Interesting info about the drop zone and the 10th Group relationship.

And Ken, you are right, in the greater scheme of things, this whole 'combat jump' issue is irrelevant.

I am curious about experiences with SOF and heavy versus light relationships. While it may be solely based on the attitudes and previous experiences of the senior leadership involved, I wonder if there are common, underlying themes to when a SOF/GPF relationship, either direction, works well.

I would have liked to argue that an armor officer is less likely to have a problem being subordinate to a senior SOF commander because they are more likely to be impressed with the people in SOF. An infantry commander (especially a light infantryman) likely had this guy as a peer or knows his reputation and is less enamored with his 'special-ness'. However, I think it really comes down to competence and a willingness to work together.

CAVGUY mentioned it in another thread that the SF we had in Tal Afar were about as helpful as a missing HEMMT fueler - its not good and a bit of a worry, but in the long run, you have other systems that can do the job and bigger problems to worry about. Meanwhile, in Ramadi, the SEALS and OGA were incredibly involved in being integrated and coordinating actions. If we had turned the relationship around to SOF being the supported HQ, I think it would have worked just as well in Ramadi, and likely would have been pretty ugly in TA.

So I guess the real answer is do your part and be a team player and hope the other guy does his.

So back to the point of this thread - RANGER MECH. While it would be great to be in a heavy unit with incredible training levels and super motivation, Ranger school probably won't make it a SOF-type unit. Most Army light infantry battalions have tons of Ranger school grads within their leadership but the bulk of the troops are just young, bright, fit Soldiers. They get to train a lot on fieldcraft and weapons, compared to most heavy units, but they are far from being a SOF. And I still can't think of missions that require an established special heavy unit.

Once you introduce the dynamic of having to maintain lots of vehicles, and remove the notion of absolute self-reliance as the number one priority in combat, I think you take away much of the special motivation that drives a Soldier to feel 'special'. However, the Rangers are playing with some of their vehicle mixes, using everything from Land Rovers to Strykers to increase their capability. The focus is still on the individual Ranger though.

Tankersteve