In article . com,
John wrote:
Here is another of those "how come" questions. What is the reason for
the two point suspension used to attach the main recovery parachute to
the Gemini spacecraft?

The main reason was that Gemini's primary landing system was originally
the Rogallo-wing paraglider, which (a) required that the astronauts have a
forward view during landing, and (b) required horizontal touchdown on
landing gear. The ordinary parachute and water landing was first meant as
a stopgap until the paraglider was ready; only fairly late in development
did it become clear that the paraglider wasn't *going* to be ready.

The other, more minor, advantages could have been achieved in less drastic
ways -- e.g., for corner-first splashdown it would have sufficed to rig
the parachute suspension to bring the capsule down tilted, as indeed was
done for Apollo.

Does anyone know what the anticipated consequences would have been if
the main chute deployed but did not shift from a single point to a two
point suspension? At first blush this doesnt seem to be a reason for
the crew to consider ejecting because if single point was good enough
for the first six (Mercury), seems it would sufficiently safe for a
Gemini crew.

Remember that Mercury had an airbag for touchdown deceleration, which
Gemini lacked. However, provided you were coming down on water as
planned, that wasn't too important -- the Mercury airbag was mostly for
abort cases involving land touchdown. A Gemini splashdown flat on the
heatshield might have been a bit harsh, but probably not enough so to
justify an abort.
--
"Think outside the box -- the box isn't our friend." | Henry Spencer
-- George Herbert |