fixed wrong launcher rails for Aim-9s and Aim-120's

[berk.kp]

As far as I know, Aim-9 missiles are not supposed to be suspended under LAU-127 rails, not sure though about Aim-120's.

 

[Tholozor]

The 127 is capable of mounting Sidewinders.

 

https://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/equip/lau-127.htm

https://www.militaryaerospace.com/articles/2015/03/marvin-missile-launchers.html

Edited August 16, 2018 by Tholozor

[AvroLanc]

The 127 is capable of mounting Sidewinders.

 

https://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/equip/lau-127.htm

https://www.militaryaerospace.com/articles/2015/03/marvin-missile-launchers.html

 

It is, but the OP image from in game is of a Lau-115. The dual mount has 2 lau-127s mounted on the sides of a lau-115 which is correct.

 

However, never seen an amraam or sidewinder mounted directly to the -115 , it looks odd. Needs some attention.

[NineLine]

Hey guys, this is fixed internally already, thanks for the report!

[berk.kp]

Thanks for the quick attention, DCS-Team!

[CHSStarKiller]

Yes, AIM-9's, and AIM-120's cannot be loaded on LAU-115C/A's and "MUST" be loaded on LAU-127's. Only exception to this are the Rhino's which can have the BRU-32's removed and a block installed to bolt a 127 directly to it giving it the appearance of being loaded somewhat to what's shown above. Just as an FYI, I'm a prior Navy Ordie, so I most def know :D

[randomTOTEN]

probably as good a thread as any to ask.. I can find no pictures online of single AIM-120's loaded on a C model F/A-18. There are pictures of this loadout on the E/F versions. Can AIM-120's be attached directly to the LAU-115, and then hung from the wing stations?

[Nealius]

Single Sidewinders fused into pylon

 

Single AIM-9M or AIM-9X on the outboard wing stations are fused into the pylons. Have not tested inboard stations or AIM-9L. Pictures attached.

[StandingCow]

Think it would be due to this, the launcher rails are wrong: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=218271

[SkateZilla]

For SUU-63/A:

AIM-7's Are mounted to the LAU-115 Directly, in Single Configuration Only

AIM-9 / AIM-120 are Mounted to LAU-127 Via LAU-115C, in Dual Configuration Only

 

There is no Single AIM-9 Configuration for the SUU-63/A on the Legacy Hornets.

 

SUU-63/A Does Not Support LAU-127x/A Directly Attached

That was added to SUU-80A/A on the Super Hornets, Even SUU-79A/A Doesnt Utilize LAU-127E/A Directly Attached.

[Nealius]

Message has been deleted. Reason: Use wishlist sub

 

Not a wishlist item. I am asking about functionality when this bug is fixed which is directly relevant to this topic. Will it be possible to add single Sidwinders/AMRAAMs to the inboard and outboard wing pylons when this bug is fixed?

[SkateZilla]

Not a wishlist item. I am asking about functionality when this bug is fixed which is directly relevant to this topic. Will it be possible to add single Sidwinders/AMRAAMs to the inboard and outboard wing pylons when this bug is fixed?

 

Legacy Hornet did not mount LAU127 directly to the SUU for Single AIM9/120 Per Pylon Loadout.

[Banzaiib]

edit: meh, ignore this

 

<3

[backspace340]

Hi Skate! Did you have some time to see this post? :)

 

And yes, the 120 can be loaded on the fuselage stores IRL - there are lots of pictures of it:

 

[backspace340]

Fuselage stations use LAU-116s: https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/systems/lau-116.htm

[berk.kp]

incorrect launcher rails for AIM-9 and AIM-120

 

As far as I know, the AIM-9 should not be attached with two rails on the pylon. Also I think the AIM-120 should be attached a different rail, more similar to that of the AIM-9.

 

[Tholozor]

Yea, it had been marked as fixed internally in your previous thread: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=218271 but I guess it never made it in?

 

Funny we should meet again like this :megalol:

[randomTOTEN]

Any update on fixing these unapproved mountings? Thx.

[Ipergallo]

So, let me know, if a fan boy comes in this forum and say there isn't a single rail LAU-127 mounted on F/A-18C, ED team change our module for make happy this guy? Actually there are LAU-127 single rail everywhere on earth that mount single aim-120 on almost every fighter that use AIM-120, so what?

 

Quote

Legacy Hornet did not mount LAU127 directly to the SUU for Single AIM9/120 Per Pylon Loadout.

 

Where are, exactly, the evidences for this? In photos or what? Please let me know where are evidences that an F/A-18C can't mount a single rail Lau-127.

 

F/A-18C historical operators:

 

US Navy

US Marines

Australia

Canada

Finland

Kuwait

Malaysia

Spain

Switzerland

 

So, you are about to say that no one of this operators never mounted an AIM-120 in a single rail? Please answer me with evidences, documents and so on. There isn't any logic in saying that an F-18C doesn't mount a single rail for an aim-120.

[Swift.]

1 hour ago, Ipergallo said:

So, let me know, if a fan boy comes in this forum and say there isn't a single rail LAU-127 mounted on F/A-18C, ED team change our module for make happy this guy? Actually there are LAU-127 single rail everywhere on earth that mount single aim-120 on almost every fighter that use AIM-120, so what?

 

 

Where are, exactly, the evidences for this? In photos or what? Please let me know where are evidences that an F/A-18C can't mount a single rail Lau-127.

 

F/A-18C historical operators:

 

US Navy

US Marines

Australia

Canada

Finland

Kuwait

Malaysia

Spain

Switzerland

 

So, you are about to say that no one of this operators never mounted an AIM-120 in a single rail? Please answer me with evidences, documents and so on. There isn't any logic in saying that an F-18C doesn't mount a single rail for an aim-120.

Switzerland did, because they have a special pylon on station 2/8 which allows direct mounting a lau127. Similar to Superhornets outer pylons.

 

For the rest, for this we must look into the performance charts NATOPS flight manual, NFM-210. This manual lists a whole bunch of performance charts for various flight performance metrics. But more interestingly it has a list of stores that the hornet can carry along with their associated drag indices and weights.

 

So, we turn to this manual and search for the entries about LAU-127. What we find is that LAU-127's drag index is only listed when mounted on 'Rack' LAU-115, which is how it mounts in DCS. Following this, we search for AIM-120 and its associated drags. With this we find the following:

AIM-7 LAU-115C/A
AIM-9 on LAU-115C/A & -127

AIM-120 on LAU-115C/A & -127

AGM-65 Maverick on LAU-117

 

So what does this tell us? Carrying an AIM-120 on a single LAU-127 direct mounted onto the pylon is not a configuration that was tested/computed, where every other minute stores and configuration was.

 

From this it become apparent that single LAU-127 must not have been possible. To the same extent, I challenge you to find an image of such a loadout on a hornet that isn't Swiss for reasons above.

[Tholozor]

To add onto @Swiftwin9s post, I believe the same information is in the TAC-300 manual as well.

[Shimmergloom667]

3 hours ago, Ipergallo said:

 

So, you are about to say that no one of this operators never mounted an AIM-120 in a single rail? Please answer me with evidences, documents and so on. There isn't any logic in saying that an F-18C doesn't mount a single rail for an aim-120.

 

You know that the burden of proof is on the person who states a claim about a certain thing being present, right? So you would have to deliver a proof about USN / USMC Hornets mounting LAU-127s directly on the wing, despite all available information showing it's mounted 115+127. We're waiting.

Edited April 25, 2021 by Shimmergloom667

[Ipergallo]

Ok, so next one is an APG-79 upgrade for all hornets? Actually USMC operates F18C with APG-79 upgrade. Is this the real or not?

 

Swiss pylons have nothing of a special pylon, NATOPS are not the only reference for an F-18C. Next time in description of module please write: US Navy model of this year without any upgrade.

 

Quote

I challenge you to find an image of such a loadout on a hornet that isn't Swiss for reasons above.

 

It's exactly what I say, evidences or documentation is only a photo or an old/new Natops manual that change almost every year, supposed to be the 2008 version that you can find easily on the net, but you can find evidences that It changes often.

 

So no photo, no party. And is this the reason for we don't have yet a dual rack for GBU-32?

 

Nevermind, I give up.

[Tholozor]

APG-79 didn't even enter testing until 2006, and even then it was for E/F Super Hornets and Growlers at the time.

 

There absolutely is a different outboard pylon on Swiss Hornets, it looks just like the outboard pylon on a Super Hornet. Normal legacy Hornets use the SUU-63 suspension pylon with the BRU-32 mounted to it, which this is not, look at this and compare it to a regular Hornet pylon.

https://m.imgur.com/jIbAVwB?r

 

Also, FYI, ED did state early in development that the module was going to be a USN/USMC Hornet circa 2005.

Edited April 25, 2021 by Tholozor

[Shimmergloom667]

24 minutes ago, Ipergallo said:

Ok, so next one is an APG-79 upgrade for all hornets? Actually USMC operates F18C with APG-79 upgrade. Is this the real or not?

 

Swiss pylons have nothing of a special pylon, NATOPS are not the only reference for an F-18C. Next time in description of module please write: US Navy model of this year without any upgrade.

 

 

It's exactly what I say, evidences or documentation is only a photo or an old/new Natops manual that change almost every year, supposed to be the 2008 version that you can find easily on the net, but you can find evidences that It changes often.

 

So no photo, no party. And is this the reason for we don't have yet a dual rack for GBU-32?

 

Nevermind, I give up.

 

No USMC Hornet of the timeframe modeled (ca. 2005) used an APG-79.

 

If you don't have pictures or documentation of a ca. 2005 USN/USMC Hornet with 127 directly on the wing, then there's no basis to argue a ca. 2005 USN/USMC Hornet should be able to be such equipped.

 

So, yeah - no proof (yeah, e.g. a picture), no party. Good stuff.

 

 

Edited April 25, 2021 by Shimmergloom667