Comments by "Titanium Rain" (@ChucksSEADnDEAD) on "OV-10 Bronco - Machine Guns, Rockets, and 3-Tons of Ammunition - Vietnam War" video.

@kschleic9053 The other way around. People involved in the OA-X program knew this would be a criticism raised against turboprops, so at Green Flag exercises the OA-X aircraft were pitted against Marines with Stingers. Allegedly, they couldn't get a lock. It makes sense. The turbine that powers the prop takes out so much heat from the exhaust, and prop wash itself mixes the exhaust with incoming air. And it is known that after the initial Stinger kills on Soviet helicopters in Afghanistan they responded by changing tactics but also installing diverter plates in the exhaust to help mask the heat signature. Meanwhile their jets were forced to fly higher. Soldiers on the ground jokingly started calling them "cosmonauts" for refusing to fly inside Stinger range.
113
The USAF brought back the Bronco to provide support for SOCOM for a year, but retired it again due to the cost of maintaining ageing aircraft.
27
@johngalt2506 He confused him for his son Trudeau, Canada's PM.
4
@vonschwendeman2611 High reliability doesn't mean maintenance costs aren't high. How are aircraft kept reliable? Maintenance.
2
@JohnRodriguesPhotographer "The main mission of the A10 as originally envisioned, the defense of the Fulda Gap" - Not really. It was meant for Vietnam. The Fulda Gap thing was a repurposing of the aircraft, and it was estimated that aircraft and pilots would not be coming back from that mission if it happened. "They're putting more and more glass cockpit components in because they can't get the damn instruments to replace the old ones." - No, they're doing that because the A-10 needs modern avionics to operate. Without modern sensors the A-10 would be outclassed. "If you try to use an f-35 in the close air support role, you have to hang wing pylons on it to carry external stores. Caring external stores negates a great deal of the f-35 stealth." - So what? It's still stealthier than any jet with external ordnance. "One of the things it was proven in Vietnam was that no matter how fast your aircraft was during weapons release it had to slow down enough" - This is not true. Nothing was proven, simply put aircraft did not have the avionics that allowed them to be effective. "The F35 does not have the loiter time of the A10" - You can't loiter in a modern battlefield. "The 25 mm gun in no way shape or form can outperform the 30 mm gun on the A10." - But it does. The 25mm APEX round was designed for that purpose. "The pilot in particular is much better protected" - No, he isn't. He is strapped to a vulnerable bullet and missile magnet.
2
@JohnRodriguesPhotographer But the A-10 was built specifically to bring the capabilities of visual targeting back, as fast jets like the A-7 made it difficult. Once again, the most desirable CAS in Vietnam were visually aimed rockets, guns, cannons and bombs. The whole point of the A-10 was the fact that fast jets did not have the electronic targeting means they have now, so jet pilots were dependent on ground controllers directing their fire while Broncos, Skyraiders, etc could see infantry in the jungle and gun them down. The A-10 was built specifically do to what you're saying it would be bad at. As a strike/bombing aircraft it was objectively worse than the A-7. But even the advanced bombing computer in the A-7 depended on being able to place a marker in the HUD by eye.
2
@danielm6049 Please stop propagating this myth. The government accountability office actually slammed the USAF for buying too many A-10s in the past.
1
@Predator42ID Which missiles scored direct hits? Because apart from shoulder fired MANPADS I don't see anything not instantly splitting any aircraft apart.
1
@JohnRodriguesPhotographer I'm not sure which seeker is being used on Stingers currently.
1
@JohnRodriguesPhotographer That's just a lie. The USAF was actually criticized for buying too many A-10s in the beginning. Please stop parroting narratives made up by lunatics in the Reformist crowd.
1
@JohnRodriguesPhotographer Meanwhile in the real world the USAF commissioned the A-X program, axed the A-7 upgrade plans to buy the A-10, got so many that the government had to start grilling them, and only really started trying to replace it two years before it was meant to. 1993.
1
@JohnRodriguesPhotographer "the criticism for the number of a10s purchased started around the so-called end of the Cold War" - This is not true. It happened in 1979.
1
@JohnRodriguesPhotographer How would the 30mm the ineffective in Vietnam? Its use is mostly against infantry, and the best aircraft to target infantry in Vietnam fired machine guns/cannons/rockets into the jungle.
1
NASA does a lot of aircraft research and they do have Broncos. Haven't seen anyone about them doing restoration work.
1