Military Review

Russia has patented a new way to launch missiles from aircraft

166
Russia has patented a new way to launch missiles from aircraft

In the future, Russian combat aircraft may receive vertical launchers for missiles, the launch of which will be carried out in mortar shells. The patent for the corresponding invention is published in the database of the Federal Institute of Industrial Property (FIPS).


Mortar launch controlled aviation missiles, interceptor missiles and other ammunition from vertical launchers were proposed by specialists from the Fakel Design Bureau named after Grushin and NPP Radar Mms. According to the authors of the invention, this method of firing is safer and allows missiles to be launched even from an aircraft standing on the ground.

The method of vertical air launch of missiles includes the vertical launch of a rocket from a launch container placed on an air carrier

- TASS quotes an extract from the patent.

Launching missiles from a vertical launcher in a mortar or “cold start” assumes that the missile will be ejected from the launcher without turning on the engine, i.e. with the help of some kind of knockout charge. The rocket starts its engines already at a safe distance from the carrier. To compensate for pressure from the oncoming air flow, the authors propose the use of stabilization engines in the bow of the rockets.

Note that the “cold start” is well known and widely used in Russian weapons, for example, to launch ICBMs, in some anti-aircraft missile systems, etc. The inventors opposed their method of launching missiles from the vertical launchers of an aircraft, which the Americans considered unsafe. Developers from the United States offered a "hot" start when the rocket engine turned on even in the launch container.
166 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Maki Avellevich
    Maki Avellevich 6 June 2020 08: 25 New
    10
    Can I have a circuit? And somehow it’s hard to understand how it will work.
    In words, too complex a system
    1. Wedmak
      Wedmak 6 June 2020 08: 29 New
      13
      Well, imagine in the fuselage of the bomber many small mines with small ICBMs ... Or, it is better, the TOP rockets in containers.
      1. Maki Avellevich
        Maki Avellevich 6 June 2020 08: 33 New
        19
        I imagined it.
        The issues of aerodynamics, both the most vertical rocket and the entire system, are not clear.
        Also complications of the design of missiles:
        To compensate for pressure from the oncoming air flow, the authors propose the use of stabilization engines in the bow of the rockets.

        Even in theory, it seems damp and not real.
        1. Mountain shooter
          Mountain shooter 6 June 2020 08: 42 New
          +7
          Quote: Maki Avellievich
          Even in theory it seems damp and not real

          But why? Bombs are thrown from horizontal flight, and nothing? And here the rockets are upward with a blast charge.
          Here the main problem is how the GOS will work. Some kind of new algorithm. It will not work to capture the target from the launch site ... although ... with the modern development of software, it may work.
          1. Tugarin
            Tugarin 6 June 2020 09: 04 New
            +4
            But why? Bombs are thrown from horizontal flight, and nothing? And here the rockets are upward with a blast charge.
            Here the main problem is how the GOS will work. Some kind of new algorithm.

            I agree with the capture of the goal here you need to ponder. And here's another question: If someone spits on a patent and develops its analogue without asking? Will they go to court? Apparently, they still want to get ahead of domestic developers with a patent. True, the idea was thrown to others.
            1. Mountain shooter
              Mountain shooter 6 June 2020 09: 07 New
              +5
              Quote: Tugarin
              I agree with the capture of the goal here you need to ponder. And here's another question: If someone spits on a patent and develops its analogue without asking?

              If it is the USA or China, then on its territory "our own hand is the ruler", we will not do anything to them! But if they accidentally start selling to third countries, there will be difficulties!
          2. novel66
            novel66 6 June 2020 10: 03 New
            0
            the main problem is free space, it is not on the plane
            1. hydrox
              hydrox 6 June 2020 10: 33 New
              +5
              Another problem :: the permissible speed at which a cold start is made - on supersonic (and even more so on hyper), it will not be so easy to do ...
              1. novel66
                novel66 6 June 2020 10: 35 New
                +4
                Well .. before hyper - aircraft .. as before China ... and so - yes, the problem
              2. Lopatov
                Lopatov 6 June 2020 13: 52 New
                +5
                Quote: hydrox
                Another problem :: the permissible speed at which a cold start is made - on supersonic (and even more so on hyper), it will not be so easy to do ...

                https://yandex.ru/patents/doc/RU2705387C1_20191107
              3. Grigory_78
                Grigory_78 7 June 2020 13: 33 New
                +3
                There are hints that this system is designed for subsonic aircraft. What rockets do you stick in the fuselage of the fighter? Where, let me ask? In the engines?
            2. Lopatov
              Lopatov 6 June 2020 13: 49 New
              +8
              Quote: novel xnumx
              the main problem is free space, it is not on the plane

              Patent name: "Method of launching a rocket from a WIDE-FUEL carrier
              laughing
              1. bayard
                bayard 6 June 2020 14: 49 New
                +7
                Quote: Spade
                Patent name: "Method of launching a rocket from a WIDE-FUEL carrier

                ABOUT ! So is it for the self-defense of a bomber? I inserted the battery into the fuselage and shoot back to victory in all angles?
                For PAK YES? But the usual weapons compartment for explosive missiles, like the Su-57, except the main one will not work? It's a wing ... flying ... there is such an area on the belly fellow - In what, there is where the engineering genius can take a walk.
                But without the risk of breaking a rocket at launch ... upright. smile
                Maybe SO it will be more accurate? wink
                1. Lopatov
                  Lopatov 6 June 2020 14: 52 New
                  +2
                  Quote: bayard
                  ABOUT ! So this is for the self-defense of a bomber

                  The Bomber is not a wide-body aircraft.
                  Here we are talking about transport.
                  And not about self-defense, but about the launch of ballistic missiles.
                  1. bayard
                    bayard 6 June 2020 15: 00 New
                    +7
                    Quote: Spade
                    Here we are talking about transport

                    Transport? lol
                    Why should they? belay
                    And how to induce / give target designation?
                    Or maybe this is for the A-100, who was never born at this time?
                    So that he would discover and direct, and he would carry the arsenal? lol
                    Such fighters are not needed for work at all - everything Himself can. yes
                    Will put an air wing at a time - no less! laughing
                    Without an ensemble. yes bully
                    1. Lopatov
                      Lopatov 6 June 2020 15: 08 New
                      +2
                      Quote: bayard
                      Transport? lol
                      Why should they?

                      A ballistic missile is more likely to overcome air defense / missile defense than a cruise missile.
                      Quote: bayard
                      And how to induce / give target designation?

                      External target designation.
                      1. bayard
                        bayard 6 June 2020 15: 18 New
                        +5
                        In the center section of the holes to start drilled?
                        If you want to make a carrier a missile carrier, there is nothing easier than using a ramp, pulling them out with an alternate exhaust parachute.
                        In this way, you can even launch an ICBM.
                        And the article mentions "missiles and anti-missiles" - therefore, we are still talking about V-V missiles.
                        And since transport and passenger aircraft do not need such protection (except perhaps for the presidential Il-96), we are clearly talking about PAK YES. Moreover, TTZ was prescribed such an ability.

                        Only here is a solution proposed extremely dubious.
                      2. Lopatov
                        Lopatov 6 June 2020 15: 21 New
                        0
                        Quote: bayard
                        In the center section of the holes to start drilled?

                        Yes.
                        Quote: bayard
                        If you want to make a carrier a missile carrier, there is nothing easier than using a ramp, pulling them out with an alternate exhaust parachute.

                        And how much energy will be lost to overcome the acceleration of gravity?

                        Quote: bayard
                        And the article mentions "missiles and anti-missiles" - therefore, we are still talking about V-V missiles.

                        The article has a lot to write. There is no such thing in the patent.
                      3. bayard
                        bayard 6 June 2020 17: 10 New
                        +4
                        Quote: Spade
                        Quote: bayard
                        In the center section of the holes to start drilled?

                        Yes.

                        Other gates. what
                        Isn't it scary to break a rocket at launch?
                        And if the knockout charge works abnormally, will it not completely knock out? And she gets stuck in such an inappropriate form?
                        Or doesn’t throw it through the keel?
                        I understand that the oncoming flow due to stabilizers will deploy the same rocket in the direction of movement ... but LOADS! Isn’t it easier than a conventional armament compartment with a start immediately forward or backward? So it’s easier to implement, cheaper and does not require special qualities from the rocket itself - that is, rockets can be ordinary / serial).
                        Quote: Spade
                        Quote: bayard
                        If you want to make a carrier a missile carrier, there is nothing easier than using a ramp, pulling them out with an alternate exhaust parachute.

                        And how much energy will be lost to overcome the acceleration of gravity?

                        It depends on what you are about to launch. If there are some aeroballistic missiles, then there will not be any special loss of energy - they pulled out, fired a parachute after 20 meters, launched a propulsion and forward - to the target.
                        And so, until the belly of transport is empty.
                        Americans do that. smile
                        If it is for "transport aviation".
                        And no energy loss.
                        Quote: Spade

                        Quote: bayard
                        And the article mentions "missiles and anti-missiles" - therefore, we are still talking about V-V missiles.

                        The article has a lot to write. There is no such thing in the patent.

                        If we were talking about the revival of the "Lun" project ... I would still believe that there is some sense in this ... but ... I will not.

                        And register a patent ... My friend has a whole portfolio of patents, but ... not in demand.

                        But if the United States decides to install such a drushlag on their planes, I will be just happy. yes bully
                      4. Lopatov
                        Lopatov 6 June 2020 19: 59 New
                        0
                        Are you too lazy to open a patent and read the link?
                      5. bayard
                        bayard 7 June 2020 02: 13 New
                        +2
                        Quote: Spade
                        Are you too lazy to open a patent and read the link?

                        I am scared to imagine the loads on the fuselage even from the expelling charge during the "mortar start".
                        And it is even more terrible to imagine a "ballistic" missile launched like this. Even the "Ohio" is not capable of firing in one gulp due to the insufficient strength of the hull.
                        But there is SHIP STEEL ... increased fluidity.
                        And the diameter of that fuselage is scary to me ...
                        Is this "Ruslan"?
                        Mriya?

                        And about reading patents. It was much more interesting to me at the time to read (and view) the patent for the mechanization of the weapon compartment of the Su-57, for the use of weapons at supersonic speeds.
                        Therefore, I believe that approximately such a compartment will be much more convenient and harmonious on a bomber, and on transport, and on a passenger wide-body aircraft, if someone bakes it.

                        But acoustic buoys, through a "drushlag" similar to your counterpart, spit out to PLO aircraft - the very thing will happen, but certainly - IN THE NIZ.
                        hi
                    2. ANB
                      ANB 7 June 2020 01: 54 New
                      +3
                      Right. Breaks a rocket in a free stream.
                      As an example, the speed of 667bdr when launching missiles is not more than 4 knots. Here, of course, air, not water, but also more speeds.
        2. Zaurbek
          Zaurbek 6 June 2020 16: 12 New
          +3
          And why is it better to just drop a rocket down from a mine vertically?
          1. iouris
            iouris 7 June 2020 00: 03 New
            +2
            Take your time, this is the next patent application.
      2. iouris
        iouris 7 June 2020 00: 02 New
        +2
        Not so long ago in Australia, a wheel was patented by a hit, but no one made money on this invention. He understood everything correctly.
  2. ancient
    ancient 6 June 2020 13: 35 New
    0
    Quote: Mountain Shooter
    Here the main problem

    Here the main problem ... how to place them in the center section of the fuselage wassat
    And .. what kind of .. "rockets" are ... somehow very vague (if not ... tougher wassat )
    They no longer know how ... to "legalize" ... already spent funds bully

    "Mortar launch of guided aircraft missiles, interceptor missiles and other ammunition from vertical launchers was proposed by specialists from the Grushin Fakel Design Bureau and the Radar Mms Research and Production Enterprise" ... nonsense ... like .. "Dunno on the Moon" lol
    1. mmaxx
      mmaxx 6 June 2020 19: 52 New
      +1
      The center section is, like, a wing. Not the fuselage at all. Why place rockets there? The wing will break.
      1. ancient
        ancient 6 June 2020 20: 10 New
        +2
        Quote: mmaxx
        Center wing is like a wing

        A "kakbe" center section to "what" or "to whom" is attached? wassat Not to the fitness, not? wink And so in itself, connected two planes and that's it wink
        And how are you going to place these .. "patented missiles" ... "mortar launch" somewhere in the fuselage, bypassing the center section?
        On the Tu-22M3, the center section is connected to the fuselage as a whole. This time.
        And where are you going to place these "patented missiles". So that ... "centering has left"? wassat
        1. mmaxx
          mmaxx 6 June 2020 20: 57 New
          +2
          The term "center section of the fuselage" is yours. The rest can be omitted.
          1. ancient
            ancient 6 June 2020 22: 34 New
            0
            Quote: mmaxx
            The term "center section of the fuselage"

            Persuaded laughing , concretize ...... in the center-wing docking center with the fuselage ... so arrange? wink
            1. mmaxx
              mmaxx 7 June 2020 06: 38 New
              +1
              And this is all about nothing. A plane in the air hangs on the wing. Everything else is simply attached to the wing. And it’s not so strong, compared with the design of the wing itself.
              There are options, of course. For example, the same Drying. There, the center section is also the fuselage compartment. In general, a very competent decision.
              I will not say about the Tu-22M3. Since the construction was not seen. But, most likely, it is similar to Migas with variable geometry. This is about the same time. Very difficult and very expensive. Very hard. Now nobody will bother with such nonsense. Have played enough.
      2. ancient
        ancient 6 June 2020 20: 29 New
        +2
        Quote: mmaxx
        Why place rockets there?

        How are you going to "bypass" the front and rear side members of the center section? Or install an additional longitudinal strength kit? wink
        What will your "patented rockets" be "attached" to? Or rather, the container of their launch? wink
        1. mmaxx
          mmaxx 7 June 2020 06: 41 New
          0
          If the patent provides for the deployment of missiles on large aircraft, then there is a place there. It is clear that the size of the rocket will not allow it to be placed in a fighter.
        2. mmaxx
          mmaxx 7 June 2020 06: 46 New
          +2
          And as regards the overall dimensions, when placing the rockets outside it is necessary to understand that in addition to the rocket with spread wings, the plane also carries a transition beam (pylon) for this rocket. Overall dimensions are very large. It’s like in air defense ships. As soon as ours invented UVP, everyone immediately abandoned all beam systems. The pluses, including the number of missiles, are obvious. True, the plane is not a ship, not just about anything you can shove. You can’t argue with that.
      3. Simargl
        Simargl 8 June 2020 06: 55 New
        0
        Quote: mmaxx
        The center section is, like, a wing.
        Center wing, high wing, low wing ... it’s also a wing mounting scheme ...
        1. mmaxx
          mmaxx 8 June 2020 14: 59 New
          0
          Midplan, not center section. wink
          1. Simargl
            Simargl 8 June 2020 18: 40 New
            +1
            Quote: mmaxx
            wink
            Well yes... drinks what
  3. Boratsagdiev
    Boratsagdiev 6 June 2020 15: 48 New
    0
    Bombs come out "along", and this type means "over".
    There will be big loads on the missiles and most likely corresponding restrictions on the application at flight speed.
  4. Maki Avellevich
    Maki Avellevich 6 June 2020 18: 37 New
    +2
    Quote: Mountain Shooter
    But why? Bombs are thrown from horizontal flight, and nothing?

    You like in an old Georgian joke
    when they shot a man stuck high on a tree with a rope that was tied around him and pulled.
    Happily fell and crashed.
    Having scratched his head, the father of the idea with a rope:
    I don’t understand anything! Yesterday, they pulled Gogu out of the well!
  5. Miron
    Miron 6 June 2020 19: 34 New
    0
    Quote: Mountain Shooter

    Here the main problem is how the GOS will work. Some kind of new algorithm. It will not work to capture the target from the launch site ... although ... with the modern development of software, it may work.

    But why her, this goal, to grab, let her imagine, the goal is flying, and it itself enters the rocket. After all, the goal is complicated, it has a motor there (often not one), glass, everything there to sit on the ground. And the anti-missile has a lemon with a wick and small things, so as not to fall immediately. Why is there all sorts of things for her to grab someone.
  • Wedmak
    Wedmak 6 June 2020 08: 48 New
    +2
    Even in theory, it seems damp and not real.

    Why? Modern missiles can withstand fairly decent overload.
    1. hydrox
      hydrox 6 June 2020 10: 41 New
      +4
      So these are overloads associated with accelerations, generally planar axis of the missiles, and with such a start, the loads are transverse (breaking off).
      1. mmaxx
        mmaxx 6 June 2020 19: 56 New
        0
        The load from shooting an IR trap is several tons. Shoots up. And several times. From the tail itself, where loads must all be transferred worse and the structure is weaker there. With the Su-27, 30 nothing happens. The impulse is very short-lived.
        1. hydrox
          hydrox 7 June 2020 06: 59 New
          0
          That's right: the duration of the load application, the shoulder of the application and the prestress of the structure before the application of the load (static, which must be taken into account).
          Well, of course, vibration.
  • qQQQ
    qQQQ 6 June 2020 09: 12 New
    +6
    Quote: Maki Avellievich
    Even in theory, it seems damp and not real.

    I agree how to deal with the oncoming air flow, while stabilizing the rocket at aircraft speeds, this is a problem, how much time and fuel it will take to turn, accelerate and again stabilize. At different angles and flight speeds of the aircraft, the ejection of missiles from the container will be at different angles, which also does not facilitate the situation. In my opinion, the game is not worth the candle, it is easier to drop a rocket from a horizontal container, which is now being done.
    1. hydrox
      hydrox 6 June 2020 10: 36 New
      0
      Or maybe think to knock it vertically down: the charge is less, the overload is less.
      1. qQQQ
        qQQQ 6 June 2020 11: 22 New
        0
        Quote: hydrox
        maybe think to knock it vertically down: the charge is less, the overload is less.

        This is if we shoot down, and if VV and the target with an excess? Even if implemented, how will this differ from current systems? With any decision, we get a narrowly specialized system with a bunch of disadvantages.
        1. bayard
          bayard 6 June 2020 15: 09 New
          +1
          Yes it is for PAK DA wise. They declared what explosives would carry, too, that they were perverted by the mind. And it’s easier to provide a couple of small arms bays (on the sides of the main one) for explosive missiles, capable of starting either forward (in the direction) or backward into the rear hemisphere. There were such experiments on the Su-34.
          Everything is on the backlog and is easy to implement. And not these fantasies - to break rockets with a free stream.
    2. Miron
      Miron 6 June 2020 19: 54 New
      0
      nizya "reset", it sticks to the vibration flow, you have to turn on the engines, launching the rocket right in the plane.
      Therefore, there is nothing to agree with.
      What does all the problems you listed
      1 "to deal with the incoming air flow, while stabilizing the missiles at aircraft speeds"
      2 "how much time and fuel will it take to turn, accelerate and stabilize again"
      3 "how much time and fuel will it take to turn, accelerate and stabilize again"
      There are now. And not one of them has been resolved, since this is impossible, taking into account the real framework of resources, finances and time.
      At the same time, the individual installation of each launcher significantly increases the cost of the entire process of serving and using those tools. And each of them has individual problems unique to each given launch.
      This solution promises unification and the creation of clips for reloading. Definitely a step forward.
      Another thing is that the current round of innovations in materials, chemistry and production can greatly change the vision of the whole battle. New solutions are possible, like guns or lasers, which will make rockets a thing of the past. But if the missiles have 10 years of life left, then these decisions are long overdue.
  • fider
    fider 6 June 2020 16: 13 New
    +6
    Once upon a time I started as a designer. Once a patent specialist comes to me and says that according to the plan, our department needs so many inventions, they say, come on. Well, I did. Exactly six months later I received a positive review. And then it went. Some inventions have been introduced into production. But basically, there were inventions for the sake of patents. Because the patent department needed it. This is the vertical start, and you’re breaking your head.
  • Bykov.
    Bykov. 6 June 2020 08: 40 New
    0
    Quote: Wedmak
    Well, imagine in the fuselage of the bomber many small mines with small ICBMs ... Or, it is better, the TOP rockets in containers.

    small ICBMs ?! Is there such a thing?
    1. Wedmak
      Wedmak 6 June 2020 08: 48 New
      +3
      No, of course, but as a good example they are very suitable.
    2. The popuas
      The popuas 6 June 2020 09: 34 New
      0
      In the wet dreams of some ... maybe yes laughing
  • letinant
    letinant 6 June 2020 08: 42 New
    +1
    Quote: Wedmak
    Well, imagine in the fuselage of the bomber many small mines with small ICBMs ... Or, it is better, the TOP rockets in containers.

    So I think, for the implementation of such a launch, either a bomber or an ekranoplan will do.
  • The popuas
    The popuas 6 June 2020 09: 21 New
    0
    Little ICBMs .. belay it's like ... request
  • knn54
    knn54 6 June 2020 10: 45 New
    +2
    I could not imagine the KR in an airplane vertically.
    And how will the aircraft "damp" the inertia / recoil during a VERTICAL launch?
    1. Alexey Z
      Alexey Z 6 June 2020 17: 39 New
      0
      Well, it's just like in an RPG, there’s still a hole below, well, or it opens at launch
  • lucul
    lucul 6 June 2020 13: 09 New
    -3
    Well, imagine in the fuselage of the bomber a lot of small mines with small ICBMs ...

    And there is .
    The main advantage is the possibility of increasing the number of missiles on board. How many fighter take missiles there for one take-off - 8, 12? Now imagine that a fighter can take 30 missiles, and a bomber -50 -100 missiles at a time. AND? Feel the difference? Immediately the aircraft began to play with new opportunities))) After all, you can cram a lot of things into the fuselage, how many Americans were tormented with the design of the internal compartments on their stealth fighters. And here the issue of stealth missiles resolved immediately))))
  • Bykov.
    Bykov. 6 June 2020 08: 34 New
    +6
    Quote: Maki Avellevich
    Can I have a circuit? And then somehow it’s hard to understand how all this will work

    Yeah, dreaming, spy!
  • Insurgent
    Insurgent 6 June 2020 10: 23 New
    +2
    Quote: Maki Avellievich
    Can I have a circuit? And somehow it’s hard to understand how it will work.
    In words, too complex a system


    Apparently something similar to this:

    1. Maki Avellevich
      Maki Avellevich 6 June 2020 14: 18 New
      0
      Quote: Insurgent
      Apparently something similar to this:

      This is not at all like that.
      The plane is flying, you know. Sometimes at very high speeds.
      A wind blows in your face and all that.
      1. Insurgent
        Insurgent 6 June 2020 14: 22 New
        +1
        Quote: Maki Avellievich
        This is not at all like that.
        The plane is flying, you know. Sometimes at very high speeds.
        A wind blows in your face and all that.


        I'll show you an illustration "mortar launch"implemented in the air defense missile system" Tor ", as an illustration concept , and on the implementation of its analogue on the plane, obviously, designers have already worked, which certainly took into account all the factors ...
        1. Maki Avellevich
          Maki Avellevich 6 June 2020 14: 25 New
          0
          Used a mortar in his youth. Understanding this principle is not difficult. Everything else has big problems with this idea.
          1. Insurgent
            Insurgent 7 June 2020 09: 08 New
            +3
            Quote: Maki Avellievich
            Used a mortar in his youth. Understanding this principle is not difficult. Everything else has big problems with this idea.


            Any fundamentally new technical solution was always a certain problem, but they were solved ...

            I am sure that the vertical "mortar launch" in aviation will not become a "stumbling block" for Russian designers.
  • Miron
    Miron 6 June 2020 19: 28 New
    0
    What is a circuit.
    1. Maki Avellevich
      Maki Avellevich 6 June 2020 19: 37 New
      0
      Quote: Miron
      What is a circuit.

      Diagram:

      graphic document [1];
      the presentation, image, presentation of something in the most general terms, simplified (for example, the outline of the report) [2];
      An electronic device containing many components (integrated circuit).
  • vik669
    vik669 6 June 2020 21: 06 New
    0
    It’s so clearly written - from the standing truth, it was previously mostly tried from a gun sometimes — once I was present for a lifetime I remember!
  • Wedmak
    Wedmak 6 June 2020 08: 31 New
    +5
    It is unlikely that this method is suitable for fighters and attack aircraft, where they seek to reduce the frontal projection. But for bombers, strategists, and trucks completely. A dozen small anti-ballistic missiles such as TORovsky can well be thrust.
  • KVU-NSVD
    KVU-NSVD 6 June 2020 08: 45 New
    +1
    Development for a self-defense system for PAK YES? PS missiles do not have to be thrown out with expelling charges, it is also possible with compressed air. The question is how to compensate for a return that is dangerous for an airplane in flight?
    1. Wedmak
      Wedmak 6 June 2020 08: 53 New
      +2
      Development for a self-defense system for PAK YES?

      By the way, yes ... good point.
      The question is how to compensate for a return that is dangerous for an airplane in flight?

      The aircraft for such systems will not be small. For example, the mass of the rocket is 50-100 kg, the mass of the aircraft is from 40 tons (hardly less), what dangerous returns are we talking about?
      1. KVU-NSVD
        KVU-NSVD 6 June 2020 08: 58 New
        +2
        Any body launched from a carrier (especially artillery — from a barrel or launch canister) gives the carrier thrust — and it doesn’t matter what kind of body it is — a shell, a stream of water, or a stream of gases. And if there is a return, then it must be compensated, for a flying airplane it is much more important than for a land or water body.
        1. Wedmak
          Wedmak 6 June 2020 09: 08 New
          0
          Well ... as if not reactive, but inverse, this is called recoil. But there is a whole bunch of such forces in fact: the recoil energy - the movement opposite to the direction of the "shot", the momentum - does not depend on the mass, and so it really needs to be somehow compensated, you probably mean it. There is also power and recoil force, which depend on the "shot" / start time.
          However, I do not think that these are big problems, compared with the complexity of other systems
        2. mmaxx
          mmaxx 6 June 2020 20: 01 New
          +1
          A bullet from a rifle barrel pierces a lot of things and flies very far. But the rifle doesn’t hit so hard on the shoulder. What problems? No need to throw a rocket at the speed of a rocket. You just need to throw it outside the fuselage.
          1. KVU-NSVD
            KVU-NSVD 6 June 2020 20: 06 New
            0
            Quote: mmaxx
            A bullet from a rifle barrel pierces a lot of things and flies very far. And the rifle doesn’t hit so hard on the shoulder

            When shooting with a rifle, you have a support underneath in the form of earth, into which the impulse goes, and try to shoot in limbo and you will begin to swing
            1. mmaxx
              mmaxx 6 June 2020 20: 10 New
              0
              Impulses are equal. A blow to the shoulder is not strong. The plane is also not in space.
              1. KVU-NSVD
                KVU-NSVD 6 June 2020 20: 30 New
                0
                Quote: mmaxx
                Impulses are equal. A blow to the shoulder is not strong. The plane is also not in space.

                Well, let's follow your logic. We compare rifle shooting and mortar launch of a rocket from an airplane in terms of the mass ratio of the projectile, without taking into account everything else. A man is roughly 100kg, a bullet of 10g, a ratio of 1 to 10000. Let the rocket be 100 kg, then for an airplane, so that the impact from the launch of the rocket was comparable to shooting a man with a rifle, 1000 tons should be weighed So the effect of a mortar launch of a rocket from an airplane and a shot from a rifle by a man is incomparable ..
                1. mmaxx
                  mmaxx 7 June 2020 06: 22 New
                  0
                  No. An IR trap flies out of the Su-27 with a return of several tons. How much exactly, I will not say, because I do not remember. But the figure is staggering. Moreover, the plane shoots them several at a time.
                  NOTHING is going to happen. On the show, all the traps shoot at once and no problems.
                  I think that if in the Middle Ages people were very literate, then the idea of ​​firearms was cut off in the bud. wink
                2. mmaxx
                  mmaxx 7 June 2020 06: 24 New
                  0
                  Well and more. If we had to shoot a rocket up to an enemy aircraft, we would get a simple gun. This is a heavy thing. But we need to throw it just outside the plane.
            2. mmaxx
              mmaxx 6 June 2020 20: 15 New
              0
              The point is that the momentum is very short. He is very strong. But very short. He does not have time to do something serious. They said in childhood at the NVP lessons that the energy of the cartridge 7,62 from AKM would have been enough to move the freight car. But the bullet does not move. And the return will not shift.
      2. Maki Avellevich
        Maki Avellevich 6 June 2020 14: 22 New
        0
        Quote: Wedmak
        For example, the mass of the rocket is 50-100 kg, the mass of the aircraft is from 40 tons (hardly less), what dangerous returns are we talking about?

        Physics to the rescue
        Power formula:
        Force (F) = m X a;
        Mass (m) = F / a;
        Acceleration (a) = F / m;

        Where,
        F = Strength
        m = Mass
        a = Acceleration
    2. dauria
      dauria 6 June 2020 14: 24 New
      +2
      . The question is how to compensate for a return that is dangerous for an airplane in flight?


      The catapult chair with the mannequin is thrown away and the flight continues. And with the fighter. And here, as I understand it, bomber and all-angle air-to-air melee missiles for protection. The decision is unexpected. A bomber that defends itself in close combat looks ridiculous in modern conditions ..
      1. Maki Avellevich
        Maki Avellevich 6 June 2020 18: 42 New
        0
        Quote: dauria
        The catapult chair with the mannequin is thrown away and the flight continues. And with the fighter.

        Ejection usually involves the loss of an airplane. Yes, and it will come a little less often than launching missiles.
    3. Alexey Z
      Alexey Z 6 June 2020 17: 41 New
      -1
      There will be no recoil, another hole opens from below, and we get recoilless
      1. Aag
        Aag 6 June 2020 18: 38 New
        +1
        Quote: Alex Z
        There will be no recoil, another hole opens from below, and we get recoilless

        Then there will be a jet, not a mortar launch.
        1. DDT
          DDT 7 June 2020 23: 29 New
          0
          The plane will be torn apart by volley ... crying
    4. forest1
      forest1 7 June 2020 06: 23 New
      0
      You can shoot the same rocket to compensate at the same time still down. Here and there will be no recoil
  • bober1982
    bober1982 6 June 2020 08: 46 New
    0
    ........,those. with the help of some kind of knockout charge.
    The only thing left is to figure out how to throw missiles out of the launcher.
    1. Wedmak
      Wedmak 6 June 2020 08: 51 New
      +3
      Springs ... Very strong springs. wassat
      1. mr.ZinGer
        mr.ZinGer 6 June 2020 09: 05 New
        0
        This is to Mr. Rogozin, he is a fan of such devices.
        1. DDT
          DDT 7 June 2020 23: 28 New
          0
          Exactly, he even offered Musk to launch satellites from a trampoline ... lol
      2. The comment was deleted.
    2. Nikolaevich I
      Nikolaevich I 6 June 2020 12: 08 New
      +1
      Quote: bober1982
      The only thing left is to figure out how to throw missiles out of the launcher.

      For the "bubble" I propose this method: a powder "pusher", arranged according to the principle of a "silent" cartridge ... well, for example, the SP-4 cartridge ...!
      1. bober1982
        bober1982 6 June 2020 12: 53 New
        +1
        Quote: Nikolaevich I
        I suggest this way

        This will not be enough, even if you manage to knock the missile out of the launcher.
        And, the methods of aiming, the theory of aiming itself, sighting devices, so there is no way to get a bubble.
        1. asv363
          asv363 6 June 2020 13: 56 New
          +1
          Vladimir, open access patent:
          https://findpatent.ru/patent/270/2705387.html
      2. asv363
        asv363 6 June 2020 14: 01 New
        +1
        Vladimir Nikolaevich, I cited a link to the patent a little higher.
        1. Nikolaevich I
          Nikolaevich I 7 June 2020 01: 35 New
          +1
          Thank you! fellow I used your link ... downloaded it to the "archive" ... let's read it! hi
    3. Alexey Z
      Alexey Z 6 June 2020 17: 42 New
      0
      Why pilots? Kicks
    4. mmaxx
      mmaxx 6 June 2020 20: 20 New
      0
      Mortar throws a charge. And rockets can do that. As in the patent - I do not know. We have a grenade launcher. I don’t remember the name, because it’s not special in this matter and the memory is not bottomless. To be able to shoot from premises, etc., he has a kick charge. Throws a grenade, and only then it starts the engine. At a safe distance. The soldier does not fly away, the grenade launcher too.
  • Thrifty
    Thrifty 6 June 2020 09: 01 New
    +2
    But will the fuselage of the aircraft withstand such constant vibrations from the ejection of missiles arising from mortar firing? Will it be necessary to strengthen the airframe? And if the engine does not work, and the rocket falls on the booster? A lot of questions, as well as problems with the implementation of this idea!
    1. hydrox
      hydrox 6 June 2020 10: 46 New
      +1
      The velocity vectors of an airplane and a rocket are perpendicular ...
  • keeper03
    keeper03 6 June 2020 09: 02 New
    +3
    He patent to the device lies a huge chasm! belay The question is who will overcome it! what
  • APASUS
    APASUS 6 June 2020 09: 03 New
    0
    What are the benefits of a cold start to this aircraft?
    1. Mountain shooter
      Mountain shooter 6 June 2020 10: 10 New
      +1
      Quote: APASUS
      What are the benefits of a cold start to this aircraft?

      Visionary. The missile is fired OVER the plane, and goes towards the indicated target at least forward, at least back, at least to the side. Launchers are hiding in the fuselage. Kickback at startup? Yes, there is such a problem. But there are many solutions. Yes, and you need to throw not very far - high ...
      1. APASUS
        APASUS 6 June 2020 10: 40 New
        +1
        Quote: Mountain Shooter
        Visionary. The missile is fired OVER the plane, and goes towards the indicated target at least forward, at least back, at least to the side.

        And what about the aircraft circular view locator? Guidance from aircraft
        1. Mountain shooter
          Mountain shooter 6 June 2020 10: 52 New
          +1
          Quote: APASUS
          And what about the aircraft circular view locator? Guidance from aircraft

          But on some, there are ... According to rumors, on the Su-57 both side and rear views ... On large planes such as strategic ones, they can also be delivered on purpose.
      2. hydrox
        hydrox 6 June 2020 10: 53 New
        0
        Quote: Mountain Shooter
        and goes to the specified goal at least forward, at least back, at least to the side.

        Question: are there systems capable of replacing the coordinates of a target on an already launched rocket and doing this, for example, via a communication channel not with a carrier aircraft, but with an Aircraft?
        1. hydrox
          hydrox 6 June 2020 16: 00 New
          0
          The sofas are silent, but the most enlightened of them was noted as a minus ...
          After all, a rocket needs to fly somewhere after such a tricky start before a target appears in the GOS and whether it will be a target, and not the Russian Tu-154 or Il-20 ...
          1. mmaxx
            mmaxx 7 June 2020 06: 16 New
            0
            In anti-aircraft missiles, she somehow flies where necessary. No GOS does not interfere.
            1. hydrox
              hydrox 7 June 2020 07: 17 New
              0
              A “fire and forget” rocket is basically a MANPADS, which in its seeker captures the target even before launch. And rockets do not fly "somehow" as you claim.
              In large anti-aircraft missiles, for this there is a channel through which the air defense system is controlled from the ground (at least a laser, at least a radio command, at least a location or television ...), the GOS can also be connected in the final section
              1. mmaxx
                mmaxx 7 June 2020 07: 49 New
                0
                But after all, anyone understands that along with the idea of ​​launching missiles from the position "as it is" to "where it is necessary", it is necessary to solve the problem of guidance. That is, turn the plane into an analogue of the air defense system. And in this way you can reach the analogue of "Aegis" in the air. And to steer the whole fight from the AWACS aircraft. Fantasy so far, that's understandable. But you will have to develop there. Look how the Jews are fighting in the air. You will admire.
                The most interesting thing is that even our coolest test pilots and aerobatics said that why spin 18 tons in battle, when the rocket should do it. The advantage of a person is in his mind, and not in the ability to deliver a plane with cancer. And in nature, man became the king of nature not because he rocked his muscles and sharpened his claws / teeth. But because he solved the problems of survival among others in a completely different way.
        2. Wedmak
          Wedmak 6 June 2020 16: 31 New
          -1
          Why replace if you can record the target azimuth on a rocket before launch? The missile starts, bends, captures the target of its radar and forth.
          1. hydrox
            hydrox 6 June 2020 16: 36 New
            0
            This is if the goal is near: and if it is an RVV database and a target for 300 km - then how?
            GOS for 300 km does not hit, and the azimuth of what to tie? To Glonass? Then the communication channel to space is needed ...
            And if the target was at the back and its coordinates were transferred to the carrier from the AWACS aircraft via the network center - then how will the rocket tilt after launch?
            1. Wedmak
              Wedmak 6 June 2020 16: 45 New
              0
              Something I strongly doubt that missiles with a range of more than 40-60 km (or maybe less) will be taken on board. Stupidly, because the greater the range, the greater the dimensions of the rocket and the more difficult it will be to push it out of the TPK.
              And the goal is not to bring dozens of these missiles with you, but to carry products for working on the ground. Unless we were planning to do something like an air defense system with our own search antenna and target illumination. But this is fantastic already.
              1. hydrox
                hydrox 6 June 2020 17: 44 New
                +1
                And if on the ground, then why indicate that the target is behind?
                And then - it is not yet obvious that this patent will be implemented, and there is clearly not enough material for discussion ...
  • mr.ZinGer
    mr.ZinGer 6 June 2020 09: 03 New
    0
    It is not clear what can be patented here?
    The principle is patented, but what is fundamentally new here?
    How then will copyright be protected?
    And if you shoot to the side or to the bottom, a new patent?
  • Pashhenko Nikolay
    Pashhenko Nikolay 6 June 2020 09: 04 New
    0
    A patent for a non-existent system is serious.
    1. mmaxx
      mmaxx 6 June 2020 20: 03 New
      0
      There are no other patents.
  • rocket757
    rocket757 6 June 2020 09: 17 New
    +1
    If the plane has to shoot off the ground .... reconnaissance, airspace control service, you need to disperse naf!
    1. hydrox
      hydrox 6 June 2020 16: 51 New
      +1
      Fine!
      Two devices in one bottle: a bomber in the air (or even a transporter (since it’s wide-body)), and in the parking lot it’s an anti-aircraft complex! laughing
      1. rocket757
        rocket757 6 June 2020 17: 36 New
        +1
        Anything can happen .... I just don’t believe in the universal, it is not as effective as specialized.
        1. hydrox
          hydrox 6 June 2020 17: 39 New
          +1
          And do not believe correctly: that's why I put a rzhachny emoticon. laughing
  • Wedmak
    Wedmak 6 June 2020 09: 20 New
    +4
    By the way, an analogue of such a system already exists in reality. Ejection seats pilots. As for the stand / not stand - remember the MIG-23M, which, after the pilot's bailout, flew half of Europe. And this is after the operation of jet engines in the cockpit, studded with control devices!
    1. Suslin
      Suslin 6 June 2020 21: 15 New
      0
      The ejection seat, of course, has jet engines, but they start outside the cockpit, and first the telescopic bar pushes the seat out.
  • Svetlana
    Svetlana 6 June 2020 09: 26 New
    +1
    I think the journalists got it wrong.
    Firstly, the military and the patent do not fit. Patents are accepted for civilian products to protect themselves and the market from fakes and make money on it. The military does not protect its mechanisms from fakes. If someone wants to make Kalash, then he produces it. (Bidders in bulk)
    Secondly, when it comes to the idea , then they are not patented, but specific devices, methods, mechanisms are patented.
    Is it possible to patent Armata, Zumvolt or Coalition? No you can not.
    1. Avior
      Avior 6 June 2020 14: 12 New
      -2
      There are different types of patents.
      Utility model, industrial design, invention.
      Scientific theories, mathematical methods, programs and so on are not patented
      . scientific theories;
      mathematical methods;
      discoveries;
      decisions that relate only to the appearance of the products;
      decisions that consist only in the provision of information;
      computer programs;
      rules of the game, methods of intellectual or economic activity

      Therefore, it is important to find out what is specifically patented.
      1. riwas
        riwas 7 June 2020 04: 52 New
        +1
        I think that the purpose of this patent is to mislead the adversary. Let him waste his resources in search of an unrealistic idea.
        1. Avior
          Avior 7 June 2020 10: 02 New
          0
          Most patents are not implemented or their implementation is impractical or meaningless.
          There are people who file patents for patents.
    2. hydrox
      hydrox 6 June 2020 16: 54 New
      0
      In military patents there is only a name, but a description of the invention is not given - this is how copyright certificates were issued in the Union.
  • infantryman2020
    infantryman2020 6 June 2020 09: 33 New
    0
    The visualization can be seen in the TV series "Space" ("Expansion"). But there is, like, open space. In the atmosphere, of course, the loads and overloads are completely different.
  • Nikolaevich I
    Nikolaevich I 6 June 2020 09: 46 New
    +1
    Back at the end of the last century, they were looking for new ways to launch aviation ammunition! For example, a kind of "superconformal" system was proposed (maybe it was called differently, but I speak as I remember). The "essence" of this system is that the ammunition was not placed on the suspensions from the bottom of the fuselage, but from the top of the fuselage! When launched, the ammunition was "fired" upward. It was believed that with such placement of ammunition ("from above"), a reduced radar signature of the aircraft was provided ...
  • vkd.dvk
    vkd.dvk 6 June 2020 10: 21 New
    0
    The speed of the airplane at this launch should be .....? For a transverse run-in of air, a rocket with an engine not running (for now) can go mad, because of a dizzy head, and, starting up, chase after its benefactor. Here it is vertically down, it seems to me more secure. Perhaps such an arrangement of containers in the abdomen of the invisible, will push there much more ....
    If a specialist finds some blockhead in my proposal, then I can counter this accusation with the possibility of launching up from a coup. You can run forward from the position of the Pugachev cobra. Back-out of the dive. Sideways - from a bend.
    1. MA3UTA
      MA3UTA 6 June 2020 11: 16 New
      0
      According to the inventors, this method of firing is safer and allows you to launch missiles even from an airplane standing on the ground
    2. DDT
      DDT 7 June 2020 23: 25 New
      0
      Down, in principle, on the "bomb" is possible. But again, the plane will cost one and a half times more due to the strengthening of the fuselage. Otherwise, he will open the mine, and he will be torn to pieces. No, this is a guaranteed Shnobel Prize wassat
  • Hey
    Hey 6 June 2020 10: 24 New
    +1
    Why only option is considered to the top , you can also consider options sideways и down.
  • Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 6 June 2020 10: 55 New
    0
    Quote: hydrox
    Question: are there systems capable of replacing coordinates on an already launched missile and doing this, for example, through a communication channel with the A-50U?

    Nothing contradicts. If networked ...
  • Pvi1206
    Pvi1206 6 June 2020 11: 04 New
    -1
    practice will put everything in its place ...
    1. Andrey.AN
      Andrey.AN 6 June 2020 13: 04 New
      0
      This is unlikely to be practiced. Those interested are unlikely to be there, throwing out some kind of log at full speed across the incoming flow.
  • Vasya Zyuzkin
    Vasya Zyuzkin 6 June 2020 11: 31 New
    0
    Well, for stealth technology, such a launch may make sense. The entire weapons system will be hidden in the fuselage.
    And such systems can be covertly put on transport and civilian board. The window opened iiiiiiiuuuuyak air-air curious NATO landed. Point blank from the window!))))))))
  • Andrey.AN
    Andrey.AN 6 June 2020 12: 35 New
    0
    It's hard to imagine this, if the wind speed at a cruising speed of two hundred meters per second, the Fakel Design Bureau is not joking, the specialists are not cheap for a campaign.
  • iouris
    iouris 6 June 2020 14: 17 New
    0
    It won’t work: a lot of excess weight. But, if only to get a patent and report for the time and money spent, why not?
    A long time ago, I came across a publication: allegedly somewhere they decided to let the UR "in-in" into the rear hemisphere at the attacking fighter, so the rocket tumbled and chased the carrier - instability.
  • Avior
    Avior 6 June 2020 14: 22 New
    -2
    Questions arise
    What should be the thickness of the fuselage?
    After all, the launch should be more than a rocket
    R-73 length 290 cm, R-27 length 360 cm.
    And most importantly, when starting forward, the speed of the aircraft is added to the speed of the rocket, which means the range and power ratio of the rocket is greater with the same dimensions.
    With a vertical start, this advantage is lost.
    And the second.
    Missiles with full-spherical launch already exist in the classic form, when launching forward. They unfold after starting up to the point that they would hit the target behind their backs. So vertical launch will not give anything extra.
    1. iouris
      iouris 6 June 2020 14: 59 New
      0
      Quote: Avior
      What should be the thickness of the fuselage?

      The question is posed correctly, but it is phrased incorrectly: there is no such thing. Vertical launch is possible (purely hypothetically) from a heavy military transport aircraft designed specifically as a carrier for such missiles. But there are no and never will be such missiles.
  • Vladimir SHajkin
    Vladimir SHajkin 6 June 2020 15: 12 New
    0
    Patented, good ...
  • Old26
    Old26 6 June 2020 16: 18 New
    +2
    Quote: lucul
    And there is .
    The main advantage is the possibility of increasing the number of missiles on board. How many fighter take missiles there for one take-off - 8, 12? Now imagine that a fighter can take 30 missiles, and a bomber -50 -100 missiles at a time. AND? Feel the difference? Immediately the aircraft began to play with new opportunities))) After all, you can cram a lot of things into the fuselage, how many Americans were tormented with the design of the internal compartments on their stealth fighters. And here the issue of stealth missiles resolved immediately))))

    In this case, a fighter can take not 30, but all 50 missiles, but a bomber, depending on the type, can take 50-100, and of the Tu-160 type - and all 200 self-defense missiles. True, the fighters and the TU-5M22 will have one extra detail that may prevent them from taking such a number of missiles, but the issue can be resolved. This "extra" part can be thrown away. I think that for such a superhyperwunderwaffe, the engine will be an unnecessary detail. And the TU-3 will have an extra part with a bomb bay with shock weapons. Otherwise, everything is fine. Certainly there will be no analogs
  • Angry
    Angry 6 June 2020 17: 07 New
    0
    Is that like the Germans during WWII "Shrage Music"? Vertical launch of NURS against enemy bombers flying above the fighter.
  • vkd.dvk
    vkd.dvk 6 June 2020 17: 22 New
    -2
    Quote: MA3UTA
    According to the inventors, this method of firing is safer and allows you to launch missiles even from an airplane standing on the ground

    At a speed of 2 km / h, the airflow with a racket, with an engine not yet started, can do anything. Being braked and spinning around all axes, the engine can push it under the tail of its own airplane. And it is not fighter-bombers who are obliged to shoot back at the attacking enemy at the airport, but to guard the airfield. Have you seen a lot of people standing in hangars or nearby, with engines not working and without pilots in the cockpits, and not ready to shoot from an air bandit? I saw these planes very often. But, behold, they are ready to defend themselves like that, almost never.
  • vkd.dvk
    vkd.dvk 6 June 2020 17: 40 New
    0
    Quote: Shaikin Vladimir
    Patented, good ...

    Every year, two hundred inventions are made, protected by patents, proving that a wooden gang in a bath saves many diseases. And as many that it’s not true.
    A thousandth of the registered such things MAY (not fact) will have useful applications. The rest is written only to stake out an idea.
    At my old job, in the design bureau, a scientist suggested that I join the stake. But on the condition that I figure out where it can be applied. The idea was this: a stud twisted into a ring with thread along the entire length. With a nut pre-screwed onto this stud. With thread run-offs agreed at the ends so that the nut does not stumble when scrolling along the ring. I did not strain, I somehow did not burn my petty past and I did not want to enter the honorable cohort of inventors. Well-known to many, Albert Einstein sprinkled over 2000 inventions. But he did not become famous for this petty heap. By the way, then he worked at the Patent Office. This is not healthy associations for me.
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. hydrox
      hydrox 6 June 2020 19: 15 New
      0
      Quote: vkd.dvk
      By the way, then he worked at the Patent Office. This is not healthy associations for me.

      And what, for a sensible head, a very bread place! laughing
  • Pavel57
    Pavel57 6 June 2020 18: 17 New
    +1
    Rather, a patent for the sake of a patent.
  • Suslin
    Suslin 6 June 2020 21: 03 New
    0
    How is this a vertical start? What width / height should the aircraft be? The author that confuses width with depth? Why then write such nonsense? The length of an aircraft missile reaches 7 meters, and I'm sorry how to launch it vertically, and even with a mortar, from a launch container? Not an article but some kind of nonsense.
  • vkd.dvk
    vkd.dvk 6 June 2020 21: 13 New
    -2
    Quote: Suslin
    How is this a vertical start? What width / height should the aircraft be? The author that confuses width with depth? Why then write such nonsense? The length of an aircraft missile reaches 7 meters, and I'm sorry how to launch it vertically, and even with a mortar, from a launch container? Not an article but some kind of nonsense.

    My dear, you confuse the IDEA with implementation. To hell with them, inventors. Let them write and wait for implementation. His patent is valid for 20 years, according to international agreements, and if anyone dares to mess around the idea, let him pay. Kids for the milk. By the way, for the design of this bamaga, you need to spit out a decent loot. Nobody works for free, but here you need to do a patent search, determine the purity of an idea, all kinds of legal affairs, contributions to Committees, and so on. Free is when the demon pays. It is harmful to the immortal soul.
  • vkd.dvk
    vkd.dvk 7 June 2020 00: 52 New
    +1
    Quote: Vasya Zyuzkin
    Well, for stealth technology, such a launch may make sense. The entire weapons system will be hidden in the fuselage.
    And such systems can be covertly put on transport and civilian board. The window opened iiiiiiiuuuuyak air-air curious NATO landed. Point blank from the window!))))))))

    For installation on civilian objects, you need to hang on yards like pirates. There are agreements, and they cannot be violated. Even Roman law asserted that "Treaties must be fulfilled." "Pacta sunt servanda". And nothing else.
    Otherwise, there will be a complete mess in the world, and people will kill themselves in a short time.
  • sen
    sen 7 June 2020 04: 18 New
    +1
    You can shoot not only up, but also to the side. For example, short-range air-to-air missiles using a helmet-mounted sight. There is no need for the rocket to turn around - the flight time of the rocket to the target is shorter.
  • Evil 55
    Evil 55 7 June 2020 05: 45 New
    0
    Is it also proposed to download only in stationary conditions? As on submarines and surface ships? The idea is far from new, but poorly "industrially applicable"
  • fa2998
    fa2998 7 June 2020 08: 29 New
    0
    Quote: Spade
    Patent name: "Method of launching a rocket from a WIDE-FUEL carrier

    What kind of nonsense they’re not inventing! What is a PATENT? That then the use of this method will pay us money. Or do we pay extra for patents and innovation in our workplace and design bureau?
  • Mister who
    Mister who 7 June 2020 10: 39 New
    +1
    It's not gonna go. For platforms Armata still ride, for airplanes not. Loss of inertia of the rocket at the start and loss of time to turn, plus additional fuel consumption to set the initial inertia. For valves you need to implement such a scheme! And do not forget to add a couple of drones.
  • Mister who
    Mister who 7 June 2020 11: 14 New
    0
    On the other hand, if the enemy is chasing the plane, you can change the suspension system to rotate - then you can shoot the rocket back, then the radar will have to be put back, somehow expensive. It’s easier to cover fighters with a bomb from the stratosphere) I wonder if the enemy knows how to hit rockets into space from planes?
  • Goshan
    Goshan 7 June 2020 12: 17 New
    0
    When flying in supersonic air, the incoming air flow will not hurt?
  • viktor_ui
    viktor_ui 7 June 2020 16: 52 New
    0
    but nothing that Poseidon has a mortar launch of buoys as cassettes on the belly there Some kind of nonsense, not a patent. I can confuse with Orion
  • Alexey G
    Alexey G 7 June 2020 17: 41 New
    0
    Missiles inside are not visible to the enemy locator!
  • Ros 56
    Ros 56 7 June 2020 18: 14 New
    0
    And how will performance compare with the cost and preparation of this device for work?
  • Vladimir750
    Vladimir750 7 June 2020 20: 10 New
    0
    And what will happen to the plane at the moment of launch? The "support" for the mortar launch will turn over in the air.
  • boriz
    boriz 7 June 2020 20: 57 New
    0
    As I understand it, this is for launching ICBMs in IL-76 aircraft. After a little refinement.
  • DDT
    DDT 7 June 2020 23: 20 New
    0
    Well, let's say the IL-76. With "mines", pneumatic spit and a rocket soars from the airplane body. To bump into the horizontal? Well, let's say it didn't crash, flies out at a speed of 50-70m / s, it should be enough for an estimate to avoid collision with the horizontal one. Let's say it didn't break in half due to overloads ... how will it unfold along the course? Moreover, probably not a problem to do, the problem is how to use it? Not only will the fuselage have to be strengthened very well, and this is weight, it is also necessary for the rocket to fly in the right direction, there energy will be lost from the oncoming stream. Plus wasted seconds for rocket ejection, rocket turn and engine start. Moreover, in terms of size, the plane will not be able to take anything serious
  • sleeve
    sleeve 8 June 2020 04: 58 New
    -1
    Isn't that a fake? Just some kind of nonsense. What is all this for? Shooting from the ground?
  • bang
    bang 9 June 2020 11: 47 New
    0
    Interesting. And what, the pursued fighter makes a "cobra" and hits the pursuer with direct fire missiles.
  • Kuz
    Kuz 14 June 2020 08: 53 New
    -1
    Will it work?