WT Forums

Hey guys, I was wondering if you could help me out a little?
Talking at work with a guy about the hog and he asked about the OA10 vs the A10, asking the difference. Now I have read that the mission is different, the OA10 being used as forward air controller, but I haven't been able to find anywhere that lists any physical differences to the plane itself. Is there any, maybe recon gear or something? Or is it strictly mission designation?

High On The Hog

_________________
\"Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a GAU-8/A at your side, kid.\"--Hawg Solo

Fairly common question...no physical differences in the aircraft whatsoever. Unless of course you consider the munitions load for the mission a physical difference. That's the only thing that identifies an OA-10...munitions load.

Go Ugly Early !
No body's ugly after 2:00 A.M.

_________________
Go Ugly Early!
Nobody is ugly after 2 A.M.

That's what I thought, thanks. Just wanted to confirm it before I swore by it. <img src=icon_smile_wink.gif border=0 align=middle>

High On The Hog

_________________
\"Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a GAU-8/A at your side, kid.\"--Hawg Solo

And what set of paperwork came with the jet in the bold print.

I think it was one of those budget plans that never seen the light of day as they were leaving the factory floor. The airforce probably envisioned at that time of still having the TAC/TASS in its structure and possibly haveing equipment for that roll. A10 had a great number projects setup for it on its very early days. Which of cource was killed off by no Funding and the ACC restructureing.

Now fac is merely an upgrade shared by pretty much any fac qualified driver on scene regardless of the aircraft anymore (SICK). Atleast the A10 provides an awesome Capability to a FAC(A) Qualified Driver.

"The power to Destroy the planet, is insignifigant to the power of the Air Force----Mudd Vader

As far as i've always heard some A-10s were redesignated as dual mission OA-10s to save them from the Cheney axe that fell on all single mission USAF tactical aircraft after ODS.

Of course, that could be wrong...

<img src="http://www.worldaffairsboard.com/sigs/snipersig.jpg " border=0>

A/OA is used for battle planning and is a bean-counter thing. In the "great battle plan" there must be a number of A-10s and a number of O/A-10s. They are also funded differently but I will not go into that here. <img src=newicons/tard.gif border=0 align=middle>

HMFIC

Dice is right and as I remember it the re-designation came as a way to save A-10s from the chopping block. When the Air Force was trimmed back to X number of fighter wings, by calling them and funding them as observation planes we were able to maintain a larger force structure of A-10s.
Cheers
db

Being responsible means sometimes pissing people off.
Gen Colin Powell ret

Dice please correct me if I am wrong here. In the early 90's after ODS, the AF did some mods called LARS. These were for SAR missions and we did soem joint ecercises at FALON NAS in NV. The mod added 2 antenna's just aft of the UHF monkey bare antenna, and gave us a few "hog bites". If i remember right at the tiem at Pope in the 75th 93-95 we only had 2 or 3 with the mod. Now I know that is a SAR ID but would'nt that fall into the O/A role? I can not remember all to mission designations, but mainly a O/A load would be mostly willie petes 1150 rnds HEI ECM and some mavs. However I have seen them loaded woth GBU 20's

JB

Utinam logica falsa tuam philosophiam totam suffodiant!

JB as far as I know, almost all of the Guard A10's are now LARS birds.

By this time tomorrow I shall have gained either a pearage or Westminster Abbey........Nelson

_________________
YGBSM !

When I left Langley, Pope was the only unit that had LARS on a couple of their jets.
It was in the works to mod additional jets but at the time nothing ws set in stone as to how many or who would have them.
The new LARS unit was going to be different than what was installed from the original mod.
It was my feeling at the time that all the jets should have the kit A mod accomplished and then just a few of the receivers and control heads available at each unit. That way it would save costs and when you needed a LARS jet you could install the LRUs in waht ever jet was available.
Not sure where it's at now.
Cheers
Db

Being responsible means sometimes pissing people off.
Gen Colin Powell ret

D.B.

As far as I know, all of our A-10s (Battle Creek) are LARS modified. The installation was done at the same time the CMS mod was done in CT. But you are correct when you say that there are only a few LARS control noggins in inventory. We normally fly around with the regular three radios and install LARS for CSAR-type missions.