Difference between wing tip lauchers

Could some one please show me the differences in the two types of wing tip launchers and to what Blocks would carry what?

Be glad to....

The launcher the technician is working on is the 16S210 missile launcher, also called the AIM-9 missile launcher. The launcher you see on the wingtip is the LAU-129 missile launcher.

The difference is the LAU-129 will carry both the AIM-9 missile, and the AIM-120 missile, to include AIM-9X. The 16S210 launcher, as the name implies, carries only the AIM-9 missile, not the AIM-9X.

Both launchers can support misc pods (ACMI, AMA, etc)

As for which aircraft carry the launcher, the 16S210 is carried by all blocks, the LAU-129 can be carried by OCU modified A model aircraft, and then all blocks of C/D aircraft.

Hope this helps.

Loader

Thanks !

Well, the lau-129 is the common launcher of the viper, but in the early blocks could be other launchers, for example, in the Venezuelan F-16, the launcher is other:

Or could be that is the launcher provided to a foreign sale program?

The lau-129 is for the Amraam and Sidewinder common launcher, but pre-amraam times, the launcher for the standard f16a to carry the AIM-9J/P/L cul be other???



The underwing and wingtip launcher is other, is the lau-7?

Another pics of this kind of launcher


A usaf F-16 with the same tipe of launcher:

note the difference between the wingtip aim120 launcher and underwing aim-9 launcher

Other pics of a usaf f-16 with lau129 launcher in sta 9 & 8


It is clear that the underwing launcher is the lau129... but is different that the other above

The "other" launchers you have shown in your photos are the 16S210 launcher, as stated above, used on all blocks/versions of the F-16, and yes, the 16S210 series missile launcher was the launcher used before the LAU-129 came out, however, the 16S210 is still used today by many countries. As stated above, the LAU-129 is AIM-9/AIM-120 and the 16S210 is just AIM-9.

Heck we still use them in the USAF, the S210 has the same RIU now as the LAU-129 so the guts are easy to get. I hated the S210 with the allen key detent release. It was not deep enough and would wear out pretty quickly. The newer ones have a simple 1/2 inch drive which is much better. I worked the S210 way back when it did not have lock pin for the fairing. Fairings came off all the time.

Erik, how many times have you had to duck or take the allen in the head when trying to retract the detent?!?! I had my glasses scraped one time, man I was glad I was wearing glasses or I might of had some eye injury!

Your right Erik, as I stated above, may countries (including US) still use the S210.

Any flutter gurus out there who can shed some light on the flutter differences between placing Lau129s at the wing tips as compared to 16S210?

LAU-129 İS bigger than the AIM 9 LAUNCHER.

ALE-50 towed decoy launcher was introduced from 1997 to the place between the rail (either AIM-9 only or Common Rail Launcher) and the wing. However, this does not affected the rails themselves.

Lajes

Guys, slightly off-topic, but I was wondering about this earlier. If you are integrating a heat seeker (probably not very complicated) do you also integrate the pylon it is fired from or is the missile adapted to be launched from differnt pylons? I know Pakistan's F-6s (now retired), F-7s and Mirage 3/5s have the ability to fire sidewinders. Any insight would be welcome.

NO changes are made to the weapons. The rail is made from the ground up to support the munitions to be loaded on it, unless of course you are bringing out a new weapon like the 9X, which is kinda like a mix of AMRAAM and older L/M and mounts on 129 rails which are daul rail lauchers. Daul Rail is misleading. It is really just one rail with two tracks, an inner and outer.

Choice between 129 or 210 is actually dependent on what type of mission is flown and whether turnaround time allows changing launchers when re-arming or changing configurations. Most ops logistics planners will try to minimize the amount of different AME suspension items during out of area operations.
Apart from that, in some load outs weight and balance management may force the choice to 210 due to their lower weight.

Nope, not quite, the drag index is the same for mission planning. The only reason to use a 210 is cause you don't have anymore 129s. The weight difference is there, sure, but 20lbs (approx) is nothing to the jet. Turn times are the same no matter which rail you are using, unless you want to load the Slammer and the jet had 210s on it. See my point, we don't send jets to war with 210s unless we have to.

I see the 'winder rail refered to as LAU-114....is that incorrect?