Re: Car vs. Bike vs. the Law



J

Jasper Janssen

Guest
On Wed, 30 Nov 2005 05:21:56 -0700, Mark Hickey <[email protected]>
wrote:

>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.


The chutes that slow down drag racers are round, and since those guys pop
2 or 3 chutes per car, times two cars, on every run, I would imagine that
they figure fairly high up in the rankings.

Jasper
 
M

Marty

Guest
"JD" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
>
> Mark Hickey wrote:
>> Shawn <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> >Mark Hickey wrote:
>> >> [email protected] 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 bastards
eventhough you could configure them for free fall or SL. Nice forward speed
and good brakes.

Marty
 
J

jim beam

Guest
Jasper Janssen wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Nov 2005 21:54:52 -0700, Mark Hickey <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>
>>>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. Transfers all the
>>bumps and bruises back to the mountain bikers.

>
>
> Does that include all the military units? It wasn't so terribly long ago
> that I remember some docu mentioning that only the elite .mil guys used
> the steerable matresses. Seals and the like.
>
> Jasper


that's true. the grunts still get kicked out low & slow with round
stuff on. no time for anything else.
 
J

jim beam

Guest
[email protected] wrote:
> Mark Hickey writes:
>
>
>>>>>Better to do a PLF on the car than a PFL on the pavement.

>
>
>>>>PLF?
>>>>PFL?

>
>
>>>Parachute Landing Fall

>
>
>>>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. Transfers
>>all the bumps and bruises back to the mountain bikers.

>
>
> Combat jumps are made at the highest safe rate for landing to minimize
> exposure to small arms fire. I'm sure you would not like to go as
> slow as possible, in a jump behind enemy lines.


1. it's very rare to drop into a hot zone. unless it's snafu.

2. you go as slow as possible to minimize dispersion, especially at night.

>
>
>>An ex-Ranger buddy of mine tells some great stories about jumping
>>with the old round chutes though... I saw him put those skills into
>>action once when he got whacked by a drunk on a four-wheeler
>>(something I hope I never get to see again...)

>
>
> It's not the shape of the chute but its rate of descent that is
> important for combat use.


if it's a tactical drop from 400', there's no time for monkeying about.
it's round 'chute and out you go.

>
> Jobst Brandt
 
M

Mark Hickey

Guest
Jasper Janssen <[email protected]> wrote:

>On Wed, 30 Nov 2005 05:21:56 -0700, Mark Hickey <[email protected]>
>wrote:
>
>>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.

>
>The chutes that slow down drag racers are round, and since those guys pop
>2 or 3 chutes per car, times two cars, on every run, I would imagine that
>they figure fairly high up in the rankings.


I don't think of 'em as "O's" but as "X's"... (but good point!).

Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $795 ti frame
 
J

JD

Guest
Mark Hickey wrote:
> "JD" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >Mark Hickey wrote:
> >> Shawn <[email protected]> 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
 
J

JD

Guest
Marty wrote:
> "JD" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
> >
> > Mark Hickey wrote:
> >> Shawn <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Mark Hickey wrote:
> >> >> [email protected] 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 bastards
> 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
 
M

Marty

Guest
"JD" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
>
> Marty wrote:
>> "JD" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]
>> >
>> > Mark Hickey wrote:
>> >> Shawn <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >Mark Hickey wrote:
>> >> >> [email protected] 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
>> bastards
>> 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.
 
M

Mark Hickey

Guest
"JD" <[email protected]> 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
 
T

Tommy Taylor

Guest
> 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
 
J

JD

Guest
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
 
J

Jasper Janssen

Guest
On Thu, 01 Dec 2005 22:08:38 -0700, Mark Hickey <[email protected]>
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
 
M

Mark Hickey

Guest
Jasper Janssen <[email protected]> wrote:

>On Thu, 01 Dec 2005 22:08:38 -0700, Mark Hickey <[email protected]>
>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