The SVP 24 isn't that high tech it's fairly good and cheap and articles in past have mentioned that the system can be put on any type of aircraft including helicopters.
It is cheap, but it is also quite sophisticated and clever... and is connected to the navigation and bombing systems on the aircraft to improve precision from an aircraft operating at altitude and at speed... it essentially predicts precisely the ballistic path of very different types of weapons to reduce the spread of impacts on the ground to the closest it could be to the aim point.
For a helicopter they generally don't fly at very high altitude and their forward speed can be reduced to make bombing rather accurate without a computerised calculation system.
No point in designing a new system when u have a tried and tested fit for purpose system already. It would allow more accuracy, and at safer distance/altitude.
Most helicopters have an operational ceiling limit with a payload of bombs that normally isn't a lot higher than 2-3km up, in fact most would be limited to that sort of height in terms of their hover ceiling, which as you would appreciate would make them easy targets for MANPADS, but rather difficult targets for small arms.
Myself and garryb in past talked about such a system on An-12 or IL-76 and turning them into a flying bomb truck, flying high, and dropping loads of dumb bombs out the back of the cargo bay doors on enemy positions. This would be a bolt on system as and when needed, and u just roll on bombs in a pallet type system.
Any system would need to have a system controlled bomb release capacity for specific bomb types as each different type would have a different ballistic performance and if you didn't compensate with different release times then they could go anywhere.
Tu-134 was an airliner not a cargo plane.
The version he is describing is a training aircraft with the nose mounted radar of the Tu-160 fitted to it that was used as a cheap training aircraft for White Swan crews.
In that sense it would be interesting as a cheap precision bomber, but I was thinking the idea was a more adhoc arrangement where you had modular systems for the transport plane... in this case the Il-476, which could have fuel tanks in the rear for inflight refuelling roles, or those tanks and pipes could be removed and replaced with a water tankage system for fire fighting, or an internal frame installed for carrying troops in large numbers in several layers/levels, or in this case an automated frame holding bombs, which could extend out the back of the aircraft in flight and release bombs out the rear of the aircraft.
The idea is that you can use standard transport planes for a variety of roles... troop transport, fire fighting, inflight refuelling, cargo transport obviously, but also high altitude bombing... either lots of bombs on one target or long endurance with fewer bombs and extra fuel to allow it to stay on station for very long periods... perhaps with two engines shut down.
The difference of course is that it will be flying at safe altitudes from MANPADS and ground fire and it can hover over the target area to simplify the bomb impact trajectories so it needs a Gefest & T system for accuracy.
Even just for domestic use if it is cheap enough and accurate enough sometimes it might be cheaper to send a transport plane than a bomber.
As an example in Syria a cargo plane arrives in Syria with cargo but if it needs to go back to Russia to collect more cargo it might be going empty... in which case you could mount some bombing equipment and take out a few targets on its way to Russia... or it might be going to Syria to bring cargo back so it could carry bombs and as it flys over Syria any target presents itself can be bombed, and if not it has just delivered 20-30 tons of bombs for the airfield...