PDA

View Full Version : The New Army Parachute system T-11 will field in 2009


agonyea
13 April 2008, 10:51
Do We have any Board members who are currently testing the T-11 or the T-11r?
----------------------------------------------------------------------


Army one step closer to new parachute system

by Maj. T.J. Wright and Keith Colliver

PEO Soldier

The Army restarted opera­tional testing of a new person­nel parachute system, the Advanced Tactical Parachute System T-11, Feb. 26 at Fort Bragg. Since the last round of testing in 2007, Program Executive Office Soldier has overhauled the T-11 system by replacing the canopy release assembly with an extremely reliable system and by making modifications to improve form, fit, and function.

The T- 11 parachute has undergone extensive devel­opmental testing in prepara­tion for operational testing. Paratroopers and jumpmas­ters from the XVIII Airborne Corps and the 82nd Airborne Division, under the supervision of the Airborne and Special Operations Test Directorate, will make over 3,200 test jumps through October to ensure the T-11 is effective and suitable for use by the airborne community. Beginning in the summer of 2009, the Army is planning to replace all T-10 parachutes with T-11 parachutes.
Officials say the T-11 pro­vides a far superior harness, canopy, and reserve para­chute to the paratrooper and an enhanced strategic capa­bility to the Army to execute a forced entry when the com­bat situation requires an immediate response.

The T- 11 better fits the smallest and largest para­trooper and can carry the heavier combat load that has become standard. It offers very little opening shock and oscillation, provides an exceptional canopy that doesn’t steal air from nearby parachutes and significantly reduces a paratrooper’s rate of descent so that Soldiers can safely land and success­fully complete their mission. The T- 10 has been in the Army inventory for more than 50 years and since that time, the weight of the Soldier’s combat load has continued to increase. In the 1950s, the total jumper weight — Soldier, parachute system and combat load — averaged 300 pounds. Today’s paratrooper is required to jump with more equipment in order to main­tain survivability and lethal­ity on the dynamic battle­field and the T- 10 system was not designed to handle these heavier combat loads. The T- 11 was specifically designed to carry a para­trooper with a total jumper weight of 400 pounds safely to the ground. Sgt. 1st Class Richard Manley, of the U.S. Army Infantry School, jumped with the T-11 during developmental testing. He said, “This is a great chute. There is no opening shock, a slow rate of descent and zero oscillations. I’ll take the T-11 over the T-10 any day.”
A key safety benefit of the T­11 is the significantly lower rate of descent. A study by the Belgian army showed there is a significant reduction in parachute landing injuries when lowering a parachute’s rate of descent from 22 feet per second to 18 feet per sec­ond. Recent testing with live jumpers and mannequins with a total jump weight of 360 pounds has shown the rate of descent of the T-10 is 22 feet per second while the T-11 is 18 feet per second. The T-11 main canopy has been tested with a payload in excess of 700 pounds and still had a rate of descent of less than 28 feet per second. In addition, the design of the main canopy is such that there is minimal oscillation after canopy infla­tion and after lowering the combat load. The T-11 achieves the lower rate of descent by having a canopy that is 28 percent larger than the T-10 while weighing only seven pounds more.
The T-11 also has a much reduced opening shock when compared with the T­10. Rather than the canopy opening immediately after it comes out of the deployment bag, like the T-10, the T-11 canopy is covered by a canopy sleeve. The static line pulls the deployment bag out of the pack tray, elon­gates the suspension lines, and exposes the pilot para­chute. The pilot parachute pulls the canopy sleeve off the canopy and the canopy inflates. The inflation of the canopy is further controlled by a slider that controls the amount of air entering the bottom of the canopy.

The combined use of the canopy sleeve and slider controls the inflation of the canopy smoothly over the course of six seconds, thus decreasing the opening shock. As a result, the para­chutist counts to six seconds, as opposed to four seconds with the T- 10, before per­forming the canopy check.

In addition to a new main canopy, the old reserve para­chute is being replaced by the T-11R reserve parachute. The T-11R has an aero-coni­cal design based on the cur­rent British low level para­chute reserve canopy. The T­11R was tested extensively under various types of main canopy malfunctions and proved to be more reliable and more effective than the current system. It has a lower opening shock and can be deployed using either hand, requiring 15 to 22 pounds of pull force. The rate of descent is about 26 feet per second, a significant improvement over the cur­rent reserves, and has less oscillation. More important­ly, the T- 11R supports a jump weight of more than 360 pounds.

Under the current fielding plan, the 75th Ranger Regiment, the Rigger School, and the Airborne School will receive the T-11 in 2009. The 82nd Airborne Division will receive the new parachute in 2010 to 2011, and T-10s will be replaced Army-wide dur­ing a seven-year period end­ing in 2015. Once the fielding of the T-11 is complete, the Army will begin rendering the T-10 obsolete and remov­ing it from the Army inven­tory as a personnel para­chute.

This is a historic time for the Army, as we enter an era where paratroopers can be confident that their equip­ment will work, carry all their kit and deliver them safely to the ground, to successfully execute the follow- on mis­sion. The T-11 will provide our Army a new capability to execute a forced entry any­where that immediate global response is necessary.

( E­ditor’s n­ote: M­aj. T­. J­.
Wri­ght, t­he a­ssistant p­roduct m­anager f­or P­ersonnel Ai­rdrop S­ystems, a­nd K­eith C­olliver a­re b­oth ma­ster-rated p­arachutists a­ssigned t­o P­EO S­oldier.)

Tracy
13 April 2008, 11:58
Maj. T.J. Wright, the assistant product manager for Personnel Airdrop Systems, and Keith Colliver are both master-rated parachutists assigned to PEO S­oldier.

Keith Colliver and I worked together at JFK Center back in in the 80's. It's nice to see some competent personnel running such an important program.

Hooah!

SFS0AVN
13 April 2008, 15:03
Any word on how it does on DZ's over 10,000ft ASL?

Attila175
13 April 2008, 16:18
Still 800ft for training and 500 for combat?

SF_BHT
13 April 2008, 16:22
Still 800ft for training and 500 for combat?

Yes it is but when the DZ is at 10,000 ASL you will be jumping at 10,800 ASL and that is a lot different than Sicily at Bragg.

Dark Helmet
13 April 2008, 16:48
That thing looks fricken huge.

VelociMorte
13 April 2008, 17:38
That thing looks fricken huge.

Yea...I'm thinking a 108 lb female might just Mary Poppins right into the next county on a nice hot day.

t10Guy
13 April 2008, 17:48
Yea...I'm thinking a 108 lb female might just Mary Poppins right into the next county on a nice hot day.

LOL... big for sure. but better as PEOPLE and equipment have gotten heavier over the years. Would love to see the average hieght/weight of a serviceman when the t10 was designed as compared to today's soliders.

CV
13 April 2008, 18:16
I worked with some of the guys at PEO Soldier that are on this project... cool stuff.

Brian1/75
14 April 2008, 10:26
So 2009 is when I get to start talking shit to cherries for never jumping a T-10D...sweet.

KidA
14 April 2008, 10:43
Yea...I'm thinking a 108 lb female might just Mary Poppins right into the next county on a nice hot day.


At least one did on the old T-10s when I was at Bragg. Landed in some dude's back yard.

And one other beat her face to death on a C-141 by not having enough ass to deploy the D-bag. Found her when they pulled the bags in.

KidA
14 April 2008, 10:45
significantly reduces a paratrooper’s rate of descent so that Soldiers can safely land and success­fully complete their mission.

I thought the reason it was 500' combat was to get your ass on the ground as soon as possible...

SOTB
14 April 2008, 11:06
I thought the reason it was 500' combat was to get your ass on the ground as soon as possible...If that were the major criteria, you could just throw hordes of people out of the plane on small reserve rounds and hope that enough survived to continue the mission.

In the scheme of things, I doubt seriously that 12 extra seconds of drop time is going to cause the loss of an airborne-insert initiated battle....

RGR.Montcalm
14 April 2008, 11:35
Is it just me or does that thing look like you could paint giant frog eyes on it? :eek: They must be vents but still struck me as funny as hell...

RetPara
14 April 2008, 12:02
I thought the reason it was 500' combat was to get your ass on the ground as soon as possible...

Its to minimize the landing dispersal of the drop. For every 100 feet of altitude the actual landing dispersal spreads by X%. Also 500ft AGL was about as low as transport pilots could fly and maintain any sort of formation.

SFS0AVN
14 April 2008, 13:02
Anyone who's worked on/with the new T-11.
Is it designed for DZ's over 10.000ft AGL? Or, does the Army test and buys parachutes like they buy aircraft. They test aircraft at Ft. Rucker (about 300ft AGL) and then wonder why they don't work right in over 50% of the world.

Offroad
14 April 2008, 13:30
Is it just me or does that thing look like you could paint giant frog eyes on it? :eek: They must be vents but still struck me as funny as hell...

LOL. It also looks like the frogs mouth is open with his tongue sticking out. (I could have fun with that in Photo Shop.)

RGR.Montcalm
14 April 2008, 13:34
LOL. It also looks like the frogs mouth is open with his tongue sticking out. (I could have fun with that in Photo Shop.)

Fire away!!

PsYcHo16
14 April 2008, 15:10
Anyone know how this compares to the rate of descent to the MC1-1?

Brian1/75
14 April 2008, 15:20
Anyone who's worked on/with the new T-11.
Is it designed for DZ's over 10.000ft AGL? Or, does the Army test and buys parachutes like they buy aircraft. They test aircraft at Ft. Rucker (about 300ft AGL) and then wonder why they don't work right in over 50% of the world.

Nope, we're all going to die! I don't design parachutes, but it seems like a large chute should slow down your decent no matter what the altitude is. Maybe you'll descend faster at 10,000ft AGL, but it'll still be slower than a T-10D at 10,000ft AGL. At least I would think. Or is there some crazy windage going on and you're worried about getting blown all over the DZ?

Almighty Bones
14 April 2008, 20:25
I used to jump out on the 2nd pass and land with the guys from the 3rd pass. Such soft sweet landings. Must have sucked for the Mortards or Scouts that were always on my bird!

Floyd
15 April 2008, 11:02
Anyone know how this compares to the rate of descent to the MC1-1?

-1B or -1C?



-1C has a non pourous canopy for a slower rate of descent
Been a long long time but if I remember correctly 18-21 feet per second for a -1C

CB
15 April 2008, 11:19
It sure looks like there is a slider above the connector links on the canopy, but I don't see it described in any of the text. Nor do I see any evidence of a sleeve.

Good link here:

http://www.airborne-sys.com/pdfs/T-11ATPS.pdf

And this site has some close-ups of the canopy release assembly, a modified version of the "Three Ring Circus" used by skydivers for years.

http://www.combatreform2.com/T-21.htm

Yup, that's a slider, see the pics of the deployment:

https://peosoldier.army.mil/factsheets/SEQ_CIE_T11.pdf < (You may get a certificate error, but the site is clean).