Apart from JDAMs having completely different methods of suspension and ejection from AIM-120 launchers.
Mounting an air-to-air missile launcher on a bomb release pylon requires an adapter, and none of those are certified for carriage on F-16.
1 Like
They are MIL-STD-1760 certified. Where did you articulate they are bomb pylons? War Thunder?
The aim-120 rails require MIL-STD-1760 compatibility. Adapter, umbilical everything.
The PIDS+ is literally designed to integrate EW capability in the pylon without taking up a store with a countermeasure pod reducing armament space. Which was a issue in the past.
It defeats the ENTIRE purpose of the system with your brilliant logic.
1 Like
The thing is we never saw single PIDS pylon that was carrying any sort of A2A missiles, so it raises a question whether its capable or requires different modification?
MIL-STD-1760 is an electrical connection type like MIL-STD-1553, it isn’t a certification for carriage.
1 Like
I understand that. But the pylon is based on the Lockheed Martin’s weapon wing, pylon. They are capable of air to air missiles. Including missiles that require advanced electronic interface such as the aim-120
I thought the same thing when I first saw it but lacking concrete evidence caused me to drop this case eventually.
Until we see A2A missiles mounted on PIDS pylons Gaijin will not accept and change it.
Lockheed Martin Wing Weapon Pylon is the structural backbone of the F-16’s external wings (Stations 3, 4, 6, and 7).
They are MIL-STD-1760 Integrated
Modern versions of these pylons are fully MIL-STD-1760 compliant. This allows the F-16 to carry and communicate with “smart” weapons like the AIM-120 AMRAAM, JDAM, and AGM-158 JASSM.
It isn’t just a mount; it contains the firing circuits, fuel lines (for stations that support drop tanks), and the 1553 data bus architecture.
The PIDS+ is fully compliant and based off the WWP from Lockheed Martin. It is entirely capable of being equipped with LAU-129.
1 Like
This is the core of the issue really, the ERU’s fit to TERMA offerings don’t match the mountings required for LAU-127, 128, 129 rails used on F-16, nor do they ever directly claim air to air weapons capability, nor has one to my knowledge ever been seen with MRL’s fit to them.
This as close as it gets;
But the MRL used by F-16 doesn’t have the same mountings as A2G stores;
So without one seeing an adapter made for this purpose they are physically incompatible without it.
2 Likes
You can literally find missile pylons on those adapters. If I am not mistaken in the game lol
Yeah that’s more of an issue of the incorrect pylon/ERU combo’s being used rather than any implicit admission that its possible to tape together a LAU-127, 128, 129 rail with a bomb dispensing ERU.
Quite alot of aircraft such as the F-15’s are mounting AIM-120’s on LAU-7’s rather that swapping them out for MRL/MFRL/CRL type rails.
There are a few issues like this in game we have reports for.
1 Like
ok, so the WWP by Lockheed can utilize all munition types, The PIDS+ is designed specifically on it and is contracted with Lockheed Martin because of it.
GJ allows them to carry Mavericks on the WWP, but not the PIDS+?
The LAU-117 is designed to connect to the exact kind of ERU used in TERMA’s offerings (note the outer pins and the flat mounts on the LAU-117 mimicking a bomb surface area);
1 Like
I know… So why is it not allowed in the game…
It’s been reported, and that’s about it. Not much else that can be done about it further I think.
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/DVJcVehVcvaM
1 Like
Maverick on PIDS? Report just hasn’t been actioned yet. But there is atleast photo evidence of LAU-117 + Maverick on a TERMA PIDS solution;
We don’t have the same evidence for air to air missile rails.
He’s time traveler.
So are you saying you want a picture of the adapter?
For the WWP on heavy inboard stations (3, 4, 6, and 7), the ADU-552 is used.
The ADU-552 bolts into the MAU-12 rack just like a bomb would. The LAU-129 then bolts onto the bottom of the ADU.
AIM-120s aren’t carried on the WWPs. They have their own pylons that replace WWP
Primarily because the F-16’s AAM launchers are meant to be universal to fit either the wingtips or under-wing stations.
3 Likes
The correction is they are capable, not typically carried.
So this a matter of obtaining the adapter for the LAU-129. As you see here the AAM rails are mounted to WWP.
Yes, with the Fraser-Nash (Cobham) Common Rail Launcher (CRL) Japan bought from the UK to equip F-2A. A launcher that isn’t used by any F-16 operator and as such isn’t cleared on F-16 -they all use LAU-129.
Gunjob and I are very familiar with CRL since it was the launcher designed by the UK to put AMRAAM on Sea Harrier, and there it likewise required an adapter to mount it on a bomb release rack
CRL on Harrier
https://forum-en-cdn.warthunder.com/original/3X/0/f/0f8b90af2ed4f2505e6993f994baa09063cd9005.jpeg
https://forum-en-cdn.warthunder.com/original/3X/2/b/2b5c7551af322bd78cd1edbdd351249106cede8d.jpeg
An adapter which again, isn’t cleared on F-16.
The version of CRL used by Japan is fitted with bale lugs to interface with a bomb ejector
CRL on F-2A
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f1/JASDF_F-2A(13-8514)_600gal_drop_tank_at_Gifu_Air_Base_October_30%2C_2016.jpg
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7d/JASDF_F-2A(13-8514)_common_rail_launcher(sta.2)_at_Gifu_Air_Base_October_30%2C_2016.jpg
Which isn’t something LAU-127/128/129 currently do. Although Marvin Engineering, who make the LAU-127/128/129 have proposed similar modifications to make LAU-128SE
https://ndia.dtic.mil/wp-content/uploads/2022/future/Tues_EGE_24762_Ross.pdf#page=17
but it’s still just a concept at the moment and isn’t in service anywhere
Other launchers designed to fit on bomb ejectors include the MFRL used by Eurofighter
https://acma.aero/what-we-do/
But again, that’s not used on F-16
1 Like