Skip to comments.
Vintage(OV-10 Bronco) planes used in Vietnam out of retirement to help US special forces in Iraq
Daily Mail ^
| Lydia Willgress
Posted on 03/11/2016 4:08:46 AM PST by protest1
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-54 next last
It's Back.... Back to the Future !
I love this I used to have a airfix model of the Bronco!
1
posted on
03/11/2016 4:08:46 AM PST
by
protest1
To: protest1
Why did we build the F-35, again?
2
posted on
03/11/2016 4:12:18 AM PST
by
ryan71
(Bibles, Beans and Bullets)
To: protest1
3
posted on
03/11/2016 4:13:25 AM PST
by
PIF
(They came for me and mine ... now it is your turn ...)
To: PIF
Thanks for the links, I did a search but managed to miss that it was posted already. Still it is such a good story the Bronco back in service!
4
posted on
03/11/2016 4:19:11 AM PST
by
protest1
To: protest1
But they want to retire the A10. People at the Pentagon are idiots
5
posted on
03/11/2016 4:20:34 AM PST
by
lavaroise
(A well regulated gun being necessary to the state, the rights of the militia shall noshi)
To: protest1
The OV-10 Widow Maker was in use by the 501st MI BDE as late as 1989 in Korea when I left.
6
posted on
03/11/2016 4:25:41 AM PST
by
Feckless
(The US Gubbmint / This Tagline CENSORED by FR \ IrOnic, ain't it?)
To: protest1
No one speaks much on how they use it. I would make a bet that they took out the 2nd seat and it’s used to haul 3,000 pounds of cargo. You could land on some short strip...off-load in ten minutes, and be airborne again. For resupply efforts in remote territory and you only have 1,000 ft, it makes perfect sense.
To: protest1
8
posted on
03/11/2016 4:29:08 AM PST
by
Doogle
(( USAF.68-73..8th TFW Ubon Thailand..never store a threat you should have eliminated))
To: protest1
Whereas an F-15 can cost up to $40,000 per flight, a Bronco can operate for just $1,000 for every hour it is in the air Well, that's a problem for the Pentagon. The plane is just too darn inexpensive! Where are the fat defense maintenance contracts!
9
posted on
03/11/2016 4:31:53 AM PST
by
Flick Lives
(One should not attend even the end of the world without a good breakfast. -- Heinlein)
To: protest1
bring back the SPADS while they're at it
10
posted on
03/11/2016 4:52:05 AM PST
by
Chode
(Stand UP and Be Counted, or line up and be numbered - *DTOM* -w- NO Pity for the LAZY - Luke, 22:36)
To: Feckless
Kaman HH-43 Husky with its counter rotating rotors was the original widow maker, IIRC.
11
posted on
03/11/2016 4:55:06 AM PST
by
NTHockey
(Rules of engagement #1: Take no prisoners. And to the NSA trolls, FU)
To: ryan71
What a silly rhetorical question.
To: protest1
turbo-prop jet? Is that like jumbo shrimp?
What about the A-1 "Spad"?
13
posted on
03/11/2016 5:06:11 AM PST
by
NonValueAdded
(Buchanan: A note of caution: This establishment is not going quietly.)
To: pepsionice
Aircraft also has a clamshell door in the back for offloading troops, supplies, etc.
14
posted on
03/11/2016 5:08:14 AM PST
by
ops33
(Senior Master Sergeant, USAF (Retired))
To: NTHockey
I'm sure there have been a few :)
Losing an engine on takeoff killed most Bronco pilots who died in them I'm told, hence the name.
15
posted on
03/11/2016 5:11:30 AM PST
by
Feckless
(The US Gubbmint / This Tagline CENSORED by FR \ IrOnic, ain't it?)
To: protest1
16
posted on
03/11/2016 5:11:56 AM PST
by
jpsb
(Never believe anything in politics until it has been officially denied. Otto von Bismark)
To: jpsb
My understanding was they needed more runway than you’d think.
17
posted on
03/11/2016 5:17:33 AM PST
by
AppyPappy
(If you really want to irritate someone, point out something obvious they are trying hard to ignore.)
To: AppyPappy
There is considerable criticism of the plane by people that know a lot more than me about it. Mostly folks think it is under powered and when fully loaded uses a lot of runway. So it appears you are correct.
18
posted on
03/11/2016 5:29:48 AM PST
by
jpsb
(Never believe anything in politics until it has been officially denied. Otto von Bismark)
To: jpsb
There was an earlier statement that it has a high heat signature, which you really don’t want for a slow-moving aircraft.
You can help the takeoff by using disposable rockets as they did in WW2.
19
posted on
03/11/2016 5:35:10 AM PST
by
AppyPappy
(If you really want to irritate someone, point out something obvious they are trying hard to ignore.)
To: jpsb
“The turbo-prop jet”
The OV-10 is NOT a jet engine-powered aircraft.
20
posted on
03/11/2016 5:39:54 AM PST
by
equaviator
(There's nothing like the universe to bring you down to earth.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-54 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson