We talk USMC/Navy forcible entry but we rarely talk about US Army/Air Force.
Isn't it amazing that the Russians have had true airborne armor for a few decades while we just dabble?
Think Defense is asking about airborne armor and if it's worth it. My belief is that it is. DEPENDING on how you're gonna use the force. If it's just elite infantry then no. If it's elite infantry that is going to do forcible entry operations then HELL YES!
If the Army and Air Force are going to be serious about the task then a few things must happen.
1. The Air Force is gonna have to get serious about penetrating transports. Don't know if that means designing a few "path finder" airplanes with advanced avionics, jamming etc...or an upgrade to a particular wings aircraft but either way it must be done.
2. The Air Force is gonna have to figure out how they're going to keep a unit resupplied until units can link up. The paratroopers can expect to be under assault almost as soon as they land. A clear supply line will be essential because the combat will be heavy from the start.
3. The Army has to clarify what they want in an armored airborne vehicle. Playing SOCOM and using Polaris rigs won't cut it. Stealth is out the door when you land a few Airborne Brigades, so they'll need something more than simple mobility. They'll need at least a bit of armor and firepower.
One thing is certain.
If the Russians can do it, we can too.
No comments :
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.