View Single Post
Old 10-07-2011, 01:52   #7
HALO99
FTFSI
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Philippines
Posts: 4
Airborne Systems is the way to go.

Im glad to hear Airborne Systems won that contract. I believe Airborne Systems used to be Paraflite (the makers of the MC-4 systems we use here in the PI). AS/Paraflite military rigs are very durable and reliable in our experience. We also have a couple of MC-4 systems manufactured by Strong Parachutes, and we have had bad experiences with its durability.

With due respect to "Strong", this is just an honest to goodness feedback. A couple of team mates experienced broken control lines during openings and under canopy, i myself experienced a pilot chute and bridal line ripping away from my canopy during opening. These incidents occurred within the year of being issued this MC4 brand, during admin jumps and out of slow flying UH-1Hs. I wonder if we just got a bad batch of rigs from Strong.

Our older issue Paraflite MC4s on the contrary never skipped a beat, we never experienced any equipment-related failure with this rig, even under heavier wing loads. USMC guys on exercises here use a "multi-mission rig" wherein they HAHO using a static-line, and we have witnessed several of them incur malfunctions with this technique, maybe its equipment related, im not sure. We find the 5-8 second FF delay for HAHO still safer, just have to compensate the canopy separations with more piloting skills.

We hope to see those new systems soon during bilateral exercises here with the 1st group guys in the next couple of years. Airborne Systems ARAPS. We're still stuck with our MC4s probably for the next several decades. http://professionalsoldiers.com/foru...es/biggrin.gif
HALO99 is offline   Reply With Quote