Three-dimensional cooperative guidance for multiple missiles: finite-time strategy with fully intermittent communication

doi:10.23919/JSEE.2025.000071

Abstract

Abstract:

This paper addresses the problem of designing distributed cooperative guidance laws for multiple missiles in three-dimensional (3D) space, considering the constraint of simultaneous impact and fully intermittent communication. The problem is structured using a 3D nonlinear mathematical model along with a topology network for interaction. By employing the relative distance and velocity leading angle as coordination variables, a novel finite-time cooperative guidance law is developed through an event-triggered strategy, which eliminates the need for time-to-go estimation. The law’s convergence is demonstrated through finite-time Lyapunov stability theory. Additionally, the guidance approach also eliminates Zeno behavior, which refers to infinite communication instances within a finite time interval, ensuring fully intermittent communication among the missiles. To prevent singularity caused by non-zero velocity leading angles in cooperative guidance, the proportional navigation guidance (PNG) law is applied when coordination variables reach consensus and missiles are nearing the target, which can guarantee that all missiles strike the target simultaneously. Simulation results verify that the developed law achieves impact time correction within a finite duration while maintaining fully intermittent communication throughout the process.

Key words: multiple missiles systems, three-dimensional (3D) impact time cooperative guidance, event-triggered control, finite-time control

Haikuo Liu, Yufei Xu, Hengzai Hu, Jinhua Yu. Three-dimensional cooperative guidance for multiple missiles: finite-time strategy with fully intermittent communication[J]. Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2026, 37(4): 1364-1373.

Figures/Tables 10

Fig 1

Fig 2

Fig 3

Table 1

Fig 4

Fig 5

Fig 6

Fig 7

Fig 8

Table 2

References 30

1	Tan M H, Shen H Three-dimensional cooperative game guidance law for a leader-follower system with impact angles constraint. IEEE Trans. on Aerospace and Electronic Systems, 2024, 60 (1): 405. doi: 10.1109/TAES.2023.3325795
2	Jeon I S, Lee J I, Tahk M J Impact-time-control guidance with generalized proportional navigation based on non-linear formulation. Journal of Guidance Control and Dynamics, 2016, 39 (8): 1885. doi: 10.2514/1.G001681
3	Huang J, Chang S, Chen S A hybrid proportional navigation based two-stage impact time control guidance law. Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2022, 33 (2): 461. doi: 10.23919/JSEE.2022.000046
4	He S M, Lin D F Three-dimensional optimal impact time guidance for antiship missiles. Journal of Guidance Control and Dynamics, 2019, 42 (4): 941. doi: 10.2514/1.G003971
5	Lee S, Cho N, Kim Y Impact-time-control guidance strategy with a composite structure considering the Seeker’s field- of-view constraint. Journal of Guidance Control and Dynamics, 2020, 43 (8): 1566. doi: 10.2514/1.G005063
6	Chi H H, Ding X H, Zhang G L Three-dimensional cooperative guidance law for multiple missiles with predefined-time convergence. Aerospace Science and Technology, 2023, 44 (8): 1238.
7	Dong F, Zhang X Y, Tan P L Non-singular terminal sliding mode cooperative guidance law under impact angle constraint. Journal of the Franklin Institute, 2024, 361 (14): 107090. doi: 10.1016/j.jfranklin.2024.107090
8	Zhang Y, Tang S J, Guo J Two-stage cooperative guidance strategy using a prescribed-time optimal consensus method. Aerospace Science and technology, 2020, 100, 105641. doi: 10.1016/j.ast.2019.105641
9	Zhao E J, Ding X, Zhang K, et al Fixed-time cooperative interception guidance law with angle constraints for multiple flight vehicles. Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2025, 36 (2): 569. doi: 10.23919/JSEE.2025.000036
10	Erer K S, Tekin R Impact time and angle control based on constrained optimal solutions. Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, 2016, 39 (10): 2448. doi: 10.2514/1.G000414
11	Shi H R, Lu F X, Wu L Cooperative trajectory optimization of UAVs in approaching stage using feedback guidance methods. Defence Technology, 2023, 24, 361- 381. doi: 10.1016/j.dt.2022.03.013
12	Sinha A, Kumar S R, Mukherjee D Cooperative integrated guidance and control design for simultaneous interception. Aerospace Science and Technology, 2022, 120, 107262. doi: 10.1016/j.ast.2021.107262
13	Sinha A, Kumar S R, Mukherjee D Three-dimensional nonlinear cooperative salvo using event-triggered strategy. Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, 2021, 44 (2): 328. doi: 10.2514/1.G005367
14	Dong W, Deng F, Wang C Y, et al Three-dimensional spatial-temporal cooperative guidance without active speed control. Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, 2023, 46 (10): 1981. doi: 10.2514/1.G007641
15	Gao M J, Yan T, Han B J, et al Cooperative guidance law based on super-twisting observer for target maneuvering. Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2024, 35 (5): 1304.
16	Li Y J, Zhu M J, An B H, et al Three-dimensional coopera- tive guidance laws with impact velocity and impact angles constraints. Aerospace Science and Technology, 2025, 159, 109997. doi: 10.1016/j.ast.2025.109997
17	Yang B, Jing W X, Gao C S Three-dimensional cooperative guidance law for multiple missiles with impact angle constraint. Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2020, 31 (6): 1286. doi: 10.23919/jsee.2020.000099
18	He S, Wang W, Lin D, et al Consensus-based two-stage salvo attack guidance. IEEE Trans. on Aerospace and Electronic Systems, 2017, 54 (3): 1555.
19	Chen S W, Wang W, Fan J F Three-dimensional piece- wise cooperative guidance with smooth switching topology. Aerospace Science and Technology, 2024, 150, 109181. doi: 10.1016/j.ast.2024.109181
20	Lv J X, Wang C H, Liu B Fully distributed prescribed- time consensus control of multiagent systems under fixed and switching topologies. Information Sciences, 2023, 648, 119538. doi: 10.1016/j.ins.2023.119538
21	Xiong Y C, Li J F, Hu C Q, et al Three-dimensional cooperative guidance strategy for heterogeneous vehicles without prior communication topology establishment. Aerospace Science and Technology, 2025, 161, 110095. doi: 10.1016/j.ast.2025.110095
22	Kumar S R, Mukherjee D Cooperative salvo guidance using finite-time consensus over directed cycles. IEEE Trans. on Aerospace and Electronic Systems, 2020, 56 (2): 1504. doi: 10.1109/TAES.2019.2934675
23	Chen Z Y, Chen W C, Liu X M, et al Three-dimensional fixed-time robust cooperative guidance law for simultaneous attack with impact angle constraint. Aerospace Science and Technology, 2021, 110, 106523. doi: 10.1016/j.ast.2021.106523
24	Yang X Y, Zhang Y C, Song S M Two-stage cooperative guidance strategy with impact-angle and field-of-view constraints. Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, 2023, 46 (3): 590. doi: 10.2514/1.G007040
25	Li W, Wen Q Q, He L, et al Three-dimensional impact angle constrained distributed cooperative guidance law for anti-ship missiles. Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2021, 32 (2): 447. doi: 10.23919/jsee.2021.000038
26	Guan Z H, Liu Z W, Feng G Impulsive consensus algorithms for second-order multi-agent networks with sampled information. Automatica, 2012, 48 (7): 1397. doi: 10.1016/j.automatica.2012.05.005
27	Heemels W P, Johansson K H, Tabuada P. An introduction to event-triggered and self-triggered control [C]//IEEE 51st Conference on Decision and Control, 2012: 3270.
28	Wang X Y, Sun S J, Xiao F, et al Dynamic event-triggered formation control of second-order nonholonomic systems. Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2023, 34 (2): 501. doi: 10.23919/JSEE.2023.000049
29	He Z, Wang J, Fan S Three dimensional cooperative guidance with field-of-view constraints based on event-triggered mechanism. Acta Aeronautica et Astronautica Sinica, 2024, 45 (2): 228.
30	Song S H, Ha I J A Lyapunov-like approach to performance analysis of 3dimensional pure PNG laws. IEEE Trans. on Aerospace and Electronic Systems, 1994, 30, 238. doi: 10.1109/7.250424

Missle	Position/km	V/(m/s)	$ {\theta }_{L}\left(0\right)/{}(^{\circ }) $	$ {\psi }_{L}\left(0\right)/{}(^{\circ }) $	$ {\theta }_{m}\left(0\right)/{}(^{\circ }) $	$ {\psi }_{m}\left(0\right)/{}(^{\circ }) $
M₁	(10.89,9.19,8.00)	330	−30	40	−15	−20
M₂	(10.77,9.20,7.90)	325	−30	40	−25	−20
M₃	(10.61,8.91,7.80)	320	−30	40	−20	−20
M₄	(10.45,8.78,7.70)	315	−30	40	−25	−15
M₅	(10.22,8.63,7.60)	315	−30	40	−30	−20

Missle	Mean miss distances/m	Mean impact time/s
M₁	0.27	55.35
M₂	0.19	55.35
M₃	0.21	55.35
M₄	0.15	55.34
M₅	0.15	55.34

[1]	Xiaoyu WANG, Sijia SUN, Feng XIAO, Mei YU. Dynamic event-triggered formation control of second-order nonholonomic systems [J]. Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2023, 34(2): 501-514.
[2]	Li Yuan, Guangfu Ma, Chuanjiang Li, and Boyan Jiang. Finite-time attitude tracking control for spacecraft without angular velocity measurements#br# [J]. Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2017, 28(6): 1174-1185.
[3]	Zhong Zhen & Duan Guangren. Analysis of finite-time practical stability for time-varying polytopic systems [J]. Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2009, 20(1): 112-119.