Skyraider II
Has a payload capacity of 8,000 pounds and features 10 external hardpoints, including eight wing hardpoints for 600-pound bombs and two centerline hardpoints for 1,000-pound bombs, with the innermost wing station optimized for armaments ranging from .50 caliber to 20mm.
A solid upgrade, going to be intrsting to see if these deploy on US/Mexico border.
” to support ground troops in permissive airspace, just as its namesake, the A-1 Skyraider, did in the Korean and Vietnam Wars.”
That would be news to US Navy pilots over North Vietnam shooting down 2 MiG-17s. Or to Korean War pilots... that they were in “permissive” airspace.
For use in permissive airspaces... ‘ya think?
Where are the napalm cannisters?
I wonder what it sounds like??... ‘specially when its diving!!
Perfect for ISR on the Southern Border!
"Permissive airspace" isn’t a formally defined term in standard aviation regulations like those from the FAA or ICAO, but it’s a phrase sometimes used informally—especially in military or strategic contexts—to describe airspace where aircraft can operate with minimal restrictions or threats. Think of it as the opposite of contested or prohibited airspace. It’s where you’ve got freedom to fly without worrying about enemy defenses, strict no-fly zones, or heavy air traffic control breathing down your neck.
In practical terms, permissive airspace might refer to areas where:
For example, in military lingo, you might hear it tossed around in discussions about “permissive environments” versus “contested environments.” A 2014 Brookings piece on air power talks about “permissive airspace” as where U.S. forces can loiter for ISR (intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance) without range or refueling headaches—think drones humming over a quiet desert with no SAMs in sight. Contrast that with “contested airspace,” where you’re dodging missiles or enemy jets.
It’s not on sectional charts or in the Pilot’s Handbook, though. Closest official terms would be “uncontrolled airspace” or “special use airspace” when it’s reserved but not restricted—like a Military Operations Area (MOA) when it’s cold. Context matters: if you heard it somewhere specific, like a news article or X post, it might carry a narrower spin.
You can’t fly a ground attack aircraft into airspace where they have a good chance of nailing you from above and below. Even the A-10 needs air cover and limited ground fire to survive.
I don't understand putting hundreds of combat proven A-10s in the junkyard and adopting a crop duster to fly low and slow.
Air Force brass say MANPADs can pop-up anywhere and take down an A-10. Well, what will they do to a crop-duster?
The A-10s are paid for. They are in service. They have been upgraded to use stand-off missiles and bombs.
This doesn't make good sense.
The Spad, version II…!!!!
The A1-E Skyraider was one bad ass bird.
Lots of ordnance on the hard points, long loiter time, and rugged as Hell…
Key phrase is “permissive airspace”.
Seems to me that a high wing, twin boom, twin engine with a centrally mounted gun would have a lot going for it.
I just object to the name. This looks like a toy compared to the A1 Skyraider. I loved that plane. It reminded me of an updated P47 Thunderbolt; ol’ Jug.
Strawberry 🍓 One. “Main body”
That thing is too cool!
Wow! Does the fuselage section forward of the wing look like a good, old North American P-51 Mustang or not?
p
I recall watching the original Skyraiders. They reminded my of bumble bees. They were so loaded with munitions in was unbelievable. I heard tales that if the throttle was cracked too hard the torque could make the pilot lose control.
And I watched them do strafing runs. Something I will never ever forget. To this day a crop duster with a radial engine doing runs on a crop reminds me of the A1E.
A prop plane? Easy to shoot out of the air.