Paratroopers have demonstrated the firepower that they could bring to bear during combat missions as the British Army’s global response force, say the British Army.

According to the British Army:

“As the culmination of a course in support weapons skills, paratroopers staged a firepower demonstration on Salisbury Plain. A fast-moving scenario saw an advancing force of enemy armoured vehicles engaged and defeated with Javelin and NLAW anti-tank missiles, 81mm mortar, Grenade Machine Guns, Heavy Machine Guns and General Purpose Machine Guns.

Paratroopers opened fire from both ground positions and while moving in RWMIK patrol vehicles.

The five-week-long Support Weapons Cadres trained soldiers from Colchester-based 2nd and 3rd Battalions The Parachute Regiment to serve in their unit’s specialist Machine gun, Mortar and Anti-tanks platoons.”

Soldiers were taught the practical skills to fire and maintain weapons in the field, and how to use firepower in different tactical scenarios.

According to the British Army website, The Parachute Regiment is the airborne infantry regiment of the British Army. The 1st Battalion is permanently under the command of the Director Special Forces in the Special Forces Support Group.

“The other battalions are the parachute infantry component of the British Army’s rapid response formation, 16 Air Assault Brigade. Paratroopers are trained to conduct a range of missions, from prevention and pre-emption tasks, to complex, high intensity war fighting. Watchwords are professionalism, resilience, discipline, versatility, courage and self-reliance.”

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
31 Comments
oldest
newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Finney
Finney
5 days ago

is 81mm still being withdrawn?

andy a
andy a
5 days ago
Reply to  Finney

thought 81 was staying and smaller one was being withdrawn

Mike
Mike
5 days ago
Reply to  andy a

The 60mm Mortar went a few years ago following a fire power review.

Graham Moore
Graham Moore
5 days ago
Reply to  Mike

Was it decided that the Paras required less firepower then? Sounds very strange.

JOHNT
JOHNT
5 days ago
Reply to  Mike

Last I heard 60mm was withdrawn from all infantry except the Paras and the Marines.

Airborne
Airborne
4 days ago
Reply to  Mike

Big mistake, useful and effective weapon.

Finney
Finney
5 days ago
Reply to  andy a

Ah ok, I thought I’d heard 81mm was also being withdrawn from either the paras or RM, glad to hear I’m mistaken!

Steven Alfred Rake
Steven Alfred Rake
5 days ago
Reply to  Finney

42 CDO lost its support Company (Heavy weapons) when it was dicked to be fleet support unit so now we only have 40 CDO and 45 CDO in 3 CDO Brd along with 2 and 3 Para in 16 Air Assault Brd (1 Para is under SF protection) The 81’s will be hear for a little longer they are still using up the ammo left over from the 2 world wars!!

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
5 days ago
Reply to  Finney

No.

John Clark
John Clark
4 days ago

This really shows the value of small highly trained well equipped air mobile units.

A single Parachute battalion can exert huge influence by being deployed in the right place at the right time.

If it’s rifle companies can then be moved around an area of operations by Helicopter, together with their equipment, you have a huge force multiplier, far more capable in effect than the physical numbers of troops deployed, especially if they are operating in support of SF elements too..

This is the future ethos of our army deployments gents.

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
4 days ago
Reply to  John Clark

Pity they are on those WMIKS.

The brigade needs it’s enablers restored. And more firepower across the board.

Quentin D63
Quentin D63
4 days ago

Is the Army looking at 120mm mortars for their Boxers?

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
4 days ago
Reply to  Quentin D63

I have no idea.
Probably not!

Airborne
Airborne
4 days ago

A mortar variant with the 120mm should be a priority mate! The 81mm just doesn’t cut it anymore.

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
4 days ago
Reply to  Airborne

I don’t recall the BA ever using that calibre. But other European armies do I believe. Wonder what the army think of it? If they are serious why not an additional RA regiment with a wheeled HIMARS type complementing the pitiful number of LG in 7 RHA. It’s air transportable with Chinook I believe. Or LSV types with ATGW or Brimstone, better than some poor sod standing atop a WMIK with Javelin and a sitting duck. 1 squadron of the HCR used to be allocated to 16. That needs restoring. But not with Ajax! Apart from the “Global Response Force”… Read more »

Deep32
Deep32
4 days ago

Hi Daniele, yes I think you are correct, we are the only NATO army that doesn’t use that calibre mortar.
There is a good article over on UKLP reference ‘modern mortar systems’, well worth a read.

Airborne
Airborne
4 days ago

Nothing new mate at all, just a loss of depth and kinetic capability. First thing to sort out would be the CS, CSS then get some decent OS guided systems. Their are more FSTs from 7 RHA allocated to the Bn Rifle Coys, but less 105s to go around!!!! Less assets pretty much in all areas. 16 Bde really is, sad to say, almost undeployable as a fighting formation mate, and needs so much reorganisation and effort to bring it up to speed, that it will pretty much never happen.

simon
simon
4 days ago

4.2″ seem to have been the largest mortar used by the BA. Always wondered why they haven’t gone for 120mm espacely when we have gone to the expensive of having them mounted in warrior

Pacman27
Pacman27
4 days ago
Reply to  Quentin D63

I hope we select the Amos twin barrelled system over the nemo, as surely it’s better to have the ability to fire 2 rounds at the same time should you need to. Also has a direct fires mode, but not sure how useful this would be. we need to take a good look at boxer now, do we really need 523 lightly armed expensive support vehicles when we are short of firepower i would put the CTA on the IFV’s and buy a full range of fires, first, we can catch up with the other stuff later. they are important,… Read more »

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
4 days ago
Reply to  Pacman27

I thought JTLV had been binned as not British?

I’d just buy it personally!

Pacman27
Pacman27
4 days ago

Probably have, but at its. OSG point it is exceptional, throw in the fact we need about 5,000 units if we are to kit out a whole division. ultimately this, foxhound or any of the other fantastic choices out there if it can come in at £250k per unit would be excellent, but we must get all the bells and whistles, not just the basic model. given the size of the army now I think 4 man teams are the way to go with the vehicle carrying the required fire and kit to make them take up the difference. I… Read more »

Airborne
Airborne
4 days ago

Agreed as ever!!!!

BB85
BB85
4 days ago

Yeah what’s that all about. I thought the Jackal replaced all the open top land rovers, special forces or no special forces.

Donaldson
Donaldson
2 days ago
Reply to  BB85
Airborne
Airborne
7 minutes ago
Reply to  BB85

The RWMIKs will go when the hercs do mate!

Jason M Holmes
Jason M Holmes
4 days ago

Especially when you see what Russian Airborne has available to them

Airborne
Airborne
4 days ago
Reply to  John Clark

Agree and also sadly disagree! No matter how much some like to sell it, the Bns firepower is quite limited, not just by weapon type and numbers but ammunition carriage and resupply. While the concept is good, a concept to which I was adhering to and enjoying for 25 plus years, actually having dispersed numbers of lightly equipped Companies ranged over various areas, can actually become a limiting factor in other ops. They need dropping, supporting (logistically and OS) moving and extracting. All which require a large number of other organisations and assets to achieve. Yes I’m a firm believer… Read more »

John Clark
John Clark
4 days ago
Reply to  Airborne

Morning Airborne, Understood. I am focusing on the supposed thrust towards lighter well equipped deployable formations, as the last Defence Review is supposed to be providing… The Army unfortunately really does seem to be in disarray at the moment. Equipment programmes poorly managed (to put it politely) and a force structure that is reliant on a large deployable Army Reserve. From what I’ve heard (some friends involved in instruction) of the AR, its way short of of having any deployable trained and ready ‘mass’ to support the now very small Army in a meaningful way. Net result, only small limited… Read more »

Airborne
Airborne
2 days ago
Reply to  John Clark

Agreed mate in your thought process of well equipped deployable light role forces, with the full CS and CSS units. And with a decent heavy armoured punch within the rest of the Army. Alas, chaos reigns, goalposts change as often as does the CDS and we are left with a mismatched pile of kit which is being levered into roles and ORBATS that don’t actually work. Cheers.

CTG
CTG
4 days ago

Awesome, as long as we’re only attacked by an army from the 1980s, we’re sorted

Humpty Dumpty
Humpty Dumpty
2 days ago

Land Rovers are vulnerable, there are better vehicles available. Plus fitting anti-air capability and a laser to shoot down drones would make sense. As would a gun firing CTAS rounds.

Last edited 2 days ago by Humpty Dumpty