With CENTCOM reinstating the OV-10, which service is best suited for the Light Attack/Armed Reconnaissance mission?

2016-07-23T23:22:07-04:00

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 23 at 2016 11:23 PM

2016-07-23T23:23:25-04:00

The A-10 and OV-1 are excellent platforms and I've said for years the A-10 should have gone to the Army.

Response by SSG Roger Ayscue made Jul 23 at 2016 11:23 PM

2016-07-23T23:23:58-04:00

As long as the support is there rock on, BUT the Army is compatable radios, training and good ALO and you rule the day and night skies.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 23 at 2016 11:33 PM

2016-07-23T23:33:58-04:00

All the way back to the Signal Corp Days and Billy Mitchell, the Air Force has chaffed at being relegated to tactical support, and has viewed themselves as a strategic power. Since becoming their own branch the AF has consistently shown that they value strategic power over tactical. I doubt the AF would even want the Bronco. Let the Marines support themselves, and let the Army support us. As far as I'm concerned the AF should be relieved of all tactical missions, the Army should get the A-10 and the AF can then focus on winning WWIII or nuking the crap out of the rest of the World. Though in all fairness, Gen Curtis LeMay was probably the last AF General who wanted to.
Also before any of our AF brothers and sisters get too bent out of shape over this, I am NOT referring to the Airmen who have done their jobs, and done them well. I'm referring to the Generals, and those at the top of the AF when setting direction and lobbying congress for money.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 24 at 2016 11:04 AM

2016-07-24T11:04:30-04:00

I am a bit surprised the Army is doing so well in this survey. I just don't think the Army would be able to plan as well their use as the Air Force can do.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 24 at 2016 1:39 PM

2016-07-24T13:39:22-04:00

Air Force!

Response by Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 24 at 2016 4:55 PM

2016-07-24T16:55:37-04:00

I think it comes down to money. The Air Force wants to offset savings on the A-10 to pay for F-35 and people. If the Air Force gives the A-10 to the Army without money and infrastructure, how would the Army sustain it?

Response by LTC Paul Labrador made Jul 25 at 2016 12:19 PM

2016-07-25T12:19:52-04:00

For regular forces, the OV-10 is best suited to the Marines. They already have a robust fixed wing support system and the lightweight aircraft is highly mobile and can be forward deployed easily enough by the Corps. Besides, the Army already has sufficient Light attack/Armed Recon in the way of our helos. Adding the OV-10 would be redundant.

Who would REALLY benefit from this type of bird though is SOCOM. Not only can this aircraft provide light attack and overwatch, it can also deploy small SF teams via parachute.

Response by CDR Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 25 at 2016 7:31 AM

2016-09-25T07:31:46-04:00

http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/3519/those-old-ov-10-broncos-sent-to-fight-isis-were-laser-rocket-slinging-manhunters

Well, boys and girls, the real results are in - the Navy wins! See the article above Navy pilots and NFOs. And, OBTW, anyone note the Black Pony on the nose. Thanks for playing! Fly Navy!

Those Old OV-10 Broncos Sent To Fight ISIS Were Laser Rocket-Slinging Manhunters

Their mission was to find, fix, and finish the enemy—and they did just that.