After all tests have gone well, the new mass jump Advanced Tactical Parachute System (ATPS) will soon be fielded.

It replaces the parachute T-10 which has been in use over the last 50 yrs and - while designed for the same tactical parameters - not only is an adjustment to the ever groing jump loads (T-11 allows 400 lbs) but also reduces sink rate (from 21 to 16 ft/s which reuces impact energy by 40%) which will significantly reduce knee injuries in the DZs (the difference is similar to a jump from 9 feet or from 5 feet). Also almost no opening shock (6 secs opening time, this thing is *huge*!) and virtually no oscillation.

Interesting article with lots of sensible comments here: http://www.socnet.com/archive/index.php/t-77115.html

Test procedures and why the new square canopy was chosen: http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...stems/atps.htm

And finally, vids:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bpZxapIrNSg

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=3fd_1231909444

Rattler

Interesting! They almost look like lanterns.
They ought to stop putting words like "Advanced" or "improved" onto the name of equipment because at some point they won't be very advanced or improved.
But I suppose then it'll just be called the T-11 when it comes into service.

OTOH, I keep thinking (and have seen nobody in any article adressing that):

Reduced sink rate (= 20% more time in the air) and no oscillation: Sitting Duck shots from the ground?

OTOH this problem was always present, and today the guys are better protected than 50 yrs ago, also I expect the DZs much better cleared/controlled than e.g. even in the ´80s.

Anyone in the know care to comment?

Rattler

I can see how it would be useful for equipment.

I never made a jump after jump school at Benning, and that was like 1980. And we used T-10s back then. That many years ago and now a upgrade? About time I guess.

From what I read, the T-11 takes like three or four extra seconds to deploy. Now that will suck. It was bad enough counting religiously, "One one thousand, two one thousand, where's my cute, three one thousand.."

Maybe it's a safety thing? Don't want the parachute deploying too close to air turbulance caused by the aircraft.

Originally Posted by rattler

OTOH, I keep thinking (and have seen nobody in any article adressing that):

Reduced sink rate (= 20% more time in the air) and no oscillation: Sitting Duck shots from the ground?

OTOH this problem was always present, and today the guys are better protected than 50 yrs ago, also I expect the DZs much better cleared/controlled than e.g. even in the ´80s.

Anyone in the know care to comment?

Rattler

We did some math on this and decided four more seconds in the air isn´t that bad.
Especially since your chances of walking away from the landing are greatly increased.
The decreased landing volocity have the benefits of you being able to deploy with most of your Team more often.
Ie: Lower rate of training accidents.
You can also pack 40 pounds more on each trooper.
Good or bad? I am undecided..
But I am leaning towards it being a good thing.
A well trained Para can and will hump more kit in the future.

//KJ.