Nice Airborne Photo

#2
And if you think that being Airborne and Para is in the least bit either warry or clever, get your hands into your very big pockets and throw money here

http://www.arrse.co.uk/cpgn/index.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=9542&start=20

If you are foreign or American and doubt how good these guys were, look here

http://www.gliderpilotregiment.org.uk/

They were part of the original Airborne Forces, landed and fought with hardly any kit and upheld the traditions that we as Brit squaddies hold to heart. The GPR Association is dying (mainly due to the fact that it was a short lived WW2 regiment and therefore has no young members) and needs you lot to cough up. It wishes to maintain its independency and therefore will not go begging to the AACA or the Para A, which is fair enough, they have an identity and it is up to us to let them keep it.

So cough up you c****

Regards

AS
 
#3
tomahawk6 said:
http://www.strategypage.com/gallery/articles/military_photos_2004102822.asp

I have added it to my desktop. Its a recent pic as the 1-501 Abn Reg has returned from duty in Afghanistan.
I was taught to keep my feet together.

As for the Glider Pilot Regiment, I have always thought of them as the intellectual's branch of airborne soldiering.

Try to get hold of a copy of 'The Wooden Sword' by I forget who. An inspiring story.
 
#5
#6
Yes, nice photo, and that is all it is. Its what you do on the ground that counts. Those of us in the Regiment lose the "thrill" of Parachuting pretty rapidly once you leave the Depot and hit Brigade/Battalion size drops and the hassle that goes along with it. Its just a means of transport which is why after 30 years of Military Parachuting I have gone to war in a Landing Craft, on a Motorbike, and in a landrover during the last 3 major conflicts.

Stella, fact of life mate that these brave old lads of the GPR are dying off and although their association will not go begging they are well supported by the Para Regt Assn and many are members. They are held in high esteem by those of us in the present generation of ABF as are the Glider Borne Troops. As a "Citizen Army" of conscripts in for the duration only and fighting a war of national survival and all they achieved doing so it makes me wonder why we make such a fuss over buckshee tours in Iraq when we are a "Volunteer" Army and enlisted to fight our countrys wars.
 
#7
#8
Vasco said:
tomahawk6 said:
http://www.strategypage.com/gallery/articles/military_photos_2004102822.asp

I have added it to my desktop. Its a recent pic as the 1-501 Abn Reg has returned from duty in Afghanistan.
I was taught to keep my feet together.

As for the Glider Pilot Regiment, I have always thought of them as the intellectual's branch of airborne soldiering.

Try to get hold of a copy of 'The Wooden Sword' by I forget who. An inspiring story.
 
#9
Its too bad you have lost the thrill of parachuting. We in the US love all things related to military parachuting. I dont know how often you jump the BA but our paratroopers get at least one jump a month. While I agree its just a means to get to the action, airborne forces are the ultimate rapid response force. Paratroopers can seize an airport to open the way for follow on forces. Paratroopers can be inserted anywhere in the world there is an open field, something the other types of infantry cannot perform.
 
#10
tomahawk6 said:
Paratroopers can be inserted anywhere in the world there is an open field, something the other types of infantry cannot perform.
like being sitting targets between exiting aircraft and landing and then trying to dump the canopy, unsheath your weapon and return fire?
 
#11
tomahawk6 said:
Its too bad you have lost the thrill of parachuting. We in the US love all things related to military parachuting. I dont know how often you jump the BA but our paratroopers get at least one jump a month. While I agree its just a means to get to the action, airborne forces are the ultimate rapid response force. Paratroopers can seize an airport to open the way for follow on forces. Paratroopers can be inserted anywhere in the world there is an open field, something the other types of infantry cannot perform.
Looks 'clean fatigues' to me. Is that 'military parachuting' or throwing yourself out of an aircraft? :roll:
 
#12
tomahawk6 said:
Its too bad you have lost the thrill of parachuting. We in the US love all things related to military parachuting. I dont know how often you jump the BA but our paratroopers get at least one jump a month. While I agree its just a means to get to the action, airborne forces are the ultimate rapid response force. Paratroopers can seize an airport to open the way for follow on forces. Paratroopers can be inserted anywhere in the world there is an open field, something the other types of infantry cannot perform.
And just what happens if your SEAD hasn't quite paid off, and the DAS on your C130 / whatever doesn't quite catch the passive missile aiming to spoil your day? Godbye Coy.....
 
#13
We may have had this debate before, but I would say that the parachute is now as obsolete as the glider as a form of military transport. Yes, parachute troops can be inserted at huge distances, complete with lots of heavy equipment. But can they be sustained? Reliably?

If the answer is anything but a very definite and properly justified 'yes', it is clear that the parachute operation can only ever be undertaken over a short period of time and, if ground-based support is to arrive, over a fairly short distance. So, what advantage does the fixed wing/parachute combination have over the helicopter? Especially when the helicopter provides an extraction as well as an insertion capability.

If you look at the full costs of maintaining a parachute capability (the aircrew training costs in particular), I think it will become apparent that it is a white elephant. The way ahead for the UK is more helos and C-17s and fewer Hercs. The Parachute Regiment can argue its own case for retention in the infantry order of battle.
 
#14
Im going to agree with Filbert_Fox on this one. As awesome as parachuting is, it has always been an extremely dangerous method of inserting troops into the battlefield. I live next door to a veteran of Arnhem and DDay, who thinks that military parachuting is one of the dumbest ideas possible. True, you may seize the airfield (hurrah!) but will most likely lose 50% of your forces during insertion back in the day of the Dakota and Lee Enfield (hmmm...) and certainly more like 70% in the modern day of the ZSU, Stinger etc. (oh dear!) What is more, you are then facing an enemy who is most likely armed to the teeth with armour, heli support, artillery etc. which, to be frank, parachutists are slightly next to * all use against. Would the human cost of a combat jump in the modern age really be worth the extra time it took to drive the IFVs etc. to the same airfield at fewer losses. Heli borne ops is definately the future in this respect - its insertion and extraction and, what is more, can provide some form of close air support/resupply to back up the troops - so long as the rest of your troops aren't more than half a day behind you. Again, having said that, within about two days on the modern battlefield (if they were still alive), i can guarantee that most troops, whether they be parachute or heli borne, would be begging to hear that "squeaksqueaksqueaksqueaksqueakclunksqueak" that accompanies the arrival of friendly armour and reinforcements. [/quote]
 
#16
tomahawk6 said:
We dropped Rangers into Kandahar without difficulty and then extracted them after the raid. No casualties.
Which fills Vasco's criteria of "very short duration". Namely, a raid. Keeping the troops resupplied, or even moving them once they're deployed is a different matter.

From a US point of view, why else did the 82nd Airborne nickname themselves "speedbumps" in late 1990?
 
#17
One valid use is to drop troops into the en rear areas and wreak havoc on his LOCs and support. This also means that the en has to commit his reserve to deal with it, making your main effort more likely to succeed as you suck forces away from the front line. But this assumes a large conventional conflict and as the Warsaw Pact is no more it's not likely these days. The Sovs believed in attacking the enemy throughout his depth simultaneously and would have tried all sorts of things. Of course their paras deployed with a section vehicle with a cannon, ATGM and machine guns. Ours get those little fibreglass jobbies with the six wheels.
 
#18
I have the utmost respect for paratroopers both Parachute Regiment and 82nd AB, had the honour to qualify on both sides of the Atlantic. That said I firmly believe that large scale Airborne insertions are defunct though the requirement remains for small scale operations of the Special Forces type. I believe the Parachute Regiment will be increasingly used in that role and that is why they will survive, unscathed, the proposed defence cuts.

I would like to see the Brits form a separate Air Assault (heliborne) brigade, on the lines of the 101st Airborne (Air Assault) Division of the US Army, capable of lifting the entire brigade including light tanks and Arty simultaneously. I believe that method of inserting conventional light infantry in Bn battle group or brigade strength far more effective than the Airborne option. Though they would still need pathfinders (perhaps even re-form Guards Independent Para Coy)! Now THERE'S a role for the proposed large Royal Scottish Regiment - Highland dash, Lowland tenacity! 1st (Scottish) Air Assault Brigade. Hey I can dream!
 
#19
Busterdog said:
I have the utmost respect for paratroopers both Parachute Regiment and 82nd AB, had the honour to qualify on both sides of the Atlantic. That said I firmly believe that large scale Airborne insertions are defunct though the requirement remains for small scale operations of the Special Forces type. I believe the Parachute Regiment will be increasingly used in that role and that is why they will survive, unscathed, the proposed defence cuts.

I would like to see the Brits form a separate Air Assault (heliborne) brigade, on the lines of the 101st Airborne (Air Assault) Division of the US Army, capable of lifting the entire brigade including light tanks and Arty simultaneously. I believe that method of inserting conventional light infantry in Bn battle group or brigade strength far more effective than the Airborne option. !
Agree with all of the above BD, except to suggest that this really is the only way to do air assaulkt ops. Saturation (or concentration of force I seem to remember form somewhere) is surely the only way to go, rather than letting the bad guy line up your firsk platoon/coy on the ground, having it away, then the second, third... as we penny packet our landings.

Suddenly turning up with a Bde sized force could give you a pretty good edge.

But you are right, dreams are free. Let's get realistic, bin the Apaches / Eurofighter (what are they for?) and keep the inf, including the heavy stuff, which we seem to keep proving time and again, is what is required when the enemy is armend with anything of more ballistic power than a pea shooter.

And before any fly-boys jump in in the defence of Apache, I'm looking at it from a parochial inf view. We don't give an ass about deep etc, I submit we want over the shoulder support like the Cobra.
 
#20
Gents, lets not turn this post into a pissing contest.
The usual snipes aimed at force projection by parachute are the same arguments tossed at ABF since their formation in WW2 and here we are over 60 years later and most countries with a half decent army still have them. They are a weapon. nothing more nothing less, and if you do not have them in the armoury you have one less option and toy to play with. Just the threat of their use keeps the enemy thinking and often forces them to deploy troops to cover the threat that would have been used elsewhere. We have never used our Nuclear Subs for the purpose they were built. Our tanks have barely been out of the box since WW2 but at least we have the OPTION of using this kit. If it aint there...
Force projection by helicopter is not strategic, they have not got the range, and lets face it we still have not got anywhere near enough of them in UK Forces and you can knock the things out of the sky with a mouth full of abuse never mind tripple A. Brigade drops by parachute is still practised by us brits and our ABF and SF have developed various methods and variations to the theme, without going in to OP SEC our force will arrive on target as part of a "package" and in the best possible air environment. The Government spend a fortune on us and we will not be up for grabs in defence cuts for some years to come. In the meantime if that means turning up for operations by foot, landing craft, or motorbike who cares, at least UK Forces have a Parachute option should they require it.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
PartTimePongo Current Affairs, News and Analysis 2
PartTimePongo The Intelligence Cell 6
Glad_its_all_over The NAAFI Bar 21

Similar threads

New Posts

Top