View Full Version : "New Chute Means ‘Softer’ Landing for Paratroopers"
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2009/08/new-chute-means-softer-landing-for-paratroopers/
ha ha , just means more shit to carry!!!!
longrange1947
08-29-2009, 10:56
More time hanging for enemy fire, longer opening time so you have to jump higher to stay safe.
Oh yeah, comfort versus safety. :munchin
MARSOC0211
08-29-2009, 11:06
I wonder why they decided not to use the SF-10A?
uboat509
08-29-2009, 18:03
I wonder why they decided not to use the SF-10A?
Can't do mass tacs with steerable chutes. Bad things happen and people get hurt, badly.
SFC W
Peregrino
08-29-2009, 19:42
We see lots of OPREPs and FLASH reports for jump injuries with the MC-6s caused by "poor PLFs". Seems there's a learning curve; something to do with downwind landings and high(er) performance canopies. :munchin
MARSOC0211
08-29-2009, 20:14
Makes sense, I wasn't even thinking about the whole mass exit and "sky sharking" issues.
It is kind of humorous how some guys can't seem to grasp the whole "if you have x knots of wind, and you have a canopy that has x knots of drive, then your relative speed is..." They do seem to quickly understand it when they come flying in at 20+ knots :D
Makes sense, I wasn't even thinking about the whole mass exit and "sky sharking" issues.
It is kind of humorous how some guys can't seem to grasp the whole "if you have x knots of wind, and you have a canopy that has x knots of drive, then your relative speed is..." They do seem to quickly understand it when they come flying in at 20+ knots :D
I explain this to my new Soldiers when they arrive after they got the damn training too.
Simple fact is: most of them see that the SF-10 does in fact move you a good speed and if prevailing winds are right, you can get close to the turn-in point.
Sad fact is: when you fail to make your last correction and face into the wind you make an ass of yourself when you eat turf and tumble closer to the remaining/already completed sticks affording them front row seating.
Lesson learned from this: 18D's appreciate this as they are required to move less distance to poke you where it hurts and tell you how funny it was. Meanwhile the crowd in the background is discussing the best method to mass distro the video in the Team Room/Staff Sections.
Agree with all points above about descent times, and safety vs. expediency to battle.
greenberetTFS
08-30-2009, 04:34
Have any of you guys jumped the T7? :rolleyes: Thats opening shock!!! ;)
Big Teddy :munchin
Have any of you guys jumped the T7? :rolleyes: Thats opening shock!!! ;)
Big Teddy :munchin
My first 4 qualifying jumps at Benning were T7 out of a C46. Fifth jump was a T10 out of a C-119. A very big difference in opening shock.
Some parts of the original design intents seem to have been lost in the sauce in favor of the distraction of dealing with jumper comfort. (just my two cents)
-Slower openings meant you could use a higher jump run speed, and a LOWER drop altitude using the increased forward throw to help inflate the canopy.
-Slower descent rate plus lower altitude, meant the same time in the air as on the older canopies, but less opening force on the jumpers and more controllable landings
-Higher jump run speed made it safer for the A/C because the A/C wouldn't need to decelerate as much prior to showing up over the drop zone, (nothing says easy like a target that slows down as it gets closer) and as well, the A/C wouldn't need to accelerate as much to egress to his return route...
win-win
Unfortunately now the primary concern seems to be creature comforts with less concern about true tactical application. I am sure there were many other design points and parameters that I never read up on, but then again I am a jumper not a designer/tester. Maybe a 'test board' guy would know the real deal.
...or we could just do pay jumps. Just my two cents, Maybe I am wrong.
Utah Bob
08-30-2009, 12:19
Can't do mass tacs with steerable chutes. Bad things happen and people get hurt, badly.
SFC W
Sometimes ya can't even do it with just one team.:D
greenberetTFS
08-30-2009, 14:56
My first 4 qualifying jumps at Benning were T7 out of a C46. Fifth jump was a T10 out of a C-119. A very big difference in opening shock.
ArtR,
I had a buddy from Chicago who was a rigger in the 11th....They had 2 T7's which they let guys use.....I made several jumps and opening shock was a hell of a lot more than the T10....:p I got my wings in April of 1955 at Ft.Bragg and it was with T10's and C-119's........ That summer I was a cherry jumper in C Company in the 505 PIR and on Operation "Sagebrush" I jumped a C-47 which was in a trail of "V's" (C-119's,C-88's,C-46's and 47's) over 40+ aircraft and the first and last mass jump I've ever been on....... :rolleyes: The sky was full of chutes.......Guy's were walking off canopy's and it was really incredible.....:eek: I'm sure their are guys that were there that had to remember it..... It looked like the invasion of Normandy......
Big Teddy :munchin
ArtR,
I had a buddy from Chicago who was a rigger in the 11th....They had 2 T7's which they let guys use.....I made several jumps and opening shock was a hell of a lot more than the T10....:p I got my wings in April of 1955 at Ft.Bragg and it was with T10's and C-119's........ That summer I was a cherry jumper in C Company in the 505 PIR and on Operation "Sagebrush" I jumped a C-47 which was in a trail of "V's" (C-119's,C-88's,C-46's and 47's) over 40+ aircraft and the first and last mass jump I've ever been on....... :rolleyes: The sky was full of chutes.......Guy's were walking off canopy's and it was really incredible.....:eek: I'm sure their are guys that were there that had to remember it..... It looked like the invasion of Normandy......
Big Teddy :munchin
Teddy, Back in those days your Airborne Divisions were making all kinds of Mass Drops. I made quite a few with the 101st in the late 50's early 60's. The biggest one I ever made was in 1954 with the 11th Abn Div in Colorado, the whole 511th AIR out of C-124's. The 10th Group had a few left over T-7's when I got there in 1955. Some of the riggers were jumping them every now and then until Col Eckman got wind of it,and that was the end of jumping T7's.
uboat509
08-31-2009, 19:30
My two cents on the jumper comfort issue. As far as being in the air longer, how much longer are we really talking about here? From an altitude of 1000 feet AGL the difference between 19 feet/second and 22 feet/second comes out to roughly seven seconds, and that's calculating for a fully inflated chute at 1000 feet, which we wouldn't have. Now consider some other factors. How many true combat jumps have there been outside of SOCOM units since Panama? I can't think of any. Guys get hurt all the time, sometimes seriously doing training jumps. A lot of commanders do not see the point in getting guys hurt training for a mission they have a very low chance of doing, especially when you consider that it means that those guys are not able to train for the missions that they will go on.
SFC W