AFSOC OA-1K Incident

[ClearedHot]

Didn't make the news but a AFSOC OA-1K had an engine failure that resulted in an off-runway excursion.

I am told the aircraft had a chip light the day prior.  Maintenance changed the oil, did an engine run and signed it off to fly.

The next day the crew was taking off when the chip light illuminated, followed quickly by a low oil pressure warning and the engine seized shortly thereafter.  The crew did a great job of getting it down but ran off the end of the runway...no one was hurt.

The thing is a beast, looks like they could bang the dents out, wash it off, bolt a new motor on and go fly.

The bigger concern is the PT-6 failure, one of the most reliable engines out there.  I don't think a U-28 would have has the same outcome.

[Swizzle]

Almost-ready-for-war, War tractor! Now to make the motors just as durable as the airframe.

Edited December 3 by Swizzle

[brabus]

1 hour ago, ClearedHot said:

The bigger concern is the PT-6 failure, one of the most reliable engines out there

 No kidding, very surprising to hear this happen to a PT-6. But, great job on the pilot’s part.

[DirkDiggler]

Great job by the pilot walking away from that, especially on a tail dragger.

Edited December 3 by DirkDiggler
Spelling

[HuggyU2]

11 minutes ago, DirkDiggler said:

Great job by the pilot walking away from that, especially on a tail dragger.

There's a reason you don't see near as many aircraft with the tail wheel mounted on the front end, doing back country flying.

 

[Biff_T]

3 hours ago, ClearedHot said:

 

 

 

This thing looks even sexier covered in mud. 

[yzl337]

Wouldn't be the first platform utilizing the PT6 to have chip light and oil contamination issues, still not uncommon in the T-6, even years after the prop sleeve touchdown issues was solved. 

[raimius]

8 minutes ago, yzl337 said:

Wouldn't be the first platform utilizing the PT6 to have chip light and oil contamination issues, still not uncommon in the T-6, even years after the prop sleeve touchdown issues was solved. 

I haven't heard of many T-6 chip lights lately.  Which base(s)?

[herkbier]

Anyone know why the OV-10 wasn’t chosen for this?

[SurelySerious]

Anyone know why the OV-10 wasn’t chosen for this?

I don’t remember it being a competitor for the Armed Overwatch RFP, honestly. Could be wrong, there were 8 iterations of this program in some shape or form between AFSOC and SOCOM.

[BashiChuni]

4 hours ago, herkbier said:

Anyone know why the OV-10 wasn’t chosen for this?

it was looked at and studied but not by afsoc

[yzl337]

10 hours ago, raimius said:

I haven't heard of many T-6 chip lights lately.  Which base(s)?

not many, but they've never completely stopped, there were 1-2 a year during my recent time at Vance. 

[PIT_Guru]

21 hours ago, herkbier said:

Anyone know why the OV-10 wasn’t chosen for this?

The OV-10 was not a contender. There were three that made it to the evaluation phase and that wasn't one of them. 

[Clark Griswold]

Anyone know why the OV-10 wasn’t chosen for this?

Just a guess but as it has not been produced since ‘86, with a limited used fleet available for purchase and modification it was probably deemed economically infeasible


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Lawman]

Just a guess but as it has not been produced since ‘86, with a limited used fleet available for purchase and modification it was probably deemed economically infeasible


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Given the condition of the ones in use by parent nations, the feasibility of some kind of buy back would have been immediately dismissed.

Most in service outside California Fire were decrepit. The Phils were flying them sans most of the instrument panel and the ejection seats until they lost a few in quick succession and at most had 3 PMC aircraft in 2014, shortly withdrawn from service afterward and replaced with a few that Thailand wasn’t doing anything with. They aren’t in much better condition.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Clark Griswold]

Given the condition of the ones in use by parent nations, the feasibility of some kind of buy back would have been immediately dismissed.

Most in service outside California Fire were decrepit. The Phils were flying them sans most of the instrument panel and the ejection seats until they lost a few in quick succession and at most had 3 PMC aircraft in 2014, shortly withdrawn from service afterward and replaced with a few that Thailand wasn’t doing anything with. They aren’t in much better condition.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Roger that
I remember seeing the renders Boeing (OV-10X) floated when the LAAR idea was in the zeitgeist but IIRC the requirement was for 100 tails, I’ve heard that for just about any aircraft type to be economically viable about 300 tails need to be built to give the necessary economics of scale to buy, operate, sustain.
Mil aircraft don’t have an exemption to this rule of thumb just access to an almost bottomless pit of money to keep the small high tech fleets possible/flying so we can “afford” 21 B-2s vs the real 100 or so we were really supposed to buy, good thinking Congress…
Cal-Fire is a great example of how if we could have thought outside the container and found other gov/maybe commercial partners we could have gotten a capable, modern LAAR done back in the GWOT days but that’s all OBE…


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[MT near]

Newish Broncos were test flown in Maryland amd even fought against ISIS target in 2017 timeframe. Not sure where they went afterwards 

[Clark Griswold]

Newish Broncos were test flown in Maryland amd even fought against ISIS target in 2017 timeframe. Not sure where they went afterwards 

Yup - Navy’s Combat Dragon test


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[herkbier]

I think California may have gotten them. It seems like the perfect platform, so what if we have to restart/recreate a production line.

The plane is super simple, even Boeing couldn’t screw it up and it could be a much needed win in their portfolio..

[uhhello]

3 hours ago, MT near said:

Newish Broncos were test flown in Maryland amd even fought against ISIS target in 2017 timeframe. Not sure where they went afterwards 

They were parked next to us in Erbil 2015

Edited December 5 by uhhello

[tac airlifter]

On 12/3/2024 at 12:35 PM, herkbier said:

Anyone know why the OV-10 wasn’t chosen for this?

It was experimented with by a different organization and had U28 folks involved in their IZ assessment.  It failed, program canceled.

On 12/3/2024 at 7:49 AM, ClearedHot said:

I don't think a U-28 would have has the same outcome.

Definitely not a U28 in that hard mud, but we had one sink landing on a sand LZ in Arlit and after an inspection it flew back. And these OA1Ks are more analogous to the NMC PC12 right?  We put a few of those off into the dirt training and they were quite robust.  We did need a prop change in the incidents I'm aware of; just under 1 mil both times & aircraft were flying by weeks end.
 

Concur on how robust the 802 is.  Remains to be seen if AFSOC leadership can wrap their minds around a totally different risk calculus than CV/MC/AC.  

[HuggyU2]

There are 2 (maybe more) OV-10's parked on the ramp at KMCC (in Sacramento), that have military paint and look very well taken care of.  I'm assuming they were sold to Cal Fire, who is also at KMCC.  

[M2]

13 hours ago, HuggyU2 said:

There are 2 (maybe more) OV-10's parked on the ramp at KMCC (in Sacramento), that have military paint and look very well taken care of.  I'm assuming they were sold to Cal Fire, who is also at KMCC.  

I see at least six here! 🫡🫡

[fire4effect]

On 12/3/2024 at 7:49 AM, ClearedHot said:

Didn't make the news but a AFSOC OA-1K had an engine failure that resulted in an off-runway excursion.

I am told the aircraft had a chip light the day prior.  Maintenance changed the oil, did an engine run and signed it off to fly.

The next day the crew was taking off when the chip light illuminated, followed quickly by a low oil pressure warning and the engine seized shortly thereafter.  The crew did a great job of getting it down but ran off the end of the runway...no one was hurt.

The thing is a beast, looks like they could bang the dents out, wash it off, bolt a new motor on and go fly.

The bigger concern is the PT-6 failure, one of the most reliable engines out there.  I don't think a U-28 would have has the same outcome.

Was taxiing at a midwestern airport a few days ago and watched one of these log at least 2 landings on one pass down the runway. In fairness there was a decent gusting x-wind but it appears the pilot had his hands full. I admit I probably would have too.

[Magic24]

On 12/15/2024 at 10:53 AM, fire4effect said:

Was taxiing at a midwestern airport a few days ago and watched one of these log at least 2 landings on one pass down the runway. In fairness there was a decent gusting x-wind but it appears the pilot had his hands full. I admit I probably would have too.

What does this comment have to do with the story of losing an engine in flight and the crew putting it down safely?