|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
Car vs. Bike vs. the Law
Mark Hickey wrote: "JD" wrote: Mark Hickey wrote: Shawn sdotherecurry@bresnannextdotnet wrote: Mark Hickey wrote: Not any more - they land as slow (vertically) as you want 'em to since virtually everyone has moved to the airfoil chutes. Not true, emergency chutes are still round. http://www.nationalparachute.com/page3.html That's why I said "virtually"... the 'chutes that are built to recover entire aircraft are also round, as are those that recover spacecraft... but on a "percentage popped" basis, I would imagine it's way under 1% total. I'll take that bet: http://www.airbornesystems-na.com/troop2.html Have you ever seen a mass tactical airborne exercise? Heavy equipment, CDS, LAPES and personnel use round chutes to this day in the military. Bet me that under 1% popped and I'll take all of your money. I can figure the military equipment using round 'chutes (and would hope that they aren't dropping THAT much equipment out of airplanes regularly), but I'd hate to jump out of an airplane over people who want to use me for target practice without being able to control where I come down (beyond a very narrow cone). Then again, I've heard stories about mid-air collisions with round 'chutes - I guess it would just be worse with wings. Do yourself a favor and google CDS, mass tactical airborne, CAPEX and C-130 for some photos to get an idea of what the sky looks like when filled with round parachutes. The most personnel I ever saw under canopy at once was an 8 ship C-141 mass tac drop in NC. At 155 troops per aircraft, that's 1240 'chutes in the air. My last jump had some Ranger running across the top of my canopy, but then again the friggin T-10 has the least amount of manueverability. I saw people tangled up, but never saw anyone get injured badly from that. JD |
Ads |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
Car vs. Bike vs. the Law
Marty wrote: "JD" wrote in message ups.com... Mark Hickey wrote: Shawn sdotherecurry@bresnannextdotnet wrote: Mark Hickey wrote: wrote: aka "fold legs in a semi upright fall, rolling to one side (while pulling on the shrouds with extended arms). Of course I have no parachute but the collapsing fall helps prevent the broken leg. Parachutes fall at about 15MPH for combat jumps and 10MPH for civilians. Not any more - they land as slow (vertically) as you want 'em to since virtually everyone has moved to the airfoil chutes. Not true, emergency chutes are still round. http://www.nationalparachute.com/page3.html That's why I said "virtually"... the 'chutes that are built to recover entire aircraft are also round, as are those that recover spacecraft... but on a "percentage popped" basis, I would imagine it's way under 1% total. Mark Hickey I'll take that bet: http://www.airbornesystems-na.com/troop2.html Have you ever seen a mass tactical airborne exercise? Heavy equipment, CDS, LAPES and personnel use round chutes to this day in the military. Bet me that under 1% popped and I'll take all of your money. JD JD, I mostly un-assed with the MC-5. I was especially fond of the identical main and reserve chutes. These work fine for HAHO but were unforgiving *******s eventhough you could configure them for free fall or SL. Nice forward speed and good brakes. Marty MC-5 = Paracommander? All of the different nomenclatures from service to service were pretty confusing at times. JD |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
Car vs. Bike vs. the Law
"JD" wrote in message ups.com... Marty wrote: "JD" wrote in message ups.com... Mark Hickey wrote: Shawn sdotherecurry@bresnannextdotnet wrote: Mark Hickey wrote: wrote: aka "fold legs in a semi upright fall, rolling to one side (while pulling on the shrouds with extended arms). Of course I have no parachute but the collapsing fall helps prevent the broken leg. Parachutes fall at about 15MPH for combat jumps and 10MPH for civilians. Not any more - they land as slow (vertically) as you want 'em to since virtually everyone has moved to the airfoil chutes. Not true, emergency chutes are still round. http://www.nationalparachute.com/page3.html That's why I said "virtually"... the 'chutes that are built to recover entire aircraft are also round, as are those that recover spacecraft... but on a "percentage popped" basis, I would imagine it's way under 1% total. Mark Hickey I'll take that bet: http://www.airbornesystems-na.com/troop2.html Have you ever seen a mass tactical airborne exercise? Heavy equipment, CDS, LAPES and personnel use round chutes to this day in the military. Bet me that under 1% popped and I'll take all of your money. JD JD, I mostly un-assed with the MC-5. I was especially fond of the identical main and reserve chutes. These work fine for HAHO but were unforgiving *******s eventhough you could configure them for free fall or SL. Nice forward speed and good brakes. Marty MC-5 = Paracommander? All of the different nomenclatures from service to service were pretty confusing at times. JD It's a 7-cell Ram Air. I've seen it called RAPS. It's a hybrid really between the MT-1 and MC-4 designs. |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
Car vs. Bike vs. the Law
"JD" wrote:
My last jump had some Ranger running across the top of my canopy, but then again the friggin T-10 has the least amount of manueverability. I saw people tangled up, but never saw anyone get injured badly from that. My Ranger buddy saw someone get hurt... the guy whose equipment bag (the one that hangs on a long tether below the jumper) dropped through the hole in the top of my buddy's 'chute. The "hurt" happened after they both landed safely. ;-) He also told me about how they'd tweak the new guys by walking on the tops of their 'chutes. Gotta believe that there were some holes pinched in some skivvies over that... Mark Hickey Habanero Cycles http://www.habcycles.com Home of the $795 ti frame |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
Car vs. Bike vs. the Law
My last jump had some Ranger running across the top of my canopy, but
then again the friggin T-10 has the least amount of manueverability. I saw people tangled up, but never saw anyone get injured badly from that. What kind of birds don't fly? Tommy C 3/325 70-72 |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
Car vs. Bike vs. the Law
Tommy Taylor wrote: My last jump had some Ranger running across the top of my canopy, but then again the friggin T-10 has the least amount of manueverability. I saw people tangled up, but never saw anyone get injured badly from that. What kind of birds don't fly? Tommy C 3/325 70-72 The Jumpin' Junkies? I always called a mass tac on Sicily "air pollution". JD |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
Car vs. Bike vs. the Law
On Thu, 01 Dec 2005 22:08:38 -0700, Mark Hickey
wrote: My Ranger buddy saw someone get hurt... the guy whose equipment bag (the one that hangs on a long tether below the jumper) dropped through the hole in the top of my buddy's 'chute. The "hurt" happened after they both landed safely. ;-) Aren't those things essentially unsteerable? So why would your buddy punish the guy for accidentally getting his gear in his chute? Jasper |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
Car vs. Bike vs. the Law
Jasper Janssen wrote:
On Thu, 01 Dec 2005 22:08:38 -0700, Mark Hickey wrote: My Ranger buddy saw someone get hurt... the guy whose equipment bag (the one that hangs on a long tether below the jumper) dropped through the hole in the top of my buddy's 'chute. The "hurt" happened after they both landed safely. ;-) Aren't those things essentially unsteerable? So why would your buddy punish the guy for accidentally getting his gear in his chute? They're not entirely unsteerable - and I would imagine the adrenaline factor was pretty much off the charts (think what would happen if the guy on top took a different turn than the guy below). Ooof. Mark Hickey Habanero Cycles http://www.habcycles.com Home of the $795 ti frame |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
if you wanted maximum braking, where would you sit? | wle | Techniques | 133 | November 18th 15 02:10 AM |
Evaulating a bike | Paul Cassel | Techniques | 96 | August 22nd 05 11:45 PM |
My New Bike | brucianna | General | 6 | June 8th 05 08:45 AM |
Some questions etc.. | Douglas Harrington | General | 10 | August 17th 04 02:42 AM |
aus.bicycle FAQ (Monthly(ish) Posting) | kingsley | Australia | 3 | February 24th 04 08:44 PM |