Special Forces first to use new parachute system

[Pete]

Special Forces first to use new parachute system

http://www.fayobserver.com/military/...6d2977b3d.html

"Special Forces soldiers on Fort Bragg are the first to use a new parachute system that promises to give them greater mobility and the ability to carry heavier loads.

The 3rd Special Forces Group is the first unit to start fielding the new RA-1 parachute, which can be used for free fall and static line operations....."

Took a while. They've been kicking this idea around for decades.

[PRB]

I always wanted to carry more weight.......

[JJ_BPK]

Originally Posted by PRB

I always wanted to carry more weight.......

I was thinking there are two reasons to get a chute with more load..

1)land softer
2)more load

What are the odds of a soft landing??

[Papa Zero Three]

Originally Posted by JJ_BPK

I was thinking there are two reasons to get a chute with more load..

1)land softer
2)more load

What are the odds of a soft landing??

I can chime in on this as I was the one who wrote the requirements for this some years back and have jumped this new system going on about 200+ times from 25K AGL and lower, as well as flown the reserve as a main during evals.

What has increased is known as the AUW or All up Weight that the canopy can hold suspended under it and still perform well for personnel landings ( it can do more for cargo but thats a different topic). So what this means, is that the RA-1 is capable of suspending more weight and handle/ perform as designed. So all those big dudes who would come screaming in on MC-4s no matter what they did, no longer have to land like a sack of potatoes. Even the big dudes with a real combat load can land softly.

This is also a 9 cell canopy vice a 7 cell MC-4. The design of the canopy is also different than what most might be familiar with as even the stabalizers inflate on this canopy and it has a no bullshit 4:1 glide ratio.

As for stalling it. Not going to happen using toggles or pulling rear risers down,unless someone does something incredibly stupid. I know this because I have done everything imaginable to actually get it to stall on purpose. You have to actually start pulling down on suspension line above the rapid links before the canopy actually starts to collapse. Lets not forget how long the risers are on military systems, you would have to have arms longer than an ape to even get close to the top of the risers on a normal reach up. To do what I described above, you have to climb up the rear risers and it isn't exactly easy or something you could do by accident.

As for the learning curve on this system. It's the glide that people have to learn to adjust to, both at altitude and when landing. The sight picture people are used to for landing the MC-4 is too short, so people typically overshoot where they think their feet will touch down. This canopy has a very generous glide however you can sink it straight down without fear of collapse. Jumpers will also now be able to use friction buckles on the front risers that are actually easy to use and functional, another God send for those light guys or those days when you're trying to get some forward drive into a headwind.

The system is also double bag static line capable, like the MC-5 system, so you can deploy this system via static line as well. It works great for following a GPS guided bundles out and for keeping people on level(s) in the stack.

The container is also a great improvement, as it's actually comfortable with body armor on.

[PRB]

Need to go back to the T-10 ....

Originally Posted by Papa Zero Three

I can chime in on this as I was the one who wrote the requirements for this some years back and have jumped this new system going on about 200+ times from 25K AGL and lower, as well as flown the reserve as a main during evals.

What has increased is known as the AUW or All up Weight that the canopy can hold suspended under it and still perform well for personnel landings ( it can do more for cargo but thats a different topic). So what this means, is that the RA-1 is capable of suspending more weight and handle/ perform as designed. So all those big dudes who would come screaming in on MC-4s no matter what they did, no longer have to land like a sack of potatoes. Even the big dudes with a real combat load can land softly.

This is also a 9 cell canopy vice a 7 cell MC-4. The design of the canopy is also different than what most might be familiar with as even the stabalizers inflate on this canopy and it has a no bullshit 4:1 glide ratio.

As for stalling it. Not going to happen using toggles or pulling rear risers down,unless someone does something incredibly stupid. I know this because I have done everything imaginable to actually get it to stall on purpose. You have to actually start pulling down on suspension line above the rapid links before the canopy actually starts to collapse. Lets not forget how long the risers are on military systems, you would have to have arms longer than an ape to even get close to the top of the risers on a normal reach up. To do what I described above, you have to climb up the rear risers and it isn't exactly easy or something you could do by accident.

As for the learning curve on this system. It's the glide that people have to learn to adjust to, both at altitude and when landing. The sight picture people are used to for landing the MC-4 is too short, so people typically overshoot where they think their feet will touch down. This canopy has a very generous glide however you can sink it straight down without fear of collapse. Jumpers will also now be able to use friction buckles on the front risers that are actually easy to use and functional, another God send for those light guys or those days when you're trying to get some forward drive into a headwind.

The system is also double bag static line capable, like the MC-5 system, so you can deploy this system via static line as well. It works great for following a GPS guided bundles out and for keeping people on level(s) in the stack.

The container is also a great improvement, as it's actually comfortable with body armor on.

[Joker]

Originally Posted by PRB

Need to go back to the T-10 ....

Yeah what he said. Everyone needs a T10 high wind landing, feet, head, feet, head, back!

[Guy]

Originally Posted by PRB

I always wanted to carry more weight.......

Maybe they're going to start jumping in mules....

[Team Sergeant]

The learning curve is going to be steep. Entanglements equal death. Low altitude hook turns can be deadly. Harder to stall, sure it is, just reach up and grab those rear risers and pull hard, it will stall....... I wish them well!

[MtnGoat]

Great another chute, we have been having new chutes every 3 to 5 years. Come on!! Really??!! Why? Yes I can read, but Really, why does the military or Army new a new chute? I understand one for jumping Body Armor since that is the road we are going down now for combat. But every 3 years!!

As I said when we talked about all of SF going to MFF training. The Regiment needs to adopt the USMC Multi-Mission Parachute System (MMPS) high glide configured during High Altitude Low Opening (HALO)/ High Altitude High Opening (HAHO) operations. MMPS Double bag MC-5(?) Parachute, and jumping techniques is much easier to teach and IMO Do. Tactical I feel it is better for SF. WE DON'T NEED A NEW CHUTE FOR THIS EITHER!!

[Papa Zero Three]

Originally Posted by MtnGoat

Great another chute, we have been having new chutes every 3 to 5 years. Come on!! Really??!! Why? Yes I can read, but Really, why does the military or Army new a new chute? I understand one for jumping Body Armor since that is the road we are going down now for combat. But every 3 years!!

As I said when we talked about all of SF going to MFF training. The Regiment needs to adopt the USMC Multi-Mission Parachute System (MMPS) high glide configured during High Altitude Low Opening (HALO)/ High Altitude High Opening (HAHO) operations. MMPS Double bag MC-5(?) Parachute, and jumping techniques is much easier to teach and IMO Do. Tactical I feel it is better for SF. WE DON'T NEED A NEW CHUTE FOR THIS EITHER!!

The MC-4, in it's evolving configurations, has been in the system for about 20 years. I believe you are confusing rounds with squares here, which is a whole different conversation.


What you describe in the the MMPS is what the RA-1 does, but without the all the unnecessary configurations and is easier to field as it doesn't require an institutional training change to the existing force. Meaning the handles are all in the same place and procedures are the same. The MMPS is a monstrosity of a system, it's uncomfortable and has more configuration parts/spare parts for rigger sheds to keep track of than you can shake a stick at, it's an uncomfortable container to wear and most importantly, the canopy is only slightly better performance wise than the MC-4 canopy.

In comparison, the RA-1 is magnitudes better in canopy performance and user comfort while requiring little to no change to the existing force or the rigger side of it. The RA-1 is the best military HALO/HAHO product out there, hands down, no question and it's what the force is getting instead of a compromise or mediocre product.

[Kcolliver]

The during design validation, the MMPS was tested along side the RA-1 (Rader Intruder). Jumpers liked the RA-1 better and the MMPS was more than twice as expensive as the RA-1

[PRB]

Originally Posted by Kcolliver

The during design validation, the MMPS was tested along side the RA-1 (Rader Intruder). Jumpers liked the RA-1 better and the MMPS was more than twice as expensive as the RA-1

That means we're buying the MMPS then......

[abc_123]

Originally Posted by PRB

That means we're buying the MMPS then......

You can't be serious. We had a similar testing / competition for new camouflage for the entire Army and after competition we ended up with.....the ACU.

oh. wait. Nevermind.

[Papa Zero Three]

Originally Posted by PRB

That means we're buying the MMPS then......

No, the RA-1 was selected and is a program of record now.

[Eagle5US]

Why wait for a transition course once at GP? Perhaps it would make more sense to incorporate this chute into the "MFF for all" pipeline?
Teach them to jump it (static and free fall) deploy / fly it properly from various altitudes, and land properly. Further add a "ground week and drop Basic ABN from the pipeline...save even more money....