Air Force Motorized Jaeger Regiment?

[William F. Owen]

I will say the capability to Strike and Hold vital targets (from long ranges)or more correctly to "capture in tact" should become a vital capability of the military. It will only become more valuable as move into the future.

Agreed, especially as armies become smaller and the earth does not. Doug Macgregors notes on dispersed mobile warfare are worth reading.

However... that does not mean there is a need for large scale airborne or airmobile operations, in the way WW2 played them out and the Cold War forecast.

If you drop anyone anywhere and they get into a fight, they have to be able to win, and break contact to be recovered. Very, very rarely does the risk match the reward.

[slapout9]

However... that does not mean there is a need for large scale airborne or airmobile operations, in the way WW2 played them out and the Cold War forecast.

General Gavin himself believed and wrote that large scale Airborne Ops were no longer feasible.

[William F. Owen]

General Gavin himself believed and wrote that large scale Airborne Ops were no longer feasible.

I believed that, but I've never had someone be explicit about it. I don't have his books, so thanks. That's interesting.

Airborne and airmobile operations are extremely high risk and this is born out by the historical record.

Actually they seem most relevant and have the greatest sustained success in COIN or small wars. In "big wars" they always seem to turn into a shambles.

[slapout9]

Actually they seem most relevant and have the greatest sustained success in COIN or small wars. In "big wars" they always seem to turn into a shambles.

Exactly. Or use in GWOT or what ever it is called know had a lot of first hand experience with this when I was in. It is nothing but a Longe Range Raiding Force. It does no have to be extracted, it could be relieved in place, but they were never meant to survive long term high intensity combat.

[Ken White]

...It is nothing but a Longe Range Raiding Force. It does no have to be extracted, it could be relieved in place, but they were never meant to survive long term high intensity combat.

That should never be forgotten by planners and those either pro- or anti- airborne. Still, that limited utility can have great merit if used correctly. Nothing else can move a body of troops 10,000 miles and get them on the ground able to fight near but not necessarily on a military objective. Air landing is an option but airfields aren't always located conveniently and are rarely unguarded.

Of course, we could have developed long range stealthy transport with significant rough field and STOL capability in order to do a far better job of getting combat ready troops on the ground in better shape at great distance -- but that might have led the Politicians into trying some risky adventures...