Surely increasing the wingspan (lift) would be more economic and effective than increasing the thrust (attaching an engine)?

I think invisibility is one of the pluses of this parachute system,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,I know the British SAS use chutes in the hours of darkness ( not this system )small and fast keeps you in a low profile

Dumb idea... not enough glide ratio. Need BIGGER wings.
Still while loafing through the sky like fat genetically modified blimp geese, they would make for great long range target practice.
I am told blimp geese taste like pork - when roasted.

Increasing the wingspan is a bad idea because it makes you extremely easy to see, the engine that would be put on the glider won\'t put off hardly any emissions, and I\'d like to see you shoot something thats 200 yards to a mile away moving at 60 mph. Not to mention the people using this system will probably be special forces, which means it\'ll most likely be a halo jump which is done around 30,000 feet, and it\'ll be at night so they wont be seen anyway.

You gotta be kidding! Not enough glide ratio. Need BIGGER wings.

Nothing says \"surprise\" quite like a HALO. Zoom, Boom. Trash ready for pick up.

Getting closer to Starship Troopers by RAH.

When you say, \"But the Gryphon Next Generation Parachute System is what has pricked most people%u2019s interest\"; don\'t you mean piqued? I would hate to have my interest pricked. /Fail

5:1 is plenty, gives much greater cross range than normal HALO jump. These wings get the jumper much further from the jump point before he dumps the wings and deploys his chute. So, from 30,000 ft a jumper could be 25 miles from his jump point before he even deploys his chute- great for entering a country from outside it\'s borders or putting jump plane out of the reach of AA. You kids can get back to your Xbox, leave the thinking to engineers.

I wonder what the pilot does with their hands during flight?