Signing up for RASP at Airborne School/AIT

[pardus]

Two different animals with very different missions. Conventional forces or "big Army" is the hammer for taking on large size enemy forces, and we are the best at it. We unfortunately get used for COIN, CT, AT (or full spectrum ops) and historically most large conventional forces are not good at it... We are obviously not as good at it as we are in maneuver warfare or large scale conventional warfare.

That said there are several conventional units that maintain high level standards for light infantry direct action raids. Not on the same level as Rangers, normally due to funding, training, experience and the occasional retard. But all the same, some of the best in light infantry operations.

Bottom line, you cannot not produce division level Ranger capability, if you could we would have done it years ago. There is a reason why Rangers are selected, specially trained, and designated as a special operation force.

Ah, not quite true. Look at what was achieved during WWII.

 

[AWP]

Ah, not quite true. Look at what was achieved during WWII.

The BN's weren't organized along a Division's lines plus they had more men in uniform then. The 1st SSF was a brigade-sized element of approximately 1,800 men. An average US WWII infantry division was around 15,000 soldiers, with some going as high as 20k.

 

[Ranger Psych]

And look at the Army size they drew from to find enough men capable of being qualified to function in the Ranger Battalions then.

7,994,750 Soldiers, in 1944.

You can't mass produce special operations units of any sort, period. There are not enough people that would volunteer for the additionally hazardous duty, and among them there are not enough that would pass the selection processes. Period.

For comparison, there's about a half million troops in the army give or take right now.

 

[pardus]

The BN's weren't organized along a Division's lines plus they had more men in uniform then. The 1st SSF was a brigade-sized element of approximately 1,800 men. An average US WWII infantry division was around 15,000 soldiers, with some going as high as 20k.

The Brits had 2 Airborne divisions, formed from the Commandos (Not to mention the 5 American Airborne divisions), who were the foundation of the Rangers. I don't see any difference between the WWII Rangers and Paras/Commandos.

Now that said. I acknowledge that it is exponentially more difficult to man and train a force the size of a division. But it has been done.

 

[Diamondback 2/2]

Well can you find 20k soldiers to train and fight like ranger regiment? Maybe, reality would be lower standards and acceptance of people who almost make the cut. Comparison of the cammandos/paras of WW2 to current SOF/ Rangers is apples to oranges. The capabilities are night and day.


As a CF soldier I can say honestly say that there is no way you can group that many, that willing to cross those bridges into one cohesive unit. I'm not sure there is an officer that could lead "effectively" such a unit ( in this army).

Either way, 75th has a hard enough time staffing their MTO/E that I really doubt you could ever get 20k at the same capability.


My $.02

 

[pardus]

Well can you find 20k soldiers to train and fight like Ranger regiment? Maybe, reality would be lower standards and acceptance of people who almost make the cut. Comparison of the cammandos/paras of WW2 to current SOF/ Rangers is apples to oranges. The capabilities are night and day.


As a CF soldier I can say honestly say that there is no way you can group that many, that willing to cross those bridges into one cohesive unit. I'm not sure there is an officer that could lead "effectively" such a unit ( in this army).

Either way, 75th has a hard enough time staffing their MTO/E that I really doubt you could ever get 20k at the same capability.


My $.02

No, they are not. If you think Bruneval, Pointe du Hoc, Lofotens Islands, St Nazaire ops were less than what the modern Rangers can do, then I postulate the exact opposite!

 

[Red Exclusive]

Well can you find 20k soldiers to train and fight like Ranger regiment? Maybe, reality would be lower standards and acceptance of people who almost make the cut. Comparison of the cammandos/paras of WW2 to current SOF/ Rangers is apples to oranges. The capabilities are night and day.

I do agree with you about the difficulty in growing a SOF to that size. But capability changes are mostly dependent upon technological advances, I would think. With better equipment, you can theoretically do more and different things. The intended mission is generally the same, however.

Winston Churchill himself wrote that he wanted "at least twenty thousand Storm Troops or ‘Leopards’ drawn from existing units, ready to spring at the throat of any small landings or descents".

Minus the number of 20K we were discussing as well, that sounds a lot like modern Rangers to me.

 

[TLDR20]

I do agree with you about the difficulty in growing a SOF to that size. But capability changes are mostly dependent upon technological advances, I would think. With better equipment, you can theoretically do more and different things. The intended mission is generally the same, however.

Winston Churchill himself wrote that he wanted "at least twenty thousand Storm Troops or ‘Leopards’ drawn from existing units, ready to spring at the throat of any small landings or descents".

Minus the number of 20K we were discussing as well, that sounds a lot like modern Rangers to me.

@Red Exclusive I used to be just like you, I was an 18y/o, 18X, who thought I knew stuff about things, so I am going to give some advice that you should heed. Shut the fuck up. Read everything here, then you can slowly start posting. Listening to an 18 year old with no experience talking about capabilities, and equipment makes me want to throw up. This website has a lot of people who KNOW things through experience, we really don't give a shit what a fresh out of high school child has to say, about almost anything.

Join the mentor forum, ask questions if you have researched and cannot find the answers yourself, but otherwise tone down the amount you post.

 

[Red Exclusive]

"Read More, Post Less". Understood, now applying it. Apologies to everyone, once again. I meant to provide an opinion, but you are right. I think I'm getting too jumpy and into this when I'm really just over my head in shit where I have no place. So I am backing off now, thank you. Except for questions, this should be my last post for a while.

To TLDR20, Ranger Psych, and Lancero: Thank you all for your answers to my original question. They helped me tremendously!

 

[DA SWO]

Well can you find 20k soldiers to train and fight like Ranger regiment? Maybe, reality would be lower standards and acceptance of people who almost make the cut. Comparison of the cammandos/paras of WW2 to current SOF/ Rangers is apples to oranges. The capabilities are night and day.


As a CF soldier I can say honestly say that there is no way you can group that many, that willing to cross those bridges into one cohesive unit. I'm not sure there is an officer that could lead "effectively" such a unit ( in this army).

Either way, 75th has a hard enough time staffing their MTO/E that I really doubt you could ever get 20k at the same capability.


My $.02

Same capability? probably not, but similar or capable of supporting yes.

Think of all the Bullshit details Conventional Units do, compared to the 75th.

Look at the number of rounds fired per Ranger vs the number of rounds fired per Soldier.
The ability to shit can someone and send them to "Legland" is a strong motivator. Airborne units used to have that capability, Hang Korea or the 3rd ID over someone's head and see if they improve.
More Rangetime, more Combined Arms time and fewer post details can bring a units capability up significantly.

 

[Diamondback 2/2]

No, they are not. If you think Bruneval, Pointe du Hoc, Lofotens Islands, St Nazaire ops were less than what the modern Rangers can do, then I postulate the exact opposite!

Do you really believe that? Tactics, technology and the sciences of warfare have changed a bit over the last 70 years. Small things like being able to see and shoot at night, infil/exfil capabilities/platforms, or things like air to ground support, CAS, fucking helicopters, etc, etc.

Todays Rangers are faster, deadlier and a lot more surgical. I'm not taking anything away from the veterans of the past, Rangers or paratroopers. But shit has changed, warfare has changed, and capabilities have changed.

 

[pardus]

Do you really believe that? Tactics, technology and the sciences of warfare have changed a bit over the last 70 years. Small things like being able to see and shoot at night, infil/exfil capabilities/platforms, or things like air to ground support, CAS, fucking helicopters, etc, etc.

Todays Rangers are faster, deadlier and a lot more surgical. I'm not taking anything away from the veterans of the past, Rangers or paratroopers. But shit has changed, warfare has changed, and capabilities have changed.

No, I say you are wrong in your assessment. Have a look at the training and capabilities of those guys back then, they did the same job without the fancy gear. Air to ground, CAS etc... have been around for the last 100 years.

 

[Ranger Psych]

Surgical? 6th Bn.

 

[AWP]

Do you really believe that? Tactics, technology and the sciences of warfare have changed a bit over the last 70 years. Small things like being able to see and shoot at night, infil/exfil capabilities/platforms, or things like air to ground support, CAS, fucking helicopters, etc, etc.

Todays Rangers are faster, deadlier and a lot more surgical. I'm not taking anything away from the veterans of the past, Rangers or paratroopers. But shit has changed, warfare has changed, and capabilities have changed.

You just unwittingly helped make his case. One way to argue the point is to compare those units against others at that time (the same one would do to the modern 75th). They were cutting edge back then, had a selection process (some formal, some was not) which resulted in guys being returned to their unit, distinctive uniforms and/ or insignia, "exotic weapons", and some of the missions were quite similar.

When you view those units against the time and their contemporaries, pardus has a good point.

 

[x SF med]

Seems like this thread has gotten a bit hot... Clearly, Ravage could have thought out his response a bit better. But regardless, he meant that Rangers are elite and, with said logic, assumed big army would implement strategies to transition into a force that operates like the 75th. He was paying attention to the high standards that Rangers are expected to perform to and thinking in regard to the simple value of a highly motivated force, not the realistic aspects of such a transition.

Although impractical, Ravage did say this with the best intentions (to my understanding). Just seems like we're coming off a bit forceful. If I'm out of line with saying this, let me know.

dude.... this ain't Dorsai, never will be, can be or have the motivation to be Dorsai. We're lucky the low standards in Big Green don't DQ more people than they do at the moment.

If you don't get my reference, do an internet search for the word Dorsai... then read the books.


I'm guessing you are matriculating at TCC or UTA ... I'm hoping against hope you're not going to go to TCU or Texas Teachers.

 

[Red Exclusive]

Yes, I'll be at UTA in the fall. I am explicitly against going to TCU.

 

[Lone Wolf 101]

Sorry to bring back a year old thread, but I'm just enlisting soon and couldn't get an option 40. Are there still chances of getting into RASP in AIT, OSUT or even airborne as of 2015?

 

[Ranger Psych]

It's not something I would rely on, personally. I would honestly pressure your recruiter and be willing to wait to get one if necessary rather than having it be a very variable maybe.

 

[Deleted member 2517]

Sorry to bring back a year old thread, but I'm just enlisting soon and couldn't get an option 40. Are there still chances of getting into RASP in AIT, OSUT or even airborne as of 2015?

A good number of guys picked contracts up at OSUT/AIT. Get a 270+ on your 3-5th APFT and you should at least get a chance to talk with the LNO for RASP.

 

[AWP]

Short of someone in the 75th's recruiting process coming along, that's about as current as you can get.