Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

Bronco Systems USA: Bronco II

Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

Bronco Systems USA: Bronco II

Old 21st Feb 2018, 23:34
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: The Alps
Posts: 2,075
Bronco Systems USA: Bronco II

Here is son of the OV-10 Bronco, the Bronco II

https://theaviationist.com/2018/02/2...new-bronco-ii/



Cheers

Last edited by chopper2004; 21st Feb 2018 at 23:47.
chopper2004 is offline  
Old 22nd Feb 2018, 07:57
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: One Three Seven, Disco Heaven.
Age: 60
Posts: 1,316
Looks more like a Cessna O2 Skymaster

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cessna_O-2_Skymaster
Dan Gerous is offline  
Old 22nd Feb 2018, 11:44
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: South Skerry
Posts: 305
Apparently trying to elbow into the USAF light attack deal - although it would be useful for the Marines, and a better way to escort V-22s than the MUX drone. (It could also short-land on a short asphalt runway without blowing a hole in it.)

Much to be said for the configuration, such as not having an engine and wing blocking your view of the ground.
George K Lee is offline  
Old 22nd Feb 2018, 13:03
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Age: 65
Posts: 1,954
Originally Posted by George K Lee View Post
Much to be said for the configuration, such as not having an engine and wing blocking your view of the ground.
Indeed. However, the original Bronco had the same advantages. The only downside I see is that this rear-engine configuration means the old Bronco's rear cargo hold, which could hold troops, would go away. Don't know how much utility that rear cargo hold would provide in today's combat environment.
KenV is offline  
Old 22nd Feb 2018, 16:49
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Washington.
Age: 69
Posts: 476
Bronco II? More like Bronco 1/2
GlobalNav is offline  
Old 22nd Feb 2018, 19:17
  #6 (permalink)  
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: The Gulf Coast
Posts: 634
/not as mod
Why does it need two people? One would think that with the technology available these days, this plane could be equipped so that one pilot had all the mission systems available. Saves on gross weight and increase mission payload.
T28B is offline  
Old 22nd Feb 2018, 19:37
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Alles ‹ber
Posts: 42
Originally Posted by T28B View Post
/not as mod
Why does it need two people? One would think that with the technology available these days, this plane could be equipped so that one pilot had all the mission systems available. Saves on gross weight and increase mission payload.
One bloke to FAC(A) perhaps?
trim it out is offline  
Old 22nd Feb 2018, 20:15
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 1,863
Originally Posted by T28B View Post
/not as mod
Why does it need two people? One would think that with the technology available these days, this plane could be equipped so that one pilot had all the mission systems available. Saves on gross weight and increase mission payload.
Working a pod whilst looking out is not easy. If you are single seat you really need a wingman to maintain awareness and stay away from the low-level environment/ terrain. If you are happy to share then the extra seat in a modern F/A-18F, F-15E, Apache, F-16I et al makes you much more effective.
Just This Once... is offline  
Old 22nd Feb 2018, 20:16
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 15,980
Much to be said for the configuration, such as not having an engine and wing blocking your view of the ground.
Well, the Cessna 337 that looks very familiar layout wise in its design used to fly along quite happily with the crew totally unaware that the overheating rear engine had long since caught fire and was burning it's way through the aircraft.
NutLoose is offline  
Old 22nd Feb 2018, 20:28
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: somerset
Posts: 92
Having the MDC running straight down the canopy centreline, in the view line, would annoy the hell outta me, though it isn't present in any other images.

http://www.grafika24.com/wp-content/...ne-Graphic.jpg

http://www.ahrlac.com/



garyscott is offline  
Old 22nd Feb 2018, 22:01
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NSW
Posts: 215
Well, the Cessna 337 that looks very familiar layout wise in its design used to fly along quite happily with the crew totally unaware that the overheating rear engine had long since caught fire and was burning it's way through the aircraft.

That's why the O-2 had a fire detection system on the rear engine...
TBM-Legend is offline  
Old 23rd Feb 2018, 06:25
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Australia
Posts: 87
Originally Posted by KenV View Post
Indeed. However, the original Bronco had the same advantages. The only downside I see is that this rear-engine configuration means the old Bronco's rear cargo hold, which could hold troops, would go away. Don't know how much utility that rear cargo hold would provide in today's combat environment.
Didnít the recent combat experiment with the OV-10G+ in Iraq confirm the ongoing utility of the cargo bay? Self re-arming at a ARP, IIRC.
2805662 is offline  
Old 23rd Feb 2018, 11:15
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 15,980
That's why the O-2 had a fire detection system on the rear engine...
And the little mirrors mounted on the wings so you could see what the legs were doing, which was one of the most frustrating designs I worked on, that and the 177RG.
NutLoose is offline  
Old 23rd Feb 2018, 11:37
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NSW
Posts: 215
I owned an O-2A and the only mirror was a little one to see the nose gear. The mains were visible from the driving seat. The O-2 has a plexiglass insert in the lower right door... The fire warning for the rear engine was a pre-start check item.
TBM-Legend is offline  
Old 23rd Feb 2018, 12:16
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 15,980
That's the mirror on the port wing.

We did an annual on a 177RG and the guy who jacked it didn't get it high enough, we watched in awe as the main gear hit the ground, lifted the aircraft off the jacks and then deposited it back on the jacks as it went over centre.... needless to say he raised it a bit higher before we put the gear down again.
NutLoose is offline  
Old 26th Feb 2018, 01:25
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: by the Great Salt Lake, USA
Posts: 1,540
Originally Posted by GlobalNav View Post
Bronco II? More like Bronco 1/2
Looks fine to me.


Ford Bronco 1978-96:
length 180.4 in (4.582 m);
width 79.3 in (2.014 m);
height 75.5 in (1.918 m);
weight 4,580 lb (2,081 kg){varied by model year from ~4,200-4,600 lb}



Ford Bronco II 1983-1990:
length 1983-1988: 158.3 in (4.021 m), 1989-1990: 161.9 in (4.112 m);
width 68.0 in (1.727 m);
height 1983-1988: 68.2 in (1.732 m), 989-1990: 69.9 in (1.775 m);
weight 3,385 lb (1,538 kg) {varied by model year from ~3,200-3,400 lb}

GreenKnight121 is offline  
Old 26th Feb 2018, 03:37
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: surfing, watching for sharks
Posts: 3,476
A Greenknight sighting. Thought you went the way of the dodo bird.
West Coast is offline  
Old 26th Feb 2018, 18:55
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 60
Posts: 5,359
I am trying to understand why Bronco II proposal isn't answered by "we have UAV's that do that now."

Anyone have an insight on that? UAV's have great dwell time. My work with Preds/Reapers found that they gave very good lasing and target ID (for the time) for a variety of scenarios.


What's the key thing that makes this niche aircraft more attractive?
Lonewolf_50 is offline  
Old 26th Feb 2018, 20:00
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: surfing, watching for sharks
Posts: 3,476
FAC (A) capability?
West Coast is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.