Classic British Flight Sim

Saw this on the Aerosoft forum. It happened on the 10th but this is the first I've read of it. The pilot is in hospital with burns and back injuries.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-gl ... e-18787181


http://www.jackbristol.com/news/bristol ... d-airport/


I believe this is the aircraft I saw one afternoon at Duxford.

My goodness.. the poor chap suffered burns too Never seen a Bronco flying.. can't remember seeing one anyway. Let's hope the pilot recovers.

ATB
DaveB

Unlike the pilot (thankfully) the Bronco's well and truly mangled, and just missed the Gnat and the Tower....

http://www.wiltsglosstandard.co.uk/news ... d_Airport/

Any idea why the Bronco has twin booms? Can't find any reference as to why.

Chris558 wrote:Unlike the pilot (thankfully) the Bronco's well and truly mangled, and just missed the Gnat and the Tower....

http://www.wiltsglosstandard.co.uk/news ... d_Airport/

Any idea why the Bronco has twin booms? Can't find any reference as to why.

Chris, the rear section of the fuselage pod could carry parachutists ( presumably a small special forces team), a couple of stretcher cases or light cargo. I believe that capability was a requirement of the original specification, which would partly explain the twin boom design - ease of loading / unloading/ jumping out of, etc. Chris Trott will probably be able to explain it more fully.

Thanks Paul!

Its a strange aircraft, always reminded me of the FMA Pucara.

Hope the pilot makes a full recovery.

TSR2 wrote:Its a strange aircraft, always reminded me of the FMA Pucara.

Or a Sea Vixen on a bad day.

Paul K wrote:Chris, the rear section of the fuselage pod could carry parachutists ( presumably a small special forces team), a couple of stretcher cases or light cargo. I believe that capability was a requirement of the original specification, which would partly explain the twin boom design - ease of loading / unloading/ jumping out of, etc. Chris Trott will probably be able to explain it more fully.

Thanks for the vote of confidence, but I think you're about as right as can be from my limited knowledge on the type. It's always been interesting to me, but my original belief was that it was due to the high wing design (needing to get the tail out of the wash of the wing for the kind of work it was designed to do) and then I found out (years later) about the capability of carrying stuff in the tail.

Your best source for knowledge on the OV-10 can be had here though - http://www.ov-10bronco.net/ This is the website of the OV-10 Bronco association (which is based just down the road in Fort Worth) and is a great source of info, including info on the accident. I've met a few members of the Association and they've got a couple nice OV-10s on display now (one former USMC model, one former USAF/US Forestry Service one). I'm hoping they'll get a flyable OV-10 before long to go along with our area OV-1 Mohawk at the Cavanaugh Flight Museum, and the O-2 Skymaster owned by a private individual (Karen) so they can all go to airshows together and show the progression of FAC aircraft with one of the multiple O-1's and L-Birds out there as well.

There you go; cheers Chris T !

Another journalistic fail, do these guys no longer do investigative journalism these days? Yet they pontificate on just about everyone else and that's OK it seems.
"Light aircraft crashes at Cotswold Airport"
Light? makes it sound like a C152.