What happened
The FAA’s narrative, in sentence case. The FAA writes it in capitals and removes private details.
On February 28, 2026, at approximately 1606 hours, a routine sport parachuting operation was conducted involving five skydivers exiting an aircraft from an altitude of approximately 15,000 feet above ground level (AGL).
Five jumpers departed the aircraft without incident and conducted standard freefall maneuvers. Following the freefall portion of the jump, the skydivers separated to allow for individual parachute deployment and canopy flight.
During parachute deployment, fellow jumpers observed that one of the skydivers experienced what was described as a “hard” parachute opening. No immediate canopy malfunctions were reported by the other jumpers during this phase.
Witnesses on the ground who were observing the skydiving event reported that the affected jumper appeared to be slumped forward in his harness with his arms down during the descent under canopy.
Observers further reported that the parachute canopy was fully deployed and there were no visible twisted suspension lines. Despite the apparently normal canopy deployment, the parachute entered a spiral descent and continued descending in that configuration until the jumper impacted the ground.
Post-incident inspection revealed no damage consistent with parachute system failure. The parachute system components appeared intact and operational.
The involved jumper was an experienced skydiver with over 3,000 documented jumps.
Additional personal or certification details were not available at the time of this preliminary report.
Following the incident, FAA personnel conducted an inspection of the parachute system and container.
Findings included:
Toggle steering lines remained in the stowed position, indicating that no steering or braking inputs had been applied during canopy flight.
The main canopy, suspension lines, and slider were inspected and found to be in good condition.
There were no visible indications of equipment malfunction or failure.
The jumper impacted the ground while the parachute canopy was deployed and in a spiral descent configuration.
No abnormalities with the canopy or line configuration were identified that would indicate a mechanical malfunction prior to ground impact.
Witness statements indicated that the jumper appeared unresponsive during the canopy descent, based on the observed posture of the jumper being slumped in the harness with arms down and the absence of steering input.
The reported hard parachute opening may be relevant to the sequence of events; however, the extent of its effect, if any, remains undetermined.
The investigation is ongoing. Based on preliminary evidence, no mechanical failure of the parachute system has been identified. Further evaluation is required to determine potential medical, physiological, or other contributing factors related to the jumper’s lack of control input following parachute deployment.
Documentation confirmed that the reserve parachute had been inspected and repacked on February 26, 2026, which was within the required inspection interval.
As the FAA filed it
ON FEBRUARY 28, 2026, AT APPROXIMATELY 1606 HOURS, A ROUTINE SPORT PARACHUTING OPERATION WAS CONDUCTED INVOLVING FIVE SKYDIVERS EXITING AN AIRCRAFT FROM AN ALTITUDE OF APPROXIMATELY 15,000 FEET ABOVE GROUND LEVEL (AGL).
FIVE JUMPERS DEPARTED THE AIRCRAFT WITHOUT INCIDENT AND CONDUCTED STANDARD FREEFALL MANEUVERS. FOLLOWING THE FREEFALL PORTION OF THE JUMP, THE SKYDIVERS SEPARATED TO ALLOW FOR INDIVIDUAL PARACHUTE DEPLOYMENT AND CANOPY FLIGHT.
DURING PARACHUTE DEPLOYMENT, FELLOW JUMPERS OBSERVED THAT ONE OF THE SKYDIVERS EXPERIENCED WHAT WAS DESCRIBED AS A “HARD” PARACHUTE OPENING. NO IMMEDIATE CANOPY MALFUNCTIONS WERE REPORTED BY THE OTHER JUMPERS DURING THIS PHASE.
WITNESSES ON THE GROUND WHO WERE OBSERVING THE SKYDIVING EVENT REPORTED THAT THE AFFECTED JUMPER APPEARED TO BE SLUMPED FORWARD IN HIS HARNESS WITH HIS ARMS DOWN DURING THE DESCENT UNDER CANOPY.
OBSERVERS FURTHER REPORTED THAT THE PARACHUTE CANOPY WAS FULLY DEPLOYED AND THERE WERE NO VISIBLE TWISTED SUSPENSION LINES. DESPITE THE APPARENTLY NORMAL CANOPY DEPLOYMENT, THE PARACHUTE ENTERED A SPIRAL DESCENT AND CONTINUED DESCENDING IN THAT CONFIGURATION UNTIL THE JUMPER IMPACTED THE GROUND.
POST-INCIDENT INSPECTION REVEALED NO DAMAGE CONSISTENT WITH PARACHUTE SYSTEM FAILURE. THE PARACHUTE SYSTEM COMPONENTS APPEARED INTACT AND OPERATIONAL.
THE INVOLVED JUMPER WAS AN EXPERIENCED SKYDIVER WITH OVER 3,000 DOCUMENTED JUMPS.
ADDITIONAL PERSONAL OR CERTIFICATION DETAILS WERE NOT AVAILABLE AT THE TIME OF THIS PRELIMINARY REPORT.
FOLLOWING THE INCIDENT, FAA PERSONNEL CONDUCTED AN INSPECTION OF THE PARACHUTE SYSTEM AND CONTAINER.
FINDINGS INCLUDED:
TOGGLE STEERING LINES REMAINED IN THE STOWED POSITION, INDICATING THAT NO STEERING OR BRAKING INPUTS HAD BEEN APPLIED DURING CANOPY FLIGHT.
THE MAIN CANOPY, SUSPENSION LINES, AND SLIDER WERE INSPECTED AND FOUND TO BE IN GOOD CONDITION.
THERE WERE NO VISIBLE INDICATIONS OF EQUIPMENT MALFUNCTION OR FAILURE.
THE JUMPER IMPACTED THE GROUND WHILE THE PARACHUTE CANOPY WAS DEPLOYED AND IN A SPIRAL DESCENT CONFIGURATION.
NO ABNORMALITIES WITH THE CANOPY OR LINE CONFIGURATION WERE IDENTIFIED THAT WOULD INDICATE A MECHANICAL MALFUNCTION PRIOR TO GROUND IMPACT.
WITNESS STATEMENTS INDICATED THAT THE JUMPER APPEARED UNRESPONSIVE DURING THE CANOPY DESCENT, BASED ON THE OBSERVED POSTURE OF THE JUMPER BEING SLUMPED IN THE HARNESS WITH ARMS DOWN AND THE ABSENCE OF STEERING INPUT.
THE REPORTED HARD PARACHUTE OPENING MAY BE RELEVANT TO THE SEQUENCE OF EVENTS; HOWEVER, THE EXTENT OF ITS EFFECT, IF ANY, REMAINS UNDETERMINED.
THE INVESTIGATION IS ONGOING. BASED ON PRELIMINARY EVIDENCE, NO MECHANICAL FAILURE OF THE PARACHUTE SYSTEM HAS BEEN IDENTIFIED. FURTHER EVALUATION IS REQUIRED TO DETERMINE POTENTIAL MEDICAL, PHYSIOLOGICAL, OR OTHER CONTRIBUTING FACTORS RELATED TO THE JUMPER’S LACK OF CONTROL INPUT FOLLOWING PARACHUTE DEPLOYMENT.
DOCUMENTATION CONFIRMED THAT THE RESERVE PARACHUTE HAD BEEN INSPECTED AND REPACKED ON FEBRUARY 26, 2026, WHICH WAS WITHIN THE REQUIRED INSPECTION INTERVAL.
Other reports on N9652F · 1
Matched to the same aircraft by N-number and date.