Boeing considers restarting OV-10 production after 23-year

Discussion in 'Tanks, planes & ships' started by spike7451, Feb 9, 2009.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. spike7451

    spike7451 RIP

    I wonder would a fleet of these down in The Stan be any good?They can carry the same payload as the Harrier & have a longer loiter time.
    OK they may not be as fast but if it delivers the goods,they'd be cheaper to 'run' & with the technology available today could be uprated.

    Boing restarts OV-10 production?..

  2. Didn't the Germans have some with some kind of mod. on the top. I remember seeing one at Alhorn I managed to get a flight in a Mohawk once
    • Funny Funny x 1
  3. From what I can gather, they are an excellent COIN/FAC platform. Simple, rugged, cheap and can perform a variety of roles effectively. You could think of it as an 'in between' from an Apache to a Harrier. A great asset to have sitting over the top of troops for long periods with the ability to give the enemy the good news. The later versions (the OV10D for the USMC) had a really good FLIR in the nose so it could easily fit the ISTAR role too.

    The only way we would ever get hold of them is if British WasteofSpace or Wasteland had an 'in road' to it. Of course, they'd want to re engine them, redo the avionics with ZX Spectrums and rip all the weapon load off them and of course quadruple the price.

    tropper, I think the boxheads stuck a jet on top.
    • Like Like x 1
    • Funny Funny x 1
  4. BiscuitsAB

    BiscuitsAB LE Moderator

    looks like one of these:

    Arado designed this aircraft in 1936 as a heavy fighter with a short, gondola-like fuselage and the Daimler Benz DB 603 engines mounted on twin nacelle/tailbooms. The upper turret had a seat and was armed with twin 20mm Rh LB 202 cannon, while the bottom turret was controlled from the prone position using a periscope for aiming. A crew of four was projected, and a full sized mock-up was constructed before cancellation of the project.

  5. Did a bit of research and they seem pretty good. Can take off on a 500 ft runway, carry in theory carry 3 tonnes of weapons and ammunition, 3 hour loiter time, and according to Google, the unit cost was $480 000 (don't Harriers cost over £10 million/$20million nowadays?). Against an insurgent enemy like the Taliban, without an air force or significant air defences, they'd be excellent, especially in large numbers - which their cost would hopefully make their greatest asset, if they didn't need too much updating. The only operational concern I'd have is their vulnerability to ground fire - they are, after all, quite slow.

    Of course, this is all hypothetical, since we're never going to get any :x
    • Like Like x 1
  6. Yes, a jet engine. They were used as target-tugs on the Baltic ranges. ISTR someone in the UK bought one to impress the impressionable at airshows.
  7. Betcha there's 1,000s of 'em in the "Bone Yard" at Davis-Monthan AFB... All wrapped up in cling film and sitting in the dry desert... Wouldn't take much: Take of the packaging and give 'em the once over and Robert’s yer Auntie’s Live-in Lover…... But then again, if they are at D-M AFB, why the b*ll ache of re-opening a mid 70s production line? Anyone smell a nice fat profit for Boeing?
  8. Surprisingly, no. Four OV10A models and fourteen OV10D models at the Boneyard. Most of the ex USAF and USMC aircraft got flogged off to third world countries such as Columbia. I suppose we qualify now so maybe they could bung us a few.
  9. Are these them? Arial photo of D-M


    If so they look pretty thredders.

    And apologies for picture size, it comes in this size or tiny.
  10. Don't think so!
  11. I found 3 just north of the Kolb rd Yuma st junct.
  12. Yeah, another spotters thread! :D

    The twin boom aircraft are C119 Boxcars.
  13. Are you sure that it's not a photo of Brize Norton?
  14. meridian

    meridian LE Good Egg (charities)

    Boeing floated the idea in response to the possible USAF requirement for a COIN aircraft that I think the National Guard are panning to use the AT6 Texan for, in a similar configuration to the Super Tucano. It was a new build not a rebuild from te boneyard. I think they are still in use in various shitholes around the world in various roles.

    I thought we covered this subject a while ago and it was thought by the grown ups to be a generally bad idea because of the speed of transit and log train issues, or was that forward air bases, not sure.

    They were withdrawn after the first Gulf War because they got shot down because they had no defensive aids but I guess in an environment like Afghanistan and if they stayed quite high using precision munitions, electro optical sensors and such like it would be quite surviable, twin engines, ejection seats, low acoustic and thermal signature and very rugged.


    I think they were designed to be operated with the minimum of specialist ground equipment and can even fly of a reasonable size deck, like Ocean for example. Perhaps we could flog the idea to the FAA


    They even have a little cargo compartment in the back that can fit a couple of chaps in :D


    Plenty of info on the web
    • Informative Informative x 1
  15. .....and its being flogged to death on pprune, just for good measure.