OV-10 Bronco as a small CAS/Transport Aircraft.

[Falkun]

If it is fully confirmed that they will return to service, then I think that it would make a great addition to the mod

[Silly_Savage]

Is that really a 4X4 map? I didn't think it was.

It's not, it's 2km.

[SkaterCrush]

Eh it feels pretty big, but I guess its just because I walk everywhere XD

[Squeezee]

If it is fully confirmed that they will return to service, then I think that it would make a great addition to the mod

Yay DEV support, lol .


The airstrip in Ramiel would be good for this, seeing as the OV-10 doesn't need a huge runway. If you really wanted overkill you could have two and they could probably take off simultaneously .

Anyway, I'd like to see some feedback on weapons please. What do you guys think is an acceptable number of rockets? Should it be 38 (Two 19 round pods), or add more pods? If there should be more pods, would they be 7 or 19 round pods? If there are 4 rocket pods though, then there will be no room for GBU-39s.

Here is what I was thinking:

Pilot: Controls main MGs (4x M60C) and rocket pods
Copilot: Controls FLIR sensor, can laze targets and deploy GBU-39s

I dunno if that is overkill though. Like I was saying, this is a light attack aircraft, and with the exception of a massive cannon and Mavericks, this is basically turning into a tiny A-10.

I was toying with the concept of Hellfires, but that would require the bombs and/or rockets to be excluded from the armament. So if there's 4 Hellfires, then there can be 2 rocket pods (Probably 7 rounds since 4 Hellfires and 38 Hydras for a light CAS plane is excessive).

[Grim1316]

looking over pictures im beginning to see that it was common to have 4x 4 5"



or a mix of 2x 7 2.5" 2x 4 5" and a 250-500lb bomb.





Personally I like these two the most.

3x CBU



or 2x 18 2.5" with a turreted m197

[Squeezee]

I was more thinking it could serve as an effective replacement to the LB Ramiel currently has (conceptually anyway, we would need confirmation on active service and a model made). So just giving it 38 Hydras would be well and good.

Active service is a no, but it's being thought of. Google "OV-10X" and you'll see the concept art for the new one (I think the old one looks better .)

Also, I was wondering if the Copilot could have something like a laser designnator, but he could use it to request artillery or mortars from the commander. It would be kinda like the GTLD, but built into the plane. He could also use it to do things like laze targets for airstrike.

Another thing is that certain models of the Bronco had M197 20MM cannons (Like the one in the Cobra) mounted in a turret on the belly. That might be a good copilot weapon.

Ideally there would be different variants of this, just like the littlebird. I was thinking Attack 1 (Rocksets, M60s, bombs or hellfires), Attack 2 (M60s, rockets, M197 cannon), and transport if paratroops are ever added in (M60s, 14 rockets to soften up the LZ, and space for a pilot and 5 paratroopers).

I really wish I knew how to model stuff .


Haha Grim, you beat me to it with the M197 . I was just thinking it would use the 2.75 FFARs because they are already in game.

[Grim1316]

the 2.5" may be ingame, but 5" are bigger, therefor they are cooler.

[Alex6714]

I would say 38 HE rockets, 14-38 WP smoke rockets, and either 4x hellfire or M197 for the gunner.

[DannyIMK]

OV-10 bronco is observation and light attack aircraft , i don't think we need that type of aircraft in PR

i don't think US Army/USMC/USAF really use that aircraft much

[Cheditor]

OV-10 bronco is observation and light attack aircraft , i don't think we need that type of aircraft in PR

i don't think US Army/USMC/USAF really use that aircraft much

As has been said in the post, it is out of service but could be brought back into service.

[Tirak]

OV-10 bronco is observation and light attack aircraft , i don't think we need that type of aircraft in PR

i don't think US Army/USMC/USAF really use that aircraft much

If anything this is the type of aircraft PR is looking for. Slow(er), reasonably armed and used for infantry support. PR could certainly use this type of aircraft if for no other reason that it's easier to justify it flying on a 4 km map.

[Ironfist7997]

well the USAF are looking for a purpose built aircraft for COIN ops, well it is only a capabilty request, but you never know what might be buzzing the enemy in the next few years.

USAF officially launches light attack fighter comeback - The DEW Line

why have a multi-million £/$ aircraft when for the same price you could have a couple of these racking an enemy position?

[Squeezee]

I would say 38 HE rockets, 14-38 WP smoke rockets, and either 4x hellfire or M197 for the gunner.

Well, there are only seven hardpoints, so 38 HE rockets and 14 WP rockets would only leave one hardpoint left. IMO WP rockets should be left out entirely, seeing as the infantry can mark targets for the Bronco to attack.

Hellfires could be carried in those racks on the gunships that hold four missiles on one hardpoint, dunno if it can be applied to airplanes IRL though.

As for the M197, I dunno what to really think of it. Yeah, it's cool and all, but an M197+rockets+hellfires+4 M60s is kinda overkill for such a small plane.

Anyway, thanks for all the support of the idea guys. I never thought I'd get this much.

[Alex6714]

Well, there are only seven hardpoints, so 38 HE rockets and 14 WP rockets would only leave one hardpoint left. IMO WP rockets should be left out entirely, seeing as the infantry can mark targets for the Bronco to attack.

Hellfires could be carried in those racks on the gunships that hold four missiles on one hardpoint, dunno if it can be applied to airplanes IRL though.

As for the M197, I dunno what to really think of it. Yeah, it's cool and all, but an M197+rockets+hellfires+4 M60s is kinda overkill for such a small plane.

Anyway, thanks for all the support of the idea guys. I never thought I'd get this much.

Couple of picks from a C130 varient.





Though I don´t know if the weight limit would permit this on the other aircraft.

If there are 7 hardpoints, take away 4 for rocket pods, then you have 3 not 1? On 2 of those you can put hellfire racks for example, and on the last one a target pod.

[Eddie Baker]

If anything this is the type of aircraft PR is looking for. Slow(er), reasonably armed and used for infantry support. PR could certainly use this type of aircraft if for no other reason that it's easier to justify it flying on a 4 km map.

The trouble is they're specialized. AFSOC will likely be the ones who have operational control, and the CFRI in the link below only lists an objective 100 aircraft. Which, given funding, will probably be less. It's why we're trying to get rid of the A/MH-6 in game.

well the USAF are looking for a purpose built aircraft for COIN ops, well it is only a capabilty request, but you never know what might be buzzing the enemy in the next few years.

USAF officially launches light attack fighter comeback - The DEW Line

why have a multi-million £/$ aircraft when for the same price you could have a couple of these racking an enemy position?

Again, they're very specialized for low intensity conflict/COIN. The AT-6B would be an easy transition to make for our pilots, and has been selected by the new Iraqi AF, but the Super Tucano is off the shelf, in production and ready to go. I'd like it if Boeing resurrected the A-1H, but it's been gone too long, and twin engines for insurance and two crewmembers for added situational awareness is almost a trump card.

Hellfires could be carried in those racks on the gunships that hold four missiles on one hardpoint, dunno if it can be applied to airplanes IRL though.

It already is, on the KC-130J "Harvest Hawk" kit (posted above) and on the Reaper (aka Predator B). Brimstone missiles, which are based on the Hellfire airframe and are similar in weight, are also mounted on fixed wing aircraft (in a three-missile rack on a single hardpoint). It's certainly a possibility, as is Viper Strike (GBU-44).

As for the M197, I dunno what to really think of it. Yeah, it's cool and all, but an M197+rockets+hellfires+4 M60s is kinda overkill for such a small plane.

Maybe a half-dozen of those converted Bronco's ever existed, and no other conversions were made, despite their utility. And I believe the M60s were not fitted alongside the M197.

[Squeezee]

Thanks for the info Eddie, and for those interesting pictures Alex6714. And you're right, that would leave 3 pods, not 1. Dunno what I waws thinking when I typed that .

Eddie, it seems that those Brimstone Missiles are only used by the UK .


Anyway, I guess WP rockets could be of use, but like I said, I dunno what they would be marking targets for, since it's an attack aircraft. Maybe if a recon variant was made to fly alongside the attack aircraft that lazed targets and fired the WP rockets to mark targets for the attack aircraft. Teamwork FTW . The recon aircraft could even carry paratroopers too, if we ever get to that stage in PR where we integrate airborne drops into the game.

So, my new ideas (Based on your info ):

Attack Variant- M60s, HE Rockets (3 , Hellfires (Maybe 2 or 4, one on a hardpoint) and the targeting pod, or we could put a drop tank there.

Recon Variant- M60s, Targeting pod, WP rockets (14) and 5 paratroops if they are integrated into PR.

[99lynx]

My only concern with the Original Suggestion is that the map in question - Operation Archer - is soon to be a Canadian Forces map... and I am more than certain that the Candain forces does not use this Aircraft, and if they were to use any operational aircraft... it would be the CF18.

[Squeezee]

Hmmmmm, I forgot about that faction switch. That would be a screwup..........

I have my own map design that was going to be designed with the Harrier in mind once it is fixed, but now I will design it for the Bronco. I am going to try to map it soon.

[Eddie Baker]

Eddie, it seems that those Brimstone Missiles are only used by the UK .

Yes, but they were mentioned as an example because of the size similarities to Hellfire, from which they are derived. Hellfire and Brimstone . . . get it?