in future transparent battlefield the airborne forces are limited in thier employability. so waht is relevence

Question

is the airborne operations viable. what is its viability in indian subcontinent?

Answer 1

Your question is flawed on many levels - and so is your ability to communicate in English - but you do raise a few points worth discussing.

Airborne forces are essentially assault troops that can be transported rapidly with a minimum of gear and dropped right on top of key real estate. The problem was, that while this was effective in the old days (Carentan, Suez Canal) as time progressed, several factors limit this option:

(1) Lack of strategic lift. Even the USAF cannot transport the entire 82nd Airborne and drop them a la Overlord. Just not feasible.

(2) Advances in ADA. Those low to mid level altitudes critical for a successful paradrop are far more lethal to slow-moving transport planes than ever before.

That having been said, Airborne forces produce the best light infantry. Lack of heavy mechanization produces troops who are fit and operate well in uneven terrain. Airborne forces also provide great "feeder units" for Special Operation forces, who recruit heavily from their ranks. The addition of aviation elements ("airmobile", "heliborne", "air assault capability" - whatever you want to call it) provides much-needed mobility on the operational level.

As for its viability in the Indian subcontinent, I fail to see the pertinence of the question, or its need to be answered.

Answer 2

True airborne units like the 82nd Airbonre are the fastest way to place highly effective, lethal boots on the ground. Nothing takes the place of a high powered striking force on the ground, projecting power.

Answer 3

Hey Mao stop trolling the internet for G2 you non-English speaking turd.

Answer 4

I dare you to make less sense.

Answer 5

Yeah whatever they said!!!!!!!!!!!!!