View Full Version : 350 Feet
Who remembers the parachute that was designed to drop troops at 350 feet and something like 250 knots?
Early to mid 80's. Was developed because of the high threat AA level for cold war insertions.
Was designed, developed and under test jumping until.......:eek:
Here is an article,, This was after me,, But I do remember rumors that the USSR jumped chute-less in WWII, into snow banks??
Here is a chart that shows probability of FAIL at different heights..
link: (http://www.combatreform.org/llparachute.htm)
This is an interesting study from 1987 on low altitude (300 ft), high speed (250 kts) personnel parachuting.
BL: The neck can't absorb and dissipate the acceleration forces of the opening shock. Basically says "don't do it"
You'd almost think that an oddly shaped parachute with an oversized reefing system that took much longer to open than the T-10 might be a good starting point...
...maybe something with a HUGE slider that kept the canopy from snapping open during a 180+ knot opening shock. Something that would rely on forward throw of the airplane to open the parachute in stages
...maybe something like a T-11
Nah. That would be silly.
112thSOLCA
11-22-2016, 03:02
I remember it....
I worked for LTG Lindsay when he commanded XVIII Airborne Corps in the mid 80s.
Just prior to taking over the Corps he did a test jump of low opening parachute system with a German Army NCO. If I recall correctly the jump was done onto Pike Field from 250'AGL.
Both chutes had problems and the German NCO died as a result.
I wasn't there when it happened but I remember General Lindsay telling about it.
These work,,
BUTT,, they have limited range and are not real stealth'd. :D
I remember it....
Both chutes had problems and the German NCO died as a result.
I wasn't there when it happened but I remember General Lindsay telling about it.
That's it. The death pretty much put a halt to the experiment.
Couple of stories in the Army Times on the system leading up to the jump on Pike Field. The chute had a set of smaller to larger chutes designed to slow down the jumper before the main chute deployed. Think HSLADS with a warm body. Somewhat complicated and I remember team room talk of "Oh, Hell No".
x SF med
11-25-2016, 04:42
Ah.... the 250/250 experiment... it sucked. It hurt, a lot. It scared the shit out of you just thinking about it.
mojaveman
11-25-2016, 05:36
I'm certain that whoever thought that one up wasn't on jump status. ;)
UWOA (RIP)
11-25-2016, 11:21
Here is an article,, This was after me,, But I do remember rumors that the USSR jumped chute-less in WWII, into snow banks??
Here is a chart that shows probability of FAIL at different heights..
link: (http://www.combatreform.org/llparachute.htm)
I remember something about the Red Army testing/trying that during WWII. Plane flew NOE at stall speed and the 'airborne' troops jumped out the door into snow drifts. As I recall the Soviets had a forty percent casualty rate as 'acceptable' ... but then again they weren't short of people ....
.
mark46th
11-25-2016, 16:43
Even high altitude, high speed chutes are dangerous. Ask Sen. McCain and anyone else who ejected...
CloseDanger
11-26-2016, 13:08
Sounds like multiple chance for cigarette roll of collapsed chute if even one does not deploy correctly, and with the vortex, who knows, it could hang you in mid air.
I remember it....
I worked for LTG Lindsay when he commanded XVIII Airborne Corps in the mid 80s.
Just prior to taking over the Corps he did a test jump of low opening parachute system with a German Army NCO. If I recall correctly the jump was done onto Pike Field from 250'AGL.
Both chutes had problems and the German NCO died as a result.
I wasn't there when it happened but I remember General Lindsay telling about it.
I remember this. My Pathfinder unit, 11th CAG, worked often with the Fallschirmjaeger 252 Bn out of Calw. We had an invitation to join them at Altenstadt so we could jump this rig. After that fatality, the jump was called off. That was in 1985.
Kcolliver
12-07-2016, 01:04
The chute was developed by Germany. A MAJ from the German Airborne School and XVIII Coprs CG, LTG Lindsey jumped. Major was killed and LTG Lindsey broke his leg in several placed. Big NO GO.
:mad:
I remember something about the Red Army testing/trying that during WWII. Plane flew NOE at stall speed and the 'airborne' troops jumped out the door into snow drifts. As I recall the Soviets had a forty percent casualty rate as 'acceptable' ... but then again they weren't short of people ....
.
I also heard that the Nazis started painting large boulders white. Not sure if that one is true.
112thSOLCA
12-07-2016, 06:11
The chute was developed by Germany. A MAJ from the German Airborne School and XVIII Coprs CG, LTG Lindsey jumped. Major was killed and LTG Lindsey broke his leg in several placed. Big NO GO.
:mad:
I think you are combining some events and have the facts confused.....
Lindsay was assigned to the Infantry School at Benning when that jump took place. He wasn't hurt on the jump.
Shortly thereafter he took command of the XVIII Airborne Corps. Within a few months of taking command of the Corps he broke his foot on a jump with the 20th Engineer Bde.
We painted his cast camouflage that afternoon and were on a plane to Honduras the next day. While in Honduras he spent time with 7th SFG.
If you saw him at that time walking around in a cast it would be easy to think he was hurt on the test jump.
The Reaper
12-07-2016, 07:29
I have done a water jump at 450' AGL and there was only one swing under canopy before my feet were in the water.
Clearly, you have to be using a modified chute to get a successful opening much below that.
TR
full cooler
12-07-2016, 10:01
Here is an article,, This was after me.
Post WWII? :D
Post WWII? :D
Hay,
You young Whippersnapper,,,
We were lucky to get the C-119's & C-47's UP TO 800 ft.. The only advantage was they were like jumping a Huey,, at 80-90 knots the exit was very easy..
LMAO
Hi, guys.
I have done two jumps on low altitude in 1997.
First (training) one was at 180 m., second one - at 130 m. (at least for first parachutist in onboard team). Although speed of craft was about 160 km/h. Mi-8 helicopter. Flight info from pilot. Д-1-5у (https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%94-1-5%D1%83) chute.
Time from exit to landing was something like 12-13 sec. Attention: Even with blank gunfire in the air toward enemies on the ground :D
It was on some kind of military show. Toy battle and maneuvres for generals.
I would repeat.
Those guys have a lot of air under open chutes.
I went to "check canopy" and hit the ground in that position one foggy night. Landed on a runway and yes, it did hurt.
CDRODA396
12-21-2016, 12:37
I made the 500' jump into Panama, and despite many people saying things like, "all I had time to do was look up then I hit the ground," or "I didn't even have time to lower my ruck it was so fast," I have always personally thought this sensation of no time was a result of "apprehension induced sensory overload," just plain fear, or some such condition that creates the impression or sensation that it all occurs that fast. I've even heard the same comments about 800' back in the 80's when that was the Division standard for N/CE/MT's, and I personally don't agree with the whole there isn't any time at these altitudes...
In Panama I exited about 1.5km south of the DZ, (yes the USAF had "issues" with overflying the DZ) and had time to see that I was no where near the DZ, I was considerably closer to the bay than the airfield, and was definitely going to land in the trees, then a few moments of "zen" while I drifted downward and took everything in...then back to reality and a tree landing. Definitely NOT look up, look down and land.
Attached is one of the more famous photos of the Ranger jump into Grenada at 500'. Clearly they are under canopy, probably at about 375'-400', and they appear to have more time under canopy coming than, "look up, look down, and hit the ground."
That is reinforced by the pics SpNkid's posted, which at 180m(590') or 130m(426') is about the same altitude, and shows the same thing, which IMO is there is time under canopy to figure out where you are, where you are drifting, and to get ready to land.
I was U.S. observer for a test jump at the German Airborne School when I was at Bad Toelz in Dec '80/Jan 81 time frame. I still have my after action report somewhere in my office. The declared plan was 250 feet altitude, no reserve.
My AAR was highly critical, and I told the SFOD(E) commander "The German's are going to kill a few of themselves with this, then it will go away."
And in 1985, at Ft. Bragg, they did. Just one, but it was enough.
miclo18d
12-22-2016, 00:25
I made the 500' jump into Panama, and despite many people saying things like, "all I had time to do was look up then I hit the ground," or "I didn't even have time to lower my ruck it was so fast," I have always personally thought this sensation of no time was a result of "apprehension induced sensory overload," just plain fear, or some such condition that creates the impression or sensation that it all occurs that fast. I've even heard the same comments about 800' back in the 80's when that was the Division standard for N/CE/MT's, and I personally don't agree with the whole there isn't any time at these altitudes...
In Panama I exited about 1.5km south of the DZ, (yes the USAF had "issues" with overflying the DZ) and had time to see that I was no where near the DZ, I was considerably closer to the bay than the airfield, and was definitely going to land in the trees, then a few moments of "zen" while I drifted downward and took everything in...then back to reality and a tree landing. Definitely NOT look up, look down and land.
Attached is one of the more famous photos of the Ranger jump into Grenada at 500'. Clearly they are under canopy, probably at about 375'-400', and they appear to have more time under canopy coming than, "look up, look down, and hit the ground."
That is reinforced by the pics SpNkid's posted, which at 180m(590') or 130m(426') is about the same altitude, and shows the same thing, which IMO is there is time under canopy to figure out where you are, where you are drifting, and to get ready to land.
My experience was closer to this. When my canopy opened I had twists, I had enough time to check canopy, then to get my bearings, I could hear Spectre blazing on Tocumen and see fire glowing through the jungle, looked down to find I was going to hit the runway. Never lowered my ruck. Whether or not there was time dialation faster or slower. I felt like I had about 20-30 seconds under canopy. Much faster than the 800ft jumps we always did in training but not the "jump-open-hit the ground" either. It was still quick. ETA: these were all T-10/MC1s. I don't know the information on opening charachteristics, and I never jumped any of the newer chutes (my chutes didn't have static lines during that time ;) )
The altitude was not normally the factor, it was the reaction time to open the reserve and it still deploy. In Grenada they didn't jump with reserves because the studies had already told them there was not time to deploy them (based on the anecdotes of people I served with that jumped in Grenada and the studies, I imagine, were from the 350ft jumps). In Panama we jumped with them, I always thought it was more of a psychological reason as a reserve deployed would probably not open in time. After a few deaths in the 90s during 800 ft training jumps, they increased training altitude to 1000ft with Cdrs able to waiver that to 800ft. The extra 200 feet gave like 5 extra seconds for the jumper to decide to pull the reserve. Which statistically reduces the chance to burn in significantly.
Anyone with experience with the jumps into Iraq or AFG?
CDRODA396
12-22-2016, 00:49
The altitude was not normally the factor, it was the reaction time to open the reserve and it still deploy. In Grenada they didn't jump with reserves because the studies had already told them there was not time to deploy them (based on the anecdotes of people I served with that jumped in Grenada and the studies, I imagine, were from the 350ft jumps). In Panama we jumped with them, I always thought it was more of a psychological reason as a reserve deployed would probably not open in time. After a few deaths in the 90s during 800 ft training jumps, they increased training altitude to 1000ft with Cdrs able to waiver that to 800ft. The extra 200 feet gave like 5 extra seconds for the jumper to decide to pull the reserve. Which statistically reduces the chance to burn in significantly.
I don't know about the Rangers, but the Brigade Air Officer for the Div jump left it up to the JM Teams. I was JM on my bird, and me and the other JM both decided we would go with Reserves, but no safety wire through the connector, and the waist band rolled and taped out of the way. We figured it was a "familiar" thing and one less "worry" by jumpers with a lot already on their mind.
Those guys have a lot of air under open chutes.
I went to "check canopy" and hit the ground in that position one foggy night. Landed on a runway and yes, it did hurt.
I was one of those guys. Actually third one on exit, due weight.
My 2nd jump I would describe as: check - AK extraction from under the reserve parachute - bang bang bang - landing (into the trench by the way ). Any special hurts did not fixed, maybe because of old good chute, maybe cause of absence of heavy equip, or maybe you're right a little about a lot of air.
As about jump altitude and timing info, I got it from pilot and ground team respectively, so I hope you don't think i'm lying. I have already passed this dispute with old Soviet paratroopers, who familiar with such parachute and with local jumping realities as well.
I'm sure you are well aware that even fully opened canopy does not mean immediately quenched speed of the falling.
In addition, I suggest that the photos were taken during the first jump from a height of 180 m. And please be mercy to some kind of $10 analog camera from 90ies about exact seeming distances on pics.
Finally I sincerely think that you are guys are tough dudes in this business and I don't pretend on gold medal in this thread.
P.S. By the way reserve parachute can be useful regardless of the altitude of the jump. For example, to descend from the branches of a tree.
Anyone with experience with the jumps into Iraq or AFG?
I had a roommate that did the jump into Iraq with 173rd.
His account, 173rd went in thinking it was going to be a real deal combat jump. They land and the Kurds are already there, and started properly rolling their chutes because SF had secured the DZ.
..... so I hope you don't think i'm lying. I have already passed this dispute with old Soviet paratroopers, who familiar with such parachute and with local jumping realities as well.
...
In addition, I suggest that the photos were taken during the first jump from a height of 180 m. And please be mercy to some kind of $10 analog camera from 90ies about exact seeming distances on pics.....
No problem - my comment was about space under the jumper. And I understand about old cameras - I carried an old 110 for years.
Most paratroopers have been dropped from the 250 ft tower and seen many others drop also. But you have the tower in view looking "tall" so the jumpers appear to be at that altitude. Move to the DZ, remove the tower and most would think that same jumper is now at 100'.
I've seen a number of jumpers with steerable chutes clear lines and then turn into the wind and hold all the way down - some even landing in trees.
No problem - my comment was about space under the jumper. And I understand about old cameras - I carried an old 110 for years.
Try a PEN EE.. :munchin
I jumped one until the lens fell off.. :p
miclo18d
12-24-2016, 00:34
I don't know about the Rangers, but the Brigade Air Officer for the Div jump left it up to the JM Teams. I was JM on my bird, and me and the other JM both decided we would go with Reserves, but no safety wire through the connector, and the waist band rolled and taped out of the way. We figured it was a "familiar" thing and one less "worry" by jumpers with a lot already on their mind.
Very similar. No pins in the reserves nor in the static lines. I still had the waist strap in.
The real difference for us, was that the safeties were suited up CE and jumped last. JMs were allowed to jump anywhere in the stick dependent on the tactical plan (i.e. jump with their squad).
I look back and remember many of the procedures that were used in training, but abandoned in combat. Not for cool points, but for mission requirements. My parachute was held together with 100mph tape, 90mm rounds that stuck outside of the ruck were taped to stay in, jumping safeties, no safety pins, etc
Many of those procedures we learned were because we really didn't train as we fought. Training rucks were always full of water, food, snivel gear... not ammo! I had so much ammo that I even ditched my woobie in favor of an extra box of 7.62 belt fed and it broke my ruck frame when I hit the ground.
To the OP topic. I can't imagine dropping another 150-200 ft. I would imagine there are a lot of factors that include ADA threat, terrain, etc that could force a higher risk jump to be conducted at lower AGL.
My hat is off to those that jumped that low to eventually keep me safe on my jump into Panama!