Air Force Motorized Jaeger Regiment?
So the Navy has Naval Air and the Marine Corps to reach out beyond its core realm, and carry the fight onto the land and through the air, some elements are even land-based to reach towards the sea (e.g. airborne ASW and patrol).
And the Army has a certain aerial capability to reach ahead, and they should kill West Point and have an Army Air Corps with all the A-10 and intra-threatre aerial transports and all the UAVs they need. They even play a role in the war against the air through their Patriot batteries. And they have a certain limited riverine capability.
In short, with some adjustments those two forces would rule their respective realms AND be able to touch their surroundings.
But the Air Force as an own branch is a problem child since the demise of SAC. CAS would be better at home with the Army (the Marines do their own CAS in any case), strategic airlift is in the hands of TRANSCOM, SOCOM is about to start their own aerial force, STRATCOM has its hands on the nuclear bombing mission and strategic ISR and all things orbital, and everybody is trying to take away the UAV mission. With interdiction alone the day is not filled. No wonder they want to venture into cyber!
But what about an approach similar to the other branches? To reach beyond the core realm? For example into ground combat. With the Air Force Motorized Jaeger Regiment.
In contrast to the Army's air cavalry helicopter force, which is short ranged and limited in scope, and the Army's airborne formations, which besides depending on assets they don't control, are far too heavy, and are basically only capable of waiting for road/rail/river-bound supply once they are inserted (faszinating that the Army still puts "airborne" on whole divisions and even corps), the AF MotYeagReg could be really made light enough for airmobile operations.
In contrast to the other airmobile/airborne formations it could be 100% owned by the Air Force and could be inserted, supported, sustained and extracted by Air Force assets - basically the C-130. The ops area could actually be quite far behind enemy lines, since the units would be light enough to be sustained through the air - General Student's dream, I guess.
UAVs could provide constant ISR ahead and guard the flanks, as well as provide ESM and ECM, Fighterbombers and UAVs could provide support and break heavy restistance, C-130 could continously provide supply and at the end extract the unit again, and fighters could provide air cover. As vehicle to make it "motorized" and give it speed and reach the BvS10 would be an option, plus DPVs and motorbikes (or BMP-3 :D). Speed and mobility would be the main weapon - besides 50cal MGs, AGLs, ATGMs, Stingers, 120mm mortars ... (the rear car of the BvS10 is pretty versatile).
Of course such a regiment would have to be very careful around dug-in or armored enemy formations, since it would almost completely rely on fighterbomber air support to clear such obstacles.
Standing up Motorized Jaeger Regiments would give the Air Force a new mission that reaches beyond its core realm, thus balancing it in a sense, like the other branches. It would also give a 3D medium-range opposed forced entry capability to the armed forces that is missing now, since neither AirCav, nor the 3D elements of the MEUs have a very deep reach (MV-22 does not have any meaningful fighting power for conventional forces).
I know and did not mean that you should not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Entropy
Ken ... If I think the perception and attitude are wrong I'm going to speak up about it ... a lot of assumption and jumping to conclusions based on bias and not evidence. The underlying subtext is that there is a hidden agenda at work. I don't think there's anything wrong in challenging those assumptions and what I see as false perceptions and I will continue to do so.
I was expressing regret that you had to do it due to what I can only presume to be on the part of some posters sheer parochiality, ignorance or a desire to yank chains to see what happens.
P.S.
Didn't you advise me once not to read the comments following newspaper columns? Allow me to reciprocate -- I suggest not reading the comments on so-called 'Defense Blogs' (present Company excepted) -- they're all as bad as the newspapers. The articles to which those comments are appended seem to quite often be full of ignorance and inaccuracies also. :eek: :D
I know. I was expressing regret that
Deleted, double post. ???
As one who was prepared for many years to engage the VDV
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Distiller
How do you see the Russian VDV troops? The Russians still believe in that concept; their main task would have been/is to capture rear HQs, blow up supplies, cut com lines, and take out enemy air defense. Though I have to admit that those guys I talked to were somewhat pessimistic about the prospect of being picked up again at the end of the mission (they also said the plan was to extract just the personnel, and leave the vehicles behind).
and their BMDs not (BMPs as you said and repeated) my only concern was whether I'd have enough Ammo or not. I suggest those who told you that just personnel and not vehicles would be extracted were correct -- IF the USSR had actually decided to bother picking up anything or anyone -- and that the number retrieved would be significantly smaller than the number dropped.
That from an old Parachute troopie and Armored Cavalry guy who knows the concept of parachuting troops and attacking the enemy in the rear is still valid regardless of the SAMS take on it -- but you do have to use some sense about what you do and where you do it and there are limitations on what parachute troops can do. They can do more without the impediment of tracked vehicles. Tracks have their place, air landing has its place, parachuting has its place. the first does not go with the latter two for all sorts of reasons -- not least simple logistics. Fuel is heavy.