JPRS ID: 9879 TRANSLATION COMPUTERIZED RADAR OPERATOR TRAINERS BY ANATOLIY NIKOLAYEVICH RAMONOV

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: JPRS
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8
• Release Decision: RIF
• Original Classification: U
• Document Page Count: 104
• Document Creation Date: November 1, 2016
• Sequence Number: 60
• Content Type: REPORTS

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2407/42/09: CIA-RDP82-40850R000400430060-8
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
JPRS L/987~
30 July 1981
~
Translation
CQMPUTERIZED RADAR OPERATOR TR~~NERS'
By ,
Anatoliy I~ikolayevieh Romanov

~ ~81~ FOREIGN BROADCAST IIVFORMATION SERVICE
FOR OFFiCIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02109: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8
NOTE '
JPRS publications contain informati.on primarily from foreign .s~
newspapers, periodicals and books, but also from news agency
_ transmissions and broadcasts. Materials from foreign-language
sources ar~ translated; those from English-language sources
are transcribed or reprinted, with the oxigin~l phrasing and
other characteristics retained.
Headlines, editorial reports, and material enclosed in brackets
are supplied by JPRS. Processing indicators such ag [Textj
or [Excerpt] in the first line of each item, or following the
last line of a brief, indicate how the original information was
processed. Where no processing indicator is given, the infor-
mation was summarized or extracted.
~ Unfamiliar names rendered phonetically or transliterated are
enclosed in parentheses. Words or names preceded by a ques-
tion mark and enclosed in parentheses were not clear in the
oxiginal but have been supplied as appropriate in context.
Other unattributed parenthetical notes with in ~he body of an
item originate with the source. Times within items are as
given by source.
The contents of this publication in no way represent the poli-
cies, views or at.titudes of the U.S. Governmznt.
COPYRIGHT LAWS AND REGULA.TIONS GOVERNING OWNERSHIP OF
MATERIALS REPRODUCED IiEREIN REQUIRE THAT DISSEMINATION
OF THIS PUBLICATION BE RESTRICTED FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY.
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-0085QRQ0040Q030060-8
FOR OFFICIAL TJSE ONLY
JPRS L/9879
30 July 1981
COMPUTERIZED RADAR OPERATOR TRAINERS
Moscow TRENE\ZHERY DLYA PODGOTOVKI 0~'ERATOROV RLS S POMOSHCH'YU EVM in
Russian 1980 (signed to press 5 Dec "19) pp 2-126
[Book "Computerized Radar Operator Trai,ners" by Anatoliy Nikolayevich
Romanov, Voyenizdat, 6,000 copies, 127 pages; UDC 681.14:621.396.96(024)]
CONTENTS
Annotation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
' Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
The Operator in the Radar Information Processing System . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Operator Selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Unique Features of Operator Activity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Actions Taken by Operators in Typical Situations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Radar Information Processing Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Semiautomatic Information Processing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Psychophysiological Characteristics of the Operator . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Operator Recognition of ~adar Signals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Trainers for Radar Operators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Computer Modeling of a Situation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
The Principles of Computer Nbdeling of a Situation . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Building a Model o~ the Trajectory of a Simulated Taruet 25
Modeling the Pracess of Arisal of Blips from Simu.lated Targets,
Detection Errors, and Interference . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
Nbdeling a Sequence of the 2~bments of Target Entry Into the Radar
Scanning Zone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
Modeling the Algorithm far Formation of the Target Blip Sequence 34
An Example of a Nbdel of an Air Raid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
Simulation of a Situation oz~ Radar Indicator Screens . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
The Composition of Target and Interferenc2 Simulation Apparatus 45
Formation of the PPI Sweep on fihe Indicator Screen 46
Measurement of Target Co~rdinateg in Digital Code . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
Representation of a Target on an Indicator Screen . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
Simulation of Jaitmiing and Interference . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
Computerized Trainers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
Trainers Used to Teach PPI Radar Operators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~1
Trainers Used to Teach Guiclance and Manual Target Tracking Operators 76
- a - [II - USSR - FOUO]
- [III - USSR - 4 - FOUO]
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2Q071Q2/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R0004Q0030060-8
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
- TeacY~ing Techniques Applied to Operators Usi.ng Trainers . . . . . . . . . . . 35
The Techr~iques of Stage-by-Stage Formation of Actions and Concepts . $5
The Unique Features of Instruction Usi.ng 7.'rainers . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
Prinaiples of Assessing Operator Training Level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
M~thematical Methods for Assessing Operator Training Level 9~
Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S9

\
,
-b-
FOR OF~'ICI~?L USE OIVLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8
FOR OFFLCIAL USE QNLY
ANNOTATION
This book examines tY~e basic technical principles of building comAUterized
trainers, and it presents the requirements imposed on trainers. Methods for simu-
- lating targets and interference on a display with the assistance of a computer
are described, as are the principles of signal simulation in trainers.
Some problems associated with operator psychological training are illuminated, the
techniques of teaching operators with trainers are described, and the methods for y
evaluating thei~r preparedness are p~esented.
The book is intended for mili.tary sp~cialists involved in the development and
cperation of trainers.
INTRODUCTION
Radio engineering troop units and subunits possess the most sophisticated combat
- equipment emb~dying the latest achievements of Soviet science. This~~poses high
- requirements on the training level of personnel servicing this equip
A high professio~a~l~~ed controltsystemst(ASU~ andctos~ompetently exploitdthe combat
equipment and au
� potentials designed inta such equipment.
Life has necessitated a search for ways to train radar operators more quickly.
Reducing specialist training time is only one part of the problem. 7.'he other is
that of upgrading the quality of work done by ope~ators with combat equipment.
Organizing and conducting combat training, commanders, political workers, and staff
off.icers base their efforts on the fact that the continually growing power and com-
plexi.~y of military equipment is intensifying the dependence between the degree to
which this equipment is assimilated by the personnel and the effectiveness of its
' combat use. ,
- The proficiency of ra3io engineering subunit crews ~lirectly influences the accuracy
with which antiaircraft missile troops znd fighter aviation perform their missions.
Therefore one of the most important requirements imposed on crew proficiency should
: be statEd as detecting targets at maximum range, providing radar information with
1
- FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-0085QRQ0040Q030060-8
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
maximum precision, and fully exploiting the possibilities of the combat eqt~ipment
when determining the composition of airborne targets.
The progress of science and technology in r~cent years has led to broad prolifera-
tion of complex technical systems. The human operator plays the decisive r~le in
such systems, and the complexity of analyzing information and of performinq control
functions has made it necessary to upgrade op~rator training and instruction qualaty.
This problem is especially impoxtant in radar applications, where operator training
based on real systems involves considerable outlays of resources and significant
expenditures of material.
Despite the rather broad use of simulators and trainers as technical devices to
teach operators the habits of controlling various systems, the effectiveness of
- their use was inadequate until recently. An analysi~ o� the development of trainers
showed that at first, their designers tried to simulate the situation in the air
with simplified models with permitted training only withsn a limited range of
operating modes. The requirements on the quality and teaching possihilities ot
trainers increased, making it necessary to raise the completeness and accuracy of
use of dynamic and information mo3els, vahich necessitated inclusion of electxonic
computers inta the trainers.
Among the merits of computerized stimulators and trainers we should include the
possibility for simulating any aerial situation, for maJcing it more or less c~mplex,
for changing the target trajectory parameters on a real ~ime scale, for reusing the
information models of the aerial situation, for studying such models in parts, and
for automatically obtaining an objective score of operator proficiency and monitoring
the course of operator training.
' Z'hese merits and advantages of computerized trainers promote more-effective training,
they raise its quality, and reduce its ~ime. ~'he results of operator training
sessions can be used as a basis for evaluating how well an operator is suited ~o
controlling a concrete system, and for comparing operators for the purpose of their
' selection.
2

' FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8
FOR OFFICIAL USE OIdI+Y
THE OPERATOR IN THE RAD~Ut INFORMATION PROCESSING SYSTEM ,
Operator Selection
A person's aptitude for a partic~.xl.ar job depends on the individual features of his
in~elligence and his capacity for enduring stresses.
Occupational selection has the purpose of detereai..zing hcnv well a specifi.c person's
capabilities fit the requirements imposed on a particular form of activity. It
would be sufficient to recall how meticulously cosmonaut can.didates are seleCted:
Not everyone will pass through the fine "sieve" of selection. For example 500
persr~ns were invited to join one of the astronaut groups in th~ USA, and only 11
persons were taken on following selection.
Selection is,just as riqorous in aviation, in rail transport~ation, and in a number
of other sectors. ~
There are many different technique~ for selecting future specialists. Important
among them are test-taking and testinq with spe~ial devi.ces. Such test programs
are developed by scientists with regard ta the particular features of the future
operator's occupational activity.
It cannot be said that all of the problems of selection have already been solved.
= Z"hey are much more complex than may be imagxned; however, the requirements on
operators in the principal specialties have bc?en defined with su~ficient complete-
- ness.
For example an operator-controller mubt have an ample working memory, good d?ction,
and a capability for quick decisions, and he must be maximally attentive, while a
radar operator must have the capability for cox~centrating liis attention for a long
period of tia~e, and he must have an ample working memory.
~rne woric of ~ radar operator is distinguished by exceptional intensity and responsi-
bility. Besides fundamental technical knawledge, it also requires firm practical
habits associated with detecting airborne targets and determining their coordinates
and their motion parameters. An operator's wrong actions may lead to serious conse-
quences such as missing an enemy airplane or causing a friendly airplane to crash
within the vicinity of the airfield. High em~tior.al tension experienced by radar
operators durinq their work, especially in a coinplex aerial situation when the time
~ to reach the right decision is iimited, and the feeling of high responsibility for
one's actions presuppose selection of willful, technically compet~nt indivrduals
as the radar operators, ones having a full grasp on the habits of working in complex
c,~~. ,~ciitio..:..
3
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007102/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
After a radar operator is selected, he must be trained. What does traininq with real
equipment involve, what is its effectiveness, anci what does it cost?
_ ~fie activity of a rad:ir operator can be divided into two stages--preparatory and per-
forming. In the first stage the operator turns~on the apparatus, tunes and adjtis~s
it as necessary, finds faults, and corrects them. Training a radar operator for work
in the first stage is complex and expensive, and use of real equipment in such training
_ reduces its operating life.
The ~ontent of the second stage can be summarized as the operator's detection of
targets on the background of various sorts of interference, determination of the
~ coordinates and motiQn parameters of detected targets, and target lock-on and tracking.
_ This stage is rather complex and laborious. Z'hus tor example, to create a complex
situation on radar screens, we would need to simultaneously launch a larqe number of
airplanes and direct their flight on particular routes that would ensure their entry
into the radar detection zone at given time intervals. The airplanes would have to
perform coA,plex maneuvers in course, speed, and altitude, and they vrould have to
create various forms of interference. We need not belabor the difficulty uf such a
task. Moreover, it is also extremely difficult to evaluate the actions c~� the opera-
tor. And yet, only a specialist with considerable experience in complex situations
can become a good, reliable operator.
Thus training operators with real equipment is ~isadvantageous due to the following
- shortcomings :
As a rule, training is expensive;
the equipment needed for training is not alway~ available;
the time allowed for training is limited by the specialist traininq schedules ane~
programs;
a specialist who has completed the training program is forc~fl to supplement his
knowledge and improve the habits he has aequirpd zn independent practical work.
Sometimes his habits are found to be insufficient, and the specialist makes mistakes
in his work, which may lead to serious consequences;
it is sometimes difficult to evaluate the result5 of such training.
- Trainers help us to eliminate these shortcomings, or at least re3uce them somewhat.
Trainers for cocnplex machines are usually designed to be as accurate copies of the
original as possible. The cost of such a trainer rmay be very high, approaching that
- of the machine itself. This is where the computer comes to our rescue: It can be
used to create a mathematical model of the machine, one capable of reproducing all
situations that may arise during work with the real object. Moreover a computer
permits us to vary the training rate. Thus a novice operator can be trai:i~~ at a
slow rate, which can be increased as he acquires experience.
4
FOR OFFI~IAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00854R400404030060-8
' FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Unique Features of Operator Activity
Irrespective of their type and purpose, automated control systems can be defined as
complexe~ of technical resources that collect, receive, transmit, and process infor-
mation. Within these complexes, which form a control loop, man is the central Unit.
Called an operator by tradition, he in a sense closes~the circle of information
processes withi.n the system, works with the information provided to him, and exercises
control (9).
The operation of such a system can be 3escribed in general form as successive comple-
tion of three basic tasks:
1. Collection and transmission, via communication channels, of xnformation on the
object ~f control--so-callc:d wa~ning informatian,'and i.ts conversion for computer
input .
2. Processing information on the object of control in accordance with prewritten
algorithms executed by computer program.
3. Output of control information, its conversion, and its transmission to the object
of control.
Of course, the degree to which the huma,-~ operator participates in different systems
varies. In principle, some systems may function without.an operator in the control
- loop (Figure 1). Here the individLal simply starts up the system, sets its work
program, and monitors the correctness of program execution. When trouble arises in
the system, the aontrol process is halted until the indiL-idual is able to correct
this trouble. Such systems are usually called automatic (for example, aut~matic
- control systems).
_ The control loop shown in Figure 2 is typical of systems characterized by a high
level of automation. 7.'hese highly developed control systems are sometimes called
semiautomatic--not the best term. The individual is connected in parallel with the
_ system, and he processes some of the inforn~ation ahout the object of control. For
the most part the operator exercises m4nitoring functions, and when an unforeseen
situation arises, he can make corrections in the control process without stopping
the system's work. A prcad~lction process dispatcher control system is an example.
. In systems that are autiors?ated in the strict sense of the term (Figure 3), the indi-
vidual takes a direct and constant part in the control process. The operator receives
information from the computer on the status of the object of control, he evaluates
it, he works out and adopts a decision, and he feeds control instructions into the
system. The computer feefls a processed and ordered set of data on the object of
_ control to the operator, the iridividual evaluates thisi.nfo~mation, and he ~akes a
decision on the nature of influence to be exerted upon the object. Ia this case the
operator makes the final decision. Various traffic control systems are exarnples of
systems.
- In automated systems workin3 in real time, in which an untimely though correct deci-
sion is equivalent to a mistake, extremely high requirements are imposed on the capa-
bilities and occupational skills oi the operators. .
5
_ FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
~u~~P~uUp ( 5 )
06aexm(1) ,
ynpnene~~tia
U6beKm
- ynpaencnuR
~ (2) 2)
na~iw~a- ~~p�30- ,
eumcna uN- eom~ena uK- I
2 ~ ~~u~u Mauu~
llpeo6paso Cperxfpa,~n~
Bamcna uN- nnn~nh uN- ;
~PMauuu ~lmn~+oquu ~
3
� B
~ ~ M yenoeeK-
-on~~mop ~
~
3~ 4enoeeK- ~ 3~ . ~
, M - onepumnp KopPgKmYP
(6)
Figure 1. Control Loop in an Automatic Figure 2. Control Loop in a Semi.auto- ,
Sys System matic System
Ku,uaHda~
ynp~aene-
Nua OQaeKm (1)
- ynpae~eNU,v
~ 8 n~~30-
w E eam~nb un
~ ~ ~ 3 ~ ~popMOquu
~ 3
cocmoANUe A
aQaeKma
nPvenemiA M
Figure 3. Control Loop in a Traffic Control System
Key: 5. Supplsmentary information
1. Object of control 6. ~rrection input
2, Information converter
3. Computer 7. State of the object of control
4. Human operator 8. Control instructions
6
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY ~
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2407/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400430060-8
_ FOR 4FFICIAL USE ONLY
Preparing information for decision making, evaluating and selecting the alternatives
~making the decision, in fact), and executing the decision--in general the basic
stages of operator activity--the operator utilizes his knowledge, experience, learned
decision making techniques, and habits. These are precisely t.he components that make
up the operator's professi~nal countenance, his psychological, or internal, as psycho-
logists say, resources or tools of activity.
_ In his work as an ~perator, the individual uses external technical resources or
tools of activity that are created by system designers. The external resources include,
- fir~t of all, the information display devices (screens, signal panels, graphic panels,
indicator instruments), the information (symbolic) models of control processes they
display, controls, and communication resources.
Four types of operator activity can be distinguished (9).
- 1. The operator-production engineer. He is directly included in the control process,
_ he works mainly in an immediate response mode, and he performs controlling actions
predominantly, guiding himself by instructions that as a rule cover almost the com-
plete set of situations and decisions he rnay encounter.
2. 'I'he operator-observer--controller (for e3cample a radar station operator, a traffic
- controller). He deals with a larger amount of information models, conceptual mpdels,
and decision makiag procedures, alid he correspondingly possesses somewhat broader
' control habits (in comparison with the first type). Such activity is typical of
operators in most automated systems.
~ 3. The operator-researcher. He makes significantly greater use of intellectual
actions and experience embodied within conceptual raodels. Controls play a still-
smaller role for him, and the importance of information models is significantly greater.
An example of such ~n operator is a researcher of any profile: a computer system oper-
ator, and so on.
4. The operator-manager. In principle, he differs little from the previous type,
but for him, the mechanisms of intellectual activity play the most importa~zt role.
'I'hese are orqanizers and managers, pErsons making important decisions and possessing
intuition, knowledge, and experience.
Perhaps the types presented here do not fully reflect all aspects of operator aetivity
(it may be suitable to distinguish the activity of an operator-manipulator perf~rming
control functions on manipulators--amplifiers of ht~man muscle power). However, this
classification simplifies revelation of the specific features of operator activity,
and helps us reveal what is most important in the work of different types of operators.
We will subsequer.tly focus our main attention on prob~ems associated with training
- operators of the first two types.
Actions Taken by Operators in Typical Situations
One of the unique features of operator activity is that the operator is deprived of
the possibility for observing the objects of control directly, and he is forced to
use information fed to him via communication channels.
7
~
_ FOR OFEICIAL USF ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02109: CIA-RDP82-00850R400440030060-8
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
The individual's visual system passesses the broadest possibilities in comp~rison
with~hi~ other analyzers playing a part in information reception. In this connection
most technical signaling resources that transmit information from machine to man are
designed for visual reception of signals bearing information.
Hearing is often used for information transmission with the purpose of reducing the
load on the visual system. The relatively small number of acoustic signals that
man can dependably distinguish is the limi.ting factor.in the use of acoustic signals.
Considering the circumstance that sound is one of the strongest stimuli of the orienta-
tion reflex, acoustic signals are used mainly as warnizg signals.
~ A rac7ar operator's activity consists of a number of successive operations associated
with distinguishing,and reeognizing marks presented on a display. 2'he starting point
of this process is the sensation which arises when the visual analyzer interacts with
the marks presented on the display.
The first stage of observation involves detection and isolation, from a set of signals,
those which are necessary to the task of the operator. From the.series of signals
he detects, the operator begins to select their most informative properties (character-
istics), which transform within him into operational units of perception. Z'he operator .
errors that arise most frequently in this stage of observation are due to insufficient
distinctness of the characteristics of the signa'ls, as a result of which they are con-
fused with each other, becoming unable to support the operator's work. Another cause
of errors in this stage is �ast supersession of useful information, as a consequence
of which the operator fails to identify the signals he needs.
The second stage of observation inv~lves c:omparisAn of an isolated signal character-
istic with the accepted standard, which is stored in the operator's memory. Here
again there is the danger of losing significant signal characteristics, if the wrong
standard or unessential characteristics are selected.
In the last stage of observation the operator processes the information he receives
in accordance with a prescribed algorithm. 'I'his may entail simply decoding and re-
cording the signal, or comparing it with a certain value, recording the comparisan
results, and so on.
W~e can mentally subdivide the process of transforming a set of input signals into
suitable actions into two stages;
Breaking down situations into class~s requiring an identical action (this is commonly
called the recognition phase);
selecting actions suited to eacn of the groups of situations.
An operator's determination of ways to solve prablematic situations within a short
ti.me interval involves so-called operationai thinking.
In a number of cases an operator will use intuition ~o evaluate a problematic situa-
tion and make a decision in a shoLt time interval. Operational thinking and intua.tion
are closely associated with ~ne another, and they are manifested in operators with
highly developed spatial and temporal faculties. As a result of this process, the
8
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2407142/09: CIA-RDP82-00854R000440030060-8
FOR OFFiCIAL USE ONLY
operator arrives at a final decision on controlling the system of which he is a
- component. The operator's ac~curacy of perception ~nd the swiftness of hi~ reactions
to incoming signals may serve as criteria by wriich to evaluate his activity.
Radar Information Processing Systems
if we are to automate airspace surveillance and air traffic control, we wo~ild.need to
.~ave complete and continuous information on the coordinates and characteristics of
u~oving aircraft appeari~zg within a given space. 'I'his information is acquired as a
rule with the help of circular or sector scanning radar.
In the initial period of radar development, the main method for determining target
coordinates with the help of a radar set was as follows (12).
Using a circular scanning display, the ~perator determined the range to the target
- and its bearing, and then he transmitted this in~ormation by telephone. To increase
the raading accuracy, electronic range and bearing scale markers were employed, and
sector displays showing target blips on a larger scale were used. This method had
a number of shortcomings: The accuracy of coordinate determination was still low,
depending to a great extent on the training level and state of the operators; the
information lost its value when its transmission rate was low.
Such shortcomings on one hand and the great potential radar has for fast detection a
of large number of targets on the other necessitated automation of radar information
processing--that is, it required the transfer ~f some or all functions of th~ human
operator associated with radar information processing to computers.
Automation of radar information processing can be partial or complete. Partial
automation entails the creation of so-called semiautomatic processing systems. The
human operator in a semiautomatic system is its most important organic unit, without
- which the system cannot work. Such systems are planned with regard to the specific
features of human psychology and physiology, such that functions could be distributed
sensibly between the individual and the computers.
All stages of processing are delegated to ca~puters in automatic radar information
~~rocessing systems. The functions of the individual in such systems are basically
- li.mited to observation of the system's work, and its technical mai.ntenance.
3oth the semiautomatic system and the automatic system are tied in directly with the
sources of radar information, and they may perform the following tasks:
Detection of signals (blips) reflecte~~ irom airborne targets~
rletermination of the cuordinates of detected targets; detection of the trajectories
of targets on the basis of the set of blips produced by a number of radar scanning
:ycles;
~ :omputation of target motion parameters (speed, course, and so on) and determination

~�i ~f coordinates on this basis, smoothed and predicted over a certain time interval.
'~~he first two tasks are usually referred to as primary radar information processing.
The others have come to be called secondary radar informati.on processing.
9
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
In an unautomated system, all of the primary and secondary processing tasks listed
above are completed by the operator, with the help of a plan position indicator.
In a semiautomatic processing system, only operations associated with determining tar-
_ get motion parameters and generating anticipated coordinates are usually subject to
automation. Tr~ese are fundamentally computer operations, and they may be performed
with the help of both analog and discrete computers. Z'he other processing tasks may
be performed in such a system by the operator, visu~?lly or with the help of inechanized
devices (plotters) that raise the accuracy of visual processing.
In an automatic processing system, both primary and secondary processing are performed
with the help of automatic logic devices and cornputers. In this case as a rule, tasks
involving the processing and coding of information obta.ined during one radar sweep are
completed with the help of specialized primary processing computers, and tasks associ-
ated with processing target trajectories are cor~.~p].eted with the help of electronic com-
puters. T.he computer memory volume and speed mLSt be sufficient to process data on all
� targets observed by the radar set, in real time.
~emiautomatic Informa~ion Processing
A simplified functional diagram af semiautomatic information processing is shown in
Figure 4. The system includes a visual display, a huma~n operator, a coordinate glotter
working off the display screen, and a computer intended to calculate the target's
motion parameters and to plot its trajectory (6).
The operator records the coordinates from the display and feeds them into the com~uter
~ by superimposing an electronic marker (blip) produced by the coordinate plotter over the
�.:~.~get blips on the displa1.
Signals (tarqet blips) are fed from the radar receiving channel to the display at dis-
crete intervals defined by the duration of the radar antenna's scanning cycle, Tp. Ob-
serving the display, the operator detects the targets, and then he selects, independently
or in accordance with target indication data, those of them which need to be processed
for automatic tracki.ng.
Lock-on of a selectad target involves successive input of the coordinates and detection
times of two successive blips into the computer. The operator uses the plotter to feed
the target coordinates into the computer. He superimposes the electronic marker created
by the plotter over the target blip, after which he presses button K and the marker co-
ordinates (identical in this case to the target coordinates) are fed into the computer.
The motion parameters are determined from the ~irst two computer inputs, and the com-
puter begins calculating the anticipated target coordinates. Anticipated coordinates
are calculated continually when analog comouters are used, and in fixed time intervals
when discrete computers are employed. The motion parameters and anticipated (extra-
polated) coordinates are transmitted to the users.
In addition the extrapolated range and bearing coordinates~~ and ~3 respectively, are
used in moving the marker across the display screen. The marker's motion trajectory
corresponds to the computed trajec}ory of the target. When a new blip associated with
this trajectory appears, the operator observes the discrepancy between the coordinates
of the new blip and the coordinates computed for the moment of observation by the computer.
If this discrepancy exceeds a permissible value, the operator makes a correction by
once again superimposing the marker over the blip and pressing button K. He stops
making such corrections when the true and computed trajectory coincide.
~ Semiautomatic processing systems enjoy broad use in cases where the number of targets
to be tracked is limited and the operator (or group of operators) is capable of
tracking each one of them with prescribed accuracy. Nbreover semiautomatic systems
10
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
~
' -
. ~ Pnc
~
. ,
~Q ~06020 06
`~O �
~pQ 'Oid
Cr i
; ~
1
_ ~ H
s j /
.
~ ~j cbeMnuK eiyucnumendnoe
?coo a nam ycmpoucrneo
d4 vac
3 KoopBunarnbi !~a ~h ~A
MapKCpa ( 5 ) !l~
~~~J
( 6 'oapaudambi arccmpanonapooanHOU K nompebumerro
(7)
omMemxu
Figur~ 4. Simplified Functional Diagram of Semiautotnatic Radar Information
Processing: 1--target blips in two consecutive sweeps; 2--extra-
poiated blip ~or the third sweep; 3--~rker trajectory
Key:
1. Radar station 4. Computer
2. Plan position�indicator 5. Marker coordinates
3. Coordinate plotter 6. Coordinates of the extrapolated blip
7. To user
can be used as back-ups in the event automatic processing systems break down or the
latter are overloaded by intense interference.
Psychophysiological Characteristics of the Operator
Each of the components of the semiautomatic system examined above performs fully defi-
nite functions: The display presents a visual representation of the information; the
plotter provides the current coordinates of targets subject to tracking; the computer
determines the coordinates and motion parameters of tracked targets. 7.'he functions
of the human operator boil down to target detection and mec:hanical actions assaciated
with recording the blips with the help of the plotter.
All of the components of the system must be tuned and adjusted before they begin work.
It is only in this case that the system would function normally and trouble-free.
After displays, plotters, and computers are adjusted, they are intended to operate
~vithout further adjustment for a long period of: time. In the course of their oper-
ation, these components need only be periodically inspected, so as to keep them in
working state.
11
- FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8
FOR QFFICIAL USE ONLY
,
Z'he reliability of the other cornponent of the system~ the human operator, is a m:tch
~ more complex issue. 7'he work of the entire system dep,ends on huw well the oper~tor
is tuned and prepared. This issu~ is within the competency of psy~hophysiologis~s,
and thexr rec~mmendations play an extremely important role in the designing of a
semiautomatic system.
- Z'he content of operator aotivity may be reduced to the following.
= 7.'he main and most difficult task of the operator is to establish the presence of
the target on the basis of th� results nf his observation of marks appearing on the
display. How successfu3. he is in this task depends not only on the way the signals
are modulated, the type of cathode-ray tube (CRT) and sweep employed, the character-
istics of th~ luminophores, the intensity of screen illumi.nation by externaJ. saurces~
the CRT's operating mode, outside stimuli, the amount of influence exer~~~7. b:{-� ii;~:~rW
ference, the nature of the targets being detected, and so on, but also to a signi-
ficant extent on the physiological and psychologi~-a1 features of the operator.
Assume that the operator must constantly observe the airspace represented on the
- radar display. In this case the periodicity with which airborne targets would appear
on the display throughout his entire work shxft, 1-2 hours for example, would not be
dependent on a particular factor. On detecting an airborne target the operator
describes it--that is, he determines its country of origin, coordinates, motion para-
meters, the quantitative composition of the target,~ and so on. He may describe the
target either vocally or through a set of the appropriate characteristics.
A sample model of a radar operator's actions is shown in Figure 5(11).
The operator's activity begins with his familiarization with the situation--that is,
with perception and the conceptualization of information appearing on th~ radar dis-
play. This requires a certain amount of time tl. Then the operator performs the
current task--he identifies the object and makes a certain decision, which takes an
amount of time t2. Finally the operator performs the necessary ~ctions, which re-
quire an amount of time t3. Such division of the operations is un~erstandably condi-
tional in nature, since it is often difficult to draw a line between perception,
decision making, and reactions of the operator; however~ this division helps us to
systematize the factors influencing the operator's work.
Perception time tl depends on many objective causes defining the visi.bility of
target blips, for example on the contrast between the blip and'the background, and
the intensity and nature of interference. Moreover tiiere are also subjective causes
influencing time tl, ones of the greatest interest to us. They include the operator's
training level, his physical and psychological state, the features of his character,
and his temperament.
Decision making time t2 also depends on many variables, for example the problem
solving algorithm, the operator's habits of executing similar tasks, and a large
number of psychophysiological features of the operator.
Z'he decision execution time t3 is a function of variables such as the arrangement of
the controls, their dimensions and shape, the compatibility of the motor actions re-
quired with the operator's accustomed actions, and the degree to which he is trained
to perform such actions.
12
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02109: CIA-RDP82-00850R400440030060-8
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
~ Onepamop C Ct0 UNBUIlUBj/C~IbMbIMI/ OCOQCNNOCi7?AMU, xapoKmepoM, npza-
~ MUJ(JQUEU N~9N0fI CUCl11CMbl, /ICUXUVCCA'f/M COClIl0AH0CM,
CDC?JOANUCM HP.~NO-MbIIL/CVHO!% OAYPtlOHOV.YlIU
. 0 I' ii t3
t
2 nncnedoeamcnnHncma pahmm~~ c:~epamnpa
BocnpuAmue onaunoednue uenu u NcnonNeuue
un�~opMauuu( 3) nv~yx pemeNUA pcmenuA (S)
; ~4~ ~6~ (,7)~
i Q~ o~
~ ~g i~ ~7 ~'D
Z~ ~ o
5

~
Y e nodto- AnEOpumM ~ TQ~CNI/pOBIINHOCl7?b 0
Tr.MNOma (11) mpexu- ~eNUF u ~u~ ucnoANCIIUU, COBMC-
myM, nnMexu �a aKpax~ pocodnocme, ~KU e~W
e- anu~+pcma Mnmapnn
one~m pip6oma Huu nodo0nn+r tn ucmBt~cnpu-
,10dUy eeNxa,uu x'en
Oneu~NUe yr.eaeu ) 4n~mnpe~, enun ue~a ave men pa0oma
Figure 5. Sequence of Operator Actions
Key:
1. The operator, together with his individual features, character, nervous
_ system organization, mental state, and status of neuromuscular. activity
2. Operator work sequence
3. Information perception
4. Target detection
5. Target identification and decision making
6. Target identification
7. Decision making
8. Decision execution
9. Active actions
10. External conditions
11. Darkness, noise, interference on the screen
12. Factors influence operator work quality
13. Training level, work experience
14. Decision making algorithm and habits associated with simi.lar tasks
15. Degree of training in decision execution, compatibility of motor actions
with accustomed movements.
13
FO~ OFF[CIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2407/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400430060-8
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
If completion of the t.ask by the operator is to be re.liable and effective, the sum S
of all three times must be a little shorter than a certain time T, by which the
operator's activity is rigidly delimited-�-that is, S= tl +t2 ~-t3 e~t > o,
n-- at n.~~ > ey< < o,
~ n-I- ~i at 4x< 0 (operator P~), then all targets within range of the radar have been detected;
in other words for practical purposes the current sweep cyclia adialram wouldenot be
since further movement of the beam of tb,e radar station's po g
able to provide any information on new targets within the limits of the remaining
part of the sweep cycle. A transition is made to formation of false blips (operator
c;wl~), and then the blips are arranged in the order of their detection--that is, in
the order of increasing detection time (operator ~ig)� Information obtained in this
- fashion during the sweep cycle is fed to the trainer's indieratorSiD e~n (operator B19~�
Then a transition is made to the next radar sweep cycle (op 20
38
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
An Example of a Nbdel of an Air Raid
The raw data for the model are:
F--Number of targets participating in the raid;
Y~~, Y~,y~~-breadth of the defense, given in rectangular coordinates;
xH--abscissa of the so-called guidance boundary; when the
target crosses it, its trajectoxy ceases to be modeled;
xp--abscissa of target detection, signifying initiation of
trajectory modeling;
p Y, p V, p yl--the probabilities of target maneuver relative to course,
velocity, and acceleration;
y~c, Y~H -possible target turning angles;
V~~, V~q.~H, H~c, H~H--possible limits of target maneuver in relation to
velocity and altitude;
To--discrete data output interval, representing a radar
sweep cycle.
The raw data are summarized on a raw data order blank to permit their input into the
computer.
~Jrder Blank for Raw Data to Create an Air Raid Nbdel
Raw Data
Serial Unit of
No. Data Measurement Symbol Value
1 Number of targets Units F
2 Breadth of defense ~t Y~c~ Y~
3 Abscissa of boundary of
guidance ~i xH
4 Abscissa of target
detection HIvt xo
5 Probabilities of target
maneuver in relation to:
course pY
velocity p v
acceleration pyl
6 Target turning angles: Radians/min
maximum Y~c
mini.mum Y~H
7 Limits of target maneuver
in relation to:
velocity ~ Ea~/min V~C, VT,gIH
altitude tavt H~c. H~H
8 Data output interval min To
The raw data are fed into the computer, the model program is started, and reports
on the targets are printed out in real time with an update interval of To.
39
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8
FOR OFFiCiAL USE ONLY
The model is built in the following order.
The first step is to set the starting velocities V02 and altitudes HO1, as well as
the starting coordina~es Y~ of all F targets. This procedure requires generation
of random numbers d~, with a uniform distribution in the interval [0,1]. 7."he
initial turning angles Yoi for all targets are assumed equal to zero (Yoi = 0~-
The initial values of Voi? H~, y~ are interpreted as random variables with uniform
distributions in the intervals [VMOK~, VMn~~1~ ~f~~~nK~~ HM~~~'1, IJMA~�, yM~~~~) respectively:
V~~[ ~ V MIIII ~`~1 l~Mi11 - - 3, ~2~~,~ PicM~ _ ~ ~
and in this case the extrapolation algorithm would have the form
_ e.~M~_--3.r1- 3xa X'.- - -
Let us illustrate the use of these algorithms with the assumption that blips with
coordinates x1= 6, x2 = 4, x3 = 2 are obtained from a nonmaneuvering target and blips
with coordinates xi = 9, x2 = 5, x3 = 2 are obtained from a maneuvering target.
Then the extrapolated coordinate for the nonma.neuvering target would be
. _ . . _ _ _
4 1 2
Xa~~~?,~= 3 �6-}- 3 '�_.:i '2_8~
while the extrapolated coordinate for the maneuvering target would be
x,~M~=3 �9-3� 5-F2== 14.
An algorithm of this so~t is run quite easily in a computer. The only shortcoming
is that as the number of blips used to predict a future coordinate increases, the
volume of the computer's main memory must increase.
The target blip si.mulator diagramed in Figure 27 imposES significant restrictions
- on the effectiveness with which computer'time is used, because during the time that
the range sweep performs its forward trace, the computer is limi.ted to just the
target blip formation task.
In fact, every time that the readings of bearing pulse counter 7 correspond to the
current target bearing value stored in the working memory of computer 9, the com-
puter switches to a subroutine that continually interrogates the contents of range
marker pulse counter 6 and compares its readings with the closest current range
value of the target, located at constant bearing. Considering that the ratio be-
tween the forward and back traces of the range sweep of a typical PPI is about
10:1, we can conclude that the computer will be occupied with just one task for
90 percent of its total working time, and that it will be free for other tasks for
only 10 percent of its time.
A functional diagram of a target blip simulator whic:n does not have this shortcoming
is shown in Figure 29. It contains PPI 1, range sweep formation block 3, antenna
simulation and bearing sweep formation block 2, bearing read-out starting flip-flop
4,kon"yunkyor bearing counter 6, range register 7, synchronization flip-flop 8,
kon"yunktor 9, shaper-amplifier 10, target blip ou~pu~ flip-flop 11,kon"yunktor 12,
pulse generator 13, and computer 14.
63
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R400440030060-8
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
_ _ - - . _ _ -
-
1 ~
1
~ r $
y !0 17 13
2 i 14
T T
B !i
~ g s~
4 5
Hav. ycm. ~l~
Figure 29. Functional Diagram of a Target Blip Simulator With One Range
Register
IGey :
1, Initial settinq
Antenna simulation and bearing sweep formation block 2 creates, on i.ndicator screen 1
jointly with range sweep formation block 3, a PPI sweep. The PPI sweep on indicator 1
is synchronized with computer 14 by range sweep start (RSSP) and end (RSEP) pulses,
produced in range sweep formation block 3. RSSP's are fed to kon"yunktor 5, which is
opened by flip-flop 4, which starts the azi.muth read-out, at the moment that the
At this
radial-circular sweep passes through the zero point of the bearing read-out.
moment the bearing read-out initiation flip-flop 4 is set in its unit state by a
single from a bearing read-out initiation siqnal produced'by the antenna simulation
and bearing sweep formation block 2.
An RSSP is fed from the output of k,on"yunktor 5 to the input of bearing counter 6,
which, by counting the number of incominq RSSP's, determines the angular position
of the PPI sweep at any moment in time. Following a complete 360� revolution of
the PPI sweep, bearing counter 6 automatically resets, and it once again begins to
count pulses arriving at its input. The output of bearing counter 6 is connected
to the computer's input register.
To permit information read-out from the bearing counter, each RSSP is additionally
fed to the input of the computer control unit interrupt block. On receiving this
signal, the computer switches to a subroutine interrogating the contents of the
bearing counter and comparing its readings with the target bearing values stored
in the computer's working memory.
If the readings of bearing counter 6 do not correspond to the closest target bearing
value, computer 14 returns to the main program, which has no relationship to target
blip simulation. Otherwise the computer ~wiseh~eto~aes o~�~~getfr qe corresget
blip at the prescribed range. For this purpo ~ range
ponding to a fixed bearing is transferred from the computer's mai.n memorY
register 7 as an inverse code, after which the computer produ~es a signal turning on
target output flip-flop 11. Switching to its unit state, the latter opens kolifYiertor
12 and thus connects pulse oscillator 13 to the input of kon"yunktar�9 via amp
shaper 10.
64 ~
FOR OFF[CIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2407/42/09: CIA-RDP82-40850R000400430060-8
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
2'he work of range register 7 is also synchronized with the PPI sweep on indicator 1.
For this purpose RSSP's and RSEP's cont~ol synchronization flip-flop 8, which opens
kon"yunktor9 at the beginning of the range sweep and closes it at the end.
Inasmuch as kon"~unktor9 is open throughout the entire time of formation of the rangs
sweep, the succession of pulses from oscillator 13 passes through it, filling range
register As soon as a number of pulses equal to the value of the current range
coordinate enters the input of the range register, the first target blip pulse
appears at its output. This pulse is then transmitted to the CRT modulator of indi-
~ cator 1.
To form a real target blip, consisting of a train of 10-12 pulses, during the return
trace of the range sweep the computer rewrites the current range value in the range
register by an inverse code 10-12 times, and produces a signal generating a target
pulse. As a result of this, target pulses appear in 10-12 successive range sweeps.
These pulses simulate a target blip with the given range and bearing coordinate.
This procedure entails the use of the target blip simulation algorithm shown in
Figure 30.
- -`l~~pQ-
~r
~ ~ x~m
Pz
~
~,r
A4
AS
Ps
Nem
AQ
- ~ Ai
Figure 30. A Flow Chart for a Target Blip Simulation Algorithm Permitting
Range Register Control
Key:
1. RSSP
2. No
3. Yes
65
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02109: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Upon arrival of an RSSP, operator A1 interrogates bearing pulse counter 6, and
logic operator P2 compares the readings of the bearing pulse counter with the closest
current value of the target bearing, stored in the computer's mai:n memory. If the
readings of the bear~_ng pulse counter do not correspond to the current target bearing,
logic operator P2 transfers control to stop operator Si~. Otherwise, when P2 = 1,
control is transferred to operator A3, which transfers the range coordinates for
the target at the given bearing from the computer's main memory to range register 7
by an inverse code.
Operator A4 forms a signal that turns on target blip generation flip-flop 11 and
transfers controi to operator AS which counts how many times the target blip gener-
ation flip-flop was turned on. 'Logic operator P6 compares this number with a con-
stant defining the number of pulses in a train. If logic operator P6 = 0, control is
once again transferred to the succession of operators Ag, A4, A5. When P6 = 1, control
is transferred to stop operator SI~.
The advantage of such a target blip simulation system is that in the event that the
readings of bearing counter 6 equal the bearing value of the target to be simulated, .
the computer performs just two operations: It transfers the range code of the target
corresponding to a fixed bearing from the computer's main memory to range register 7,
~ and it sets target blip generation flip-flop 11 in its unit state. After this the .
computer turns to other programs, until the next interrupt pulse appears.(RSSP).
~ 1
But the target blip simulation system examined here cannot simultaneously simulate
several targets at different ranges but on the same bearing. This is a consequence
of the design of the range register, which is capable of supporting formation of only
one target blip on each radial sweep of the beam.
- i 16 I9 i
I ~a ~ I
~ n I
i ~s
i i
1/ ~4 .
I . I
I Id 1Z
~
g y r
u rn a ~
~2 J
~ T
/2 9
'4 ~
Figure 31. Functional Diagram of a Target Blip Si.mulator Possessing a Range
Register Switching Block
66
FOR OFF[CIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2407/42/09: CIA-RDP82-40850R000400430060-8
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
A functional diaqram of a target blip simulator free of this shortcoming is shown
in Figure 31. It contains indicator 1, antenna simulation and bearing sweep forma-
block 2, range sweep formation blo:k 3, bearing read-out initiation flip-flop 4,
kon"yunktor 5, bearing counter 6, pulse oscillator 7, kon"yunktor8, target blip gener-
ation flip-flop 9, amplifier-shaper 10, kon"yunktor 11, synchronization flip-flop 12,
registers 13, 14, and 15 storing the current target range coordinates, current
_ target range coordinate switching block 16, which ~tains q~te groups 17, 18, and 19,
switching unit 20, (diz"yunktor)21, and computer 22.
Working with range sweep formation block 3, antenna simulation and bearing sweep
formation block 2 createsa PPI sweep on the screen of indicator 1.
The PPI sweep on indicator 1 is synchronized with computer 22 with the assistance of
range sweep start and range sweep end pulses generated in range sweep formation block
3. For this purpose RSSP's are fed to kon"yunktor v, which is opened by bearing puls;
read-out initiation flip-flop 4 at the moment that the PPI sweep crosses the point
of initiation of bearing read-out--that is, when the bearing is 0. At this moment
bearing read-out initi~a~ion flip-flop 4 is set in its unit state by a bearing read--out
initiation signal generated in antenna simulation ancl bearing sweep formation block 2.
'~he RSSP's pass from the output of kon"yunktor 5 to the input of bearing counter 6
which, by counting tt?e number of entering RSSP's, fixes the position of the PPI sweep
at any moment in time. Following a complete 360� revolution of the PPI sweep,
bearing counter 6 automatically resets, and once again begins counting pulses coming
to its input. ThP output of bearing counter 6 is connected to the input register of
computer 22.
In order to permit information read-out from bearing counter 6, each kSSP is addi-
tionally fed to the input of the control unit of computer 22. In response to this
signal the computer switches to a subroutine interrogating the contents of bearing
counter 6 and comparing its readings with thz target bearing values stored in the
computer's main memory.
If the readings of bearing counter 6 do not correspond to the closest target bearing
value, the computer returns to the main program having no relationship to target
blip simulation. Otherwise the computer switches to a subroutine to form target
blips located at different ranges but at the same bearing.
For this purpose the computer, which contrals gate groups 17, 18, 19, successively
transfers, in the form of an inverse code, the range code va~ues for targets fixed
_ at a given bearing from its main memory through switching unit 20 to target range
coordinate storage registers 14, 15, 26. After this the computer produces a signal
turning on target blip generation flip-flop 9. Switching to its unit state, the
latter opens kon"yunktor7 and thus connects pulse oscillator 8 to the input of
kon"yunktorll via amplifier-shaper 10.
The operation of kon"yunictorll is controlled by synchronization flip-flop 12, which
opens it at the beginning of the range sweep and closes it at its end. Because
kon"yunktorll is open throughout the entire time of range sweep formation, the
sequence of pulses produced by oscillator 7 passes through it to the inputs of
target range coordinate storage registers 13, 14, 15. Inasmuch as the range
67
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
coordinates of targets at a fixed bearing are stored in these registers in inverse
code, after each of the registers is filled with a number of pulses equal to the
coordinates of the target ranges, a bli~ pulse corresponding to each target appears
at the output of eac:~ of them. Z'he blip pulses from differen~ targets pass through
diz"yunktor 21to the CRT modulator of indicator 1.
Simulation of Jamming and Interference
In order to create, on an indicator screen, a model of an aerial situation typified
by the presence of jamming and interference, it would be suitable to delegate simu-
lation of the latter to the computer.
_ Figure 32 gives an approximate idea of what radar screens look like when they are
affected by jamming and interference (5), and Figure 33 shows one of the possible
flow charts for a computerized jammi.ng and interference simulator.
1
~ / / ' ~ ~ , 1 .
` 1 1
i ~''~~1~~ ' ` ~ /
~ / i
` J /
a 6
Figure 32. Appearance of the PPI Screens of Radar Stations Subjected to
Interference (a) and JaAnning (b)
r
1 16 ~S R
!B
2 ~
r'
3 14 19 .
!3
1 8 6 12 10
S 4
T
/la~l) ~ 1 11
B
9 10
Figure 33. Flow Chart of a Computerizec~ Jan�ning and Interference Simulator
~y~l. Initial setting .
' 68
~ FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
The simulator contains indicator 1--a cathode-ray tube with long image persistence,
antenna simulation and bear.ing sweep formation block 2, range sweep formation block
3, kon"yunktor4, bearing read-out initiation flip-flop 5, bearing counter 6, inter-
ference bearing start determination block 7, interference bearing end determi.nation
block 8, interference bearing start storage register 9, interference bearing end
storage register 10, interference generation flip-flop 11, interference voltage
formation block 12, diz"yunktor 13, synchronization fiip-flop 14, analog kon"yunktor
15, matching block 16, range marker pulse oscillator 17, kon"yunktorl8, register 19,
and computer 20.
Working together with range sweep forn~ation block 3, antenna si.mulation and bearing
sweep formation block 2 creates a PPI sweep on the screen of indicator 1.
To simulate jamming on the indicator screen, shown in one variant in Figure 32b,
during the back trace of the range sweep the computer transfers the coordinates of
the interference bearing start and end coordinates to registers 9 and 10.
The PPI sweep on indicator 1 is synchronized with computer 20 by means of RSSP and
RSEP pulses generated in range sweep formation block 3. Range sweep start pulses
are fed to the input of kon"yunktor 4, which controls bearing read-out initiation
flip-flop 5. When a"north" pulse, produced by antenna simulation and bearing sweep
formation block 2, appears at the moment the PPI beam passes the azimuth read-out
initiation point, flip-flop 5 opens kon"yunktor 4, and then bearing counter 6 begins
fixing the current bearing values by counting the number of RSSP's enterinq its
input.
Blocks 7 and 8, which determine the start and end of the interference bearing, com-
pare the current bearing values determined by counter 6 with the interference bearing
coordinates stored in registers 9 and 10. As soon as the current bearing value of
counter 6 equals the bearing value stored in interference bearing start register 9,
- interference bearing start detiermination block 7 produces a pulse that places inter-
ference generation flip-flop 11 in its unit state. The high potential produced by
the unit output of flip-flop 11 turns on its current voltage formation block 12,
which produces the range sweep illumination voltage. The illumination voltage
passes through analog kon"yunktor15, the controlling input of which is connected
to synchronization flip-flop 14, to the input of matching block 16, and then to the
CRT modulator of indicator 1.
As a result of this, beginning with the initial interference bearing, the screen of
indicator 1 would be completely illuminated within the limits of the start and end
bearings of the interference. :he interference is t~zrned off from the indicator
screen by a pulse produced by interference bearing end determination block 8, at
the moment that the carrent bearing value of counter 6 is equal to the bearing
values stored in interference bearing end register 10. Passing to the zero input
of interferenc e generation flip-flop 11, the pulse produced by intereference
bearing end determination block 8 returns thE flip-flop to its initial state, and
thus turns off interference voltage formation block 12.
Analog kon"yunktorl5 is needed because in contrast to the situation with jamming,
only a part of the range sweep on the indicator screen is illuminated in the
presence of passive interference. Figure 32a shows the appearance of interference
produced on indicator screen 1 by terrain features.
69
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
To simulate such interference, computer 20 transmits not only the start and end
values of the interference bearing to registers 9 and ZO, but also the range
coordinate of the interference, read from the center of the indicator screen 1; the
latter is transferred to register 19 by an inverse eade. Range marker pulse gener-
ator 17 is connected to register 19 via kcyn"yunktor 18, the controlling input of
which is connected to synchronization flip-flop 14.
At the start of the range sweep, synchronization flip-flop 14 opens analog l~on"yunktor '
15 and kon"yunktor 18. As a result,the range sweep illumination voltage coming
from the output of interference voltage formation block 12 lights up the indicator
screen. However, as soon as a number of pulses equal to the value of the inter~
ference range coordinate enters register 19, a pulse arises at the output of
register 19. 2'his pulse passes through ~z"yunktor 13 to the zero input of synchro-
nization flip-flop 14, returning it to its initial state without waiting for the
end of the range sweep. As a consequence analog kon"yunktor 15 and kon"yunktor 18
break the corresponding circuits, and formation�of interfe~ence on this range
sweep ends. �
70
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8
FOR OFFiCIAL USE ONLY
- COMPUTERIZED TRAINERS
Trainers Used to Teach PPI Radar Operators
A flow chart of a trainer i.ntended to teach operators how to use PPI radar stations
~ is shown in Figure 34 (15). Its composition includes plan position indicator 1,
antenna simulation and bearing sweep formation block 2, range sweep formation block 3,
bearing flip-flop 4, bearing kon"yunktor bearing.c.ounter 6, range flip-flop 7,
range marker pulse oscillator 8, range kon"yunktor 9, range counter 10, target signal
amplitucle range setting block 11, target signal amplitude determination block 12,
matching block 13, semiautomatic coordinate plotting mechanism 14, marker formatian
block 15, marker x coordinate register 16, marker ~ coordinate register 17, time
pulse sensor 18, time registration flip-flop ~9, time kon"yunktor 20, ~ime pulse
counter 21, and electronic computer 22.
r yl~ f ~ _ . .
_ 2 4 ~f '
6
3 ~
NN P/j 1
F.
~ NR P/! 1 9 10
~
B
11
IS
ll i1
/6
!4
17
13
/ b
rB 20 1~
r
r~
Figure 34. Flow Chart of a Trainer for PPI Radar Operators
Key:
1. SSP 3. RSSP
2. SEP 4. RSEP
71
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
The essence of the trainer's operation is as follows.
~
Antenna simulation and bearing sweep formation block 2 generates scan start pulses
(eSP's) and scan end ~ulses (SEP's), which pass throuqh the unit and zero inputs of
bearing flip-flop 4 respectively. At the moment bearing read-out is initiated, an
SSP sets bearing flip-flop 4 in its unit state, thus opening bearing kon"yunktor 5~
the input of which receives a constant flow of range sweep start pulses produced
by range sweep formation block 3. RSSP's pass from the output of kon"yunktor 5 to
the input of bearing counter 6, which counts the incoming RSSP's, thus fixing the
current bearing values. When the PPI sweep completes.a full revolution, a scan
end pulse produced by antsnna simulation and bearing sweep formation block 2 returns
bearing synchronization flip-flop 4 to its initial state. With the start of a new
scan, bearing counter 6, the output of which is connected to the input register of
computer 22, once again begins recording the current bearing values.
RSSP's and RSEP's are also used to synchronize the work of range flip-flop 7, which
is connected to range kon"yunktor 9; range u~rker pul~e oscillator 8 is connected to
the other input of the latter, and range counter 10 is connected to its output. Thus
range counter 10 records the current range ~lues from zero t~ maximwn in each range
sweep. As with the output of bearing counter B, its input is connected to computer 22.
- Target bli~s and target trajectories are form~ed in the following fashion. The current
bearing and range coordinates of all targets are fed into the compute~ memory. After
the trainer is turned on, each RSSP passes to bearing counter 6, and~simultaneously
each pulse is fed through the computer's in.terrupt channel to the input of its control
unit. In response to this signal the computer switches to a subroutine interrogating
the contents of the bearing counter and comparing its readings with the value for the
first target range coordinate, stored in the computer's main meu?ory.
If the readings of bearing counter 6 do not correspond to the value of the closest
target bearing coordinate; the computer returns to its main program not associated
with target blip formation. Othenvise the computer switches to a second subroutine
forming target blips at a given range; this entails continuous interrogation of the
ccntents of range counter 10 and comparison of its readings with the value of the
closest range coordinate of a target at fixed bearing.
As soon as the current target value corresponds to the~reading of the range counter,
the computer feeds a signal to target signal amplitude determination block 12,
causing it to produce a target pulse on the i.ndicator's ranqe sweep.
The reason target signal amplitude determination block 12 is within the composition
of the trainer is that in real conditions, a nonlinear dependence exists between
the amplitude of the signal received by the radar station and the range to the ~arget.
This dependence is shown in Figure 35.(10). However, because of the action of the
automatic gain adjustment circuit in the receiving channel of the radar station and
saturation of the receiver at low target ranges, a signal at the output of the re-
ceiver increases in intensity only to a certain value; therefore this law is usually
simulated approximately in trainers.
72
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02109: CIA-RDP82-00850R400440030060-8
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
P~D
1
1-~
a
Fiaure 35. Change Experienced b.y a Signal at a Radar. Receiver Input
_ Depending on Range to the Target 1, and Simulation of This
Change by a Trainer Z
In the trainer under examination here, the amplitude of the signal received by the
radar station is simulated by the target signal amplitude range setting block ,
one of the possible variants of which is shown in Figure 36. The main component
of the block is linearly-falling voltage generator 26, the input of which is
connected to adjustable constant voltage sourc~ 25 via analog kon"yunktor 23, con-
trolled by flip-flop 24. At the begi.nning of a range sweep, an RSSP sets flip-flop
23 in its unit state, thus opening analog kon"yunktor 25, which connects the adjust-
able constant voltage source to linearly-falling voltage generator 26, starting up
the generator. Z"he magnitude of the constant v~oltage fed to the input of generator
26 is set such that the law of change of the linearly-falling voltage~would be close
to the law of change of the signal reeeived by the radar station, depending on range
to the target.
i i
~ ~ & I
I 74 15 26 ~ 1B '
I I ~K 6nnKy coZna-
J coea~r
uA
I Nll~/1 T i MB ~
i NKPQ 73 i ~1 i
~o,,m 3BM
12 ~
L
Figure 36. Flow Chart for a Target Pulse Formation Block
Key:
1. RSSP 3. From computer
2, RSEp 4. Zb matching block
In this case the target signal amplitude determination block 12 (Figure 34) would
consist of delay multivibrator 27 (Fi~ure 36), connected to the controlling input
of analog kon"yunktor 2t3, the other input of which is connected to the output of
linearly-falling voltage generator 26. At the moment a si.gnal requiring production
73
FOR OFFICiAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
of a target pulse on the indicator's range sweep arrives, delay multivibrator
generates a pulse, the duration of which is equal to the duration of the pulse
reflected from the target. This pulse passes to the controlling input of analog
kon"yunktor 28, openi::g it and thus connecting the output of linearly-falling voltage
generator 26 to matching block 13 (Figure 34). The latter interlinks the target
signal amplitude determination block with the CRT modulator of indicator 1.
At the end of the range sweep an RSEP returns flip-flop 23 (Figure 36) to its initial
state, disconnecting the constant voltage source from linearly-falling voltage gener-
ator 26. When as RSEP appears, the linearly-falling voltage generator starts up
. once again, and the process of target signal amplitude formation repeats itself.
Zb simulate successive target pulses on k successive range sweep lines, the computer
transmits a target blip generation signal to block 12 (Figure 34) another (k-1)
times at the moment the current target range is equal. to the reading of range counter
10.
To simplify the trainer flow chart Figure 34 does not show the jamming and inter-
ference simulation blocks, though such interference may be simulated in precisely
the same way as the target blip.
Information is read semiautomatically i.n the trainer with the assistance of semi-
automatic coordinate plotter 14, marker formation block 1v, and marker coordinate
x and y registers 16 and 1?.
In principle, coordinates may be read semiautomatically off of various types of
conventional radar indicators, for which purpose the indicator must be equipped with
a special plotter.
An electron-optic reading method has enjoyed extensive application abroad (12).
7.'he operation of the tarqet coordinate plotting unit (Figure 37) basically consists
of the Eollowing. The unit contains guide mechaniem 1, which consists of two
slotted yokes situated 90� relative to ear,h other; rod 2,connected to a handle and
plotting button 3~rocks in the slots. Devices 4 that convert the tilt angles of
the rod into a binary ntuaber are mounted on the axles of the yoke. As the rod rocks,
binary numbers proportional to the rod's tilt angle (xTq and yM) are picked off from
these converters. PasSing through.a "x,y number-voltage" converter, these numbers are
transformed into constant voltages which, acting upon the CRT's deflecting system,
determine the position of a luminescent electronic marker on the screen. Rocking
~ rod 2, the operator moves the electronic marker and superimposes it over the return
from the target. When superimposition occurs, he presses plotting button 3, which is
connected to switch 5. The switch closes the contacts of the x and y binary number
output in the computer, and thus marker coordinates xM and yM , equal to the coordi-
nates of the target at the moment of superimposition, are transmitted to the computer.
This method requires the use of special indicators on which the simulated radar situ-
ation is superimposed over secondary signals such as, for example, markers, symbols,
and digits.
74
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02109: CIA-RDP82-00850R400440030060-8
FOR OFF[CIAL USE ONLY
. ~1' _ _ ,
. anr j
~
z
~ - ~
. ~
I
~ ,
~ -/A~ ~~1 ~
4 - 4 (
90' . 5 I .
xM YN o-r
~~2~ ~
I
aaoeo
~~1p0 ~ 3 ) I
Figure 37. Functional Diagram Explaining the Principle of Electron-Optic
Coordinate R~ead-Out: 1--guide mechanism; 2--rod; 3--plotting
handle and button; 4--devices converting rod tilt angles into
binary numbers; 5--switch
Key:
1. CRT 3. "x,y niunber-voltage" converter
2. To computer
The radar situation and the marker can be simulated by the same deflecting system
in polar coordinates.
Reproduction of the marker requires interruption of sawtooth voltages to the CRT's
deflecting system for long enough to transmit the constant voltages of the marker.
The frequency of marker illumination must be such that on one hand the marker would
be observed as a nonblinking point, and on the other hand the loss of information ,
caused by interruption of the sweep would be minimal.
In this trainer system (Figure 34), electron-optic coordinate plotting differs from
the system shown in Figure 37 in that the coordinate plotter contains a system which
converts turning angles in relation to each of the coordinates into a code. The
readings of these converters are transmitted to registers 16 arid 17 (Figure 34),
connected to the computer. In this case when the marker is superimposed over the
- target blip, the operator presses the plotting button, and a"plot" pulse is gener-
-sted in block 14. This pulse passes through the computer's interrupt channel to its
~�ontrol unit, switching the computer to the subroutine interroqating the contents of
marker coordinate registers 16 and 17 and comparing their.readings with the true
coordinates of the simulated targets.
75
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00854R400404030060-8
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONY.Y
Inasmuch as the true position of the target is recorded in the computer memory in
polar coordinates while the marker position is given in rectangular coordinates,
the computer transforms the coordinates of the marker from rectangular to polar,
and compares them with the target coordinates. As a result of the comparison the
computer determines the error made by the operator in measuring the coordinates.
In addition to determining the precision characteristics of the operator, the trainer
can also measure and record the temporal characteristics of his work. For this
purpose the trainer contains time pulse sensor 18, conneeted via kon"yunktor 20 ,
the controlling input of which is connected to time recording flip-flop 19, to time
pulse counter 21.
The moment a target blip appears on the indicator screen, the target pulse is passed
to time recording flip-flop 19, placing it in unit state and thus opening kon"yunktor
20. From this time on, ~on"yunktor 20 begi.ns passing time pulses from time pulse
sensor 18 to time pulse counter 21. When the operator reads the coordinates, time
- recording flip-flop 19 returns to its initial state in response to a"plot" pulse,
thus blocking kon"yunktor20. Concurrently, because the "plot" pulse is transmitted
to the computer at the mament the plot button is pressed, the computer interrogates
the time pulse counter and records the result in its memory--the operator's reaction
time.
At the desire of the training supervisor the accuracy and time characteristics may be
appropriately processed by the computer, and the results can be printed out.
The operator locks onto a selected target for tracking by successively inputting the
coordinates and moments of detection of two successive blips into the computer.
Using the first two inputs, the computer determines the motion parameters and
calculates the anticipated coordinates of this target, which are then used to move
the marker across the indicator screen of the trainer.
To calculate the marker coordinates for one or two sweeps ahead, it would be suffi-
cient to use Newton's simple extrapolation foxmulas (12).
Trainers Used to Teach Guidance and Manual Target Tracking Operators
The task of guidance and manual target tracking radar operators differs~from that of
PPI radar operators in that they must use target indication data--that is, the
target coordinates--to aim the intended system in such a way that the bisector of
the scanning sector would intersect the target (Figure 38). The operator observes
the aerial situation on a guidance indicator, which looks approximately as shown in
Figure 39. This indicator has a scanning pattern similar to that of television; the
scanning pattern is created by a scanning motion of the antenna beam pattern (S).
Then the operator superimposes the marker of the slave range system (the horizontal
marker) over the target (as a result the target is placed at the intersection of
' the scanning sector bisector and the horizontal range marker) and sets the antenna
control system and the slave range sys~em in manual tracking mode, trying to keep
the target at the intersection of the scanning sector bisector and the horizontal
range marker.
76
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2407/02109: CIA-RDP82-00854R000400030060-8
F~OR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
GucccKmpucn (1)
CtKmopn cKanupoeanuA
r ~1 d ~
E _
o'cs
~ ~
i- ~l c�.i E a~/
.~_~r~--~. ~ va\L~
~ \ ~
/ ~~y ~ d
Y
y y
~
~ Wupuxa
'~~7 cr.?cmupn 3)
cKnnupoannuA
rnc (4)
Figure 38. Scanning Pattern of a Guidance Radar Beam
Key:
1. Scanning sector bisector 3. Scanning sector width
2. Scanning sector height 4. Radar station
i
~ Z~
(1~
�x ~
~
~
4'
Yso~ Mecma (a~uMym)
Figure 39. Approximate representation of a guidance indicator:
1--scanning sector bisector (vertical marker); 2--target
blip ; 3--horizontal range markerf 4--range sweep line
Key:
1. Range ~
2. Angle of sight (bearing)
- � 7?
FOR OFF[CIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2Q07/02109: CIA-RDP82-0085QR000400030060-8
FOR OFF[CIAL USE ONLY
The flow chart for a trainer used to teach guidance and manual tracking operators
is shown in Figure 40 (16).
6 9
~ B
10
1!
y 11
1
p 13
/ .
3 1 84 ~5 f
16 `4
~ g
!1 IB t9
13 5 ~(i .
?1 ?S '
?2
16
Figure 40. Flow Chart of a Trainer Used to Teach Guidance and Manual
Tracking Operators
The trainer consists of guidance indicator 1, angular sweep formation block 2,
range sweep formation block 3, vertical marker formation block 4, horizontal marker
formation block 5, antenna system simulation block 6 connected to angular antenna
movement control 7, scanning sector start pulse formation block 8, scanning sector
end pulse formation block 9, blocks 10 and 11 maasuring .th� coordinates of the left
and right boundaries of the scanning sector respectively, scanning bisector pulse
formation block 12, control flip-flop 13, angular coordinate read-out kon"yunktor 14,
block 15 which reads the angular coordinates within the scanning sector, range
flip-flop 16,. range marker pulse oscillator 17, range kon"yunktor 18, range coordi-
nate read-out block 19, horizontal marker position determination block 20, block 21
which converts angular movement of the control into a code, manual tracking control
22, matching block 23, computer 24, code switching block 25, and manual tracking
block 26.
Before the trainer is placed into operation, the program for the target trajectory
and interference is fed into the computer's main memory.
After the trainer is turned on, a zebra-striped display is created on indicator
screen 1 by blocks2 and 3, which form the angular sweep and the range sweep.
78
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2407/42/09: CIA-RDP82-40850R000400430060-8
~FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
The position of the scanning sector of the indicator screen is synchronized with
the position of the antenna system by blocks 8 and 9, which correspondingly form
the sector scanning start and end pulses. 7.'hese blocks are rigidly joined to
antenna system simulation block 6. Controlling antenna system simulation block 6
by control 7, the operator moves the scanning sector's boundaries, which are indi-
cated by scanning sector start (SSP) and end (SEP) pulses, generated by blocks 8
and 9.
One of the possible variants of the scanning sector start and end pulse formation
systems is shown in Figure 41.
1
' K 3BM
(1)
= NIIC
~2) 2 3
8 4 5
G
7
NKC
~3~1 ~1)
?c 3BM
- �Figure 41. Principle of Measiring Scanning Sector Boundary Coordinates:
1--rotation angle-code converter; 2--scanning sector bisector
sensor; 3--scanning sector start sensor; 4--magnet; 5--electric
motor; 6--scanning sector end sensor; 7--current collector;
8--control
Key :
1. To computer 3. Scanning sector end pulse
2. Scanning sector start pulse
A disc with a magnet mounted on it is rigidly secured to the axle of the electric
motor, which rotates at a constant speed. Opposite this disc and mounted co-
axially with it is another disc, on which three sensors are mounted: scanning
sector start and end sensors, and a scanning sector bisector sensor. The axle of
the second disc, upon which the current controller is mounted, is rigidly connected
to the scanning sector movement control.
� When the disc with the permanznt magnet i;: turned by the electric motor, scanning
sector start , scanning sector bisector, anc~ ~canning sector end pulses are formed
successively in the sensors before the second disc.
- ~,vo systems converting rotation angles inta a code determine the coordinates of
the scann~ng sector boundaries. The readings of one of them correspond to the posi~
- tion of the scanning sector's left boundary while the readings of the second
79
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8
- FOR OFF[CIAL USE ONLY
correspond to the position of the scanning sector's right boundary. When sector
scanning begins, a pulse formed by the scanning sector sensor passes through the
current collector to the rotation angle-code converter, and the converter's readings
are transmitted to the computer's input register. In similar fashion, at the end of
sector scanning a pulse formed by the scanning sector end sensor passes through the
second rotation angle-code converter, and the coordinates of the scanning sector are
. once again transmitted to the computer's input register. A pulse defining the loca-
tion of the scanning sector bisector passes through the current collector through
the vertical marker formation block.
Scanning sector start pulses start up angular sweep formation block 2(Figure 40),
while scanning sector end pulses return it to its initial state. Inasmuch as the
repetition frequency of scanning sector.start and end pulses is 16-24 Hz, an
angular sweep is formed on the indicator screen. The range sweep is created on
the indicator screen by range sweep formation block 3, which i.n turn produces range
sweep start (RSSP's) and end (RSSP's) pulses.
In order that the target blips would appear on the indicator screen only after their
coordinates are within or on the boundary of the scanning sector, the scanning
sector left and right boundary coordinate measuring blocks, which are connected to
scanning sector start and end pulse formation blocks 8 and 9, and to antenna simula-
tion block 6, record the absolute coordinates of the left and right boundaries of
the scanning sector, which are read by computer 24.
Coordinates within the scanning sector are determined more precisely by block 15,
which reads the angular coordinates within the scanning sector, and by block 7.~9;
which reads the range coordinates.
With this purpose the training sector start and end pulses are transmitted to
control flip-flop 13, which, upon arrival of a sector scanninq start pulse, op,ns
the angular coordinate read-out kon"yunktor which connects range sweep formation
block 3 to block 15, which reads the angular coordinates within the scanning sector,
and when a scanning sector end pulse arrives, it closes the kon"yunktor.
Thus the readings of block 15, which records every angular coordinate within the
scanning sector, are fed to the computer.
Nbreover RSSP's formed by block 3 are fed to range flip-flop 16, which, upon arrival
- of an RSSP, opens range coordinate read-out kon"yunkto~l8, connecting the output of
range marker pulse oscillator 17 to range coordinate read-out block 19, and when an
RSEP arrives, it closes it. Every range sweep is broken up into discrete intervals
by range marker pulses, and at every m~oment in time, coordinate A is recorded by
range coordinate read-out block 19, the readings of which are fed into the computer.
The computer controls simulation of target and interference blips on the indicator
screen. For this purpose when a scanning sector start pulse reaches the computer,
the latter switches to a subroutine interrogating the readings of scanning sector
left and right boundary coordinate measuring blocks 10 and 11, and compares their
readings with the current coordinates of targets and interference, stored in the
computer memory.
80
FOR OFF[CIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02109: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8
FOR OFFICIAL USE aNLY
As soon as the operator changes the angular position of the antenna by control 7
in such a fashion that the target and interference coordinates stored in the com-
puter memory are within the scanninq sector, the computer switches to its second
subroutine, interrogatinq the readings of block 15, whi.ch reads angular coordinatea
within the scanning sector, and compares them with the target and interference angu-
lar coordinates stored in the computer memory.
As soon as these readings are equal to the coordinates of some particular target or
inter~erence source, the computer switches to a third subroutine interrogating range
coordinate read-out block 19 and comparing its reading~ with the range coordinate
of the simulated target or interference source. When the latter are equal, the
computer feeds a signal to matching block 23, causing the first pulse from the
target or interference source to appear on the range sweep. Inasmuch as the number
of pulses received by the guidance radar station from a target pulse train is random
and depends on the scanning rate and the breadth of the antenna's beam pattern, the
concrete value of the target or interference pulse chain width is picked by the
computer program in accordance with the concrete tactical situation being simulated.
To simulate target pulses following the first (lC-1) pulses, the computer generates,
on k successive range sweep lines, another (k-1) times,a signal turning on the
target or interference pulse range sweep at the moment the current values of the
target or interference range are equal to the readings of range coordinate read-out
block 19.
Vertical and horizontal markers are formed on the indicator screen to simulate
lock-on of tracking systems to the target in relation to angular coordinates
(bearing) and range.
The vertical marker is formed by illuminating the tnid-line of the range sweep, which
corresponds to the position of the scanning sector bisector and divides the scanning
sector of the antenna in half. For this purpose block 12 (Figure 40), which forms
scanning sector bisector pulses, generates a pulse that passes to vertical marker
formation block 4 at the moment the antenna's beam pattern aligns itself with the
middle of the scanning sector (when the disc bearing the magnets is opposite the
scanning sector bisector sensor, Figure 41). Block 4 illuminates one of the range
sweep lines.
One of the possible variants of the vertical marker formation block is shown in
Figure 42.
X3N 1 ( 4 )
_ T ~j, T 1' K 3/IT
1 2 d 4
~
2 XRP/~
I c3)
Figure 42. Flow Chart of a Vertical Marker Formation Block
Key:
1. VMSP 3. RSEP

~ 2. R: `;P 4. To CRT
81
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02109: CIA-RDP82-00850R400440030060-8
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
_ The vertical marker start pulse (VMSP) generated by the scanning sector bisector
sensor is transmitte3 to the input of delay flip-flop 1, setting it in its unit state.
The need for a delay flip-flop stems from the fact that because there is no syn-
Chrony between scanr,ing sector start pulses and range sweep start pulses, the verti-
~ cal marker start pulse may appear at any moment during formation of. the range sweep.
The delay flip-flop delays the vertical marker start pulse until the next range
sweep start pulse arrives.
Switching to its unit state, delay flip-flop 1 opens kon"yunktor 2, to the other
input of which range sweep start pulses are constantly fed. The first RSSP follow-
~ng,the VMSP passes through kon"yunktor 2 to thej~,nput of lightinq flip-flop 3, switching
it to its unit state; this pulse simultaneously passes'to the input of delay flip-
flop 1, returning it to its initial state.
The high potential picked off from lighting flip-flop 3 is fed through amplifier 4
to the controlling electrode of the CRT, illuminating one of the range sweaps. At
the end of the forward trace of the range sweep the range sweep end pulse passes
through the zero input of ligh~ing flip-flop 3, returning it to its initial state
and thus shutting off the lighting voltage.
The horizontal marker is formed by block 20 (Figure 40), which determi.nes the position
of the horizontal marker. The value of the current coordinate of the CRT's beam
position is fed to one input of this block from range coordinate read-out block 19,
while the other receives either the coded value of the position of manual tracking
control 22, formed by block 21, which converts angular movement of the control into
a code, or the coded value of the target velocity from the computer.
Horizontal marker position determination block 20 compares the coded ;;~~~:~w~of the
current coordinate of the CRT's beam position with the coded value of the angular
position of manual tracking control 22, or the target velocity, and at the moment
of their equality it triggers horizontal marker formation block 5, which produces
a lighting pulse that proceeds to the cathode of indicator 1's CRT. Inasmuch as.
this comparison is made in relation to every bearing sweep line, the succession
of lighting signals forms a horizontal marker, which may m~ve across the display
screen as manual tracking control 22 is rotated.
When an operator is working with the trainer, first he searches for a target, for
which purpose he moves the scanning sector by moving scanning sector angular control
7, until such time that a target blip appears on the screen. The operator's task
is to set the position of the scanning sector in such a way that the vertical marker
would divide the target marker in half. Then, moving manual tracking control 22,
the operator superimposes the horizontal marker over the target blip in such a way
that the target blip would be at the i.ntersecti~~n between the vertical and horizontal
markers. ti::ter this the operator presses a button which turns on manual tracking
block 26.
At this moment code switching block 25 disconnects block 21, which converts anqular
movements of the control into code, from block 20, which determines the position of
the horizontal marker, connecting the latter directly to the computer. A code pro-
portional to the rotation rate of control 22 passes through manual tracking block 26
to the computer, where it is transformed by a special subroutine into a code
82
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00854R400404030060-8
FOR OFFIC[AL USE ONLY
proportional to the target's velocity; then the code is transmitted through code
switching block 25 to horizontal marker position determination block 20.
Thus by correctly selecting the rotation rates of controls 7 and 22, the o~erator
is able to keep the target blips continuously superimposed over the intersection of
the horizontal and vertical markers.
The flow chart for the algorithm simulating target and interference blips on a
guidance indicator screen in shown in Figure 43.
. _ N f
A~
f2?
Hem n
z
a
- ~.T
Nem
4
~Q
AS
Nem p
e
,~a
B,
AB
~ Hem v
� 9 .
QO
A,~
Figure 43. Flow Chart of an Algorithm Simulating Interference and Target
Blips on a Guidance Indicator Screen
Key:
1. Scanning sector start pulse 3. Yes
2. No
The algorithm begins with operator A1, which interrogates the readings of the left
and right scanning sector Y~oundary cooxdi.nate measurinq blocks at the moment a
scanning sector start pulse reaches the computer. Logic operator P2 compares the
readings of the scanning sector boundary coordinate~measuring blook with the closest
values of the target bearing coordinates, stored in the computer's main memory. If
83
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02109: CIA-RDP82-00850R400440030060-8
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
logic operator P2 = 0--that is, if the target and interference bearing coordinates
lie within the scanning sector boundaries, control is transferred to stop operator
A10� Otherwise control is transferred to operator A3, which interrogates block 15
(Figure 40), which reads angular coord~nates.within the scanning sector. If logic
operator P4 = 0--that is, the target and interference angular coordinates do not
correspond to the readings of block 15, control is once again transferred to operator
A3. But if P4 = 1, control is transferred to operator As,which interrogates range
coordinate read-out block 19.
Logic operator P6 compares the readings of the range coordinate read-out block with
the closest range coordinate value recirded for the given bearing and stored in the
main memory of the computer. If logic operator P6 = 0, control is transferred to
operator A5, which once again interrogates the range coordinate read-out block,
setting its reading at a new position.
As soon as the readings of range coordinate read-out blockl9 correspond to the
total range coordinates--that is, when P6 = 1, control is transferred to operator
B~. The latter forms and transmits a target pulse to the CRT modulator of indicator 1.
In addition operator B~ transfers control to operator Ag, which counts the ntunber of
pulses produced by operator B~.
Logic operator Pg compares the number of target pulses transmitted to the indicator's
CRT m~dulator with a constant defining the width of the pulse train. If logic oper-
ator Pg = 0, control is transferred to operator A5 which, together with operators
p5 and B6, once again forms and transmits the next target pulse. When the number of
pulses generated by operator B~ is equal to the number of pulses defined by the
constant, condition Pg= 1 is satisfied, and control is transferred to stop operator
A10�
Operator errors are recorded by an operator work precision evaluation program:
After target blips are produced on the indicator screen, the angular coordinate
and range coordinate of the target are compared with the positions of the vertical
and horizontal markers. If the target blip is not at the intersection of the horizontal
and vertical markers, a subroutine registers the angular deviation of the target
blip from the vertical marker, and its range deviation from the horizontal marker.
Concurrently the computer also registers the times at which these deviations were
detected.
When the operator finishes work with the trainer, the computer prints out the
precision characteristics of the operator's work, in real time.
84
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02109: CIA-RDP82-00850R400440030060-8
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
TEACHING TECHPQIQUES APPLIID TO OPERATORS USING TRAINERS
The Techniques of Stage-by-Stage Formation of Actions and Concepts
The theory of stage-by-stage formation of actions and concepts permits us to digress
- from the traditional fonas of training, in which the future specialist is first
presented the knowledge he requires, and then he engages in real acti.ons. According
to the theory of stage-by-stage formation, traini.n~ begins not with communicating pre-
liminary knowledge and actions to the student , but rather with furnishing him with
an action fundamentals orientation chart--an AFO chart, also called a test card,
bearing specific instructions, drawings, graphs, and so on. It indicates the sequence
and content of all operations associated with the action the operator is assimilating.
Such a chart (test card) must include elements that would account for psychological
difficulties encountered by the students.
Using a test card, the student can imanediately perform a previously unknown action
correctly (though slowly). All directions helping the student to correctly perform an
action are involuntarily memorized, together with a large vollnne of the most diverse
information necessary for the performance of this action. Thus the stage in which the
student must intentionally learn the material is excluded. As a consequence of this,
as well as due to immediate formation of the correct skills and exclusion of unneces~
sary trials, errors, and the associated loss of time, the duration of the course of
instruction decreases significantly as well. As the students assimilate the necessary
information, the instructor gradually reduces the number of external cues, and he con-
trols the instruction process in such a way that information contained on the action
fundamentals orientation chart weuld qradual.ly transform into the corresponding knowledge
~f a new action.
t~~hen actions are formed in this manner, qualities the student needs, such as wisdom,
flexibility, the ability to make generalizations, and consciousness, permitting him
to act correctly in diverse conditions, are developed through proper selection and
change of the initial material--that is, th~ose tasks which assist: in formation of a
r.ew action.
The basic provisions of the theory of stage-by-stage formation were tested out in many
u~its, to include the Order of Lenin Nbscow Antiaircraft District, in which radar oper-
ator training was organized in such a fashion that the students performed all of the
~ctions associated with inspecting, turning on, and testing a station, as well as of
;letecting targets, both with and without interference, from the very beginning of
~`raining, slowly but without mistakes (18). Error-free actions were insured by slow,
85
FOR OFFICIA~. USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00854R400404030060-8
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
(1) Bardamn nr.pnnr, dnHCCCViue ~
1. NoMCp qCnu ( 2) ~ 24 ~ fcma nu .~uarcvcHrra~ c~crmopa uan yw~c~KU ~Kpnxo T
7. A,~uMym uenu; ( 3 )
- Naumu nanpnenenue na uene: ( 4) en, 25~ (26) �
- omcvem ar.'cmu no eepmuKOnaHOU ( 5) ~ ~a nu �e~a ~z~~~~MU . upak?e
Meinxr. no vacoeou cmpenKC u� nenue"acnuoumb
soceem
( 2 ~ Nem
~ ,~iircy,n rpnpMy uyue ~0
nr~tt, 8 .mr.ecm .
qena da S' Ur,na notcp~c� I{e~a en/aeo Ur.nn nn~oo
(~o J Mr,mn~e dune dayx na ~la o,n ~ou ~/J nm .~ac~evener
S� M~moK S' MC/NKU S' Men~KU ~~~,,,rx cc~rniol+. 3a~~rwe"b~ nn~~~cnn-
rmcKnnnKO ccxnmar~ e
au~c
FjiKax n~xa cnupnreaie 3 3
aer.a axOuN 31 unu nAmce )
AauMy~n A3uMyin A.~rrMym Aa~~Mym u nn nu uPnn
MCn~KU nenori ,S � nc~uxi S' ncnn6 S� ~i nu nu u~~b. u Na nu qeAa.
~ MemKU + d' _ Mr.mKU * 1" Mcmnu + 4" (
9
HP.m Qa Ncm
rt cn~ Q ~ ~ 5 )
3 Qonnencma qcnu (14 ) ~ 2 ( ~
~QU2~AC6 001 !(P,N/11~ 9KpQNQ~ NUUIpf! JMlI~IC' U~UM~mh 0/K1XUl1lA~ O~~U/1IA~ Qo~~e� o~ro.wume~ Qoscu~'uma~
f.IM1N(((lA C/I!/IH4UA C!lWNUUF , CmaH4uA , Clil[iN[(UA ,/IION((U
~ 15 UC QIIU.M'QQUlCI% K t(C/lU MCl1JKU (~U/IbNQCI!!ll ~ '~~m ,Y~U~'C,m
(x~Ka~pY~n ~iuKr.up{~m Qmr[rr~em Ka~PY~"
URnNlR~IA1C ORmUBNbfC ~NlGtiYlOnblE l~d/ON~P ~N.~PON- HL7CUlIXp1N-
I!(1Mf.Xfl. /lOMCXU� lIOMEXU. AOAICXU. h1E ~~0~'~~. N~
fC/~A /(P./lU f/�'mb 1(~~tl f.f.lOb I(CBQ
Qcn~ ~m 10 qr.nb nocepe !{eao earu~r, !(cna rte~~uc P~ 35 ~6 r~r,~~ "~"3$ u~('~39
(su,ooJ-KM auNC deyx . ira ~lr n,n ~m 1/a~ u~� q.
Mem,re IO,~M eKn~oK IUR,u Mem,ru 1/I,YM Mt'mKU Ba~doma
B�~d�m� ~cpeoe
g~ d~,~
~ 8) Aonccea 8)
/la~anvcinn Qunanncmy /lana~~ocma Rannnncre _ _ _ _
du HrcroKU' dn Nu~rNr.u BO NIIXHL'(I dn eu~ruc~i
1/}A'M MC/7/A'U lP+YM MC/AA'U ~/1*M ~'~~~K� ~ Q?RbNCUU/CC ORUCQM ~j d~(Rmcae~cmu onepamnpa
~17~ +iKAf *~A'M ~RM ~91[~~~.~~....~.^~
~ L-------
Figure 44. Principle of Organization of a Test Card Used to Teach Radar Operators
the Actions of Target Detection
Key:
1. Make initial report
2. Target number
3. Target bearing
4. Find direction to target
5. Read the values on the vertical marker, clockwise
6. Target on 5� (30�) marker
7. Bearing of marke.r
8. Target midway between two 5� markers
9. Bearing of left 5� marker, +3�
10. Target to right of 5� marker and 1/3 away from it
1:L. Bearing of left 5� marker, +2�
12. Target to right of 5� ma.rker and 2/3 away from it
13. Bearing of left 5� marker, +4�
14. Target range ~
15. Moving from cen~er of screen, find range marker closest to target
_ 16. Target on 10 (5~1,100) km marker
17. Range to marker
18. Target midway be:tween two 10 km markers
19. Range to lower :LO km marker, +5 km
20. Target 1/3 abov~: 10 km marker
[key continued on following page]
86
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-0085QRQ0040Q030060-8
' FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
21. Range to lower 10 km marker, +3 km
22. Target 2/3 above 10 km marker
23. Range to lower 10 km marker, +7 km
24. Are ~ere illuminated areas or sectors on the screen?
25. No
26. Yes
27. Is a target present?
28. Make initial report
29. Reduce illumination by "Briqhtness" and "Gai.n" adjustments
30. What is the shape of the illuminated area ?
31. Sector, several sectors, entire screen illuminated
32. Individual areas of the screen illinninated in the form of bright bands or spots
33. Spiral curves illuminated
34. Is target visible?
35. Report: "Station being jammed. Target present"
36. Report: "Station being ja~ned. Target absent"
37. Report: "Station receiving interference. Target present"
38. Report: "Statioii receiving interference. Target absent"
39. Report: "Station receiving asynchronous interference. Target present"
40. Report: "Station receiving asynchronous interference. Target absent"
41. See subseq~ient descrip~ion of operator activity
successive, step-by-step performance of all operations, with reliance upon the action
- fundamentals orientation chart.
The AFO chart (test card) places emphasis on the logic of an operator's work. This
- permits the students to assimilate not only the individual operation contained in
activity that is new to them, but also the general principles of its st~ucture.
For example by performing th~ operations of target detection and tracking, the operator
may find himself working both in the absence and in the presence of interference.
Therefore the action fimdamentals orientation chart must allow the younq operator to
organize his activities in all situations that may arise at one time or another. In
this case the individual elements (branches) of this chart would contain descriptions
of successive operations, a complete set of cues for each of these op~rations, and
a system of directions defining how and in what order he is to follow these branches,
and how he is to perform each operation.
As with the entire chart as a whole, the individual branches of the chart are set up in
sucr a way that the student would correctly perform each operation as he pxogresses
from or.~e direction to the next. slowly at Eirst (but correctly at the first try!).
The principle of organization of such a chart (test card) is shown in Figure 44.
Certain elements of this test card may be made more specific. What we are attempting
to show rere is o:~iy the general principle of organization of an action fundamentals
orientation chart, ar.3 the way the activity of students may be organized on its basis;
this figurs also shows the sequence oi actions taken by an operator in making his
initial report.
a~ ~
, FOR OFFI~IAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-0085QRQ0040Q030060-8
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Another example of a test card prepared for a lesson in which the student learns to
tune the PPI of a P-10 radar station is shown below.
- Z'hese are the meaninys of the symbols employed:
~--do perform this operation, and go on to the next;
� -~A--do not perform this operation, and report to the instructor (lesson leader);
independently perform the operations listed in the text.
Test Card for Plan Position Indicator Tuning
1. Set operating mode switch at EQiO + SCALE.
~
2. Did a narrow, sharp sweep line appear?
Turn brightness and focus knobs to make sweep line narrow and sharp.
3. Is the start of the sweep precisely at the center of the indicator screen?
Turning splines marked Center, Vertical, Horizontal, set the origin of the
sweep precisely at the center of the screen, so that it align~ with the
hole in the center of the graphic scale.
4. Is the image on the indicator screen sharp?
y-~ Set the CONTRAST-OFF tumbler switch at its CONTRAST position, and the
mode switch in its ECHO + INTERROGATION poSition to improve the visibility
of signals on the background of terrain featuzes (interference).
5. Is the sweep brightness too high?
Turning the BRIGH"~'NESS knob, reduce ~he sweep brightness to where it is
barely visible.
6. Set the GAIN knob at its far right position.
i
7. Is the image on the screen of normal brightness?
y-} Turning the spline marked BRIQiTNESS LEVFL, set the required image
brightness.
8. Set the mode switch at its SCALE POSITION, and set the scale switch at
position 100.
~
9. Does the second scale mark~er align with the 10 km division of the graphic
scale?
88
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00854R400404030060-8
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Turning the spline�marked START-100, li.ne up the second scale marker with
the 10 km division.
10. Is the lOth marker aligned with the 100 km division on the graphic scale?
Turning the spline marked END-100, align the lOth marker with the 100 kia
division on the graphic scale.
It may appear at first glance that the actions are in a sense made aare complex,
more cumbersome. But this is only a first itnpression. In fact, this scheme permits
us to organize t.he training in such a way that a young soldier would be able to
per�orm the appropriate tasks right away, and without mistakes. This is simply a
qualitative alteration of the process for forming a needed action.
In order to simulate assimilation of the content of an action by the students,
after a certain amount of time (extremely short) the test card is substituted by an
abbreviated one. L~ter on, the operator will be able to work without relying on
test cards, since owing to orqanization of activity in this way, he will quickly
assimilate all elements of the test cards.
When working with the test cards, and in his first attempts at working without them,
the operator must talk out his actions aloud, laying emphasis in his speech on
the significant factors and basic conditions leading to correct performance of the
required action. Such verbal accompaniment allows.the student to develop conscious
performance of each action, with a complete understanding of all of its features and
circumstances, and to qradually dispense with external cues provided by the lesson
leader,such as the AFO charts, gradually as the actions are assimilated.
As the actions are assimilated, the ~tudent progresses to fast and abbreviated
mental rehearsal of the individual operations--that is, he mentally recalls what
he must do next. 7.'hen he begins to mentally rehearse larger operations consisting
of several smaller ones. After a while, the need for such rehearsals disappears.
From this moment on, the particular action in a sense becomes automatic. Now the
operator works silently, and he reports only those data that are required by the
appropriate documents. It may be said that this basically ends formation of a new
action. What comes next is improvement of the new action in terms of its speed.
- Thus while in traditional instruction the operator acts on the basis of knowledge
he had acquired earlier, in this case he does not learn the knowledge beforehand,
instead receiving it in the form of cues or directions (test cards) explaining
what he must do. The operator reads the~e directions aloud, and then he perfornis
the necessary actions.
It should be noted, however, that if the young operator conns the habits of radar
control i.n relation to some unchanging conditions (const:ant weather cond~tion~, the
same types uf tazgets, and so on), were a change in these conditions to occur, the
operator would once again find himself in an unf3miliar situation. In this case
his actions would unwittingly slow c7own, because the operator would not be able
to imanediately distinguish the concrete ways in w~ich the new situation differs from
the customary one, what sort of operation could be carried over from the previous
situation to the new one, which operations require some adjustment, and so on.
89
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2407/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400430060-8
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Therefore, from the very beginning of training, the radar operator must be placed
in conditions that would compel him to work in different sectors of the screen, both
in the absence and in the presence of interference, while tracking different types
of targets, and so on. The possibility of such work is guaranteed by the AFO chart,
which permits us to conduct the training not according to the principle of going
from the simple to the complex, as is required by traditional didactics, but rather
according to the principle of contrast, where tasks of varyi.ng difficulty are per-
formed from the very beginning, with simple tasks alternating with complex ones.
This promotes maintenance of high student efficiency, raises interest in the
training, and keeps the training challenging.
It need not be feared that formation of an action at the very beginning of training
in a broad range of conditions is a slow process in such training. The benefits of
this approach will appear later on, as the actions are improved and practically
utilized.
Comparative data obtained in military units show that this method significantly
reduces the time to form the knowledge and habits required of radar operators,
beginning with turning on the station and ending with complete control of its
.functions, and with mastery of target tracking habits equivalent in proficiency to
that of a specialist 3d class. In this case half of the training time is used up
with detailed test cards, an~. 30 percent is devoted to abbreviated test cards.
The time required to make young soldiers ready for combat crews is decreased by
a factor of 1.5-2.
In this method, the role of junior conananders in subordinate traininq rises signi-
ficantly, and control over specialist training by commanders and chiefs of all
ranks improves. They may determine, at any moment, objectively, and with the least
expenditure of time, how well training is proceeding with detailed and abbreviated
test cards, reveal the causes of shortcomings, and take efficient steps to eliuninate
t~hem.
Mo:~eover this method raises the possibilities for individual training right at the
wor:-places. It is effective in subunits containing i.ndividuals in many different
specialties. In this case, properly organized independent training reducFS, by
several times, the amount of training time required to restore the habits of combat
duty lost by operators for various reasons.
Training by this method may be performed anywhere: i.n radio engi.neering subunits
and at training centers; by the group method in training subunits, and individually
right with the real radar stations and automatic control systems.
2'he Unique Features of Instruction Using Trainers .
The forms of instruction exam~ined here have one more advantage. 7."he psychological
techniques embodied within the test cards for performing the actions of detecting
and tracking airborne targets, to include low-altitude target~, permit the use of
simulators and trainers to teach the operators.
Practical training with trainers is as a rule preceded by theoretical instructions
and demonstration of the work by experienced operators. The training begins with
90
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2407/02109: CIA-RDP82-00854R000400030060-8
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
development of sensomotor culture--the operator's functional background. An oper-
ator's sensomotor culture is defined as his capability for implementing an adopted
decision that may be expressed in the form of a simple sensomotor reaction, a
complex sensomotor reaction, and sensomotor coordination.
A simple sensomotor reaction is an operator's fastest possible response to a sudden-
ly arising but previously known signal with a known, simple, solitary movement.
All other reactions are complex. Typical complex reactions are: the discrimination
reaction (a certain movement must be made in response to one signal, and no movement
is made in response to others), the choice reaction (selection of a needed movement
out of a large number of possible movements), and the swi.tching reaction (selecting
one of several buttons to be pressed in response to a particular signal).
After sensomotor culture is developed, individual procedures are practiced operation
by operation, gradually going on to complexes of actions. 2'he student should pro-
gress to complexes of action before he forms sound habits associated wtih the per-
formance of individual procedures.
Tn each stage of training, only those elements of the aerial situation model which
the operator requires for the performance of a given procedure are used.
Each complex action is practiced as follows:
The instructor (lesson leader) provides a complete description of the place and
- significance of the given operation within the overall process of target detection
and tracking;
the instructor performs the indicated operation quickly, as would be required in
real combat work;
the instructor repeats the entire operation slowly, explaining each action as he
performs ~t;
the i.nstructor once again performs the operation, but this time the student pro-
vides all of the explana~~a^s by answering the instructor's questions;
the student performs '~he operation, continually explaining what he is doing and
what he intends to do further;
the stt~dent practices the given operation, and the instructor scores his performance
of each element.
'The er.ercise goes ~~n until the student iis able to complete the operation satis-
factorily twice.
Iri the event gross errors arise, the instructor explains their causes, he demon-
strates and tx~~lairis how the stucl.ent should act, he recreates the situation in
which the :o~sLaxe nad been made, and he requires the student to repeat the exercise.
Later on cne instructor makes the worl~: of the operator more complex by i.ncluding
interference and jar~minq on the traine~r's indicator screen, by increasing the
number of targets, and by introducing malfunctions, thus achieving error-free per-
formance of all procedures by the opez~ator.
~
91
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02109: CIA-RDP82-00850R400440030060-8
FOR OFFICIAL USE aNLY
Operator training ends with a critique. Using computer data obtained during the
exercises and relying on his own observations, during the critique the instructor
reaches his own conclusions about the successfulness of the students, he notes the
~ errors, he states tha objective for the next training exercise, and if certain
mistakes were the result of ignorance of the theoretical material, he explains the
latter.
Principles of Assessing Operator Training Level
The results of radar operator training must be summarized in accordance with certain
*xaining principles embodied within the trainer at the ti.me of its desi;gn. Inasmuch
as the trainers examined in this book are computerized, they do not impose any
sort of restrictions on the nature of the habits that may be developed by the oper-
ators. The reason for this is that a computer can run any operator training algo-
rithm.
Z'he overall assessment of the training level of a radar operator and an automated
control system operator is the sum of the partial scores awarded for the following
stages of the operator's activity:
theoretical knowledge;
knowledge of the rules, instructions, and manual~.requlating operator activity in
different situations;
the ability�to perform individual procedures and equipment maintenance operations
in allotted time;
the ability to practically apply acquired knowledge.
Thus an operator's activity may be represented either as a single process fallowing
a certain algorithm, or as a set of several procedures and actions. In the first
case we would need to award an overall score, and in the second we would have to
award partial scores to the individual procedures and operations.
Partial scores must be awarded to operator habits and skills because only this way
can we promptly single out and eliminate concrete mistakes influencing the activity
as a whole, and preclude reinforcement of incorrect habits.
Finally, this approach is well consistent with the requirements of the operational-
integral me:thod of trainiiig: At th~e beginning of training; when individual proce-
dures are being worked oui:, each of them must b~e scored separately, and in subse-
quent stages of the training it would be suitable to score the performance of a
n~unber of mutually associated procedures, or th~ operator's entire activity as a
whole.
7.'he following techniques can be recc~mnended for assessing the activity of an operator
working with a computerized trainer.
92
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONL',l
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2447/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400434460-8
.
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
We write out a detailed description of the behavior of a certair. ideal operator,
using perhaps a master operator of the radio engineering troops, or an operator
lst class as our model. Each step in the activity of a student undergoing training
is compared with the behavior of the ideai operator. For this purpose we write a
mathematical description of the ordpr of actions of the ideal operator, and feed
- this description into the computer in the form of a p~ogram.
Ir. the course of training, the computer also follows the actions of the student
operator, step by step. Assessing the behavior of the student operator, the com-
puter records mistakes and deviations in his actions from the actions of the ideal
operator, and in addition it considers the time required to run the algorithm.
In this case the algorithm is defined as a set of elementary information processing
acts, and selected logical conditions defining an order of performance of these acts
which would lead to the particular objective--compl~te processing of the information.
Let us illustrate the above with the actions of a radar operator detecting and
tracking targets with the assistance of a marker..
'r7~~ arbitrarily divide the operator's responsibilities into elementary operations-
actions A and logic conditions P, which we arrange in the following sequence:
A1--detection of a target blip on the indicat~r screen;
A2--superimposition of the marker over the target blip, and attachment of a serial
r.~,unber to the blip;
P3--determination of this blip's presenc~ in the next radar scan;
P,~--determination of the coincidence of the target blip and the marker position.
The pattern of operations in the algorithm has the following form:
target released from tracking
A1 A2 Pg P4
- ~
~ Tt,e terms of the algorithm function in succession, from left to right. In this
case if a successive logical condition is not satisfied, the operator must proceed
in the order indicated by the arrow.
Operdt.ion~, performed ~y an ideal operator are thus represented in the form of such
a tormalized algorithm, which is then recorded in the computer memory, together
with th~ ar.ioun~t of time set aside for the performance of these operations.
The _ r-~ ~:;.~a~ ~.c:;.s ~nd lag~.~ cendi~ians .:~y rtach in the hundreds for an
a1.7or; -~f mon~~~: ~ i~e :,~~amplexity. S-tuc-ly of thE algorithms of a hiunan operator's
acti.on ~ac~>>d allow us to evaluate the relative complexity of his responsibilities,
ar:~i isol~~t~, for individual study, the portions af the algorithms that are the
hardest to assimilate.
93
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/42/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
- An algorithm of the activity of radar and automated control system operators is
co~?only assessed on the basis of intensity, stereotypy, and logical complexity.
Intensity depends on the ratio of the number of operations ir the given algorithm
- . to the time allowed for the algorithm.
� Stereotypy depends on the number of continuous sequences of operations in the
algorithm, and the length of each of these sequences.
- Logical complexity is defined by the number of portions of the algorithm containing
a continu~ous sequence of logical coz~'itions, and .the number of these conditions in.
each group.
The more intense the algorithm and the qreater its logical complexity, the harder
it is to perform. It has been established that those elements of an algorithm which
contain a continuous succession of three c~onditions and more are the most difficult
for the operator.
27,.e activity of radar and automated control system operators improves through lengthy
and systematic training:
Confusion of similar operations is gradually eliminated;
the time required by the operator to perform the procedures of target.detection
and tracking decreases and becomes more stable;
elementary habits becou?e grouped together, merging into habits of a Iiigher order;
extra motions are eliminated, and new combinations of motions arise. Visual control
over the correctness of motions disappears; '
operators concentrate their attention not on the performance of an action, but on
its result;
- resistance to outside interference arises, tiring and tension decrease, and atten-
tion becomes less concentrated.
- These factors must be accounted for when evaluating an operator's training level.
A direct scoring metrod is the most ,~uited to the purposes of troop practice.
In this method we score the precision and correctness of each procedure or decision
of the operators. Experience has shown that a large number of alternative actions
and decisions made by radar operators (of the "yes-no" type) may be described ex-
haustively by "right" or "wrong" scores (with a consideration for the time requiz~ed
tn complete them).
The concrete meaning of "action precisian"~ depends on the nature of the given
action. The following can be thought of as typical actions of radar and automated
control system operators:
a) Reading target blips off of an electronic indicator (blip classification);
b) Isolating a useful signal from noise on an electronic indicator;
94
FOR OFF[CIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8

APPROVED F~R RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
c) determining the coordinates of target blips on an indicator screen, with and
without auxiliary viewi.ng inst~tunents;
d) reacting to a previously known signal (turning on a required tumbler switch)j
e) continuous output of generated data by means of a control stick;
f) discrete output of comanand information with the assistance of keys, tumbler
switches, switches, and so on;
g) t~ackin.g a target (superi.mposing a marker over the return from a moving target);
h) oral reports, commands.
These examples show that the whole typical list of operator actions may be sub-
divided into three groups depending on the possibilities for automating their
assessment.
'I'he first group of habits (a, b, f, q) can in fact be fully described as to the
correctness of their execution, inasmuch as these are alternative "yes-no" reactions.
The second group of habits (c, e) may be assessed in terms of the accuracy of their
execution--the size of the error made, expressed quantitatively as the difference
between the true value of the variable to be deteriained and the value determined
by the operator. ~
Assessment of the actions in t-he third group (target tracking for example) requires
developznent of a c~mplex mathematical model, one which is run raost easily in com-
puterized trainers.
- Mathematical Methods for Assessinq Operator Training Level
In cybernetics, we equate man to a complex inforn~ation system, the activity of
which is influenced by many psychological and physiological factors that are hard
to account for. Therefore each realization mf an action or procedure by the indi-
vidual is a random event, and in accordance with probability theory, thp scores of
the results would be random.
If we assume that the quantity of elementary factors influencing the score of
operator activity is ]arge, and that the role of each of them in forming a random
error is small, then the random error should have a normal c~istri.bution.
If a developed habit is to be scored correctly, we would need to subject the results
of operator training to statistical treatment, which would require a large volume
of calculations. Therefore if we are to score an operator's actions immediately
~fter ? tY~ining session, we would need to automate these calculations. Such auto-
mation ;.s achieve~, most siinply in computerized trainers which record all character-
istics c~f operator activity in the course of training, and display a score for the
operator's activi!-.y after the training is completed.
95
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2047/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00854R000400430060-8
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Mathematical methods for assessing an operator's training Ze ~el permit us to ob-
jectively describe the qualitx of the training, and compare different operators
amonq each other. In practice, we often encounter difficulties i.n determining which
operator is best, if they are all able to perform their work-related actions within
standar.d time. How, for example, do we compare operators whose performance jugt
barely satisfies the standard, when one of them must be evaluated on the basis of
operation fulfillment time, and the other must be evaluated in tezzns of the accuracy
with which nominal values of a parameter are set?
Finally, how da we evaluate the success of an operator who decides to become an
- operator 3d class and challenges, to a competition, another operator intending to
become an operator lst class? Assuming both operators meet the challenge, how do
we determine which has a better grasp of his specialty, relative to the profi~iency
required of his class?
One of the most widespread methods for evaluating operator work quality is to calcu-
late the standard deviation, which describes the scatter of concrete results about
a mean. We can use it to evaluate the stability of the achieved level: The smaller
the standard deviation, the more stably the specialist or crew is working (4)� It
would not be difficult to calculate this standard deviation if we know the results
of the actions of the operator, and the quality of these operators. Then we can
find the average result M, and use it~to calculate the standard deviation:
- - ~(/N~ M~~ _I- (ly1- Ml' (/1-in - M1' ~
Q /z '
where M1, M~,..., l~I.y~--individual results of the operator; n--n~er of results;
M--average result .
It would be more difficult to compare the characteristics of operators when they
are measured in different units, for example volts and seconds.
The solution to this situation is provided by the variation coefficient C, which
is used to compare either different characteristics or identical characteristics,
the only condition being that the standard deviations must be significantly
different:
C=M.
The value of this coefficient is lower for operators who work more stably relative
to the average results.
,We can compare operators exhi.biting different levels of training by using a special
normalized deviation coefficient, x.
7.'his coefficient is calculated on the basis of known standard requirements for the
' mean MH and standard deviation Qg:
_ MN_M
x= oH .
96
- FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-04850R000400030060-8
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Knowing the requirements i.mposed on specialists of the particular class, it would
not be difficult to establish that the lower the value of the normalized deviation
ccefficient, the better are the characY.eristics attained by the students (4).
f fT . _ - _ -
f f~ ~ r a
a `r~ ~ . A
~ I ~ ~ I`
j I ~ . ~ I
% I ~ 0 I ~
e~ n+ r ; N M ~ t.
Figure 45. Actual (a) and Theoretical Figure 46. Actual ~a) and 'i'heoretical (b)
_ (b) Distribution of the Results of Distribution of the Results of a Correct
an Incorrect Training Technique Training Technique
- f fT o 0
I ~ ~
~ 1
~ `
`
~
Ml N t
Figure 47. Actual (a) and ~'heoretical (b) Distribution of the Best Possi.ble
Results
By applying the normal distri.butxon law to the training results, we can~reveal
whether or not the training process is correctly organized. Let us examine, for
example, the case shown in Figure 45, where the horizontal axis represents the
average result M and the standard characteristic N. 7.'his mutual location of the
actual (a) and theoretical (b) curves appears when mistakes are made in the work
or when the training technique is incorrect.
In another case (Figw:e 46) the actual and theoretical curves coincide. Z'his means
that instruction is proceeding normally, there are no gross errors in work, and the
quantity of training ses~ions should be increased to permit~attainment of the
standard result.
In the third case (Figure 47) we find that the studAnts have reached the limit of
their possibilities. Further growth in the characteristics would be possible only
if the work is organized in some other way, for example by redistributing functional
responsibilities among the crew members, or changing the sequence of elementary oper-
at~cn~.
97
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2447/02/09: CIA-RDP82-44850R444444434464-8
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
We can also use the law of rare phenomena and the binomial law in addition to the
normal distribution to analyze training.
7.'he law of rare phenomcna allows us to establish whether or not mistakes made in
the work are a rare event arising owing to objective , to a certain extent unavoidable
causes, or due to subjective causes whicY!'may be eliminated.
The binomial di.stribution law is used to analyze so-called alternative events. These
are events with only two outcomes possible: One pleases us, and the other does not.
For example a crew may either satisfy a standard, or fail it. If training proceeds
noz~cnally, then the dxs~ribution of failures would be subordinated to a binomial law.
Technical training resources--trainers, simulators, visual aids, classroom equipment,
and so on--play an important role in maintaining high combat readiness in the troops.
With their help, soldiers study the theoretical principles of the design and opera-
tion of modern combat equipment, and they acquire the necessary practical habits of
its;use, in combat and in the course of daily op~ration. Br~ad introduction of simu-
lators and trainers is also significantly promoting economi:*.ation ~of the life of
combat equipment.
As armament becomes more complex, the existing technical training resources must be
constantly updated and improved, and'new models must be created. Efficiency experts
play a large role in the creation of such equipment. Z'hey, the specialists who
come into direct content with the combat equipment, and use it, are precisely the
ones who must design new, more aophisticated technical training resources.
t
98
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Anisimov, B. V., and Chetverikov, V. N., "Preobrazovaniye informatsii dlyw
ETsVM" [Conversion of Information for a Digital Computer], Moscow, Izd-vo
"Vysshaya shkola", 1968.
2. Belotserkovskiy, G. B., "Osnovy impul'snoy tekhniki i radiolokatsii"
[Principles of Pulse Technology and Radar], Leningrad, Izd-vo "Sudostroyeniyz",
1965.
3. Buslenko, N. P., "Nb~~lirovaniye slozhnykh sistem" [Modeling Complex Systems],
Nbscow, Izd-vo "Nauka", 1968.
4. Grebennikov, N. I., "Innovators :tn t.he National Air Defense Forces, and Improve-
ment of Technical Training Resour~es," VESTNIK PVO, No 8, 1975.
5. Kazarinov, Yu. M., et al., "Rad~otekhnicheskiye sistemy" [Radio Engineering
Systems], Moscow, Izd-vo "Sovetskoye radio", 1968.
6. Kuz'min, S. V., "Osnovy teorii isifrovoy obrabotk~. radiolokatsionnoy info~matsii"
[Principles of the Theory of Digital Radar Information Processing], Moscow,
I?d-vo "Sovetskoye radio", 1974.
7. Likharev, V. A., "Tsifrovyye metody i u~troystva v radiolokatsii" [Digital
Methods and Devices i.n Radar], I~bscow, Izd-vo "Sovetskoye radio", 1973.
8. Listov, K. M., and Trc:`imov, K. Ll., "Radio i radiolokatsionnaya tekhnika i
- ikh pri.meneniye" [Radio and Radar Equipment,, and Its Application~,, Mflscow,
Voyenizdat, 1960.
9. Maydel'man, I. N., et al., "Otobrazheniye informatgii v avtomatizirovannykh
sistemakh upravleniya" [Display of Information in Automated Control Systems],
Moscow, Izd-vo "Sovetskoye radio", 1972.
10. Rall', V. Yu., et al., "Trenazhery i imitatory VN~"' [Naval Trainers and
Simulators], Moscow, Voyenizdat, 1969.
11. Romanov, A. N., and Frolov, G. A., "The Cri;:eria of Operator Uccupational
Selection," VESTNIK PVO, No 6, ]969.
99
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8
~ FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
12, Romanov, A. N., and Frolov, G. A., "Osnovy avtomatizatsii sistem upravleniya"
[Principles of Automated Control Systems], Moscow, Voyenizdat, 1971.
13. RDmanov, A. N., aad Frolov, G. A., "Digital Computer Stimulates a Situation,"
TEI~iNIKA I VOORUZHENIYE, No 10, 1973.
14. Rc~manov, A. N., "A Device for Simulating the Location of a Target in Space
on an Indicator Screen," Author's Certificate No 417808, Bulletin No 8,
28 February 1974.
15. Romanov, A. N., "A Trainer for Operator Training," A~:thor's Certificate Iyo
479144, Bulletin No 28, 30 July 1975.
16. Ramanor, A. N., "A Trainer for the Training and Instruction of Guidance Radar
Operators," Author's Certificate No 525999, Bulletin No 31, 25 August 1976.
17. "Spravochnik po osnovaa? radiolok~tsionnoy tekhniki" [Handbook on the Principles
of Radar Technology], Moscow, Voyenizdat, 1967. .
18. S"yedin, S. I., and Ivanov, A. A., "On the Basis of the Stage-by-Stage Foraiation
Technique," VESTNIK PW, No 4, 1975.
COPYRIQiT: Voyenizdat, 1980
11004
CSO: 8144/1317 ~ - ~D "
100
- FOR OFFlCIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400030060-8