logo
Can The OA-1K Skryraider II Actually Be Useful In A Pacific Fight?

Can The OA-1K Skryraider II Actually Be Useful In A Pacific Fight?

Yahoo06-05-2025
Questions about the future of the U.S. Air Force's new OA-1K Skyraider II continue to swirl amid an ongoing shift toward preparing for potential peer conflicts and away from counter-insurgency and other low-intensity operations for which the special operations light attack aircraft was originally envisioned. Whether or not the program could be axed as part of a Pentagon-wide realignment of priorities under President Donald Trump is now also a topic of great interest.
A high-ranking Air Force official recently talked at length about the OA-1K, including what roles it could play in a future high-end fight in the Pacific, with TWZ's Howard Altman, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss planning issues. Air Force Special Operations Command (AFSOC) took delivery of the first Skyraider II in April and expects to eventually receive 75 of the aircraft in total. The two-seat, single-engine turboprop's official nickname, which is a callback to the famed A-1 Skyraider that U.S. forces flew during the Korean and Vietnam Wars, was announced in February.
'The way that the OA-1K will look on day one is not how probably the OA-1K will look on day 1,000,' the Air Force official said. 'As we field it, it will continue to iterate based on the requirements that our supported forces articulate to us. We're intimately involved with all of those forces, even as we speak, on shaping the initial and then also the growing requirements that I'm sure that we will find for that platform going forward.'
The OA-1K 'was designed to be very flexible. A big element of the platform is, again, this notion of modularity, [and] open systems architecture,' they continued. 'What that does for us is, on a given mission, you might put certain types of capabilities [on the aircraft] – those could be ISR [intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance] capabilities, … strike capabilities – you may have more of one than the other, depending on the day or the mission requirement of the supported force. But then the next day, that may change, and you can rapidly swap out what the capabilities are of the platform on a given mission.'
The original core vision for the OA-1K was an aircraft capable of performing close air support, armed overwatch, and ISR missions, primarily in support of special operations forces, and while operating in permissive airspace. SOCOM's Armed Overwatch program, which resulted in the Skyraider II, kicked off in 2020, but leveraged many years of other abortive light attack aircraft programs and related test and evaluation efforts that had been heavily driven by the demands of the Global War on Terror (GWOT) era.
Another key goal for the Armed Overwatch program was to help free up tactical combat jets, bombers, and other aircraft that had been employed in these roles in countries like Afghanistan and Iraq for more demanding and/or higher-priority missions, as well as reduce costly wear and tear on those platforms from constant and of short-endurance sorties. A light attack aircraft like the OA-1K would also have the benefit of being able to be pushed forward with a minimal logistics footprint to far-flung locations, even ones with next to no infrastructure. This, in turn, would put them closer to operating areas, reducing travel time and increasing on-station availability, all without the need for already heavily in-demand tanker support.
However, the SOCOM selected the OA-1K as the winner of the Armed Overwatch competition in 2022, by which time the U.S. military had withdrawn from Afghanistan and the larger pivot to preparing for high-end operations, with a particular eye toward the Pacific, was in full swing. U.S. forces expect to face increasingly far more capable and longer-ranged air defenses in any large-scale conflict, especially in the region against China. The Air Force has explicitly warned about the potential threat of anti-air missiles able to reach targets up to 1,000 miles away emerging in the coming decades. This, in turn, has already called into question the relevance of the Skyraider II, as well as other special operations aircraft more tailored toward lower-end contingencies.
So 'how could we support them [friendly forces] if it's in the Pacific or anywhere else? The OA-1K certainly has some roles and missions that can [provide] support there. And then in a large-scale combat operation, we are looking at, in partnership with other components of SOCOM [U.S. Special Operations Command], what are some of the things that it could do,' they added. 'Can it employ air-launched effects, at range, at standoff, in a flexible way that would provide value?'
'Launched effect' is a catch-all that the U.S. military uses to refer broadly to uncrewed aerial systems that can be launched from air, ground, and maritime platforms, and be configured as one-way attackers or to perform other non-kinetic missions, including electronic warfare, ISR, and signal relay. The term reflects increasingly blurry lines between multiple categories of aerial systems, especially traditional cruise missiles and long-range kamikaze drones.
The Air Force official that TWZ spoke to did not elaborate on what kinds of 'launched effects' the OA-1K might carry in the future, but there is a growing array of relevant designs already in various stages of development within the U.S. military, as well as by private industry. SOCOM also has a Small Cruise Missile (SCM) program, primarily intended to provide new standoff strike capability for the AC-130J Ghostrider gunship, but that could be applicable to other platforms like the Skyraider II. The AC-130J is another AFSOC platform facing questions about its relevance in future high-end fights.
In 2023, L3Harris, the prime contractor for the Skyraider II, also said it had modeled potential loadouts for the aircraft that included AGM-84 Harpoons and AGM-158B Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile-Extended Ranges (JASSM-ER), according to National Defense Magazine. The AGM-84 and AGM-158B are traditional air-launched anti-ship and land-attack cruise missiles, respectively. L3Harris had also done that modeling work independently of its contracts with SOCOM. The aforementioned SCM program and others like it within the U.S. military are also heavily focused on offering lower-cost alternatives to munitions like the Harpoon and JASSM-ER.
L3Harris has put forward GBU-39/B Small Diameter Bombs (SDB) and GBU-53/B StormBreakers, also known as Small Diameter Bomb IIs (SDB II), as potential future armament options for the OA-1K. The GBU-39/B and GBU-53/B both offer a degree of standoff capability, and the ability to engage static and moving targets over dozens of miles.
Otherwise, the prospective loadouts that have been put forward for the OA-1K to date align with the original lower-intensity mission focus and center on a mix of non-standoff precision munitions. These include AGM-114 Hellfire missiles, Advanced Precision Kill Weapon System II (APKWS II) laser-guided 70mm rockets, and 500-pound GBU-12 laser-guided bombs. Pods to allow the Skyraider II to launch stores from Common Launch Tubes (CLT), which could include precision-guided missiles and bombs, as well as air-launched drones, have been put forward, as well. The OA-1K will also be able to carry podded sensor systems.
For the Skyraider II, launched effects with standoff range could open up additional possibilities when it comes to operational employment of the aircraft.
'The next point that I would make there is that's where we start to get into things like Adaptive Airborne Enterprise. We get into enhanced precision effects,' the Air Force official we talked to said in response to a question regarding the future of the AC-130J that they also said was relevant to the OA-1K. 'So this is where we start talking about our platforms. And we are putting capabilities on them that now make them more flexible and enable them to provide support to the joint force and SOF [special operations forces] … in a number of environments.'
Adaptive Airborne Enterprise (A2E) is an overarching term for concepts of operations that AFSOC has been refining for some years now that focus on increasing deployability by reducing personnel and logistics footprints, as well as the collaborative employment of capabilities. A2E work so far has focused heavily on the MQ-9 Reaper drone, but the Air Force has made clear in the past that the concept extends to other aerial platforms, crewed and uncrewed, as well as friendly ground and maritime forces.
Another key element of A2E has been exploring how capabilities can be employed across areas of increasing risk, as highlighted in the graphic below. This is particularly relevant for a platform like the OA-1K, which could deploy launched effects from permissive airspace, but to support operations in adjacent higher-risk areas. Skyraider IIs could potentially be pushed to forward operating locations where they could conduct similar operations from within the bubble of friendly defenses. Similar concepts of operations have been put forward by the U.S. Army and other branches of the U.S. military in recent years with a particular eye toward ensuring the relevance of less survivable platforms in higher-end conflicts.
The OA-1K's deployability and small operational footprint could help make it difficult for enemy forces to target, in general. The aircraft might also be useful for providing more localized force protection and surveillance around forward operating locations like island outposts, which could include counter-drone patrols. In particular, the APKWS II rockets that are expected to be in the Skyraider II's arsenal are already proving themselves to be valuable air-to-air weapons against drones, and their capabilities in this regard are set to expand further.
U.S. Fighter aircraft shoot down Iran-backed Houthi one-way-attack drones with AGR-20 FALCO Advanced Precision Kill Weapon System (APKWS) Laser Guided 2.75" Rockets.#HouthisAreTerrorists pic.twitter.com/bDoVnKwotc
— U.S. Central Command (@CENTCOM) March 19, 2025
The high-ranking Air Force official also stressed to TWZ that SOCOM and AFSOC still expect to be tasked with the kinds of lower-intensity missions and crisis response scenarios in environments with more permissive airspace that led to the acquisition of the OA-1K in the first place.
'We still have this requirement on the SOCOM side of the house to do counter-terrorism, crisis response, counter-VEO ['violent extremist organization missions]. And really, that was the notion of the OA-1K originally, [it] was a cost-effective platform in the counter-violent extremism environment,' they said. 'So that still is a relevant mission set.'
They also highlighted how continuing to engage with allies and partners in the Pacific region on lower-intensity fights where the OA-1K is relevant remains an important way of building military-to-military relationships that could extend into a future major conflict.
'Now you start to think about competition and building relationships with allies and partners. And there's all the lead-up to something someday, where there's just this notion of strengthening relationships,' they explained. 'How do you train with partner nations? Many of them still have their own counter-VEO concerns, they also have their own counter-terrorism/crisis response concerns. How could we support them if it's in the Pacific or anywhere else?'
The Air Force has also raised the possibility of utilizing OA-1K's closer to home, including in support of border security missions. Since January, President Donald Trump's administration has significantly expanded U.S. military support to civilian law enforcement agencies along the southern border with Mexico, as well as surrounding bodies of water. The Skyraider II would offer a lower-cost alternative to the MQ-9 Reapers that have been supporting those operations, as well as augment higher-end ISR platforms now in use, or even supplant them in more limited ways. They could also supplement U.S. Customs and Border Protection ISR aircraft.
There are additional questions surrounding the OA-1K beyond just AFSOC plans to employ the aircraft. The Air Force's stated plan is to leverage personnel and other resources from the divestment of U-28A Draco and MC-12 turboprop-powered crewed ISR aircraft to help field the Skyraider II. At the same time, the service, along with SOCOM, insists that the OA-1K is not intended as a direct replacement for those aircraft. SOCOM and AFSOC have faced criticism, including from the Government Accountability Office (GAO), a Congressional watchdog, over how these force structure decisions were made and the potential for resulting gaps in ISR capacity.
'Right now, our focus, really, at this point, is ensuring that the OA-1K is on time,' the Air Force official told us when asked about any plans for a more direct replacement for the U-28As and MC-12s.
The Pentagon's top leadership under President Trump is also promising a major realignment of priorities in the proposed defense budget for the 2026 Fiscal Year. This is already having major impacts on various programs, especially within the U.S. Army, and other efforts across the services could be staring down major cuts, if not outright cancellation.
'I really don't have any info for you there,' the Air Force official told us when asked about any concerns that the OA-1K could be on the chopping block, especially over questions about its future relevance in high-end conflicts. 'I, frankly, don't know, and I don't have any indication that the program is going to get canceled. We've got our birds that continue to deliver. We're focused on, how do we get the crews trained? How do we get it outfitted to be able to make its first push down range to meet SOCOM requirements? And, you know, there's all kinds of speculation about budgets and whatnot out there, but right now, our focus is really not on that. It's about fielding the combat capability.'
In the meantime, the Air Force is looking at launched effects with standoff range and other new capabilities, as well as concepts of operations to go with them, as potential paths to help keep its new OA-1K light attack aircraft relevant in various contexts going forward.
Contact the author: joe@twz.com
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Ravens' John Harbaugh on White House visit with Trump: 'I root for our president'
Ravens' John Harbaugh on White House visit with Trump: 'I root for our president'

Yahoo

time25 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Ravens' John Harbaugh on White House visit with Trump: 'I root for our president'

OWINGS MILLS, Md. (AP) — Baltimore Ravens coach John Harbaugh described his recent visit with President Donald Trump as simply another great opportunity to meet a chief executive. Harbaugh and several family members — including his brother, Los Angeles Chargers coach Jim Harbaugh — were invited to the White House earlier this month. John Harbaugh talked about the trip after practice Wednesday. In 2019, while lashing out at U.S. Rep. Elijah Cummings, Trump tweeted that the Democrat's Baltimore district was a 'disgusting, rat and rodent infested mess' where 'no human being would want to live.' Harbaugh was asked about the decision to visit the White House in light of some of Trump's comments about the Ravens' home city. 'How you framed that question — I would have framed that question like: 'You got a chance to go visit with the president, man. What was that experience like?'' Harbaugh said. 'It was amazing. It was awesome. And I promise you I root for our president. I want our president to be successful just like I want my quarterback to be successful and I want my team to be successful, and it was an amazing experience.' John Harbaugh conceded that Jim Harbaugh has met more presidents than him. 'He's got seven, I got four. I had a chance to meet President Obama twice — incredible experience. Had a chance to meet President Biden when he was vice president in Iraq, and spent a lot of time with him in Iraq," he said. "Jim got invited also to the White House to meet President Reagan because he was a Heisman Trophy candidate. We got to go as a family, so I met President Reagan — have a picture in my office of that.' ___ AP NFL:

Hegseth sent classified info from battlefield commanders on Signal chat
Hegseth sent classified info from battlefield commanders on Signal chat

USA Today

time26 minutes ago

  • USA Today

Hegseth sent classified info from battlefield commanders on Signal chat

WASHINGTON – Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth divulged classified information in March from battlefield commanders about the U.S. attack on Houthi rebels in a chat on the commercial messaging app Signal, according to a U.S. official. The Washington Post reported on July 23 that the Pentagon Inspector General, which is reviewing the matter, has evidence that the information Hegseth shared detailing the timing of U.S. airstrikes came from a classified email. The message was classified as secret information when Gen. Erik Kurilla, the commander of U.S. Central Command, sent it to Hegseth, a U.S. official who was not authorized to speak publicly, told USA TODAY. The Pentagon stood by its contention that the information Hegseth revealed on the Signal chat, which had inadvertently included a journalist from The Atlantic, wasn't secret. More: Trump adviser Michael Waltz defends Signal use, says he stayed on White House payroll "The Department stands behind its previous statements: no classified information was shared via Signal," Sean Parnell, the Pentagon's chief spokesman, said in a statement. "As we've said repeatedly, nobody was texting war plans and the success of the Department's recent operations – from Operation Rough Rider to Operation Midnight Hammer – are proof that our operational security and discipline are top notch." Rough Rider is the name of the operation to bomb Houthi rebels in Yemen who have attacked ships in the Red Sea. The Houthis agreed not to target U.S. ships after heavy bombardment there. Midnight Hammer is the name for the U.S. attack on Iran's nuclear sites.

Gabbard releases more Russia documents to accuse Obama of ‘manufacturing' intelligence
Gabbard releases more Russia documents to accuse Obama of ‘manufacturing' intelligence

CNN

time27 minutes ago

  • CNN

Gabbard releases more Russia documents to accuse Obama of ‘manufacturing' intelligence

National security Russia Donald Trump Tulsi GabbardFacebookTweetLink Follow One day after President Donald Trump accused former President Barack Obama of treason over the intelligence assessment that Russia interfered in the 2016 election and sought to help Trump, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard declassified a highly sensitive congressional report she claimed was more evidence of a 'treasonous conspiracy.' The release of the redacted report, written during the first Trump term by Republicans on the House Intelligence Committee, was the latest step in a multi-faceted effort from Gabbard and other Trump allies to attack the FBI's Russia investigation and the intelligence community's assessment on Russian election interference. Attorney General Pam Bondi announced Wednesday evening that the Justice Department was creating a strike force to assess the evidence released by Gabbard and 'investigate potential next legal steps which might stem from DNI Gabbard's disclosures.' Speaking from the White House podium on Wednesday, Gabbard stopped short of accusing Obama of treason, deferring to Justice Department lawyers. But she alleged that 'the evidence that we have found and that we have released directly point to President Obama leading the manufacturing of this intelligence assessment.' 'They knew it would promote this contrived narrative that Russia interfered in the 2016 election to help President Trump win, selling it to the American people as though it were true,' she said. Gabbard insisted the Russian goal in 2016 was to sow distrust in American democracy — not to help Trump, a key judgment of the 2017 assessment that Republicans have long challenged. But her claims that the Obama administration 'manufactured' the assessment are not supported by the newly redacted House report — or CIA Director John Ratcliffe's own review of the intelligence assessment, which he released earlier this month. Ratcliffe's review argued the assessment that Russian President Vladimir Putin 'aspired' to help Trump win the 2016 election should not have been a so-called high confidence judgment, which indicates the intelligence community's level of certainty, and it took issue with some of the analytic procedures underpinning the assessment. But Ratcliffe's review found that 'the overall assessment was deemed defensible.' The House report — which involved intelligence so sensitive it was kept in a so-called 'turducken,' or a safe within a safe, at CIA headquarters — took a similar stance on the key judgment that Russia sought to help Trump, arguing that the assessment made analytical leaps based on relatively thin sourcing and failed to weigh contradictory intelligence highly enough, but neither argued that it was 'manufactured.' Still, the release of the House Intelligence Committee review, led by former Rep. Devin Nunes when now-FBI Director Kash Patel was a top aide, was a long-sought victory for Trump — in large part because it pushes back against a similar review conducted by the GOP-led Senate Intelligence Committee in 2020, which found the intelligence supported the conclusions that Putin interfered to help Trump and there were no 'significant tradecraft issues' in the preparation of the assessment. Gabbard's decision to publicize the report when multiple predecessors had declined to do so, including Ratcliffe during Trump's first term, comes at a moment when her standing within the Trump administration had been in question. In June, Trump publicly undermined Gabbard's assessment on Iran's nuclear capabilities and she was absent from at least one major national security meeting to discuss Israel and Iran. CNN reported at the time that the president viewed her as 'off-message.' Democrats accused Gabbard of jeopardizing intelligence community sources and methods by releasing the report. 'The desperate and irresponsible release of the partisan House intelligence report puts at risk some of the most sensitive sources and methods our Intelligence Community uses to spy on Russia and keep Americans safe,' Sen. Mark Warner, the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, said in a statement. 'And in doing so, Director Gabbard is sending a chilling message to our allies and assets around the world: the United States can no longer be trusted to protect the intelligence you share with us.' One Democratic congressional source said intelligence agencies were still in the process of proposing redactions to the document ahead of its release, but that Gabbard declassified the report Wednesday before the process had been completed. The Office of the Director of National Intelligence did not respond to a request for comment. A former senior US intelligence official said they were alarmed by some of the material in the report that remained unredacted, warning it could alert Moscow to how intelligence was collected and potentially endanger sources. The report includes an explanation from the classified assessment that some judgements are based on a human intelligence source with secondhand access for several specifics, including Putin's order to pass collected material to WikiLeaks, Putin's views on Hillary Clinton, and details about 'specific, planned Russian Foreign Intelligence Service efforts.' 'It should also scare the crap out of any source we have who reports on politically inconvenient subjects,' the intelligence official said. 'If I were them, I'd be going dark about now.' In 2017, the US extracted from Russia one of its highest-level covert sources inside the Russian government. Trump and his allies in Congress have sought to release the House Intelligence Committee report for years now. The material that was being scrutinized was so sensitive that the CIA would only let congressional staffers view it at CIA headquarters, requiring their work stay locked up at Langley. The committee brought in its own safe for its files — which became known as the 'turducken' — that remained locked away at the CIA during the Biden administration. It's not clear whether the full extent of the classified House Intelligence Committee report was redacted, declassified and released on Wednesday. In the lead-up to the 2020 election, Trump allies pushed Ratcliffe, who was then the director of national intelligence, to release a redacted version of the report. But Ratcliffe ultimately did not so do amid strenuous objections from CIA and NSA officials, who warned it would damage sources and methods and US relationships with allies. Instead, the report was part of a large collection of documents brought to the White House in the final days of the first Trump administration, which were redacted so they could be declassified and released. The redacted documents were not ultimately released before Trump left office in 2021, though he did so in March. But an unredacted copy of the documents — including the highly sensitive intelligence that was redacted from what was released Wednesday — went missing and was apparently never found. US intelligence officials scrambled to assess the potential damage of the binder's contents becoming public after it went missing at the end of the first Trump administration, according to a source with direct knowledge of the events. There are hints at why the intelligence agencies were so concerned with the report in the declassified version released Wednesday. The report includes redacted lines that detail what signals intelligence the assessment had relied upon, as well as what Putin was being told and how it was obtained. The House document provides one of the most detailed glimpses to date into the raw intelligence relied upon by analysts to produce the 2017 assessment — but one that is impossible to compare to the Senate review that reached the opposite conclusion on the judgment that Putin was aspiring to help Trump. Much of the documentation for that panel's reasoning remains classified. The House report accuses Obama administration intelligence leaders of relying on thinly sourced and uncorroborated intelligence to conclude that Putin preferred Trump, while alleging that the assessment suppressed intelligence that Putin did not care who won and that Russia's intelligence services allegedly possessed damaging information about Clinton that was not released before the election. The January 2017 assessment does note there was a disagreement on the level of confidence in that assessment: the CIA and FBI had high confidence, and the NSA had medium confidence. But the GOP report argues that the conclusion was flawed, based upon previously unpublished intelligence reports, including three that were 'substandard.' One report, based on a single human source the House panel said was biased against both Trump and Putin, contained a claim that Putin was 'counting' on Trump's victory, according to the committee. That claim was interpreted in different ways by different analysts but was ultimately used to reach the 'aspire' judgment, the report said. 'One scant, unclear and unverifiable fragment of a sentence from one of the substandard reports constitutes the only classified information cited to suggest Putin 'aspired' to help Trump win,' the report states. The Ratcliffe-led CIA in its review found that the 'aspire' judgment was 'plausible and sensible, but was an inference rather than fact sourced to multiple reporting streams,' noting that it also rested on an assessment of 'the public behavior of senior Russian officials and state- controlled media, and on logic.' It said that the assessment authors had properly interpreted the sentence fragment. The report also details what US intelligence knew about Russian intelligence material collected on Clinton that was not released before the election, including allegations about her health, which Republicans wrote 'would have created greater scandals' than the hacked materials from John Podesta released by WikiLeaks. Republicans questioned why this information wasn't released if Russia was trying to help Trump (CNN was unable to confirm the origin or veracity of any of the allegations). CNN reached out to Clinton aides for comment. The GOP report criticizes the assessment's inclusion of the infamous and discredited dossier written by British intelligence official Christopher Steele, which was paid for by the Clinton campaign and alleged coordination between Russia and the Trump campaign. A summary of the dossier was included as an annex in the January 2017 assessment, after CIA officials objected to including it in the report itself. The intelligence analysts who prepared the report told the Senate Intelligence Committee the dossier played no role in the analysis of Russia's interference. Special counsel John Durham, who was appointed by then-Attorney General Bill Barr during Trump's first term, spent four years investigating a wide range of topics, including potential wrongdoing by the FBI and intelligence community during the 2016 post-election period. He never accused any US officials of any crimes related to the 2017 intelligence assessment,

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store