Aiaa99 1707 PDF
Aiaa99 1707 PDF
Michael D. Crowe
Aerospace Engineer
Butler Parachute Systems, Inc.
Roanoke, Virginia 24017-0098
ABSTRACT
This paper presents the design and development of
parachute canopies utilizing the BAT (Butler Aero-
space Technologies) Sombrero Slider, a new and
unique parachute inflation control device. As back-
ground, a brief discussion of common parachute fail-
ure modes is presented to illustrate the impetus for the
creation of this new device. The operation of the BAT
Sombrero Slider is presented in detail along with re-
sults from numerous drop tests of parachutes that use
the device.
1
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
RELIABILITY OF PARACHUTE SYSTEMS There are, of course, other parachute system failure
The reliability of a parachute system or subsystem is a modes but most of them are not directly tied to the can-
complex and sometimes nebulous concept unless you opy. Other failure modes might include pack closures
specify the configuration in detail and the test condi- due to bent pins; failure due to damage from external
tions (weight, airspeed, altitude, etc.). For the pur- sources such as chemical contamination of the canopy
poses of this discussion, we will count as successful, cloth or physical damage to the parachute; and, unfor-
any deployment that accomplishes the recovery of the tunately, failures caused by rigging errors. In the next
payload with little or no damage to the parachute or sections we will examine the primary failure modes
payload. This will allow us to statistically ignore the and then introduce a significant new solution to the
minor damage that sometimes occurs for various rea- random failures.
sons. Further, for simplicity, we will discuss only the
“NORMAL” STRUCTURAL FAILURE
raw reliability numbers (i.e. R=0.9, etc) rather than the
more formal statistical methods (i.e. R=0.9 at 90% To briefly discuss the easiest of the above items first,
confidence). Also note that, by convention, a 1% fail- remember that any type of structure can be overloaded
ure rate (F) is equivalent to a reliability of 99% (or (a parachute, an airplane, the human body,
R=0.99) and conversely a 100% failure rate is equiva- etc.). However, failure points for most structures are
lent to a reliability of 0% (R=0.0). fairly easy to predict for normal situations such as ex-
ceeding airspeed limits or overstressing the airframe by
If we take the reliability as defined above as our meas- maneuvering. In an airframe, for example, the usual
ure of goodness or worth of a particular parachute, then safety margin will generally allow for things like ma-
a parachute with a reliability of R=0.99 (F=0.01) is ten neuvering loads, normal fatigue, minor assembly er-
times better than one with a reliability of R=0.9 (F-0.1) rors, minor corrosion during service, etc. However, the
and R=0.999 (F=0.001) is 100 times better than random (unknown and/or unpredictable) problems in
R=0.9. Of course, the overall objective of designers is airframes such as hidden damage, undetected material
to have as many “9s” as practical (within the con- flaws, abnormal fatigue, incorrect repairs, unauthorized
straints of the program objectives) for the stated condi- modifications and accumulated slop in the flight con-
tions. trol system make it very difficult to quantify or predict
in a manner that allows a reasonable structural margin
Based on the author’s extensive experience with a wide to suffice.
variety of canopies for personnel parachute systems,
we feel that the suspended weight is almost irrelevant In parachutes, as in airframes, if you can eliminate ran-
within a very wide range. Therefore, the airspeed at dom failures then you can establish structural operating
pack opening is usually the critical factor in determin- limits with a high degree of confidence. However, in
ing the reliability of the system on any given deploy- both airplanes and parachutes, without some means to
ment. This is true because the weight is a linear factor eliminate or control the random occurrences, then large
and velocity is an exponential factor in determining structural margins or severely reduced operating limits
both the kinetic energy to be dissipated and the aerody- must be applied to ensure safe operation. To further
namic forces acting on the parachute. Therefore, we complicate the issue with parachutes, we have a non-
will largely ignore the suspended weight in the discus- rigid structure that has extensive interaction with the air
sion that follows and discuss mainly the effects of itself during the opening process. That, coupled with
velocity. Further, we will focus this discussion on the nature of textile construction, results in the need for
catastrophic failures and largely ignore the minor parachutes to have a much higher margin of safety than
problems. aircraft (typically 100-200% margin rather than 50%).
2
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
these three cases (extreme opening shock, absence of a Random failures of any device are the hardest to man-
chute, or a catastrophic structural failure) has fatal age and are, by definition, unpredictable (except statis-
consequences, it’s obvious that the answer lies else- tically). The inversion malfunction (a.k.a., Mae West,
where. line-over) is the genetic defect of all types of solid
cloth (as opposed to ring slot or ribbon) round para-
In order to contrast normal openings, structural over- chutes. Inversions will occur in all types of solid
load failures and random failures, we have included cloth round parachutes except those equipped with
several video sequences taken from drop test some means to prevent them; i.e. the anti-inversion
video. Video sequence 1 shows a normal opening se- netting found on many troop parachutes, the BAT
quence on a lightweight, very low permeability, coni- Sombrero Slider™ (more details later), or perhaps
cal canopy at 130 KIAS with 220-lb. gross some other device. The US Army adopted the anti-
weight. This is actually a fairly good opening, even inversion net technique (originally developed in the
though it does show the usual asymmetry of the skirt UK) for their troop chutes in the 1970’s and experi-
during the inflation process and it exhibits minor over- enced a dramatic reduction in inversion malfunc-
inflation and post inflation collapse shown by the dim- tions. Although the net has been very effective in troop
pling in frames 1-D and 2-J. Video sequence 2 shows chutes, it has not been widely adopted for other uses.
the same sequence from the side view wherein you can
see the classic inflation sequence as the apex gradually Video sequence 5 shows a close-up view (video from
collects air and inflates at an ever increasing rate, the tailgate) of a deployment sequence in which a par-
forming an onion profile, then eventually reaching a tial inversion results in a catastrophic failure of the
point where the skirt rapidly snaps full-open. This is, canopy. In frame 5-D you can see the beginning of the
of course, the classic “top down” mode of opening and inversion that rather quickly results in failure. As
is the usual sequence for solid cloth parachute cano- clearly shown here, this small bubble inflates nearly
pies without some sort of other device involved. instantaneously (because of its very small volume),
grows rapidly then blows out as the lines fail and the
Video sequence 3 shows the exact same parachute canopy shreds itself. This failure occurred at the fairly
with a catastrophic structural failure following a nor- modest conditions of 140 KIAS at 220 lbs.
mal deployment and inflation. In this case, the failure
is entirely due to overload because of the higher Video sequence 6 shows the axis view of a most un-
weight and airspeed (300-lb. @ 180 KIAS). As you usual opening sequence. Here we see an inversion
can see in the sequence, this is a very nice opening, from beginning to end; during which, a single gore of
right up until the time the canopy literally explodes. In the canopy is split from bottom to top during the initial
this sequence, there are no omitted frames in the vicin- exposure of the skirt and then the canopy fully inverts
ity of the failure, and you can see that about 40% of itself by inflating and pulling through the split
the canopy explodes from one frame to the next gore. This drop was at 150 KIAS with 300-lbs. gross
(roughly 0.03 seconds). Sequence 4 shows a side view weight with a light duty cargo canopy constructed of
of the same event. Again, this canopy shows the clas- MIL-C-7020 nylon cloth with lightweight lines and
sic onion profile and a good opening, but the loads are reinforcements. Amazingly, the skirt band was not
such that the canopy fails. In the authors opinion, this severed by the inversion process, which allowed the
canopy is a very well balanced design in that it fails subsequent inflation rather than total collapse.
over large areas at essentially the same time (rather
than a single failure point that propagates through the THE CAUSE OF INVERSIONS
canopy). During the 1970’s, Robert Calkins1, (now of Boeing
Escape Systems but then at Wright-Patterson AFB in
RANDOM CATASTROPHIC FAILURES the USAF Parachute Systems Engineering Branch)
The parachute industry has spent years in the quest for conducted an extensive series of tests on 28’ military
parachutes that are structurally sound, damage tolerant, canopies that revealed (for the first time) how inver-
of reasonable weight, highly reliable and with opening sions actually occurred. The hundreds of drop tests
characteristics that provide the greatest possible recov- conducted by Calkins were filmed at a very high frame
ery envelope. Although progress has been made, the rate with sufficient resolution to show that the inver-
major stumbling block has always been the inversion sions actually occurred at, or just before, line
problem and, until now, there has been no practical stretch. In reality, the inversions were not “line-
solution to the problem. overs”, they were actually “skirt-cross-unders” (for my
lack of a better descriptive term).
Prior to the Calkins study, many people assumed that It is significant that many of these incidents reported
the inversion occurred as an artifact of over-inflation by riggers servicing skydiving gear usually follow a
and rebound of the canopy. In fact, the so-called re- main canopy malfunction and cutaway, which results
bound inversion is extremely rare, if not non- in a low speed (perhaps in the range of 30 to 80
existent. Further, since the Calkins study was confined KTAS) deployment of the reserve canopy. Anecdotal
to the 28’ military canopy, (a flat circular design) there evidence such as that related here suggests that tempo-
were presumably quite a few instances of post-inflation rary partial inversions, and sometimes even total inver-
collapse with opportunities for the rebound inversion to sions, can sometimes occur at low speeds (under 80 to
occur. BPS has also seen the post-inflation collapse 100 knots) without causing catastrophic damage to the
phenomena on several occasions while testing C-9’s canopy. However, catastrophic damage has been occa-
but has not yet captured a rebound inversion on the C-9 sionally reported for even very low speed deploy-
or any other canopy. Video sequence 7 shows an ex- ments. In addition, a line-over, or partial inversion
cellent example of the post inflation collapse phenome- that does not clear, will usually result in a survivable
non that did not result in an inversion. As valuable as rate-of-descent and sometimes occurs with relatively
the Calkins study was, there was little follow up in the minor damage to the canopy (at low speeds).
industry because, although he had revealed the true na-
ture of the problem, no one presented a readily avail- Even in light of the above discussion, the facts remain
able solution. that an unfortunately common result of the inversion
phenomena (partial, total and temporary) is the catas-
FIELD EXPERIENCE WITH INVERSIONS trophic failure of the canopy caused by localized over-
Anecdotal evidence collected through the years by loading of the canopy and/or suspension lines. The
civilian and military parachute riggers suggests that prospects for survival are consequently poor in this
temporary partial inversions actually occur much more case.
frequently than is widely realized. Riggers who inspect
and repack reserve canopies after use have informally DEPLOYMENT EFFECTS ON RELIABILITY
reported these findings for years without realizing the Based on experience at BPS in testing of a very large
cause. As many riggers have found (again, without re- number of personnel type parachutes (over 350 tests in
alizing the cause) a temporary partial inversion leaves 1998 alone) with very similar conditions, I now be-
evidence in the form of a wide variety of friction burns lieve that every conventional parachute design will
and scuffing in the lower sections of the canopies; and have several knees in the reliability vs. speed
occasionally, as friction burns on the lines. Further, curve. That is, every parachute has some moderate
when a temporary partial inversion occurs on canopies speed below which, for most purposes, the reliability
with deployment diapers, the damage tends to be con- approaches 100%; the same parachute also has a corre-
centrated in the immediate vicinity of the diaper, pre- sponding speed at which the reliability is effectively
sumably because the diaper prevents the skirt or lines 0% (zero). The graph at the bottom of this page shows
from easily sliding past that point on the canopy. the reliability vs. speed relationship in a qualitative
manner for several different types of canopies.
0 .7 5
Reliability
C -9
L a rg e V L P
0 .5
M e d iu m L o P o
S m a ll V L P
0 .2 5
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450
V e l o c ity A t L in e S t r e tc h (ft /s )
4
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
In between the extremes on the reliability curve, things The graph to the left shows this relationship in a quali-
get a lot harder to sort out. For example, I believe that tative manner. The legends refer to Low Porosity
there is a certain velocity (for every parachute design) Canopies (LoPo), the 28’ military canopy (C-9) and
where a significant increase in inversion type malfunc- large/small Very Low Permeability canopies (VLP).
tions occurs. The major factors appear to be the dy-
namic pressure at line stretch and the permeability of INVERSIONS SOLVED
the cloth; i.e. the lower the permeability and/or the As part of an effort to control the opening shock of
higher the dynamic pressure, the higher the instance of small, lightweight, very low permeability, personnel
inversions. These two factors combine to generate a parachutes at speeds above 150 KEAS, Butler Para-
differential force across the skirt, between the outside chute Systems, Inc. (BPS) and Butler Aerospace Tech-
and inside of the canopy. Unfortunately, the differen- nologies, Inc. (BAT) have jointly developed a simple,
tial force is not symmetrically distributed around the highly effective and elegant solution to both the open-
skirt during the initial exposure to the air stream and ing shock and the inversion problems. The BAT Som-
large variations in the movement of the skirt are rou- brero Slider™, provides a speed and weight sensitive,
tinely seen. On the other hand, don’t forget that the inherently self-modulating control of the inflation
differential pressure across the canopy is what causes it process. It is a significant technological breakthrough
to inflate in the first place. in parachute inflation control and we are confident that
this device will prove to be one of the most important
The practical lower limit of the differential force across technologies ever developed in the field of parachute
the skirt occurs with highly porous ribbon type engineering. Incidentally, the nickname “sombrero”
chutes—like the landing deceleration drogue on the comes from the appearance of the device, which you
Space Shuttle for example—which have virtually a will notice in photographs 1 and 2. In practice, the
zero instance of inversion malfunctions. The upper design and operation of the BAT slider has proven to
limit on differential force (at a given speed) would oc- make the occurrence of a line over or partial inversion
cur with a true “zero permeability” cloth much like that type malfunction all but impossible.
used on the newest generations of ram-air sport para-
chutes. Therefore, somewhere along the speed range, a Because it is the only device that, by itself, has enabled
significant decrease in reliability will occur—the trick an increase in reliability by several orders of magni-
is to find that limit for each parachute application and tude, we consider the BAT Sombrero Slider™ to be
stay well below it for operational use. one of the most important new parachute technologies
in decades. Among the many benefits, it:
Based on a qualitative analysis of the personnel para- • eliminates line-over malfunctions (the round para-
chute canopy tests that BPS has conducted, some of the chute canopy’s “genetic defect“)
small, lightweight, low permeability canopies in use • enhances the canopy inflation and opening per-
today will have in excess of 50% catastrophic failure formance across the entire operating speed range
rates at speeds of 130 to 150 knots. These same cano- with no detrimental side effects
pies would almost certainly exhibit a 100% failure rate • opens the canopy faster at low speeds while also
at speeds over 180 knots. Some of the larger, low per- slowing the canopy opening at high speeds
meability personnel canopies have the same problems, • provides self-modulating, continuous control of
but they occur at somewhat higher speeds. The me- the inflation process
dium size Low Porosity canopies will have the same • forces the canopy to open from the bottom up in a
problems, but I would expect the speed range to be controlled and consistent manner
somewhat higher than the very small canopies and • reduces the sensitivity to line twists.
probably about the same as the larger canopies. The C-
• can be retrofitted to some existing canopies
9 (if equipped with deployment diapers, sleeves or
• can be selectively “tuned” to nearly any opening
bags) will exhibit the same tendencies but at much
time or force profile required
higher speeds due to the very high cloth permeability—
perhaps in the range of 180 to 200 Knots for a spike in • provides nearly perfect symmetry of the canopy
malfunctions and perhaps as high as 250 knots before skirt for ideal structural loading
approaching 100% structural failure. The C-9 not • has no pyrotechnics, no mechanical marvels, no
equipped with deployment devices will presumably electronic gizmos and no miracles occurring
experience the problems at a somewhat lower speed. • is a very sophisticated concept with a very simple
execution
• is an aerodynamic solution to an aerodynamic
problem
HOW THE BAT SOMBRERO SLIDER™ WORKS
As you can see from photographs 1 and 2, the slider
itself is composed of two main elements. The first ele-
ment is the inner section that is typically constructed as
a hemisphere using the same cloth as the canopy. The
second element is the mesh skirt that is typically con-
structed as a flat annular section and joined to the
hemisphere during the manufacturing process. The
outer perimeter of the mesh section is reinforced with
tapes and webbing so that grommets can be set in the
perimeter (ideally, one grommet per suspension line
but many other arrangements could be used). During
assembly, each line is routed thru the appropriate
grommet on the slider and then to its particular connec-
tor link. Some type of slider stop is necessary to pre-
vent the slider grommets from jamming onto the skirt
or line attachment points. This can be easily accom-
plished with rings finger trapped into the lines (ala BPS
HX canopies).
6
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
prevent further expansion of the main canopy until the far as total system drag is concerned. Although we
slider is forced downward when the system decelerates have not conducted tests specifically to examine this,
through the transition velocity. While the slider is help we plan to do so in the very near future.
up against the canopy, the airflow into the main canopy
will stagnate as the canopy reaches its maximum beach The BAT Sombrero Slider™ provides speed sensitive,
ball condition (for the slider still up). However, the self modulated control of the inflation process; how-
entire system (parachute and payload) is constantly de- ever, it also fundamentally changes the physics of the
celerating throughout this process; therefore, the force opening process. In effect, when compared to the
holding the slider up is constantly decreasing along same canopy without the slider, the addition of the
with the airspeed. For a particular application, the vari- slider causes the canopy to open faster at slow speeds
ous parameters in the slider sizing details and the re- (by forcing the skirt to open instantaneously) and also
lated canopy factors can be tuned for nearly any result causes the same canopy to open slower at high
desired. speeds. This modulation effect works throughout the
speed range and is completely dependent on the condi-
As an example, at low speeds (say 50 ft/sec ≅ 30 tions (i.e. slider geometry selected, suspended weight
KIAS) there is very little force holding the slider up and airspeed). The effect is highly sensitive to air-
against the canopy and it can be forced down very speed variations (as described previously) and some-
quickly. Conversely, at much higher speeds (say 300 what sensitive to weight variations. Varying the
ft/sec ≅ 175 KIAS) the force holding the slider up weight for the same speed will result in a slower open-
would be 36 times greater ((300/50)2) than the corre- ing for a lighter weight—which is desirable because
sponding force at the lower velocity. However, the fill that tends to move toward the ideal situation of “equal
rate is only six times greater (300/50) than at the lower ‘g’ for equal velocity” which has obvious benefits for
velocity. ejection seats as well as bailout parachutes.
Incidentally, the initial drag rise on the system is sig- For examples of specific deployments, please examine
nificantly faster than a similar parachute without the the video sequences and the captions so you can relate
slider. In fact, given the very rigid shape and sharp the text to actual deployment events. Video se-
leading edge of the hemispherical portion of the slider, quence 8 shows an axis view (from the ground) of a
we can safely assume a very high Cd (at least canopy equipped with the slider during infla-
1.0). Thus, we can easily (at least conceptually) sepa- tion. Video sequence 9 shows a close up on the open-
rate out the slider drag from the total drag of the system ing process shot from an on board video cam-
up until the point where the slider begins its downward era. Notice that each of the steps described above is
movement after which its effect is largely finished as evident as you step through the frames.
TEST RESULTS, DATA AND TRENDS no further structural failures of the sliders but we have
Butler Parachute Systems has conducted over 300 test occasionally blown small sections of the hemisphere
drops for a commercial product development pro- for the larger sizes. In response to the blown sections,
gram. These were performed primarily during the we have added a “belly band” and are using a heavier
spring of 1998, but many since as well. During the cloth for the larger sizes. These minor problems are
program (see HX Series below) there were zero mal- usual to any development effort and must be ex-
functions and zero structural failures while within the pected – after all, the hemispherical part of the slider,
design parameters set for the production para- is essentially a very small parachute canopy and must
chutes. These new canopies can operate at significantly be designed as such.
higher weights with more consistent and predictable
openings and with dramatically improved reliability Because of the cost of the instrumentation systems
when compared to any canopy without the BAT only a few of the tests have been conducted with full
slider. instrumentation. However, about 25% have been con-
ducted with Brinnell type load cells which are much
We did, however, experience a few pure structural fail- cheaper and almost indestructible. The Brinnell cells
ures at very high weights and speeds. Further, we had provide a peak load reading that is fairly accurate (+/-2
one test in which the slider itself failed by tearing away to 3%) up to about 10,000-lb. on the systems we have
the center sections from the perimeter (grommet loca- devised and they are now routinely used on all
tion). In response to this failure of a lightly reinforced drops. Further, we have devised a more accurate
slider, we immediately halted the test program for a method of reading the “dent”. You may find more de-
few days and strengthened the slider radial tapes and tails on the operation of the Brinnell load cells on the
junctions with the periphery. Since then, we have had BPS web site at www.butlerparachutes.com.
25
20
15
"g" Load
10
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Velocity (KEAS)
"g" @ 200 lb. "g" @ 300 lb.
8
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
In addition to the load data, we have a minimum of two rically similar and we have begun normalizing the data
(and usually three or four) video views of every drop on the basis of canopy loading (W/CdS). The trends
made during this program. By using multiple cameras appear to track closely among the sizes but there is sim-
and training our camera operators carefully, we have ply too much data to present here in a useful format.
managed nearly 500 drop tests over the past four years
without a totally missed event (knock on wood!!). As a The charts presented here illustrate some of the test re-
result, there are literally thousands of video clips that sults of the HX500 (25.25 Do) canopy tests at various
have been examined, timed and cataloged. By using conditions. You will notice that at higher canopy load-
the best available view of each drop we have extracted ing the curves are a bit better behaved, and in several
the event timing on Sony Hi-8 EVS-7000 professional cases are essentially flat from 85- to 205-KEAS. This
video decks with RC time code (hours, minutes, sec- extraordinary result is further evidence that the BAT
onds, and frames). The frame counts were then entered Sombrero Slider dramatically and fundamentally alters
into a spreadsheet and converted to real relative time. the opening process for the better.
For most purposes, we use line-stretch as time zero al-
though some data was presented to the FAA with pack Further, it is evident that about 80-90% of the work of
opening as time zero (per their performance testing re- decelerating the payload is already complete by the time
quirements under AS-8015b). the slider begins its downward movement (particularly
at lower canopy loading). The time of slider movement
Because of the tremendous amount of data generated and first full open are marked on one of the charts be-
during our testing programs, I have elected to present low for reference; however, we are using the time to
data here from only one of the twelve canopy sizes slider movement for most of our modeling efforts.
tested to date. The canopies tested to date are geomet-
3000
2500
2000
Load (lb)
1500
1000
500
0
0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80 2.00
5.0
4.5
4.0
3.5
3.0
Time (sec)
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
0 50 100 150 200 250
Speed (KEAS)
102 LB 153 LB 220 LB 300 LB (Cutaway) 440 LB 500 LB
EFFECTIVENESS IN PARACHUTE CLUSTERS 3-canopy cluster will typically see as much as 100%
As one would probably deduce after viewing the video variation from lowest to highest and occasionally will
tapes and carefully considering the mode of operation, have one or more canopies fail to inflate at all.
the BAT Sombrero Slider has proven quite effective in
testing in clusters. During March 1999, BPS partici- Video sequence 10 shows clips taken from the first
pated in a demonstration program sponsored by the cluster drop. Although not at the ideal viewing angle,
Canadian Forces Parachute Center in Trenton, On- the video clearly shows how evenly the canopies are
tario. Two drops were made at approximately 130 inflating. We are very encouraged by these prelimi-
KEAS, 1000’ AGL and 1690-lb. and 2090-lb. gross nary cluster drops and plan to pursue additional clus-
weight (respectively). ter drops in the near future.
DEMONSTRATED APPLICATIONS
The first drop was a direct bag static line deployment
of three 37’ Do canopies (in individual T-10 d-bags Although the BAT Sombrero Slider is a very new de-
inside an outer bag) and resulted in less than 2% varia- velopment, there have already been quite a few appli-
tion in peak opening load among the three cano- cations of the technology. For example, the
pies. The second drop was a pilot chute deployment of HX Series Emergency Parachute canopies from
the same canopies at 2090-lb. and again resulted in a BPS are the first commercially available products util-
very small variation in canopy loads (although at a izing the BAT Sombrero Slider™. They have the
higher peak load per canopy). This variation of less highest airspeed and weight ratings of any FAA Au-
than 3% in both cases is very significant given that a thorized emergency parachute canopies certificated
under C23b/c/d.
10
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
Applications demonstrated to date have included: pies, and over 100 test jumps on various BPS prod-
ucts. He has a current FAA Master Parachute Rigger
• The four HX-Series Canopies (19.5’ to 27.9’ Do) in License with all ratings. He is a licensed pilot with
production under FAA TSO-C23d. experience in a wide variety of aircraft including aero-
• The BPS troop parachute programs, including the batics and soaring.
adaptation of the BAT Sombrero Slider to the US
Army MC1-1c (net removed) and development of a Michael D. Crowe was employed at Butler Parachute
family of troop parachutes by Butler Parachutes. Systems as aerospace engineer and management assis-
• A UAV program for a 900-lb. VTOL UAV. tant; most recently serving as the Operations Manager
until early May 1999. He has a BS in Aerospace Engi-
• A target demo program at 200 KEAS at 1290-lb.
neering and an MBA from Virginia Polytechnic Insti-
• The 3-canopy cluster mentioned above.
tute and State University. In his two years at Butler
CONCLUSIONS Parachutes, he was involved in parachute system de-
sign, product testing, and inventory control. During
Butler Parachute Systems has demonstrated beyond the development of the canopies utilizing the BAT
any reasonable doubt that the BAT Sombrero Slider™ Sombrero Slider™, his primary responsibility was to
is the most effective device ever invented for control- manage and direct the test program, data reduction and
ling the inflation process of conventional para- analysis. His assistance is greatly appreciated.
chutes. It completely eliminates inversion type mal-
functions and provides the parachute designer with one
of his most effective and versatile tools in controlling
Administrative Notes:
opening shock and force profiles. Further, it is the
only device ever invented that benefits the entire speed • This paper includes dozens of video clips and photo-
range of the parachute system with no detrimental side graphs that are reproduced here in black and white.
effects. After June 30th, 1999, this paper will also be posted
on the Butler Parachute Systems web site, where
ABOUT THE AUTHORS they may be viewed in color if desired.
Manley C. Butler, Jr. is the founder and President of • This paper also has an accompanying video presen-
Butler Parachute Systems, Inc. now located in Roa- tation which, while not strictly necessary, greatly
noke, Virginia. He also serves as the President of But- aids in illustrating the technology. A copy of the
ler Aerospace Technologies, Inc. (or BAT) which video may be requested from the authors.
owns the rights to the invention that is the subject of • The BAT Sombrero Slider™ was invented by the
this paper. primary author of this paper, Manley C. Butler, Jr.
(US Patent 5,890,678, patents pending world-
He has been involved in aviation activities all of his wide). A separate company, Butler Aerospace Tech-
adult life, beginning with his time in the US Navy as nologies, Inc. (BAT), holds the rights to this inven-
an Acoustic Sensor analyst on the S3A Viking. He tion and will license the technology under the usual
spent three years in the fleet with VS-22, during which sort of commercial arrangements.
he accumulated some 350-flight hours in Navy tactical • Please feel free to contact the author to discuss your
aircraft and 35 traps onboard the USS Saratoga. In particular application.
1976 Manley was selected for a Navy commissioning
program and left the fleet to attend the University of References
Texas at Austin, where he received a BS in Aerospace 1. Calkins, Robert B. Parachute Partial Inversion,
Engineering in 1980. After graduation he spent one AIAA 79-0451
year as Director of Engineering at ParaFlite Inc. then
moved on to the Naval Weapons Center at China
Lake, California as a recovery systems engineer and
program manager from early 1983 until the end of
1986. One of his projects at China Lake was the first
(and so far the only) successful in-flight ejection test
using a ram-air canopy.
ParaPhernalia/FFE 24' Conical. 130 KIAS @ 220 lb. Normal opening sequence (side view)
Same test as sequence #1.
13
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
VIDEO SEQUENCE # 3
4-A 4-B
4-C 4-D
4-E
15
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
VIDEO SEQUENCE # 5
5-G 5-H
17
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
VIDEO SEQUENCE # 7
7-A 7B 7-C
7-D 7E 7-F
19
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
VIDEO SEQUENCE # 9
20
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
VIDEO SEQUENCE # 10