In a sweeping overhaul of its airborne operations, the U.S. Army will recode nearly 20,000 parachutist positions across the force, marking a significant shift in how airborne readiness and training are managed.

According to Army officials, the restructuring aims to sharpen the focus on combat-ready troops while preserving the Army’s airborne capability — without continuing the strain on aircraft and resources that has hindered broader readiness efforts in recent years.

The decision to recode the positions — meaning the billets will no longer require soldiers to maintain jump status or receive associated jump pay — comes after a comprehensive review that involved more than two dozen Army organizations over five months.

Dennis Quaid’s #1 Warning for Americans

The review was led by Lt. Gen. Gregory Anderson, commander of the 18th Airborne Corps, who emphasized that the move is not about budget cuts but about redirecting focus and assets to the troops who may actually be called upon to jump into combat.

“This is not about saving money; it’s about getting readiness to where we need it,” Anderson said. “We started to assume risk with the high-end forces that have to be ready to go tonight.”

The Army has maintained a total of 56,756 paid parachutist positions since 2006 — a number that, for context, is more than four times the 13,000 paratroopers who jumped into Normandy during World War II.

However, recent challenges, including limited availability of transport aircraft such as C-17s and C-130s, have reduced the frequency and quality of airborne training.

Anderson said the high number of jump billets, many of which are not tied directly to combat units, diluted the effectiveness of training across the force.

“What ends up happening, we take fewer aircraft, same jump requirements and units doing everything they can to achieve basic airborne currency,” he said.

“In many cases, they were not meeting even currency.”

Currently, Army regulations require a soldier to complete four jumps annually to maintain airborne status. But with limited aircraft and an increasing number of jump-designated positions, the Army has struggled to maintain that standard across the board.

The result, Anderson said, has been a growing gap in proficiency, especially among support units less likely to deploy directly into combat via airborne insertion.

The recoded positions will still be considered airborne billets in structure, meaning soldiers assigned to them will be airborne qualified, but they won’t be on active jump status unless they are in a designated assault role.

If needed, soldiers can be retrained through a refresher course and placed back on jump status, ensuring the force remains flexible and capable.

“These decisions help make our paratroopers more proficient by concentrating on those who could be jumping into combat,” said Army Chief of Staff Gen. Randy George in an email to Army Times.

“Too many positions were allocated outside the direct combat force. This was a drain on resources and we’re fixing it.”

As part of the changes, the Army estimates the following recoding breakdown by command:

• 9,000 positions from U.S. Army Special Operations Command
• 3,600 positions from the Army National Guard
• 3,500 positions from Army Forces Command
• 1,900 positions from the Army Reserve
• 1,000 positions from U.S. Army Pacific
• 850 positions from U.S. Army Europe and Africa

These numbers are still being finalized and reflect a broader effort to align resources with the Pentagon’s requirement to keep 15,000 parachutists ready to deploy at any time.

The review also prompted deeper questions about the role of airborne forces in future conflicts, including whether support units — such as logistics or medical battalions — realistically need to jump alongside assault elements during initial combat operations.

“Are support battalions going to jump into a combat situation with the assault echelon?” Anderson asked. “Or would they come in later some other way?”

That sort of strategic recalibration is central to the Army’s new approach.

While airborne operations remain a critical part of rapid deployment and response missions, Army leaders say the previous model spread airborne resources too thin and required too much effort to maintain a standard that didn’t match operational realities.

By narrowing the focus to assault echelons and combat-ready forces, the Army believes it can improve readiness, increase the proficiency of actual jumpers, and better allocate limited airlift resources.

In the end, this restructuring reflects an evolving military landscape — one where agility, precision, and combat readiness take precedence over legacy requirements.

And for airborne units, that means jumping only when it matters most.