• About Air & Space
  • Email Updates
  • Member Services
  • Shop
  • Archive
airspacemag.com
  • Smithsonian Institution
  • Smithsonian Channel
  • goSmithsonian
  • Smithsonian magazine
  • Home
  • History of Flight
  • Flight Today
  • Military Aviation
  • Space Exploration
  • Photos
  • Videos
  • Subscribe
During the Vietnam War, the OV-10 Bronco served many masters. For the Navy, it flew light-attack missions. A forward air controller for the Air Force and Marines, it marked targets for fighter bombers like the F-100
(Courtesy Dennis Darnell)
  • Military Aviation

Legends of Vietnam: Bronco's Tale

One of the most versatile aircraft of the Vietnam War appears on the verge of a comeback.

  • By William E. Burrows
  • Air & Space Magazine, March 01, 2010

Related Topics

Propeller Aircraft

Military Aircraft

Vietnam War

Photo Gallery

A Bronco returns to Udorn Air Base Thailand.

Legends of Vietnam: Bronco's Tale

Explore more photos from the story


Video Gallery

One Tough Airplane

How the OV-10 Bronco beat the system and lived to fight.


Article Tools

  • Font
  • Share/Save/Bookmark Share
  • Email
  • Print
  • Digg Digg
  • Comments
  • StumbleUpon StumbleUpon
  • RSS
  • Reddit Reddit

    The U.S. military has been here before: fighting an enemy who wears no uniform, one who hits and runs then disappears, blending in with local villagers. It has pursued before, with overwhelming technological superiority, guerrilla fighters who improvise weapons and use the terrain to hide. The rugged mountains along the Afghanistan-Pakistan frontier, where the Taliban and al Qaeda hide, are as effective at concealment as the dense swamps and forests of Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia. In Vietnam, the U.S. military learned that when striking an elusive enemy, high-performance jet fighters were much more successful when they were directed by lighter, slower airplanes that could wait and watch for the enemy to move.

    Last July the Air Force revived its requirement for a slow-moving, light-attack/armed reconnaissance aircraft, and Boeing’s Global Services and Support group responded with an updated version of a Vietnam veteran: the OV-10 Bronco. In Vietnam, the OV-10 (“O” for observation; “V” for short takeoff) was highly adaptable and performed many missions for the Air Force, Navy, and Marines. But it was primarily a forward air control aircraft whose machine guns, rockets, and bombs could quickly make it ferocious.

    “You could do quite a bit of damage while you were waiting for the heavier stuff,” says Dennis Darnell, who in 1969 and 1970 was a first lieutenant in VMO-2, an observation squadron supporting the First Marine Division at Da Nang. “And if the situation was right, you wouldn’t even need the heavier stuff. You could get Medevac or troop transport helicopters in and pluck [U.S. infantry] out of difficult situations and that would be the end of it.” The OV-10 was armed with four 7.62-mm machine guns and a variety of external weapons. For the Marines, the ordinary load was four rocket pods: two with white phosphorous rockets for marking targets and two with 2.75-inch, folding-fin rockets for striking them.

    In 1971, 15 Air Force OV-10s with the 23rd Tactical Air Support Squadron, based at Nakhon Phanom Air Base in northeastern Thailand, were modified with laser designation pods and LORAN (long-range navigation) systems. The modified OV-10s would join the effort to interdict troops and supplies moving on the Ho Chi Minh Trail, according to aviation historian Darrel Whitcomb, who flew those forward air control missions.

    Forward air controllers, or FACs, are the flying equivalent of army scouts who range ahead of the main unit to locate the enemy and quickly report its location and strength. The FAC’s mission is to call in artillery, fighter-bombers, or naval gunfire to reduce or eliminate the threat.

    The FACs with laser designators illuminated targets for McDonnell F-4 Phantoms, at the time the only aircraft in Southeast Asia equipped with laser-guided weapons. On the OV-10, the LORAN “talked to” the laser designation system, says Whitcomb, so that pilots would receive a readout in the cockpit of the coordinates of the illuminated target. “The weapons systems guy in the back seat would hold the designation system crosshairs on the target,” he says, “and the bomb would come down and it would guide right to the target.”

    The control vanes on the bombs deflected fully or not at all, so the bombs would follow a zig-zag path. “I can still see it to this day,” says Whitcomb. “The bomb came off the F-4, and you could see it wobbulating—pitching up and down as it tracked to the target. Normally it took about 34 seconds to fall to the ground.”

    The Bronco arrived in Vietnam in 1968. It didn’t take long for it to develop a reputation that made the Viet Cong think twice about shooting at it. “After a while, the enemy knew that it was a FAC aircraft,” says Darnell. “We got cut some slack because if they missed, [they knew that] within a few minutes we could bring the world down around their ears.”

    1 2 3 4 5 6

    The U.S. military has been here before: fighting an enemy who wears no uniform, one who hits and runs then disappears, blending in with local villagers. It has pursued before, with overwhelming technological superiority, guerrilla fighters who improvise weapons and use the terrain to hide. The rugged mountains along the Afghanistan-Pakistan frontier, where the Taliban and al Qaeda hide, are as effective at concealment as the dense swamps and forests of Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia. In Vietnam, the U.S. military learned that when striking an elusive enemy, high-performance jet fighters were much more successful when they were directed by lighter, slower airplanes that could wait and watch for the enemy to move.

    Last July the Air Force revived its requirement for a slow-moving, light-attack/armed reconnaissance aircraft, and Boeing’s Global Services and Support group responded with an updated version of a Vietnam veteran: the OV-10 Bronco. In Vietnam, the OV-10 (“O” for observation; “V” for short takeoff) was highly adaptable and performed many missions for the Air Force, Navy, and Marines. But it was primarily a forward air control aircraft whose machine guns, rockets, and bombs could quickly make it ferocious.

    “You could do quite a bit of damage while you were waiting for the heavier stuff,” says Dennis Darnell, who in 1969 and 1970 was a first lieutenant in VMO-2, an observation squadron supporting the First Marine Division at Da Nang. “And if the situation was right, you wouldn’t even need the heavier stuff. You could get Medevac or troop transport helicopters in and pluck [U.S. infantry] out of difficult situations and that would be the end of it.” The OV-10 was armed with four 7.62-mm machine guns and a variety of external weapons. For the Marines, the ordinary load was four rocket pods: two with white phosphorous rockets for marking targets and two with 2.75-inch, folding-fin rockets for striking them.

    In 1971, 15 Air Force OV-10s with the 23rd Tactical Air Support Squadron, based at Nakhon Phanom Air Base in northeastern Thailand, were modified with laser designation pods and LORAN (long-range navigation) systems. The modified OV-10s would join the effort to interdict troops and supplies moving on the Ho Chi Minh Trail, according to aviation historian Darrel Whitcomb, who flew those forward air control missions.

    Forward air controllers, or FACs, are the flying equivalent of army scouts who range ahead of the main unit to locate the enemy and quickly report its location and strength. The FAC’s mission is to call in artillery, fighter-bombers, or naval gunfire to reduce or eliminate the threat.

    The FACs with laser designators illuminated targets for McDonnell F-4 Phantoms, at the time the only aircraft in Southeast Asia equipped with laser-guided weapons. On the OV-10, the LORAN “talked to” the laser designation system, says Whitcomb, so that pilots would receive a readout in the cockpit of the coordinates of the illuminated target. “The weapons systems guy in the back seat would hold the designation system crosshairs on the target,” he says, “and the bomb would come down and it would guide right to the target.”

    The control vanes on the bombs deflected fully or not at all, so the bombs would follow a zig-zag path. “I can still see it to this day,” says Whitcomb. “The bomb came off the F-4, and you could see it wobbulating—pitching up and down as it tracked to the target. Normally it took about 34 seconds to fall to the ground.”

    The Bronco arrived in Vietnam in 1968. It didn’t take long for it to develop a reputation that made the Viet Cong think twice about shooting at it. “After a while, the enemy knew that it was a FAC aircraft,” says Darnell. “We got cut some slack because if they missed, [they knew that] within a few minutes we could bring the world down around their ears.”

    “If a guy fired at us, the [pilot] would go into a steady orbit around the gun pit, and the bomb would come in,” says Whitcomb. “And the enemy realized that if they saw an OV-10 go into a standard left-hand turn”—the pilot’s maneuver to enable the backseater to designate the target—“they’d better stop shooting because they were about to get hit with a laser-guided bomb. And we used that as a defensive tactic: If they shot at you, just go into standard left-hand orbit.

    “We lost some OV-10s doing that kind of stuff,” he adds.

    The reluctance of the enemy to fire was sometimes frustrating to the pilots, who were prohibited by the rules of engagement from attacking certain targets in Vietnam unless the bad guys fired first. So the idea was to get them to shoot. Gordon Evans, a Marine first lieutenant in 1971, remembers flying a patrol 20 miles west of Da Nang when he spotted a group of about 10 North Vietnamese soldiers lined up on a dike. He made a close pass to get them to fire. Nothing. He went around again. “They just didn’t pay me any mind,” Evans says. “They knew what was going on. So I went around to make still another pass, real slow. My backseater got agitated and said, ‘I don’t think this is a good idea. We’re gonna get hosed.’ ” But there was still no fire from the men on the dike. “I was all of 24, bulletproof, and knew everything,” he says. “I dropped my gear and my flaps, put all the lights on in the airplane—this is daytime—and went by in a landing configuration” to make the best possible target. He finally elicited a response. “Several guys on the dike pulled down their trousers and mooned us,” Evans says.

    In the Era of Boom and Zoom

    The Bronco was developed through a process unique in military procurement history. Two Marine Corps majors, K. P. Rice and the late William H. Beckett, were neighbors in Santa Ana, California, in 1961. (“K.P.” stands for Knowlton Prentice, which is “great for a Congressman,” Rice says, but “lousy for a Marine.”) The two had been in a Corsair squadron together in 1949, and, sitting on Beckett’s patio, they would discuss the Navy and Air Force preoccupation with sleek, swept-wing fighters and exotic weapons during what Beckett called “the era of boom and zoom.” They believed that the services were ignoring conventional weapons necessary for the close air support of ground forces.

    What was needed, Beckett and Rice determined, was a scrappy observation airplane that could not only find enemy combatants but also attack them on the spot. They envisioned a twin-engine turboprop that would be faster than helicopters, yet slower and more versatile than jets. And it had to be simple and easy to maintain. Furthermore—and this was revolutionary—the aircraft had to be capable of taking off and landing in so short a space that it could be stationed with battalions in combat areas, not at some far-off air base. Each battalion would in effect have its own small air force. The two would-be designers limited the wingspan to 20 feet and the distance between landing gear to six and a half feet so that the aircraft could land on and take off from roads in undeveloped areas.

    “Why don’t we build one?” Rice finally asked his friend. The two men built as much of a full-scale fiberglass model as would fit in Rice’s garage (because of the space limitation, attaching the wings was out of the question), and then began trying to sell the concept to “The System,” as Rice scornfully called the 1960s decision makers in the Pentagon and the aircraft industry. Their design was met with deep skepticism, partly because, unlike other attack aircraft, it didn’t carry tons of bombs. “We don’t want to do that,” Rice and Beckett patiently explained. “We want to base it with the troops and carry infantry ordnance.” They had in mind the 106-mm recoilless rifle.

    The Navy fought the project at first, Rice says, but eventually came around, and so did the Air Force. In 1963, the services began writing requirements for a Light Armed Reconnaissance Aircraft. The Navy required landing gear that would enable the aircraft to operate from rough areas, and to test that capability, built a runway that looked like a sine wave. In a 2009 video documentary (made as a thesis for a master of fine arts degree by a student at the University of North Texas), the OV-10 gamely bounces down the runway’s hills and valleys as Beckett describes the test results: “The best pickup truck could do something like 7 mph on it before it went completely out of control. The OV-10 was supposed to land and take off on that. And they could. The plane could do it, but the pilot couldn’t.” The aircraft shook so violently that the pilot’s vision blurred.

    What was finally built—by North American Aviation, which, after a series of mergers, was later absorbed by Boeing—was a much larger aircraft (the wingspan doubled) with more systems than the two friends had originally planned. “But it was still recognizable,” says Rice. “It could still be a pretty useful airplane.”

    As Rice and Beckett had stipulated, the wings were set behind the narrow, tandem cockpit but even higher than in the original design, so they would not block the view of the ground or of anything lurking above and behind the aircraft. And the canopy was wider than the cockpit and bulged, which made the view spectacular.

    Ready, 24-7

    Appropriately, the first six Broncos that went to Vietnam were sent by the Marines and flew their first missions on July 6, 1968. An Air Force contingent arrived on August 1 and began operational missions a couple of weeks later. The Navy sent Light Attack Squadron Four (VAL-4), the “Black Pony,” in April 1969 to provide close air support for its “brown water” river and coastal operations, attack Viet Cong supply routes, and provide fire support for the SEALs.

    “We had an aircraft in the air from six o’clock in the morning until right after sunset,” says Chuck Burin, a Marine aviator with VMO-2 in Da Nang who on a previous tour had flown A-4 Skyhawks. Today, Burin is the chairman of the board and historian of the OV-10 Bronco Association, a group of 400 veterans and Bronco fans headquartered in Fort Worth, Texas. The group has restored two Broncos for a museum displaying forward air control aircraft and memorabilia at Fort Worth Veterans Memorial Air Park at Meacham Field. One of them is an OV-10A that both Burin and Dennis Darnell flew in Vietnam.

    With aircraft aloft all day—and crews on standby for night missions—a Marine OV-10 was always ready to support troops coming in contact with enemy forces. “We’d always have a crew on the ‘hot pad,’ as they called it, ready to go,” says Michael Cerre, a Marine tank officer who flew as an aerial observer. Marines who flew in the Bronco back seats were not aviators; instead they were infantry, artillery, or tank officers “who knew how to talk to guys on the ground,” Darnell says.

    "On very-heavy-activity nights, we were sleeping under the wing of the plane,” says Cerre. “I can remember we used to wear [on lanyards] around our necks little plastic cheat sheets with the last coordinates we had for reconnaissance teams, so if they’d wake us to say, ‘You’re scrambling to support team Jolly Roger,’ I’d look down and the coordinate was right on my chest. We didn’t want to waste a second. While the pilot was doing everything he had to do to get us off the ground, he’d say, ‘Where we going?’ ”

    The observer would be busy pinpointing the coordinates on a map and working the radios to find the fastest and safest route to the destination—around, over, or under artillery fire. “It was a really intense period of listening to a lot of voices from a lot of sources,” Cerre says, adding that the experience helped him in his later career. As a broadcaster, “I’d have that link in my ear listening to the director yelling in all kinds of things and it was easy,” he says. “It was only two people speaking.” As a Marine observer in Vietnam, he had four radios, and was accustomed to hearing a lot more than two.

    “The backseater could do what several radio operators on a C-130 could do,” adds Jim Hodgson, who also flew the aircraft and is the executive director of the OV-10 Bronco Association.

    The job was “locating the ground force,” says Darnell, “isolating them on the maps, finding out what kind of a jam they had gotten themselves into, and then orchestrating whatever support was available at the time.” When there was no action, a crew was assigned to a specific area for daily recon missions so they could become intimately familiar with it, and report any changes to the intelligence officers. “It was amazing that after a while you could tell if a stream crossing had been used or if vegetation had changed,” says Darnell.

    Says Burin: “You’d notice everything: The farmers aren’t out in the field today. Why is that?”

    With external fuel tanks, an OV-10 could fly for five and a half hours. In addition to the four machine guns, which were mounted in sponsons bolted to the fuselage, there was a centerline station for a 20-mm cannon. The aircraft could carry up to 2,400 more pounds of rockets, bombs, or missiles on the sponson attach points.

    “For those of us right out of pilot training, it was a slug compared to the T-38,” says former Air Force pilot Brad Wright, “but boy, was it nimble. You could turn on a dime and make change. It wasn’t sleek like a fighter jet, but it was plenty functional. It was a fun airplane to fly. It was responsive, fully aerobatic, had great visibility and good fuel economy.” Like other OV-10 pilots, though, Wright says that the aircraft was seriously underpowered.

    “You always want more power,” says Burin. “I think the guys flying the F-22 want more power. But a number of OV-10s were lost in sloping terrain because they just couldn’t fly out of it. And if you lost an engine,” he continues, “if you didn’t dump everything that was hanging on that airplane, you were going to crash.”

    Although the maximum altitude in the airplane’s published specifications is 26,000 feet, Broncos could work from the treetops up to only 18,000 feet “in optimum conditions,” according to Burin, “but we rarely flew above 10,000 feet.” Likewise, the aircraft could be considered a short-takeoff-and-landing craft, but it could take off in the advertised 800 feet only “with a light load on a cool day,” Burin says.

    The Marine Bronco drivers and their backseaters ordinarily flew at 1,000 or 1,500 feet, so were most threatened by ground fire. The Air Force flew higher, at around 4,000 to 5,000 feet. “They had a lot more stuff shooting at them,” says Burin, referring to flights over the Ho Chi Minh Trail.

    “At the start of the year I was concerned about [being hit by ground fire], but I guess I got over it,” says Jack Thompson, who was an FAC in Vietnam in 1971 and 1972. “It was almost a daily thing. I was there a year and I flew 234 missions, and so you get used to it. And the airplane, it’s like it was a part of me. It was slow and responsive.”

    It wasn’t as slow as helicopters. Dennis Darnell, who also flew helicopters in Vietnam, much preferred the OV-10. “A lot of times if you were checking out, you’d go high and dive, and go by at a tremendous speed—a luxury you didn’t have in helicopters,” he says. “You were just always slow in those things. The reason I was so pleased with the OV-10 is I never had to put one in because of battle damage; whereas in four months, on my first tour I lost three helicopters.”

    When a Bronco did need repairs, the work could be done with ordinary hand tools. In addition, no ground equipment was needed to start OV-10 engines; and in an emergency, high-octane automobile fuel could be used in place of aviation fuel with only a slight loss of power.

    The airplane did have a vulnerability, however: No Bronco pilot ever ditched the aircraft and survived. Aware that a pilot had been killed in an attempted ditching, Air Force Captain Steven L. Bennett chose to try anyway: in late June 1972 after a surface-to-air missile damaged his left engine and left landing gear. Bennett made the decision because the missile blast had destroyed the parachute of his observer, Marine Captain Mike Brown. Darrel Whitcomb was attacking enemy targets near the Demilitarized Zone when he got a call from Bennett. Whitcomb rendezvoused with the stricken aircraft and watched as it came down just off the South Vietnam coast. “By the time the helicopter got there,” says Whitcomb, “they were able to rescue the backseater, but Bennett was killed.” Bennett was the only OV-10 airman to receive the Medal of Honor.

    What kept Bronco crews awake at night, says Michael Cerre, was the fear of directing an air strike or artillery strike on friendly forces or on civilians. “Was it the wrong bend in the river?” he remembers thinking right after the bombs had been released. “Was it the wrong hooch?”

    “For the recon troops, we were calling for air strikes within 100 meters of them and that was terrifying,” says Cerre. “The jets would be coming in—they had to make these steep, tight turns—and the pilot would be saying ‘Am I cleared?’ but their wings would still be rocking and I’d answer ‘Negative, negative, negative’ because I had to make sure that the pilot had steadied his wings and had his sights on that target.

    “And then there was this moment that haunts me to this day. [After the bomb was released] the radios would go silent. And you hope you hear the ground troops say, ‘We’re okay,’ or ‘That was on target.’ But sometimes it wouldn’t be okay. Either there was terror in their voices because the bomb had hit so close or the enemy was still coming.”

    Old Bronco, New Tricks

    On February 23, 1991, the night before the Operation Desert Storm ground assault officially began, the First and Second Marine Divisions were already inside occupied Kuwait, breaching the minefields that Iraqis had laid. A holdover from the war in Vietnam was with them. Above the advancing Marines, an OV-10D—a Bronco with upgraded engines and a night vision system—monitored the ground action. The lead battalion, new to combat and moving fast in the dark, called in air support that could have hit friendly positions nearby. Captain Kevin Trepa, the Bronco observer who had a more complete picture of the battlefield, intervened and almost certainly prevented fratricide.

    After Desert Storm, the Marine Corps decided to retire the OV-10 because its slow speed made it vulnerable to anti-aircraft weapons. (Of the 20 deployed in Desert Storm, two were shot down, both A models.) A flurry of articles in the Marine Corps Gazette worried that no airplane remaining in the inventory could perform the same mission as well. The Air Force’s recent call for proposals seems to validate that belief, at least in those combat areas without sophisticated air defenses.

    Mark Pierce is leading Boeing’s business development effort with the OV-10(X). “In theaters where the air defense threat has been peeled back,” he says, “this would be a perfect platform to do convoy support or light-attack/armed reconnaissance at a fraction of the cost of what the [services] have been doing through F/A-18s, F-16s, F-15s, and A-10s.” Though it would still be the same simple airframe, it would have a fully computerized cockpit, intelligence sensors, and a 30-mm gun in a centerline pod. It could also carry smart bombs and up to 16 Hellfire missiles.

    Boeing is planning for a world market and hopes to sell upgrades to countries that have bought new and previously owned Broncos: Germany, Thailand, Venezuela, Indonesia, Colombia, and the Philippines. In the meantime, more than a few Bronco pilots and observers believe that if the U.S. Air Force needs a light-attack/armed reconnaissance aircraft, the one that performed the missions so successfully in Vietnam should report for duty.

     

    William E. Burrows is an Air & Space contributing editor.

     


     
    Comments

    As you can see from my email address, I was a Nail FAC out of NKP in 71-72. I was one of three pilots selected for the combat evaluation of the Laser OV-10 known as Pavenail which took place at Ubon Thailand with most of the missions flown into Cambodia. If you have any questions about that Laser system (which was removed from the OV-10's before they left SEA) I can help.

    Posted by John W. Van Etten on January 24,2010 | 10:26AM

    I was a crew chief on ov-1o both with 20 & 23 tass and have often wondered what ever became of my best performing plane from 23 tass I set a world record with tail# 67-14671 I managed to keep it flyin for 212.2 hours in a single month!! like I said it was the best ,and its overall 6 month average was 176 hrs /month I really loved "671"

    Posted by harry J aldworth on January 24,2010 | 10:43AM

    Great plane worth bringing back. The A-10 is a superlative CAS platform, but people should consider bringing back the A-1 which has fine loiter time and played an impressive role in providing cover for SAR helicopters touching down to rescue downed air crews.

    Posted by Donald A. Petkus on January 24,2010 | 08:36PM

    I have seven and a half years on the OV10 and find it to be the best plane I have ever crewed and flown. I was on them at DaNang, NKP,McDill and Shaw AFB. I was the only enlisted Air Force NCO to be back seat FCF Qualified on the OV10. I would love to see it come back. Harry R. Shank Msgt Retired.

    Posted by Harry Shank on January 26,2010 | 09:04AM

    Salutations! I'm an avid model aircraft builder and currently preparing for my next project, which is building a 1/72 YOV-10D (55395). I was wondering if anyone from membership could help with a clear closeup picture of the logo painted on the vertical stab. I can't figure out what it is. The following a link to a picture of the aircraft in question w/ logo, but to far to tell what it is to make a decal. http://www.scaleaero.com/yov10nogs.htm Thanks, Alex

    Posted by Alex on January 28,2010 | 08:20PM

    For more information about the Navy's only OV-10 Bronco squadron, Light Attack Squadron Four (VAL-4) go to www.backpony.org

    Posted by Dave on January 29,2010 | 06:01PM

    I remember seeing USMC Broncos at airshows back in the 80s and 90s where they'd pull the nose up in a high angle and troops with parachutes would slide out the back into freefall. Pretty neat trick to see.

    Posted by Chris on February 8,2010 | 11:10AM

    I too have always been fascinated by the OV-10, but I have never flown or really been around one other than static display. While I find the concept of the comeback intriguing, there is one huge issue that no one has touched on, the UAV. While the man in the loop is a valuable thing in certain situations,(UAVs actually have men in the loop too) the UAV dose much the same job as an OV-10 would be called upon to do. The only real capability that the OV-10 has over the MQ-9 Reaper for example is the cargo bay. That might be good for Spec Ops resupply, but even the Fire Scout UAV has been tested in that role. What would be the real advantage?

    Posted by John on February 9,2010 | 01:25PM

    I had the honor of serving with VAL-4 Black Ponies in 1970-71 at Binh Thuy as a plane captain on OV-10's. I am proud to have served as a Pony and to have worked 0n such a great aircraft as the Bronco was. Tom Poland

    Posted by Tom Poland on February 12,2010 | 08:09PM

    Mr. Van Etten, Are you the same Mr. Van Etten that worked as a pilot for Great Lakes Chemical Corp? If so, as a college student at a talk you gave I remember seeing one of your OV-10 "Home movies" shot in SEA. Any chance of you sharing that again on YouTube or something similar? Bill Johnson, Maj(Ret),USAFR

    Posted by Bill Johnson on February 12,2010 | 09:49PM

    I had the opportunity to work on the OV-10 while assigned to the 20th TASS during my tour at DaNang AB, Vietnam in 1971. It was a tremendously versatile airplane and I enjoyed working on them as an Instrument techinican. There is some discussion about bringing the Bronco back and hopefully it will return to service. Ken Brown, MSgt, USAF Retired

    Posted by Ken Brown on February 13,2010 | 08:05PM

    RQST email address for John W, Van Etten. (Note: I wrote the recommendation letter and made the presentation to install the laser system in the OV-10's at Ubon). Stephen Hubert 433 TFS Paveway I EDITORS' REPLY: We don't give out contact information. Please send your request, along with your contact information, to editors@si.edu and we will try to forward your request to Mr. Van Etten.

    Posted by Stephen Hubert on March 17,2010 | 03:19PM

    Thank you for adding my grandfather Captin Steven L. Bennett. It means alot that people will never forget what sarcrifices one must make to insure freedom in our country. I just wanted to tell you thanks.

    Posted by Jake buck on March 21,2010 | 09:44PM

    I was fortunate to have served with Light Atkron Four (VAL-4), the Navy's only OV-10A squadron. Our unit was based at Binh Thuy in 4 Corps and supported both SEAL and Riverine operations throughout the Mekong Delta. Our ordinance loads consisting of Zuni rockets, 2.75" 19 shot pods and 20mm Mk. 4 gun pods proved more than sufficient to control and decimate any target encountered. It's viability might be suspect in the high threat environments in which ops are currently being conducted, but given the other candidates being suggested and the upgrades proposed by Boeing, it would be a great choice. It is a very forgiving aircraft and a treat to fly.

    Posted by Lynn Henish on April 12,2010 | 06:24PM

    Dear Sir I want to ask please If some one may know by official records,"did The Royal Australian Airforce pilots any of them ever have flown North American OV-10 Bronco during the Vietnam conflicts in the 1960s plus have any of them stationed briefly in The Country of Australia" Sir.? I am a Aviation Enthisiast and The North American 0V-10 Bronco Reccon Warhorse would have to be one of my favourite aircraft since I'm studying V.T.O.L.and S.T.O.L. etc.

    Posted by Jeffrey Phillip Meadowvale on May 22,2010 | 06:46PM

    Need help locating 3 0v-10 pilots who were out of Danang. These guys were wounded on hill 55 in Oct. 1971. They were wounded by a mortar that also killed a US Army Col. and also wounded others. Maybe you could contact other OV-10 organizations and I can find these guys. Their code name was Lopez. Any help with this would be greatly appreciated. Thank You! Tiger (code name) Hill 55 (1970-1971)

    Posted by Phil Mac on June 5,2010 | 11:02AM

    In response to Phil Mac - You may try contacting guys from the FACNET. Smitty

    Posted by Matt Smith on June 8,2010 | 12:38PM

    They stood interceptor/alert duty in Korea as late as 1980, as I recall. Two of them next to the jets in their respective bunkers at all times. The NORKS had a WWI/construction biplane contraption (AN-12 Colt,IIRC) that served them as an air assault platform. Their idea of that was hanging on the end of a rope and barrel rolling onto the ground from them. Osan had it written into their ABD exercise scenarios-- The Broncos were the only thing the USAF had slow enough to track them through the mountainous approaches and kill em prior to that point.

    Posted by Jorge Wall on June 11,2010 | 02:05PM

    July-October 1970, 3 Army-Lockheed YO-3As were based at Phu Bai I Corps. The YO-3A had 2nd generation NVAP, IRI, and Laser Target Designator. (see www.yo-3a.com.) We had Marine Corps officer with us evaluating the YO-3A for the Marines. The Marines had tested the LTD CONUS on the YO-3A before coming over to join us at Phu Bai. I am in personal contact with the Marine Corps officer who was T/O on the YO-3A and he said he employed the LTD often and that it was his favorite target designator over the other target designator YO-3A, the, Infrared Illuminater. We believe this is the 1st use of an LTD on a fixed wing aircraft in Vietnam. Would love to know if anyone knows of any earlier LTD applications in Vietnam prior to July-October 1970 time frame. Of Note the Mission equipment on the YO-3A was designed and built by Electro-Optical, a division of Xerox. Any one interested in more information can contact me through the www.yo-3a.com website. Also, see http://www.airspacemag.com/military-aviation/stalker.html

    Posted by Kurt Olney on June 22,2010 | 12:21PM

    Anyone still in contact with Hostage Rifle (Phil Smith)? We were Quonset hut mates at MMAF 1969. I flew 46s with HMM-165 but having an OV-10 around was always nice - they were the shortest link to fixed wing air whenever we ended up in a shxt sandwich. As I recall, for a time the MMAF OV-10s were getting better KBAs than the F4s flying out of Danang. Semper Fi, 'til I die!

    Posted by Jeff Sinclair on June 28,2010 | 01:27PM

    Great bird, I served with it for 10 years off and on. The flight hour to man hour ratio and operating costs were the lowest in the Naval inventory, even in its advanced age and after two mods. I imagine with modern mandrel type composite wing and airframe plus updates to its many mech-elec systems(60s tech)it would be the ideal low cost multi-purpose COIN platform; with even lower flight/maintenance ratios. The LW-3B ejection seat had 0-0 capability...so the seats weren't a drawback when you were only 30 feet off of the ground with no chance of surviving a "silk only Bailout"!

    Posted by Rick Barton on July 19,2010 | 01:37PM

    Post a Comment


    Name: (required)

    Email: (required)

    Comment:

    Comments are moderated, and will not appear until AirSpaceMag.com has approved them. Air & Space reserves the right not to post any comments that are unlawful, threatening, offensive, defamatory, invasive of a person's privacy, inappropriate, confidential or proprietary, political messages, product endorsements, or other content that might otherwise violate any laws or policies.



    Advertisement


    Most Popular Video

    • Newest
    • Most Viewed

    Signs of an Active Moon

    (08:44)

    The Last Missing WASP

    (08:44)

    Truck Killer: The A-26

    (04:34)

    Go For Launch!

    (3:52)

    View All Newest Videos »

    Jetting Through the Grand Canyon

    Jetting Through the Grand Canyon

    (03:55)

    Go For Launch!

    (3:52)

    Truck Killer: The A-26

    (04:34)

    Refueling Over Iraq

    Refueling Over Iraq

    (02:20)

    View All Most Popular Videos »

    Most Popular

    • Viewed
    • Emailed
    • Commented
    1. The Gosh of Oshkosh
    2. The First Photo From Space
    3. The Curse of the Cargomaster
    4. The 727 that Vanished
    5. The Truth is Out There
    6. Inside the Enola Gay
    7. Case Closed
    8. Welcome to Cyberairspace
    9. Department of Flying Saucers
    10. Cause Unknown
    1. The Drifters
    2. The Black Eagle of Harlem
    3. The First Photo From Space
    4. The Truth is Out There
    5. In the Museum: The Mysterious Second Seat
    6. Night Stalkers
    7. The People and Planes of Anoka County
    8. The Last to Die
    9. Welcome to Cyberairspace
    10. What's the radiation risk from airline flying?
    1. I Got Shot Down
    2. The Curse of the Cargomaster
    3. Aircraft That Changed the World
    4. John Freeborn: 1919-2010
    5. Welcome to Cyberairspace
    6. The Billy Mitchell Court-Martial
    7. One More For The Checklist
    8. Air & Space Airshow Spotter's Guide
    9. Restoration
    10. A Hard Day's Night

    Advertisement


    In the Magazine

    September 2010

    • The Truth is Out There
    • Lost In Space
    • Cold Case
    • Department of Flying Saucers
    • Checking In...
    • The Curse of the Cargomaster

    View Table of Contents »

    Join Us

    Twitter

    Follow Air & Space magazine on Twitter

    Snapshot

    Half a Century Ago

    Plans for a big rocket moved forward.

    Reader Scrapbook

    Send In Your Photos

    Check out our scrapbook of readers' aviation and space pictures. Then add your own.

    Need to Know

    What determines an airplane’s lifespan?

    Some keep flying for decades, while others end up on the scrap heap.

    • Smithsonian Store
    • Smithsonian Journeys

    Air Force One Model

    Item No. 67981

    Northern Lights of Canada

    Marvel at nature's most magnificent phenomena - the Northern Lights - during this fascinating adventure into Canada's wilderness (Sep 9 - 13, 2010)



    View full archiveRecent Issues


    • Sep 2010


    • Aug 2010


    • Jul 2010

    Newsletter

    Sign up for regular email updates from Air & Space magazine, including free newsletters, special offers and current news updates.

    Subscribe Now

    About Us

    Air & Space/Smithsonian magazine has been delighting aerospace enthusiasts with the best writing about their favorite subject since April 1986. As an adjunct of the Smithsonian Institution's National Air and Space Museum, Air & Space matches the grand scope of the Museum, encompassing every era of aviation and space exploration. With stories that range from the Wright Brothers to the design of NASA's next lunar lander, Air & Space emphasizes the human stories as well as the technology of aviation and spaceflight.

    Explore our Brands

    • goSmithsonian.com
    • Smithsonian Air & Space Museum
    • Smithsonian Student Travel
    • Smithsonian Catalogue
    • Smithsonian Journeys
    • Smithsonian Channel
    • Site Map
    • Privacy Policy
    • Copyright
    • About Air & Space
    • Contact Us
    • Advertising
    • Reader Panel
    • Subscribe
    • RSS

    Smithsonian Institution

    Produced by Clickability