that the projectile sweeps over time. At time t0 it is at point 4, at time t3> t0 at meeting point 11. Spatially speaking, the projectile moves from the left behind out of the plane of the figure to the top right front.

However, the calculations for the whereabouts of both the target and the storey are naturally fraught with uncertainties. This is due to measurement and model inaccuracies as well as external disturbances. Measurement errors of the sensor play a role for the target, especially if it can only be tracked for a short time and a relatively long projectile flight time has to be taken into account, the type of extrapolation calculation and the unknown maneuvers of the target after the projectile exit. The spread of the weapon and the ammunition are of importance for the projectile, for the latter in particular the initial speed spread, the directional errors, particularly as a result of control deviations in the servo control, and meteorological influences. The underlying trajectories are therefore the most probable trajectories according to the calculation model. For each path point there is a probability distribution for the actual location of the target or floor, here called the uncertainty zone for short.

An uncertainty zone 6 is sketched as an example in FIG. At time t3, when the target is most likely to be in meeting point 11, there is an area (not shown) within which the target is located with a probability that is close to one. At the same time, a spatial area (not shown) can be specified within which the floor is with a probability close to one. The overlay Both areas result in the sketched uncertainty zone 6 around the common point 11, the shape of which is given here as a model. The proportion of the target uncertainty predominates considerably. It is not difficult to determine that there is a considerable probability that the projectile will miss the target.

To ensure a hit, the templating of the floor is a good option. Figure 2 also shows the corresponding conditions. The ignition or disassembly time t0 is earlier than the calculated meeting time t3. At time t0, the projectile is at the disassembly point 4. After the ignition, the fragments of the projectile spread out conically. This cone 14 is indicated in FIG. 2 - it opens towards the viewer. The tip of the cone 14 is at the location of the projectile at the ignition, the axis lies in the direction of movement of the projectile and the opening angle and the density distribution of the fragments is a characteristic of the projectile; typically the density decreases towards the outside. At time t3, the fragments are essentially distributed in a circularly delimited plane and form a fragment disk 5. The plane is orthogonal to the projectile trajectory 3 and contains the calculated meeting point 11. The radius of the fragment disk 5 is ideally just so large that the greatest extent the uncertainty zone 6 finds space in it. The advance in time, that is the time difference t3-t0, by which the projectile is disassembled before the calculated point of impact t3, is advantageously chosen in knowledge of the projectile characteristics, in particular the opening angle of the cone, so that at time t3 the fragment disk 5 extends the extent of the Uncertainty zone 6. The uncertainty zone 6 is significantly larger for long storey flight times than for short ones. Here the advantage of a temping only becomes apparent when it is shot down when the conditions are known. The time advance can then be adjusted to the present situation.

The likelihood of a hit can therefore be significantly increased by the temping process. However, the probability of success does not increase to the same extent. As the advance in time or the radius of the fragment disk 5 increases, the fragment density decreases quadratically. However, the probability of destruction also decreases with density. For a given total weight, this basically applies regardless of the optimization between the number of fragments and the weight of the fragments.

An improvement in this regard can be achieved if the target is measured further while the projectile is in flight and the tempo is only set in flight. DE-A-2348365 teaches how the latter can be accomplished, for example. The required data are passed on to the floor 32 'with the aid of a radio connection, symbolically represented in FIG. 1 by the antenna 38 and the radio signal 39. At the time of the tempering, thanks to the continued measurement and calculation of the target path, a corrected meeting point can already be specified, and the uncertainty zone for the location of the target is generally smaller. In the case of an almost unchanged calculated meeting point even at the time of the flight control, FIG. 2 remains valid, but a different scale now applies than before. Thanks to the continued measurement, the uncertainty zone 6 is smaller in its dimensions (and somewhat changed in shape) and the distance of the decomposition point 4 from the calculated meeting point 11 is shorter. The density of the fragment disk 5 is correspondingly higher. If the probability of a hit remains approximately the same, the probability of destruction and thus the probability of success can be increased if the projectile is "on the right track".

However, the continued survey results in a corrected meeting point that is against the edge of the original If there is an area of uncertainty, there is nothing left to do other than to set a time advance similar to that of the time limit when shooting so that a hit is even possible. The hit probability can be obtained, but the probability of success cannot be increased. In other words: once the meeting point has been calculated and the floor has been fired accordingly, it is possible to continue to measure the expected destination near the theoretical meeting point with increasing accuracy, but the options for responding to the floor are very limited. Only if the additional information confirms a favorable constellation between the floor and the target can a smaller time advance be selected, which increases the fragment density in the collision and thus the probability of destruction.

The invention now remedies this. The additional information is used to increase the likelihood of destruction compared to the method with the fragmentary bullet in flight, and thus to improve the chances of success. For this purpose, a projectile is used which can also be temped in flight through the fire control system or, preferably, remotely ignited, the fragments of which, however, spread out in the shape of a cone after being dismantled. The destructive potential in the form of kinetic energy in the fragments is concentrated on an expanding ring.

FIG. 3 shows in the same way as FIG. 2, in a mixed representation of spatial and temporal elements, the conditions after the dismantling of such a conical shell bullet. At time t1, the projectile is at the point of disassembly 9. From then on, the fragments of the projectile continue to fly in space at approximately the same axial speed, and all of them spread uniformly in all directions with approximately the same radial speed. The As time progresses, fragments sweep over a conical shell 19 of finite strength, as is sketched in FIG. 3. The viewer looks into the narrowing funnel. The calculated bullet trajectory 3, which in turn is indicated by a directed straight line, forms the axis of the cone, the point of decomposition 9 the tip. At time t2, the projectile would have been in trajectory 3 at point 12. Now it is divided into a circular fragment ring 10, which lies approximately in the orthogonal plane to path 3 through point 12. It is easy to see that the fragment density in this ring is considerably higher than that when the same number of fragments is distributed over the entire circular area.

FIG. 3 also shows the conditions for successful missile defense using the inventive method. The target trajectory 1 calculated at the time the projectile was fired intersects the projectile trajectory 3 at the meeting point 11, which was then calculated in advance, at the theoretical hit time t3. With the help of the continued target measurement, the probable target trajectory around the time t3 can be determined more precisely during the projectile flight time, but before the projectile has reached point 9. This is shown as the corrected target trajectory 2. At time t2 - for the figure t2 <t3, but this is not mandatory - the target is most likely at point 8. The location of the target is known at time t2 except for an uncertainty zone 7, which is generally much smaller than that Uncertainty zone 6 shown in FIG. 2 for the location of the target around the theoretical meeting point 11 at time t3, as is determined when the projectile is fired. The location 13 of the destination at time t3 after the updated calculation naturally lies within the uncertainty zone 6.

At this point it should be noted once again that the above considerations are relative information regarding a bullet trajectory assumed to be fixed. Absolutely in the room the projectile trajectory is also different than calculated in advance. It too is fraught with uncertainty. However, these are combined with those of the target in an uncertainty zone of the target with regard to a determined projectile trajectory. Any deviations of the actual bullet trajectory determined from the one calculated in advance, in particular, for example, on the basis of bullet drop measurements, are offset in a reduced uncertainty zone of the target. Furthermore, the ballistic influences are neglected for the calculations in the immediate vicinity of the meeting point, and the movements of the projectile and fragments are considered to be approximately linear and at a uniform speed. This approach is retained in the following.

The most important floor exit measurement is that of the initial speed, which latter has a significant influence on the floor trajectory. In servo-controlled guns, the directional errors due to control deviations can also be measured well and can be used to determine the uncertainty zone.

For a special embodiment of the method, the system is also supplemented by a tracking and measuring device 37 (FIG. 1) for the projectiles fired. This is advantageously on the gun, but can also be combined with the fire control device 33. In this way, the probable location of each individual storey 32 'can be continuously and precisely determined in the pre-calculated meeting time, which contributes to a further shrinking of the uncertainty zone.

As sketched in FIG. 3, the target is at time t2 within the uncertainty zone 7 around point 8, which in turn lies in the middle of the wall thickness of the fragment ring 10. This is the hit situation, with the projectile being disassembled at time t1, so that the fragment ring 10 meets the target at time t2. Thanks to the relatively high fragment density, the likelihood of destruction is high for such a hit.

nach der Zerlegung, die Kurve 22 jene des Kegelmantelgeschosses im gleichen Zeitpunkt. In beiden Fällen nimmt die Dichte mit der Zeit quadratisch ab, da sich die feste Zahl der Fragmente auf eine Fläche verteilt, die sich mit der Zeit quadratisch ausdehnt, weil der Radius der Kreisfläche linear mit der Zeit zunimmt. Die Kurve 23 zeigt die Verhältnisse für das herkömmliche Fragmentgeschoss zur Zeit 2·T1 nach der Zerlegung, die Kurve 24 jene des Kegelmantelgeschosses.Here there is an essential difference from the conventional projectile, which is at most temp in flight, the fragment density of which decreases towards the outside; Since the target is more likely to remain in the center of the uncertainty zone than to the outside, the fragments are concentrated in the center, because this gives the most chance of success. FIG. 4 shows, over the radius r, the different fragment densities d for the two types of storey at two different times. Curve 21 shows a possible density distribution of the conventional fragmentary storey for a certain time $\text{T1 = r1 / vr}$

after disassembly, curve 22 is that of the conical shell bullet at the same time. In both cases, the density decreases quadratically with time, since the fixed number of fragments is distributed over an area that expands quadratically with time, because the radius of the circular area increases linearly with time. Curve 23 shows the conditions for the conventional fragmentary bullet at the time 2 * T1 after disassembly, curve 24 that of the conical jacket bullet.

It should be remembered that the stated method serves primarily to ward off missiles. Missiles have small dimensions. Target areas of 700 square centimeters and less are not uncommon. If the fragment density is too small, there is therefore a risk that no hits will occur at all or the hits of some very small fragments will not suffice to render the missile harmless.

von der Geschossflugbahn 3. Der momentane Zielort p(t) wird durch die Komponenten xf(t), yf(t) und zf(t), die Zielgeschwindigkeit durch die Komponenten vfx, vfy und vfz angegeben. Wo auf der Kegelachse, das heisst der Geschossflugbahn 3 der Ursprung des Koordinatensystems gewählt wird, spielt keine Rolle.Based on the considerations below, it is now shown that the described method always allows the fragment ring and the expected location of the target to meet, so that a hit is highly likely, and thanks to the relatively high fragment density, success is very likely. A simplifying approach is used, which is based on linear equations. Using the invention, those skilled in the art can increase the accuracy to a more detailed level Fall back on model. A Cartesian coordinate system is used as the basis for the calculations, the axis directions of which are defined as follows: x-axis in the direction of the projectile trajectory 3, y-axis in the orthogonal plane thereto horizontally; The z-axis thus has the direction of the intersection line between a vertical plane through the projectile trajectory and the orthogonal plane to the projectile trajectory. The axis directions are indicated in FIG. 3 at point 12. The projectile moves along the x-axis with the velocity vg> 0, the fragments also have a radial component vr. The ratio vr / vg determines the opening angle of the cone. At time t> t1, the fragments all have the x coordinate xg (t) and the distance $\text{r (t) = vr (t-t1)}$

from the projectile trajectory 3. The current target location p (t) is given by the components xf (t), yf (t) and zf (t), the target speed by the components vfx, vfy and vfz. It does not matter where the origin of the coordinate system is selected on the cone axis, that is to say the floor trajectory 3.

. Die vorläufig ebenfalls unbekannte Differenz zwischen der korrigierten Treffzeit t2 und der zuvor berechneten Treffzeit t3 sei mit T bezeichnet: $\text{T = t2-t3}$

. T kann positiv oder negativ sein - in der Figur 3 ist T offensichtlich negativ. Es gilt:

$\text{xf(t2) = xf(t3) + vfx·T und xg(t2) = xg(t3) + vg·T}$

woraus sich durch Gleichsetzen unmittelbar ergibt:

Due to the continued measurement, the destination 13 at time t3, p (t3) is known. The time t1 is searched so that the fragment ring 10 contains the location 8 of the target, p (t2), at the temporarily unknown corrected meeting time t2. This results in a first condition that the x-coordinates of the projectile fragments and the target must be the same, that is $\text{xf (t2) = xg (t2)}$

. The previously unknown difference between the corrected hit time t2 and the previously calculated hit time t3 is denoted by T: $\text{T = t2-t3}$

. T can be positive or negative - in Figure 3, T is obviously negative. The following applies:

$\text{xf (t2) = xf (t3) + vfx · T and xg (t2) = xg (t3) + vg · T}$

which directly results from equating:

, das ist in der Figur 3 die x-Komponente des Abstands des Punktes 13 vom Punkt 11, ist beschränkt durch die ursprüngliche Unsicherheitszone 6. T ist somit immer bestimmbar und genügend klein.The equation always has a solution that gives a good approximation for the correction T of the hit time. It can be assumed that the only reasonable prerequisite is fulfilled, according to which vg> vfx, that is to say that the target does not move faster in the direction of the floor than the floor itself; normally even vfx <0. The local filing $\text{xf (t3) -xg (t3)}$

3, that is the x component of the distance of point 13 from point 11, is limited by the original uncertainty zone 6. T is therefore always determinable and sufficiently small.

ergibt sich der Abstand a(t2) des Ziels von der Geschossflugbahn 3 bzw. der Kegelachse aus der Wurzel der Quadratsumme von

$\text{yf(t2) = yf(t3) + vfy·T und zf(t2) = zf(t3) + vfy·T :}$

$\text{a(t2) = √[yf(t2)·yf(t2)+zf(t2)·zf(t2)].}$

With the now known T and $\text{t2 = t3 + T}$

the distance a (t2) of the target from the projectile trajectory 3 or the cone axis results from the root of the square sum of

$\text{yf (t2) = yf (t3) + vfyT and zf (t2) = zf (t3) + vfyT:}$

$\text{a (t2) = √ [yf (t2) * yf (t2) + zf (t2) * zf (t2)].}$

As a second target condition, the fragment ring radius must be equal to the distance of the target from the projectile trajectory, i.e. the condition r (t2) = a (t2) must be met, whereby:

$\text{r (t2) = vr * (t2-t1) = vr * (t3 + T-t1).}$

This results in the disassembly time t1 sought

, das heisst, die gesuchte Lösung existiert.Both a (t2) and vr are positive values. In any case, t1 is less than $\text{t2 = t3 + T}$

, that is, the solution you are looking for exists.

For practical use, a certain spread will be provided for the radial speed vr of the fragments, so that the fragment ring 10 is given a finite width. With this measure, the remaining, reduced uncertainty zone 7 is taken into account.

The method according to the invention thus ensures a high probability of a hit paired with a high concentration of the fragments of the projectile and thus ensures a high probability of success.

Of course, the method can also be used to combat other moving targets, namely the defense against aircraft and combat helicopters. With knowledge of the invention, it is readily possible for the person skilled in the art to make the necessary adaptations to the characteristic task.

Claims (6)

Method for increasing the probability of success in missile defense by means of a projectile (32) which can be dismantled remotely, fired from an weapon system (30) containing a fire control device (33) and a gun (34), the projectile (32) individualizing when fired and its time of disassembly in flight is determined remotely, characterized in that the target measurement is continued by the fire control device (33) after the projectile (32) has been fired, and thus the location of the target at the expected time of the meeting is increasingly determined that a projectile (32) is used, the projectile parts of which of the disassembly at approximately the same radial speed, taper apart on an expanding ring (10), and that the time of the disassembly is selected such that the target meets a point in time and location with a point (8) on the ring (10) Bullet parts results. A method according to claim 1, characterized in that the projectile parts are evenly distributed on the expanding ring (10). Method according to claim 1 or 2, characterized in that when the projectile (32) is fired, exit values are measured, the prospective location of the projectile (32 ') at the probable meeting time is determined more precisely and is included in the calculation of the disassembly time. A method according to claim 3, wherein the initial velocity of the projectile (32) is measured as the exit value and is included in the calculation. Method according to claim 3, wherein the directional errors of the gun (34) are measured as the outgoing value and are included in the calculation. Method according to Claim 1 or 2, characterized in that the projectile (32) is measured in flight after the launch and the whereabouts of the projectile (32 ') is increasingly determined from the expected point of impact.

Images