Didn't I read the Russians dropped some troops into the snow during WW2? I can't remember the story now.

That's called a plane crash.

Now there goes my coffee! :har:

Judging by how the Russkies used to drop their paras...well...

https://giant.gfycat.com/PowerlessPleasingButterfly.gif

Unfulfilled Promise: The Soviet Airborne Forces, 1928-1945 by Leroy Thompson, page 46-47
Liberal use of salt recommended.

That's it. Thank you Dowly.

Mere technical details that can and will all be solved now that it's been proved possible. With any new idea there are always a bunch of negative nancy's ready to proclaim it impossible or once someone actually does happen and proves them wrong they then claim that it's useless.

After all the Wright Brothers invention was considered a dangerous and unreliable contraption that killed it's first passenger, the telephone was a useless curiosity that would never become popular let along replace the telegraph, any train reaching more than 30 mph would kill everyone aboard by sucking the air out of their lungs, submarines are expensive boondoggles that tend to kill their crews far more often than they kill the enemy and so forth.

A man has proven a new way to get to the ground safely besides using a parachute. I am confident that somebody will build upon this.

What do you Legs know about it?

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BiYapjgIQAAYSvr.jpg

I know that guy has a parachute.

The Wright brothers discovered a new era, the very idea of lift and drag and how to use/overcome it.
In 2016, we have a broad knowledge about aviation, gravity and other forces in question. It doesn't make any sense, there is no "maybe we just don't know" magic pony around the next corner that would make this a good idea, in any scenario.

Besides that, let's look at it from a military and logistical perspective.
So you want to drop paratroopers, regulars, by throwing them out of a plane so they can 'safely' land in a net on the ground. (The guy who did this stunt nearly missed, by the way...)

I mean...
Who will build the nets, the enemy?
And how many per soldier?
Does every soldier need his own net?
Will one net suffice for a chalk or two?
Will they jump all at once or with delays so they won't pile up in the net(s)?
Have you thought about this for more than 2 seconds?
What about the heavy equipment a soldier carries?
What about support equipment for hundreds of soldiers?
Throw them into the net too, or make them glide in from 75km out?
Have you thought about this at all?
I don't even!?

How intensive and expensive must the training be for these soldiers?
Military equipment and procedures are meant to be "idiot safe" whenever possible - for obvious reasons. You can drop any imbecile with a gun out of a plane by use of static line, not much he can screw up and still enough injuries happen.
Now yeah, let's train everyone to become some super military free fall expert who's gonna free fall into nets that... someone hopefully will build up(wat!?) because...uhm...it's totally useful and so much better than any other method in use? On top of all that, since when does the military (besides SOF operations) still perform *real* combat jumps, especially on a regimental level or something?
Meaning, your "ground fire" example is pretty much irrelevant anyways, since you can simply bring in paratroopers the actually safe and efficient way, by landing them, or dropping them via static line.

Anyways:

 

http://i.imgur.com/5HcQ0Eh.png

Frankly, this is crazy on every level.

Out of idle curiosity, what's the RCS of the average parachute? :hmmm:

Out of general ignorance, what's an RCS? :88)

Out of an effort to explain myself, in the context I meant it, RCS means Radar Cross Section. :yep:

Thank you, and I don't know (the answer to your original question).

Me neither, but I know military as well as civilian radars can indeed pick parachutes up.