LAPES history

[JDK]

LAPES = Low Altitude Parachute Extraction System

The RAAF is about to retire its DHC-4 Caribou aircraft, and the RAAF say they are the only aircraft they use configured for LAPES - while obviously the C-130 Hercules is in USAF service, but presumably not in RAAF use (H/J models now). What equipment would be different?

http://www.parachutehistory.com/military/lapes.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low_Altitu ... ion_System

Some questions:

When was it 'invented'? (Answered above, but comment welcome - were there prior / similar versions known?)

Which types have been able to use it in history, as well as current types?

The British Blackburn Beverley could do it as 'ULLA' and there's also the term VLLE as well. Interesting discussion here:
http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?t=88620

Any other thoughts from our loadmasters?

[Aeronut]

LAPES, ULLA, VLLE are all very similar in that they require the aircraft to fly at a low height (for ULLA it was 10 ft +/- 5ft!). The difference comes down to how the loads were restrained/released from the aircraft. The US (and therfore most of the Western world) have aircraft that use the Dash 4a cargo handling system (or a variant of) restraints. The UK uses a cargo handling system called Skydel and a final restraint called CATRA.

Of course prior to LAPES/ULLA there was GPE (Ground Proximity Extraction) where instaed of parachutes the load was extracted by catching an arrestor cable with a hook attcahed to the load.

[bdk]

I think you'll find that the C-17 is configured for LAPES.

[JDK]

I think you'll find that the C-17 is configured for LAPES.

Certainly part of the offer. However are RAAF examples able to use it (or other 'export versions' - Canadian, RAF - as well)?

[Ken]

When I checked out in the USAF C-130 in late '92, each unit only had a couple designated LAPES crews as a special qual. Over time they too faded away and as of the late 90's until today I know of no USAF Herk crews accomplishing LAPES deliveries.

The hazard and expense (much of the pallets and equipment, I was told, was one time use) plus the exposure of the airplane low and slow in a tactical situation just didn't endear it to the AF. Those same loads today would be delivered either by landing or by conventional airdrop in the Herk world. Never saw any other USAF airframes accomplish LAPES, although, as you say, maybe the C-17 is "fitted". Given other technologies, I doubt we'll see the US doing any LAPES in the future, either.

[JDK]

Thanks Ken. I wonder if the Vietnam situation was the core of the use?

[Ken]

To the best of my knowledge, yes, LAPES was primarily a Vietnam tactic/technology. Beyond that it seems like exercises and airshows. I'd be interested to hear if anyone has knowledge of LAPES being used operationally, say, in Grenada or any other actual contingency.

[dfrat]

We used LAPES in Honduras in the late 80s. I remember the platforms having 4-5 blivets on them. The first would always burst due to the energy generated by the drop. It took two or three drops to figure out the first blivet that was prone to burst should be filled with water vs fuel.

There is nothing quite like being on the DZ when a C-130 comes in for a LAPES drop. I was always inpressed, even more so when we found tire marks on the hard dirt LAPES zone. Just a tad below the desired hieght.

[T2 Ernie]

The only requirement to be "fitted" for LAPES is to have a tow-plate extraction system. This system can be used on any dash-4 configured USAF platform that can drop Heavy Equipment loads.

The tow-plate release system is different from the traditional HE extraction in that a drogue chute is deployed prior to reaching the drop zone and at the pre-determined computed air release point (CARP), the drogue chute is released which extracts the main chutes.

Tow-plate releases are probably more accurate than regular HE extraction (which relies on a bomb-shackle release in the overhead cargo compartment to "swing" an extraction chute into the slipstream), but they have their own set of challenges.

In the mid-90s, there were a series of inadvertent releases mostly here at Kirtland AFB (probably due to the higher TAS) and a test program was put into place to beef up the tow-plate itself. I actually flew the flight test portion of the tow-plate test and released something like 50 drogues in one afternoon at varying speeds. At the end of that, we dropped what is, to my knowledge, the last tow-plate HE drop (at least in AFSOC). For whatever reason, it was decided the two-plate wasn't really required anymore (although we still have the procedures in our book and checklists). I was also involved in re-writing the BLU-82/B drop checklist to remove the tow-plate (the last dozen or so went out like regular HE drop - and there are no more of them).

I was never LAPES qualified, but I was around when it died - it would've been about '94. The Army put out a request for information to see if it was required - the only command that even entertained it was SOCOM who thought there was a niche requirement to do LAPES on NVGs (would've loved to have done that!), but in the end, it just wasn't a requirement for the Army, so it went away for the USAF. In fact, it went away in early '93, was resurrected with a handful of crews, just in case, then went away completely in late '94.

The RAF did Ultra Low Level Airdrop (ULLA) with their Herks - at least their SF unit did (I cannot speak to their non-SF Herks), but it too had gone by the time I did my exchange in '00.

[noizeedave]

C-130s in the USAF can all do LAPES, the key is, which was stated early by Ken is that they are dangerous, costly in destruction of equipment and many times totally destroyed vehicles and other items jettisoned out the back. My understanding is that although "Capable", not justified enough to practice anymore. But the parts and pieces of the required system are always installed standard on C-130s, including Es, H1 to H3s and J's. J models now have the towplate capability built in for use of H blocks.

Its the requirement, safety and cost that have left the LAPES system unused currently. With GPS and computer aided drops, you can drop more accurately on the target from higher altitudes to do the job.

[JDK]

Thanks very much gents, very comprehensive info there.

T2 Ernie - I don't talk air force - can you explicate your acronyms for a penguin, please?

[T2 Ernie]

C-130s in the USAF can all do LAPES,

I wouldn't say that. I would phrase it as the aircraft are capable of doing LAPES (and we are most definitely arguing semantics at this point, but it is an important distinction in my mind). To my knowledge, the slick C-130s do not use the tow-plate anymore and may not even have the checklists to do it. There is no requirement. Therefore, while the aircraft may be capable, the crews are not. Given AMC's penchant for risk avoidance at all costs, I seriously doubt it would ever make a comeback either...

the key is, which was stated early by Ken is that they are dangerous, costly in destruction of equipment and many times totally destroyed vehicles and other items jettisoned out the back. My understanding is that although "Capable", not justified enough to practice anymore.

While there have been some spectacular and high-profile LAPES accidents, I wouldn't categorize them as unsafe or dangerous. I've flown a similar profile for different reasons many times. One of the big differences between LAPES and the RAF's ULLA was the descent profile prior to the drop - ULLA was a much more moderate descent (probably 3* glidepath) whereas LAPES, having been born out of Khe San, was a high & steep approach (perhaps as high as 6-10* glidepath) with a huge tailswap at the end NOT intending to touch down. Challenging, yes - dangerous, no. Proficiency is the key.

Its the requirement, safety and cost that have left the LAPES system unused currently. With GPS and computer aided drops, you can drop more accurately on the target from higher altitudes to do the job.

It is the lack of requirement by the Army that has left LAPES unused. The Mobility portion of the USAF is a service provider and the C-130 customer is the Army, primarily. If the Army had a requirement for it, LAPES would never have gone away.

I don't talk air force - can you explicate your acronyms for a penguin, please?

LAPES = Low Altitude Parachute Extraction Chute
ULLA = Ultra-Low-Level Airdrop (RAF version of LAPES - very similar)
HE = Heavy Equipment
CARP = Computed Air Release Point (this is the point in the air where the load is released based on ballistics & windage to land in the desired area)
AFSOC = Air Force Special Operations Command
SOCOM = Special Operations Command (the Joint Unified Command)
NVGs = Night Vision Goggles
SF = Special Forces (RAF 47 SQN (SF) is who I was referring to)
Hope that helps....

[Ken]

bump

[tom d. friedman]

[quote="dfrat"]We used LAPES in Honduras in the late 80s. I remember the platforms having 4-5 blivets on them. The first would always burst due to the energy generated by the drop. It took two or three drops to figure out the first blivet that was prone to burst should be filled with water vs fuel.

There is nothing quite like being on the DZ when a C-130 comes in for a LAPES drop. I was always inpressed, even more so when we found tire marks on the hard dirt LAPES zone. Just a tad below the desired hieght.[/quote




what is a blivet?? or what does it's abbreviation stand for??

[Ken]

A fuel blivet is a cylindrical rubberized bladder.

http://outontheporch.org/category/syria/