79
79
0
Is the airborne concept outdated? In almost 14 years of war has there been any parachute deployments of troops into a combat zone?
Tactics
Parachuting
Paratrooper
Airborne School
XVIII ABN Corps
Posted 9 y ago
Responses: 186
2
2
0
Just reading this, and yes the 173rd jumped into Northern Iraq. And elements of the Rangers/Spec Ops jumped into Afghanistan.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
Chief...I will point out that military and political leadership said the Atom Bomb made Amphibious Assaults obsolete after WWII, and then we landed at Incheon during the Korean War. Just because we haven't done something (when was the last time AEGIS or Patriot shot down a TBM), doesn't mean we won't need it.
The Joint Publications list 3 units capable of doing forcible entry into a theater...a Marine Expeditionary Unit (MEU) and the 82nd and 101st...To me, the option for vertical envelopment is something that will always be relevant. (And I am a nasty leg...was enlisted in the Marine Infantry before I became an Army officer).
The Joint Publications list 3 units capable of doing forcible entry into a theater...a Marine Expeditionary Unit (MEU) and the 82nd and 101st...To me, the option for vertical envelopment is something that will always be relevant. (And I am a nasty leg...was enlisted in the Marine Infantry before I became an Army officer).
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
No, and until there is some advancement I can't foresee it ever will. To be able to deploy entire units of infantry and light armor with a single flight of several planes behind enemy lines, cutting supply lines, encircling enemy troops W/O alerting the enemy is an awesome tool/strategy. Step up a space and you get Airborne Rangers with additional skill sets. 200 Marines behind enemy lines is a dangerous force! Semper Fi!
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
As a current paratrooper and master rated jumpmaster I truly believe in the airborne concept we are Americas shock force we are what scares the blank out of people and makes them think twice so yea were essential to national defense and U.S. Foreign policy
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
When the aircraft that don't need airstrips can fly to the other side of the world on no notice, but that's just a replacement for a parachute delivery system, if that still needs special soldiers for the operation, it's still airborne
(2)
(0)
SPC Nathan Freeman
We aren't talking about dropping gear. We've been doing equipment drops. Airborne operations refer to putting a Brigade of troops behind enemy lines to take over key infrastructure.
(0)
(0)
SSG John Jensen
I know it's an incomplete thought, but my brain doesn't work like it used to, I have to keep a dictionary next to me when I e-mail ( every unit I was in I was known as the human dictionary.
Air Assault needs to land somewhere to offload and reload for the operation, when their birds can fly straight there is when the Abn will be outdated, and you have to add the equipment issue, the US Military refuses to have a light tank that can support the advance forces, what;s the point of having the most powerful tank in the world if it can't go anywhere?, the thought is still incomplete
Air Assault needs to land somewhere to offload and reload for the operation, when their birds can fly straight there is when the Abn will be outdated, and you have to add the equipment issue, the US Military refuses to have a light tank that can support the advance forces, what;s the point of having the most powerful tank in the world if it can't go anywhere?, the thought is still incomplete
(1)
(0)
2
2
0
What really bothers me about a number of the answers or statements of opinion is that not a single individual commenting apparently understands the "airborne concept". And I know that a large number of my airborne paratrooper brethren will disagree, but the 101st Airborne Division in its current form is an Airborne Division. As was discussed in another thread Glider troops were Airborne, and the current evolutionary part of that is the Air Assault methods used by the 101st and the 82nd, when assets are available. There is also another type of Airborne unit that everyone tends to forget about and has only been in existence twice within the US Army since the beginning of Airborne units and that is Air Land. And there is only one unit in the entire US Army that has been active in every single role, and it is still on the rolls of the 82nd Abn Div, it's sister regiment happens to be in the 101st but it was never an Air Land unit.
(2)
(0)
COL (Join to see)
To me, the 101st is a more viable, while strategically less mobile answer. Less risk invovled and provides the ability to extract vice creating a land LOC to a stranded airborne unit. We find much more evidence of modern use of helicopters on the tactical landscape than we find of airborne operations.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
As a person who been in an airborne unit, I believe that airborne units are getting outdated, I believe that AA would serve the military far better than AB
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
Throughout time all militaries have to change and adapt to new threats. If we take the emotion out of the equation, I do believe that it is time to transform the 82d Airborne Division as we did the 101st. I do believe that we continue to need units that can be deployed via parachute drop, but those should be limited to Special Operations organizations. It just isn't practical nor are the risks worthy to continue to maintain a Division-size Airborne organization. Maybe we initially maintain 1 or 2 Separate Airborne Brigades, but that should be the most. Also, 18th Airborne Corps needs to be transformed as well. This would save the Defense Department a lot of funds that should be used for higher priority needs. I know that many are going to hate loosing their $150 per month allowance, but how many units struggle just to get the ability to have their Soldiers Jump. Again we need to take the emotions out of the discussion, and structure our forces against our threats.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
CPO Gregory Smith this discussion was pretty good on a similar topic. https://www.rallypoint.com/answers/strategic-debate-there-will-never-be-another-need-for-a-mass-airborne-drop
Special operators will always need it.
Special operators will always need it.
Strategic Debate - There will never be another need for a mass airborne drop | RallyPoint
Disagree One should shy away from the use of the word “never”. If there is anything to be learned from studying history and military art, its that you should never say never—events have a way of playing out in ways that challenge any preconceived notions. Another word that must bear scrutiny is the word “mass”. When mass is used in this context, one may imagine the classic images of operations Overlord and Market-Garden, where up to three...
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
Nope, nothing beats a suprize Airborn insertion, capture an Airfield and use it to bring in a full scale of Soldiers and equipment
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google