<title>Comparison of head-steered and aircraft-fixed infrared imagery for employing the AGM-65 Maverick missile</title>

Abstract

Eight veteran USAF fighter pilots, experienced with AGM-65 Maverick air-to-ground missiles, flew a night, low-level ground attack mission in a flight simulator equipped with a helmet-mounted display (HMD). The mission was performed by delivering five Maverick missiles against ground vehicles using either an aircraft-fixed forward-looking infrared (FLIR) sensor image on a head-up display (HUD) or a head-steered FLIR as the missile aiming device. Additionally, the pilots employed their weapons by two methods: fixing and launching missiles singly or in varying numbers (multiple method). The purpose of the experiment was to determine what, if any, advantage there is to employing the AGM-65 using the HMD FLIR image to slew the missile seeker onto the target versus the conventional method of using the FLIR image displayed on the HUD. With a head-steered sensor (and fixing and launching weapons singly) subjects released their weapons quicker (14.6 second interval between launches vs. 17.1 sec.), at a higher altitude (1739 feet vs. 1603 ft.), and slightly farther from the target (3.42 nautical miles vs. 3.37 nm). Furthermore, data indicated the pilots looked farther off-boresight when searching for and locking the weapon onto a target, thereby more effectively using the full field-of-regard of the missile seeker. The participants also contributed their opinions of the advantages and disadvantages of the two mechanizations.