|
Paras to be grounded due to wrong chutes
Ahh.... the Daily Fail, by the image used they are planning to drop them in boxes... :ugh:
https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....fed1c16664.png The British Army’s elite Parachute Regiment is set to be grounded because the introduction of new parachutes was delayed by Whitehall bungling, The Mail on Sunday can reveal. The famous Red Berets are expected to suspend combat parachute jumps and training for new paratroopers next year in an embarrassing blow to one of the Army’s most formidable units. The move comes as the Parachute Regiment prepares to celebrate its 80th anniversary and is understood to have infuriated senior officers. Based in Colchester, Essex, the Paras are the only force in the world to use the so-called Low Level Parachute (LLP), which allows them to jump at just 450ft from the C-130J Hercules aircraft. |
Does it matter if they haven't got the parachutes to jump out of the C-130J that the RAF will be getting rid of at the same time. No Herc, No Parachute, No Problem
|
You don’t need a Herc, anything with wings will do!
https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....894fa7da5.jpeg |
A good reason not to ever throw anything away.
|
In other outlets they are not grounded but will not be able to do low altitude drops.
|
The last time the UK did a large combat para drop was at Suez in 1956.
I think the capability gap till the new chutes arrive might be considered acceptable. |
I hold no brief for sensational press media and have very low expectations of accuracy.
However, much of the media [including broadcasting and the posh papers] are to a degree self-censoring. If there is a grain of truth in sensational aviation/ military stories [probably leaked by a middle-ranking serving member] then I for one would wish to know of it. Always provided that such leaks did not advantage potential enemies ............. a difficult proviso. A free press is a most precious jewel in a democracy. Don't shoot the messenger! |
The famous Red Berets are expected to suspend combat parachute jumps |
Buy American....I am sure the US Army can spare enough to outfit the British Paras.
There is a small unite near me that does a bit of jumping now and then.....the 82nd Airborne Division, the Army Special Forces, and the Army Rangers along with other lesser publicized groups. |
Originally Posted by SASless
(Post 11267590)
Buy American....I am sure the US Army can spare enough to outfit the British Paras.
There is a small unite near me that does a bit of jumping now and then.....the 82nd Airborne Division, the Army Special Forces, and the Army Rangers along with other lesser publicized groups. |
What is the point of jumping from 450 feet ............ it might reduce vulnerability of the troops by reducing flash to bang, but it seems very unhealthy for the "delivery platform".
|
Originally Posted by langleybaston
(Post 11267607)
What is the point of jumping from 450 feet ............ it might reduce vulnerability of the troops by reducing flash to bang, but it seems very unhealthy for the "delivery platform".
|
Originally Posted by langleybaston
(Post 11267607)
What is the point of jumping from 450 feet ............ it might reduce vulnerability of the troops by reducing flash to bang, but it seems very unhealthy for the "delivery platform".
Having completed the meat bomb course, I for one would have wanted to have spend as little time floating helplessly in the sky as I could, had I ever had to use the training for 'real'. Weighing up the options, which would you rather take your chances with? Low height with a suitable chute or more chance of getting brassed up by a disgruntled local? |
Originally Posted by The Helpful Stacker
(Post 11267616)
(In a world where every man, woman, child and their dog can seemingly get hold of an AK variant.....)
Having completed the meat bomb course, I for one would have wanted to have spend as little time floating helplessly in the sky as I could, had I ever had to use the training for 'real'. Weighing up the options, which would you rather take your chances with? Low height with a suitable chute or more chance of getting brassed up by a disgruntled local? |
Originally Posted by langleybaston
(Post 11267625)
Clearly a minimum time in the air, but a bit tough on the aircraft I would have thought .......... which was the point I was trying to make.
The C130 of various variants seems to have been quite capable, if other platforms aren't then that is an issue of purchasing surely? |
I think the point is that most para drop roles have taken by helo insertion at short range and increasingly by V-22 and then FVL.
The scenarios where it would be safe to use C-130 or Aa-400M to perform insertion at below 500ft without risk of catastrophic risk of loss of £400M airframes and 100+ troops being vanishingly small. Particularly at a time when the army is increasingly looking at ranger type forces used, and inserted, in packet sized units. |
I thought Paras were so hard they didn't need chutes?
What about HALO? btw has there ever been a parachute mission that was successful? |
Originally Posted by uxb99
(Post 11267630)
I thought Paras were so hard they didn't need chutes?
What about HALO? btw has there ever been a parachute mission that was successful? |
Originally Posted by ORAC
(Post 11267628)
I think the point is that most para drop roles have taken by helo insertion at short range and increasingly by V-22 and then FVL.
The scenarios where it would be safe to use C-130 or Aa-400M to perform insertion at below 500ft without risk of catastrophic risk of loss of £400M airframes and 100+ troops being vanishingly small. Particularly at a time when the army is increasingly looking at ranger type forces used, and inserted, in packet sized units. |
Originally Posted by ORAC
(Post 11267628)
I think the point is that most para drop roles have taken by helo insertion at short range and increasingly by V-22 and then FVL.
The scenarios where it would be safe to use C-130 or Aa-400M to perform insertion at below 500ft without risk of catastrophic risk of loss of £400M airframes and 100+ troops being vanishingly small. Particularly at a time when the army is increasingly looking at ranger type forces used, and inserted, in packet sized units. I fully agree that, other than for very specific small unit requirements, the use of large scale parachute forces is pretty much dead. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 02:59. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.