NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #26/NN_1992_26.iso/spool/fj/question/misc/1445

Internet Message Format | 1992-11-11 | 4.6 KB

Path: sparky!uunet!ccut!wnoc-tyo-news!etl.go.jp!ume!gama!lab!wasisaka
From: [e-mail] (WASHISAKA Mitsukazu)
Newsgroups: fj.questions.misc
Subject: Patriot
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 12 Nov 92 04:30:36 GMT
Sender: [e-mail]
Distribution: fj
Organization: NTT Basic Research Labs., Tokyo, Japan.
Lines: 83

$@OI:d(J@NTT $@$G$9!%(J

bit $@$N(J 12 $@7n9f$N(J 64 $@%Z!<%8$N:82<$N5-;v$rFI$s$G$$$F:FEY5$$K$J$C$?$N$G$9$,!$(J
$@!V2$(J$@=#$N@o>l$G$O%Q%H%j%*%C%H$O@d$($:0\F0$7$F;HMQ$9$k!%!W$H$$$&$N$O$J$<(J
$@$J$N$G$7$g$&!)(J

$@$3$l$N$b$H5-;v$rFI(J$@$s$@;~$b7^7b%_%5%$%k$r?t;~4V$*$-$K0\F0$5$;$F;HMQ$9$k(J
$@$H$$$&>u67$,NI$/$o$+$i$J$/$F!$@_CV8e(J($@%7%9%F%`;OF0(J$@8e(J)$@?t;~4V$GH/<M$9$k$H$$$&(J
$@0UL#$+$H;W$C$?$N$G$9$,!$?t;~4V$G0\F0$5$;$F;HMQ$9$k$N$J$i$=$NM}M3$O$J$<$J$N(J
$@$G$7$g$&!%(J

> From: [e-mail]
> Date: 3 Apr 92 09:47:14 GMT
> Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
> Subject: Re: Design question about Patriot
>
> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Jeff Berkowitz) writes:
> > [...]
> > The article states "...this particular Patriot battery had been
> > running continuously for about 100 hours...[and]...had built up
> > a timing lag of 0.3433 second."  This timing error was sufficient
> > to shift the "range gate" enough to cause the system to disregard
> > the Scud.
> >
> > My "comp.realtime" question: what algorithm in the Patriot system
> > would cause an ABSOLUTE time variation like this to change a
> > relative computation, like the predicted course of the incoming
> > missile?
>
> I just received my copy of the US General Accounting Office's "Report
> to the Chairman, Subcommittee on Investigations and Oversight,
> Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, House of Representatives:
> Patriot Missile Defense - Software Problem Led to System Failure at
> Dhahran, Saudi Arabia" (phew!)
>
> Since I can't find a copyright notice on it anywhere, I'll quote the
> appropriate paragraph:
>
> "The range gate's prediction of where the Scud will next appear is a
> function of the Scud's known velocity and the time of the last radar
> detection.  Velocity is a real number that can be expressed as a
> whole number and a decimal (e.g., 3750.2563...miles per hour).  Time
> is kept continuously by the system's internal clock in tenths of
> seconds but is expressed as an integer or whole number (e.g., 32, 33,
> 34...).  The longer the system has been running, the larger the number
> representing time.  To predict where the Scud will next appear, both
> time and velocity must be expressed as real numbers.  Because of the
> way the Patriot computer performs its calculations and the fact that
> its registers are only 24 bits long, the conversion of time from an
> integer to a real number cannot be any more precise than 24 bits.
> This conversion results in a loss of precision causing a less accurate
> time calculation.  The effect of this inaccuracy on the range gate's
> calculation is directly proportional to the target's velocity and the
> length of the the system has been running.  Consequently, performing
> the conversion after the Patriot has been running continuously for
> extended periods causes the range gate to shift away from the center
> of the target, making it less likely that the target, in this case a
> Scud, will be successfully intercepted."
>
> Interestingly, when the Israelies were running their Patriot systems,
> they studied the heck out of them, and noticed this problem after
> merely 8 hours of operation.  (8 hours corresponds to a range-gate
> shift of 55 meters; 100 hours corresponds to 678 meters.)  They
> sent this data back, and the Americans responded with something like,
> "This was designed for the European theater, where it would be run
   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> for a few hours before being moved.  Who in his right mind would
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> run a system continuously for eight hours?  Or more?"  They did
> write a software patch to fix the problem, but it took two weeks to
> arrive in Saudi, because of transport difficulties.  It arrived the
> day after the failure.
>
> --
> Frederick G. M. Roeber | CERN -- European Center for Nuclear Research
> e-mail: [e-mail] or [e-mail] | work: [phone]
> r-mail: CERN/PPE, 1211 Geneva 23, Switzerland | home: [phone]
> --
> "Sorry, baby, I can't take you to the pizza joint tonight, I've got to go
> back to the lab and split the atom." -- Ayn Rand, "What is Romanticism?"

-----
WASHISAKA Mitsukazu  ([e-mail])