View Full Version : They're Jumping the T-11
Someone give us some feedback on these puppies??
Airborne School students on Fort Benning, Ga., completed the first jump March 16 using the Army's new T-11 parachute, which is replacing the decades old T-10
Airborne :lifter:lifter:lifter:lifter
armymom1228
03-19-2010, 18:56
Dang! So that is what happened to that missing bedsheet last laundry day.:D
Kyobanim
03-19-2010, 20:12
Dang! So that is what happened to that missing bedsheet last laundry day.:D
That's not your bedsheet, that's some fat ladies underwear
http://www.army.mil/-news/2009/10/15/28805-riggers-test-t-11-parachute/
FORT LEE, Va. (Oct. 14, 2009) -- The airborne operation at McLaney Drop Zone Friday was just like any other.
Forty or so rigger students and cadre were gathered on the tarmac - some fully geared up and ready to board the aircraft - others undergoing inspections before being cleared to jump.
But this operation was different in that several of the participants were equipped with the Army's newest parachute.
The Advanced Tactical Parachute System T-11 made its debut at Fort Lee as six cadre members of the Quartermaster School's Aerial Delivery and Field Services Department logged a successful jump from a UH-60 Black Hawk Helicopter.
Maj. Samuel Burns, ADFSD deputy director, said his department is participating in the T-11 operational testing and fielding phase which aims to work out any kinks in the system.
"The fielding is ongoing," he said, noting many operational units are already equipped with the new parachute. "We have them here because the T-11 will become part of the parachute rigger AIT program of instruction."
In fact, the T-11 will be phased in over the next three years and become the Army's main parachute system, replacing the T-10, which has been in service more than 50 years. ADFSD has already received roughly 250 T-11s and will begin teaching the new parachute system to students within "the next 60 days," said Burns.
Additionally, ADFSD rigger instructors and staff will play a critical role in the Army-wide phase-in period, traveling to units worldwide to provide instruction and guidance on the use of the system.
"We'll send the first teams out in November," said Burns.
Judging from the sentiment Friday, the T-11 will likely be warmly received.
"I think they'll be happy to get one," said Sgt. 1st Class Timothy Vogt, one of the six Soldiers who logged a jump in the new parachute.
The T-11 differs from its predecessor in that the canopy deployment is smoother, oscillation is minimized and it is designed to carry a heavier load, about 100 pounds more and closer to current load requirements. Additionally, it has a canopy that is larger and square-shaped, contributing to a slower descent rate.
"Comparing the rate of descent to other parachutes that I jumped, it's relatively slower," said Master Sgt. Tonika Scott-Morris, the ADFSD sergeant major who has had more than a 100 jumps using a variety of parachutes. "If the descent is slower the landing is softer."
A softer landing is critical to preventing injuries, said Scott-Morris. The T-11's rate of descent is roughly four seconds slower than the T-10.
Scott-Morris said that although the test went well and most of the jumpers were impressed with the new equipment, the results are not conclusive.
"With any new piece of equipment, you will have deficiencies that are not discovered until actual (large-scale) operation of (that equipment)," she said.
Scott-Morris said there were reports of deficiencies with the T-11, but they have been addressed. She said her cadre will perform more jumps to further validate the modifications.
"We'll do five to 10 more jumps just to get good concurrent data," she said
Some of those tests will include jumps from high-performance aircrafts such as the Air Force C-130.
The 75th Ranger Regiment and the U.S. Army Airborne School have also received the new T-11. Fort Bragg's 82nd Airborne Division is still in the fielding process, and the rest of the Army will field the T-11 by 2014.
That would be A Co 1-507th - when I was there a couple of weeks ago they were prepping for it - they were only planning to do one jump per BAC class for familiarization as it takes a lot more time to repack them vs the T-10.
Cadre opinions on the T-11 were mixed - there are some peculiarities - one of the cadre nearly lost an ear the day I was out on the DZ due to riser capewell placement which seems to be an issue to watch when chuting up.
The thing is huge compared to a T-10 - sure glad I didn't have to run off of the DZ with that kit bag full of parachute and harness. :p
Richard
The Reaper
03-20-2010, 09:18
Story is that the T-11 takesd two riggers 90 minutes to pack.
I wonder if they are going to add riggers to the TDA, or reduce the number of jumps required?
TR
armymom1228
03-20-2010, 10:52
:o
LongWire
03-20-2010, 10:56
Story is that the T-11 takesd two riggers 90 minutes to pack.
I wonder if they are going to add riggers to the TDA, or reduce the number of jumps required?
TR
How will they get their 25 a day? :rolleyes:
So the Army is using a new canopy. WHY? what is the difference between the new one and the old umbrella shaped parachute and why the change. How does it affect mmm, floating down..
You might wanna reread post #3 in this thread. ;)
Richard
greenberetTFS
03-20-2010, 11:06
Well,since it's a completely "soft" landing,they won't have to train PLF's anymore....;) It was feet,ass and head,right? ;)
Big Teddy :munchin
mojaveman
03-20-2010, 11:09
The T-11's rate of descent is roughly four seconds slower than the T-10.
Would that fact create a hinderance during a live combat jump where jumpers would be fired on as they were floating down?
The T-11's rate of descent is roughly four seconds slower than the T-10. Would that fact create a hinderance during a live combat jump?
Slower in reference to what altitude?
Normal training jumps for s/l is 1250' AGL (Above Ground Level) for Basic Airborne Course students and night jumps for experienced jumpers - 800' AGL for day jumps for experienced jumpers - 450' AGL for a combat jump.
I would think the rate of descent offers no issues for a successful combat jump.
Richard's $.02 :munchin
longrange1947
03-20-2010, 18:58
The guys just finished training in the parachute. Opening time is longer hence higher opening altitude. Yes, longer under canopy. BUT, softer landing for your shot up body. :munchin :D
alright4u
03-20-2010, 20:02
Will this chute, in the opinions of those in the know, help our wounded troops in SF and those on other airborne asssignments until they recover? I am asking as I do not know?
We used to use Lake McArthur for water jumps to keep some on jump status. I had a great NCO help me in the Army .
Anyone recall a D license number 007? Great SF trooper.
I kinda prefer my MC-4.... y'all can keep the non-steerable parachutes.
:D
Will this chute, in the opinions of those in the know, help our wounded troops in SF and those on other airborne asssignments until they recover? I am asking as I do not know?
We used to use Lake McArthur for water jumps to keep some on jump status. I had a great NCO help me in the Army .
Anyone recall a D license number 007? Great SF trooper.
Nope, but I do know an SF SGM(RET) who could be confused with the 3rd Bond.:)
We are taking care of our wounded troops in SF. Though we are not scheduled for fielding of the T-11. We've been known to send guys to Key West for water jumps.
We SCUBA teams used to set up a monthly water DZ at Mott Lake to (1) practice our SOPs and to (2) support those undergoing physical rehab who needed to jump for pay purposes but couldn't yet make a land jump.
MG MacMull ('Big Mac') was a BIG guy - he'd just relax in the water and float around until we came and pulled him into the IBS - it always left me with a mental picture of dragging a whale up onto its decks of a ship.
Richard
We SCUBA teams used to set up a monthly water DZ at Mott Lake to (1) practice our SOPs and to (2) support those undergoing physical rehab who needed to jump for pay purposes but couldn't yet make a land jump.
MG MacMull ('Big Mac') was a BIG guy - he'd just relax in the water and float around until we came and pulled him into the IBS - it always left me with a mental picture of dragging a whale up onto its decks of a ship.
Richard
MacMull was BIG, litterally bumped into and off him while running into the PX on Bragg back in 1982. :D
I kinda prefer my MC-4.... y'all can keep the non-steerable parachutes.
:D
My sentiments exactly Stras. These look like they would be easier to walk off of the top of though.
Lightningstrike
03-21-2010, 12:46
I'm in airborne school right now we do 1 jump with the t-11 which will be are first jump, then 4 more jumps with the t-10. Well on to tower week.
ZonieDiver
03-21-2010, 15:01
I kinda prefer my MC-4.... y'all can keep the non-steerable parachutes.
:D
Damn, I am old! It was MC-1's for me...
We SCUBA teams used to set up a monthly water DZ at Mott Lake to (1) practice our SOPs and to (2) support those undergoing physical rehab who needed to jump for pay purposes but couldn't yet make a land jump. Richard
Did you get hazardous duty pay for jumping into Mott Lake with all the goodies that were dumped in the bottom of it?:lifter
Damn, I am old! It was MC-1's for me...
We still have the MC-1s.. Currently on the MC-1D, You may remember the HALO parachute as the MC-3 (with the belly mount T10 reserve). The new(mid 90's) Halo parachute is the MC-4, which replaced the MT-XX. Much nicer to jump and get to land where you want.
Last hard class
03-21-2010, 15:19
I kinda prefer my MC-4.... y'all can keep the non-steerable parachutes.
:D
Can you picture Jump school or even the 82nd on a mass tac with steerable chutes?
We still have the MC-1s..
I think ZD was referring to the MC1 (pull the forks/slip risers) vs the MC1-1 w/toggles which I think you are referring to here. I hated the MC1 because you had to realign the risers and replace the forks prior to landing or else. :eek: I only pulled them one time - after surviving that experience, I just left them in and steered by pulling the risers like a T-10 which worked fine. We really liked the MC1-1 as a general purpose steerable s/l chute for our purposes.
Our old HALO chute was the OD canopy MC1 w/blast handle until replaced by the MC-3 (a dark charcoal PC canopy) and quickly followed by the HAPPS. But those were the days...:cool:
Can you picture Jump school or even the 82nd on a mass tac with steerable chutes?
The 82nd AB tried the MC1-1 a few times - quickly and correctly decided it was OK for pathfinders but not for their mission related mass tacs and stuck with the venerable T-10. ;)
Richard
ZonieDiver
03-21-2010, 21:51
I think ZD was referring to the MC1 (pull the forks/slip risers) vs the MC1-1 w/toggles which I think you are referring to here. I hated the MC1 because you had to realign the risers and replace the forks prior to landing or else. :eek: I only pulled them one time - after surviving that experience, I just left them in and steered by pulling the risers like a T-10 which worked fine. We really liked the MC1-1 as a general purpose steerable s/l chute for our purposes.
Our old HALO chute was the OD canopy MC1 w/blast handle until replaced by the MC-3 (a dark charcoal PC canopy) and quickly followed by the HAPPS. But those were the days...:cool:
The 82nd AB tried the MC1-1 a few times - quickly and correctly decided it was OK for pathfinders but not for their mission related mass tacs and stuck with the venerable T-10. ;)
Richard
Richard is absolutely spot on! I was referring to the MC-1... and the realignment of those risers. All was well until an "oh God" moment. We had to turn in a chute that had the forks pulled. Often, we pulled them after we had PLF'ed.
In the last few years of my Reserve time, I jumped and MC-1-1, and it was a great improvement.
alright4u
03-22-2010, 11:49
Nope, but I do know an SF SGM(RET) who could be confused with the 3rd Bond.:)
We are taking care of our wounded troops in SF. Though we are not scheduled for fielding of the T-11. We've been known to send guys to Key West for water jumps.
Glad to hear you keeping them on jump status. The D007 was a MSG in 67 who went back to SOG. He was at CCS, but; I did not see him in 69 due to other duties. MSG Vernon Glen was a helluva trooper.
Buffalobob
03-24-2010, 09:43
Is the T-11 the same thing as an MC-6?
Is the T-11 the same thing as an MC-6?
No - the MC-6 is akin to the MC-3 which is a variant of a Para-Commander.
Richard