Jump to content


Photo

AAF or paratrooper parachute?


  • Please log in to reply
14 replies to this topic

#1 ThompsonSavage

ThompsonSavage
  • Members
    • Member ID: 45,626
  • 1,135 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:ETO

Posted 19 September 2012 - 01:44 AM

Asking this question for my father who is an AAF collector. He is pretty sure that the parachute is WW2 issue, but thinks this model was used by paratroopers.
Is he right?

Attached Images

  • para1.JPG
  • para2.JPG
  • para3.JPG
  • para4.JPG


#2 ThompsonSavage

ThompsonSavage
  • Members
    • Member ID: 45,626
  • 1,135 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:ETO

Posted 19 September 2012 - 01:45 AM

Last picture

Attached Images

  • para5.JPG


#3 ken88

ken88
  • Members
    • Member ID: 48,105
  • 2,326 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:ETO

Posted 19 September 2012 - 01:53 AM

24 panels? Both...

#4 ThompsonSavage

ThompsonSavage
  • Members
    • Member ID: 45,626
  • 1,135 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:ETO

Posted 19 September 2012 - 03:23 AM

So used by both AAF and airborne?

#5 ken88

ken88
  • Members
    • Member ID: 48,105
  • 2,326 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:ETO

Posted 19 September 2012 - 04:31 AM

So used by both AAF and airborne?


Correct. I even have one with a bag attached to it. 24 panels, white, probably one for medical supplies. Most of the time paratroops used these white canopies in their reserve chest packs.

#6 ThompsonSavage

ThompsonSavage
  • Members
    • Member ID: 45,626
  • 1,135 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:ETO

Posted 19 September 2012 - 05:53 AM

And how about AAF crewmembers (because that's what my father is looking for)?
Also reserve chute?

#7 5thwingmarty

5thwingmarty
  • Members
    • Member ID: 96,854
  • 1,107 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Maryland Heights, MO

Posted 19 September 2012 - 09:50 AM

AAF crew members only wore one chute. Many of them wore the harnesses for the quick attaching 24-ft chest chutes and kept the chutes close by in case a bailout was called for. Fighter pilots used the seat chutes. Bomber pilots could wear several different types depending on their preferances and availability.

The 24-foot chest chute is the same for either airborne or AAF.

Marty

Edited by 5thwingmarty, 19 September 2012 - 09:51 AM.


#8 J_Andrews

J_Andrews
  • Members
    • Member ID: 2,689
  • 2,881 posts

Posted 19 September 2012 - 10:36 AM

Troop parachutes (that is, for paratroops), MAIN canopies were 28' diameter, whether T-5, T-7 or even T-10.

The greater size was because a paratrooper PLUS EQUIPMENT could be expected to weigh significantly more than
an aircrewman. Of course, the greater size could not fit into the usual CHEST pack, so it was packed on the BACK of the jumper.

#9 rr01

rr01
  • Members
    • Member ID: 54,272
  • 1,089 posts

Posted 19 September 2012 - 12:29 PM

How many panels on the chute? I think another distinction is that there should be a "bridle" loop at the apex of a troop chute which looks like it's collecting all the intersecting shroud lines into one bundle. This is where the 80# cord would be used to attach that canopy apex to the deployment bag. Bailout chutes should not have these since they use a spring activated pilot chute as part of the deployment sequence.

#10 Mr-X

Mr-X
  • Members
    • Member ID: 2,389
  • 4,640 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Central Highland's of Victoria, Australia - Uc Dai Loi

Posted 19 September 2012 - 07:35 PM

Drawing number 42G2001 is a 24 foot canopy. I understand that it could be used in many types of chute. Seat and chest included.

#11 BEAR

BEAR
  • Members
    • Member ID: 15
  • 577 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 19 September 2012 - 09:21 PM

Troop parachutes (that is, for paratroops), MAIN canopies were 28' diameter, whether T-5, T-7 or even T-10.


T10 parachutes are 35' in diameter with 30 panels and suspension lines.

#12 J_Andrews

J_Andrews
  • Members
    • Member ID: 2,689
  • 2,881 posts

Posted 20 September 2012 - 05:21 PM

You are correct re the T-10. The T-10 is post-WWII, hence outside my ken and, since downsizing my files for retirement, I could not find a source. I thought the T-10 was a bit bigger, but had 30' in mind.

AFTER posting I recalled one of my old Army bosses, a Rigger from 1950 on, telling me how the T-10 canopy was "bigger, because it COULD be bigger". That is, a larger NYLON canopy could fit inside a bag the same volume as the older ones. Further, the more "silk", the heavier the load supported and/or the slower the descent (theoretically), which gave more time for "correction" by hanging on the risers, etc.

#13 BEAR

BEAR
  • Members
    • Member ID: 15
  • 577 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 20 September 2012 - 06:30 PM

The T10 was parabolic shaped which meant that the skirt of the canopy was a smaller diameter than the main body. This shape allowed for a more stable descent and reduced oscilation and greater weight suspension.


#14 WWII Parachutist

WWII Parachutist
  • Members
    • Member ID: 40,412
  • 299 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 21 September 2012 - 05:50 PM

That drawing number on the chute is the standard for all WWII 24' canopies, used in AAF 24' diameter Chest, seat, back, and troop reserve chutes. Not for cargo though, cargo chutes were not made from nylon or silk as it was not economical. The shortage of nylon for parachutes actually continued into the Korean war.
The troop reserve switched from 22' to 24 in 1942, hence the 42......... drawing number. The first number represents the year of adoption.
Those roughly stenciled markings are French markings, put on it postwar.

#15 WWII Parachutist

WWII Parachutist
  • Members
    • Member ID: 40,412
  • 299 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 21 September 2012 - 06:01 PM

You are correct re the T-10. The T-10 is post-WWII, hence outside my ken and, since downsizing my files for retirement, I could not find a source. I thought the T-10 was a bit bigger, but had 30' in mind.

AFTER posting I recalled one of my old Army bosses, a Rigger from 1950 on, telling me how the T-10 canopy was "bigger, because it COULD be bigger". That is, a larger NYLON canopy could fit inside a bag the same volume as the older ones. Further, the more "silk", the heavier the load supported and/or the slower the descent (theoretically), which gave more time for "correction" by hanging on the risers, etc.


Actually the T-10 canopy pack volume is quite a big larger, and it's impossible to try to pack it a pack designed for a 28' canopy, like the T-5 or T-7. That's even with the material being changed from the old 1.6 oz twill to the 1.1 ripstop material that is thinner.
The tests on the XT-10 showed that although it did reduce landing impact and increased hang time, it was harder to steer with the risers. At the time many young troops thought of the brand spankin new T-10's as the chute for "old men" because of its reduced landing force and easier opening shock.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users