Isn’t this an ADU-552? its bolted to the sides of pylons doesn’t look like its been fit to MAU-12 to me?
No MAU-12 ERU to be seen?
No MAU-12 ERU to be seen?
You did not read the rest of the post.
it’s a variant.
Can you provide a citation?
Just be clear your claim is F-16’s can carry a LAU-129 rail fit with an ADU-552/A on a TERMA PIDS pylon fit with a MAU-12 ERU?
1 Like
First I want to correct a mistake ADU-552/A looks identical, but it’s the incorrect variant for the WWP MAU-12 & ultimately the PIDS+.
The correct adapter is ADU-706. It features an internal wiring harness that passes high-speed digital data and power from the Lockheed Wing Weapon Pylon directly to the LAU-129
To answer your question.
YES. They pylon is capable of providing EW capability & swapping out munition types.
Air forces don’t want “dedicated” pylons for every station because it limits what the plane can do.
This is critical to Multi-Role Versatility (Swing Role) capability.
It’s kind of idiotic idea that in order to use missiles a crew must switch out the entire pylon losing your advanced EW capability that is now integrated with the RWR, even your HMD (PIDS+ Belgian Defense Configuration) when you already have full MIL-STD-1760 data bus capability…
By keeping the MAU-12 inside the pylon, the aircraft stays “universal.” That is the entire point of the system.
On Monday, it can carry a 2,000lb JDAM using the MAU-12 hooks. On Tuesday, the crew can clutter the pylon by simply adding the adapter and the LAU-129 rail to carry an AIM-120.
As we established MAU-12 is designed to hold lugs (loops) on a bomb. A missile rail like the LAU-129 is designed to be bolted to a surface.
To bridge this gap, the ADU-706 adapter has “fake” lugs on top that click into the MAU-12 hooks. The bottom of that adapter has the bolt holes for the rail. The adapter is “plugged in” tightly to the MAU-12 that they function as a single unit.
Terma’s own technical documentation states that their smart pylons are "based on the Lockheed Martin Wing Weapon Pylon (WWP).
The MAU-12 Ejector Release Unit (ERU) remains the internal core of the PIDS+.
Because the PIDS+ uses the standard MAU-12 mounting points, it can accept the ADU-706 adapter just like a standard pylon.
This was intentional by design so it can remain universal without forcing a customer to buy a 5 different PIDS+ to fill each mission role. Only Gaijin would do something like that haha.
In T.O. 1F-16C-33-1-2 series, which covers non-nuclear munitions loading in it ADU-706 is discussed.
Marvin Engineering catalog ADU-706 P/N 852AS100
Can you post relevant excerpts from the sources
Come on man an ass AI answer. And its not even convincing its all relying on the previous inferences you’ve given it.
Its easy provide me information on ADU-706 (specification sheets from the manufacturer etc), photos of ADU-706 mounted to a MAU-12 or similar ERU. Or the whole package together, LAU-129 > ADU-706 > MAU-12.
I can see what’s happened, we started having a conversion, you started with your view, and slowly mine and @da12thmonkey’s comments have knocked out the pillars of your argument, so fearing you might have to concede literally anything, you thrown a bunch of PDF’s at an AI chat bot with your argument and copy pasted its response.
1 Like
Wtf was Ai about it? I spent an hour typing that going back and forward even reconfirming several times. God forbid anyone makes sure what they say is properly worded and looked into while the do several other things midday.
Surely you can provide the excerpts from your sources that corroborates your claims then.
Surely it’s not ai hallucinations
knocked out pillars of my argument?? fearing to concede??
Haha first of all, its not that serious lol. Not everyone lives on a video game forum & feels threatened like their home has been intruded when questioned.
I was told its not capable as matter of fact. But you guys do not actually know. Yes or No?
Why is you feel the need to swoop in like batman every time a person with a UK profile icon is in a discussion? Definitely a pattern here.
I was in London November, place reminds me of Vegas. Will you start swooping in for me?
it was your same general argument repackaged with this;
as your citation, where are the relevant sections of those materials that back up your argument. What does a ADU-706 even look like?
Marvin Engineering also tried to engineer the LAU-128SE as darth mentioned;
A product purpose built to fix this problem, but if ADU-706 exists and is for this purpose then lets see it?
1 Like
First off, thats not fair, @Morvran is in every thread and any he isn’t is he soon will be. You just need to say the word BOL and he will be here.
Secondly, I’d like to find evidence there is a way to get missile rails on the PIDS+ pylons to make them more useful. Loads of players want to see this.
6 Likes
Hold on here, who is arguing? I found where you guys can find some references yourselves. I given you a lead, do what you want with it.
Why should I provide anything? So that it ultimately sits in queue? Like the maverick?
it looks like ADU-552/A, but different.
Its not the only way to make them useful.
Have you looked into the helmet sight capability that PIDS+ (BD configuration only) offers that visually marks threats as well as even gunfire?
It was rudimentarily modelled in the TWS at release, but was a OP as it detected heading, velocity and range data at max range as the radar. Real world, its a passive optical system and cannot measure these elements direct. It should only detect the object and measures range over time.
A full track file cannot be determined with optical sensors in reality, and the information oversaturated the player as you can see. Simple detection markers without track file information with set detection range when the pylons are equipped would be best instead of only when tws is selected.
PIDS+ offers 360 degree protection, its not in-game either at all. Player uses one pylon, they should get half the coverage.
It was removed and made a comeback, even added to the F-15E pod, but only difference was that detected targets disappeared after a certain time limit has expired and was not updated via tws. They since removed it a second time.
Because otherwise there’s no proof and you’re probably talking out of the side of yer mouth
nothing new isnt it
as seen in the Mig-29 thread
2 Likes
Did you say BOL?
4 Likes
Its a video game forum, not a trial.
Look, I like you Kiz. I must admit. You are actually reasonable and do weigh the evidence presented. I have seen that in your other discussions.
When you ask for additional evidence, I will make an effort to provide.
I apologize for coming off the rail regarding the use of an old manual and the logic that it should somehow apply to every MiG-29 ever. I know that it’s not a narrative you devised and continue to circulate on the forum intentionally.
I took that frustration out on you and again, I apologize.
To start off on a clean slate, stand-by. I will work on this in detail.
F-16s with PIDSs are also missing the triple rack rocket pods as an option.
Though I was looking for triple Maverick evidence before reporting that.