Forums: Skydiving: Gear and Rigging:
Cypres-2 fire on ground

 

First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 5 Next page Last page  View All

Nelyubin  (D 18617)

May 30, 2011, 3:56 AM
Post #101 of 124 (2484 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Frankyspanky] Cypres-2 fire on ground [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
If you are refereeing to Kopples post it was from Vigil not Cypres.

It does not help that the client does not provide more information. Though there is a language barrier there. We have to assume that the client is telling the truth about the reserve popping open recently so that leaves a few possibilities...

.

Such statement very strange.
The device has been given in Airtek with the detailed description of a case.
Airtek has received the device. Airtek has replaced a device cartridge. Airtek has sent the device to the owner. The case with the device has interested Airtek only after publicity at forums.


(This post was edited by Nelyubin on May 30, 2011, 4:02 AM)


sundevil777  (D License)

May 30, 2011, 5:53 AM
Post #102 of 124 (2449 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Nelyubin] Cypres-2 fire on ground [In reply to] Can't Post

Post #67 of this thread seems to show to me that Airtec is admitting that they are stumped, but are asking for help in gathering the circumstances (had not at the time received that help), and want to solve this mystery. The fact that a firing was previously recorded that seems to not have actually happened (at least in terms of the unit still powering up normally), does make the lack of data on the final jump where the reserve activated more understandable - in terms of something seriously being wrong with this unit. Airtec is left with being in the position of wanting to recreate what happened, but can't simply expose it to a set of well understood conditions such as the door of a plane opening, or a plane pressurizing, or an electromagnetic field, or trying to cut a loop with no tension or lubrication, or swooping. I find it reasonable that they have never seen this type of failure, and would truly like to be able to figure it out.

The comment about losing data from impact is strange though, but I do not think it means Airtec is dismissing this failure (again, see post #67). That does not support the conclusion by some that Airtec wants to sweep this under the rug. That does not compare to the Vigil response at one time to avoid hot temps, or that the device can't be expected to differentiate between being in freefall and the opening of a door. That does not compare to the Argus response that their cutter can't work reliably unless the loop is lubricated or under tension, or that a metal ball was in the way but we won't show you detailed pics of it. Big difference.


Frankyspanky

May 30, 2011, 2:16 PM
Post #103 of 124 (2392 views)
Shortcut
Re: [sundevil777] Cypres-2 fire on ground [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Post #67 of this thread seems to show to me that Airtec is admitting that they are stumped, but are asking for help in gathering the circumstances (had not at the time received that help), and want to solve this mystery.

They have been given the information and they seem stumped because they are reluctant to conclude that it was entirely a failure of the unit?

They probably want more information because they cannot come to any other conclusion other than their unit was faulty.

Yes they are interested, as expected, but nothing is beng done about it and the rest of us are left to wonder.

I'm sure Avacom are interested in their cutters too.

AAD in their sensors, so all 3 major AAD companies have a fault they are interested in.

Still makes this one the single worst failure of all IMHO.


(This post was edited by Frankyspanky on May 30, 2011, 2:22 PM)


Frankyspanky

May 30, 2011, 2:21 PM
Post #104 of 124 (2390 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Nelyubin] Cypres-2 fire on ground [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Such statement very strange.
The device has been given in Airtek with the detailed description of a case.
Airtek has received the device. Airtek has replaced a device cartridge. Airtek has sent the device to the owner. The case with the device has interested Airtek only after publicity at forums.

I appologise for insinuating that a full description was not given to Airtec, obviously from your response it has.

This clarifies things more. Especially your information about Airtec only becoming interested once the fault hit the public forum.


Nelyubin  (D 18617)

May 31, 2011, 7:56 AM
Post #105 of 124 (2288 views)
Shortcut
Re: [sundevil777] Cypres-2 fire on ground [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:


The comment about losing data from impact is strange though, but I do not think it means Airtec is dismissing this failure (again, see post #67). That does not support the conclusion by some that Airtec wants to sweep this under the rug. That does not compare to the Vigil response at one time to avoid hot temps, or that the device can't be expected to differentiate between being in freefall and the opening of a door. That does not compare to the Argus response that their cutter can't work reliably unless the loop is lubricated or under tension, or that a metal ball was in the way but we won't show you detailed pics of it. Big difference.
Such words Ertek put into question the incidents when they say " the device not included "


HSPScott  (D 22285)

Jun 7, 2011, 9:25 AM
Post #106 of 124 (2145 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Nelyubin] Cypres-2 fire on ground [In reply to] Can't Post

Has there been any final conclusions on this?


Nelyubin  (D 18617)

Jun 8, 2011, 8:58 AM
Post #107 of 124 (2044 views)
Shortcut
Re: [HSPScott] Cypres-2 fire on ground [In reply to] Can't Post

No.
Also I think won't be what conclusions.


Nelyubin  (D 18617)

Sep 20, 2011, 7:28 PM
Post #108 of 124 (1875 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Nelyubin] Cypres-2 fire on ground [In reply to] Can't Post

Funny answer:
http://www.cypres.cc/...emid=178&lang=en


catfishhunter  (D 28796)

Sep 20, 2011, 8:25 PM
Post #109 of 124 (1850 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Nelyubin] Cypres-2 fire on ground [In reply to] Can't Post

Wow so the dealer was taking the new cutters and replacing them with out of date cutters? Scary as no one would know unless soemthing happened as who checks the serial number except the rigger putting it in andi if that rigger is the dealer as well....Lots of questions in that report.


pchapman  (D 1014)

Sep 20, 2011, 9:13 PM
Post #110 of 124 (1840 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Nelyubin] Cypres-2 fire on ground [In reply to] Can't Post

To summarize, Airtec says that the cutter activated because of cable damage and thus a short circuit, which fired the cutter without the computer recording an activation. They believe the cable was damaged by rough handling at some time.

The cutter was not the one that came with the Cypres 2 originally, but a 10+ year old one off a Cypres 1, that had never been sent in for servicing. (The Cypres 1 & 2 mixing is OK, other than that the Cypres 1 connector is not waterproof.)

They essentially admit that the investigation took longer than it should have, because at first they didn't check whether the cutter firing could have come from a damaged cable.


My comments:

Presumably damaged cables are quite rare and they haven't seen many of them, explaining why that wasn't what they first suspected.

(This would probably be a different issue than that of the fitting between the metal cutter body and the cutter cable, where older ones were more flexible, and newer ones harder, leading to a few broken cutters in some rigs where the cutters take a lot of force. That came up in a dz.com discussion in the last year or so.)

Airtec implies that there was no opportunity for them to notice whether the cabling might have been damaged, because the cutter had never been sent in.

So it appears that the Cypres' internal checks can detect some but not all wiring faults in the cutter cable. (e.g., Cypres 1 code 8997 for a cable error)

The Cypres 2 manuals, both older and newer ones I have seen, do state (in a highlighted box) that spare cutters still need 4 year checks!

The Cypres 1 manual, however, does not seem to mention this. The Cypres 1 manual never got much updating. The current edition on the SSK site is the 2001 version, which is very close to the original version, with hand sketched drawings. Early Cypres' did not have a field replaceable cutter so the issue of spare cutters wouldn't have come up when the manual was written. The manual was updated to show the connection for the field replaceable cutter, but didn't mention maintenance for spare cutters.

I don't know if any other documents (e.g. on the SSK site) might have asked for Cypres 1 cutters to be checked at 4 yr intervals too.

So while Airtec may have always intended for spare cutters (once they were field replaceable) to be checked every four years, this seems not to have been communicated to users until the Cypres 2 era. (Correct me if I'm wrong.)

Leaving aside the issue of the factory checking spare cutters, one wonders whether the damage to the cable would have been visible to a rigger, whether looking for damage specifically or not.

I also notice that this year SSK has included small cards showing a photo of a new cable stowage method, if one receives a Cypres back from servicing. Perhaps a coincidence. This method wraps some of the cable within the main pouch, instead of coiling it all under the small cable cover, where the cable could easily get kinked right next to the long cutter connection plug.

In the end it comes down to the ideas that spare cutters are supposed to get 4 year checks too, and that if a cable is physically damaged, a cutter can inadvertently fire. Despite the idea that AAD's are working fine if they pass their self test, not all errors can be found -- especially a short circuit that hasn't yet occurred.

It does make me wonder how power is distributed in the cutter cable -- I would have thought when a cutter isn't being activated, there would be no power supplied to the cutter cable at all, so a short circuit would not matter. Hmm.


(This post was edited by pchapman on Sep 20, 2011, 9:37 PM)


NWPoul  (D 178119)

Sep 20, 2011, 10:05 PM
Post #111 of 124 (1823 views)
Shortcut
Re: [pchapman] Cypres-2 fire on ground [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
It does make me wonder how power is distributed in the cutter cable -- I would have thought when a cutter isn't being activated, there would be no power supplied to the cutter cable at all, so a short circuit would not matter. Hmm
This is exact part which make me confused...
How in da **** the short cut in da cable can lead to activation of cutter??
Without any traces of electrical impulse (enough for ignition) passes from battery through all electrical chain inside the cypress's body?? How Airtek can find out, that exact disccovered cable damage had lead to activation??


Nelyubin  (D 18617)

Sep 20, 2011, 10:14 PM
Post #112 of 124 (1818 views)
Shortcut
Re: [pchapman] Cypres-2 fire on ground [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
Wow so the dealer was taking the new cutters and replacing them with out of date cutters? Scary as no one would know unless soemthing happened as who checks the serial number except the rigger putting it in andi if that rigger is the dealer as well....Lots of questions in that report.


CYPRES 2 Users Guide, page 25:
Quote:
Notes:
1. CYPRES 1 field replaceable cutters (no aluminum
grip) can be used with CYPRES 2. They
will function properly, however this combination
is not water-resistant.
CYPRES 2 cutters (identified by aluminum grip)
can be used with any CYPRES 1 with the field
replaceable cutter connector. They function
properly - but this combination is not waterresistant.


(This post was edited by Nelyubin on Sep 20, 2011, 10:21 PM)


spootch  (C License)

Sep 20, 2011, 11:52 PM
Post #113 of 124 (1780 views)
Shortcut
Re: [NWPoul] Cypres-2 fire on ground [In reply to] Can't Post

+ 1
somethings fishy. I also would assume the cable would be dead till the unit sent the signal through it.
I know nothing about how the unit self tests, but the only way I can see it fire is if the unit was turned on and it checked for a circut an POP! That, or theres a constant live that runs through it and it touched the dead side?

anyone?


sundevil777  (D License)

Sep 21, 2011, 3:25 AM
Post #114 of 124 (1718 views)
Shortcut
Re: [pchapman] Cypres-2 fire on ground [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
So it appears that the Cypres' internal checks can detect some but not all wiring faults in the cutter cable. (e.g., Cypres 1 code 8997 for a cable error)

The nature of wiring faults can be that they are intermittent. The internal checks can't detect them if they are not there at the time of the check.


theonlyski  (D License)

Sep 21, 2011, 6:15 AM
Post #115 of 124 (1626 views)
Shortcut
Re: [sundevil777] Cypres-2 fire on ground [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
So it appears that the Cypres' internal checks can detect some but not all wiring faults in the cutter cable. (e.g., Cypres 1 code 8997 for a cable error)

The nature of wiring faults can be that they are intermittent. The internal checks can't detect them if they are not there at the time of the check.

Once the cypres (atleast the cypres-1 I tested) was powered up and past the POST... you can unplug the cutter and the unit says nothing.

I got the idea from the first part that the cutter seemed to be activated intentionally with a battery.


Premier billvon  (D 16479)
Moderator
Sep 21, 2011, 3:38 PM
Post #116 of 124 (1459 views)
Shortcut
Re: [NWPoul] Cypres-2 fire on ground [In reply to] Can't Post

>How in da **** the short cut in da cable can lead to activation of cutter??

When explosive initiators are used it's common practice to short their leads together at all times to ensure no inadvertent activation. Before use they are twisted together, and once installed they are shorted together by the firing circuit until needed. They are spec'd to pass a VERY small current without activating, so you can easily test them (i.e. if you can pass 100uA, then you know the initiator is connected to the firing circuit.)

Thus a short in a cable would prevent the unit from detecting an open cutter. In addition, depending on how the firing circuit was wired, a short from shield to one of the leads could fire the cutter. (It would be silly to design it this way but I have no details on how they actually did design it.)


NWPoul  (D 178119)

Sep 21, 2011, 10:16 PM
Post #117 of 124 (1377 views)
Shortcut
Re: [billvon] Cypres-2 fire on ground [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
>How in da **** the short cut in da cable can lead to activation of cutter??

When explosive initiators are used it's common practice to short their leads together at all times to ensure no inadvertent activation.
Well, that mean that SC is prevent, not lead of activation

In reply to:
In addition, depending on how the firing circuit was wired, a short from shield to one of the leads could fire the cutter. (It would be silly to design it this way but I have no details on how they actually did design it.)
Yep, I though about this, but even not mention it coz it's would be really silly design can't imagine that such devices can be made this silly way








USPA  (D 81812)

Sep 23, 2011, 2:13 AM
Post #121 of 124 (1117 views)
Shortcut
Re: [virgin-burner] Cypres-2 fire on ground [In reply to] Can't Post

Bei Angriff unter Wasser gedrueckt, Wasserbomben. Letzter Gegnerstandort
08:30 Uhr, Marqu AJ 9863, 220 Grad, 8 Seemeilen, stosse nach. 14 Millibar
faellt, NNO 4, Sicht 10.


virgin-burner

Sep 23, 2011, 2:16 AM
Post #122 of 124 (1113 views)
Shortcut
Re: [USPA] Cypres-2 fire on ground [In reply to] Can't Post

is that in texel!? i was there two weeks ago.. Tongue






First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 5 Next page Last page  View All

Forums : Skydiving : Gear and Rigging

 


Search for (options)