Newbie questions Rail / Ejector launchers

"AL" wrote in message ...
Hi,
Here is a newbie question.

What are the merits and the pitfalls of rail vs ejector launchers
for guided missiles? I suppose bombs have to be ejector launched and
rockets rail.

Whenever I visit an airshow, I ended up scratching my head.


A general rule for missiles might be:
Ejector racks next/on the fuselage
Rails away from the fuselage. underwing and wingtip.

Ejector racks kick the missile out from the fuselage to get out of the
airflow, to clear other protuberances (other missiles, etc) and also to
limit the burn effects from the missile motor.

Consider if the F-4/Sparrow were on rails. The front missile can't launch
without burning the aft missile, and the aft missile can't launch because
the front missile is in the way.
(Not counting the fact that two of the fins are recessed into the fuselage,
and the missile body itself is in a slight recess)

Pete

Consider if the F-4/Sparrow were on rails. The front missile can't launch
without burning the aft missile, and the aft missile can't launch because
the front missile is in the way.
(Not counting the fact that two of the fins are recessed into the
fuselage,
and the missile body itself is in a slight recess)

Originally the plan was to use rails that swing down... the front missiles
were on a trapeze system, and the aft ones were on arms that swung down from
an inboard hinge (parallel to roll axis). That got scrapped halfway through
the design process.

F102 had rails for missiles and tubes for rockets. 3 each RX tubes
were in each of the center four doors. MX rails were pneumatically
extended and retracted. The firing cycle was thus: Doors snapped open,
rear (3) rails extended, 3 missiles fired, front rails snapped down as
rears retracted, front 3 missiles fired, front rails came up, doors
snapped closed - all in 3 seconds flat. Everybody was extremely
respectful of extended doors on the ground especially with HP
pneumatic (3000PSI) system charged. Special clamps held doors extended
when working around the Deuce in this condition.
Walt BJ

"WaltBJ" wrote in message
om...
F102 had rails for missiles and tubes for rockets. 3 each RX tubes
were in each of the center four doors. MX rails were pneumatically
extended and retracted. The firing cycle was thus: Doors snapped open,
rear (3) rails extended, 3 missiles fired, front rails snapped down as
rears retracted, front 3 missiles fired, front rails came up, doors
snapped closed - all in 3 seconds flat. Everybody was extremely
respectful of extended doors on the ground especially with HP
pneumatic (3000PSI) system charged. Special clamps held doors extended
when working around the Deuce in this condition.
Walt BJ

Right. Rails for missiles held internally. Same as the -106.

IIRC, a guy at Loring lost part of his arm putting the downlocks on a bird
coming back from an alert mission. You had to put the locks on prior to
shutdown, and with the doors open. Fault in the system caused a door-close
just as he was putting on one of the locks.

There is no possible way to move fast enough to avoid the doors snapping
shut.

Pete

Pete wrote:

"AL" wrote in message ...


Hi,


Here is a newbie question.

What are the merits and the pitfalls of rail vs ejector launchers
for guided missiles? I suppose bombs have to be ejector launched and
rockets rail.

Whenever I visit an airshow, I ended up scratching my head.



A general rule for missiles might be:
Ejector racks next/on the fuselage
Rails away from the fuselage. underwing and wingtip.

Ejector racks kick the missile out from the fuselage to get out of the
airflow, to clear other protuberances (other missiles, etc) and also to
limit the burn effects from the missile motor.

Consider if the F-4/Sparrow were on rails. The front missile can't launch
without burning the aft missile, and the aft missile can't launch because
the front missile is in the way.
(Not counting the fact that two of the fins are recessed into the fuselage,
and the missile body itself is in a slight recess)

Pete




So a AIM-9 when mounted on the fuselage willl be ejector launched or are
they limited by design?

--
AL
New anti-terrorism tool, "Fly naked"
http://www.alfredivy.per.sg

So a AIM-9 when mounted on the fuselage willl be ejector launched or are
they limited by design?

All AIM-9's are rail launched. Fuselage mounting of one would require a
short pylon and a rail attached to it.

"Bob Martin" wrote in message
...
So a AIM-9 when mounted on the fuselage willl be ejector launched or are
they limited by design?

All AIM-9's are rail launched. Fuselage mounting of one would require a
short pylon and a rail attached to it.

A-7
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/a-7-dvic154.jpg

Pete

"Pete" wrote in message
...

"Bob Martin" wrote in message
...
So a AIM-9 when mounted on the fuselage willl be ejector launched or
are
they limited by design?

All AIM-9's are rail launched. Fuselage mounting of one would require a
short pylon and a rail attached to it.

A-7
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/a-7-dvic154.jpg

Looks like it fits the discription well, doesn't it.

"Pete" wrote


A general rule for missiles might be:
Ejector racks next/on the fuselage
Rails away from the fuselage. underwing and wingtip.

And of course, to any "general rule", there is an exception.

A-7
Little pylons w/ rails, mounted to the fuselage.
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/a-7-dvic154.jpg

Pete

On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 04:00:33 GMT, "Pete" wrote:


"Pete" wrote


A general rule for missiles might be:
Ejector racks next/on the fuselage
Rails away from the fuselage. underwing and wingtip.

And of course, to any "general rule", there is an exception.

A-7
Little pylons w/ rails, mounted to the fuselage.
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/a-7-dvic154.jpg

Pete

As with the F-8 and F-104

Al Minyard