AF Light Air Support Aircraft

[ClearedHot]

4 hours ago, Hacker said:

The people with those concerns should have been laughed out of the room.

Buy a couple of Super Cubs, Decathlons, or any number of GA airplanes, and teach people to fly taildraggers. It is done every day with low-time GA pilots in a couple hours.

It came straight form the mouth of the then AFSOC Commander who was by trade a Pavelow guy. 

2 hours ago, Clark Griswold said:

From the article 

Exactly how and where the OA-1K might be used in an operational context remains to be seen, especially as the focus of the current Trump administration seems to be much less on Africa and other areas of lower-intensity conflict.
 

This is the conundrum.  Can you have a cheap(er) manned platform that has some relevance to supporting the Big Fights but can prosecute the Small Fights on its own?

Rhetorical question and I won’t plug the Scorpion for the umpteenth time but this is how to get a light strike bought in numbers.

Why do folks think this can't be used in the big fight against China?  I can think of 69 missions it can do in that fight.  During the recent Special Air Warfare Symposium the current AFSOC Commander mentioned putting Small Cruise Missiles on them.  Pop up out of a dirt strip on an off axis and dramatically complicate the calculus of the Chinese.  Also, the Taiwan scenario will include operations on the periphery that will have a big impact on the fight.  There are 10,000+ little islands between the PI, Indonesia and Vietnam...

[Hacker]

1 hour ago, ClearedHot said:

It came straight form the mouth of the then AFSOC Commander who was by trade a Pavelow guy.

Then it would have been even more funny to show him in a fancy curated PowerPoint presentation that GA guys with 4 hours of training can figure out how to fly a taildragger safely. That isn't even a fraction as complicated or challenging of a skill to learn as formation flying or even hovering a helicopter.

Even a rotorhead could do it.

Edited April 11 by Hacker

[Clark Griswold]

2 hours ago, ClearedHot said:

Why do folks think this can;t be used in the big fight against China?  I can think of 69 missions it can do in that fight.  During the recent Special Air Warfare Symposium the current AFSOC Commander mentioned putting Small Cruise Missiles on them.  Pop up out of a dirt strip on an off axis and dramatically complicate the calculus of the Chinese.  Also, the Taiwan scenario will include operations on the periphery that will have a big impact on the fight.  There are 10,000+ little islands between the PI, Indonesia and Vietnam...

Institutional bias, pride and the misperception that it detracts from the prestige of the Air Force.

Not my opinion but what I think certain GOs think when they see these aircraft.

Been listening to this series of pods during my commutes and I would recommend this episode 

https://podcasts.apple.com/podcast/id1500955155?i=1000702238181

Other episodes I didn’t make it thru but this one was interesting and had comparison and insight on the offerings, Piertrucha didn’t think much of the Scorpion but whatevs.  In this pod though they make mention that Goldfien while CSAF didn’t think much of it and paraphrasing from the pod, “Other people fly turboprops not us”.

Not my opinion again but that’s what I think the top dogs in the USAF think, that it is beneath us.

As to your point of the multitude of missions it (a light platform) could do, no disagreement, my two cents looking at this from the outside for years is that it has to be sold as a family of systems (intentional buzz phrase use) to get attention and serious consideration.

Light platform + CCA / UAS + ACE mission / capabilities + Network Warfare + EW capabilities 

Basically you are cutting off the naysayers by showing it’s not just a cheap way to deliver a Hellfire or SDB to Hilux carrying jihadis but it is that plus these other capes that we see now in the spectrum of conflict(s)… drone killer, weapons truck, sensor node, CCA quarterback, light austere capable mobility platform, etc…

Getting several companies to come together and offer it might inspire more interest and confidence in the idea

[viper154]

9 hours ago, Hacker said:

The people with those concerns should have been laughed out of the room.

Buy a couple of Super Cubs, Decathlons, or any number of GA airplanes, and teach people to fly taildraggers. It is done every day with low-time GA pilots in a couple hours.

Well yes, the concern wasn’t that the pilots would have trouble with some training. It was that there was no plan, except to stick them in a shiny new multi million dollar 16,000lb turbo prop tail wheel with all the toys instead of spending a couple extra bucks to send them to get a couple hours in a light civ tail wheel to get the basics. 
 

Hopefully that’s changed, I’ve been out of the loop for awhile. 

[Clark Griswold]

Not sure if the Caldius B-350 would count as light but if we are discussing platforms that can do the armed overwatch mission and be relevant for the INDOPACOM theater, bigger seems better sts

Payload, fuel and size to accommodate larger stand off weapons, podded sensors, etc…

I don’t think it went past the airshow mockup but an aircraft this size is probably where the SOF and MCO communities could meet in the middle and get a common platform for both mission sets, they do overlap.

 

Enough for everyone’s gear to fit, enough power to carry enough to be relevant, enough range to be back from the fight but capable of operating in small fields to support the big fight.  
As it never flew, it’s just a WAG but a combat radius of 450 NM with probably 2+ hours on station, it easily covers the naval passages south of the PI to Northern Australia, probably 2000 NM ferry range, self deploy but rugged & cheap enough to operate in detachment in AFRICOM for continuous operations there.

[Pooter]

1 hour ago, Clark Griswold said:

Not sure if the Caldius B-350 would count as light but if we are discussing platforms that can do the armed overwatch mission and be relevant for the INDOPACOM theater, bigger seems better sts

Payload, fuel and size to accommodate larger stand off weapons, podded sensors, etc…

I don’t think it went past the airshow mockup but an aircraft this size is probably where the SOF and MCO communities could meet in the middle and get a common platform for both mission sets, they do overlap.

 

Enough for everyone’s gear to fit, enough power to carry enough to be relevant, enough range to be back from the fight but capable of operating in small fields to support the big fight.  
As it never flew, it’s just a WAG but a combat radius of 450 NM with probably 2+ hours on station, it easily covers the naval passages south of the PI to Northern Australia, probably 2000 NM ferry range, self deploy but rugged & cheap enough to operate in detachment in AFRICOM for continuous operations there.

[arg]

On 4/11/2025 at 9:23 AM, ClearedHot said:

It came straight form the mouth of the then AFSOC Commander who was by trade a Pavelow guy. 

Why do folks think this can't be used in the big fight against China?  I can think of 69 missions it can do in that fight.  During the recent Special Air Warfare Symposium the current AFSOC Commander mentioned putting Small Cruise Missiles on them.  Pop up out of a dirt strip on an off axis and dramatically complicate the calculus of the Chinese.  Also, the Taiwan scenario will include operations on the periphery that will have a big impact on the fight.  There are 10,000+ little islands between the PI, Indonesia and Vietnam...

The big question is, will leadership know how to use it?

[SurelySerious]

The big question is, will leadership know how to use it?

The Navy will be involved since it’s INDOPACOM territory sooooooo

[Clark Griswold]

 

https://www.twz.com/air/russia-testing-shotgun-armed-yak-52-trainer-aircraft-to-down-ukrainian-drones
 

 

[Clark Griswold]

Not sure this has been posted in the thread but Victory Aviation in a modified Thrush 510 doing AR

https://www.victoryspecialmissions.com/military

 

 

Is there any proposal or capability to do this with the OA-1K?

 

[tac airlifter]

38 minutes ago, Clark Griswold said:

Victory Aviation in a modified Thrush 510 doing AR

Is there any proposal or capability to do this with the OA-1K?

 

OA-1K can't fly IMC yet so they aren't ready to be a tanker...

[Clark Griswold]

OA-1K can't fly IMC yet so they aren't ready to be a tanker...

WTF? Why?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Lawman]

WTF? Why?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If I had to guess….



Like all the other aircraft we have that can deploy a weapon within feet of a point on the earth, but can’t be trusted to fly a GPS approach.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Magic24]

https://www.airandspaceforces.com/socom-oa-1k-armed-overwatch-cut-2026/

[Clark Griswold]

3 hours ago, Magic24 said:

https://www.airandspaceforces.com/socom-oa-1k-armed-overwatch-cut-2026/

Big Air Force to AFSOC:

Edited July 12 by Clark Griswold

[Clark Griswold]

3 hours ago, tac airlifter said:

It’s not certified.  Why isn’t it?  I do not know.  The U28, which this is designed to replace, received each modification due to combat demand from various TF who had a lot of sway and money during the GWOT.  With that pressure gone and those organizations mostly focused elsewhere I think the sense of urgency which characterized U28 upgrades is lacking.  Or more accurately, what limited attention those entities have for small wars (versus peer) remains on the U28 which is still doing the Lords work, and bandwidth hasn’t spilled over to this new thing.  That’s my read anyhow.

Combine that with the fact it’s a lot harder to do specialized things in aviation than people appreciate, and here we are.  It doesn’t help that the last 2 AFSOC/CCs left the command listless and bereft of strategic identity or focus.  HQ AFSOC has serious issues with jealousy & small dick syndrome, every community feels slighted by others for reasons maybe real but certainly perceived.  It needs vision and leadership and cohesion to effectively rise above squabbling tribes into an organization emotionally mature enough to be an equal partner in SOCOM and therefore capable of advocacy for how its own vision serves the whole. 

My understanding is it can’t shoot yet either.  Someone actually in the program please correct me, but I was with their commander last month and no one has taken it to a range & shot yet 🤷🏽‍♂️

Not certified and why?  Lack of GO support, belief that the mission is not part of the core AF mission(s).  
I could go on, heard as an anecdote a two star deride the AT-6 back in the 2016-17 timeframe with a “who’d wanna fly that” comment while at the Puzzle Palace.   If a GO can’t imagine himself flying it I think they just play along and kill it later, same with the C-27J and other small fleets.

Anyway… they’ll continue shenanigans and kill the program eventually.

FWIW, if a person is lurking here with the ear of a decision maker, we’re gonna be suppressing insurgents, criminals/pirates, and all manner of rabble at the periphery of the Free-ish World from now till the end of time… Reapers and other UAS are good but round out the team with a capable, modular, purpose built platform, the Scorpion.   Don’t overthink it, just acquire it.

 

[skybert]

What’s that, like an 8 gallon giveaway?

[Pooter]

On 7/12/2025 at 9:06 PM, Clark Griswold said:

I could go on, heard as an anecdote a two star deride the AT-6 back in the 2016-17 timeframe with a “who’d wanna fly that"

Such a wildly out of touch quote. Pretty sure the entire T-6 faip mafia would give their left nut to fly a weaponized version with 50% more horsepower

[Clark Griswold]

4 hours ago, Pooter said:

Such a wildly out of touch quote. Pretty sure the entire T-6 faip mafia would give their left nut to fly a weaponized version with 50% more horsepower

Yeah, I was taken aback, said 2 star had been at a couple meetings, visited my boss to talk shop / bullshit a bit and seemed ok overall.  I was surprised that a fighter guy would crap on it, LA posed and still poses no threat to the manned fighter mission.  They operate in different roles now and really even during GWOT.

When A-1s and AT-37s were introduced in Vietnam, they didn’t take missions from -105s, -4s, etc… same thing in GWOT and now.  
 

[Clark Griswold]

Question for any 11F who flew the AT-6B, did it have enough power with the new engine and prop combo to sustain energy to be useful for some lead-in fighter training?

 

Edited Tuesday at 08:26 PM by Clark Griswold

[Pooter]

8 hours ago, Clark Griswold said:

Question for any 11F who flew the AT-6B, did it have enough power with the new engine and prop combo to sustain energy to be useful for some lead-in fighter training?

 

Didn't fly the AT-6B but I know any variant of the T-6 sustains energy better than a 38 which we got by with for well over half a century. And the cherry on top is your ASD can be longer than a 0.8 😆

[Clark Griswold]

Didn't fly the AT-6B but I know any variant of the T-6 sustains energy better than a 38 which we got by with for well over half a century. And the cherry on top is your ASD can be longer than a 0.8 

Yup
Never gonna happen but the need for a light inexpensive (in airplane money) to operate aircraft capable of the mission demanded by the light attack armed reconnaissance mission has overlap with primary / intermediate military flight training, seems like the AT-6 could have been not just an answer to LAAR but also an evolution over the T-6 without as much disruption to that part of the UPT enterprise.

Rugged & reliable for high use rate / repetitive sorties.
Benign flight characteristics for student pilots, inexperienced foreign pilots in training but capable of acro / defensive maneuvers for missions.
Economical costs in acquisition and sustainment. A simple training sortie would cost as much as much as a complex sortie, in flight hour cost, normalizing over a syllabus.

In your intermediate phase of training, it would give you a wider syllabus before you tracked and specialized.

Just my opinion


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk