Airborne forces are useless in this modern day. Why do we still have them?
why are they useless
>>30177553
americans lack comprehension to properly apply something @ instantly designate it useless/obsolete
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=itmpL2XJ6qM
>>30177695
@ is not &. Shit you're probably 15 and grew up on the Internet, get it right.
>>30177695
That made less sense than the usual shitposting on /k/.
>>30177478
So what is the best plane for paratroops? costs taken into consideration.
I think C-295, $28 mil, delivers most men for lowest price but I am not sure.
>>30177478
But they are not, they are useful for rapidly securing/reinforcing areas prior to a conflict, as well as being effective light infantry.
Using them for WWII scale combat drops is stupid as fuck and such tactics are way outdated much like D-day-esque amphibious assaults.
>>30177478
Didn't we use them in GW1? IIRC we dropped a couple thousand paratroops onto a stretch of highway in the desert several hundred miles behind the border; they set up an impromptu airstrip where fuel and munitions were delivered and staged for the "left hook" armored column.
>>30178961
>and such tactics are way outdated
Yea just like conventional war itself is outdated, right?
>tfw graduated Airborne School a few weeks ago
>>30177478
They're useless on the tactical scale, they still fill a strategic niche.
It's one that's narrower than ever, but it isn't completely dead just yet and when you're America, you can afford to buy every tool in the toolbox, even the niche ones.
A lot of positions in Northern Iraq were taken by US airborne troops, as they had a substancial role on the invasion, splitting Saddam's forces into two groups.
>>30179718
wasnt that the last resort because turkey blocked their route?
>>30179617
This is what PJs do, and they're quiet effective at it. To say that airborne forces are useless is idiotic.
they might not be useless later
>>30179713
Paratroopers have already been made totally obsolete by gliders.
>>30179724
Even if Turkey allowed US ground froces move trough Turkish soil, making use of airborne infantry would still be the best choice, seeing that north Iraq's terrain is hilly and has a lot of mountains, albeit a few big cities, giving an operator of airborne troops - a main bulk of infantry supported by howitzers and a few vehicles and helicopters - an excellent edge in the combat.
>>30177478
They're not just grunts who happen to jump out of planes. They're multifunctional, just like any spec ops. The Brits proved their worthiness as elite troops in the Falklands. The Argies paratroops also fought relatively well.
Massive static line low altitude drops, like muh Normandy, are obsolete.
Having an entire airborne battalion ready to be be anyone in the world in 18 hours is pointless.
HALO and some limited use of small static jumps, are still viable.
>>30181667
Except in the USA, Maroon Berets are just grunts and POGs that fall out of airplanes.
Other countries' paratroopers are more akin to the US Army Rangers.
