On Occasion Stupid People Do Not Triumph

[ThomasP]

 

[MIflyer]

This is part of a larger discussion. Do we need $100M stealth fighters to intercept an airliner with a drunk on board? And do we think a Predator will last 5 min in an environment where the Other Side has at least the capabilities of a P-43? Will we be using the B-21 for CAS? I saw two B-2's that looked like that is what they were practicing. A Hi-Lo mix of aircraft is the obvious solution. In WWII Ascension Island was defended by P-39's, for obvious reasons. In Iraq they have been shooting Hellfires from Cessna Caravans and were hanging out the door of OH-58's firing M-4's because they were out of missiles.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Thanks for the reference to the agreement. I know the Air Force is considered responsible for most fixed wing aircraft, but I do not know how responsibility for the OV-1 Mohawk and OV-10 Bronco worked out in the end. I know (I think ) that during the Vietnam War and for some time after the 2 platforms were the responsibility of the Army. I think the Army was looking to operate the A-10 under a similar reasoning - they even suggested changing the designation to OA-10.

I am not familiar with what combat capable fixed wing aircraft the Army currently operates - are there any?

AFAIK, the only fixed wing aircraft the US Army was operating in a large fleet capacity were C-12s. The Army operated other types for ELINT purposes but these were in small numbers. I actually worked on one of these programs many years ago.

 

[Admiral Beez]

I've seen no evidence, at least in official channels that the Army currently wants or needs the A-10 to stick around. If anything could see some folks wanting to get their hands on the money allocated for this modification.

Everyone likes a big gun. It's why we're all nostalgic for battleships and why there was a push to keep the Iowas In service into the 1990s and beyond.

 

[J_P_C]

Agree 100%

I see CAS in the same light as some hold on to VR air to air combat. Between aircraft like the F-35, UAVs and advanced weapons integration, folks have to look at CAS in a different light.

well drones seems to be answer here, assumption is must grow up in payload and speed capabilities, for sure it will not be relatively cheap machines as most of UAVs right now...

 

[GreenKnight121]

Thanks for the reference to the agreement. I know the Air Force is considered responsible for most fixed wing aircraft, but I do not know how responsibility for the OV-1 Mohawk and OV-10 Bronco worked out in the end. I know (I think ) that during the Vietnam War and for some time after the 2 platforms were the responsibility of the Army. I think the Army was looking to operate the A-10 under a similar reasoning - they even suggested changing the designation to OA-10.

I am not familiar with what combat capable fixed wing aircraft the Army currently operates - are there any?

The US Army continued to operate the OV-1 Mohawk in "liaison" and "Forward Air Controller" roles... the latter actually did include direct attack on some targets, mostly via rockets. A number of recon & ELINT variants were produced, and the US Army stopped arming them around 1968 (this had continued in Vietnam in technical violation of the 1965 agreement).

The Army retired the OV-1s in 1996 without direct replacement - its missions were assigned to various drones, the USAF's B707-based E-8 JSTARS, and the Army's DHC Dash-7-based EO-5C (ARL-M, currently being replaced by the Dash-8 based EO-5D ARL-E).

As the Army is NOT supposed to operate any armed combat-capable fixed-wing aircraft, they do not currently operate any such aircraft (officially, at least).


The OV-10 was a USAF & USMC aircraft (with the USN operating a few)... the Marines were originally partners with the Army on the OV-1 (from inception in June 1956 to September 1957) but withdrew due to "excessive complexity and unnecessary sophistication". In 1963 the Marines and USAF (with approval from the Army & Navy) issued a specification for a Light Armed Reconnaissance Aircraft (LARA). NAA's OV-10 design (NAA-300) won in 1965 over Convair's Model 48 Charger (9 other entries had been rejected at the paper proposal phase, and Convair had built the Charger demonstrator with its own funds after the NAA 300 had been selected).

The Army never had any intention of buying the OV-10 (as it would have meant giving up their OV-1s), but the USMC and the USAF Special Operations used the OV-10 extensively for a multitude of missions... from gun-CAS (it could carry 4xM60s), light bombing/rocket attack, supply (it had a rear cargo bay with a removable tail-cone, paradrops (it could carry 5 equipped paratroops), Medevac (1 attendant & 2 stretcher patients in the cargo bay)... and so on. The FLIR-equipped OV-10D variant was very useful for night missions.

 

[ThomasP]

Hey GreenKnight121,

Thanks for the info.

 

[vikingBerserker]

My padre flew the OV-1 Mohawk during the Gulf War. He absolutely loved that aircraft.

 

[ThomasP]

A friend of mine flew them in Vietnam. I remember him saying that he loved the way it handled, like a low power sportscar.