MC-5 System?

[ParaStrike 0]

Does anyone know where i can obtain one of these?

[theonlyski 8]

Quote

Does anyone know where i can obtain one of these?

Your local recruiter. Marines I believe.

"I may be a dirty pirate hooker...but I'm not about to go stand on the corner." iluvtofly
DPH -7, TDS 578, Muff 5153, SCR 14890
I'm an asshole, and I approve this message

[NewGuy2005 53]

Quote

Quote

Does anyone know where i can obtain one of these?

Your local recruiter. Marines I believe.

And they are free!!

[theonlyski 8]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Does anyone know where i can obtain one of these?

Your local recruiter. Marines I believe.

And they are free!!

(some restrictions apply, your experience may vary)

"I may be a dirty pirate hooker...but I'm not about to go stand on the corner." iluvtofly
DPH -7, TDS 578, Muff 5153, SCR 14890
I'm an asshole, and I approve this message

[angryelf 0]

They show up on here every once in awhile... You might also check a DRMO auction. If you get it at an auction you will probably have to get it relined as the military likes to cut the lines of canopies they auction off.

That being said-I'm pretty sure MC-5's do not have a TSO, and aren't really "legal" for civilian skydives. Having quite a bit of experience jumping them-they aren't very much fun to jump, the canopies suck to fly, the containers have horrible pin protection, etc. Do a search, Lou Diamond has a very good post with a lot of great reasons why jumping an MC5 in the skydiving world is less than optimal. If you are looking for a collector's item-disregard.

-Harry

"Sometimes you eat the bar,
and well-sometimes the bar eats you..."

[councilman24 37]

Quote

...That being said-I'm pretty sure MC-5's do not have a TSO, and aren't really "legal" for civilian skydives. ....-Harry

U.S. Military equipment is legal for civilian use as per the definition of an approved parachute from part 105 below.


105.3 Definitions.
For the purposes of this part—

Approved parachute means a parachute manufactured under a type certificate or a Technical Standard Order (C–23 series), or a personnel-carrying U.S. military parachute (other than a high altitude, high speed, or ejection type) identified by a Navy Air Facility, an Army Air Field, and Air Force-Navy drawing number, an Army Air Field order number, or any other military designation or specification number.

I'm old for my age.
Terry Urban
D-8631
FAA DPRE

[angryelf 0]

Cool. I still wouldn't want to jump one for fun...

"Sometimes you eat the bar,
and well-sometimes the bar eats you..."

[councilman24 37]

Me either.

But remember, this is how skydiving started! There was nothing BUT military surplus equipment. And even when I started in 1978 most students were trained on military surplus equipment.

I'm old for my age.
Terry Urban
D-8631
FAA DPRE

[mjosparky 4]

Quote

Cool. I still wouldn't want to jump one for fun...

Would you jump one if your exit weight was 320 pounds? Would you jump one if you were carrying 105 pounds of flag into a demo? They weren’t designed to be fun, they were designed to carry a load and they do a good job of doing that.
I had a MT-1X for several years that I used for demos and some testing.

Sparky

http://flic.kr/p/9M3fra

My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

[pchapman 279]

Quote

Would you jump one if your exit weight was 320 pounds? Would you jump one if you were carrying 105 pounds of flag into a demo?

You have a point of course. Probably a hell of a lot cheaper to acquire than a Sigma rig.

But I'll add that they are ancient in design and ugly from a rigging standpoint. Nothing that awkward and outdated in basic design is used in skydiving today. (Let's leave Strong Dual Hawk Tandems out of this. ) Good for early 80's nostalgia though, kind of like rigs such as the RTS Mirage or the ParaFlite Swift.

[LouDiamond 1]

Quote

Quote

Would you jump one if your exit weight was 320 pounds? Would you jump one if you were carrying 105 pounds of flag into a demo?

You have a point of course. Probably a hell of a lot cheaper to acquire than a Sigma rig.

But I'll add that they are ancient in design and ugly from a rigging standpoint. Nothing that awkward and outdated in basic design is used in skydiving today. (Let's leave Strong Dual Hawk Tandems out of this. ) Good for early 80's nostalgia though, kind of like rigs such as the RTS Mirage or the ParaFlite Swift.

Not true. There are countries that are still buying and using the MC-5 for their military forces. Just curious, how many MC-5's have you assembled? Rigging wise, there is nothing fundamentally different about them from any current system. It's all really very straight forward and standard, it just might not be "pretty" to some but then again, its a purpose built military system, not a sports H/C retooled to fit a military role. The only thing that may be foreign to some civilians, is when it is in the static line configuration, as it employs a reefing system that is attached to the slider, something that has roots from earlier days of parachuting but is still found on all modern military systems that offer a dual bag RAM air static line capability.

"It's just skydiving..additional drama is not required"
Some people dream about flying, I live my dream
SKYMONKEY PUBLISHING

[pchapman 279]

Ok, I've only rigged up one MT-1XX system, but it sounds like that's pretty much the h/c for the MC-5 system.

I'll admit they are functional, and bulky because they need to be strong and have adjustments and extra attachment points etc.
But still ancient in design and some things would be done differently now.

Needle fold staging loop? Ancient.
(Tho' I wondered why it took so long for them to come back in sport para!)
Two pin? Ancient.
Grommet tabs on edge of PC for closing loops to go through? Ancient. (But it does locate the PC well.)
Velcro all over the reserve flap? Ancient.
Isn't the PC pretty wimpy too? Ancient.
Deployment assist pockets on reserve bridle? Ancient.
Stubby wide early 80s toggle design? Ancient.
ParaFlite style line attachment sewing? Ancient.
Snap fasteners for riser covers? Ancient. (Maybe still useful & functional though.)
Type IIA closing loop? Ancient. (Not sure but I thought that's the original type.)

And that lower reserve losing loop, isn't that a pain to pack, and a bizarre design with it snaking around the pack job and stowed lines, rather than taking a straight path from the backpad like on modern designs?

All this from a company that couldn't cut it in the real world. ( = sport skydiving) 'Course, you might think it is the other way around, where the military is the real world, the serious stuff, not the fashion conscious sport side of things.

[LouDiamond 1]

There is a more up to date system, offered by the same company that has done away with your notations. And for clarification, Paraflight is/was the company that produces the MC-5, it has since undergone a name change but they still produce this system for certain customers and they are definitely still around in a capacity that goes well beyond military personnel systems. Don't tell me you really think sport skydiving drives the industry,ever been to PIA?


As an aside, there are a lot of things on todays sports systems that can be considered "ancient" but they work and we still use them.

"It's just skydiving..additional drama is not required"
Some people dream about flying, I live my dream
SKYMONKEY PUBLISHING