Posted on May 5, 2014
Should Airborne School be a requirement to serve in an Airborne Unit?
77.9K
208
74
29
29
0
First off, I am not trying to offend anybody that is not airborne that is currently serving in an airborne unit. But doesn't it make sense that if you are in the unit, you should be airborne qualified? Some people also argue that being airborne is an obsolete skill. Just looking for some thoughts. Thanks.
Posted in these groups: 
Airborne School
Paratrooper
Airborne School Paratrooper
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 56
28
28
0
Absolutely, if you are going to serve in an active Airborne unit you should be Airborne qualified. My advice would be to fulfill every requirement your duty position requires. For example, if your duty position has and SQI and/or ASI then you should fulfill those requirements to be fully qualified for the position.
(28)
(0)
COL Jason Smallfield, PMP, CFM, CM
SSG Rodney,
- Things have changed in the 82nd ABN and at Fort Bragg since the 1990s. Simply stated not 100% are either ABN qualified or in paid parachutist positions.
- The above is more a reflection of a changed fiscal environment then it is of a change approach to their organizational mission.
- With above written, a logical argument on why 100% should be jump qualified is to ensure there are no have's or have not's within the organization, help better esprit de corps within the formation, and to enable better understanding across the formation on what is needed/when across all phases of an airborne operation.
- In addition, the Army is about effectiveness not efficiencies. In other words, it is more important for us to be able to win our nation's wars than it is to get the most "bang for the buck". Yes, we try to do both but these two concepts are not equal in my opinion.
- Things have changed in the 82nd ABN and at Fort Bragg since the 1990s. Simply stated not 100% are either ABN qualified or in paid parachutist positions.
- The above is more a reflection of a changed fiscal environment then it is of a change approach to their organizational mission.
- With above written, a logical argument on why 100% should be jump qualified is to ensure there are no have's or have not's within the organization, help better esprit de corps within the formation, and to enable better understanding across the formation on what is needed/when across all phases of an airborne operation.
- In addition, the Army is about effectiveness not efficiencies. In other words, it is more important for us to be able to win our nation's wars than it is to get the most "bang for the buck". Yes, we try to do both but these two concepts are not equal in my opinion.
(1)
(0)
23
23
0
If you in a Airborne unit, ether show up with them or be prepared to go get them!
(23)
(0)
17
17
0
It's not an obsolete skill, however if you are assigned to a Airborne unit you should be Airborne qualified to be able full fill the any mission given. Just like myself being in a Air Assault division I need to be Air Assault qualified to be able to full fill the mission required.
(17)
(0)
MAJ Matthew Arthurs
Slightly off target, but since when do you need to be Air Assault qualified to perform the Air Assault mission?
(2)
(0)
CW3 (Join to see)
Agreed. Before I became a pilot I was a Jumpmaster and a Pathfinder, but not Air Assault qualified. Definitely did A LOT of Air Assault missions at Bragg. I never saw the point of going to AA school when I already had my torch. However, if I end up going to Campbell, I’ll go to the school because it is what is expected of those assigned to the 101st.
(0)
(0)
CPT Patrick Dougherty
My first assignment was a platoon leader in B 1/504 in November 1969, right to Jumpmaster school. Assigned to the 101st Pathfinders in RVN, ended up being the CO. Brought them back to Campbell, rebuilt the unit and for a time the advanced airborne school was part of us. Left to takeover A 1/327. As a sport parachutist I was also the Post Freefall Safety Officer. Wanted to go to flight school but they didn’t need 0-3s. So I got out went in the FBI for 27 years. 22 as a pilot, then retired and spent 10 years as a corporate pilot. A short time in C 2/11 SFGA. My employer told me to make a choice reserves or continue as a 1811/Special Agent. No choice really. Best people and best job for me ever. I am still in touch with many of my fellow paratroopers from every unit I was in.Met my wife of 49 years through another LT while in B 1/504. My brother in law ended up in the Bureau also. I owe a lot to the Airborne. There is just something special about a Airborne soldier.
Pat Dougherty
Pat Dougherty
(1)
(0)
SPC Bob Ridley
I agree sir. There is something special about an Airborne soldier & an Airborne unit. I served in the Army Reserve with Service Company, 11th SFGA, Fort Mead, MD. I loved it. However, like you sir, I had to give it up when my enlistment was over due to my civilian business. CPT Patrick Dougherty
(0)
(0)
10
10
0
Short answer: Yes, all personnel assigned to an airborne unit should be airborne qualified.
Long Answer:
- Forced entry operations. The US can not hope that all operations will involve an adjacent or close by country where we can conduct RSOI. The US must have the capability and the capacity to "force the door" open.
- History. The people who argue that airborne is an obsolete skill tend to also be the ones who argue that we have seen the last of war. Large scale airborne operations such as Operation Market Garden or D Day may not be seen again but smaller scale operations to seize an airfield or a port to set conditions for follow on operations have not yet been overcome by technology, organizations, alliances, or the like.
- Organizational mission. If the purpose of an organization is to get to the fight by means of parachute drop then why would someone be in the organization who can not do this? Kind of like joining a football team but wanting to play basketball instead. Makes no sense.
-
Long Answer:
- Forced entry operations. The US can not hope that all operations will involve an adjacent or close by country where we can conduct RSOI. The US must have the capability and the capacity to "force the door" open.
- History. The people who argue that airborne is an obsolete skill tend to also be the ones who argue that we have seen the last of war. Large scale airborne operations such as Operation Market Garden or D Day may not be seen again but smaller scale operations to seize an airfield or a port to set conditions for follow on operations have not yet been overcome by technology, organizations, alliances, or the like.
- Organizational mission. If the purpose of an organization is to get to the fight by means of parachute drop then why would someone be in the organization who can not do this? Kind of like joining a football team but wanting to play basketball instead. Makes no sense.
-
(10)
(0)
9
9
0
Since there have been several airborne assaults in the current war I wouldn't call the insertion method obsolete.
(9)
(0)
8
8
0
MAJ Ronnie Reams
I was a leg in HQ USA SFC on loan to the USA SOC as a plans' officer DCSIM. Had to wear Maroon Beanie, not get a green one with candy stripe, had a full flash, even though not flash qualified. Not really a bad deal, most folks were not into AB. My immediate superior was a female SES.
(1)
(0)
LTC Stephen C.
In the grand scheme of things, MAJ Ronnie Reams, I’m sure it doesn’t matter. Holy smoke, I’ve been retired since MAY98, so what the heck do I know.
As far as berets go, Army Special Forces changed criteria all the time. I saw green berets with DUI only, with DUI and candy stripe, etc. I was glad when the Special Forces tab was introduced. I sent in my paperwork, strapped on the tab, and moved out.
As for maroon berets, I’ve never been an advocate for them. Now that the Army has gone back to a uniform reminiscent of pinks and greens, I would have preferred traditional airborne units to go back to the garrison cap with a glider patch. Needless to say, no one consulted me, but that would have been more in keeping with the uniform tradition established by the first airborne units.
As far as berets go, Army Special Forces changed criteria all the time. I saw green berets with DUI only, with DUI and candy stripe, etc. I was glad when the Special Forces tab was introduced. I sent in my paperwork, strapped on the tab, and moved out.
As for maroon berets, I’ve never been an advocate for them. Now that the Army has gone back to a uniform reminiscent of pinks and greens, I would have preferred traditional airborne units to go back to the garrison cap with a glider patch. Needless to say, no one consulted me, but that would have been more in keeping with the uniform tradition established by the first airborne units.
(1)
(0)
8
8
0
Serving in a unit shouldn't require the training, but positions in a unit require a certain MOS, grade, SQI, ASI, and language.
If your position requires it, you should be qualified or become qualified shortly after assuming it.
If your position requires it, you should be qualified or become qualified shortly after assuming it.
(8)
(0)
MAJ Javier Rivera
Agree. In today's fiscal constrained environment many parachute paid positions are been converted or under consideration to non paid within the airborne units even at USASOC. So there is no requiremtns nevertheless if the opportunity arise for a Soldier to go he/she should jump on the bandwagon but I desire no to go should not be taken against such Soldier.
(0)
(0)
SSG Nick Tramontano
Part of the problem is there are not always enough airborne qualified troops to fill certain MOS positions in the units. However , it should be mandatory to be jump qualified.
(0)
(0)
7
7
0
Yes you should be airborne qualified. If you are not you should volunteer to go to airborne school before you get to your assignment.
(7)
(0)
7
7
0
Why would you go to an Airborne unit with out your jump wings or prepared to go to school to earn them? I would of figured that as an airborne unit it would be a requirement.
(7)
(0)
7
6
1
To be a part of a specific division one should not need the specific training, ie ABN / AASLT. Having served with both the 101st and 82nd in Afghanistan, I did so not being either ABN or AASLT. I served both in a support / service role and the fact I was either one did not affect the job I did. Only if the specific job requires the training should you be required to have that training. For example if you want to be a part of JSOC, you should have all of the required training to support their mission.
(7)
(1)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google