moo From Falkland Islands, joined May 2007, 3615 posts, RR: 4 Posted (11 months 5 days ago) and read 6552 times:
The AIM-120 can be carried and fired in a fair few ways, ranging from rails, from a aircraft body station such as on the F-18, from attachment points on the F-15, direct from a pylon on the Sea Harrier (when carried under the body), or from internal bays on the F-22 and F-35.
The majority of these methods do not require rails - but do the other methods incur a performance penalty in not using rails?
moo From Falkland Islands, joined May 2007, 3615 posts, RR: 4 Reply 2, posted (11 months 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 6506 times:
Quoting BigJKU (Reply 1): If they do it would be fairly minor. The biggest impact on performance is going to be launch altitude, speed and angle to target.
So why carry rails at all then? Just hang the missiles off the pylons and be done with it...
spudh From Ireland, joined Jul 2009, 279 posts, RR: 1 Reply 3, posted (11 months 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 6471 times:
I'd assume its down to the pylons being universal carriers requiring the rails as interface for the AIM-120. Most of the other methods such as conformal and internal are dedicated to the AIM-120 (or Sparrow before it)
Confuscius From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 3652 posts, RR: 2 Reply 4, posted (10 months 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 5769 times:
Don't forget the "FOX THREE" radio call for an active radar-guided missile launch.
BigJKU From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 728 posts, RR: 11 Reply 6, posted (10 months 4 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 5562 times:
Rails are generally attached to pylons. A pylon can often carry two (or more) rails. Rails are essentially the adapters off of which you can fire AAM's. I don't know enough about the Sea Harrier to speak on it but I would guess that attached to each attachment point (pylon or body) was some sort of rail or ejector devices (AMRAAM can be launched either way).