ALARACT 275/2014 officially retires the T-10 parachute effective today, 31 Jan 2014. Thanks for all the memories.
We reserve the right to refuse advertising to anyone
Entries (RSS)
and Comments (RSS).
Soldier Systems Daily is in no way affiliated with the US Government.
Copyright © Soldier Systems Daily 2008-2021. All Rights Reserved.
I jumped them, and I also jumped the new T11s. The T11 were IMO terrible.
I agree. I’ll take a T10 any day, although my fav is the MC-6.
I know a guy who was on the operational test of the T-10 in the early 50’s
Pretty impressive 50 years, with a good record of reliability.
All the MC1-1 parachutes are just modified T-10’s. Are they gone from US inventory too?
More than likely. I know USASOC is jumping the MC-6s now.
USASFC, and USAJFKSWCS no longer use the MC-1, not sure about other elements.
Jon, OPT
Wonder if I could score one w/ reserve.. Lots of memories under canopy..
Ive heard the new t 11 called widow makers…. so that comforting ….
T11s big benefit is the slower rate of descent but it takes forever to steer. I’d bet that some of the issues with the 11 are because of people not maintaining interval in the aircraft and winding up next to each as their canopy opens and now they can’t get away fast enough. I have a love hate relationship with the spreader too, especially after getting caught in a SPCs suspension lines on the ground as he was being drug across Sicily DZ wrapped in the spreader in the fetal position….
Yeah, I’m going to miss the T10 lol
Crash-10. Good (but unforgiving) teacher. You learned or you burned…
airborne!
Looks like the date in the article should be 31 December, not January.
That rig is the subject of one of my all time favorite quotes from active duty…”1SG has more time in a T-10 than you got in a t-shirt cherry, beat your face and remember to stand up when he enters the squad room!” An E-6 SSG to a E-nuthin’ PVT circa 1995….
Hahahahaha! +1
I jumped in modified T-10s back in the late 1970s, as a civilian, and they were old then. Just now retired/removed from inventory? With a service life like that, you’d think John Browning designed it.
The T-10 was good for teaching, but for actual operational the T-11 has it beat. The T-11 can support more weight (up to two combat equipped jumpers), and can prevent rolled ankles on the landing. Due to its longer static line, it requires the jumpers, upon exit, to get a proper and tight body position with hands on the reserve immediately or their arm may get wrapped up into the static line of the jumper in front of them. Also, the landings tend to be a little harder due to faster decent speeds, but if the jumpers PLF properly they don’t get concussions. Those who do tend to get concussions are the less experienced and younger Soldiers and Airmen who have been away from Airborne School for awhile, and get complacent with jumping….the number on cause of issues in the Airborne community. …complacency.
My last jump with a T10 was a combat equipment jump at Luzon DZ on Camp Mackall in July of 2014. I hit just as hard on that jump as I did on my first jump. I was never a fan of the T-10 after jumping the MC1-1 or MC6, but it always opened so I can’t complain. A great piece of gear that served us well for a very long time.
Fond memories!
Good Bye Old Friend. My first dates with the T-10 were at Airborne School during FEB 1983. I loved the “riser slips” to enjoy the best roller coaster downslope of my life. We used the MC1-1B in the Marine Corps. It was always exciting, but I felt as if I had more control with the T-10. The evening of my spinal cord injury on 12 AUG 1986 would have been avoided if I would have had the T-10 and able to manipulate the risers instead of the “toggles” of the MC1-1B. Well, that’s one old guy’s take on it. And I agree/concur with all other statements that every time the parachute deploys, it was a GOOD JUMP! Happy New Year’s for 2015 to one and all.
Okay – I officially feel old now….
Does anyone remember when the MC1-1C was replaced by the MC6?
With the retirement of the T-10, it just got me thinking of all the ‘chute’s I have used.
HATE the T-11.
I don’t think it is officially retired. It is no longer being procured but they are still in the inventory. I don’t know about active duty, but we are still jumping it on the reserve side of the house.
I think the 1-1C was replaced, willy-nilly, from about 2008-10. Both are fine chutes. The T-10? What a bruiser that I will never forget…. That said, Bragg has seen many T-11 issues as of last year including a burn in, and many premature reserve openings from jumpers in the door. Over all, the T-11 has seen some major issues during its infancy that Must be worked out. Honestly, considering how the amount of issues we have seen with the 11, the T-10 is being pushed out too early. The bureaucracy has pushed this too hard and unfortunately, we will still see more mishaps to come! Carpe Diem…
I have not jumped the T-11 but I did have a T-11 reserve open by itself while jumping an MC-6. It opened about fifteen seconds after I had both hands on the toggles. The only thing I can think of is that I may have jostled the reserve handle on the opening shock, but I don’t think I did. I know the tuck tabs were stowed because the JM missed doing it during JMPI and I had to get it corrected. Luckily, the malfunctions NCO had eyes on me from exit to the reserve opening or I don’t think many would have believed my story. It opened very slowly since I was already under an inflated canopy. If nothing else it was a very soft landing with two canopies overhead.
I don’t have any experience with the T11. My last few of jumps before retiring was with the MC6. I liked it. But the MC1 was the workhorse for USASOC for many years.
As a historical note, the MC1 was originally a “product upgrade” for the T10 and was intended to replace the T10 in the 80s.
When I went to Jumpmaster School at Bragg in 1983 we were trained to expect a mix of the T10s and MC1s for several years.
The T10 still had the “dial a death” harness at the time and wasn’t transitioned to the MC1 harness until later. It made JMPI more interesting because you had to learn a difference sequence for each harness.
At that time the 82nd was doing “mass tacs” with that mix. Real mass tacs, i.e. shot gunning both doors of an Aircraft as fast as you could push the jumpers out. That was high adventure.
Not surprisingly there were multiple entanglements and stolen air incidents on almost every jump. And increased injuries and some fatalities. The medics on the DZs got plenty of practice.
Inexperienced or cherry jumpers just couldn’t stay out of each others way with that many chutes being “driven” through the sky at the same time.
Eventually the idea was shelved and the T10 (upgraded with MC1 harness) was reinstated as the mass tactical parachute of choice.
Until the T11 came along.
TLB
MC series chutes were never adopted for large unit mass tactical jumps due to required jumper separation, this prevented them from being allowed for dropping from two doors simultaneously. More than twice as much TOT, with half the amount of jumpers dropped per pass is a huge issue when trying to saturate a DZ with paratroopers.
Jon, OPT
Jon,
That’s right. But I can assure you that the 82nd tried like hell to make it work in 83-84.
I was in the 1/504 at the time and involved as a jumpmaster on many of those adventures.
The Division even had an MC1 “driver school” we put everyone through to try to increase individual proficiency. That helped, but not enough.
Suffice to say we injured a good number of people in the process.
The alternate / staggered door exit techniques you describe were temporary work arounds eventually adopted that increased safety and decreased injuries – but created the other tactical issues you mention.
Finally (late 85 I think but I don’t remember the exact timing), the powers that be made the correct decision that getting the maximum number of jumpers (safely) out of the aircraft in the shortest amount of time was the critical task.
So we reverted back to the T10 for mass tactical jumps. But as I said, the original plan was to replace the T10 entirely and “pure fleet” the MC1 for all static line operations.
It wasn’t the first or last time the Army had a “good idea” that didn’t work as expected.
TLB
Additional side note.
The 82nd and other conventional units at Bragg did continue to use the MC1s for fun jumps, jumpfests, and foreign wing exchange jumps, etc.
Tactically, some of the Airborne Engineer platoons and the Infantry Scout platoons continued to train on the MC1.
Those same platoons were also all certified in rough terrain jump techniques with MC1s in 86-87. I left Division in 88 so I don’t know how long those requirements remained in effect.
I’m presuming that the T11 replaced the MC1 and the T10 for all purposes in conventional units?
I’m pretty sure the conventional units are NOT routinely using the MC6.
TLB
Not up to date on them, but I’m pretty sure you’re right about 27th engineers, rough terrain jumpers, jump in create LZs, think they were using steerable in late 90’s.
Jon, OPT
Graduated Airborne School Feb of 83, 2-505 at Bragg. Loved the T-10, hated -1B. Comment about cherries driving around the sky hit the mark, cracked me up. I also had terrible landing on North Sicily, near the bleachers, that never would have happened with a T-10. Find memories nonetheless. You haven’t lived until you have been part of a two door mass tac.
Graduated Airborne School Feb of 83, 2-505 at Bragg. Loved the T-10, hated -1B. Comment about cherries driving around the sky hit the mark, cracked me up. I also had terrible landing on North Sicily, near the bleachers, that never would have happened with a T-10. Find memories nonetheless. You haven’t lived until you have been part of a two door mass tac.