My nephew is head of engineering for Air Tractor in Olney, Tx. This is his latest project in conjunction with L3.
https://www.airandspaceforces.com/article/armed-and-dangerous/

Crop Duster Squadron. Take it to DC for a test run?

A great idea!

OV-10 was and is a better platform.

Curious to why. I see a couple performance advantages, but it can't carry the munitions of the Air Tractor.

No, the OV-10 didn't have the weapons load or the loiter time, and had almost zero electronics.

I like it!!

Being a former Armed OH-58D Crewchief this is just what the Dr ordered...

Sky Warden - that is kind of scary.

Curious I am. Had occasion to hang out with some Marine OV10 jockeys and admire their birds. Each was equipped with the following:

4 M60 machine guns
1-2 19 tube pods of 2.75” FFAR
1 minigun pod
4 5” rockets, a pair on each wing.

Given such I’d think they could be rigged with a wide variety of modern weapons.

Can’t see them being much use in a real war but they would be just the thing for curbing civil disobedience, how many have the FBI and IRS ordered?

my older son, an engineer, usaf major, and senior-rated, special-operations pilot at hurlburt/duke, spent several months in waco flying and evaluating the air tractor. he concluded that the air tractor is an awful choice. so naturally it was chosen.

that would in truth be the air tractor, according to my son who flew it extensively over several months.

video posted to YouTube on Aug 4, 2022
YouTube channel: Ed Nash's Military Matters

Like a P47 but with a better engine. As long as it is properly up armored.

kwg

Rio Grande patrol plane! Tag the wetbacks with dayglow paintballs!

FTFY!

Dan, with a weapons loadout like that, an OV-10 would have only enough fuel to patrol the base perimeter for maybe an hour. That might be fine for the Marines, but not as an air cover plane.

I'm not arguing either for or against the "Warden" but we do need something very much like it.

We had one! The P-47!!

The times are gone when all the needed sensors and computers were inside the pilot's helmet. That may or may not be progress, but it is reality.

While it is buttugly, it has an 8 hour loiter time which seriously out performs the A-10's ninety minute loiter time. Plus it can operate from remote fields without a huge, highly technical maintenance crew.

Africa, here we come...

Ask him if he ran into Major General Sean M Farrell while there. He is the son of one of my classmates-Rtd. Lt General Lawrence "Larry" Farrell.

Major General SEAN M. FARRELL

Maj. Gen. Sean M. Farrell is the Deputy Commanding General, Joint Special Operations Command, Fort Bragg, North Carolina. In this role, he oversees the study of special operations requirements and techniques, ensuring joint interoperability and equipment standardization. In addition, he prepares assigned, attached and augmented forces to conduct special operations against threats to protect the Homeland and U.S. interests abroad.

Maj. Gen. Farrell was commissioned through the Reserve Officer Training Corps at Florida State University. He is a command pilot with more than 3,500 flight hours in the AC-130H Spectre, AC-130W Stinger, AC-130U Spooky and C-130E Hercules aircraft and has flown combat missions in Bosnia and Afghanistan. He has commanded at the wing, group and squadron levels.

Prior to his current assignment, the general served as Director for Force Structure, Requirements, Resources and Strategic Assessments, U.S. Special Operations Command, MacDill Air Force Base, Florida.

His Dad Larry


LIEUTENANT GENERAL LAWRENCE P. FARRELL JR.
Lieutenant General Lawrence P. Farrell Jr. is the deputy chief of staff for plans and programs, Headquarters U.S. Air Force, Washington, D.C. He is responsible to the secretary of the Air Force and the chief of staff for planning, programming and manpower activities within the corporate Air Force. He develops, integrates and analyzes the long-range and strategic plans, the $450 billion Future Year Defense Program (FYDP), manpower and organizational requirements, and management innovation to support national security objectives and military strategy.

A 1965 graduate of the U.S. Air Force Academy, he has served as vice commander, Headquarters Air Force Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, and as deputy director for Air Force programs and resources, Headquarters U.S. Air Force, Washington, D.C. He also served as deputy director, Defense Logistics Agency, Arlington, Va., and as deputy chief of staff for plans at Headquarters U.S. Air Forces in Europe, Ramstein Air Base, West Germany. He has commanded a tactical fighter squadron, has served as deputy chief of staff of operations for a tactical fighter wing and as system program manager for the F-4 and F-16 weapons systems with the Air Force Logistics Command, Hill Air Force Base, Utah, and has commanded the 401st Tactical Fighter Wing, Torrejon Air Base, Spain. A command pilot with more than 3,000 flying hours, he flew 196 missions in Southeast Asia.


Larry Jr's Dad.

Major Lawrence P. Farrell, Sr., 89, of Tempe, AZ, passed away January 21, 2006 in Tempe. Major Farrell retired from the Air Force in 1960. He flew the Berlin Air Lift. He was a member of the 7th Combat Cargo Squadron during WW II in the Philippines. His last assignment was as Chief of Maintenance at Sheppard Air Force Base in Texas.

My Dad was stationed at Sheppard AFB and this was my connection to the family.

Nice ass, but what kind of plane is taking a bath?

Personally that seems well armed to me for the mission they were designed for.

As far as the Skywarden taking over the Warthog's duties not impressed.

0. Not sure what yet I think of it. Will hash out a few things below.

1. Skywarden is not an A-10 replacement. A-10 is meant for high-intensity combined arms mechanized/industrialized conflict. Like what we are seeing in Ukraine. SW is a special operations support plane to be used to support our spec ops guys on mission in BFE-istan or teh People's Republic of Sub-Saharan BFE. Or Main Street, USA.

2. The best analogy is hte Little Bird:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MD_Helicopters_MH-6_Little_Bird
Relative to the LB, SW has several times the payload, serious sensor package, beaucoup loiter time, and much more commo.

These are the kind of guys jockeying LBs and presumably SWs whrn they come online:
"After the shootdown of the MH-60L, call sign "Super Six-One", by a rocket-propelled grenade (RPG), an MH-6 Little Bird, call sign "Star Four-One", landed in the street next to the downed MH-60 and attempted to evacuate the casualties. The pilot went to assist survivors, successfully pulling two soldiers into the Little Bird, while the copilot laid down suppressive fire from the cockpit with his individual weapon. Under intense ground fire, the MH-6 departed with its crew and survivors."

3. Looks like they are trying to replace several aircraft with one to cover most/all functions.

4. I think the workload of the two crewmen will be prodigious. They will be humping to please just to keep up with the ISR mission.

Who mentioned that?

Africa? LOL

Interesting conversation this is. One of the things folks ought to consider about things of this nature is the broad range of performance capabilities. Didn't mention this earlier, but I saw Jarhead OV-10s with an external fuel tank. Were USAF versions different that Marine versions? Don't have a clue. Given mission objectives it isn't necessary for any aircraft to carry weapons that are irrelevant. Might just be that an extra fuel tank would serve good purposes. Another thing worth consideration is basic performance specs. Case in point: The OV-10, relic that it is, could run circles around the proposed SOCOM bird. Use your Google-Foo to explore that.

And yes, I like the Warthog a LOT... It is the modern age version of the A1E and I know how effective they were by experience. Those artifacts hardly ever missed a target.

Lived on Fort Lewis back in the 80's, Man those Warthogs are amazing talk about maneuverable and powerful. The Skywarden strikes me as pretty easy to take out with a heavy machine gun, plenty slow enough ground fire could be effective. Speed is important. I consider the OV-10 an iconic airplane that performed it's duties very well. The Skywarden is in my opinion the low bid option. That said if it's duties are to provide what an attack helicopter does it's loiter time is a big plus. Might be harder to hit with a rocket propelled grenade.

Dan, the Marine OV-10 mission is very different from the USAF one. The USMC guys fly a direct troop support mission as a light attack plane. The USAF flies the Forward Air Control mission the does NOT involve offensive weapons. They can load up a Marine OV-10 with ordnance because they'll only be flying it a few miles to the battle. USAF flies four-hour missions hundreds of miles from base doing recce. No weapons but lots of fuel. In the old days, a FAC carried nothing but smoke rockets to mark targets for the fighters. OVs carried two rocket pods and a large belly tank. (They sometimes didn't even have ammo for the machine guns, the pilots being forbidden to use them anyway. ROE, ya know)

If you read the article about the Sky Warden, they specifically mention it being used in places like Africa. The idea is to combine a "FAC" recce mission with a light attack ability. Beaucoup sensors and comm, long loiter, two-seat crew for the workload, and some impressive firepower. If I were a dog soldier on patrol, I'd sure love having that kind of overhead help.

Again, I'm not arguing for or against that particular plane, but stating that the mission itself is needed. (And the A-10 is NOT the plane for it. Nor is a helicopter, as good as both of them are for other things.)

Kind of looks like a drone with a seat and canopy.

Two seats. And there will never be the degree of situational awareness in any drone that a human crew can provide. Not the least of which is due to "latency". When a drone sees something, that scene is not seen by the drone operator for as long as two seconds, just due to multiple up/down satellite links and processing time. Two seconds is an eternity in combat. That doesn't even address the tunnel vision effect of drone vision compared to "corner of the eye" vision of a human crew.

From a personal viewpoint, I have 180 degree peripheral vision, and that field of view saved my life at least once in combat.

A pair of something like these sitting on strip alert might of come handy for the guys that were killed in the Tongo Tongo ambush. A French jet did eventually make it to the site, but well after the initial ambush.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-61631439


Is somalia in South America?

Yeah, that country where we have had cover spec-ops groups roaming around for decades.

The USMC OV-10's could also carry a 4-man Recon team in the back and dump them out at low altitude and they would hit the ground in a distance not exceeding 100 yards. Saw it happen once.

Would a turbine powered A-1 fulfill any those needs?

From the ground persons view, quick get in close and support me seems like something might be needed.
There a lot of different battleground scenarios out there and I doubt anything in the inventory is "best" for them all!

Of course I always look from the "me on the ground looking for some assistance" view!

No

They tried back in the 50's with the A2D Skyshark, but had trouble with the turboprop engine technology of the time. By the time the technology caught up interest in the program had vanished.

A2D Skyshark