ALIGNMENT OF STRAPDOWN INERTIAL NAVIGATION SYSTEM:

A LITERATURE SURVEY SPANNED OVER THE LAST 14 YEARS

Jamshaid Ali1 and Fang Jiancheng2
School of Instrumentation Science and Optoelectronics Engineering,
Beijing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Beijing – 100083, China
E-mail: 1jimmi4u@hotmail.com, 2fangjiancheng@buaa.edu.cn
1. INTRODUCTION
Alignment is the process whereby the orientation of the axes of a strapdown inertial navigation system
(SINS) is determined with respect to the reference axis system. The basic concept of aligning an INS is quit
simple and straight forward. However, there are many complications that make alignment both time-
consuming and complex. Accurate alignment is crucial, however, if precision navigation is to be achieved
over long periods of time without any form of aiding [1].
Alignment requirement is related to the necessity for the best estimate of the attitude, velocity and
position of a vehicle with respect to the reference navigational frame. Poor initial alignment accuracy will end
up with poor navigation. In many applications, it is essential to achieve an accurate alignment of an INS
within a very short period of time. This is particularly true in many military applications, in which a very
rapid response time is often a prime requirement in order to achieve a very short, if not zero, reaction time [1].
A comprehensive survey on the literature published on alignment of SINS during 1990-2004 is presented.
In a broad sense, alignment of SINS can be divided into two categories i.e. initial alignment and in-flight
alignment. Part 2 of this survey paper presents details on initial alignment papers. Part 3 explores research
material published on in-flight alignment. Literature review on transfer alignment is a subject of part 4.
2. INITIAL ALIGNMENT
Initial alignment process is of vital importance to INS. Its requirement is related to the necessity for the
transformation of the sensor outputs into a best estimate of the attitude, velocity and position of a vehicle with
respect to the reference navigational frame. Since INS is entirely self-contained, it can align itself by using the
measurements of local gravity and earth rate. Normally, alignment process is divided into two phases, i.e. the
coarse and fine alignment. The purpose of coarse alignment is to provide fairly good initial condition for the
fine alignment processing.
In the SINS, initial alignment process consists of determining the transformation matrix which relates the
instrumented body frame to the computational navigation frame. Theoretically, an analytic self alignment
method for SINS is functionally equal to the physical gyrocompassing in gimbaled systems [2].
2.1 Coarse Alignment
A lot of literature has been devoted to coarse alignment methods. The purpose of coarse alignment
algorithm is to estimate the orientation of the instrumental axes relative to navigation frame. The use of the
algorithm output depends on the platform technology. For the gimbaled case, the platform core is aligned
physically according to the angles obtained. For the strapdown implementation, the analytical platform is
initialized to this orientation.
Two methods of coarse alignment have been discussed in [3]. One of them utilizes directly both
accelerometer and gyro measurements for attitude estimation. Accelerometer outputs are used for solving the
leveling problem while gyro outputs are required for azimuth estimation. The accuracy estimation is bounded
by the angular vibration profile. The other approach, called gyrocompassing, uses the gyro outputs for
continuous tracking of the instrumental axes attitude (leveling and azimuth). The projection of the gravity
acceleration vector on the instrumental axes contains a constant term and a time varying component which is
proportional to the earth angular rate. Therefore gyrocompass is in fact the use of least square estimation
based on the accelerometer outputs. The constant term estimated is used for leveling calculation and the
varying term allows the azimuth calculation. Discussion in [3] shows that leveling estimation is same for both
algorithms while azimuth estimation is different. In direct algorithm, azimuth estimation is based on the
average of the gyro measurement while in gyrocompassing algorithm it is base on the estimation of the linear
trend of the accelerometer measurements.
Article in [4] discusses initial alignment into two steps i.e. coarse alignment and fine alignment. The
analytic coarse alignment DCM relating the local to body frame has been obtained directly from the gravity
and earth spin vectors in the local (launch site) and body frame. Here, in order to compute an accurate and fast
coarse reference, the sensor data is first filtered to reduce the noise, and then time averaged to generate
angular velocity and linear acceleration. The time averaged information is then used to compute the unit
vectors and DCM, and then the attitude quaternion can be generated from the DCM. The attitude quaternion

1
generated by this coarse alignment is used to initialize the propagated quaternion at the commencement of the
fine alignment.
Autonomous alignment method mentioned in [5] also starts from the coarse alignment method. Here
outputs of the INS are measurements by three accelerometers and three angular rates with sensitive axis is
supposed to be perfectly aligned with three perpendicular directions. If the gravity vector and latitude where
the alignment is going to be carried out are known, given equations can be used to for single deterministic
solution. However, in measuring rotations, and accelerations, imperfect measuring units are used.
Consequently, an average alignment matrix is obtained. For this reason this analytical alignment is called a
coarse alignment.
Coarse alignment method has also been narrated in [1] under the heading of ground alignment methods.
Here also the body mounted sensors are used to measure components of specific force needed to overcome
gravity and components of earth’s rate. Using the derived relationships, initial transformation matrix can be
computed.
Coarse alignment has been explained in detail in [6]. Course alignment is achieved by measuring the
components of the sensed acceleration vector in vehicle’s body frame and using this measurement to estimate
the initial value of body to local level frame. Block diagram of the alignment process is also given. Coarse
alignment mechanization is also a subject of [7]. The chapter 6 of [8] provides a detailed derivation of
equation for the analytical coarse alignment of SINS.
2.2 Error Analysis of Coarse Alignment
In [2], two analytic coarse alignment formulae are discussed in brief. Error analysis for each computation
method is fully evaluated analytically. It is found that choosing different basis to setup the reference
navigational frame will result in distinct alignment errors. Analysis made in this reference is helpful in design
of ground coarse alignment process for SINS.
The gyrocompass alignment errors of SINS are known to have an interesting relationship with the bias
errors of inertial sensors. For example, when an SDINS in stationary navigation maintains the alignment
attitude, there is cancellation between the alignment errors and inertial sensor biases. On the other hand, SINS
changes the alignment heading, the cancellation between them is perturbed and relatively large navigation
error may be generated. In paper at [9], a modified SINS error model with the pseudo states is newly derived
including position error states. Through covariance simulation, the modified SINS error model which
considers the characteristics of gyrocompass alignment errors is compared to the conventional SINS error
model which does not consider the characteristics of gyrocompass alignment errors.
In [10], the characteristics of gyrocompass alignment errors are investigated from a stochastic theoretical
point of view and the two kinds of covariance analysis approaches are presented. One is to use an existing
conventional SINS error model considering the correlation between the initial attitude errors and the sensor
biases. The other is to utilize a modified SINS error model where the attitude error states are transformed into
new state variables, so-called pseudo states which are initially uncorrelated with the sensor biases. Here,
conceptual equivalence of the characteristics of gyrocompass alignment errors in the two SINS error models
has also been investigated. Difference between the two approaches has also been explained with the
conclusion that the two approaches give the same result.
In order to achieve the best performance from an inertial platform, a two step gyrocompassing procedure
is applied. In the first step, the IMU is caged to the IMU case. The platform is leveled, azimuth is measured,
and the north drift component is found from the horizontal gyro drift errors. These drift rates are measured
from tilt measurements by the accelerometers. In the second step, the IMU cluster is rotated by 90 degree and
the alignment procedure of the first step is reapplied. The gyro drift rates are obtained from the north drift
components, which are measured in the two position procedure. A detailed description of the two position
process is given in [11]. This description is then applied to find the gyrocompassing error resulting from the
gyro nonorthogonality.
2.3 Fine Alignment
This is a precise alignment stage in which the small misalignment angles between reference frame and the
body frame are computed accurately through processing the information of various sensors. In this way, an
accurate initial transformation is formulated. Here, the Kalman filter provides estimates of the attitude errors,
and the north and east velocity errors.
The work in [4] explains a fine alignment scheme. The five state Kalman filter employed here generally
follows the seven state Kalman filter formulations. Here, the five states are west and north components of
velocity error and west, north and down components of alignment angle error. A Schuler-tined filter includes
the reciprocal of radius of earth in the state matrix. Here reset filter mechanism has been employed with
update no more than a second apart, and thus the inclusion of the reciprocal of radius of earth term does not
make any difference. Consistent with this approximation, the transport rate term for the local level navigator

2
associated with this filter are neglected while the Coriolis terms, which are orders of magnitude greater, are
included. Recursive steps of the Kalman filter algorithm have been summarized in a flow diagram.
The reference [12] applies the extended Kalman filter to a state vector of large dimension. Here error
models for the inertial instruments have been developed. Performance accuracy of the inertial system has been
well established using error models with a dual analysis covariance program. Attitude error model has also
been presented. Direction cosine differential equations and their approximate solutions are also presented. In
order to reduce the computational load, the high speed accelerometer data is compressed by a least square pre-
filter from which inputs to the Kalman filter are derived. In designing the filter, conversion of parameter
estimation to state estimation makes this problem nonlinear. A technique for decoupling the gyro
accelerometer residuals is derived. This reference also describes the type of instrument parameters which can
be estimated and those which can only be compensated with factory derived values. A discussion of the
results from post-processing simulated IMU data is presented to demonstrate the performance, convergence,
stability and accuracy of the filter estimator. Calibration and alignment data were generated using an IMU
simulator software.
An SINS error model that plays an important role in the implementation of a Kalman filter for alignment
or aided navigation algorithms is derived in [13]. In this reference, the relationship between tilt angles and
quaternion errors is derived by differencing the DCMs of the true navigation frame and the analytic platform
frame. Tilt angle model in the local NED frame is newly derived from the previous quaternion error model
using the relationship, and it is shown that the SINS error model with the tilt angle is equivalent to the
conventional perturbation error model. Here, based upon the error model equivalence, the quaternion error is
computed using the perturbation error model, and the effect of multiposition alignment is examined by
calculating the error covariance. A relationship between tilt angle and quaternion error is presented and the tilt
angle model is derived.
The SINS system matrix may be manipulated by changing sensor position or equivalently rotating vehicle
body. Thus, by choosing different sensor position, the observability of SINS system can be improved. This
technique is called multiposition alignment. It is demonstrated in [14] that using this technique, alignment
errors in SINS can be drastically reduced.
Many spacecraft missions require precise pointing of their payload boresight and precise knowledge of
the payload boresight attitude from ground processing of attitude sensor, gyro and payload telemetry. Such
precision is obtained at reasonable expense in part by system alignment calibration. [15] treats the problem of
absolute alignment calibration of a system comprising two star trackers, an inertial sensor assembly of three
fiber optic gyros and an imaging instrument. The alignment and gyro calibration models are implemented in a
Kalman filter referred to as alignment Kalman filter (AKF). The AKF optimally estimates attitude, gyro bias,
gyro calibration parameters and sensor alignment relative to the payload. Process noise is a natural part of the
model and so the filter can be made to track parameter variations. Misalignment and gyro error models are
derived here and an efficient numerically reliable implementation of AKF is developed.
For the alignment problem where the output is very fine measurement of earth rate under noisy conditions,
the velocity error can affect the azimuth alignment accuracy. Consequently, it is accounted for during the
alignment process to improve the azimuth determination accuracy. This is achieved through fine alignment
using Kalman filter as discussed in detail in [6]. In this reference, Kalman filtering techniques have been
discussed in detail.
A Kalman filter formulation is described in [7] that, in addition to ground gyrocompassing, provides fast
reaction and airstart capability without an initial heading estimate. This is accomplished by use of Doppler
velocity sensor and a position source such as GPS, manual flyover update or target sighting system. Filter
transition from coarse to fine align is accomplished without disrupting the estimation of the inertial instrument
or aiding sensor errors, by defining the azimuth error state as wander angle error, and using a simple, but
effective, manipulation of the filter covariance matrix.
A fast initial alignment method for SINS has been investigated in [16]. Here, SINS error model for the
stationary alignment has been introduced and observability of the SINS error model has been analyzed. Then,
on the basis of SINS error model and analysis of computer simulation results, a fast estimation method of the
azimuth error is presented for the initial alignment of SINS on stationary base. It has been shown that the
estimation method greatly accelerates the convergence rate of the Kalman filter that is used to reduce the
initial alignment time. Simulation results have been presented to show the efficiency of the proposed method.
Gyrocompassing is a preflight fine alignment procedure performed to determine initial attitude error. The
accuracy of inertial navigation sensors in an integrated navigation system is frequently specified by
performance during gyrocompassing. This procedure with base motions has been depicted in [17] and results
are presented. Here, a covariance analysis program is used to compute the 1 sigma quantity of the alignment
errors for a 1 nmi/h integrated navigation system. The alignment characteristics of the system undergoing base
motion disturbances are formulated as a Kalman filtering problem with zero integrated velocity updates.

3
 The work presented in [18] demonstrates a general nonlinear psi-angle approach that does not require
coarse alignment. In this model, the three misalignment angles are assumed all large. Three states are used to
describe three psi-angles. The approach is identical to the standard small error methods when the process
errors diminish to small angles. The position and velocity error models are also presented and standard
extended Kalman filter is used to solve the nonlinear problem. Experimental results are presented considering
total uncertainty in azimuth orientation using a low cost IMU aided with DGPS.
A nonlinear error model with large azimuth error is proposed in [19] where the process of initial
alignment is divided into two stages namely: first using piecewise linearization; second, using linear filtering
method. The nature of this method is piecewise linearization algorithm, so the error of linearization exists.
Also computation load becomes quite large as the number of linearization segments grows. Extended Kalman
filter, iterated filter and second order filter are applied to this problem. Simulation demonstrates that azimuth
estimation accuracy of alignment is greatly enhanced, and meanwhile, the alignment time is shortened.
The research presented in [20] considers the problem of course alignment of SINS. Error equations of
nonlinear characteristics have been obtained at a considerable level of a priori course uncertainty. The
algorithm for solving the problem of optimal estimation of the state vector described by nonlinear equations
from linear measurements have been developed for the analysis of a potential alignment accuracy, with
piecewise Gaussian approximation of posteriori density used. Results are presented to demonstrate validity of
the given methods.
Error estimation of ground alignment to an arbitrary azimuth is mentioned in [21]. Here, based on a
practically simplified error model of inertial navigation system, observability of ground alignment process is
presented. The system states of the simplified model are not decoupled into subspaces as that of aligning an
inertial system mechanized into local level frame. Algorithms for estimating misalignment angles are
provided for both general and simplified models to achieve initial alignment.
For terrain vehicle navigation application using low grade gyros, a simple six degree of freedom earth
surface navigator is derived in [22]. The calibration and alignment are investigation when the system is at rest.
Based on the observability of the error model at rest, a state transformation is presented. This transformation
decouples the observable modes, which are based on physical insight, from the unobservable modes. An
example is given to illustrate the performance of Kalman filter.
A systematic analysis of the observability of an inertial navigation system in ground alignment is
presented in [23]. Here, it is shown that the unobservable states are separately contained in two decoupled
subspaces. The constraints on the selection of unobservable states are discussed. An estimation algorithm
which is derived fully from the horizontal velocity outputs for computing the misalignment angles is narrated.
It reveals that the azimuth error can be entirely estimated from the estimates of leveling error and leveling
error rate, without using gyro output signals explicitly.
In [24], two forms of Kalman filter system error models are evaluated using filter stability considerations.
These error models are based on one of the two the assumption used to obtain reduced state models for
wander azimuth mechanization; either the navigation frame azimuth alignment or the local azimuth tilt error
with respect to the navigation frame is zero. The stability evaluation assumes that body referenced Doppler
velocity and navigation frame GPS Position measurements are used. Stability and Monte Carlo simulation
results show that with the combination of Doppler and GPS, the later assumption produces the more stable
and accurate filter estimates.
A completer error covariance analysis for the SINS is presented in [25]. It is investigated that the cross
coupling terms in gyrocompassing alignment errors can significantly influence the SINS error propagation. In
this analysis, pseudostate variables are introduced utilizing the characteristics of gyrocompass alignment
errors. This approach simplifies the covariance analysis by making the initial covariance matrix to a diagonal
form. Through the error covariance simulation, applicability of the proposed scheme is verified.
Because of the poor observability of INS on stationary base, the estimation error of the azimuth will
converge very slowly in initial alignment by means of Kalman filtering. In [26], a fast estimation method of
the azimuth error is proposed for the initial alignment of INS on stationary base. On the basis of the fast
convergence of the leveling error, the azimuth error can be directly calculated. By means of this fast initial
alignment method, the time of initial alignment is reduced greatly. The computer simulation results are
presented to illustrate the efficiency of the method.
The research in [27] aims at discussing how to apply the dynamic programming theory to the alignment
of SINS with the background of land navigation using a closed-loop. By taking the state as the feedback and
optimizing the control strategy, it shows that how the system proceed from the dynamic programming theory
and how to find the strategy to achieve the alignment on the condition of the quadratic performance index.
The work presented in [28] is an efficient initial calibration and alignment algorithm for a six-degree of
freedom IMU. The individual error models for the gyros and accelerometers are presented with a study of its
effects in trajectory prediction. A full error model is also presented to determine the sensors needed for full
observability of the different perturbation parameters. Finally, dead reckoning experimental results are

4
presented based on the initial alignment and calibration parameters. The results show that the algorithm
proposed is able to obtain accurate position and velocity information for a significant period of time using an
IMU as the only sensor.
The azimuth misalignment angle, being one of the largest non-stationary INS error components, has a
significant impact on the INS accuracy; therefore [29] focuses on the development and testing of a special
procedure for the azimuth error estimation. The method presented is based on a traditional Kalman filter and
uses GPS velocity and heading information for measurement updates. The filter is divided into two stages,
defined by a different degree of observability of the error components in the state vector. The estimation of
the azimuth misalignment is performed only when it is strongly observable, in other words, during high
vehicle dynamics. To reduce the transition period of its estimation, the problem statement is reformulated so
that the azimuth misalignment error becomes a directly measured component. The discussed algorithm is
tested for a land navigation application.
The investigation in [30] presents test results for a system that uses an improved kinematic alignment
algorithm suite that provides a high-quality navigation solution using direct carrier-phase and pseudo-range
GPS measurements tightly coupled with measurements from a low-cost IMU system. The test data shows the
utility of an airborne and ground based version of this system for use in precision registration of video
imagery. This has applications for generating target coordinates and also for use in mapping and navigation
for a variety of military and civilian applications.
This article in [31] suggests processing of the gyro and accelerometer measurements with multiple levels
of wavelet decomposition to remove the high frequency noise components. The proposed wavelet de-noising
method was applied on a navigational grade inertial measurement unit (LTN90-100). The results showed that
accurate alignment procedure and fast convergence of the estimation algorithm, in addition to reducing the
estimation covariance of the three attitude angles, could be obtained.
3. IN-FLIGHT ALIGNMENT (IFA)
Many offensive and defensive missile systems require accurate alignment of the onboard INS in order to
achieve a high probability of kill against their intended targets. For system in which time is not critical, this
alignment process can be performed prior to launch by utilizing navigation data form the launch platform and
calibrating the missile’s INS to this reference. However, for systems that require rapid reaction time,
significant pre-launch delays for alignment are not tolerable. In this case, and the alignment process must be
performed after launch during the missile flight. Inflight alignment utilizes acceleration and angular rate data
from an IMU, together with data provided by external sensors during flight. Differences between the INS state
estimates and the external data are used by a Kalman navigation filter to generate error corrections that
remove, over time, the effects of initial alignment errors and other types of navigation errors. For flights of
sufficient duration, these errors can be brought to tolerable levels before commencement of the missile’s
terminal guidance phase, where accurate alignment is essential [32].
In [32], Attitude Dilution of Precision (ADOP) metric has been derived in detail, and then it has been
extended to include additional navigation performance metrics. This extension entails a modest increase in the
amount of computations, but is useful in isolating the degree of observability for each metric and their
changes to engagement geometry and trajectory shaping. Application of the ADOP to a theater defense
missile has been elaborated. At the end, inflight alignment performance has been investigated.
In [33], a nonlinear observer is proposed for a strapdown inertial navigation system inflight alignment
problem using an H-infinity filter Riccati equation and a freedom parameter. It guarantees the least degree of
stability even though the lower bound of the process noise related terms in the Reccati equation becomes zero
and to take care of nonlinear errors of the SINS. In addition, a freedom parameter has been introduced in the
filter Reccati equation to improve the degree of stability, the residual set of estimated errors, and the filter
performance measure.
An IFA for a system with large attitude errors is proposed in [34]. With an odometer as an external aid,
the velocity aided SINS is designed. New error models applicable to IFA for the system in the presence of
large attitude errors are derived. To obtain equivalent error models, the quaternion error is divided into two
types. One is additive quaternion error and the other is multiplicative quaternion error. The rotation vector
error is introduced as a new variable. Exact relationships between these attitude errors are also derived.
Equivalent velocity and attitude error models are obtained. To verify the validity of the proposed error model
in a system with large attitude errors, equivalent error models are applied to van tests for IFA.
An error model that appropriately describes the INS behavior during IFA has been explained in detail in
[35]. Error model constitutes a linear dynamic system for simpler observability matrix to be used in analysis.
Method of observability has been explained and analysis has been made for observability of vertically
damped and undamped INS during IFA. Covariance simulation results have also been presented which
confirm the analytic results.

5
 A new in-flight alignment method for the vehicle with the large heading error or without heading
information is presented in [36]. Generally the heading error is much larger than leveling error, so a new
horizontal frame is introduced to separate the heading error and leveling error. A linear navigation error
dynamic model is derived from the attitude error model and then the Kalman filter is applied to the model as
the alignment filter. To show the performance of the of the proposed alignment algorithm, the computer
simulation is carried out. The target system of the simulation is an unmanned vehicle.
The stationary alignment of SINS is an important process to determine the angular relationship between a
navigation frame and a body frame before a navigation mode begins. The [37] shows that by employing GPS
carrier phase and differential phase rate measurement, observability and performance of the alignment process
of SINS can be improved more efficiently. Here, the SINS error model for the stationary and inflight
alignment has been described. An observation model of double differenced GPS carrier phase and differential
phase rate measurements is derived in order to be used with the SINS error model. Covariance analysis results
are presented to analyze the observability and the performance of the suggested GPS/INS system.
Two dominant SINS error models are psi-angle model and phi-angle model, and the misalignment angles
are assumed to be small, i.e. less than 5°. However, these models are not effective for a system with large
attitude errors because the neglected error terms in the models may degrade the performance of the designed
filter or even make it unstable. The SINS nonlinear error models are derived in [38] using additive quaternion
error, which is applicable to the system with large attitude errors. Simulation results are presented, and it
shows that the nonlinear error models and filtering techniques can improve the performance of in-flight
alignment.
In SINS, with sizeable attitude errors, the uncertainty caused by linearization of the system degrades the
performance of the filter. In [39], a robust filter and various error models for the uncertainty are presented.
The analytical characteristics of the proposed filter are also investigated. The results show that the filter does
not require the statistical property of the system disturbance and that the region of the estimation error
depends on a freedom parameter in the worst case. Then, the uncertainty of the SINS is derived. Various in-
flight alignment methods are proposed by combining the robust filter with the error models and simulation is
carried out accordingly.
Establishment of local level wander azimuth navigation and body reference frame for an INS based on
outputs of an IMU without the use of initial attitude information is addressed in [40]. These frames are
established using a Kalman filter algorithm implemented with an INS error model formulated for large
heading errors and using position measurement updates. Only position and velocity in a geographic reference
frame are used for initialization of the INS equations. Results are presented to elaborate this concept.
The article in [41] discusses the functional development of the missile’s aided navigation system and
Kalman filter-based error correction concept. The system utilizes GPS and up-linked radar measurements to
effectively identify and cancel errors in initial missile attitude, missile position and velocity, missile IMU
errors, radar face misalignments, and ship initial position errors. New in-flight alignment performance metrics
such as the ADOP and missile’s Observability Maps are described and used to analyze the Navy Theater
Wide (NTW) missile system. Navigation performance results are presented to illustrate the achievable
alignment accuracies relative to system requirements.
An in-flight alignment technique for a strapdown inertial navigation system (SINS) employing a stars
pattern recognition procedure for identifying stars sensed by a CCD electro optical star sensor is presented in
[42]. Collinearity equations are used to estimate the sensor frame star coordinates and the conventional least
square differential correction method is used to estimate the unknown orientation angles. A comparison of this
attitude with the attitude estimated by the SINS provides axes misalignment angles, an observation to the
Kalman filter. Simulations using Kalman filter are carried out for SINS employing local level navigation
frame. Analysis shows that celestial updates are effective in estimating and compensating for gyro errors as
well as the position and velocity errors that occur due to the SINS misalignments.
A new spacecraft sensor alignment estimation approach based on the unscented filter is derived in [43].
Basic six-state attitude estimation is widely implemented in actual spacecraft missions. However, more
stringent spacecraft pointing accuracy requires sensor alignment calibration to be performed post-launch to
accommodate in-space disturbances and launch shock vibration. Sequential filtering is preferred since the
calibration parameters could drift over time. It also minimizes ground crew intervention and mission
disruption. Simulated spacecraft data results shows that the unscented filter is more robust and more suitable
for on-board implementation than the traditional extended Kalman filter. Also, experimental results using the
unscented filter are shown to test the performance of the algorithm using real data.
Several different approaches are reviewed in [44] which are applicable to the in-flight estimation of
attitude sensor alignments. These include: batch alignment estimation, which uses an attitude-independent
derived measurement but which requires that data from different sensors be simultaneous within a given
frame; sequential alignment estimation using the Kalman filter, which does not have this requirement but is

6
much more sensitive to the inherent nonlinear dependence of the measurement on the attitude; and batch
methods in which the derived measurements are generated using a Kalman filter and which have the best
properties of both of the previous methods with a smaller computational burden. These three approaches are
presented in a common context without numerical examples.
Simple and statistically correct algorithms are developed in [45] for batch estimation of spacecraft sensor
relative misalignments without the need to compute the spacecraft attitude or angular velocity. These
algorithms permit the estimation of sensor alignments in a framework free of unknown dynamical variables.
In particular, these algorithms are less sensitive to data dropouts of long duration, and the derived
measurements used in the attitude independent algorithm usually make data checking and editing of outliers
much simpler than would be the case in the filter. A factorized estimator for the alignments is also developed.
A very efficient approximation for this algorithm is realized with relies on the QUEST measurement model
and the algorithms are applied to a realistic simulated example.
In the investigation of the problem posed by in-flight attitude sensor alignment estimation when such
alignments are not completely observable from the in-flight data, in-flight relative misalignment estimates and
prelaunch estimates that have been corrupted by launch shock are exploited to devise a best estimate of
absolute sensor misalignments [46]. Simple solvable models are used to compare the absolute misalignments
with the relative ones that were incorrectly interpreted as absolute, as well as with the pseudoinverse solution
and with simulated data. A methodology for estimating the launch-shock error levels is developed, and an
estimator is derived in [46] for a specific model of the launch shock and the prelaunch alignment covariance.
4 TRANSFER ALIGNMENT
Occasionally, it is necessary for a vehicle to carry more than one IMU, for a variety of reasons. For
instance, in the Apollo moon mission, both the command module and LEM had their own IMUs aboard. In
this, and other similar examples, the commands module’s IMU is called as the master IMU and the LEM IMU
as the slave. It is further necessary that in order for the slave IMU to operate properly, it must initially be
aligned to an inertially fixed coordinate system. This is because the IMU coordinate system must coincide
with the coordinate system that its pre-calculated trajectory has been determined in. There are, indeed, several
ways of doing this. Among these, transfer alignment is a method to align the slave IMU to the master IMU;
assuming, of course, that the master IMU was itself inertially fixed.
In [47], three INS error models are compared in the problem of transfer alignment. In the transfer
alignment application, the aircraft’s reference navigation system attitude information is additional information
to assist in evaluating the performance of different INS error models. This reference assesses the
performances and estimates qualities provided by the different INS error models. Results using the three
different error models described are also presented.
The transfer alignment process is discussed in detail in [1]. Here four methods are presented namely; one-
shot transfer alignment, airborne inertial measurement matching, velocity matching alignment and position
update alignment. One-shot method is the simplest one where position, velocity and attitude data is copied
from the aircraft’s own navigation system directly to the missile system. Inertial measurement matching
method has received much attention in recent years. This technique relies on the comparison of measurements
of applied motion obtained from the two systems to compute the relative orientation of their reference axes.
An initial coarse alignment may be achieved by one shot process, before initiating the measurement matching
process. In velocity matching alignment method, estimates of velocity generated by the aligning system are
compared with estimates of the same quantities provided by the aircraft’s own navigation system. System and
measurement equations are outlined to construct a Kalman filter that may be used to process the velocity
information and so to obtain estimates of the alignment errors. In position update alignment method, an
aircraft may be equipped with various sensors or systems capable of providing position fix information which
may be used to align an onboard INS during flight.
In [48], a new approach to the alignment and calibration of SINS is proposed. That is, to use artificial
neural network (NN) based multilayer perceptron to correct the alignment and calibration errors of IMU. The
filter shall be placed between the IMU and the navigation computer. For this purpose, the multilayer
perceptron is trained using the outputs of a master IMU. Thus, the neural network filter takes the
measurements from the slave IMU and after correction gives measurements close to the master IMU. The
initial position and velocity vector needed by the navigation unit may be taken directly from the master INS.
Then, the slave INS may start operating independently. In this reference, first some background information
on INS initialization problem and training methodology developed are presented. Then, discussion on the NN
filter structure and on the training algorithm is presented. Effectiveness of the NN filter is demonstrated
through a case study.
The weapon’s navigation solution proceeds once its DCM is initially taken as the aircraft’s INS DCM,
and its navigation solution is initialized with position and velocities. This initial attitude is in error due to the
misalignments between the two INSs. A refinement to this initialization is necessitated by the initial attitude

7
differences and the time-varying attitude differences due to the weapon’s instrument errors. This refinement is
accomplished by matching dynamic states between the two INSs. The matching is implemented in a Kalman
filter based algorithm. Formulation presented in [49] uses velocity-plus-rate matching, and is implemented in
a conventional navigation frame error formulation. This formulation provides structural observability of the
attitude error states when the velocity-only matching algorithm is used. The filter formulation is developed
and analysis methodology is presented.
Transfer alignment for air –to-air missile mentioned in [50] considers the aircraft navigation system as the
master INS, the missile navigation system as a slave. This alignment process adjusts the slave INS based on
the master INS. Simulation results are presented to verify the presented scheme.
In [51], modified Kalman filter equations are derived which allow accounting for time correlated
measurement and system noise without increasing the size of the filter state vector. Numerical simulations
show the increase in accuracy of the estimated missile attitude with this technique. Additionally, a method is
given for identifying the required vibration model parameters from the IMU data.
As stated in [52], sensor motion compensation requirements place unique constraints on the motion
sensor system. The motion sensor subsystem design satisfies these constraints using a low cost SINS by
employing two Kalman filters. One Kalman filter transfers aligns the motion sensor subsystem to the master
navigator and the other filter estimates and corrects the misalignments between the motion sensor subsystem
instrument axes and the sensor axes. Simulation results are presented to show that using a methodology for
developing a large Kalman filter based on intensive system covariance analysis and Monte Carlo simulation
yields a system design that meets the requirements.
The problem of optimal interaction between aligned INS and reference navigation System in the process
of initial alignment, calibration and initial velocity determination on moving base is considered in [53]. The
theoretical verification of the approach is presented that requires the minimal number of parameters
transmitted from a reference system to an aligned one. The proposed technique is shown to be optimal in
accuracy if the INS system is described with sufficient certainty by finite number of parameters.
The design of a rapid and robust transfer alignment system for advance kinetic energy missiles is
presented in [54]. Owing to the high acceleration level, and the reduced engagement time, the transfer
alignment which aligns the slave IMU with the master ground launch vehicle IMU, must be accomplished in a
short time with high accuracy. The scope of the transfer alignment system design presented here includes the
assessment of inertial guidance accuracy, transfer alignment formulation, simulation environment
development, maneuver scenario evaluation, system error analysis, tradeoff study, and filter robustness and
sensitivity analysis.
A new transfer alignment method is presented in [55] which uses only accelerometer measurements in the
gravitational field. The benefits claimed in this scheme are the freedom to choose IMU gyros based solely on
in-flight considerations and the ability to update the transfer alignment by simply making new measurements
of gravity and processing the measurements taken before vehicle’s erection. Here, algorithm development,
error analysis and laboratory results are presented.
Transfer alignment methods can be divided into two classes, one named calculated parameter matching
(CPM) and the other named measured parameter matching (MPM) [56]. The CPM has certain accuracy in
estimating the fixed misalignment angles but it is incapable of estimating the angle of wing flexible
deformation with low alignment speed. The MPM has high aligning speeds while its precision is seriously
affected by the model errors of wing flexible deformation. The research in [56] combines the advantages of
both of the methods and proposes a new transfer alignment scheme with a damped vibration model is used as
the model of flexible deformation.
Results of various transfer alignment techniques including velocity matching, integrated velocity
matching and doubly integrated velocity matching approaches are presented in [57]. This study addresses the
key transfer alignment Kalman filter issues such as the effect of wing flexure vibration on instrument error
estimation and rapid alignment concepts. A description of how a transfer alignment Kalman filter is
implemented and used in inertially guided weapons is included. Performance of various algorithms is
evaluated using actual flight test data.
The IMU alignment by examining results from two different INS modeling approaches is realized in [58].
It emphasizes on the alignment during the aircraft’s low dynamics ground operations before takeoff. The tow
models are based on the computer frame and perturbation error models, and are formulated to use position
observations in transfer alignment Kalman filter algorithm. The use of position observation is consistent with
other navigation aids such as GPS. Performance measures used to evaluate the two INS error models’ results
include: filter state convergence rates, IMU navigation solution heading compared to the reference IMU
heading, and post-alignment unaided navigation position error growth during maneuvers after aircraft takeoff.
The work in [59] studies an improved SAR motion compensation system, which includes a master INS
and a GPS receiver located near the mass center of the aircraft, a slaved low cost strapdown IMU mounted on
the antenna structure. A Kalman filter is an integral part of this system; it acts to continuously transfer

8
alignment from a high accuracy GPS/INS integrated navigation system to the less stable strapdown navigator.
The state equations and measurement equations are derived and simulation results are presented to show the
validity of the algorithm.
In [60], the federated Kalman filter is employed for the rapid transfer alignment with its designed
structure and algorithm. The models of the velocity matching subsystem and attitude matching subsystem are
elaborated. Simulation results are presented to show that the precision and convergence rate of this filter is the
same as that of centralized Kalman filter whereas the calculation burden in greatly reduced.
A transfer alignment methodology which eliminates the maneuver liming constraint is proposed in [61].
The new alignment approach augments the traditional master-to-slave velocity matching with master-to-slave
attitude matching along the aircraft z-axis direction. This augmentation results in continuous observability of
the weapon's drift along that axis. Moreover, the filter formulation makes possible the capture of the
alignment error of the slave INS along the aircraft z-axis after first transfer alignment maneuver. Hence, the
weapon azimuth is always available after first maneuver. The resulting thirteen states and four measurements
Kalman Filter is derived and analyzed.
In [62], a robust filter for an IFA is presented to effectively eliminate system errors in the case where a
SINS has large initial attitude errors. Here, an extended robust H-infinity filter is proposed for a general
nonlinear uncertain system and its characteristics are analyzed. Analysis results show that the proposed filter
has robustness against disturbances such as process and measurement noises, and parameter uncertainties.
Simulation results demonstrate that the proposed filter effectively improve the performance.
Formulations of Kalman filters are presented in [63] which are capable of aligning one strapdown inertial
sensor assembly with another by estimating the misalignment angle between them. One formulation treats the
case of a fixed misalignment. Another treats the case of a dynamic misalignment, caused, for example, by
bending of the common supporting body. Measurements can be made by gyros only, or by gyros plus
accelerometers. Filters which estimate inertial sensor error parameters are also discussed here.
An all-purpose rapid transfer alignment algorithm set has been developed in [64]. It may be configured to
suit differing grades of INS, alignment duration, processing capacity and flexure and vibration environments.
The algorithm set has been validated by simulation in a flexure environment for the alignment of missile INS
with gyro drift down to 100 degrees/hour. It has also been successfully flight tested in real-time onboard.
Simulations have shown that these enhancements improve transfer alignment performance where there is
sufficient processing power to implement them.
The research in [65] presents results from a study of weapon IMU transfer alignment using the aircraft's
navigation system position data. The alignment process consists of first establishing a navigation solution
using the raw IMU outputs, then via a Kalman filter algorithm estimate errors in the weapon navigation data
using aircraft navigation system data as observations. The aircraft's navigation system data is used to initialize
the weapon's navigation solution. The results presented in this paper are based on using the aircraft's position
data as the filter algorithm's observation. Using flight data, it is shown that a weapon's navigation frame can
be aligned to an accuracy of less than 1 milliradian. The affect of the aircraft's flexible structure during higher
maneuver levels is illustrated.
Innovative developments in [66] include the estimation of additional acceleration and gyro states and
estimation of force dependent relative orientation, which has enabled robust alignment using wing rock
maneuvers, which do not require the pilot to change trajectory. Transfer alignment has been verified in real-
time by flight trials on an aircraft. In addition, techniques have been developed to prevent transients in the
aircraft integrated navigation solution following GPS re-acquisition after an outage of several minutes from
disrupting the transfer alignment process.
The work in [67] presents the results to show that transfer alignment robustness may be maximized. It
narrates that weapon navigation accuracy may be significantly improved by using the aircraft INS/GPS
navigation solution as the reference for transfer alignment as opposed to a pure inertial reference. However,
where GPS is re-acquired after an outage of several minutes, a transient occurs in the INS/GPS solution which
can disrupt transfer alignment. Transient detection and handling techniques have therefore been added to the
transfer alignment algorithm. Where the transfer alignment algorithm is provided with a pure INS reference in
addition to the INS/GPS reference or with aircraft INS corrections, transients may be handled directly.
The accuracy of the transfer alignment of a missile INS can potentially be enhanced by using an
integrated INS/GPS navigation system on board the aircraft as a reference in place of a pure INS. However,
modifications to the transfer alignment algorithm may be required to cope with the intermittent nature of GPS
signals in a military environment. A simulation study, using trials data from an aircraft INS/GPS, is conducted
in [68]. The performance of a conventional velocity-matching transfer alignment algorithm is assessed using
both the blended INS/GPS velocity and the corresponding pure inertial velocity as the reference.
Research in [69] presents a transfer alignment procedure developed to significantly reduce the alignment
maneuver and timeline requirements for an air-launched weapon. An 18-state Kalman filter is designed to
recursively process INS and IMU velocity-match and attitude-match data at a 12.5 Hz rate. The aircraft is

9
required only to perform a brief 20-deg wing-rock maneuver during alignment. Laboratory and flight tests
indicate that the proposed filter is capable of aligning the IMU to within 1 mrad of truth within 5 sec.
Article in [70] explores the timeline/calibration tradeoffs associated with advanced alignment procedures
for aircraft employing GPS-aided, IMU-equipped weapons. Results indicate that if GPS aids the IMU over at
least a portion of the weapon flight, a 5-sec advanced transfer alignment procedure is expected to achieve
weapon navigation accuracy comparable to that achieved by a conventional alignment procedure lasting
several minutes.
References
1. D. H. Titterton and J. L. Weston, “Strapdown Inertial Navigation Technology”, IEE Radar, Sonar,
Navigation and Avionics Series 5, 1997, pp. 259-292.
2. Y.F. Jiang, “Error Analysis of Analytic Coarse Alignment Methods”, IEEE Transactions on Aerospace
and Electronic Systems, Vol. 34, No. 1, 1998, pp. 334-337.
3. L. Schimelevich and R. Naor, “New Approach to Coarse Alignment”, IEEE Position Location and
Navigation Symposium, 1996, pp. 324-327.
4. N.S. Reddy and J. Murray, “Transfer Orbit stage Gyrocompass Alignment Algorithm Twist and Sway
Environment for Mars Observer Mission on Commercial Titan”, IEEE Aerospace and Electronic Systems
Magazine, February 1991, pp. 3-7.
5. O. Tekinalp and M. Ozemre, “Artificial Neural Networks for Transfer Alignment and Calibration of
Inertial navigation Systems”, AIAA 2001-4406.
6. P.G. Savage, “Strapdown Inertial Navigation – Lecture Notes”, Strapdown Associates, Inc., July 14, 1997
(Sixth Printing).
7. T.M. Pham, “Kalman Filter Mechanization for INS Airstart”, IEEE Aerospace and Electronic Systems
Magazine, January 1992, pp. 3-11.
8. A.B. Chatfield, “Fundamentals of High Accuracy Inertial Navigation,” Published by American Institute
of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 1997, pp. 109-128.
9. H.W. Park, J.G. Lee and C.G. Park, “Error analysis of Strapdown Inertial Navigation System Aligned by
Gyrocompassing”, Proceedings of the 1995 IFAC Intelligent Autonomous Control in Aerospace, Beijing,
China, August 14-16, 1995, pp. 191-195.
10. H.W. Park, J.G. Lee and C.G. Park, “Covariance Analysis of Strapdown INS Considering Gyrocompass
Characteristics”, IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems, Vol. 31, No. 1, 1995, pp. 320-
328.
11. B. Priel, “The Effect of Gyro Nonorthogonality Error on Gyrocompassing” IEEE, Transactions on
Aerospace and Electronic Systems, Vol. 28, No. 3, 1992, 890-893.
12. M.S. Grewal and R.S. Miyasako, “Application of Kalman Filtering to the Calibration and Alignment of
Inertial navigation Systems”, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, Vol. 36, No. 1, January 1991, pp.
4-13.
13. D.Y. Chung, J.G. Lee, C.G. Park and H.W. Park, “Strapdown INS Error Model for Multiposition
Alignment”, IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems, Vol. 32, No. 4, 1996, pp. 1362-
1366.
14. J.G. Lee, “Multiposition Alignment of Strapdown Inertial Navigation System”, IEEE Transactions on
Aerospace and Electronic Systems, Vol. 29, No. 4, 1993, pp. 1323-1328.
15. M.E. Pittelkau, “Kalman Filtering for Spacecraft System Alignment Calibration”, Journal of Guidance,
Control and Dynamics, Vol. 24, No. 6, 2001, pp. 1187-1195.
16. J.C. Fang and D.J. Wan, “A Fast Initial Alignment Method for Strapdown Inertial Navigation System on
Stationary Base”, IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems, Vol. 32, No. 4, 1996, pp.
1501-1505.
17. C. Hua, “Gyrocompass Alignment with base motions: Results for a 1 nmi/h INS/GPS System,” Journal of
the Institute of Navigation, Vol. 47, No. 2, 2000, pp. 65-74.
18. X.Y. Kong, Eduardo Mario Nebot and Hugh Durrant Whyte, “Development of a Nonlinear psi-angle
model for large misalignment errors and its application in INS alignment and Calibration,” Proceedings of
the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Detroit, Michigan, May 1999.
19. D.L. Wang and H.Y. Zhang, “Nonlinear Filtering Algorithm for INS Initial Alignment,” Chinese Journal
of Aeronautics, Vol. 12, No. 4, 1999, pp. 246-250.
20. S.P. Dmitriyev, O.A. Stepanov and S.V. Shepel, “Nonlinear Filtering Methods: Application in INS
Alignment,” IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems, Vol. 33, No. 1, 1997, pp. 260-271.
21. Y.F. Jiang and Y.P. Lin, “Error Estimation of ground Alignment to Arbitrary Azimuth,” AIAA-93-3823-
CP.
22. S.S. Saab and K.T. Gunnarsson, “Automatic Alignment and Calibration of an Inertial Navigation
System,” IEEE Position Location and Navigation Symposium, 1994, pp. 845-852.

10
23. Y.F. Jiang and Y.P. Lin, “Error Estimation of INS Ground Alignment through Observability Analysis,”
IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems, Vol. 28, No. 1, 1992, pp. 92-96.
24. R.M. Rogers, “Kalman Filter Inertial Navigation System Error Model Based on Filter Stability
Considerations,” AIAA-94-3547-CP, pp. 65-70.
25. H.W. Park, J.G. Lee and C.G. Park, “Error Analysis of Strapdown Inertial Navigation System Aligned by
Gyrocompassing,” Proceedings of the 1995 IFAC Intelligent Automation Control in Aerospace, Beijing,
China, August 1995, pp. 191-195.
26. X.L. Wang, G.X. Shen and D.L. Tang, “A Fast Initial Alignment Method of Inertial Navigation System
on Stationary Base,” Proceedings of the 4th World Congress on Intelligent Control and Automaton June
2002, Shanghai, China, pp. 1390-1394.
27. Y.Yong, L.J. Miao and C.Z. Hou, “Application of Dynamic Programming Theory to the Alignment of
SINS,” Proceedings of the 4th World Congress on Intelligent Control and Automaton June 2002,
Shanghai, China, pp. 577-581.
28. N. Eduardo and D.W. Hugh, “Initial Calibration and Alignment of an Inertial Navigation,” IEEE Position
Location and Navigation Symposium, 1997, pp. 175-180.
29. A.O. Salycheva and M.E. Cannon, “Kinematic Azimuth Alignment of INS using GPS Velocity
Information,” Proceedings of National Technical Meeting, San Diego, CA, January 2004.
30. A. Brown and D. Sullivan, “Precision Kinematic Alignment Using a Low-Cost GPS/INS System,”
Proceedings of ION GPS 2002, Portland, Oregon, September 2002.
31. N. El-Sheimy, S. Nassar and A. Noureldin, “Wavelet De-noising for IMU Alignment,” IEEE Aerospace
and Electronic Systems Magazine, October 2004, pp. 32-39.
32. C. Johnson, E.J. Ohlmeyer and T.R. Pepitone, “Attitude Dilution of Precision - A New Metric for
Observability of In-flight Alignment Errors” AIAA 2000-4277.
33. M.J. Yu, J.G. Lee, C.G. Park and D.S. Shim, “A Nonlinear Robust Observer Design for SDINS Inflight
Alignment”, AIAA 2001-4404.
34. M.J. Yu, J.G. Lee and H.W. Park, “ Comparison of SDINS Inflight Alignment using Equivalent Error
Models”, IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems, Vol. 35, No. 3, 1999, pp. 1046-1053.
35. G.G. Meskin, I. Y. Bar Itzhack, “Observability Analysis of Piece-Wise Constant Systems - Part II:
Application to Inertial Navigation In-flight Alignment”, IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic
Systems, Vol. 28, No. 4, 1992, pp. 1068-1075.
36. H.S. Hong, J.G. Lee and C.G. Park, “In-Flight Alignment of SDINS under Large Initial Heading Error”,
AIAA 2001-4183.
37. J.G. Park, C.G. Park, G. Jee and J.T. Oh, “The Enhancement of INS Alignment Using GPS
Measurements”, IEEE Position Location and Navigation Symposium 1998, pp. 534-540.
38. C.L. Wei and H.Y. Zhang, “SINS In-flight Alignment using Quaternion Error Models,” Chinese Journal
of Aeronautics, Vol. 14, No. 3, 2001, pp. 166-170.
39. M.J. Yu and S.W. Lee, “A Robust Extended Filter Design for SDINS In-flight Alignment,” International
Journal of Control, Automation, and Systems, Vol. 1, No. 4, December 2003, pp. 520-526.
40. R.M. Rogers, “IMU In-motion Alignment Without Benefit of Attitude Inialization,” Journal of the
Institute of Navigation, Vol. 44, No. 3, 1997, pp. 301-311.
41. E.J. Ohlmeyer and D.B. Hanger, “In-Flight Alignment Techniques for Navy Theater Wide Missiles,”
AIAA 2001-4401.
42. J. Ali and J.C. Fang, “In-flight Alignment of Inertial Navigation System by Celestial Observation
Technique,” Proceedings of the International Symposium on Inertial Navigation Technology and
Intelligent Traffic, Nanjing, China, October 2004.
43. K.L. Lai, J.L. Crassidisy and R.R. Harman, “In-Space Spacecraft Alignment Calibration Using the
Unscented Filter,” AIAA 2003-5563.
44. M.D. Shuster, “In-flight Estimation of Spacecraft Sensor Alignment,” Proceedings of the Annual Rocky
Mountain Guidance and Control Conference, Keystone, CO, 1990, pp. 253-274.
45. M.D. Shuster, D.S. Pitone and J.B. Gerald, “Batch Estimation of Spacecraft Sensor Alignments I.
Relative Alignment Estimation,” Journal of the Astronautical Sciences, Vol. 39, No. 4, 1991, pp. 519-546.
46. M.D. Shuster and D.S. Pitone, “Batch Estimation of Spacecraft Sensor Alignments II. Absolute
Alignment Estimation,” Journal of the Astronautical Sciences, Vol. 39, No. 4, 1991, pp. 547-571.
47. R.M. Rogers, “Comparison of Inertial Navigation System Error Models in Application to IMU Transfer
Alignment” AIAA 97-3599.
48. O. Tekinalp and M. Ozemre, “Artificial Neural Networks for Transfer Alignment and Calibration of
Inertial Navigation Systems”, AIAA 2001-4406.
49. R.M. Rogers, “Velocity-Plus-Rate-Matching for Improved Tactical Weapon Rapid Transfer Alignment”,
AIAA 91-2783-CP.

11
50. Y. Li, S.H. Wang and Z. Ye, “Study of Fast Transfer Alignment on Moving Base,” Chinese Journal of
Aeronautics, Vol. 12, No. 4, 1999, pp. 211-216.
51. J. Wendel, J. Metzger and G.F. Trommer, “Rapid Transfer Alignment in the Presence of Time Correlated
Measurement and System Noise,” AIAA-2004-4778.
52. L.W. Stimac and T.A. Kennedy, “Sensor Alignment Kalman Filters for Inertial Stabilization Systems,”
IEEE Position Location and Navigation Symposium, 1992, pp. 321-334.
53. L. Vodicheva, “INS Initial Alignment and Calibration on Moving Base: Aligned and Reference System
Interaction,” Proceedings of the 9th Saint Petersburg International Conference on Integrated Navigation
Systems, May 2002, pp. 391-393.
54. C. Yang, C.F. Lin, D. Tarrant, C. Roberts and P. Ruffin, “Transfer Alignment Design and Evaluation,”
AIAA-93-3892-CP, pp. 1724-1733.
55. C.F. Hagan and C.S. Lofts, “Accelerometer Based Alignment Transfer (ABAT),” IEEE Position Location
and navigation Symposium, 1992, pp. 133-140.
56. C.Y. Zhang, “Scheme of Alignment for Strapdown Inertial Navigation Systems,” AIAA ICAS-92-7.6.3,
pp. 1304-1310.
57. C.C. Ross and T.F. Elbert, “A Transfer Alignment Algorithm Study Based on Actual Flight Test Data
from a Tactical Air-to Ground Weapon Launch,” IEEE Position Location and Navigation Symposium,
1994, pp. 431-438.
58. R.M. Rogers, “Low Dynamics IMU Alignment,” IEEE Position Location and Navigation Symposium,
1998, pp. 272-279.
59. F.X. Cao, Z. Bao, J.P Yuan and E. Zheng, “Transfer Alignment from Airplane GPS/MINS Integrated
System to SAR Strapdown Navigator,” Proceedings of the 3rd World Congress on Intelligent Control and
Automaton June 2000, Hefei, China, pp. 2088-2091.
60. D.Q. Gu, Y.Y. Qin, R. Peng and X. Li, “Rapid Transfer Alignment using Federated Kalman Filter,”
Proceedings of the International Symposium on Inertial Navigation Technology and Intelligent Traffic,
Nanjing, China, October 2004.
61. J. Reiner, “In-Flight Transfer Alignment Using Aircraft-to-Wing Stiff-Angle Estimation,” AIAA- 96-
3818.
62. M.J. Yu, J.G. Lee, C.G. Park and K.C. Park, “An Extended Robust H-infinity Filter Design for SDINS In-
Flight Alignment,” 15th Triennial World Congress of the International Federation of Automatic Control,
Barcelona, July 2002.
63. S. Alanm, “Kalman Filter Formulations for Transfer Alignment of Strapdown Inertial Units,” AGARD,
Analysis, Design and Synthesis Methods for Guidance and Control Systems, SEE N90-29338 24-04,
1990.
64. P.D. Groves and J.C. Haddock, “An All-purpose Rapid Transfer Alignment Algorithm Set,” Proceedings
of the Institute of Navigation 2001 National Technical Meeting, Long Beach, CA, 2001, pp. 160-171.
65. R.M. Rogers, “Weapon IMU Transfer Alignment using Aircraft Position from Actual Flight Tests,” IEEE
Position Location and Navigation Symposium, 1996, pp. 328-335.
66. P.D. Groves, “Optimizing the Transfer Alignment of Weapon INS,” Journal of Navigation, Vol. 56, 2003,
pp. 323-335.
67. P.D. Groves, G.G. Wilson and C.J. Mather, “Robust Rapid Transfer Alignment with an INS/GPS
Reference,” Proceedings of the ION National Technical Meeting, California, 2002.
68. P.D. Groves, “Transfer Alignment using an Integrated INS/GPS as the Reference,” Proceedings of the
55th Annual Meeting of the Institute of Navigation, Cambridge, USA, June 1999, pp. 731-737.
69. G. William and S. Kevin, “Advanced Transfer Alignment for Inertial Navigators (A-TRAIN),”
Proceedings of the National Technical Meeting of the Institute of Navigation, Anaheim, CA, USA, 1995.
pp. 113-124.
70. S. Kevin and G. William, “Advanced Alignment Concepts for Precision Guided Weapons,” Proceedings
of the National Technical Meeting of the Institute of Navigation, Anaheim, CA, USA, 1995. pp. 131-142.

12