Head-Down 402 — Organise multiple-aircraft loads

Application

Covers organising a head-down load large enough to need more than one aircraft: flying the aircraft in formation, timing exits across the planes, assigning sectors of the build, and running the comms that keep two or more plane-loads on one plan.

This is the next step up from a single-aircraft big-way (FFP-HD401), the slot craft, slotting logic and breakoff architecture of that unit still apply, scaled across planes. Assumes competence organising single-aircraft big-ways. Sky only for the jumps; the aircraft-formation plan is set with the pilots on the ground.

Pre-requisite units

FFP-HD401 (organise head-down big-ways) and FFP-HD403 (engineer big-way formations). RPL route: a record of organising or key-slotting on multiple-aircraft head-down loads, plus mentoring under a record-attempt organiser.

What multiple aircraft add

Everything hard about a single-aircraft big-way is still true, plus four things the extra planes introduce:

• Aircraft in formation. The planes fly a briefed formation (typically a lead plane with others stepped down and back) so the exits stack in the right place.
  • This is flown by the pilots to a plan the organiser and the pilots agree.
  • The jump organiser does not fly the planes but owns the exit plan that depends on the formation being flown.
• Exit timing across planes. Each plane’s group exits on a cue keyed to the lead plane, so the sub-formations arrive at the build in the right order and place.
  • Too early or too late and a whole plane-load arrives out of position.
• Sector assignment. The build is divided into sectors, and each plane-load is briefed to build its sector, base and near slots from the lead plane, outer sectors from the trailing planes, as the formation design dictates.
• Comms. With flyers split across aircraft, the brief, the dirt-dive and the go/no-go have to reach everyone the same way. Radios between pilots and a single organiser voice on the ground are the norm.

Elements and performance criteria

1. Plan the load

1.1

Set the total group size and the split across aircraft against the flyers, the aircraft and the conditions.

1.2

Assign each plane-load a sector of the build and the slots within it.

1.3

Agree the aircraft formation and the exit cue with the pilots-in-command, in writing where the operation requires it.

1.4

Confirm every participant's credentials and currency against the entry criteria and the local gates.

2. Design the breakoff at scale

2.1

Extend the breakoff architecture of FFP-HD401 across the whole formation, verifying at least 1,000 ft banked per wave.

2.2

Assign waves and radials so sub-formations from different planes break into clear, non-converging airspace.

2.3

Coordinate exit separation and the aircraft's ground track with all pilots.

3. Brief across planes

3.1

Brief the whole load together so every flyer can state their plane, sector, slot and breakoff wave.

3.2

Brief the exit cue and the abort, including what each plane-load does if the aircraft formation is not made.

3.3

Confirm the comms plan (pilot radios, ground organiser, in-plane keys) and run full dirt-dives per plane and combined.

4. Run and debrief

4.1

Run the load to the plan, holding the breakoff regardless of build completeness.

4.2

Debrief across planes with video, attributing timing or sector errors to a cause and a fix, and record the plan for the next attempt.

Bold criteria are safety-critical, strongly recommended must-meet standards within FFP courses, not regulations. An exit-timing, aircraft-formation or breakoff error puts multiple plane-loads at risk, so a Not Yet Satisfactory on a bold criterion makes the unit Not Yet Competent.

Foundation skills

Coordinating pilots, a large group and a breakoff plan across aircraft. Scaling the single-aircraft breakoff architecture to non-converging multi-plane waves. Briefing and comms that reach a load split across planes.

Performance evidence (suggested sufficiency — adjust locally)

A guide, not a gate, and honestly a thin evidence base at drop-zone scale, since multiple-aircraft head-down loads are rare outside record attempts. A record of organising or holding a key organising role on multiple-aircraft head-down loads, learned under an experienced record-attempt organiser. Most flyers meet this by apprenticeship on real record or record-style loads, not by a jump count.

Knowledge evidence

• Describe how aircraft fly in formation for a big-way exit and why the exit plan depends on the pilots flying it.
• Explain exit timing across planes and what goes wrong when a plane-load exits early or late.
• Explain sector assignment: which plane-load builds which part of the formation, and why.
• Explain how the single-aircraft breakoff architecture extends across planes so sub-formations break into non-converging airspace.
• State the comms plan a multi-plane load needs and the abort if the aircraft formation is not made.

Assessment conditions

Assessed on real multiple-aircraft head-down loads (or record-style loads under an experienced organiser); the aircraft-formation and exit plan are assessed with the pilots on the ground, the breakoff in the air. Video across planes is the primary debrief tool. Assessor: an experienced head-down big-way / record organiser current in the discipline, using the published FFP-HD402 checklist.

Each criterion Satisfactory / Not Yet Satisfactory; unit Competent / Not Yet Competent, recorded as a milestone.

Coaching priorities

Deliver in the project’s priority order: Safety → Fun → Learning (curriculum Part A0). The organiser and pilots own the load’s safety, the aircraft-formation plan, exit cue and breakoff are non-compensable. Debriefs run without blame and end on a win with one focus for the next attempt.

RPL evidence set

For experienced record organisers the organising is the evidence. A record of multiple-aircraft head-down loads organised or key-slotted; the plans used; a word from a recognised record organiser. Because the corpus is thin here, the RPL leans on demonstrated apprenticeship on real formation loads.

Sources