Warbird Information Exchange

USMC Looks To Revive OV-10s For Use In Iraq

By Joshua Kucera, JDW Staff Reporter, Washington, DC

Jane's Defence Weekly
April 12, 2006

The U.S. Marine Corps is looking at the possibility of reviving
the retired
OV-10 Bronco observation aircraft for use in Iraq,  according to a
top service
official.

The aircraft, which was retired from U.S. service in 1994, would
be used to
augment surveillance of roads in Iraq.

Having additional aircraft there could increase the chances of
U.S.  forces
detecting the emplacement of roadside bombs or improvised
explosive devices
(IEDs), some service officials believe.

"If this is a capability we think that will take out the IED or 
help us
catch the IED maker ... you bet [we are interested]," a  senior
marine commander
told Jane's.

Service officials, with the help of an association of retired
OV-10 pilots,
have identified aircraft and pilots that could be used in Iraq, he
said.

The Marine Corps Warfighting Laboratory has been tasked to examine
the cost
of such a plan and the concept of operations it might use,  the
commander added.

However, not all marine officials are enamoured with the idea.

Lieutenant General John Castellaw, the service's deputy commandant
for
aviation, told Jane's he thought the experience of the Gulf War
showed that the
aircraft was too vulnerable.

Marsh Aviation, which manages the inventory of the
government-owned OV-10s
and does upgrade work for international OV-10 customers, could
remanufacture 10
or 12 of the aircraft suitable for military  use by piecing
together parts of
various aircraft, said Floyd Stilwell, Marsh Aviation's chief
executive
officer.

The company could start delivering aircraft within 10 months at a
normal
production rate and faster if the government paid for it, 
Stilwell said.

The OV-10 proposal is one of many schemes - often secretive - to
revive
retired aircraft or convert civilian aircraft for use in
operations in Iraq and
elsewhere.

The U.S. Army has converted at least three Shorts 360-300 aircraft
under the
name Constant Hawk to do surveillance in Iraq and the sea  lanes
of the Middle
East. Two of the aircraft collided with each other in Wisconsin in
February
shortly before they were to be sent to Iraq.

Mohawk Technologies of Florida has operated a fleet of six OV-1
Mohawk
reconnaissance aircraft under a U.S. Department of Defense (DoD)
contract for about
12 months, said Paul Pefley, the company's president. Pefley
declined to say
where the aircraft were being operated or for which branch of the
DoD. The OV-1
was retired from U.S. Army use in 1996.

Most of the non-traditional aircraft plans, however, have gone
nowhere and
have been openly advocated only by a collection of  veterans
associations and a
handful of members of Congress.

There is a growing constituency, however, of people who believe 
that
Soldiers and Marines in Iraq need better real-time intelligence
and look back to the
Vietnam-era Forward Air  Controllers (FACs) as a model of how
counterinsurgency can be 
fought from the air.

Those FACs were more tightly integrated with small units than the
surveillance aircraft used today, and more effective, the 
Congressional staff member
said.

"The air force is looking at all this, but very quietly," he said.
"There's
really a gap in combat information at a platoon commander,  convoy
leader level
that is real and as real-time as you can hope  to have it. We've
got dozens
of systems operating over there but  there's a big logjam in the
[intelligence]
pipeline, and everyone 
knows it."

Psst... Don't tell anyone but the USAF has contacted me about using our AC-47 in Iraq. might pull out the 7.62mm guns and go with 2 20mm gatlings.

Keep em Flying !

Hell, the USAF actually have an AC-47 on the active inventory so why not use on in Iraq??

_________________
Chris Globe
UK
http://www.picasaweb.google.com/Chris.M.Globe

Or maybe even put guns out the back f the MC/HC-130's, there you have it, a cheap, stable, reliable(ish) FAC aircraft

_________________
Chris Globe
UK
http://www.picasaweb.google.com/Chris.M.Globe

At one time the 147th FIG in Houston had 9 aircraft with no engines in them. They only had 12 to start with. We offered to help fill the gap with the F-4. Some of those guys didn't see the humor !

Isn't there a short supply of Prop Blades for the OV-10s? Maybe if more get made some exra could be tacked onto the Gov-ment run for a good price.

I'd love to see some OV-10s around. What a great show it could be, an OV-10 marks a target and an F-4 screams over with a HUGE Pro-tech display going off!

Tim

_________________
www.tailhookstudio.com

Tim, the original carbon fiber blades used on the OV-10D are definitely in short supply. Marsh Aviation was supposed to be working on an alternate prop. Jack Ballard, long time N.A. OV-10 Tech Rep, told me that the OV-10D engine/prop combo was not the best nor the most efficient combination but the Marines selected it anyway. The State Dept guys approached Ham Standard about making new blades and were quoted at around $125,000.00 per blade.

The 10Ds are the only airframes that are truly available but they are held in storage at AMARC for the State Dept at Patrick for use as sprayers down south. There were about 10-12 last time I saw them.

All of the A models have been turned over to CDF for tanker leads.The BLM aircraft that were transferred to CDF have been broken up for spares and the Bronco association has been given 2 for static sans engines and props. They went to Honeywell,refurbed and sold to Columbia.

i think it's a great idea!!!! & at a great savings to over $$$ burdened taxpayers. the ov 10 was originally developed for just this kind of scenario. why piss away $$$$ for the same low cost technology needed 30 years ago. same type of warfare, minus jungle, but same enemy philosophy. as the old saying goes...... if it works, don't mess with it.

_________________
tom d. friedman - hey!!! those fokkers were messerschmitts!! * without ammunition, the usaf would be just another flying club!!! * better to have piece of mind than piece of tail!!

It would probably work well, Tom. But the OV-10, the aircraft nobody wanted but now seems to be in short supply isn't sexy enough for the powers in charge.

Of the OV-10s that were lost by the Marines, one was an A and was operating outside of its known rules of engagement and the D was a similar situation. I know that they were hit with short range IR missiles. An anti IR exhaust gas shield/mixer was developed for the OV-10 but the shrouds were left CONUS. I don't believe the "disco lights" were fitted either.

Once the IR zones were redefined there were no further losses.

After Desert Storm the Marines rushed to disband the 2 remaining OV-10 squadrons and VMO-4, the reserve unit at Atlanta, this was in 1994. The early retirements were pushed by the Clinton budget cuts. The Air Force dropped the OV-10 from service in 1993.

I believe that the only way you would see Bronco reactivation would be by pulling the remaining Ds from the State Dept, return them to operational config. and rebuild them with new avionics, new generation FLIRS, and fit the 20mm that worked so well during testing. You are probably talking maybe 15 airframes available. These were SLEPed by the Marines shortly before Desert Storm so they should have good times remaining on the airframes. The Air Force was VEEERRRRYYY thorough in getting rid of their aircraft. They went to Thailand, Phillipines, Columbia, Venezuela, and a few statics. The balance were turned over to US Forest Service who gave them to CDF where they were rebuilt for the tanker lead role and to BLM. BLM cancelled the program and turned over 15 engineless/propless airframes to CDF. Most were used as spares source for the flyers.

Would it happen, I doubt it. They would have to reopen the production line and I would bet the tooling is long gone. Most of the ready spares have already gone to FMS.

Besides the Air Force and Navy are saving all their money for F-22, JSF, F-35,and F-18E/F. They aren't about to waste money on the OV-10 just like they weren't about to buy the Piper Enforcer. No matter how well it does the mission. As far as pissing away $$$$, what do they care, it aint there money and there's more where that came from.

The birds being refurbished for Marsh in Mesa, AZ are being finished off with a four blader of some type. Is this the alternate prop or just something that works in the interim?

Hey, the A-37 that is sitting in the USAF Museum was pulled out and placed back into active service during the Viet Nam war, then re-retired. So I guess anything is possible

_________________
Historical Aircraft Squadron

I'm not sure Chad, Marsh is working on several mods for the Colombian OVs. They are using that great slug of antidrug money that was appropriated several years ago.

The Yankee YOV-10 that burned had 4 blade props on it. I don't think Marsh is reinventing the wheel out there, I'm sure that they are using the information gathered during the many years of testing and then the data developed during the OV-10D+SLEP/conversion.

I heard that one of the changes being done is to modify the sponsons to accomodate 2 .50 cal instead of the M60s that were originally installed.

I was out west last Fall and talked to a BLM pilot about the OV-10. I was introduced to a one legged pilot named Cliff LeBeouf that flew a C-12F (King Air) in to Kalispell , Montana for avionics work. He has about 5000 hours in the Bronco and hates them. He said they were miserably hot in the cockpit, extremely uncomfortable seats, loud, communication was lacking with the backseater/observer compared to the Barons (T-72's) the BLM had before. Zero forward visiblity from the backseat and if you drop your pencil writing down a clearance you have to roll the OV-10 inverted to retrieve it as it disappears down in the belly of the bird. Distance between the two seats prohibits handing things back and forth like in the T-34, etc.
He did say it had phenomenal side visibility, manueverable, and had "fuel for days." 10 or 12 hours of fuel plus drop tank capability.
He seemed very thankful to be flying the military King Air. The BLM added windows above the side windows for increased air to ground visiblity. He likes the air conditioning, comfortable seating, speed, pretty much everything about the C-12's.
They aren't going to remanufacture OV-10's because remember "this war will be over in 6 months and everyone gets to come back home." It sounds like they have dipersed them to other countries and they just aren't available. There probably aren't a lot of fans from the pilots that flew them everyday. More likely would be to modify something like the C-12, which has excellent factory support, or purchase something from a foreign country "off the shelf" as a stop gap.
I still like the OV-10 and hope a few more get on the civilian registry.

I was out west last Fall and talked to a BLM pilot about the OV-10. I was introduced to a one legged pilot named Cliff LeBeouf that flew a C-12F (King Air) in to Kalispell , Montana for avionics work. He has about 5000 hours in the Bronco and hates them. He said they were miserably hot in the cockpit, extremely uncomfortable seats, loud, communication was lacking with the backseater/observer compared to the Barons (T-72's) the BLM had before. Zero forward visiblity from the backseat and if you drop your pencil writing down a clearance you have to roll the OV-10 inverted to retrieve it as it disappears down in the belly of the bird. Distance between the two seats prohibits handing things back and forth like in the T-34, etc.
He did say it had phenomenal side visibility, manueverable, and had "fuel for days." 10 or 12 hours of fuel plus drop tank capability.
He seemed very thankful to be flying the military King Air. The BLM added windows above the side windows for increased air to ground visiblity. He likes the air conditioning, comfortable seating, speed, pretty much everything about the C-12's.
They aren't going to remanufacture OV-10's because remember "this war will be over in 6 months and everyone gets to come back home." It sounds like they have dipersed them to other countries and they just aren't available. There probably aren't a lot of fans from the pilots that flew them everyday. More likely would be to modify something like the C-12, which has excellent factory support, or purchase something from a foreign country "off the shelf" as a stop gap.
I still like the OV-10 and hope a few more get on the civilian registry.

Instead of throwing the big bux at the "problem" is there a simpler solution
we've missed? What if we got "really low-tech retro" and introduced pork
fat as an element in the weaponry and then announced our change in tactics? Or am I being politically incorrect?

_________________
He bowls overhand...He is the most interesting man in the world.
"In Peace Japan Breeds War", Eckstein, Harper and Bros., 3rd ed. 1943(1927, 1928,1942)
"Leave it to ol' Slim. I got ideas...and they're all vile, baby." South Dakota Slim
"Ahh..."The Deuce", 28,000 pounds of motherly love." quote from some Mojave Grunt
DBF