Control Law Development for the
Lateral Axis of a Fighter Aircraft
Andrew Sparks, Richard Adams, and Siva B a n d a
Wright Laboratory, WWFIGC, Wright Patterson AF'B, OH 45433-6553
Abstract
Multivariable control laws for the
lateral axis of a fighter aircraft operating
a t subsonic speeds a r e presented. A
feedback gain matrix, designed using
Downloaded by Indian Institute of Technology on October 1, 2012 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.1992-4408
linear quadratic regulator theory with
integral action, is used to track stability
axis roll r a t e a n d sideslip angle
commands. The design weights for the
LQ regulator a r e chosen to produce
desirable flying qualities. The closed
loop aircraft meets flying qualities
specifications across the subsonic flight
envelope. The control laws are realized
in a nonlinear simulation by scheduling
t h e regulator gains with dynamic
p r e s s u r e u s i n g a cubic h e r m i t e
interpolation. This design forms t h e
basis for control laws a t high angles of
attack.
Introduction
An important attribute of future
fighter aircraft will be the ability to
maneuver effectively to angles of attack
above maximum lift. Such extreme
maneuvering capability will improve the
fighter's combat effectiveness. Flight to
high angles of attack will increase the
maximum instantaneous and sustained
turn rates and improve the pilot's ability
to point the nose. The former improves
the maneuverability of the aircraft for
offensive a n d defensive maneuvering,
while the l a t t e r improves t h e pilot's
ability to launch a weapon successfully
a t a n adversary. Flight to high angles of
This paper is declared a work of the US
Government and is not subject to copyright
protection in the United States.
attack, however, can only be considered
if the aircraft shows adequate handling
characteristics a t the extreme operating
points.
T h e r e a r e s e v e r a l physical
phenomena a t high angles of attack that
degrade handling characteristics. These
include directional instability, roll
reversal., kinematic and inertial coupling,
and wing rock. Each of these can lead to
loss of control and possibly to dangerous
situations. To further complicate things,
the dynamic aircraft model h a s large
amounts of uncertainty a t extreme flight
conditions. This uncertainty comes from a
scarcity of accurate data a t the extreme
conditions a n d from t h e i n h e r e n t
nonlinearity in the aircraft dynamics.
There is also a large variation i n the
dynamic pressure, so the control surface
effectiveness varies widely. All of these
factors combine to m a k e control of
aircraft a t high angles of attack a very
challenging problem.
Several researchers have
investigated the problem of control of
aircraft operating a t high angles of
attack. In [I],the researchers developed
control laws using inner loop linear
quadratic regulator feedback with a n
outer loop H, controller to get a fixed
controller for a Herbst type maneuver.
The controller was designed only for a
specific maneuver, while gain scheduling
across t h e flight envelope was not
addressed. In [2-51, linear and nonlifiear
techniques a r e u s e d to control a
supermaneuverable aircraft model a t
high angles of a t t a c k . Although
nonlinear techniques show significant
 promise, nonlinear control laws are not
a m e n a b l e t o flying q u a l i t i e s o r
robustness analysis using linear
techniques. In 161, high angle of attack
control laws a r e developed for a free
f l i g h t wind t u n n e l model u s i n g
eigenstructure assignment. Here, flying
qualities considerations a n d control
power c o n s t r a i n t s were u s e d t o
formulate a desired eigenstructure for
the closed loop system, and a series of
algebraic equations are used to find the
feedback and feedforward gain matrices.
Downloaded by Indian Institute of Technology on October 1, 2012 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.1992-4408
The Variable Stability In-flight
Simulator Test Aircraft (VISTA) is a n in-
flight simulator being developed. The
VISTA will be used to s t u d y new
technology in the control of advanced
configuration vehicles a n d advanced
control concepts. The baseline aircraft
being modified to create the VISTA is the
F-16. To prevent directional divergence,
the largest angle of attack t h a t the pilot
can reach is limited to well below the
angle of attack a t maximum lift. With
the angle of attack limiter, a pilot can
maneuver freely without fear of a lateral
departure a t high angles of attack. The
angle of a t t a c k limiter restricts the
aircraft to maneuvers t h a t are a safe
margin below maximum lift, so there is a
potential loss in performance to allow
safe flight. For the VISTA to perform
maneuvers a t high angles of attack, the
dynamic characteristics a t and above
maximum lift must be improved.
This paper presents the results of
t h e first p a r t of a project to study
improving the dynamic characteristics of
a fighter aircraft a t high angles of attack.
The study consists of three parts. First,
flight control laws will be designed for
the current configuration of the F-16.
Multivariable control theory will be used
to design control laws for the aircraft
operating in the conventional
maneuvering envelope. This is done as a
first step to gain experience with the
aircraft and the design method. The
resulting control laws will provide a
smooth transition between the
conventional maneuvering envelope and
the high angle of attack regime by having
a common control structure. Second, the
maneuvering envelope to a higher angle
of attack will be considered. The flight
control laws will be extended to the high
a n g l e of a t t a c k r e g i m e u s i n g
multivariable control. Finally, new
control effectors, including vortex control
by nose blowing, are being considered.
These new effectors will be included in
the aircraft model and be used in the
design for the high angle of attack
envelope.
In this paper, the results of the
control law design for the lateral axis for
the conventional maneuvering envelope
are presented. First, a list of design
r e q u i r e m e n t s from flying qualities
specifications is presented. Then,
descriptions of t h e aircraft and t h e
nonlinear model are given. The linear
model used for control system design is
described next. Linear quadratic
regulator theory is reviewed, and the
control law design process using LQ
regulator theory with integral action is
shown. The weights in the quadratic cost
f u n c t i o n a r e chosen t o produce
acceptable flying qualities. Linear and
nonlinear elements are used to build the
command shaping feedforward loops.
The control gains a t several design points
are scheduled with dynamic pressure and
the gain schedule is implemented in the
nonlinear simulation. Linear and
nonlinear responses to pilot inputs are
plotted to show command following.
Flying qualities analyses are performed
and the results presented, and future
research goals are summarized.
 Design Requirements
The basic philosophy of the
lateral flight control laws is to provide
control of the stability axis roll rate and
the sideslip angle. Control of stability
a x i s roll r a t e r a t h e r t h a n t h e
conventional body axis roll rate reduces
kinematic coupling during rolls a t high
angles of attack. At low angles of attack,
body and stability axis roll rates are
practically the same. Control of sideslip
angle helps maneuvers to be coordinated
Downloaded by Indian Institute of Technology on October 1, 2012 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.1992-4408
and allows landing in a crosswind.
The performance requirements of
i n t e r e s t a r e t h e flying qualities
requirements from MIL-STD-1797 [71.
These requirements give measures of
whether the aircraft has a n acceptable
response to pilot inputs. Several flying
qualities requirements are based on a
low order equivalent system
approximation of the actual dynamics
between the pilot input and the output of
interest. The actual high order transfer
function from the pilot input to the
output of interest is approximated by a
low order equivalent system so the two
match closely over a specified frequency
range. The parameters of the low order
equivalent system are used to determine
whether the aircraft response will be
acceptable to a pilot.
The low order equivalent system
used for analysis of lateral directional
flying qualities is the fourth order
transfer function from pilot's lateral stick
to roll rate. Since the objective is the
control of stability axis roll rate, i,the
transfer function used for the analysis is
that from the lateral stick to stability axis
roll rate. This gives a better measure of
flying qualities a t higher angles of attack
t h a n body axis roll r a t e . The
characteristic equation of the equivalent
system consists of a pair of complex poles
describing the Dutch roll mode and two
real poles describing the roll and spiral
modes. The numerator has a complex
pole pair and an equivalent time delay to
account for the effect of the high order
dynamics. The equivalent system is
To meet level I flying qualities,
the equivalent Dutch Roll frequency
must be higher than 1 radlsec and the
equivalent Dutch roll damping ratio must
be larger than 0.19. The equivalent roll
mode time constant must be less than 1
second. The equivalent spiral mode must
be stable or have a time to double
amplitude of greater than 12 seconds
after a perturbation in roll angle.
Finally, the equivalent time delay must
be less than 0.10 seconds.
Aircraft Model
The F-16 aircraft is a lightweight,
single engine, supersonic fighter. The
aircraft is statically unstable in pitch for
increased performance. The aircraft has
leading and trailing edge flaps, an all
moveable horizontal tail, and a single
rudder. The leading edge flaps are
scheduled with angle of attack to
improve cruise performance. The
horizontal tail is used symmetrically for
pitch control and differentially for roll
control. The pilot controls include a
force-feel side stick, rudder pedals, and a
throttle.
The VISTA nonlinear model is a
FORTRAN program i n a generic
nonlinear simulation environment. This
environment consists of a simulation core
and FORTRAN subroutines making up
t h e application model. Specific
application modules include subroutines
describing the equations of motion,
nonlinear actuators with r a t e a n d
position limits, and sensors. Additional
subroutines describe the propulsion
 system, weight and moments of inertia
variations, the atmosphere, and the
existing digital fly-by-wire control
system. The aerodynamic data exists for
a wide range of Mach numbers, altitudes,
and angles of attack and sideslip. The
model is detailed enough to simulate long
duration and large amplitude maneuvers
with extreme accuracy. The nonlinear
model is used to generate linear models
for control law design and to generate
nonlinear time histories to evaluate
control designs.
Downloaded by Indian Institute of Technology on October 1, 2012 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.1992-4408
Linear Model Description
The nonlinear model open loop
airframe dynamics were used to generate
linear models for control law design.
Linear models were generated a t several
different flight conditions corresponding
to different Mach numbers and altitudes.
The nonlinear model was trimmed a t a
wings level, 1 g operating condition and
linearized using a small perturbation
technique. Each of the states was
perturbed by a small amount, and the
linear model was formed from the
derivatives of each of the states about the
others. The design flight conditions are
shown in Figure 1.
Figure 1 Flight Envelope
The resulting models are tenth
order. The model s t a t e s were
transformed to the conventional aircraft
states: E u l e r angles, body axes
rotational rates, forward speed, angles of
attack and sideslip, and altitude. The
longitudinal states were decoupled from
t h e l a t e r a l directional s t a t e s , so
i n d e p e n d e n t fifth o r d e r l a t e r a l
directional a n d longitudinal models
resulted.
The neutrally stable heading state
of the lateral directional model was
truncated to get a fourth order model.
The states of the fourth order model are
roll and sideslip angles and roll and yaw
rates . The equations are:
The inputs to the lateral
directional dynamics are the differential
horizontal tail (6dt), the differential
flaperon (Q), and the rudder (ar). The
deflections of the differential flaperon
and the differential tail are combined to
form a single input in the linear model
(?ja). The combined control effectiveness
of the flaperon and differential tail is
formed by s u m m i n g t h e control
effectiveness of the flaperon and one
fourth that of the tail. Thus, a single
input is created in the design model. In
the implementation of the control laws,
the command sent to the differential
flaperon is scaled by one fourth and sent
to the differential tail. On the current F-
16, the ratio of differential horizontal tail
to differential flaperon varies a s a
function of airspeed since the flaperon is
more effective a t low speeds and the
horizontal tail is more effective a t higher
speeds. Since this design only treats the
low speed envelope, the ratio was
assumed to be constant throughout the
 design
The measured outputs were
assumed to be roll and yaw rates and
sideslip angle. It was assumed for this
design that the sideslip angle could either
be measured directly or reconstructed
from inertial data. Only one weight and
store configuration and the trim throttle
setting were used in the design and in the
analysis. The aircraft stores consisted of
AIM-9 wingtip missiles and no external
fuel tanks.
Downloaded by Indian Institute of Technology on October 1, 2012 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.1992-4408
Linear Control Law Design
Linear quadratic regulator theory
was used to design the control laws for
the lateral axis of the aircraft. Linear
quadratic regulator theory computes a
feedback gain matrix for a system given
by the state equation [81
that minimizes a quadratic performance
index of criterion outputs, z, given by
where
z = Fx + G u (5)
The weighting matrix Q is used as
a design variable to trade off different
criterion outputs in the cost function.
The solution is given by the feedback
gain matrix is
where P is the positive definite solution
to the algebraic Riccati equation
The synthesis model was formed
by truncating the roll angle state from
the fourth order linear model in equation
(2). This resulted in a neutrally stable
s p i r a l mode when t h e r e s u l t i n g
controller was used on the fourth order
linear model. A neutrally stable spiral
mode in the closed loop aircraft is
desirable. The stability axis roll rate was
formed using the body axis roll and yaw
rate and angle of attack signals. The
sideslip error and the stability axis roll
rate error signals were integrated to get
two additional states. The resulting
synthesis model has the following states:
sideslip angle, roll and yaw rates,
integral of sideslip angle, and integral of
stability axis roll rate. There are two
inputs to the synthesis model: aileron
deflection, which consists of a
combination of flaperon and differential
tail deflection, and rudder deflection. The
linear synthesis model is
PI = P
p = p cosa + r sina
A block diagram of the control
system is shown in Figure 2. Since
sideslip angle and roll and yaw rates are
measured, and the integrated error
signals are generated, all the states of
the synthesis model are available for
feedback.
The criterion outputs were chosen
to achieve good flying qualities in the
closed loop design. Combinations of
states are created to produce zeros in the
criterion outputs. The desired closed
loop poles are used to select the criterion
outputs, since the closed loop poles will
approach these zeros. The desired flying
qualities are used to select these zeros,
providing a way to incorporate desired
 6
PEDAL / I/ + E ~ P
B 3
Figure 2: LateralIDirectional Flight Control System
flying qualities into the design 191. For
Downloaded by Indian Institute of Technology on October 1, 2012 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.1992-4408
the lateral directional model in this
design, t h e first criterion output is a
combination of roll rate, yaw rate, and
integrated stability axis roll rate, and is
given by
s+K1 .
.I= ( T I P the criterion output equations the desired
= P + KIP
= p cosw + I- sinw
The second criterion output is a
combination of sideslip angle, integrated
sideslip angle, and t h e derivative of
sideslip, and is given by
The derivative of t h e sideslip
angle is formed using t h e sideslip
equation in (8). This is only used to
formulate the design equations, and the
derivative of sideslip is not required for
control. The third and fourth criteria
outputs are the control inputs:
The flight condition a t Mach 0.8
rs+l
1
*b
and 30,000 feet altitude was initially
chosen a s the first design point. The
angle of attack a t this condition is 3.4
degrees, and the linear state space model
of the third order dynamics is given in the
appendix. The constants in equations (9)
and (10) are selected to make the zeros of
(9) closed loop poles [91, since the closed
loop poles approach these zeros. The
+ KIP
constant KI in (9) is chosen to be 3.0 to
specify the inverse of the desired roll
mode time constant. The constants and <
o in (10) are chosen to be 0.8 and 3.0,
respectively, to specify the desired Dutch
roll damping a n d frequency. Unity
relative weights were initially chosen on
the criterion outputs.
The resulting control gains gave
good responses when used with the
nominal design model. However, when
models of the actuator dynamics were
included in the simulation, the resulting
closed loop system was unstable because
of phase lag in t h e actuators. The
weights on t h e control i n p u t s were
increased by a factor of ten and the
r e g u l a t o r g a i n s were recomputed.
Although the system was now stable
when the actuator models were included
in the dynamics, there was excessive
control activity and poor response in the
closed loop system with the actuators.
The weights on the control inputs were
increased further. The linear time
responses showed excessive sideslip
 during a rolling maneuver, so the weight
on the sideslip criterion output was
increased to 5. After several iterations,
the design weights are:
Q = diag(1,5,40,20)
shown by the dashed line, follows the
command, shown by the solid line, while
in Figure 6, the roll rate cross coupling is
small. This good performance is
representative of the performance a t all
(12) of the design points.

This value of Q was used with the 0.05

linear models a t each of the design flight
conditions. The resulting regulator gain
matrix has ten elements, feeding back
the three states and the two integral
states to the two independent plant
Downloaded by Indian Institute of Technology on October 1, 2012 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.1992-4408

inputs. The gain matrix for the first

nominal design point is given in the ,
.
C
tr oI
m
appendix.

A linear roll rate step response

appears in Figures 3 and 4 for the flight
-0 02
condition a t Mach 0.6 and 10,000 ft. The I
Time (sec)
J 6 8 10

linear simulation includes the fourth

Figure 4 Sideslip Ang-le Coupling
order linear plant dynamics, second order
1.4
actuator models for the flaperons, the
horizontal tail, and the rudder, the 1.2
- ,...../-...
,
integrators, the regulator gain matrix,
and the pilot command prefilters. In -g ;
Figure 3, the roll rate, shown by the Z, . i
d a s h e d l i n e , closely follows t h e -
DD
0.8

j
:

command, shown by the solid line. In $0.61

;
Figure 4 shows that the sideslip angle is -.-a j
very small for the roll rate command, Z !
showing t h a t t h e system h a s good z -
:
0.2 - ;
decoupling.
0 -'
7 8 10
~ i m :(sec) "

Figure 5 Sideslip Angle Step Response

12

0 '
I 2 4 6 8
I
10
Time (sec)
Figure 3 Roll Rate Step Response

In Figures 5 and 6, a sideslip angle

Figure 6 Roll Rate Coupling
step response is shown at the same flight
condition. In Figure 5, the sideslip angle,

Nonlinear Implementation
The regulator gains a t each of the
design points were plotted as a function
of dynamic pressure. Seven flight
conditions representing a wide range of
dynamic pressures were selected to be
used a s t h e gains in t h e nonlinear
implementation. The design points that
were selected to be used in the final
implementation are shown in Figure 1.
The gains a t the seven discrete points are
Downloaded by Indian Institute of Technology on October 1, 2012 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.1992-4408
fit in a cubic hermite interpolation [lo].
Several nonlinear elements a r e
included in the feedforward path of the
control system. First, deadbands a r e
used a s b r e a k o u t forces i n t h e
feedforward loop between t h e pilot
i n p u t s a n d t h e command s h a p i n g
prefilters. These breakout forces are
implemented to prevent undesired
motion from small stick and rudder pedal
inputs. A 1 lb side stick breakout force is
used, and a 5 lb rudder peal breakout
force is used.
A nonlinear control gradient is
used to convert the pilot stick force to
commanded stability axis roll rate in
degrees per second. The gradient is
piecewise linear, with two different
slopes. There is a small slope for small
stick forces a n d accurate control over
precision maneuvers and corrections, and
a much larger slope for large forces and
gross maneuvering. The rudder pedal
control gradient is used to convert rudder
pedal force to commanded sideslip angle
in degrees. The gradient is linear, and is
designed to provide a ten degree sideslip
command with a 90 lb pedal input. The
maximum commanded sideslip is ten
degrees.
The prefilters for the roll rate and
sideslip commands a r e used to provide
command shaping from the pilot inputs.
The sideslip prefilter is a first order lag
with a pole a t -15. The roll rate prefilter
is also a first order lag. For large
commands, the prefilter pole is a t -2.5.
For small commands and for commands
moving toward zero roll r a t e , t h e
prefilter pole is a t -5. This allows the
pilot to accurately perform s m a l l
maneuvers, a n d to stop rolling crisply
when the desired toll attitude is reached.
The structure of the controller is
shown in Figure 2. The stability axis roll
rate command is broken down into two
separate signals: a body axis roll rate
command a n d a body axis yaw r a t e
command created using the angle of
attack signal and the stability axis roll
rate command. Each of these signals is
used to generate a rate error signal. 'The
sideslip command is subtracted from the
sideslip measurement to create t h e
sideslip error signal. These signals, as
well as the integrated sideslip error and
stability axis roll rate error, are fed back
to the regulator.
The control laws were
implemented in FORTRAN and used in
the nonlinear simulation. A time history
was generated for stick and pedal step
inputs a t numerous flight conditions.
The roll response a t Mach 0.6 and 10,000
ft. is shown in Figures 7 and 8. The
aircraft roll rate tracks the command
2 4 6 8
Time (sec)
Figure 7 Nonlinear Roll Response
 very well, once again with a minimum of
sideslip. Similar performance was
observed a t all the flight conditions
simulated.
Downloaded by Indian Institute of Technology on October 1, 2012 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.1992-4408
Figure 8 Nonlinear Sideslip Coupling
Flying Qualities Analysis
An equivalent system transfer
function matching program was used to
fit the lateral stick force to stability axis
roll rate transfer function to the fourth
order equivalent transfer function in
equation (1)a t several flight conditions.
The equivalent systems were matched for
the frequency range between 0.1 and 10
radsec. The high order transfer function
from stick force to roll rate was found by
closing the regulator feedback loop
including the two integrators around the
fourth order linear plant model with first
order a c t u a t o r dynamics for t h e
flaperons, horizontal tail, and rudder.
The command shaping prefilter with a
pole a t -2.5 was included in the transfer
function. The resulting high order
transfer function has ten states.
A three step process was used to
simultaneously match the characteristic
equation in the stick force to roll rate
transfer function with that of the pedal
force to sideslip transfer function. First,
the high order transfer function was fit to
a first order roll mode approximation
The roll mode time constant, TR, was
taken from this first order equivalent
system. Next, the high order transfer
function from rudder pedal input to
sideslip angle was computed a t each
flight condition. This higher order
transfer function was fit to a second order
Dutch roll approximation
The Dutch roll natural frequency, o ~ ,
and damping, < D , were taken from the
second order equivalent system.
Finally, the higher order transfer
function from stick force to stability axis
roll rate was fit to the fourth order
equivalent system in equation (1). The
values for the roll mode time constant
and t h e Dutch roll frequency a n d
damping were set a t the values found
using the low order fits in equations (13)
and (14), and fixed during this final low
order fit. The equivalent time delay was
taken from this fourth order fit. The low
order equivalent system matched the
high order system very well over the
frequency range of interest for all the
points analyzed.
The Dutch roll frequency and
damping, roll mode time constant, and
equivalent time delay are plotted in
Figures 9-11. For each of the flight
conditions where the flying qualities
were tested, the values are well within
the level I boundaries. The spiral
stability was assessed from the high
order transfer function. At each of the
points in Figure 1, the spiral mode was
nearly neutrally stable. Level I flying
qualities are defined as a spiral mode
 with a time to double amplitude after a Summary
disturbance in roll of a t least 12 seconds.
Thus, this requirement is met for all of This paper presented the results
the flight conditions. of the flight control synthesis procedure
and the flying qualities and robustness
analysis results for the lateral axis of the
fighter aircraft. Linear quadratic
IOK f r
regulator theory was used to control
stability axis roll rate and sideslip using
20K fr
the pilot's lateral stick and the rudder
x ?OK fr
pedals. The closed loop system showed
good flying qualities and robustness.

1
't'
Downloaded by Indian Institute of Technology on October 1, 2012 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.1992-4408

;:/I<, ,
The next step will be to expand
the flight control laws to the high angle
of attack flight conditions using the
O I
Level 2 current aircraft configuration. The key
I1
1 2 4 6 S 10 factor in the design will be to maintain
Dutch Roll Frequency (radlsec)
directional stability with t h e rudder
Figure 9 Dutch Roll Parameters
effectiveness drastically increased during
high angle of attack maneuvers. Finally,
new control effectors, such a s vortex
Level ? + lilK ft
a 2OK t r
nose control through blowing, will be
x I I I K fr added to the baseline model to improve
0 the yaw control power and potentially
0 I cvel I
a 08 add to the high angle of attack capability.
E
References

[ I ] R.Y. Chiang, M.G. Safonov, K.P.

Madden, and J.A. Tekawy, "A Fixed H,
0.2 0.4 11.6 0.8
Controller for a Supermaneuverable
Mach Number Vehicle P e r f o r m i n g t h e H e r b s t
Figure 10 Roll Mode Time Constant Maneuver," Proceedings of the 1990 IEEE
Conference on Decision a n d Control,
Honolulu, HI.

[2] S.A. Snell, D.F. Enns, a n d W.L.

G a r r a r d , "Nonlinear Control of a
Supermaneuverable Aircraft,"
Proceedings of the 1989 AIAA Guidance,
Navigation, and Control Conference,
Boston, MA.

[3] W.L. Garrard, D.F. Enns, and S.A.

J
Snell, "Nonlinear Longitudinal Control of
02 04 11 6 08 I a Supermaneuverable Aircraft,"
Mach Number
Proceedings of t h e 1989 American
Figure 11 Equivalent Time Delay Control Conference, Pittsburg, PA.

[4] S.A. Snell, D.F. Enns, and W.L.
G a r r a r d , "Nonlinear Inversion Flight
Control for a S u p e r m a n e u v e r a b l e
Aircraft," Proceedings of the 1990 AIAA
Guidance, Navigation, a n d Control
Conference, Boston, MA.
[5] S.A. Snell, D.F. Enns, a n d W.L.
G a r r a r d , "Optimization of L a t e r a l -
Directional Dynamics for a n Aircraft
Operating a t High Angles of Attack,"
Proceedings of the 1991 AIAA Guidance,
Downloaded by Indian Institute of Technology on October 1, 2012 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.1992-4408
Navigation, a n d Control Conference,
New Orleans, LA.
[6] T.R. Wendel, J.R. Boland, D.E.
Hahne, "High Angle of Attack Control
Law Development of a Free-Flight Wind
Tunnel Model Using Direct
Eigenstructure Assignment,"
Proceedings of the 1991 AIAA Guidance,
Navigation, and Control Conference,
Appendix
The linear model a t the flight condition Mach 0.8 and 30,000 ft is:
The resulting gain matrix is:
New Orleans, LA.
[71 "Military Specification - Flying
Qualities of Piloted Vehicles," MIL-STD-
1797, March, 1987.
[81 R.L. Dailey, "Lecture Notes for the
Workshop on H, and p-Methods for
Robust Control," 1990 American Control
Conference, May 21-22, 1990, S a n Diego,
CA.
[9] C.M. Thompson, E.E. Coleman, and
J.D. Blight, "Integral LQG Controller
Design for a F i g h t e r Aircraft,"
Proceedings of the 1987 A I M Guidance,
Navigation, a n d Control Conference,
Monterey, CA.
[lo] K. Kahaner, C. Moler, and S. Nash,
Numerical Methods a n d S o f t w a r e ,
Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ,
1989.