Incidentally, the pictures I have seen suggest the .50 cal and the .30 cal used identical tripods, is this right? Presumably this would mean you could easily knock up a .50 cal support option as well?
I checked a few good pictures over the weekend, and it seems to me that the tripod for the M2 Browning has much longer and thicker legs than that for M1919A4 Browning. There might also be some other detail issues. Furthermore, the M2 tripod is reportedly much heavier in weight. Furthermore, the tripod for M1917 MG also seems to differ from those two.
On the other hand, sculpting the tripod is probably quite easy job compared to putting together the gun itself and the crew.
That said, you would not find M2 Browning in a parachute battalion, at least in one that had recently jumped. There were none authorised in the TOE, and possible "unauthorised acquisitions" would be rather heavy to haul along, especially considering the weight of their ammo. That said, a para unit that ends up in a regular infantry role could get a bunch of wheeled vehicles assigned to it, and those sometimes came with an AAMG mounted.
In regular infantry battalion six M2 Brownings were authorised, but these were scattered individually on vehicle AA-mounts across the battalion. While it would be possible to dismount them and put on a tripod mount, this would require quite some manpower. Furthermore, the ammo was heavy and available in limited amounts (authorised load of 6 ammo cans of 110 rounds each) compared to the plentiful .30 cal rifle rounds.
For details about the allocation of weapons and ammo across the US leg infantry and airborne battalions, I would recommend checking this website:
http://www.bayonetstrength.uk/