Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Does anyone have any solid information on the configuration and weapons load carried by the OV-10G+ in Iraq in 2015 during its operational trial there?

The on-line article below states that it carried the centre-line fuel tank and was armed with the APKWS missile, slaved to the MX-15HD FLIR unit (it might be an MX-15Di unit fitted instead). I guess that they flew with one 7-shot rocket pod on each outer-sponson station. Two 19-shot pods would have been overkill as they probably didn't come across that many targets each night. The only photo I have seen of the OV-10G+ armed show it with 7-shot pods and the photo probably comes from the State-side Combat Dragon tests. There is no mention of Hellfire or machine guns. It doesn't appear that the sponson guns were fitted. Also, the under-wing mounts are present in some photos and are removed in others and it appears that even for the ferry flights from the USA to Iraq, no wing-mounted fuel tanks were carried. A two-missile launch rail system for the Hellfire missile is available for fixed-wing ops but it doesn't appear the OV-10G+ flew with these either, as far as I can tell. Apparently most targets engaged were soft and were often strikes against individuals or small groups in buildings or soft-skinned vehicles.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/those-old-ov-10-broncos-204500085.html

It is incredible to think that the same airframe performed the (almost) identical mission profile in two different theatres of war, first in Viet Nam with the YOV-10D NOGS (1971?) and the OV-10G+ in 2015. That is a gap of 44 years! A Nam YOV-10D would make a nice model too. :thumbsup:

LD.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No info on what you've requested, Sorry. But I'm curious about converting existing OV-10D kit into the G+ configuration. New engines and props, plus what others?

-Jeff

Modern ASE gear, A very large FLIR display in aft cockpit and some new comm antennas.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think new

4-blade props,

FLIR turret,

FLIR cockpit display,

antennae,(plenty of them!)

RWRS and flares,

accurate depiction of rocket pods

are need to build an OV-10G Plus.

Not sure the engine nacelle shape has changed much, even with the new engines fitted. I think the exhaust pipes might needed to be added but that is it.

Anyone able to suggest a source for the four-blade propellers?

Is the 1/72 Academy OV-10D long enough in the nose area? Looks a tad short to me.

LD.

Link to post
Share on other sites

accurate depiction of rocket pods

Hey-

True enough. The rocket pods required to fire APKWS are 7-shot LAU-68F/A, which are longer than the legacy LAU-68 pods. The extra length is required to protect the APKWS delicate innards.

Phil

Link to post
Share on other sites

From the recent Wolfpak sheet (72-092) that covered those markings LINK

The 7.62mm guns were removed from the sponson and the centerline was typically seen fitted with an external tank. Wing pylons were not carried. The normal configuration for the missions was an FN Herstal RMP LC Rocket/Machine Gun pod on the starboard outer sponson and a Mongoose flare pod on the port outer sponson with LAU-68 rocket pods on the inner stations.

Mark, at Wolfpak, corresponded with somebody that was involved in the program who provided the info.

Regards,

Murph

Link to post
Share on other sites

From the recent Wolfpak sheet (72-092) that covered those markings LINK

Mark, at Wolfpak, corresponded with somebody that was involved in the program who provided the info.

Regards,

Murph

Thanks for the info, Murph. Very useful. Ordered those decals ( a little expensive but it'll be a unique-ish build).

LD.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for that link and info. It looks like the Bronco's combat career is over, now that these two airplanes have been returned to NASA. A pity, given the capabilities of this aircraft but it makes it an even more desirable aircraft to build in model form.

LD.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I do wonder why they selected the OV-10 for that trial. An old, out of service aircraft available in very limited numbers. Seems like many other platforms could have done the job, especially since the real advantage it brought was related to the sensors, displays and armament.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It looks like they chose the OV-10 because it was a readily available asset. It was already active in the inventory(NASA), was transferred to the Navy and then Special Ops. No purchase of an airframe was necessary and this seems to be what got the approval from the USAF etc. It seems USSOCOM met plenty of barriers as they sought to get this trial into the air. As you say, the OV-10G simply served as a platform to get the new sensor and weapons over the battlefield and ably demonstrate the concept that USSOCOM have in mind.

The fight to get the A-29 programme up-and-running is a story of various vested interests squabbling over what serves a particular Senator or General best. A $2,000 per hour turbo-prop versus a $40,000 per hour fast jet to do FAC is a no-brainer? Somebody should be court-marshalled over the fact the US Military doesn't have a cost-effective FAC like the OV-10 or A-29. Sometimes faster and louder is not always best. Sadly, the OV-10 is now retired from combat for good with US Forces, but it is still an interesting modelling subject.

The propeller from a Beechcraft King Air appears to be the best option for a suitable four-blade prop. If these props can be sourced, an OV-10G build might be on the cards. :thumbsup:/>

LD.

Edited by Loach Driver
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
On ‎9‎/‎3‎/‎2016 at 10:44 PM, Loach Driver said:

The fight to get the A-29 programme up-and-running is a story of various vested interests squabbling over what serves a particular Senator or General best.

 

One of the biggest obstacles to the program was the esteemed Senator from Arizona.

 

Regards,

Murph

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 5 months later...
On 10/13/2016 at 4:38 PM, Murph said:

 

One of the biggest obstacles to the program was the esteemed Senator from Arizona.

 

Regards,

Murph

Although he was prone to making public statements, it was behind the scene machinations from the Kansas delegation at Senate and House level that stopped the proposed funding of Phase II of Imminent Fury (Detachment of 4 aircraft for overseas deployment) in 2010. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/31/2016 at 3:47 AM, Loach Driver said:

Does anyone have any solid information on the configuration and weapons load carried by the OV-10G+ in Iraq in 2015 during its operational trial there?

The on-line article below states that it carried the centre-line fuel tank and was armed with the APKWS missile, slaved to the MX-15HD FLIR unit (it might be an MX-15Di unit fitted instead). I guess that they flew with one 7-shot rocket pod on each outer-sponson station. Two 19-shot pods would have been overkill as they probably didn't come across that many targets each night. The only photo I have seen of the OV-10G+ armed show it with 7-shot pods and the photo probably comes from the State-side Combat Dragon tests. There is no mention of Hellfire or machine guns. It doesn't appear that the sponson guns were fitted. Also, the under-wing mounts are present in some photos and are removed in others and it appears that even for the ferry flights from the USA to Iraq, no wing-mounted fuel tanks were carried. A two-missile launch rail system for the Hellfire missile is available for fixed-wing ops but it doesn't appear the OV-10G+ flew with these either, as far as I can tell. Apparently most targets engaged were soft and were often strikes against individuals or small groups in buildings or soft-skinned vehicles.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/those-old-ov-10-broncos-204500085.html

It is incredible to think that the same airframe performed the (almost) identical mission profile in two different theatres of war, first in Viet Nam with the YOV-10D NOGS (1971?) and the OV-10G+ in 2015. That is a gap of 44 years! A Nam YOV-10D would make a nice model too. :thumbsup:

LD.

The wing stations were removed in late 2014 and fairings installed. The ASE was upgraded to new AAR-47(v)B sensors and wingtips and tails modded for them. 

 

Some pictures res on the web show the the INMARSAT radome on top of wing/fuselage well (between the 2 Batwing SATCOM antennas. 

 

The rear cockpit got a massive 22" HD display during the late 2014 mods and a LED external selectable covert lighting configuration replaced the taxi light, anti smash and formation lights (they appear milky white to unaided eye). The 4 olive drab control heads for the PRC-117G radios reside on top of WSO instrument panel. 

 

Although 5" Zuni rockets were tested in 2013, the weapon of choice for deployment was the 2.75" laser guided APKWS (only 6 cleared for the 7 shot pod by NAVAIR). The Herstal .50 gun pod was also tested and cleared in early 2015 along with the modified Mongoose pod (reconfigured for 4 ALE-47 chaff/flare dispensers in forward firing configuration). 

 

Another note to serious modelers: the American flag on tail should be black for the deployment (original color variant is accurate up through late 2014) and the lower VHF antennas located on tail booms were upgraded in mid 2014 with higher performance configuration late has a long dipole trailing from the shark fin (look hard at images on web and you'll see what I mean).

 

PS Hellfire not tested or carried

IMG_5039.JPG

Edited by Heyjoe
Added image
Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone know what the current status of this program is?  Was it just a test / evaluation program that has run it's course or are these aircraft going to be returning to the theater?

 

Still unclear on what benefits the OV-10 brought to the party.  Sounds like the real advantage was with the sensors and weapons.  If so, why not utilize something that is readily available in numbers, like a Cessna Caravan?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is best overview of purpose of CD II and it was written by senior WSO involved in both IF and CD II. The deployment was an Extended User Evaluation (EUE) of a survivable platform with far more survivability and capability than a Caravan or PC-12 with ability to operate in austere locations with minimal support footprint. The aircraft are currently in "sleeping beauty" mode back with NASA. Note: CD II was initiated by GEN Mattis while at CENTCOM and USAF is picking up the baton now to look at continuing to evaluate options for Light Attack. 

 

https://m.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2016-06/bronco-12-cleared-hot

Edited by Heyjoe
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 6 years later...
On 3/18/2017 at 9:26 AM, Heyjoe said:

modified Mongoose pod (reconfigured for 4 ALE-47 chaff/flare dispensers in forward firing configuration). 

 

With the release of the ICM OV-10D kit in 1/72 I'd like to tackle this conversion.

 

I know that Heyjoe hasn't logged into these forums in about 5 years, but I'll ask the question and maybe somebody else knows the answer:

 

What are the dimensions of the Mongoose pod? There isn't much that comes up in internet searches, or for ALE-56 which is apparently the correct designation. Thanks for the info,

 

Hoops

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/18/2017 at 1:09 PM, Heyjoe said:

Here is best overview of purpose of CD II and it was written by senior WSO involved in both IF and CD II. The deployment was an Extended User Evaluation (EUE) of a survivable platform with far more survivability and capability than a Caravan or PC-12 with ability to operate in austere locations with minimal support footprint. The aircraft are currently in "sleeping beauty" mode back with NASA. Note: CD II was initiated by GEN Mattis while at CENTCOM and USAF is picking up the baton now to look at continuing to evaluate options for Light Attack. 

 

https://m.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2016-06/bronco-12-cleared-hot

Didn't realize you prowled these woods HJ.

Could all this have been a precursor for the OA-1K Armed Overwatch aircraft ??

Steve

Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, A-10 LOADER said:

Didn't realize you prowled these woods HJ.

Could all this have been a precursor for the OA-1K Armed Overwatch aircraft ??

Steve

 

He hasn't logged in to the ARC forums since 2019...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...