Forums: Skydiving: Gear and Rigging:
Cypres 2 service bulletin

 


avgjoe  (Student)

Feb 1, 2013, 10:18 AM
Post #1 of 186 (11070 views)
Shortcut
Cypres 2 service bulletin Can't Post

Interesting stuff.
Attachments: SB_31012013_eng.pdf (32.1 KB)


Southern_Man  (C License)

Feb 1, 2013, 10:20 AM
Post #2 of 186 (10986 views)
Shortcut
Re: [avgjoe] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

So much for set it and forget it.


dthames  (B 37674)

Feb 1, 2013, 10:23 AM
Post #3 of 186 (10972 views)
Shortcut
Re: [avgjoe] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

Wow! Based on my experience with electronics hanging up from static issues, it would be wise to do this test regardless of the MFG date of the unit.

Thanks for the post.


pchapman  (D 1014)

Feb 1, 2013, 10:24 AM
Post #4 of 186 (10970 views)
Shortcut
Re: [avgjoe] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

For recent units only:

Quote:
CYPRES 2 units manufactured February 2009 through December 2012 (02/2009 - 12/2012).

A modified component from a supplier may rarely cause an unexpected lockup even when showing zero. May happen in high static electricity conditions.

Therefore check before each jump is required, by pressing the button to confirm the LED flashes. [Very inconvenient!]

The bulletin does confirm that one packing mat Cypres fire did occur.

Cypres maintenance and production were held up recently while Airtec hunted down the problem, I was told by SSK. [Explaining why my unit isn't back from maintenance yet.]

Perhaps unusually, there is no actual recall of the units, and no indication of how the issue would be fixed if the unit is sent back outside of normal maintenance.


(This post was edited by pchapman on Feb 1, 2013, 10:25 AM)


dontlikemustard  (B License)

Feb 1, 2013, 10:34 AM
Post #5 of 186 (10933 views)
Shortcut
Re: [avgjoe] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

so now for the next 4 years i need to make sure my cypres is functioning properly. i still check it before every jump but come on, really?

i paid the extra bucks for this unit because they claim to be extremely reliable...

they should fix this issue on their own dime.


(This post was edited by dontlikemustard on Feb 1, 2013, 10:35 AM)


Southern_Man  (C License)

Feb 1, 2013, 10:39 AM
Post #6 of 186 (10917 views)
Shortcut
Re: [pchapman] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
The bulletin does confirm that one packing mat Cypres fire did occur.

I believe this was in Florida over the holidays.

According to this document: http://www.pia.com/...uments/TS120cV3b.pdf cypres were tested for electrostatic discharge up to 25KV. They must not have tested the revised component.


hillson  (D 33134)

Feb 1, 2013, 10:56 AM
Post #7 of 186 (10869 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Southern_Man] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

Assuming it is the same unit...it happened at the Invasion.


Premier skybytch  (D License)

Feb 1, 2013, 11:14 AM
Post #8 of 186 (10819 views)
Shortcut
Re: [pchapman] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Therefore check before each jump is required, by pressing the button to confirm the LED flashes. [Very inconvenient!]

Seriously? It's inconvenient to check your gear before you put it on? If you do a complete gear check that includes lifting the reserve flap to check the pin (like we teach students to do), it will take what, three seconds longer to check the AAD? Wow, that's asking an awful lot of you. How do you handle the inconvenience and time involved in turning it on in the morning?

At least this time the static turns it off instead of making it fire like the Cypres 1 did (who remembers anti static sleeves?). Much rather that it was off when I thought it was on than firing when I don't want it to. When it's off, it can't kill me.


gowlerk  (C 3196)

Feb 1, 2013, 11:43 AM
Post #9 of 186 (10753 views)
Shortcut
Re: [avgjoe] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

Interesting indeed. My wife bought a brand new one last year. DOM 04/12. Does this mean that for her $1600 she has to worry about this for 4 years?

Ken

Edited to add that I've just sent a message to both Airtec and SSK to let them know that the proposed solution to the problem is not acceptable here. We'll see what they say.


(This post was edited by gowlerk on Feb 1, 2013, 12:00 PM)


mototryph1  (A 64367)

Feb 1, 2013, 12:03 PM
Post #10 of 186 (10710 views)
Shortcut
Re: [dontlikemustard] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
so now for the next 4 years i need to make sure my cypres is functioning properly. i still check it before every jump but come on, really?

i paid the extra bucks for this unit because they claim to be extremely reliable...

they should fix this issue on their own dime.

Agreed, I paid the extra for a cypres thinking problems like this could be avoided. I check my shit every jump anyway, so its not that bad. What concerns me are other "changes" we may not be aware of and the problems they might cause. I know if I owned a company like this I would feel morally obligated to fix this for FREE, sand in a timely manner.


EOCS  (C License)

Feb 1, 2013, 12:06 PM
Post #11 of 186 (10699 views)
Shortcut
Re: [avgjoe] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

Just bought a cypres new made in nov/2012 a week ago
.. needless to say im not happy. have to wait 4 years for update.....


(This post was edited by EOCS on Feb 1, 2013, 12:06 PM)


EOCS  (C License)

Feb 1, 2013, 12:13 PM
Post #12 of 186 (10680 views)
Shortcut
Re: [skybytch] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
Therefore check before each jump is required, by pressing the button to confirm the LED flashes. [Very inconvenient!]

Seriously? It's inconvenient to check your gear before you put it on? If you do a complete gear check that includes lifting the reserve flap to check the pin (like we teach students to do), it will take what, three seconds longer to check the AAD? Wow, that's asking an awful lot of you. How do you handle the inconvenience and time involved in turning it on in the morning?

At least this time the static turns it off instead of making it fire like the Cypres 1 did (who remembers anti static sleeves?). Much rather that it was off when I thought it was on than firing when I don't want it to. When it's off, it can't kill me.

Sorry but the fact that it appears to be working correctly unless you check for it to be actually hung up is not a solution. if it was look at your cypres before putting on your rig and it said ERROR then it might be at the very most understandable as a problem and have to be sent in for service. The fact that it hangs and appears normal and working is unacceptable. I believe in and do a full gear check before each jump, regardless this is not a solution, this is a work around..... Saying this is fine because its better then a past problem does not mean its not a problem.

This should be fixed for free as soon as we send them in, not at the next service interval.


Maksimsf  (B 37743)

Feb 1, 2013, 12:34 PM
Post #13 of 186 (10631 views)
Shortcut
Re: [EOCS] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

That is kind of sad. I already set my mind on the brand new cypress, but good thing I didn't click "check out" button just yet.


gowlerk  (C 3196)

Feb 1, 2013, 12:35 PM
Post #14 of 186 (10626 views)
Shortcut
Re: [EOCS] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
This should be fixed for free as soon as we send them in, not at the next service interval.

Absolutely. If it can fail before you board why can't it fail after you board?


Maksimsf  (B 37743)

Feb 1, 2013, 12:57 PM
Post #15 of 186 (10586 views)
Shortcut
Re: [gowlerk] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Quote:
This should be fixed for free as soon as we send them in, not at the next service interval.

Absolutely. If it can fail before you board why can't it fail after you board?

+1 Unsure


julio_gyn  (A 705)

Feb 1, 2013, 1:18 PM
Post #16 of 186 (10540 views)
Shortcut
Re: [avgjoe] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

I think this is the holly crap moment....


DiverMike  (C 40024)

Feb 1, 2013, 1:25 PM
Post #17 of 186 (10515 views)
Shortcut
Re: [julio_gyn] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

Thank goodness I have an Argus Shocked

(Never thought I would ever say that in a CYPRES thread.)


Premier PhreeZone  (D License)
Moderator
Feb 1, 2013, 1:26 PM
Post #18 of 186 (10510 views)
Shortcut
Re: [avgjoe] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

All units that are shipping from Airtec now (and I understand none have shipped for several weeks) should be addressed so new units are clear of the issue.

I would suggest waiting a few days to see if Airtec and/or SSK can expand on some of the questions that have been posed to them to get additional clarification on this. Please contact Airtec or SSK directly to get information on the unit that you are jumping to see what the best options are.


Henry7

Feb 1, 2013, 1:35 PM
Post #19 of 186 (10482 views)
Shortcut
Re: [DiverMike] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

Two questions:

First, this is already starting to be brought up, but how does a gear check ensure proper performance after a gear check and through the completion of each jump? Can't the same failure potentially happen on board the plane?

Second, the service bulletin states: "In addition, a recent activation, after the rig had been placed on the packing mat, has been linked to this phenomenon." Doesn't this mean that the cypress randomly fired? If that is the case, this is an even bigger issue then the unit not functioning.

If either is the case, its hard to justify the required action or solution as adequate.


DvK  (B License)

Feb 1, 2013, 1:36 PM
Post #20 of 186 (10482 views)
Shortcut
Re: [avgjoe] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

I'd like to know about this "activation on the mat"

Does anyone have any info on that? Why did the unit fire? Could it have fired later on as well? What about the carpets used in various aircraft? Could I contribute to this problem when sliding over the carpet towards the door on a day with very dry air?


Premier DSE  (D 29060)

Feb 1, 2013, 1:43 PM
Post #21 of 186 (10454 views)
Shortcut
Re: [PhreeZone] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
All units that are shipping from Airtec now (and I understand none have shipped for several weeks) should be addressed so new units are clear of the issue.

I would suggest waiting a few days to see if Airtec and/or SSK can expand on some of the questions that have been posed to them to get additional clarification on this. Please contact Airtec or SSK directly to get information on the unit that you are jumping to see what the best options are.


Having two school units in at SSK right now, I'm wondering if they'll do the repair while it's in for the 4 year? Also wondering if it will delay return.

So..if you bought a new unit, either send in now for 'update' and spend how much?
Or, check every jump for the next four years?


pchapman  (D 1014)

Feb 1, 2013, 1:48 PM
Post #22 of 186 (10430 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Henry7] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

I'm guessing that due to the nature of the fault, if the Cypres fails, it'll do so on the carpet when exposed to static but is unlikely to in the airplane after your final check. It'll lock up or fire on the carpet, not after.

So the failure won't be completely random in time and location.

Not a big consolation but it is something.


EOCS  (C License)

Feb 1, 2013, 1:51 PM
Post #23 of 186 (10421 views)
Shortcut
Re: [DSE] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
All units that are shipping from Airtec now (and I understand none have shipped for several weeks) should be addressed so new units are clear of the issue.

I would suggest waiting a few days to see if Airtec and/or SSK can expand on some of the questions that have been posed to them to get additional clarification on this. Please contact Airtec or SSK directly to get information on the unit that you are jumping to see what the best options are.


Having two school units in at SSK right now, I'm wondering if they'll do the repair while it's in for the 4 year? Also wondering if it will delay return.

So..if you bought a new unit, either send in now for 'update' and spend how much?
Or, check every jump for the next four years?

Im also curious of this part, for those that have older then this years cypres 2 i would see this as a send your unit in and have it checked because we found a problem for free case, after all its Guaranteed for 12.5 Years. Mines 3 months old.... Actually its not even in my rig yet but still in the sealed bag it came in :D

Will see what they say, but since they actually have a fix for it i hope they do the right thing.


gzimmermann  (D 31852)

Feb 1, 2013, 2:03 PM
Post #24 of 186 (10393 views)
Shortcut
Re: [DSE] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Or, check every jump for the next four years?

Very good example of worst communication scenario here. Airtec, you really screwed up this one! There were 3 AAD manufacturers until recently, one dropped out. Two to go. I have read probably everything available since the bulletin yesterday but I still cannot stop to shake my head. Either you sold a not so reliable product for years and nobody knew or you did the worst communication and risk mitigation job I can only imagine... This was what the trust in your brand was built upon and we all invested money into it. It will never be like that from now on, no matter what you do!


(This post was edited by gzimmermann on Feb 1, 2013, 2:21 PM)


captain1976  (D 7183)

Feb 1, 2013, 2:27 PM
Post #25 of 186 (10327 views)
Shortcut
Re: [avgjoe] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

I was having the same issues with my Cypress I.

In addition, it turned itself off about 5 times in 1 month last July so I think the same problem runs deeper than their bulletin states.

Went with the Vigil because I got sick of the never-ending broken promises of delivery dates in addition to the turning-off issue


(This post was edited by captain1976 on Feb 1, 2013, 2:33 PM)


EOCS  (C License)

Feb 1, 2013, 2:31 PM
Post #26 of 186 (2816 views)
Shortcut
Re: [gzimmermann] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
Or, check every jump for the next four years?

Very good example of worst communication scenario here. Airtec, you really screwed up this one! There were 3 AAD manufacturers until recently, one dropped out. Two to go. I have read probably everything available since the bulletin yesterday but I still cannot stop to shake my head. Either you sold a not so reliable product for years and nobody knew or you did the worst communication and risk mitigation job I can only imagine... This was what the trust in your brand was built upon and we all invested money into it. It will never be like that from now on, no matter what you do!

I personally disagree here. If airtec does what they should and effectively recalls the aads to be fixed then im ok with that. and it will justify one of fhe main reasons i bought it.what i have a problem with is being stuck with a known defective product that should be guarenteed aginst just such defects.


gzimmermann  (D 31852)

Feb 1, 2013, 2:56 PM
Post #27 of 186 (2787 views)
Shortcut
Re: [EOCS] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
In reply to:
Or, check every jump for the next four years?

Very good example of worst communication scenario here. Airtec, you really screwed up this one! There were 3 AAD manufacturers until recently, one dropped out. Two to go. I have read probably everything available since the bulletin yesterday but I still cannot stop to shake my head. Either you sold a not so reliable product for years and nobody knew or you did the worst communication and risk mitigation job I can only imagine... This was what the trust in your brand was built upon and we all invested money into it. It will never be like that from now on, no matter what you do!

I personally disagree here. If airtec does what they should and effectively recalls the aads to be fixed then im ok with that. and it will justify one of fhe main reasons i bought it.what i have a problem with is being stuck with a known defective product that should be guarenteed aginst just such defects.[/reply]

..and this is a lot of my point too: I used to jump an Aerodyne Icon rig with Skyhook. One day two years ago I got a call from my rigger: Service bulletin, send it in or you are grounded. Which I did, mod done, paperwork done and nobody really cared at the DZs I jumped right afterwards. I sold it and hope that the new owner did not have any problems afterwards. Since AADs are mandatory at many DZs I wonder how they would check the "reset after every jump" of thousands of Cypres2 manufactured after 09 now. Not that I have considered my AAD as last resort at anytime, which you never should. My Neptune also shows "under canopy since 12500ft" usually when I do wingsuit jumps. The AAD is a reserve device we should not rely on, unlike the reserve parachute and EPs. However...


SStewart  (D 10405)

Feb 1, 2013, 3:21 PM
Post #28 of 186 (2752 views)
Shortcut
Re: [gzimmermann] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

Airtech needs to man up and recall these units. Test them, fix the problem, and return them to service.

Anything less is not acceptable.


Southern_Man  (C License)

Feb 1, 2013, 5:00 PM
Post #29 of 186 (2662 views)
Shortcut
Re: [DvK] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
I'd like to know about this "activation on the mat"

Does anyone have any info on that? Why did the unit fire? Could it have fired later on as well? What about the carpets used in various aircraft? Could I contribute to this problem when sliding over the carpet towards the door on a day with very dry air?

I'll tell what I heard, but it is at least 3rd hand, so I don't guarantee anything about the information. A low pass at the boogie on one of the cloudy days (which may mean extra static electricity in the air). Normal deployment, everything about the jump and landing were fine (no swooping, docile canopy, Sabre II 190 loaded ~1:1 I believe). Walked back in, placed the rig on the packing mat. At some point between placing it on the mat and it being packed the pilot chute launched. It was not immediately clear at what point the Cypres fired, as nobody heard the pop, apparently. This was a 04/2012 unit, I believe.

That's all I know. Except I'll reiterate what I said above, which is that according to the Cypres PIA document the Cypres was tested to be shielded from ESD up to 25KV (which is considerably above what you could get environmentally). Apparently when they changed the component they did not redo all the engineering tests or didn't catch it. It is not knowable at this point what the amount of ESD was required to fire the unit, so it would be pure speculation on whether it would be able to be fired from the carpet in airplane, etc.


dpreguy  (D 835)

Feb 1, 2013, 6:10 PM
Post #30 of 186 (2584 views)
Shortcut
Re: [avgjoe] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

OK all.

I'm not getting the test part. press the usual button and if it flashes red it is OK? That much is simple, but dang it, wouldn't it always flash the first time, and do so three times to turn it on?

Or is the Service Bulletin direction only to apply after it has has been turned on and THEN hit the button once and see the flash before each jump? I doesn't actually say that, but I guess that's what they mean?


dpreguy  (D 835)

Feb 1, 2013, 6:13 PM
Post #31 of 186 (2576 views)
Shortcut
Re: [dpreguy] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

OK I'll walk the walk of shame here. Reread it and it does say ("after it is turned on") I guess I should have had it in front of me and read it more carefully.


gowlerk  (C 3196)

Feb 1, 2013, 6:21 PM
Post #32 of 186 (2565 views)
Shortcut
Re: [avgjoe] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

It will be interesting to see the reaction to this in the "Nanny" states with National organizations that like to ground things in a hurry. EU countries and Australia come to mind. Some of them were pretty quick to jump on the Argus. I'm glad the CSPA T&S committee has not been able to ram through a mandatory AAD rule yet.


hcsvader  (E 2952)

Feb 1, 2013, 8:27 PM
Post #33 of 186 (2500 views)
Shortcut
Re: [avgjoe] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

Oh no, now people will have to check thier gear before every jump...


Like your meant toUnimpressed


Divalent  (C 40494)

Feb 1, 2013, 8:27 PM
Post #34 of 186 (2498 views)
Shortcut
Re: [avgjoe] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Action to be taken:
Prior to each jump, during your pre-boarding equipment check (after the CYPRES has been switched on), perform the following system test: {snip} ...

In reply to:
If the unit is not in working condition, failure to perform this procedure prior to each jump will result in an increased risk to the user.

What does this mean, exactly? It seems to say that if the unit is not working, the risk will be lower *IF* you do the procedure, compared to if you don't do the procedure. Why is that?

Does the procedure make the defective unit less likely to misfire (like, it helps it recover temporarily; kind of a "reboot")? Or do they mean it will be safer because you will now know the unit is no longer functional, and so you either won't jump, or you will turn it off before you jump?


nigel99  (D 1)

Feb 1, 2013, 8:56 PM
Post #35 of 186 (2478 views)
Shortcut
Re: [mototryph1] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
so now for the next 4 years i need to make sure my cypres is functioning properly. i still check it before every jump but come on, really?

i paid the extra bucks for this unit because they claim to be extremely reliable...

they should fix this issue on their own dime.

Agreed, I paid the extra for a cypres thinking problems like this could be avoided. I check my shit every jump anyway, so its not that bad. What concerns me are other "changes" we may not be aware of and the problems they might cause. I know if I owned a company like this I would feel morally obligated to fix this for FREE, sand in a timely manner.

It can never be avoided, just minimised. It is why I get so pissed off on the Vigil hate threads. ALL AAD's can fail, in reality Cypres is probably the most reliable, but it will NEVER be 100%.


Skydivesg  (D 10938)

Feb 1, 2013, 9:00 PM
Post #36 of 186 (2470 views)
Shortcut
Re: [PhreeZone] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
All units that are shipping from Airtec now (and I understand none have shipped for several weeks) should be addressed so new units are clear of the issue.

I would suggest waiting a few days to see if Airtec and/or SSK can expand on some of the questions that have been posed to them to get additional clarification on this. Please contact Airtec or SSK directly to get information on the unit that you are jumping to see what the best options are.

It will be interesting to see what the big gear stores do with the stock they have on the shelves.

Will they send it all back and wait for new product assuming Cypres allows that or just sell it until it's gone.

Anyone working for those stores please chime in.

.Be the canopy pilot you want that other guy to be.
.


nigel99  (D 1)

Feb 1, 2013, 9:02 PM
Post #37 of 186 (2466 views)
Shortcut
Re: [pchapman] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
I'm guessing that due to the nature of the fault, if the Cypres fails, it'll do so on the carpet when exposed to static but is unlikely to in the airplane after your final check. It'll lock up or fire on the carpet, not after.

So the failure won't be completely random in time and location.

Not a big consolation but it is something.

I don't know. Being cramped in a tight aircraft with people rubbing nylon against you is quite a good environment for ESD.Unsure


RIGGER  (D 7933)

Feb 1, 2013, 10:07 PM
Post #38 of 186 (2439 views)
Shortcut
Re: [dontlikemustard] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

Smile Hi

I agree but you can send it at No Charge to SSK / Airtec & fix it.

We have a DZ to take care on that & so other DZ's around the world.

Cheers


RIGGER  (D 7933)

Feb 1, 2013, 10:30 PM
Post #39 of 186 (2428 views)
Shortcut
Re: [dthames] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

Smile Hi

I agree, each CYPRES2 AAD of any mode & from any mfg. date must be checked as well.

Cheers


(This post was edited by RIGGER on Feb 1, 2013, 11:23 PM)


RIGGER  (D 7933)

Feb 1, 2013, 11:30 PM
Post #40 of 186 (2398 views)
Shortcut
Re: [nigel99] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

Smile Hi

The test provided by Airtec should insure that any Cypres2 with an error will be catch on the gorund before jumping it - it says "before each jump" = could be good on 1st jump & fail on the 2nd jump.

There is not a formula for accurate data when or where it could happaned - it is rare but could happan at any time with any Cypres2 unit.

IMO, ALL CYPRES2 AAD'S OF ANY MODE & DATE OF MFG. MUST BE TESTED THE SAME BEFORE EACH JUMP.

Cheers


(This post was edited by RIGGER on Feb 1, 2013, 11:33 PM)


aeroflyer  (C License)

Feb 2, 2013, 12:21 AM
Post #41 of 186 (2369 views)
Shortcut
Re: [RIGGER] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

So what do you do if you test your cypress by the button push and it doesn't blink? Reset it? Is it safe? Take it out and jump without?

I hate to think that I've been jumping three years with a possibly faulty Cypress. Especially where I'm jumping now it's dry with tons of static.

C'mon Airtec, stand up and volunteer to fix our units. If this problem is commonplace I see it being real bad for students renting gear.. they might not all know.


iobject

Feb 2, 2013, 2:16 AM
Post #42 of 186 (2303 views)
Shortcut
Re: [aeroflyer] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
So what do you do if you test your cypress by the button push and it doesn't blink? Reset it? Is it safe? Take it out and jump without?

If it's not blinking it means that it's not responding. Then it can't be turned off, can it?


coticj  (D License)

Feb 2, 2013, 2:57 AM
Post #43 of 186 (2268 views)
Shortcut
Re: [iobject] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

What about the units that were manufactured before 09, but were sent back for service say last year? Is it now also affected or?


Premier skydiverek  (C 41769)

Feb 2, 2013, 3:01 AM
Post #44 of 186 (2264 views)
Shortcut
Re: [RIGGER] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Smile Hi

I agree but you can send it at No Charge to SSK / Airtec & fix it.

They do not advertise that in their bulletin.


djar

Feb 2, 2013, 3:14 AM
Post #45 of 186 (2254 views)
Shortcut
Re: [iobject] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:

If it's not blinking it means that it's not responding. Then it can't be turned off, can it?

This would suggest that a failed unit will be detected by the user the next time he tries to turn it on, as it will still be on and not reacting when given the "startup sequence". If this is the case, every occurrence should be known by airtec, and they could provide the exact number off how many units are effected, or am i wrong?


RIGGER  (D 7933)

Feb 2, 2013, 4:59 AM
Post #46 of 186 (2202 views)
Shortcut
Re: [aeroflyer] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

Smile Hi

I would take it out & send to Airtec.

Cheers


(This post was edited by RIGGER on Feb 2, 2013, 5:00 AM)


iobject

Feb 2, 2013, 6:57 AM
Post #47 of 186 (2151 views)
Shortcut
Re: [djar] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:

If it's not blinking it means that it's not responding. Then it can't be turned off, can it?

This would suggest that a failed unit will be detected by the user the next time he tries to turn it on, as it will still be on and not reacting when given the "startup sequence". If this is the case, every occurrence should be known by airtec, and they could provide the exact number off how many units are effected, or am i wrong?

Except if the unit shuts down after 14 hours and appears to be OK next morning.


ChrisD  (No License)

Feb 2, 2013, 9:54 AM
Post #48 of 186 (2018 views)
Shortcut
Re: [PhreeZone] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
All units that are shipping from Airtec now (and I understand none have shipped for several weeks) should be addressed so new units are clear of the issue.

I would suggest waiting a few days to see if Airtec and/or SSK can expand on some of the questions that have been posed to them to get additional clarification on this. Please contact Airtec or SSK directly to get information on the unit that you are jumping to see what the best options are.

I can appreciate anyone’s desire to give a wonderful manufacturer a little lee way to see how and in what fashion they will ultimately approach/handle this issue.

The obvious time-bomb is however the fact that the unit, when you look at it, it appears ok! I believe the quote was "[]...it will have a... 0 on the display...[]." In other words it will appear NORMAL, but in reality it doesn’t work.

Waiting for the manufacturer to respond under these circumstances in quite simply unacceptable! While I can understand some comments about checking your AAD every jump, and comments like "a little [] inconvenience..." may at first sound plausible they are nevertheless unacceptable.

It is unfortunate that this has happened to this company because it sounds like it was beyond their control. Their response to their customers however is not beyond their control and their response should be an immediate recall of all defective units. Any response short of recalling defective equipment is a slap in every one of their customers faces! In a very real sense they have just indicated what their position is by electing to NOT service all existing units to the best of their abilities!

Do I give SSK any leeway for informing the general public about this issue in the first place? No not really, because responsibility can be a deal breaker and this issue is their responsibility, not ours! You have seen their response. My response is to remove the unit from any rig I have control over until they fix their problem at their cost!
C


Lineset

Feb 2, 2013, 10:59 AM
Post #49 of 186 (1979 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ChrisD] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

If everyone handed in their AAD,s for a check what do you think the turn around time would be would be?If you live in a country where you have to have a AAD i bet you could right off 2013 season. I will be doing the check before every jump. What else can we do apart from staying on the ground


IanHarrop  (C 1152)

Feb 2, 2013, 11:47 AM
Post #50 of 186 (1947 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Lineset] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
If everyone handed in their AAD,s for a check what do you think the turn around time would be would be?.

And I'll bet the sport market is probably tiny compared to the military market.

If so, I suggest that they would recall military units first. Gotta keep those gov't customers happy Crazy


Premier skydiverek  (C 41769)

Feb 2, 2013, 12:26 PM
Post #51 of 186 (3005 views)
Shortcut
Re: [IanHarrop] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

Airtec manufacturer 8000 Cypreses PER YEAR, so we are talking about over 20,000 AADs.


DivingWombat  (B License)

Feb 2, 2013, 2:34 PM
Post #52 of 186 (2921 views)
Shortcut
Re: [skydiverek] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

After a long conversation with a DZO, telling me he had issues with every of his 10 vigil 2, I decided to change my order and went for a cypres 2. It seems that every AAD manufaturer has its problems. Pirate

I am mostly concerned about a possible misfire.

I hate the idea to pop a recently packed reserve, send the unit back, wait and pay the additional packjob.


williammonk

Feb 2, 2013, 7:23 PM
Post #53 of 186 (2804 views)
Shortcut
Re: [hcsvader] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Oh no, now people will have to check thier gear before every jump...


Like your meant toUnimpressed

I have never had a problem checking my gear before each jump, but what really worries me here is the unit failing as you board and move about inside the plane.

Some others mentioned that static should only be a concern on the packing mat, but how many other people have been static shocked by their car at the gas station? It happens. In the case of aircraft, it's enough of an issue that any aircraft being fueled must be grounded prior to fueling operations.

Another big concern of mine is a reserve firing inside the aircraft.

I'm sure some will argue that there are safeguards in place, but malfunctioning hardware / software is not always predictable in nature. Just ask the satellite guys.Wink

AirTec has got to recall these units. It has got to be a nightmare for management, but at this point (as far as I'm concerned) they've got a potentially dangerous product out there.


but that might just be me...

William.


RIGGER  (D 7933)

Feb 2, 2013, 9:31 PM
Post #54 of 186 (2753 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ChrisD] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

Smile Hi

Well said but the tset should cover up & find a "Dead" Cypres 2 in the fre-flight checks.

The issue is that the fix will take time = many rigs will be grounded including Tandems, Students, Sports & Military.

Frown My concren is if a skydiver / TI / AFF I will forget to run the test before a specific jump or in between jumps form any reason like "back to back" or whatever & the Cypres 2 in that specific jump will be "No Active" - in case of an issue who will "cover up" ? liability issues ?

All factors should be considered by the users, "Public Safety" (Tandems, AFF students, Rental rigs)

The most important - if you move on with SB create a "Check Up" control sysetm for Tandems, AFF & Rental rigs. Skydivers must be informed & move to "do it yourself" - maybe some big notes at the DZ's & in the packing & boarding area.

Think about it.

Cheers


nigel99  (D 1)

Feb 3, 2013, 12:00 AM
Post #55 of 186 (2711 views)
Shortcut
Re: [RIGGER] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

I just want to point out to the people saying check your gear, people should have been checking their display already. BUT this service bulletin requires an extra step - you now need to PRESS the button before EVERY jump.

this service bulletin affects roughly half of the units at our dz according to the local rigger. I wonder how long people will continue to press the button before complacency kicks in?


RIGGER  (D 7933)

Feb 3, 2013, 4:59 AM
Post #56 of 186 (2576 views)
Shortcut
Re: [RIGGER] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
SmileHi

Well said but the tset should cover up & find a "Dead" Cypres 2 in the pre-flight checks.

The issue is that the fix will take time = many rigs will be grounded including Tandems, Students, Sports & Military.

FrownMy concren is if a skydiver / TI / AFF I will forget to run the test before a specific jump or in between jumps from any reason like "back to back" or whatever & the Cypres 2 in that specific jump will be "No Active" - in case of an issue who will "cover up" ? liability issues ?

All factors should be considered by the users, "Public Safety" (Tandems, AFF students, Rental rigs)

The most important - if you move on with SB create a "Check Up" control sysetm for Tandems, AFF & Rental rigs. Skydivers must be informed & move to "do it yourself" - maybe some big notes at the DZ's & in the packing & boarding area.

Think about it.

Cheers

I correct some typo.

Cheers


sundevil777  (D License)

Feb 4, 2013, 1:10 AM
Post #57 of 186 (2247 views)
Shortcut
Re: [williammonk] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
what really worries me here is the unit failing as you board and move about inside the plane.

Some rigs are designed to allow easy access to the control unit under the reserve flap. If you wanted, you could arrange a check to be done before jump run. It would of course be more difficult for rigs with the control unit on the back pad, although loosening the chest strap might be practical to allow access.


(This post was edited by sundevil777 on Feb 4, 2013, 1:13 AM)


Premier skydiverek  (C 41769)

Feb 4, 2013, 1:53 AM
Post #58 of 186 (2223 views)
Shortcut
Re: [avgjoe] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

From Airtec Cypres website:

"Our Goal: 100% Reliability and 100% Safety
Guaranteed for 12.5 Years.

Benefit from our comprehensive experience and the competence of the unprecedented leader of modern electronic opening devices, the CYPRES. Only the original CYPRES quality guarantees the safety you are looking for - for 12.5 years. This also includes our unique and free worldwide repair services (with the exception of shipping), as long as there are no signs of intentional damage, and maintenance has been completed properly within the recommended intervals.

CYPRES - maximum Reliability that you can trust."

Source: http://cypres.cc/...emid=103&lang=en

 


(This post was edited by skydiverek on Feb 4, 2013, 1:58 AM)


Premier skydiverek  (C 41769)

Feb 4, 2013, 3:42 AM
Post #59 of 186 (2168 views)
Shortcut
Re: [skydiverek] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

New SB FAQs:

http://www.cypres-usa.com/SB-FAQ/


bartr  (C License)

Feb 4, 2013, 12:36 PM
Post #60 of 186 (1945 views)
Shortcut
Re: Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

I'm a bit confused... the german update says something a little bit different... Or not? ...use google translate for the first paragraph:

There have been recent incidents that some Cypres 2 devices off devices not after 14 hours. In this case, they show zero, but do not work and do not respond well to a button click. Moreover, there was a case of activation of a packing sheet, which is not allocated to this phenomenon.
Intensive investigations indicate that this (cause much static) with low humidity and the packing to do on non-conductive surfaces has. Container as well as caps are made of nylon and create friction during movement and may enormously high voltages. A floor covering of synthetic fiber favors the additional very strong.
The number of incidents that can lead to this behavior, however, is very, very low.


http://www.myskydive.de/...PCA_31012013_deu.pdf


(This post was edited by bartr on Feb 4, 2013, 12:38 PM)


johnjds  (D 5703)

Feb 4, 2013, 1:41 PM
Post #61 of 186 (1883 views)
Shortcut
Re: [avgjoe] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

If cypress is such a good company, they would recall every unit efected by this SB.


after all, they helped put argus out of buzz. Note, back up your produce.
john

In reply to:
de.


Ron

Feb 4, 2013, 1:46 PM
Post #62 of 186 (1879 views)
Shortcut
Re: [skybytch] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
Seriously? It's inconvenient to check your gear before you put it on?

12-14 team jumps in a day.... Yes, having to change my routine that I have had for 6k jumps to make up for a device that was supposed to be "set and forgotten" IS a big deal.

Quote:
At least this time the static turns it off instead of making it fire like the Cypres 1 did

Then there is also nothing to prevent it from turning off AFTER I did the prejump check..... Static buildup does not just happen on packing mats.

And it seems you didn't read the SB: "In addition, a recent activation, after the rig had been placed on the packing mat, has been linked to this phenomenon."


Suha

Feb 4, 2013, 2:11 PM
Post #63 of 186 (1843 views)
Shortcut
Re: [bartr] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
I'm a bit confused... the german update says something a little bit different... Or not? ...use google translate for the first paragraph:

[..] Moreover, there was a case of activation of a packing sheet, which is not allocated to this phenomenon. [..]

This part has been translated wrong. In german it clearly states, that the activation is allocated to this "phenomenon"...


captain1976  (D 7183)

Feb 4, 2013, 2:36 PM
Post #64 of 186 (1810 views)
Shortcut
Re: [bartr] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
I'm a bit confused... the german update says something a little bit different... Or not? ...use google translate for the first paragraph:

There have been recent incidents that some Cypres 2 devices off devices not after 14 hours. In this case, they show zero, but do not work and do not respond well to a button click. Moreover, there was a case of activation of a packing sheet, which is not allocated to this phenomenon.
Intensive investigations indicate that this (cause much static) with low humidity and the packing to do on non-conductive surfaces has. Container as well as caps are made of nylon and create friction during movement and may enormously high voltages. A floor covering of synthetic fiber favors the additional very strong.
The number of incidents that can lead to this behavior, however, is very, very low.


http://www.myskydive.de/...PCA_31012013_deu.pdf


These service bulletins like aircraft SB's need to be translated by people fluent in both languages before they are released; that means the grammar too.

Otherwise you get a bunch of twisted shit like in the report you shared with us.


(This post was edited by captain1976 on Feb 4, 2013, 2:38 PM)


nigel99  (D 1)

Feb 4, 2013, 5:52 PM
Post #65 of 186 (1735 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Ron] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Quote:
Seriously? It's inconvenient to check your gear before you put it on?

12-14 team jumps in a day.... Yes, having to change my routine that I have had for 6k jumps to make up for a device that was supposed to be "set and forgotten" IS a big deal.

Quote:
At least this time the static turns it off instead of making it fire like the Cypres 1 did

Then there is also nothing to prevent it from turning off AFTER I did the prejump check..... Static buildup does not just happen on packing mats.

And it seems you didn't read the SB: "In addition, a recent activation, after the rig had been placed on the packing mat, has been linked to this phenomenon."

I think it is pretty enlightening how many people simply do not understand the gravity of the situation. You've got a good point, after 6000 jumps, you have to learn a new procedure.


piisfish

Feb 5, 2013, 1:07 AM
Post #66 of 186 (1641 views)
Shortcut
Re: [captain1976] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
These service bulletins like aircraft SB's need to be translated by people fluent in both languages before they are released; that means the grammar too.

Otherwise you get a bunch of twisted shit like in the report you shared with us.
or they could publish it in german only


hcsvader  (E 2952)

Feb 5, 2013, 5:31 AM
Post #67 of 186 (1553 views)
Shortcut
Re: [nigel99] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
Quote:
Seriously? It's inconvenient to check your gear before you put it on?

12-14 team jumps in a day.... Yes, having to change my routine that I have had for 6k jumps to make up for a device that was supposed to be "set and forgotten" IS a big deal.

Quote:
At least this time the static turns it off instead of making it fire like the Cypres 1 did

Then there is also nothing to prevent it from turning off AFTER I did the prejump check..... Static buildup does not just happen on packing mats.

And it seems you didn't read the SB: "In addition, a recent activation, after the rig had been placed on the packing mat, has been linked to this phenomenon."

I think it is pretty enlightening how many people simply do not understand the gravity of the situation. You've got a good point, after 6000 jumps, you have to learn a new procedure.

Here's a fun bit of information for those of you that are worried about your unit becoming inoperable and you not being aware of it.

Did you know that once you turn on your cypres unit and it goes thru it's checks, you can disconnect the cutter and no error message or any indication that the unit will not work will appear.
So if the cables connected to cutter were to be broken during a rough landing, or damaged during installation (both have happened) you would have no way of knowing that your cutter is not going to function until you turn the unit on again and it runs thru the self checks.

The "set it and forget it" attitude towards AADs is BS and has been for quite some time. Batteries die, equipment gets damaged, operator error and alien interference can effect how our gear works.

You can check your AAD on the ground before each jump, and in most rigs even in the plane before exit.

Sure a lot of people are pissed off about this issue with the cypres unit but hopefully a positive outcome of this will be that people learn to do a full gear check before each jump, and better understand how their gear works.


Nelyubin  (D 18617)

Feb 5, 2013, 5:53 AM
Post #68 of 186 (1536 views)
Shortcut
Re: [hcsvader] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

Yes. You name known to many facts.
But I think that they are contrary to the marketing policy and manuals airtek. Wink


hcsvader  (E 2952)

Feb 5, 2013, 6:27 AM
Post #69 of 186 (1503 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Nelyubin] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

From the cypres website
Quote:
Benefit from our comprehensive experience and the competence of the unprecedented leader of modern electronic opening devices, the CYPRES. Only the original CYPRES quality guarantees the safety you are looking for - for 12.5 years. This also includes our unique and free worldwide repair services (with the exception of shipping), as long as there are no signs of intentional damage, and maintenance has been completed properly within the recommended intervals.

CYPRES - maximum Reliability that you can trust.

Yup they guarantee their product, and they even say in the SB that if you have an effected unit that you will get a replacement. So as long as you do the check and your unit still works... Your unit still works.


Nelyubin  (D 18617)

Feb 5, 2013, 7:29 AM
Post #70 of 186 (1451 views)
Shortcut
Re: [hcsvader] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

:)
CYPRES 2 User's Guide English 1-2012
Quote:
CYPRES, which is the acronym of „CYbernetic
Parachute RElease System“, is an automatic activation
device which meets all needs, requirements,
and desires of today‘s skydivers. Once it
is installed, you can‘t hear it, you can‘t feel it and
you can‘t see it.
The operation is easy: If you jump from your DZ
into your DZ just switch it on prior to the first
jump of the day and then forget about it.* It is not
necessary to switch it off, because CYPRES will
do this itself.


hcsvader  (E 2952)

Feb 5, 2013, 7:40 AM
Post #71 of 186 (1442 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Nelyubin] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

And that's since been updated via the SB Wink


neandertal  (D 26131)

Feb 5, 2013, 12:18 PM
Post #72 of 186 (1329 views)
Shortcut
Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

I always recommended Cypres to my friends because of my satisfaction with their quality and customer service. So, yesterday I called SSK and to my dismay, they told me that Airtec will not take my units until they are due to 4 years maintenance. I offered to pay for the repair. Same answer. From now on my answer to friends will be like: Whatever bro, buy the cheap one and spend the change in beer.


IanHarrop  (C 1152)

Feb 5, 2013, 1:15 PM
Post #73 of 186 (1293 views)
Shortcut
Re: [neandertal] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
I always recommended Cypres to my friends because of my satisfaction with their quality and customer service. So, yesterday I called SSK and to my dismay, they told me that Airtec will not take my units until they are due to 4 years maintenance. I offered to pay for the repair. Same answer. From now on my answer to friends will be like: Whatever bro, buy the cheap one and spend the change in beer.

+1 they seem to indicate that there may a another option sometime in the future, but I am not holding breath... not when there is something on the order of 32,000 units to inspect.

"4) My CYPRES is in the affected date range but is still responding, can I send it in for the update now?
No, at this time please do not send in a CYPRES that does NOT fail the pre-boarding test unless it is time for the 4-year maintenance. We are looking into other possibilities to deal with the affected units and ask that you to be patient with us while we work out the best solution to minimize turn-around time. As you can imagine, it would be impossible to deal with all units at once as there is only a certain amount of capacity available both at SSK in the US and Airtec in Germany ."

http://www.cypres-usa.com/SB-FAQ/


Ron

Feb 5, 2013, 1:22 PM
Post #74 of 186 (1283 views)
Shortcut
Re: [nigel99] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
I think it is pretty enlightening how many people simply do not understand the gravity of the situation. You've got a good point, after 6000 jumps, you have to learn a new procedure.

I think the bigger issue is they know there is a problem and that issue has led to a firing on the ground.... But they *claim* it will not happen in the plane or on exit or in freefall.... But they USED to claim it would not fire on the ground either.

Frankly, their solution is crap.


Lineset

Feb 5, 2013, 1:45 PM
Post #75 of 186 (1260 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Ron] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

Do tell us your solution then.


Ron

Feb 5, 2013, 2:26 PM
Post #76 of 186 (2278 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Lineset] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
Do tell us your solution then.

1. I am not a company that sold a product.
2. They should offer to repair them NOW and they should pay for it and the pack job.

Tylenol should be case study in how to deal with a mistake... They set the gold standard and this is nowhere close.


Skybear

Feb 5, 2013, 2:55 PM
Post #77 of 186 (2263 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Ron] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

Tylenol was a simple recall. Nobody wanted it back.

I understand your wish to get it repaired now, as I understood the wish of 31999 other people, including myself. But how shall 20 production people, all intensively trained for their job, cope with that NOW? Do you really want to wait in-line as number 27892, to get your unit back in July 2014? Get real. They were fucked up by a faulty piece of electronic that wasn't discovered although it was tested to very high standards. Now 14 out of 32000 units hung themself up, which equals 0,0004375%. Do you use condoms or does your wife/girlfriend use the pill? You should worry more about their reliability than those of the Cypres or any other AAD.


labrys  (D 29848)

Feb 5, 2013, 3:17 PM
Post #78 of 186 (2242 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Skybear] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
I understand your wish to get it repaired now, as I understood the wish of 31999 other people, including myself. But how shall 20 production people, all intensively trained for their job, cope with that NOW?

My opinion is that they should figure out how many they can cope with in a reasonable time frame like a couple of weeks and then start accepting units for upgrade in reverse order of manufacture.

That would get the newer units (the ones who have to wait the longest for repair) fixed first. It really bothers me that they're expecting their newest customers to wait the longest.


Ron

Feb 5, 2013, 3:40 PM
Post #79 of 186 (2228 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Skybear] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
I understand your wish to get it repaired now, as I understood the wish of 31999 other people, including myself. But how shall 20 production people, all intensively trained for their job, cope with that NOW? Do you really want to wait in-line as number 27892, to get your unit back in July 2014? Get real.

You 'get real'. They sold a product and a major fault has been found. Their 'solution' is to hope it does not fire in the plane like it did on the ground.

You may be happy wearing something that could misfire and kill you, you'll have to forgive me if I am not so cavalier.

Quote:
Do you use condoms or does your wife/girlfriend use the pill? You should worry more about their reliability than those of the Cypres or any other AAD

A faulty condom or the pill has no danger if killing a plane load of people.

You can be an apologist (or someone that works for them?) if you want. Me, I am disappointed and have the right to claim their service sucks.

Telling someone that they have 4 years to deal with a problem is unacceptable in any industry....


VTmotoMike08  (D 30399)

Feb 5, 2013, 3:48 PM
Post #80 of 186 (2225 views)
Shortcut
Re: [] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

From the service bulletin:
In reply to:
...is because the manufacturer of a component made a change on an internal ASIC microcircuit (which is something like a processor) to a higher level of integration.

What does "a higher level of integration" mean?


labrys  (D 29848)

Feb 5, 2013, 3:52 PM
Post #81 of 186 (2220 views)
Shortcut
Re: [VTmotoMike08] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
What does "a higher level of integration" mean?

In processors, it usually means more circuitry in the same sized or smaller package.

Edit: I have no idea if that's true in this case though.


(This post was edited by labrys on Feb 5, 2013, 3:53 PM)


f94sbu  (D 16017)

Feb 5, 2013, 4:11 PM
Post #82 of 186 (2197 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Ron] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
You 'get real'. They sold a product and a major fault has been found. Their 'solution' is to hope it does not fire in the plane like it did on the ground.

As the issue is ESD related, once the unit has locked up, it will not fire some time later. That is why they are saying that it wont fire in the plane or mid air.
When the rigg is closed, the unit is much better protected from ESD. It would require a discharge of over 50 kV for the discharge to reach the Cypres. You will be kicking and screaming in pain long before that happens.
I understand that you are frustrated that you cannot always get what you want but you really need to learn some of the basics around this issue before you claim that your world is crushing down due to this.


nigel99  (D 1)

Feb 5, 2013, 4:52 PM
Post #83 of 186 (2175 views)
Shortcut
Re: [f94sbu] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Quote:
You 'get real'. They sold a product and a major fault has been found. Their 'solution' is to hope it does not fire in the plane like it did on the ground.

As the issue is ESD related, once the unit has locked up, it will not fire some time later. That is why they are saying that it wont fire in the plane or mid air.
When the rigg is closed, the unit is much better protected from ESD. It would require a discharge of over 50 kV for the discharge to reach the Cypres. You will be kicking and screaming in pain long before that happens.
I understand that you are frustrated that you cannot always get what you want but you really need to learn some of the basics around this issue before you claim that your world is crushing down due to this.

I disagree. Firstly in many (most) instances higher level of integration on an ASIC (Application SPECIFIC integrated circuit) is done to save cost. So speculatively Airtec went to cut production costs and their testing was inadequate - leaving their customers screwed. Unless they are using ASIC for a general purpose IC, the ASIC is probably specific to them and changes would have been commissioned or approved by them. Interesting to see them blame the manufacturer.

If the issue is genuinely ESD related, and it would be interesting to know the facts on this, then it is probably in an unstable state. You can't predict HOW it will react, which is why 10% of the faulty units MISFIRED (1 in 14 units). If you've ever done ESD testing, for something like a Cypres it will be an air discharge of 8-16kV typically. If people were experiencing that level of ESD while packing we would know about it - it is not pleasant.

I feel for them, but part of selling products like this is having good follow up customer service and contingencies for a major product recall.


Ron

Feb 5, 2013, 5:23 PM
Post #84 of 186 (2164 views)
Shortcut
Re: [f94sbu] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
As the issue is ESD related, once the unit has locked up, it will not fire some time later. That is why they are saying that it wont fire in the plane or mid air.

Uh, there already was a fire in Sebastian on a packing mat of one of these units.

Quote:
When the rigg is closed, the unit is much better protected from ESD. It would require a discharge of over 50 kV for the discharge to reach the Cypres. You will be kicking and screaming in pain long before that happens.


I don't see many packers kicking and screaming in pain... But one unit has already fired on the packing mat.

Quote:
I understand that you are frustrated that you cannot always get what you want but you really need to learn some of the basics around this issue before you claim that your world is crushing down

I understand that you are making excuses... But you really need to learn some of the facts that have already been communicated and discovered before you accuse others of over reacting.


Southern_Man  (C License)

Feb 5, 2013, 6:24 PM
Post #85 of 186 (2146 views)
Shortcut
Re: [f94sbu] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
As the issue is ESD related, once the unit has locked up, it will not fire some time later. That is why they are saying that it wont fire in the plane or mid air.
When the rigg is closed, the unit is much better protected from ESD. It would require a discharge of over 50 kV for the discharge to reach the Cypres. You will be kicking and screaming in pain long before that happens.
I understand that you are frustrated that you cannot always get what you want but you really need to learn some of the basics around this issue before you claim that your world is crushing down due to this.

I am interested to know why you are claiming this. The testing CYPRES documented is only up to 25 KV. Then, best I can tell, they did not perform all the testing again when they changed the circuit.

We do not have any data on what level of ESD led to the unit discharging or the other units locking up. I also would like to hear more technical details on the fix. Without some more technical details I think it is impossible to claim the unit won't fire in the airplane or mid-air. We simply don't have the information to make that determination.

I am not very technically proficient, so I am not sure my understanding is 100% correct but I am trying to figure it out.


sundevil777  (D License)

Feb 5, 2013, 6:56 PM
Post #86 of 186 (2125 views)
Shortcut
Re: [labrys] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Quote:
I understand your wish to get it repaired now, as I understood the wish of 31999 other people, including myself. But how shall 20 production people, all intensively trained for their job, cope with that NOW?

My opinion is that they should figure out how many they can cope with in a reasonable time frame like a couple of weeks and then start accepting units for upgrade in reverse order of manufacture.

That would get the newer units (the ones who have to wait the longest for repair) fixed first. It really bothers me that they're expecting their newest customers to wait the longest.

Given that some other AAD mfgs have a warranty that is only one year, then those mfgs could be expected to tell their customers tough luck (or some version of that which is even less satisfying than Airtek's position).

I think this issue might well resolve by Airtek/SSK investing what it takes to significantly increase their repair/maintenance capacity. That capacity increase will of course take a significant amount of time. I think the only other thing they can do for their customers is to offer some money as compensation. Besides money or increasing their capacity as quickly as possible, what do people expect them to do?

I've been turning my unit off then back on between each jump for the last year. I'm really not worried, this seems pretty trivial compared to issues involving other mfgs.


(This post was edited by sundevil777 on Feb 5, 2013, 6:58 PM)


captain1976  (D 7183)

Feb 5, 2013, 7:06 PM
Post #87 of 186 (2111 views)
Shortcut
Re: [piisfish] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
These service bulletins like aircraft SB's need to be translated by people fluent in both languages before they are released; that means the grammar too.

Otherwise you get a bunch of twisted shit like in the report you shared with us.
or they could publish it in german only

English is the recognized international language in aviation and skydiving is aviation.


(This post was edited by captain1976 on Feb 5, 2013, 7:07 PM)


normiss  (D 28356)

Feb 5, 2013, 7:18 PM
Post #88 of 186 (2095 views)
Shortcut
Re: [captain1976] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

Yet in this case are there not different SB's based on the nation of sale/use of the Cypres?
That was my understanding based on what I was told anyway.
It seems this is all quite confusing.

Fix the software, find a way to get everyone updated.

Now.


Premier billvon  (D 16479)
Moderator
Feb 5, 2013, 7:46 PM
Post #89 of 186 (2075 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Ron] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

>You may be happy wearing something that could misfire and kill you, you'll have to
>forgive me if I am not so cavalier.

You don't have to be happy - or even jump with it. You can take it out and keep jumping, or not jump until you get a new one. Your choice.

>A faulty condom or the pill has no danger if killing a plane load of people.

True. But if you pulled 50% of condoms off the market for a potential problem with a few of them, then a lot of people would get sick and/or die from the resulting STD's.

Pulling a large percentage of AAD's out of the market for months has some significant negative repercussions in terms of safety. Yes, Airtec should fix them all. However, doing it all right now might just kill more people than it saves - so I can understand their reticence to do that.


Nelyubin  (D 18617)

Feb 5, 2013, 8:31 PM
Post #90 of 186 (2049 views)
Shortcut
Re: [f94sbu] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

There was another device will work on the ground. http://www.dropzone.com/...pres%20fire;#4115862
Airtek gave a strange answer technically illiterate. http://www.cypres.cc/...emid=178&lang=en
It was the instrument of 2007.


williammonk

Feb 5, 2013, 11:10 PM
Post #91 of 186 (1991 views)
Shortcut
Re: [billvon] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

>You don't have to be happy - or even jump with it. You can take it out and keep jumping, or not jump until you get a new one. Your choice.

I can not accept this point of view. When I pay almost 1500 dollars for a piece of equipment, I expect it to work as designed.
Even though some people will not find this issue as cause to worry, what about the rest of us? For airtek to expect someone
who recently purchased a cypres to wait four years for a known manufacturing defect to be corrected is ludicrous.

As a moderator and highly experienced jumper, I can't believe you would liken a life saving device to a contraceptive product.

But I'm not really concerned about my cypres failing when I need it most. What concerns me is a cypres firing on the ride to altitude.
a malfunctioning cypres bringing down a load full of jumpers due to a known defect would be a crying shame.

>As the issue is ESD related, once the unit has locked up, it will not fire some time later.

From your comment, it is obvious that you do not understand integrated circuits, or the complex microarchitectures that they compose.
In a complex electrical system (such as the processor found in the cypres) the results of an ESD are unpredictable. There are literally
millions (even billions) of wires in such a processor. Even simulating an ESD on all of these points would be a grueling challenge, and
one that would not show that a misfire is impossible. Here's a quote from an oft-quoted paper relating to ESD.

"[2000 volts can] kill electronic components or even worse damage the components to where the a chip acts erratic or fails months later."
-- Not very predictable.


nigel99, I'm sorry, but research shows that you are not correct when you state:
> If people were experiencing that level of ESD [8-16kV] while packing we would know about it - it is not pleasant.

"studies have shown that a static charge built up by scuffing shoes on a carpet can exceed 20,000 volts" (but this should bolster your point.)
I walk across carpet on the way to the plane every weekend. I'm sure I'm not the only one.

Now, for the few who like to do math problems and show some statistics that make this issue seem irrelevant, here's one for you guys.

(SkyBear)

37/9,000,000: 0.000411111111% -- An insignificant number, right?
Number of linked accidents versus number of toyotas that were recalled due to accelerator problems.

14/32000: 0.04375% -- Cypres units that have malfunctioned. (Check your math buddy)

Now by my math, a cypres malfunctioning is one hundred and seven times more likely than a toyota...

Would you like to send in your toyota to have a known manufacturing defect fixed?
Would you drive 23 of your closest friends and family around in a car that you know has a manufacturing defect?
Would you like the manufacturer to tell you that they will not fix the problem?

"Get real." -- I think it's time for you to get real.

scientific quotations from "http://www.texndixie.com/esd.htm"

I don't want anything unreasonable. I just want to have the option to have my (nearly) brand new cypres fixed. Anything less is unacceptable.

William.


(This post was edited by williammonk on Feb 5, 2013, 11:26 PM)


nigel99  (D 1)

Feb 5, 2013, 11:23 PM
Post #92 of 186 (1975 views)
Shortcut
Re: [williammonk] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
nigel99, I'm sorry, but research shows that you are not correct when you state:
> If people were experiencing that level of ESD [8-16kV] while packing we would know about it - it is not pleasant.

"studies have shown that a static charge built up by scuffing shoes on a carpet can exceed 20,000 volts" (but this should bolster your point.)
I walk across carpet on the way to the plane every weekend. I'm sure I'm not the only one.

Hey William, my point is that discharging 16kV (approximately) of static is not pleasant! You certainly notice it, when you build up static on a carpet and discharge into a door knob or whatever.

Regardless the ESD testing of products is normally pretty rigorous and at levels that make you flinchLaugh


williammonk

Feb 5, 2013, 11:30 PM
Post #93 of 186 (1952 views)
Shortcut
Re: [nigel99] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

Agreed.

Just trying to illustrate that 20kV shocks happen every day, not trying to step on your toes Crazy

William.


ELLIOTT  (A License)

Feb 5, 2013, 11:33 PM
Post #94 of 186 (1949 views)
Shortcut
Re: [williammonk] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

For somthing we can do ourselfs as a first step how about removing carpets from the packing area and replace it with something that does,nt cause static or find a way to ground out the carpets/packing mats. I will not be packinging on carpets.


nigel99  (D 1)

Feb 6, 2013, 12:11 AM
Post #95 of 186 (1919 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ELLIOTT] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
For somthing we can do ourselfs as a first step how about removing carpets from the packing area and replace it with something that does,nt cause static or find a way to ground out the carpets/packing mats. I will not be packinging on carpets.

Make sure you remove all the Nylon from your rigLaughLaughTongue.


piisfish

Feb 6, 2013, 12:40 AM
Post #96 of 186 (1910 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Skybear] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Now 14 out of 32000 units hung themself up, which equals 0,0004375%. Do you use condoms or does your wife/girlfriend use the pill? You should worry more about their reliability than those of the Cypres or any other AAD.
according to my calculations that would be 0.04375%, but I quit doing maths 20 years ago.
We don't use either, very happily Smile
I still have 2 Cypres (1 being from november 12...)
I still don't want anything but a Cypres in my rigs
When they said they had no cases in Europe, do they not consider Switzerland as Europe ?


swoopin

Feb 6, 2013, 2:07 AM
Post #97 of 186 (1879 views)
Shortcut
Re: [williammonk] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
I don't want anything unreasonable. I just want to have the option to have my (nearly) brand new cypres fixed. Anything less is unacceptable.

Many countries have laws specifically designed to assist consumers such as yourself. It might be a good idea if those that feel they would like their money back to start exploring the laws pertaining to grantees in their country/state.

Especially if your unit was purchased from a local reseller.


piisfish

Feb 6, 2013, 2:26 AM
Post #98 of 186 (1869 views)
Shortcut
Re: [swoopin] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

monk, I will buy your Cypres at Argus price Smile


Ron

Feb 6, 2013, 4:48 AM
Post #99 of 186 (1823 views)
Shortcut
Re: [billvon] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
True. But if you pulled 50% of condoms off the market for a potential problem with a few of them, then a lot of people would get sick and/or die from the resulting STD's.

Apples/Oranges. I am not suggesting that 50% get pulled off the market. I am suggesting the fix the problem faster than 4 years. And if a condom manufacturer found a problem, they would recall the product not tell you to finish with a blow job for four years to work around their issue.

Quote:
However, doing it all right now might just kill more people than it saves - so I can understand their reticence to do that.

Nonsense, people could decide to jump or not without an AAD. What we have now is a problem that is not totally defined and that could result in a misfire. And the company's solution does not address the potential misfire danger.

They had a misfire on a packing mat, they ASSUME that it can't happen in the air or on the plane. But they also ASSUMED that this would not happen and last I recall when they had a packing mat misfire on the C1 they grounded all the units till you could put a sleeve on the control unit.

Now they just tell you not to worry about it and that you have to apply their assumed workaround for up to 4 years.


(This post was edited by Ron on Feb 6, 2013, 4:54 AM)


iobject

Feb 6, 2013, 5:35 AM
Post #100 of 186 (1785 views)
Shortcut
Re: [williammonk] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
14/32000: 0.04375% -- Cypres units that have malfunctioned. (Check your math buddy)

Now by my math, a cypres malfunctioning is one hundred and seven times more likely than a toyota...

You are just being hysterical. Probability that your Cypres locks up is like 0.0004. Probability that You'll really need one fired is something like 0.00000X (pessimistic estimate: activations devided by the total number of jumps). Together those make a probability for You to actually die of it like 0.0000000000Y. By pushing the button before jump You just make it REALLY unlikely to happen during this particular jump. It is almost safe to say it is impossible for you to actually catch this malfunction at a 600 ft doing over 35 m/s.

With the Toyota You said there were 37 accidents. Do You know how many were dead?

Somebody with actual mathematical skills could come up with more precise numbers. The bottom line is you are paying 1500 to be "more safe". 100% reliability is like 0% fat. It's never 100% nor 0%. There is no Santa Claus :)


sundevil777  (D License)

Feb 6, 2013, 5:37 AM
Post #101 of 186 (1585 views)
Shortcut
Re: [williammonk] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Agreed.

Just trying to illustrate that 20kV shocks happen every day, not trying to step on your toes Crazy

William.

Why not just intentionally zap it as much as possible, walk around with your rig on while developing a huge charge shuffling your feet on carpet while in a room with a dehumidifier, all to expose it to as much static charge as possible? You'll either get your unit to lock up - and then it can be sent in for the fix, or you'll have more confidence in the unit to withstand lots of static.


sundevil777  (D License)

Feb 6, 2013, 5:39 AM
Post #102 of 186 (1582 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Ron] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
am suggesting the fix the problem faster than 4 years.

I think it will, eventually, but that can't happen now.

If people could figure out how to get units to lock up, by intentionally exposing it to static, then that would push the issue by flooding their service dept with more units to fix.


(This post was edited by sundevil777 on Feb 6, 2013, 5:42 AM)


piisfish

Feb 6, 2013, 5:54 AM
Post #103 of 186 (1565 views)
Shortcut
Re: [sundevil777] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
am suggesting the fix the problem faster than 4 years.

I think it will, eventually, but that can't happen now.

If people could figure out how to get units to lock up, by intentionally exposing it to static, then that would push the issue by flooding their service dept with more units to fix.
it will be faster than 4 years for the 2009 units, a tad more for the 2010 and 2011, and the longest for the 2012 units.


f94sbu  (D 16017)

Feb 6, 2013, 5:57 AM
Post #104 of 186 (1564 views)
Shortcut
Re: [nigel99] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:

I disagree. Firstly in many (most) instances higher level of integration on an ASIC (Application SPECIFIC integrated circuit) is done to save cost. So speculatively Airtec went to cut production costs and their testing was inadequate - leaving their customers screwed. Unless they are using ASIC for a general purpose IC, the ASIC is probably specific to them and changes would have been commissioned or approved by them. Interesting to see them blame the manufacturer.

If the issue is genuinely ESD related, and it would be interesting to know the facts on this, then it is probably in an unstable state. You can't predict HOW it will react, which is why 10% of the faulty units MISFIRED (1 in 14 units). If you've ever done ESD testing, for something like a Cypres it will be an air discharge of 8-16kV typically. If people were experiencing that level of ESD while packing we would know about it - it is not pleasant.

I feel for them, but part of selling products like this is having good follow up customer service and contingencies for a major product recall.

You dont need to explain what ASIC means to me, I know it pretty well since I design those things. Furthermore, I have 10+ years of experience designing ESD-resistent products. Airtec said that their vendor changed the part, not that themselves changed it. For the volume that Airtec has, redesigning an asic would never cut any costs. Furthermore, Airtec said that the original component was not available any longer, how would that happen if the chip was done specifically for Airtec? Since you have no clue what the real issue is, you are not doing anybody a favor by your clueless speculations.


pchapman  (D 1014)

Feb 6, 2013, 6:00 AM
Post #105 of 186 (1559 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Ron] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Quote:
when they had a packing mat misfire on the C1 they grounded all the units till you could put a sleeve on the control unit.

As I recall units stayed in service and Airtec sent out silver sleeves free, luckily a relatively simple interim fix although still annoying, until units were updated at the factory when they went in for regular servicing. A few incidents did show that occasionally their RF / ESD limits were exceeded, and that started the process of AAD manufacturers realizing that the standards had to be extremely high to prevent the occasional problem.

(Even so, that learning took time, When Vigil came on the market later, they still had ESD problems. It doesn't seem the easiest problem to solve.)


Skybear

Feb 6, 2013, 6:12 AM
Post #106 of 186 (1546 views)
Shortcut
SB [In reply to] Can't Post

I wonder, if some of you just don't read their SBs and FAQs. They are working on a quicker solution than the 4-year-service, but they can't do it overnight due to several limitations. Instead of hiding the problem they made it public, so that everyone is aware and can act accordingly to their recommended practice. They cared way more about safety than about damagin their public image. As long as you act as recommended you will be safe. When they found a way to fix them all quicker, then they will do. No need to ground 32000 unites for several months. No need to shutdown several hundred AFF and Tandem businesses for several months.

When Helmut Cloth developed the C1 from 1985 to 1990 he put all his money, more than 1 million Deutsche Mark, in this project. He was almost bankrupt when he started production but he really wanted to make it as perfect as possible and not sacrifice quality for time or earlier profit. The same man who played the game really hard back then is now taking care of this problem. You can trust that he works day and night on it and a solution will come. In the past, Airtec was critizised for communicating late, when all the work was already done and the fixes were ready. Now they changed their policy, because of safety considerations, and again a lot of people are ranting around. If you can do it any better, than build your own AAD and bring it to the market. If you can't then please shut up and leave it to people who have more than 25 years of experience with it.


f94sbu  (D 16017)

Feb 6, 2013, 6:16 AM
Post #107 of 186 (1542 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Ron] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Quote:
As the issue is ESD related, once the unit has locked up, it will not fire some time later. That is why they are saying that it wont fire in the plane or mid air.

Uh, there already was a fire in Sebastian on a packing mat of one of these units.

That's my point. It fires when the ESD happen, once it has happened, the unit is essentially dead. The outcome of the ESD is that the unit locks up, but if the ESD pulse triggers the fire, of course the unit fires.

In reply to:

Quote:
When the rigg is closed, the unit is much better protected from ESD. It would require a discharge of over 50 kV for the discharge to reach the Cypres. You will be kicking and screaming in pain long before that happens.


I don't see many packers kicking and screaming in pain... But one unit has already fired on the packing mat.
When the unit is on the packing mat, you have more or less direct access to it, hence the discharge needed is a lot lower than when the unit is protected inside the rigg. To reach the surface of the unit on the packing mat, around 1-4 kV is needed, when it is in the plane, >50kV is needed. Since people were bringing up all sorts of claims about props and fuel causing static electricity, I just wanted to point out that we would have a ton of other problems before the charges would build a level where it would even be physically possible to reach the Cypres unit.

In reply to:

Quote:
I understand that you are frustrated that you cannot always get what you want but you really need to learn some of the basics around this issue before you claim that your world is crushing down

I understand that you are making excuses... But you really need to learn some of the facts that have already been communicated and discovered before you accuse others of over reacting.

I am not making any excuses. If you want to be unhappy about their way of handling this, please be so, I wont mind. However, you are making claims about the underlying issue that are simply not true. You ARE overreacting to the discussion about ESD simply because you have no idea what you are talking about. Companies pay me money to solve their ESD issues so I have a fairly reasonable amount of experience of it. They do not pay me for their customer service, so I am not making any comments about Airtecs way of communicating this, although, as a layman, I would probably say that the way that Airtec communicated allowed the internet experts to shred their message to pieces when they tried to explain in layman's word what the issue is. Not sure if there is a way to explain this given all the arm chair experts out there.


(This post was edited by f94sbu on Feb 6, 2013, 8:18 AM)


ELLIOTT  (A License)

Feb 6, 2013, 6:28 AM
Post #108 of 186 (1531 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Ron] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

Could always buy a new one .Hopefully without problems then resell the old one after its been serviced. At a loss of ..... bucks . Back in the old days we would hardly get in the planr when some one had a AAD. To jump with them just was.nt on .


mccordia  (D 94775)

Feb 6, 2013, 6:45 AM
Post #109 of 186 (1514 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ELLIOTT] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

My guess would be Cypres not being able to take a recall of 20.000 units in one go, so for now the solution presented is a temp. fix with a quick answer, while they investigate a more fitting solution for long term.


piisfish

Feb 6, 2013, 7:03 AM
Post #110 of 186 (1499 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ELLIOTT] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Could always buy a new one .Hopefully without problems then resell the old one after its been serviced. At a loss of ..... bucks . Back in the old days we would hardly get in the planr when some one had a AAD. To jump with them just was.nt on .
new ones don't exist yet Tongue maybe try and buy an older one, or trade it against one. Hell, I would trade my "older Cypres" against newer ones if anybody wants a 4+ yr old Cypres


Ron

Feb 6, 2013, 8:46 AM
Post #111 of 186 (1427 views)
Shortcut
Re: [f94sbu] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
That's my point. It fires when the ESD happen, once it has happened, the unit is essentially dead. The outcome of the ESD is that the unit locks up, but if the ESD pulse triggers the fire, of course the unit fires.

That's what you *think*. You don't know, they don't *know*.

Quote:
I am not making any excuses

Yeah, you are.... You are saying they are doing a great job and you are *guessing* they have it all figured out.

Quote:
Companies pay me money to solve their ESD issues so I have a fairly reasonable amount of experience of it. They do not pay me for their customer service

My degree is in marketing, and I work directly with customers on very technical issues everyday as my job at a Fortune 500 company. So I have a good bit if experience with customer service, and think I am more than qualified to say their actions on this issue is crap.


piisfish

Feb 6, 2013, 8:53 AM
Post #112 of 186 (1420 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Ron] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

get a job at Airtec as a marketing consultant. Help them reach 2000$ a pop Unimpressed

You don't like it ? Sell it. I'll buy. Cheap.


d100965  (D 100965)

Feb 6, 2013, 9:18 AM
Post #113 of 186 (1404 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ELLIOTT] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

If you've bought a new Cypres recently (say within the last year) then in the UK you are covered by the sale of goods act 1979.


Under the Sale of Goods Act 1979 goods must be:-
•as described
•of satisfactory quality
•fit for purpose - this means both their everyday purpose, and also any specific purpose that you agreed with the seller (for example, if you specifically asked for a printer that would be compatible with your computer)

Goods sold must also match any sample you were shown in-store, or any description in a brochure.


You could therefore argue yourself a refund then either purchase an alternative AAD or simply re-buy a new Cypres without the fault when production restarts.

or

Getting a faulty item replaced or repaired:-

You have the right to get a faulty item replaced or repaired if it's too late to reject it. You can ask the retailer to do either, but they can normally choose to do whatever would be cheapest.

Under the Sale of Goods Act, the retailer must either repair or replace the goods 'within a reasonable time but without causing significant inconvenience'.

If the seller doesn't do this, you're entitled to claim either:

• a reduction on the purchase price, or
• your money back, minus an amount for the usage you've had of the goods (called recision)

If the retailer refuses to repair the goods, and they won't replace them either, you may have the right to arrange for someone else to repair your item, and then claim compensation from the retailer for the cost of doing this



p.s. My Cypres is unaffected, I have no dog in this race. I am simply posting the consumer rights you have in the UK.


(This post was edited by d100965 on Feb 6, 2013, 9:26 AM)


ChrisD  (No License)

Feb 6, 2013, 9:33 AM
Post #114 of 186 (1385 views)
Shortcut
Re: [avgjoe] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Interesting stuff.


Work the problem people,...


The side issue of: "static electricity," is not the issue.


C


Lineset

Feb 6, 2013, 9:47 AM
Post #115 of 186 (1368 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ChrisD] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

Ok we have all these rights but the manafactue can not /does not think it nessary to honor these rights ,What then ? Right back where we started . The world is a better place with Cypess than without .Think about it


f94sbu  (D 16017)

Feb 6, 2013, 10:04 AM
Post #116 of 186 (1356 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Ron] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Quote:
That's my point. It fires when the ESD happen, once it has happened, the unit is essentially dead. The outcome of the ESD is that the unit locks up, but if the ESD pulse triggers the fire, of course the unit fires.

That's what you *think*. You don't know, they don't *know*.
Based on my experience of the subject I call tell this with some level of certainty which can never be 100% of course. If I wasn't sure that this certainty is pretty darn close to 100%, I wouldn't say anything, however, if you choose to doubt this, I suggest that you chose to doubt pretty much everything else around you too as no one can ever be 100% sure of everything. Everything is relative and in this case, I am relatively more experienced than you Wink

In reply to:
Quote:
I am not making any excuses

Yeah, you are.... You are saying they are doing a great job and you are *guessing* they have it all figured out.
I am sorry, but you must be mistaking me for someone else. I have never made _any_ excuses for their way of handling this. I have questioned your objection to the ESD issue and tried to explain how this works. You can chose to not listen to me, but for the last time, please stop making claims about a subject that you have absolutely no clue about.
In reply to:

Quote:
Companies pay me money to solve their ESD issues so I have a fairly reasonable amount of experience of it. They do not pay me for their customer service

My degree is in marketing, and I work directly with customers on very technical issues everyday as my job at a Fortune 500 company. So I have a good bit if experience with customer service, and think I am more than qualified to say their actions on this issue is crap.

Great! You happen to know a few engineers and now you are an expert on ESD? Gee, I guess I should have gone to business school instead of earning a double major in electrical engineering and physics engineering Laugh
For the last time, if you want to discuss the way Airtec chose to communicate, please do so with someone else. However, stay away from trying to explain ESD issues as you are clearly not qualified to make any comments on it. Besides, I know for a fact that the way Airtec is communicating is just an interim solution but honestly, I very much prefer the way that they have chosen to communicate instead of them being silent until the final solution can be presented. With this fact in mind, why don't you pretend you are them and explain to the rest of us how you think that they should have communicated the issue?




Ron

Feb 6, 2013, 10:29 AM
Post #118 of 186 (1337 views)
Shortcut
Re: [f94sbu] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
Great! You happen to know a few engineers and now you are an expert on ESD?

No, and I never made such a claim. You however have made claims that you know what is going on. So that means you either:

1. Are making a guess without having seen the real data.
2. Have seen the data from the company since you work for them.

Quote:
Gee, I guess I should have gone to business school

That might have helped you from making claims without data...

You are free to give an opinion, but you are making statements of fact either as an employee acting as someone independent, or as an outsider without the real data.

At any rate... You are making excuses.... The only question is have you seen the data or are you just taking a wild guess?

In either case.... I don't really care who/what you are. They have an issue and they have suggested a lousy solution.

Quote:
With this fact in mind, why don't you pretend you are them and explain to the rest of us how you think that they should have communicated the issue?

OK, for fun....

They take anyone that bought a unit in the last year and give them a new unit in exchange for the old unit. They take the old units and fix them and then give them to the people who have a two year old unit, then continue that till they have exchanged the 4 year old questionable units with fixed 3 year old units.

Each customer gets a 'free' year added to their AAD and they can take the year 4 AAD's and give them to sponsored athletes or sell them at a discount.


(This post was edited by Ron on Feb 6, 2013, 10:58 AM)


GobbleGobble  (D 32887)

Feb 6, 2013, 10:52 AM
Post #119 of 186 (1312 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Ron] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Quote:
Great! You happen to know a few engineers and now you are an expert on ESD?

No, and I never made such a claim. You however have made claims that you know what is going on. So that means you either:

1. Are making a guess without having seen the real data.
2. Have seen the data from the company since you work for them.

Quote:
Gee, I guess I should have gone to business school

That might have helped you from making claims without data...

So either you work for them and are making excuses or you are making a guess and making excuses.

You are free to give an opinion, but you are making statements of fact either as an employee acting as someone independent, or as an outsider without the real data.

At any rate... You are making excuses.... The only question is have you seen the data or are you just taking a wild guess?

In either case.... I don't really care who/what you are. They have an issue and they have suggested a lousy solution.

Ron, do you believe it's possible that right now Airtech/SSK lack the ability to turn around 20k+ units in a timely manner?

How much capital, and how long would you think it would take to train enough employees to handle that load?

Turnaround time per unit test is about 2 weeks. I don't know how many they are able to service concurrently at each center. I'd suggest it's well below what would be required to do a full blown recall. I'd also tend to believe that manufacturing capacity is such that they are unlikely to be able to quickly crank out 20k+ new units to issue as replacements as quick as anyone would like.

Capacity that you are asking for doesn't get created overnight. I tend to agree with F94sbu that this is a first step, not the only step. Do I know that for certain? Nope.

Vent all you want, it's not going to help. And it doesn't seem to be making you feel any better.


Ron

Feb 6, 2013, 11:07 AM
Post #120 of 186 (1298 views)
Shortcut
Re: [GobbleGobble] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
Ron, do you believe it's possible that right now Airtech/SSK lack the ability to turn around 20k+ units in a timely manner?

Recall/not to recall is a actuarial question. You risk the known cost of doing the recall with the unknown cost of doing less and any lawsuits and damage to your reputation that a lesser action might bring.

There is a smart course, and then there is a gamble. They have chosen a gamble.

Even with a recall they take a hit to brand image.... The less action they take the bigger hit they take. If there is an accident they take a massive hit and risk being shut down in some countries like the Argus and Vigil had happen to them.

Toyota didn't really have the ability to recall all the cars with reported brake problems.... They did it anyway.


f94sbu  (D 16017)

Feb 6, 2013, 1:29 PM
Post #121 of 186 (1212 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Ron] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Quote:
Great! You happen to know a few engineers and now you are an expert on ESD?

No, and I never made such a claim.
How come you keep challenging my statements on ESD issues?
In reply to:
You however have made claims that you know what is going on. So that means you either:

1. Are making a guess without having seen the real data.
2. Have seen the data from the company since you work for them.

The laws of physics don't change depending on which company you work for, therefore, I can make such claims as:
1: Air discharge can be approximated with around 1mm per kV
2: A Cypres unit inside a packed rigg is approximately 5 cm away from any outside object.
3: The ability for nylon to conduct current is lower than air.

Conclusion: A Cypres unit in a packed rigg is a lot better protected than a unit in an open rigg on a packing mat. If the issue is ESD and that the data so far indicate that the issue has only been provoked on open riggs in environments where static buildup is common, you can be fairly certain that once the unit is protected inside the rigg, it will not randomly fail after it has been verified to function.

Of course, there is a minimal chance that the issue is really something else, but so far, we have only been discussing the validity of Airtec's claim that a packed rigg can be considered 'safe' with a very high confidence.

If you still wish to debate whether this is an excuse or not, please remember that the same logic can be applied to any AAD. Any AAD is safer from ESD inside a rigg compared to outside. Still think I am making excuses for Airtec?

In reply to:

Quote:
Gee, I guess I should have gone to business school

That might have helped you from making claims without data...

Well, since the data that I refer to has nothing to do with Airtec or Cypres units, I am not sure what you mean. As an engineer, the whole decision making process is built around acquiring data, analyzing data, applying theory and then back to step one. Why exactly would I follow a different path here?

In reply to:
You are free to give an opinion, but you are making statements of fact either as an employee acting as someone independent, or as an outsider without the real data.

At any rate... You are making excuses.... The only question is have you seen the data or are you just taking a wild guess?

In either case.... I don't really care who/what you are. They have an issue and they have suggested a lousy solution.

Quote:
With this fact in mind, why don't you pretend you are them and explain to the rest of us how you think that they should have communicated the issue?

OK, for fun....

They take anyone that bought a unit in the last year and give them a new unit in exchange for the old unit. They take the old units and fix them and then give them to the people who have a two year old unit, then continue that till they have exchanged the 4 year old questionable units with fixed 3 year old units.

Each customer gets a 'free' year added to their AAD and they can take the year 4 AAD's and give them to sponsored athletes or sell them at a discount.

Ok, so you clearly have been sitting under a rock this whole time. Check the FAQ. They are already working on a more permanent solution. Whatever it may be, we don't know, but your claim that they are doing the wrong thing is just ridiculous. But perhaps you think that they should have waited to communicate anything before a final solution was in place? NB: A service bulletin is intended to keep the user of a device as safe as possible, it may not necessarily address how affected units will eventually be replaced.


Ron

Feb 6, 2013, 1:54 PM
Post #122 of 186 (1186 views)
Shortcut
Re: [f94sbu] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
How come you keep challenging my statements on ESD issues?

I have said that you either do not have the data, or that you work for the company and are acting like an unconnected individual.

You might be very smart, you might be like a god when it comes to electricity..... But unless you have the data, anything you say is a guess. Educated? Maybe. Guess? Yes.

Quote:
If the issue is ESD

And there you have it... You don't *know* if it is ESD. Yet, that did not stop you from making "factual" claims that it was and that there is no danger.

Quote:
Ok, so you clearly have been sitting under a rock this whole time.

Ah yes.... when out of intellect, people often resort to personal attacks.

I'm done with you and your assumptions that you treat as fact.


377  (F 666)

Feb 6, 2013, 2:31 PM
Post #123 of 186 (1154 views)
Shortcut
Re: [f94sbu] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

Wonder if the ASIC mfr forgot to put in adequate "clamps" on inputs? The simplest clamps are diode resistor networks that take excessive voltage to ground. Done right they can give ICs pretty decent ESD protection. But high voltage from ESD is sometimes like a big mean gorilla. It doesn't respect fences or cages.

http://www.navsea.navy.mil/...ectDischargeCons.pdf

I am disappointed that Cypres is making the customer do a QC check for them on every jump. In the past, they have offered superb customer support and service. This time the task is so overwhelming that they have apparently gone into wimp mode. Still, I hope the product defect class action parasite lawyers don't go after them.

I bet Madd and Lars (Larsen and Brussgaard) would have manned up if one of their skydiving electronic products exhibited the same kind of failure. Bet they are thanking their lucky stars that they avoided the temptation of entering the AAD market.

The old SSE Sentinel MK 2000 AAD had a dirt simple design with no ICs and no software. Just a couple of AA batteries, an altitude switch and a rate switch in series, an RC network to prevent landing shock induced contact bounce on the switches from firing the pin puller.

Apparently that design isn't flexible enough to handle modern skydiving descent rate profiles, but I sure liked its simplicity.

377


Premier billvon  (D 16479)
Moderator
Feb 6, 2013, 2:53 PM
Post #124 of 186 (1136 views)
Shortcut
Re: [williammonk] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

>When I pay almost 1500 dollars for a piece of equipment, I expect it to work as designed.

You can expect whatever you like. You can also take it out if you don't like it. It really is up to you.

>As a moderator and highly experienced jumper, I can't believe you would liken a
>life saving device to a contraceptive product.

I didn't; Ron did. I was answering him. I don't think they are very much alike, other than pulling all or most of them off the market for a long time might just cause more problems than it solves.

>What concerns me is a cypres firing on the ride to altitude. a malfunctioning cypres
>bringing down a load full of jumpers due to a known defect would be a crying shame.

Well, it's much more of an issue in the door than on the ride to altitude. But yes, it is a risk - and has always been a risk. In the early days of the Cypres 1 there were a few firings in the door. It was a risk then; it was a risk now. It will be a risk in the future even once they put this fix in.

Is it too much of a risk for you? That's up to you. If you don't want to take the risk, take the Cypres out.

>From your comment, it is obvious that you do not understand integrated circuits, or the
>complex microarchitectures that they compose. In a complex electrical system (such
>as the processor found in the cypres) the results of an ESD are unpredictable. There >are literally millions (even billions) of wires in such a processor.

There are actually about two dozen bond wires. Everything else is part of the IC itself - metalization, substrate, active areas within the substrate etc.

>Would you like to send in your toyota to have a known manufacturing defect fixed?

If it was serious, sure. It would be up to me whether I drove it or not.

>Would you drive 23 of your closest friends and family around in a car that you know
>has a manufacturing defect?

No, but I've driven 4 of my friends around in a Toyota that had a recall that I hadn't gotten done yet.

>Would you like the manufacturer to tell you that they will not fix the problem?

?? They haven't - they've just told you they will not fix it right now.


f94sbu  (D 16017)

Feb 6, 2013, 4:05 PM
Post #125 of 186 (1086 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Ron] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
I have said that you either do not have the data, or that you work for the company and are acting like an unconnected individual.

You might be very smart, you might be like a god when it comes to electricity..... But unless you have the data, anything you say is a guess. Educated? Maybe. Guess? Yes.

Seriously, what is it that you dont get? I DO have the data on ESD. Thats all I am explaining. Is the issue ESD related? Only Airtec knows, however IF what that are saying is true, then my comment is justifying why Airtec claims that the danger is minimized once the rigg is closed (ie why the issue cannot happen at a random point in time and why people do not need to worry about the issue ocuring after they have done the crude sanity check) Thats all I have been saying. People were worried that an ESD issue would be the same with the rigg is closed as when it is open. I have provided scientific evidence why it is not. In fact, the same remains for any AAD, but you didn't seem to take notice of that fact. I am not in any way defending Airtec, I am explaining why a closed rigg is less susceptible to ESD.

In reply to:
And there you have it... You don't *know* if it is ESD. Yet, that did not stop you from making "factual" claims that it was and that there is no danger.

Correct, so far we can only trust what Airtec claims the root cause to be. Maybe this is a huge coverup for something else? Maybe they all wanted an extended vacation and shut down the company for a couple of weeks. Why are we even talking about this? Do you have evidence that any of this has even occurred? (No, you dont need to reply to that part, it was rhetorical)

In reply to:
Ah yes.... when out of intellect, people often resort to personal attacks.

Well well, what an convenient way for you to end this conversation? I was making a remark on the fact that there are more information from Airtec than just the bulletin. Judging from your remarks on their handling of the issue, it was apparent that you haven't read it. I was snide in my remark pointing it out to you and I guess you took it personal as it showed your ignorance. Is it a 'personal attack'? Hardly! If it was personal attack, I would be making a disparaging comment on you as a person which was unrelated to the fact. What I did was being (apparently) a little too harsh in the way I commented on the fact that you obviously haven't done your homework. It is nothing personal in that other than I pointed out that your argument was flawed.


f94sbu  (D 16017)

Feb 6, 2013, 4:32 PM
Post #126 of 186 (2311 views)
Shortcut
Re: [377] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Wonder if the ASIC mfr forgot to put in adequate "clamps" on inputs? The simplest clamps are diode resistor networks that take excessive voltage to ground. Done right they can give ICs pretty decent ESD protection. But high voltage from ESD is sometimes like a big mean gorilla. It doesn't respect fences or cages.

With the risk of going way of topic...
Pads on a chip (the part of the silicon where the chip is connected to the outside package via one or more bonding wires) come with an ESD protecting structure by default. It is part of the standard cell library from the silicon manufacturer. However, they usually don't provide protection in the >10kV range simply because it is impossible to build a protective structure at the same time combining that with the thin gate oxide required for modern asics. The level of protection that a pad gets is fairly random as it depends on a lot of properties around the pad and how many binding wires that are used for the interconnect. However, the manufacturer is guaranteeing a lower limit of the protection of course. If you create a design based on one revision of a chip, it is possible that another revision may be more susceptible (still within the legal limit). If you want your design to withstand higher discharge pulses, it may then be required to add additional protection outside the chip. And in this case, I would assume that there is a lot of external protection anyway simply because the level that the unit can handle is way beyond what's normally required.

The unit has the CE stamp which means that it can withstand a certain level of ESD ( 4 kV contact discharge, 8 kV air discharge). That doesn't mean that you can have discharges higher than this level, it just states that it is a reasonable level to require from an electronics manufacturer. If the requirement would be to withstand >20kV pulses, we wouldn't see the smartphones and other gadgets that we have today as it is impossible to fully protect them. Hence why the CE limit is lower than what can be seen in a real world scenario. I cannot find anywhere in the Cypres manual where it states what level of ESD that it can take, so given the CE stamp all a lawyer could do is to claim that it does not fulfill those requirements. Which I am pretty sure that it does, however, I can definitely understand why Airtec wants to go beyond that. Regardless how much protection that is added nothing can be made 100% safe of course. This applies to any of the equipment that we use.

If someone isn't happy about that uncertainty then I suggest that they dont skydive at all since there are a lot of other uncertainties around them that are much more likely to kill them than ESD causing their AAD to malfunction.


nigel99  (D 1)

Feb 6, 2013, 6:01 PM
Post #127 of 186 (2286 views)
Shortcut
Re: [f94sbu] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

A quick question for you. Why do you feel that an open rig is more vulnerable than a closed rig? The Cypres control box is in the reserve pack (at least in every rig I have seen).

My control box is actually against the side of my reserve pack tray and you can see the outline.

The display head/human interface on most rigs doesn't appear to be more or less protected with a packed or unpacked rig.

I'm not trying to be a smart arse. I think earlier in the thread Billvon also implied that the packing mat is where it is vulnerable.


pchapman  (D 1014)

Feb 6, 2013, 6:11 PM
Post #128 of 186 (2280 views)
Shortcut
Re: [f94sbu] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

I've only seen a little info on Cypres ESD testing. That was in their report for the PIA's TS-120. I think the name of the doc out there may be TS120cV3b.pdf.

Attached is a screen shot of the section, since the pdf is protected from copying. They mention Mil Std 331B, 25 kV, etc, stuff I can't comment on.
Attachments: cypres esd clip.jpg (366 KB)


IanHarrop  (C 1152)

Feb 6, 2013, 6:51 PM
Post #129 of 186 (2260 views)
Shortcut
Re: [pchapman] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

http://www.pia.com/...uments/TS120cV3b.pdf


GobbleGobble  (D 32887)

Feb 6, 2013, 8:04 PM
Post #130 of 186 (2231 views)
Shortcut
Re: [IanHarrop] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post


Yup, more than happy to continue buying CYPRES even after this current issue.


f94sbu  (D 16017)

Feb 7, 2013, 4:22 AM
Post #131 of 186 (2129 views)
Shortcut
Re: [nigel99] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
A quick question for you. Why do you feel that an open rig is more vulnerable than a closed rig? The Cypres control box is in the reserve pack (at least in every rig I have seen).

My control box is actually against the side of my reserve pack tray and you can see the outline.

The display head/human interface on most rigs doesn't appear to be more or less protected with a packed or unpacked rig.

I'm not trying to be a smart arse. I think earlier in the thread Billvon also implied that the packing mat is where it is vulnerable.

It is a good and valid question! My argument for that is the fact that the unit is (in most riggs) less accessible when the rigg is closed compared to an open rigg. Step one in solving any ESD problem is to isolate components by distance so that the likelihood of a discharge is lower. If a discharge occurs, the impact is also lowered as the 'spark' is losing some of its energy having to travel over a longer distance. (This is all empirical knowledge after ESD protecting lots of consumer electronic products).

If it is possible to expose to the unit to the same amount of ESD on a closed rigg compared to an open one, then I guess that the issue can still occur. However, we would need more data on the actual issue itself to be sure of course. For example, it is very likely the susceptibility to ESD is different depending on which part of the unit you are touching. Areas where there are cable attachments are usually more exposed. If I were Airtec, I would have tested a closed rigg and compared with an open rigg to get some more data, but I cannot speak for them of course.

The display head is (according to the test document that Airtec published) tested for ESD and if the ESD takes out the display unit, the testing shows that the control unit continues to function. As I don't know the nature of this particular issue, I cannot tell if the discharges taking out the device has been done on the main unit or the display, but given Airtecs comment on closed vs open rigg, I can only assume that the main issue was the control unit.

Dragging a rigg across a packing mat is probably one of the more plausible situations where you are building up static around the device. Once the rigg is packed and you put it on, the charges have either discharged, or didn't exist in the first place. If there was ever a discharge when you put your rigg on, trust me, you would notice. I have been playing enough with our ESD testing equipment to know that even low levels of charges hurt like a bitch.


Nelyubin  (D 18617)

Feb 7, 2013, 9:30 AM
Post #132 of 186 (2023 views)
Shortcut
Re: [f94sbu] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
The display head is (according to the test document that Airtec published) tested for ESD and if the ESD takes out the display unit, the testing shows that the control unit continues to function. As I don't know the nature of this particular issue, I cannot tell if the discharges taking out the device has been done on the main unit or the display, but given Airtecs comment on closed vs open rigg, I can only assume that the main issue was the control unit
.
Wink There is no control unit (the separate module).
There is a button of remote control.


stayhigh  (F 111)

Feb 7, 2013, 10:22 AM
Post #133 of 186 (1991 views)
Shortcut
Re: [avgjoe] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

why dont you guys just lie about light not flashing and turn it in???
once it is their hand they aren't gonna send it straight back without updates


377  (F 666)

Feb 7, 2013, 4:23 PM
Post #134 of 186 (1881 views)
Shortcut
Re: [stayhigh] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

Do it yourself ESD generator. See photo attached.

Cheap ESD analyser on eBay:http://www.ebay.com/...;hash=item2327d0366f

377


(This post was edited by 377 on Feb 7, 2013, 4:26 PM)
Attachments: ESD GUN.jpg (13.2 KB)


piisfish

Feb 8, 2013, 1:26 AM
Post #135 of 186 (1793 views)
Shortcut
Re: [stayhigh] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
why dont you guys just lie about light not flashing and turn it in???
once it is their hand they aren't gonna send it straight back without updates
well you can try, but you will be quickly categorized as a liar... If it doesn't flash, the display still shows 0v , and is like "frozen" on a normal ON display.
If it turns OFF, it is not frozen


nigel99  (D 1)

Feb 8, 2013, 1:51 AM
Post #136 of 186 (1786 views)
Shortcut
Re: [piisfish] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
why dont you guys just lie about light not flashing and turn it in???
once it is their hand they aren't gonna send it straight back without updates
well you can try, but you will be quickly categorized as a liar... If it doesn't flash, the display still shows 0v , and is like "frozen" on a normal ON display.
If it turns OFF, it is not frozen

well on a reasonable number of rigs it is genuinely difficult to press the button through the plastic and get a response. The SB tells you if it doesn't flash it is faulty. My guess is that many people will genuinely worry at the lack of response in these circumstances and send the unit in.

Doesnt mean they are lying, simply cautious. As normal with jumpers every single one of these incidents will be classified as failures. So i expect to see the reported failures rise dramatically over the next few months.


piisfish

Feb 8, 2013, 1:56 AM
Post #137 of 186 (1784 views)
Shortcut
Re: [nigel99] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
well on a reasonable number of rigs it is genuinely difficult to press the button through the plastic and get a response. The SB tells you if it doesn't flash it is faulty. My guess is that many people will genuinely worry at the lack of response in these circumstances and send the unit in.

Doesnt mean they are lying, simply cautious. As normal with jumpers every single one of these incidents will be classified as failures. So i expect to see the reported failures rise dramatically over the next few months.
does that mean that they are having trouble turning it ON ? seriously ?


nigel99  (D 1)

Feb 8, 2013, 3:14 AM
Post #138 of 186 (1763 views)
Shortcut
Re: [piisfish] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
well on a reasonable number of rigs it is genuinely difficult to press the button through the plastic and get a response. The SB tells you if it doesn't flash it is faulty. My guess is that many people will genuinely worry at the lack of response in these circumstances and send the unit in.

Doesnt mean they are lying, simply cautious. As normal with jumpers every single one of these incidents will be classified as failures. So i expect to see the reported failures rise dramatically over the next few months.
does that mean that they are having trouble turning it ON ? seriously ?

Yes I've experienced a few rigs that it is more difficult/temperamental to turn the AAD on (both Vigil and Cypres). The plastic on the rig itself is not very pliable and requires more force than normal. That can mean 2 or 3 attempts to get it to turn on as the timing gets screwed. I'm not implying that they require 10 minutes of fiddling and messing around.


dpreguy  (D 835)

Feb 9, 2013, 7:00 AM
Post #139 of 186 (1561 views)
Shortcut
Re: [f94sbu] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

This isn't a reply to f94, but a general question.

A long time ago the Cypres 1 units were thought to be affected by the pilot keying the mike to transmit. Or something like that. The Cypres factory solution back then was to insert the display unit into a "silver sleeve". This was a little plastic tube/sleeve which was somewhat opaque but still allowed the user to see the readings. Supposedly shielded the unit from the mike keying. I saved a couple and put them in my Cypres notebook, just because I am a collector.

Are we about to see "silver sleeves" (covers) for the display and/or the box itself make a comeback?


IanHarrop  (C 1152)

Feb 9, 2013, 7:12 AM
Post #140 of 186 (1549 views)
Shortcut
Re: [dpreguy] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

Good memory! I have no idea if that's a possible solution but here's the links to the old SBs about the silver sleeve. Just posting this for those that are interested in history

Original silver sleeve SB from Airtec http://www.cypres.cc/...silversleeve1997.jpg

later update silver sleeve - no longer supplied on new units http://www.cypres.cc/...silversleeve1999.jpg


Abedy  (D 10153)

Feb 9, 2013, 8:44 AM
Post #141 of 186 (1519 views)
Shortcut
Re: [labrys] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Edit: I have no idea if that's true in this case though.

Oh come on, not only you refuse to accept that Airtec has to deal with a problem a supplier caused, you also at least imply that they are lying?
But hey, it's an AAD thread, keep shooting... CrazyMad
I met Helmut Cloth several times and have also visited the Airtec manufacture and from what I have learned firsthand I can tell you that they really work at very high standards.
Heck, it happened to about 10 of 30,000 units and - if at all - 1 in 30,000 with a pack mat fire. They offered a solution that is inconvenient but as far as I see it, balances the wish of folks to keep jumping with the probability of your very unit going faulty even if you comply with the SB (should then go down to ,000000000000000001% or something)
I've jumped the CYPRES in my sports rig for 2 years with it being "vulnerable" and didn't wet my pants (as I couldn't be aware of the condition) The worst thing that might happen is it freezes.
But what do I know...

And NO, I do NEITHER work for Airtec NOR do I get any money from them for posting here. I have just been satisfied with their products for 10+ years and won't turn a moaner about this issue.
This is also my last post here, as I know that these discussions very fast start spinning around one issue with hardcore zealots flaming each other. Not my cuppa.


labrys  (D 29848)

Feb 9, 2013, 5:34 PM
Post #142 of 186 (1421 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Abedy] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
Oh come on, not only you refuse to accept that Airtec has to deal with a problem a supplier caused, you also at least imply that they are lying?

Jesus... that isn't remotely what I posted about. Someone asked what "higher level of integration" meant and I responded with what the semiconductor industry usually means when they use that phrase. Then I said that I didn't know for sure that Airtec meant the same thing...

How the fuck does that translate into me suggesting that they are lying?


swoopin

Feb 9, 2013, 7:12 PM
Post #143 of 186 (1400 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Abedy] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
The worst thing that might happen is it freezes.
But what do I know...

The worst thing is that the unit may fire when you do not want it to. One already has (on the packing mat after a jump) and Airtec have stated that this problem is related and caused by static...


nigel99  (D 1)

Feb 9, 2013, 11:31 PM
Post #144 of 186 (1370 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Abedy] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

when it comes to equipment like harnesses, reserves and AAD's I think it is a good idea to put brand loyalty aside and consciously question the data.

The worst that can happen is significantly more than 'just freezes'.

I'd say no AAD manufacturer would knowingly mislead people, but there is tremendous pressure by the community to release information and fixes quickly. That can result in incomplete or even completely inaccurate information being released.


Abedy  (D 10153)

Feb 10, 2013, 5:53 AM
Post #145 of 186 (1313 views)
Shortcut
Re: [swoopin] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
The worst thing that might happen is it freezes.
But what do I know...

The worst thing is that the unit may fire when you do not want it to. One already has (on the packing mat after a jump) and Airtec have stated that this problem is related and caused by static...

One more, last answer.
If it should fire on the packing mat it ain't "worst case", it just is inconvenient as you have to have your reserve repacked and have the CYPRES serviced (incl. new cutter which I understand will be shipped free of charge)
It can't fire in the plane and especially not in freefall or during canopy ride, just read the FAQ, answers to questions 14 to 17.


Abedy  (D 10153)

Feb 10, 2013, 5:58 AM
Post #146 of 186 (1307 views)
Shortcut
Re: [nigel99] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
when it comes to equipment like harnesses, reserves and AAD's I think it is a good idea to put brand loyalty aside and consciously question the data.

The worst that can happen is significantly more than 'just freezes'.

I'd say no AAD manufacturer would knowingly mislead people, but there is tremendous pressure by the community to release information and fixes quickly. That can result in incomplete or even completely inaccurate information being released.

I'd rather say you carefully read the information provided by the manufacturer instead of blustering in the forum, huh? Wink The information is provided, and if ya read it: Freezing is what MIGHT happen; firing won't.

EOT


JerryBaumchen  (D 1543)

Feb 10, 2013, 11:04 AM
Post #147 of 186 (1234 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Abedy] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

Hi Carsten,

Quote:
It can't fire in the plane and especially not in freefall or during canopy ride

Remember that this is the same company who adamantly said that a CYPRES could never fire while under canopy.

I was on the dz the day that Troy K made one fire. I helped him get rigged up and saw the results.

AirTec virtually called him a liar and stood by their position that it could not happen. Until a jumper got killed because it did.

JerryBaumchen


nigel99  (D 1)

Feb 10, 2013, 3:55 PM
Post #148 of 186 (1170 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Abedy] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
when it comes to equipment like harnesses, reserves and AAD's I think it is a good idea to put brand loyalty aside and consciously question the data.

The worst that can happen is significantly more than 'just freezes'.

I'd say no AAD manufacturer would knowingly mislead people
, but there is tremendous pressure by the community to release information and fixes quickly. That can result in incomplete or even completely inaccurate information being released.

I'd rather say you carefully read the information provided by the manufacturer instead of blustering in the forum, huh? Wink The information is provided, and if ya read it: Freezing is what MIGHT happen; firing won't.

EOT

ok i had read that before and the article that 0eter %hapman posted by Airtek on their ESD testing procedure. In the ESD testing document they state the reason for high levels of static DURING deployment.

Which statment is correct, as these statments directly conflict each other?


gowlerk  (C 3196)

Feb 10, 2013, 4:36 PM
Post #149 of 186 (1145 views)
Shortcut
Re: [nigel99] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

       Talk about "ESD" and where and when it can occur and what the effects may be is just techno mumbo jumbo to me. The bottom line is that these units contain a component that have caused a misfire and therefore need to be replaced.

Experienced jumpers with proven ability to perform EPs under real world conditions only receive a small benefit from using an AAD. Any risk of a misfire outweighs that benefit in my estimation. And that of my wife, who actually owns one of these. (04/12 DOM, same as the reported firing on the mat) Accordingly I have removed it from her rig as she requested. This means it is nothing but an expensive paper weight until it is repaired. So I have sent it to SSK with a request that it be repaired under the terms of their warranty. I anticipate that she will be jumping without an AAD for the whole season here in Canada. I don't like it very much, but I can't say that I am angry with Airtec. They are between a rock and a hard place here. They could ground them all until repaired, or let people use them until repairs can be scheduled.

They seem to have made the calculation that the potential good of having an AAD is greater than the potential risk of a catastrophe caused by a misfire. I sincerely hope they are correct.

Ken


Ron

Feb 11, 2013, 8:14 AM
Post #150 of 186 (1032 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Abedy] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
It can't fire in the plane and especially not in freefall or during canopy ride, just read the FAQ, answers to questions 14 to 17.

THEY say it can't fire.... They also thought these units were perfectly fine - Till they were not.

Simple fact is that they are making a guess based on a problem that they didn't know they created. I'd say being aware that they might also not know what else might happen is a very valid position.

Blind faith is foolish.


f94sbu  (D 16017)

Feb 11, 2013, 10:01 AM
Post #151 of 186 (2400 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Ron] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Quote:
It can't fire in the plane and especially not in freefall or during canopy ride, just read the FAQ, answers to questions 14 to 17.

THEY say it can't fire.... They also thought these units were perfectly fine - Till they were not.

Simple fact is that they are making a guess based on a problem that they didn't know they created. I'd say being aware that they might also not know what else might happen is a very valid position.

Blind faith is foolish.

They said that the unit cannot fire because of this problem. Not that that it will be 100% error free once this has been fixed. Besides, statistically, I'd say that they are correct as we have not seen any unit fire in freefall caused by ESD even though millions of jumps being made. What is your agenda really? You do realize that there has been hundreds of saves by these 'faulty' devices and perhaps 20 deaths that could have been prevented if the person had an AAD in their rigg? The FUD you are spreading isn't exactly making skydiving safer. Statistically speaking that is.


f94sbu  (D 16017)

Feb 11, 2013, 10:45 AM
Post #152 of 186 (2385 views)
Shortcut
Re: [dpreguy] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
This isn't a reply to f94, but a general question.

A long time ago the Cypres 1 units were thought to be affected by the pilot keying the mike to transmit. Or something like that. The Cypres factory solution back then was to insert the display unit into a "silver sleeve". This was a little plastic tube/sleeve which was somewhat opaque but still allowed the user to see the readings. Supposedly shielded the unit from the mike keying. I saved a couple and put them in my Cypres notebook, just because I am a collector.

Are we about to see "silver sleeves" (covers) for the display and/or the box itself make a comeback?

I hope you dont' mind me giving my thoughts on this? Smile

A metalized sleeve would do very little to prevent ESD from reaching the unit. The issue with units triggering when they were subjected to high levels of electromagnetic waves is a different EMC (ElectroMagnetic Compatibility) problem. A metalized sleeve is essentially forming a Faraday cage around the unit which electromagnetic waves have a hard time penetrating. The signal from any radio system is carried in an electromagnetic wave. A charge that is discharged to the sleeve is likely to continue to the Cypres unit next as the charge has nowhere to go. The only way for a sleeve to be protective of ESD is if you connect it to ground. In this case, the charge is now taking a predictable path to somewhere in the electronics where it wont do any damage.
Therefore, putting the unit into a sleeve is only going to be a marginal improvement, but the real issue remains.

Besides, if you open up a Cypres unit, I am pretty sure that they have certain parts shielded with metallic parts. But as you cannot shield everything, there are places where the ESD will find its way inside and then you have to rely on other measures, such as diodes connected to the signal wires. (In addition to the diodes that are always part of a regular input/output pin in a chip)


nigel99  (D 1)

Feb 11, 2013, 2:22 PM
Post #153 of 186 (2319 views)
Shortcut
Re: [f94sbu] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
Quote:
It can't fire in the plane and especially not in freefall or during canopy ride, just read the FAQ, answers to questions 14 to 17.

THEY say it can't fire.... They also thought these units were perfectly fine - Till they were not.

Simple fact is that they are making a guess based on a problem that they didn't know they created. I'd say being aware that they might also not know what else might happen is a very valid position.

Blind faith is foolish.

They said that the unit cannot fire because of this problem. Not that that it will be 100% error free once this has been fixed. Besides, statistically, I'd say that they are correct as we have not seen any unit fire in freefall caused by ESD even though millions of jumps being made. What is your agenda really? You do realize that there has been hundreds of saves by these 'faulty' devices and perhaps 20 deaths that could have been prevented if the person had an AAD in their rigg? The FUD you are spreading isn't exactly making skydiving safer. Statistically speaking that is.

Ron made the point early on that he does alot of team jumps and the 'fix' of remembering to press a button prior to every jump is not nice. It results in him having to change his procedures that have been ingrained over 6000 odd jumps.

So I see Rons agenda as simply being a disapointed and probably angry customer. Ron has always promoted safety here, and I don't for a moment think he is suggesting people stop using AADs.


f94sbu  (D 16017)

Feb 11, 2013, 3:14 PM
Post #154 of 186 (2291 views)
Shortcut
Re: [nigel99] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
So I see Rons agenda as simply being a disapointed and probably angry customer. Ron has always promoted safety here, and I don't for a moment think he is suggesting people stop using AADs.

As parts of his message was an attempt to prove that a Cypres could fire at any time of a jump and that Airtec has no clue whats going on, it is not hard to see that people could misinterpret that as a statement that an AAD makes your skydive more dangerous instead of safer. I don't mind him being a disappointed customer, however, the issue is taken far out of proportion. Do the math and you will see how silly this entire discussion is. (Silly as in how all of a sudden people think that their Cypres II turned into a paper weight overnight)


Ron

Feb 11, 2013, 3:27 PM
Post #155 of 186 (2282 views)
Shortcut
Re: [f94sbu] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
As parts of his message was an attempt to prove that a Cypres could fire at any time of a jump and that Airtec has no clue whats going on, it is not hard to see that people could misinterpret that as a statement that an AAD makes your skydive more dangerous instead of safer.

An AAD that could fire at any time is not a safe device. The truth is that they do not KNOW what the problem is and until recently didn't think there was a problem at all.

I am pretty consistent that a 'safety' device that causes a problem is a problem. Given that 20% of skydivers will not jump without an AAD and that we are not sure what the total failure picture of this actually is (and that just blindly trusting the media from a company that just weeks ago said there was no problem at all) is foolish.

I also am 100% consistant with ANY AAD problem... No matter the brand. But I have held CYPRES as the standard and now they are having the exact same issues and I will not give them any more slack that I gave any other company.

If you doubt my consistency..... Do a search. When VIGIL had issues, I held them to the fire. When ARGUS had issues, I held them to the fire.... To not do the SAME when CYPRES screws up in the SAME manner would be to show a bias.

So you will have to excuse me if I don't just blindly trust the word of a company that they know everything about this problem when just a week ago they didn't know they had a problem.

Quote:
Do the math and you will see how silly this entire discussion is.

And if ONE of these fires on climb out and takes off the tail of a a plane..... Will I still be "silly"?

And the fact is they don't know what the end result is....


nigel99  (D 1)

Feb 11, 2013, 5:22 PM
Post #156 of 186 (2263 views)
Shortcut
Re: [f94sbu] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Quote:
So I see Rons agenda as simply being a disapointed and probably angry customer. Ron has always promoted safety here, and I don't for a moment think he is suggesting people stop using AADs.

As parts of his message was an attempt to prove that a Cypres could fire at any time of a jump and that Airtec has no clue whats going on, it is not hard to see that people could misinterpret that as a statement that an AAD makes your skydive more dangerous instead of safer. I don't mind him being a disappointed customer, however, the issue is taken far out of proportion. Do the math and you will see how silly this entire discussion is. (Silly as in how all of a sudden people think that their Cypres II turned into a paper weight overnight)

Just remember context. I'm not sure how widespread AAD acceptance was when you started jumping, but when I started people were very sceptical. When an AAD has a flaw or problem, many people will rightly be extremely worried about the potential impact. After all it is not possible to do a physical inspection, in the same way that you can for a reserve handle fault (for example).


gowlerk  (C 3196)

Feb 11, 2013, 5:38 PM
Post #157 of 186 (2255 views)
Shortcut
Re: [f94sbu] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
(Silly as in how all of a sudden people think that their Cypres II turned into a paper weight overnight)

Silly? I resent that. But if it makes you feel better my wife who owns it does not consider it a paperweight. She considers it a door stop. It does not do what was advertised to do. Would you buy an affected one with your money? Now THAT would be silly.


piisfish

Feb 11, 2013, 11:57 PM
Post #158 of 186 (2192 views)
Shortcut
Re: [gowlerk] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Silly? I resent that. But if it makes you feel better my wife who owns it does not consider it a paperweight. She considers it a door stop. It does not do what was advertised to do. Would you buy an affected one with your money? Now THAT would be silly.
can I buy her doorstop for 100$ ? That's a fair price for a doorstop Smile


f94sbu  (D 16017)

Feb 12, 2013, 5:38 AM
Post #159 of 186 (2126 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Ron] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
An AAD that could fire at any time is not a safe device. The truth is that they do not KNOW what the problem is and until recently didn't think there was a problem at all.

Truth is a pretty strong word coming from a person who is accusing people from making wild guesses... But otoh, truth seem to mean a different thing to some marketing people so I guess you just fall in the category Laugh
If Airtec was shipping AAD's without this ESD problem prior to the component change and are now shipping units with a fix that makes as resistant to ESD as it was prior to 2009-02 it seems like they have a tiny little more clue what is going on compared to an armchair expert on the internet whose sole ground for his conclusion is a marketing degree.

Again, if you want to be pissed that you need to press the button to check the unit instead of just looking at the display, be my guess, but stop pretending that you have a clue whats going on. You haven't done the homework and you will (statistically of course) get people killed if you convince them that an AAD is an unsafe(er) device.

Quote:
So you will have to excuse me if I don't just blindly trust the word of a company that they know everything about this problem when just a week ago they didn't know they had a problem.

Sorry, but you couldn't be more wrong. Airtec has been working on this since end of last year. How could that be if they had no idea that they had a problem a week ago? I happen to have insight info on when they started to work on this problem and how it affected other things (no new units were produced while they were looking for the problem and no units were serviced).

I'm sorry, but you are making wild accusations and speculations, you are comparing oranges to apples etc. Again, can you tell us what your agenda is? If it is safety, you are not exactly making skydiving safer by convincing people that AAD's are inherently unsafe devices.

Quote:
And if ONE of these fires on climb out and takes off the tail of a a plane..... Will I still be "silly"?

Do the math. 2011, 9 skydivers died in accidents that could have been prevented by the use of an AAD. No one was killed because of a Cypres unit firing on climb out. In fact, there is no knowledge of any unit firing other than around its designated altitude. When you enter a skydiving plane, you expose yourself to a huge number of unknown factors that can kill you, yet, you have no control over them. One of them is of course the fact that an AAD can deploy a reserve while the jumper is standing in the door. However, from a statistical point of view, you will die many many times over for other reasons than that. I am not sure what your agenda is, but given that you seem to have convinced at least one reader here that the device in his wife's rigg is an unsafe device, you are not exactly improving the odds better for people to survive a skydiving incident.


f94sbu  (D 16017)

Feb 12, 2013, 6:01 AM
Post #160 of 186 (2111 views)
Shortcut
Re: [gowlerk] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
Silly? I resent that. But if it makes you feel better my wife who owns it does not consider it a paperweight. She considers it a door stop. It does not do what was advertised to do. Would you buy an affected one with your money? Now THAT would be silly.

Can you explain what the logic behind that conclusion is? All Cypres saves that happened last 3 years, really didn't happen? Or could I put any door stop in my Cypres and have it save me in freefall?

Here are some hard facts for you:

2011, there were 9 fatal incidents in the world that could have been prevented by the use of an AAD. There were 6 documented saves. (I am sure that there are more, but lets just use the documented saves for now)

That means that the odds that your wife will die from a no pull is 1 : 405 314

The odds that she will find he Cypres unresponsive (ie find her rigg not airworth) is 1 : 1 321 679

The odds that her rigg will open on the packing matt due to a Cypres activating is 1 : 18 239 169

Ie, the chance that she dies from a no pull is 3 times higher than she even seeing her Cypres being locked up. The later being a completely harmless event. I sincerely hope that you have found other ways of improving her safety odds.

I am sure that you would like to get your unit serviced sooner than the scheduled maintenance period, however, did you consider asking SSK what the earliest time they could accept the unit is? In the meantime, do you really think that it is unsafe to jump with the unit? (Look at the real data and not what your instinct tells you...)


Ron

Feb 12, 2013, 6:06 AM
Post #161 of 186 (2119 views)
Shortcut
Re: [f94sbu] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
Truth is a pretty strong word coming from a person who is accusing people from making wild guesses... But otoh, truth seem to mean a different thing to some marketing people so I guess you just fall in the category

Oh look, more personal attacks. CrazyWhen out of facts
and logic, people often attack the person. It seems the best you can do.

It seems the only thing you wish to do is attack me, so good day.


gowlerk  (C 3196)

Feb 12, 2013, 7:21 AM
Post #162 of 186 (2086 views)
Shortcut
Re: [f94sbu] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
I am not sure what your agenda is, but given that you seem to have convinced at least one reader here that the device in his wife's rigg is an unsafe device, you are not exactly improving the odds better for people to survive a skydiving incident.

I am not sure what YOUR agenda is. But I want to assure you that nothing ANYONE has said in this forum has in anyway influenced our decision to remove this unit from service and return it under warranty to have it's defect corrected. We decided this after reading the SB. The unit can not be trusted to perform is intended function, and the defect has been linked to a misfire. My wife has been in a two out situation before, due to a p/c in tow, and no, there was not an AAD firing involved. She escaped that uninjured, but does not want to chance another one. If she wanted to be "statistically" safe, she would stop jumping. She wants a non-defective AAD, that's what she paid for.

You don't seem to be capable of understanding any viewpoint but your own. Go ahead and jump your faulty CYPRES, (or do you even have one?) If it was really OK to continue using these why did Airtec stop production? How many lives will be lost due to unavailability of AADs? I'm not willing to wait 3 years and then pay them to correct the problem. Let them spend some of the money they use for advertising to fix this flaw. This company likes to take shots at their competition in their ads, it's about time they ate a nice slice of humble pie. And it's about time you learn to respect view points different from your own.

You are correct that no one here has a clue what's going on, but you fail to see that includes you. Airtec carefully chooses what information to release, and when to release it. And even if they shared everything it would be highly technical. The armchair engineers here would immediately start misinterpreting it. The bottom line for me is that the unit is faulty and needs repair. How simple is that?

Do you work for or have any connection to Airtec? Is your unit affected?

Ken


(This post was edited by gowlerk on Feb 12, 2013, 7:30 AM)


f94sbu  (D 16017)

Feb 14, 2013, 11:25 AM
Post #163 of 186 (1858 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Ron] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Quote:
Truth is a pretty strong word coming from a person who is accusing people from making wild guesses... But otoh, truth seem to mean a different thing to some marketing people so I guess you just fall in the category

Oh look, more personal attacks. CrazyWhen out of facts
and logic, people often attack the person. It seems the best you can do.

It seems the only thing you wish to do is attack me, so good day.

I thought I could lighten the mood with the smiley, but apparently I was wrong. You failed to comment on any of the obvious flaws in your reasoning that I pointed out. Instead you were pretty quick to pull out the "personal attack" card. I can only assume that you are out of arguments since long. You have been unable to counter any of my arguments with anything but "you dont know" while your pride yourself with having access to "the truth". Care to explain that?


f94sbu  (D 16017)

Feb 14, 2013, 4:04 PM
Post #164 of 186 (1789 views)
Shortcut
Re: [gowlerk] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
I am not sure what YOUR agenda is.

To keep people as safe as possible. And to avoid having people judgements clouded by the FUD that is being spread.

Up until a week ago, most people in this forum had no idea what ESD was short for. I happen to have a fair amount of knowledge of it, so if you were interested in an explanation of the reasoning that Airtec has made, I could give you one. If one is convinced that they are lying their teeth off, I don't think that there is any point discussing anything, that a source that can be remotely biased, has presented. If your viewpoint is that you want to go by your gut feeling, I am not going to stop you, but if you argue with me about technical things, I have the knowledge to back it up. Thats not an opinion, thats facts. The same as for the odds around skydiving. How you chose to interpret it, its up to you, but again there is no point arguing around those facts.

It is interesting to see someone claiming their Cypres being 'faulty' when you don't even know what 'faulty' is defined as. Let me just tell you that your Cypres will be faulty by definition even after the fix. ESD protection measures deteriorate as a part of the way they protect the device. If you zap your cellphone/computer/AAD enough times it _will stop functioning_. No matter how much protection that is added to it. I completely agree that 14 locked up units is not acceptable and I am glad that Airtec finally got themselves together to flush out the issue. However, I think that you are heavily overreacting claiming that your Cypres all of a sudden turned into a doorstop. If that's how you feel, dont worry, I am not going to force you to change your opinion, however I was presenting some facts that might get you to see things from a more objective perspective.

Statistically, your Cypres is still much more functioning than most of the other gear we use. Did you know that a reserve parachute only has to show a certain number of successful openings to be certified? It does not matter how many tests that fail as long as x number of tests were successful. How many reserve parachutes are tested (not just inspected) before being shipped to a customer?

Again, I am just trying to put these failures into perspective of everything else related to skydiving. I am sorry to hear about your wife's two out and I have no problem that she is making choices based on that experience. However, I just wish that you wouldn't project that to the rest of people who listens as the facts simply don't agree with you. (Again, just look at the statistics and you'll see).

To be honest, I'd be perfectly ok jumping without doing the check every time I jump. Statistically, it is more likely that I am going to forget to turn my Cypres on in the morning of a fatal jump compared to the unit locking up without me noticing it.

No, I dont work for Airtec, nor am I sponsored by them in any way. I just happen to work a lot with both electronics and skydiving safety.


gowlerk  (C 3196)

Feb 14, 2013, 5:33 PM
Post #165 of 186 (1755 views)
Shortcut
Re: [f94sbu] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

      I don't really care about the extra check or the fact that it may not fire. The only thing that matters to me is that the problem has been linked to a misfire. Misfires can have disastrous consequences.

I'm not sure what FUD is, but I suspect it is another of the ways you like to use to ridicule other people. Like calling them "silly" or accusing them of having an "agenda." Your technical knowledge is impressive, but you do not have access to Airtec's data, so your analysis is meaningless. I do not agree with your definition of faulty.

I use the word " faulty" because the unit contains a component that the manufacturer has determined must be replaced before the unit can be trusted to work as designed. I am not happy about the situation, but neither do I particularly blame Airtec, nor do I think they are lying. They do however have an agenda that is different from mine. That is just a fact of being a for profit business.

I also am not discouraging others from using affected units. Just today I installed one in a customer's rig. I sat down with him and made sure he had read and understood the SB. I didn't tell him what my wife had decided about hers. He had already decided to just go along with Airtec's plan for now. It is a brand new unit DOM 11/12. Interestingly enough, I had thought that they had suspended production before this, but apparently not.

As far as statistics go, I will paraphrase Samuel Clement. There are three kinds of lies. In order of severity they are lies, then damned lies, and then statistics. How well other components are tested is irrelevant to the subject at hand. I am aware that there have so far only been a small number of cases. I hope it stays that way. But it will not surprise me if it doesn't.


Premier billvon  (D 16479)
Moderator
Feb 14, 2013, 5:48 PM
Post #166 of 186 (1747 views)
Shortcut
Re: [gowlerk] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

>But if it makes you feel better my wife who owns it does not consider it a paperweight.
>She considers it a door stop. It does not do what was advertised to do. Would you buy
>an affected one with your money?

If the price was right? Sure. I've made thousands of jumps with people using AAD's from those batches with no problems. If not I'd just buy a new one (I get them at dealer cost anyway.)

ANY AAD can misfire. You can have an affected unit, send it back to Airtec, have them update it, get it back - and still have it fire in the door. The odds of that are very low, but they are there. The odds of it happening with one of the affected units are somewhat higher but are still very low. Is it low enough for you? Your call.


gowlerk  (C 3196)

Feb 14, 2013, 7:13 PM
Post #167 of 186 (1722 views)
Shortcut
Re: [billvon] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
If the price was right? Sure.

Agreed, but the price was full retail. I'd like to trade it for a new one minus the one year of use it has. I fact I've asked Airtec to do that. But I know they won't.

Quote:
Is it low enough for you? Your call.

This one is tougher. We don't really know what the odds are. We do know that Airtec felt it was necessary to mention it in the SB, and that they would like to down play it. Since I don't know what the odds are why would I chance it? Any AAD could fire at any time, but these ones are known to have a component that have caused a misfire, and that the manufacturer feels needs to be replaced. There is a large difference there. The only reason they are not recalling the units is that it would be logistically difficult. An experienced skydiver with a proven record of handling EPs only gets a small benefit from using an AAD. I'm sure you don't need to be reminded of when no one used them. And why they didn't. I did notice that you stated you've made thousands of jumps with people using them, and not that you use one yourself. I will also continue to jump with people using them. Also my call.


f94sbu  (D 16017)

Feb 15, 2013, 3:09 AM
Post #168 of 186 (1672 views)
Shortcut
Re: [gowlerk] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

You are taking the misfire out of proportion and reading something into it that it is not. If you chose to believe that Airtec has done their homework, they have determined that the on ground misfire due to ESD will not happen in the air. They even explained why. If you think that they are lying, then we can stop having this discussion. If you are curious about it, there is a scientific argument why their statement is accurate. The only counter arguments that I have seen so far are "They are lying" "You have no clue" or "They do not know".

FUD means Fear Uncertainty and Doubt, and it is pretty close to your words when you claim that your Cypres unit is nothing but a doorstop. It is not used to mock anybody. I am glad that you didn't use the same claim when you spoke to your customer today, but how would I know that from your previous posts? (Btw from what I know, the production stopped after 11/12 so this unit is probably one of the very last ones produced before the shutdown)

As far as you Samuel Clement quote, you are reading something into it that it is not. What the quote refers to is the fact that statistics can be used to prove anything _if_ you skew the facts or leave other things out. From a predictability perspective it is pretty accurate. (I use statistics in my work to help my decision making and it is a pretty powerful tool). For example, statistically, we could be fairly certain that over the next 3 years, we would have seen around 10-20 locked up Cypres units if the fix wasn't applied. You being surprised over that outcome is based on nothing but your feeling which is often not accurate. Google "Monty Hall problem" for an excellent example where people feel for whats correct is completely opposite to the real outcome, which btw can be easily predicted using statistics.


f94sbu  (D 16017)

Feb 15, 2013, 3:39 AM
Post #169 of 186 (1663 views)
Shortcut
Re: [gowlerk] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
We don't really know what the odds are.

Actually we do. Over the last 3 years, 14 locked up units, one on ground misfire, no in air misfire. You can look up the number of jumps made during that period and you will have a pretty accurate picture of the likelihood of this happening.

Quote:
but these ones are known to have a component that have caused a misfire

This is wrong. You make it sound like the unit itself can misfire at any point in time. ESD has caused the misfire and the units unfortunately does not have enough ESD protection to handle that. Why is this important? It is, because you can solve this in 2 ways: Eliminate ESD and/or improve the ESD protection. As ESD of this kind is eliminated in freefall, it wont happen there. You are already taking the misfire out of proportion and making it something it is not. Should Airtec address is issue. Of course they should (and they are, we just dont like the way they do it). Should we stop jumping with Cypres's as they can now spontaneously fire in freefall more often than 2 weeks ago. Seriously not!

Quote:
An experienced skydiver with a proven record of handling EPs only gets a small benefit from using an AAD.

People still die from no-pulls. Experienced people. And not everyone has yet had time to become experienced. Looking back at the statistics from 2011 indicate that AAD's have not had as marginal impact as you make it seem.

Quote:
I'm sure you don't need to be reminded of when no one used them.

How about a reminder of the fatality rate from no-pulls back then?


nigel99  (D 1)

Feb 15, 2013, 4:23 AM
Post #170 of 186 (1647 views)
Shortcut
Re: [f94sbu] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

Hi,

Just to be awkward, Cypres in their own documentation regarding ESD state that significant levels of static are generated DURING deployment. In fact in their article that Peter posted, not once do they mention static on a packing mat.

It does seem that since 2004, they have substantially changed their views, and the views posted in the SB, directly contradict their own published paper.


f94sbu  (D 16017)

Feb 15, 2013, 6:02 AM
Post #171 of 186 (1609 views)
Shortcut
Re: [nigel99] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Hi,

Just to be awkward, Cypres in their own documentation regarding ESD state that significant levels of static are generated DURING deployment. In fact in their article that Peter posted, not once do they mention static on a packing mat.

It does seem that since 2004, they have substantially changed their views, and the views posted in the SB, directly contradict their own published paper.

Agreed, I have also seen that part. I took their statement back then as a reason why they felt it is necessary to test the device up to levels of 25 kV (while the legal requirement to get the CE approval is only 8kV). If such high levels of static was generated during deployment, you would feel a shock once you land or once you touch your rigg again. As that is something I have never heard of, I can only assume that the levels of static that is built up is lower. However, dragging your feet across a mat, especially if you have rubber shoes is a well known way of creating static electricity. (Anyone you used to play pranks with their friends using this method knows what I am talking about)

I am not sure that the SB is contradicting their paper, all that the are really saying is that they feel that they need to protect the device for more ESD than normally required. I am not sure if their paper would need to state that static electricity can be built up on carpets as that's a known fact for anyone who is developing an electronics device.


gowlerk  (C 3196)

Feb 15, 2013, 7:41 AM
Post #172 of 186 (1589 views)
Shortcut
Re: [f94sbu] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

   Thank you. I'm glad to see that the level of the discourse around this issue has improved greatly. The main reason I posted in the first place was to let the group know that I had decided to send the unit to SSK for repair under warranty and that we would see what happened. I did not say that all these units are doorstops. I said that once it was decided to remove the unit from service until it's repaired mine may as well be. I'd rather have it sit in the SSK building than my desk. It won't get repaired here.

I must confess that I do have enough FUD in me that I do not entirely trust that the unit can only misfire under the limited conditions stated. This partly grows out of the understanding that it is in Airtec's best interest that this be so, and I hope it's correct. But Airtec's best interest is not my best interest.

FUD can be misused, but it is not a bad thing. We would not be here without it. I do not advocate that these units be pulled, only that in our case that is the decision we have come to. And I'm not wanting to rehash the AAD argument in general but I stand by the simple statement that only a small benefit is received in this case. I chose those words carefully. Do not read into them any more or less than they say.

I am curious about the fix for this. I had assumed it would be replacing the component, but the FAQ states only that there is both a software and a hardware aspect to it, and that the original component is no longer available. I'm not sure why they need to be so murky about this, but I do feel there may be a reason they aren't more clear.

As to seeing what will happen with the unit the UPS tracking indicates that they received it 7 days ago. They have not yet acknowledged that, or answered my request for warranty service. Under the circumstances I can understand that and I will give them another 7 days before I inquire about it.


Lineset

Mar 6, 2013, 11:57 AM
Post #173 of 186 (1170 views)
Shortcut
Re: [gowlerk] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

How about a update .


gowlerk  (C 3196)

Mar 10, 2013, 8:43 AM
Post #174 of 186 (1036 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Lineset] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

They have sent an email acknowledging that they have received it. That's all for now.


1888  (D 320)

Apr 21, 2013, 1:41 PM
Post #175 of 186 (624 views)
Shortcut
Re: [gowlerk] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

They had mine for two months. It was not affected by the SB as it was made in 04. SSK said it had to go back to Germany for additional adjustments etc. Probably backed up with SB issues. Guess I'll buy a Vigil next time around?


sundevil777  (D License)

Apr 21, 2013, 4:02 PM
Post #176 of 186 (1290 views)
Shortcut
Re: [1888] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

The fact that it needed extra work in Germany should remind you that a self test is not enough to know if everything is as it should be, or is as you should want it to be.


nigel99  (D 1)

Apr 21, 2013, 11:35 PM
Post #177 of 186 (1262 views)
Shortcut
Re: [sundevil777] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
The fact that it needed extra work in Germany should remind you that a self test is not enough to know if everything is as it should be, or is as you should want it to be.

Firstly I'm not sure you can draw that conclusion reliably. Certainly a self test can't fix anything, so I don't see a link.

Secondly, despite the 12 and 20 year lifetime statements, both AAD manufacturers assume a very light usage. When you take the use into account both are pretty poor, compared to automotive or medical products.


f94sbu  (D 16017)

Apr 22, 2013, 5:45 PM
Post #178 of 186 (1203 views)
Shortcut
Re: [nigel99] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Secondly, despite the 12 and 20 year lifetime statements, both AAD manufacturers assume a very light usage. When you take the use into account both are pretty poor, compared to automotive or medical products.

You forget the fact that people are expecting to lowest possible cost and applaud competition from lower priced AADs.
FWIW, the level of aging tests performed by Airtec by far exceeds the normal level of testing that a similarly priced consumer electronics product are subjected to.


sundevil777  (D License)

Apr 23, 2013, 2:58 AM
Post #179 of 186 (1167 views)
Shortcut
Re: [nigel99] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
The fact that it needed extra work in Germany should remind you that a self test is not enough to know if everything is as it should be, or is as you should want it to be.

Firstly I'm not sure you can draw that conclusion reliably. Certainly a self test can't fix anything, so I don't see a link.

The unit was sent in for regular maintenance without having shown any error codes or trouble. A self test can't identify many faults. Of course a self test can't fix anything. Some think that a very thorough check as required by the cypres is not needed because a self test will find any problems - that thinking is wrong as this case shows.


(This post was edited by sundevil777 on Apr 23, 2013, 3:16 AM)


sundevil777  (D License)

Apr 23, 2013, 8:57 AM
Post #180 of 186 (1112 views)
Shortcut
Re: [nigel99] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

I think a reminder of the philosophy behind why substantial maintenance is a good idea and what happens during cypres maint testing is appropriate. It is much more than putting it in a chamber and confirming that it works. A self test cannot confirm the accuracy and precision of a sensor, or that a cold solder joint will not function at all when the unit is later at some temp extreme, among other things.

http://www.cypres-usa.com/english_maintenance.pdf

http://www.cypres-usa.com/...e_of_reliability.pdf


(This post was edited by sundevil777 on Apr 23, 2013, 8:58 AM)


ChrisD  (No License)

Apr 23, 2013, 9:06 AM
Post #181 of 186 (1105 views)
Shortcut
Re: [f94sbu] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

With all due respect,...competition? Price fixing is more like it. Proving this is another matter, but trust me there's not a lot of competition in this secondary market. Now if you want to speak about competition in the industry as far as container / canopy issues, now that there's real competition! The DoD report describes competition as being insanly cutthrought!

If there was true competition we would have a USA brand! Instead we have a few american hopefulls selling their wares on ebay (that the skydiving community dosen't even know they exsist.)Unsure

People arn't expecting anything, by the peoples response they have demonstrated an amazing lack of interest regaarding this whole issue?


nigel99  (D 1)

Apr 23, 2013, 2:59 PM
Post #182 of 186 (1076 views)
Shortcut
Re: [sundevil777] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
I think a reminder of the philosophy behind why substantial maintenance is a good idea and what happens during cypres maint testing is appropriate. It is much more than putting it in a chamber and confirming that it works. A self test cannot confirm the accuracy and precision of a sensor, or that a cold solder joint will not function at all when the unit is later at some temp extreme, among other things.

http://www.cypres-usa.com/english_maintenance.pdf

http://www.cypres-usa.com/...e_of_reliability.pdf

Those are good points.


f94sbu  (D 16017)

Apr 23, 2013, 9:36 PM
Post #183 of 186 (1057 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ChrisD] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
With all due respect,...competition? Price fixing is more like it. Proving this is another matter, but trust me there's not a lot of competition in this secondary market. Now if you want to speak about competition in the industry as far as container / canopy issues, now that there's real competition! The DoD report describes competition as being insanly cutthrought!

If there was true competition we would have a USA brand! Instead we have a few american hopefulls selling their wares on ebay (that the skydiving community dosen't even know they exsist.)Unsure

People arn't expecting anything, by the peoples response they have demonstrated an amazing lack of interest regaarding this whole issue?

I could quickly come up with the following devices: Cypres, Vigil, Argus, m2, Astra (which is a US brand btw). Some may not be in business any longer for various reasons but 5 different manufacturers for a relatively small sport is definitely competition in my book. I dont want to start a brand war, but just to highlight that there is competition and the competition for lower cost could very well have caused at least one of them to make a design decision that has proven to cause trouble.
Some manufacturers state that their design is maintenance free (resulting in a lower total cost of ownership) where as others state that there is no way to make a device 99.999% reliable without a periodic maintenance. TCO is a point often brought up when various models are being compared.


pchapman  (D 1014)

Nov 20, 2013, 6:21 AM
Post #184 of 186 (623 views)
Shortcut
Re: [avgjoe] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

 
*** This is about the existing Cypres bulletin from 31 January 2013, where certain newer C2's might very occasionally freeze, not some new bulletin ***

Looks like Airtec/SSK have been getting through the backlog for service, and now are allowing some more C2's to be sent in even before their regular maintenance time.

They haven't opened it up for the full date range of affected units, but just ones manufactured July 11 to Dec 12. They do not cover shipping costs etc as it isn't a full recall.

The document is labelled as an addendum to the original bulletin, in a separate file. It is dated "November 2013":

http://www.cypres-usa.com/...w-up_11_2013_eng.pdf


Southern_Man  (C License)

Nov 20, 2013, 7:16 AM
Post #185 of 186 (598 views)
Shortcut
Re: [pchapman] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

Thanks for posting that, it is good news.

My understanding is that turn-around time is now 4-6 weeks which is pretty much in line with what it was prior to the whole kerfluffle.


Premier skydiverek  (C 41769)

Nov 20, 2013, 2:35 PM
Post #186 of 186 (467 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Southern_Man] Cypres 2 service bulletin [In reply to] Can't Post

Southern_Man wrote:
Thanks for posting that, it is good news.

My understanding is that turn-around time is now 4-6 weeks which is pretty much in line with what it was prior to the whole kerfluffle.

Maintenence is 2 weeks now:

http://cypres.cc



Forums : Skydiving : Gear and Rigging

 


Search for (options)