Eric Huppert clarified this early In this thread. Max TO weight is 14,444 lbs and Vne is 350K. The D model variant is 1000 HP each side.

[/quote]


Eric Huppert clarified this early In this thread. Max TO weight is 14,444 lbs and Vne is 350K. The D model variant is 1000 HP each side.[/quote]
Looks like the CalFire versions don't require an LOA. Tristan Gibbs mentioned earlier in the thread that he flew one for CalFire and he doesn't have an LOA for it.

Scott Hanes of Blue Air on the other hand does have an LOA for the OV-10. I assume Blue Air uses a more powerful version (D model?) requiring an LOA - i.e. a checkride with a DPE is required.[/quote]

CalFire-Blue Air. One of these is not like the other. CalFire is a Public Aircraft operator, no LOA required

I don’t get on this site much, to clarify, Cal Fire aircraft are all operated under public use except the king airs. So we don’t even need to have pilot certificates technically. There aren’t any airworthiness cards so per the FAA the aircraft don’t exist. We also can’t be ramp checked. But only required crew members on board at all times.

The other Broncos being built, I have no idea how they are certified, if it’s under the experimental side or a restricted category. Lots of ex military aircraft (C130s used in the public sector) get a restricted airworthiness with lots less work then a full standard cert.

A DPE is required under the same requirements that it is in the normal world. All our OV10s are operated at a gross of 10,500. However I know the military went up to 17k ish, so it would all depend on what the operator gets written down in the manual under whatever category they certify it to.

I don’t know where a LOA would be required except for the first DPE to fly the aircraft, then he would type the next few guys. I know in the certified world the FAA would type themselves as well and usually be a part of the flight test campaign in a small way.

Thanks for the information about public aircraft. I've never quite understood that exemption and it's a bit strange!



The handful of non Cal Fire OV-10s are operated as "experimental exhibition".

Not a LOA anymore - That term has been replaced by an "Authorized Experimental Aircraft" which appears (oddly) on the "Limitations" section of your certificate. To get an AEA requires an 8710 and a checkride by a specialty DPE.

There are a small number of DPEs who are technically legal in anything with propellers and can give checkrides. There are also a few who are specifically listed as OV-10 examiners.

Robert

Hmmm ... I wonder if I could get that added to my CLOA to do check rides in the OV10. Would be fun to fly one again here and there. I need to chat with my manager.

Another excellent Bronco mission article on Air Facts Journal by Dale Hill

https://airfactsjournal.com/2025/03/buf ... C-Q.Rrv3FZ

Great Read Norman

Does anyone have information about the OV-10As that NASA operated?

I’m building a model of N524NA and would appreciate any information about paint colors, scheme, and fonts.

I’m also looking for details of the instrumentation mounted on the nose and wings. Trying to model the nose boom by sight using the few publicly available images has been tough.

Thanks!

There are two D models sitting on our ramp in MCC that came from NASA. Suspiciously they aren’t in regular NASA colors though.

That said … N524NA is a Falcon jet per the registry. Was this a previous registration your referring to?

N524NA photo attached.

By my recall the OV-10's performance numbers were very similar to the T-28's and we '28 drivers could do a lot with that plane. I always figured that the OV-10, besides having turbine engine advantages, could out do a '28 by using touches of differential thrust.

The OV-10 was a fine plane. Maybe lessons learned in modern combat can generate a new plane to do the OV-10 stuff.

The Australian that I sold my Excalibur to was a Vietnam Bronco FAC pilot. He told me that he would fly along a tree line at low level and the NVA would run out into the open to fire at him after he passed. He said he could turn the plane flat in a split second like a turret like no other plane can and light them up. I imagine he was using differential thrust. The straight fat wing, heavily counterbalanced ailerons with vortex generators, roll spoilers and two large rudders in the propeller slipstream gave it some very unique flying characteristics.

The short rough field capability, superior visibility, 4 M60Cs, ability to haul cargo and airdrop along with turbine reliability made it a much more capable counterinsurgency platform than the T28.

Did someone say T-28 and OV-10?

Robert

Was the OV-10 ever used much in combat to carry troops or wounded in the back? Seems crazy, but it was designed for that.

They hauled lots of beer.

They were sometimes flown with the aft door removed and used for low level insertions. They could come in at tree top level and pull vertical to insert paratroopers to rescue downed airmen. Some that I parted out had static line cables and jump lights in the back. A wingman would fly cover and then both could fire on the enemy to keep them pinned down for a Huey to do the evacuation.

There are some good stories in “A Lonely Kind of War”, “Hit My Smoke” and “DaNang Diary”