Is the airborne concept outdated?

Actually yes they did jump in Afghanistan.

It will never be out dated. Boots on the ground when they are needed. AIRBORNE!!!!!!!!!!!

No - The mode adapts to the mission at hand, with all options on the table. To profoundly oversimplify for illustrative purposes, consider a someone who drives a cheap but sporty 2 - seater in their early 20's. Somewhere along the way, they upgrade to a more practical and safe midsized sedan. Then with marriage, kids, etc a minivan or SUV enters the picture. The kids learn to drive, & the family adds a used midsized to the mix. The young adult child may get a job and upgrade the used midsized to a newer sporty model. Eventually, the empty - nest couple returns to a midsized sedan that allows them to get around town and travel to visit kids/grandkids. All options are available & selected as the need arises.

Hell no! airborne is the ONLY WAY to insert a Batallion size unit within 48 to 72 hours. Period.

Static line airborne is outdated. Modern ADA has ensured that. Some traditions are embraced and will never be let go, like airborne. Some are never to officially live, like the stetson. With ADA, air to air combat, satellites, other countries having their own airborne, and the knowledge of what airborne is, unless it's like the Iraq jump where people jumped into a secured DZ because Turkey didn't want to allow people to travel through it, there will probably never be a real jump. There's no way it could be a success in modern combat. I urge people to take an objective look at airborne, put aside the fact that you've been in it for so many years and look at it strictly from a modern combat point of view. Any country we would need to really jump into has the defenses to expect and obliterate an airborne insertion.

Ok, After serving in the only division that matters and going to Operation Just Cause... The need is their people... Let's not totally weaken our countries way to react in a fast matter... Does the division Commander need to be on jump status... What a way to lead, no better way by doing what you ask your troops to do. When I went to operation Just Case we jumped right next too some Col, LTC and yep the Division CSM.... Airborne it's not just a saying it is the way we fight!

Yes the AIRBORNE ARE NECESSARY. How can an Navy mechanic ever understand?
AIRBORNE PARATROOPERS belong in the Armed Forces (First to fight last to leave)

* Yes and no. Vertical envelopment as a concept is wasteful, dangerous and pretty much rendered obsolete by the advent of Air Mobility. That being said, for small unit insertions it is absolutely vital. To answer your question about how often it has been used, I believe that the US has made maybe three or four large scale parachute drops since the end of WWII, I believe the most recent being when the Rangers dropped on Panama. To illustrate how obsolete this idea is, research the airborne invasion of Sicily, when an allied navy fired on a fleet of transports and wiped out a fair number of paratroops before they hit the ground.

No I dont think so. We have to continue to be a combat ready force and even thou there may not be any reason for this type of operations we have to continue training and be in a ready state for any future operations that may come in the future. Train the way you fight thats the motto.

I'll weigh in on this. Is the the concept of airborne operations outdated? No, it is not. Matter of fact there have been over 30 combat jumps since 9/11 that have involved American military forces and at least as many jumps that involved NATO allies in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Africa. Most of these jumps have involved small units, a dozen or fewer men. For the US, there have been about 7 company sized combat jumps (mostly involving the 75th Ranger regiment and one involving a company from the 82nd Airborne) and one battalion sized or larger jump involving the 173rd.

What is outdated is the size of the element that the US military thinks is tactically viable for an operation. Most Airborne units are designed for battalion or larger operations. The reality is we should shift our focus to platoon or company sized operations. All reconnaissance units, that is Infantry, not Cav, should be airborne and have standoff capabilities (HAHO). Static line jumping at the battalion, brigade, and division levels should be maintained for Joint Force Entry operations but the focus needs to shift away from such large units.

Bottom line, air assault capabilities do not give the same level of rapid vertical envelopment of a target with the technology we currently have as airborne operations. Helicopters are too noisy and don't have the legs for transoceanic flight. That said, the US military needs to shift their doctrine from Battalion and Brigade sized operations and adopt the SOF mentality of Company, Platoon, and Team sized airborne operation.

Sad to see how many people, to include senior ranking members of the military are so clueless about what has gone on in the last 14 years of war. This is open source info for God's sake.