Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!watmath!att!cbnews!military From: johnson@amsaa-seer.brl.mil (Don Johnson) Newsgroups: sci.military Subject: Re: Army fixed-wing (Was: Rutan's Million Dollar Ground Attack Plane) Message-ID: <1990Aug30.025618.28101@cbnews.att.com> Date: 30 Aug 90 02:56:18 GMT References: <1990Aug8.030537.26069@cbnews.att.com> <1990Aug17.023750.1538@cbnews.att.com> <1990Aug28.042603.28745@cbnews.att.com> Sender: military@cbnews.att.com (William B. Thacker) Organization: AMSAA/GWD, APG, MD 21005 Lines: 24 Approved: military@att.att.com From: Don Johnson In article <1990Aug28.042603.28745@cbnews.att.com> geoffm@EBay.Sun.COM (Geoff Miller) writes: |In article <1990Aug17.023750.1538@cbnews.att.com> betz@marob.masa.com (Tom Betz) writes: |>The Army can't use it because the divorce decree between the |>Army and Air Force requires it not to fly any fixed-wing |>aircraft. |What about the OV-1 Mohawks? Aren't they set up for some kind of limited |COIN mission? Or are they strictly FAC aircraft? How does the OV-1 compare |with the OV-10 in mission and performance? The Palm Beach accord of 1948(?), which established the role and mission for the Air Force, limited Army fixed wing capability to 5000 lb take off weight. The Mohawks (and U-21s (?)) fall into this category. -- W. Donald Johnson O tempora! O mores! Operations Research Analyst johnson@amsaa-seer.brl.mil