696GrocuttT 0 #51 December 12, 2003 Ok so these guys have done a bucket load of jumps using the vigil in real world conditions when it didn't fire when it shouldn't have. My question is how many jumps have they done under conditions where it should fire. The cypress has probably done thousands of real world jumps where it should have fired and it has. I don't think the same can be said for the vigil. The fact is no matter how much testing is done things can always go wrong when something is released. Just look at the display glitch on the cypress 2. I'm sure they tested the hell out of it in the lab but it still caused problems in the field. There are plenty of people (me included) in this sport that prefer to wait until something new has been around a few year before trying it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
arlo 0 #52 December 12, 2003 i thought i was pretty clear on my post, but obviously a few people still think i am trying to "defend" the newness of the vigil. my post was in response to someone saying the vigil didn't have much real world testing. i called bullshit. simple as that. not once did i say it had the time in the field as the cypres does. you guys can stop with your "it hasn't been out there as long as the cypres" stuff because HELLO! that's pretty obvious to most anyone that can grasp simple concepts. did i ever say that the vigil had an equivalent amount of time in the field? NO. go back and read again. i just pointed out an example of two rw teams that used the vigil and put thousands of jumps on them. i pointed this out because someone said they didn't think the vigil had any significant pre-release jumps in the real world. The cypres has over 1000 saves over the 12 years it has been out. OF COURSE the vigil doesn't have 1000+ saves. who would be silly enough to think it could possibly have that many real world saves? test jumpers would have been humming it down about once a day to meet those numbers before it was released. and you're right. no matter how much testing is done things can still go wrong - but don't fool yourself into thinking it can only happen upon its release. it can happen ANYTIME. shit happens sometimes regardless. its over time that these glitches are fixed/minimized. i have no problems with the cypres - i jump one. our former 4-way team videographer's life was saved by one (his neck was broken in freefall and was paralyzed so he couldn't physically pull). so singing its praises to me is preaching to the choir. but i believe if someone if going to put out misleading information about a product because they "think it might happen to do this" or they "think it never went thru the rigors of testing in this particular manner", then it should be corrected. arlo Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LouDiamond 1 #53 December 12, 2003 Thanks Arlo. I have been watching this thread for a while and I was just getting ready to pretty much say what you posted. The big picture in all of this is that there is now another AAD on the market for skydivers to choose from based on their individual motivating factors. Ultimately, it will create a competitive market and that means better deals for the end user."It's just skydiving..additional drama is not required" Some people dream about flying, I live my dream SKYMONKEY PUBLISHING Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AndyMan 7 #54 December 12, 2003 Just keep in mind, it took roughly ten years for people to build confidence in the Cypres. While much of that has changed because we've learned a properly designed device is a good thing, also keep in mind that FXC attempted to enter the market with the FXC Astra, a device which never became widely accepted, for good reason IMHO. There is an extreme shortage of information regarding long term reliability of the Vigil. Even the shorterm is unclear - while there is an awareness of reported misfires, these incidents have been glossed over by the manufacturer and not thoroughly explained in a technical manner. Like the Astra, I will be waiting to see how it works for other "real" users, in conditions where any errors will be widely circulated with a technical analysis. I do not consider tests done by insiders good enough. Third party evaluations without any form of Non-Disclosure Agreements are a minimum. _Am__ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rigging65 0 #55 December 12, 2003 QuoteJust keep in mind, it took roughly ten years for people to build confidence in the Cypres. I'm not disagreeing, but think about this: It took 10 years to build confidence with jumpers who had been around to see the Pre-Cypres days...it took much less time to sell it to newer jumpers who hadn't seen the negatives of past AADs. Most of them look at an AAD like a seatbelt. Why on earth wouldn't you want something that is probably, most likely, going to save your ass from death when you can't see death coming? With the "mainstreaming" of the sport and with more new jumpers every day, young jumpers are becoming the market majority...and that's who, IMO, mfgs. are marketing towards. What's the saying... If you're gonna be young, you'd better be tough? (I've heard it with "stupid" in place of "young" also ). Young jumpers don't have the advantage of hindsite and experience, but they also aren't jaded by things in the past...things that occurred when there was much less money for good R&D in the industry and standards were lower.... "...and once you had tasted flight, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward. For there you have been, and there you long to return..." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
beej 0 #56 December 12, 2003 QuoteJust keep in mind, it took roughly ten years for people to build confidence in the Cypres. Actually, it took roughly ten-15 years for people to build confidence in AAD"S. This means that airtech have done the 'hardwork' in gaining acceptance from jo public. Now, finally, another AAD, that is electronic based like the cypres will soon be available. The acceptance hurdle is nowhere near as big as it was 10-12 years ago. The idea of a monopoly by airtech always disturbed me, so I am glad there will be another rival...just as long as the 'duopoly'(2 sole companies in the marketplace) don't start any co-hesive price fixing! ---------------------------------------------------- If the shit fits - wear it (blues brothers)-- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rjf98 0 #57 December 13, 2003 Seems like it already has if you ask me. Initially they were advertising this unit at around $800 US. Now it's selling for what 11 or 12 hundred. Same Same for Cypress. It doesn't have a usefull life limit..... yet. Also costs less per year to maintain so it's got that going for it, but price has definetly gone up from what they initially claimed they would be able to sell them for. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
diablopilot 2 #58 December 13, 2003 Quotebut price has definetly gone up from what they initially claimed they would be able to sell them for. I believe there were special conditions to thet $800 price point, kinda like beta testing or something....---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jimbo 0 #59 December 13, 2003 QuoteThere is an extreme shortage of information regarding long term reliability of the Vigil. Even the shorterm is unclear - while there is an awareness of reported misfires, these incidents have been glossed over by the manufacturer and not thoroughly explained in a technical manner. Misfires? I've heard, so far, of exactly one. Please tell us about the misfires you've heard about. With regards to the manufacturer not providing a technical explanation I have two questions. 1. Have you requested on? I'm not at all surprised that they didn't release a geeky technical explanation, most people could care less. 2. What makes you think they should give it to you? You're going to get to a point where it is not in their best interests to release the information due to IP. Ya know, the Cypres misfires and doesn't fire when it's supposed to quite often, at least a few times a year I seem to recall. Why aren't people up in arms about that? - Jim"Like" - The modern day comma Good bye, my friends. You are missed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skymedic 0 #60 December 13, 2003 QuoteYa know, the Cypres misfires and doesn't fire when it's supposed to quite often, at least a few times a year I seem to recall. Why aren't people up in arms about that? exactly!!!! I have personaly seen two of these while on a FL DZ. one popped while in the plane as we were going up....the other popped as the guy turned and tracked away....at 5,000feet!!! it does happen... Marc otherwise known as Mr.Fallinwoman.... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AndyMan 7 #61 December 13, 2003 Quote Ya know, the Cypres misfires and doesn't fire when it's supposed to quite often, at least a few times a year I seem to recall. Why aren't people up in arms about that? Because you can go to their website and read a technical analysis of whats going on. _Am__ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AndyMan 7 #62 December 13, 2003 Quote Actually, it took roughly ten-15 years for people to build confidence in AAD"S. This means that airtech have done the 'hardwork' in gaining acceptance from jo public. Now, finally, another AAD, that is electronic based like the cypres will soon be available. Did you miss the reference to the FXC Astra? Electronically based, just like the Cypres. It was never accepted because it was never proven. I will not accept the Vigil until it is proven. I will not jump on the bandwagon of the "latest new thing". The Vigil is NOT the first alternative to the Cypres. _Am__ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jimbo 0 #63 December 13, 2003 QuoteBecause you can go to their website and read a technical analysis of whats going on. Got a link to an article explaining any recent misfires? The patent to the Vigil is linked from their website, what information are you after that isn't covered there? What does Airtec provide (besides 12 years of accumulated data) that Vigil doesn't? - Jim"Like" - The modern day comma Good bye, my friends. You are missed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sdctlc 0 #64 December 14, 2003 Quote I will not accept the Vigil until it is proven. I will not jump on the bandwagon of the "latest new thing". The Vigil is NOT the first alternative to the Cypres. _Am I think what people are constantly forgetting is that AAD's are back up items. Yeah sh*t happens and the "back-up" is there for the rare occurrence when it does and you need you ass pulled out of the fire. Does the Vigil have the 12 year track record of the Cypres, no but how could it, its new??? BUT being new is not necessarily a bad thing and it does seem to have addressed some of the issues people had with previous non-accepted AAD's. I have made well over 1000 jumps w/o an AAD and then after I got one I have made most (read that as "not all") of my jumps since then with the AAD, yes to decrease the "what-if" factor. Would I jump w/o one again, yeah it is not something that makes me sit up at night in a cold sweat as it seem to be the case for many out there. Finally would I buy a Vigil for my next AAD, yeah I would! There really has been nothing that they have done that would make me think it was not good. Lawsuits happen and my guess is that Airtec is worried about losing market share. They should be worried if a unit can come into the market that gives it a run for its money. Is there a track record of saves, no and the fact is that its new. Kim noted a fire at the correct altitude when the jumper had it calibrated incorrectly, from that instance it seems to have worked just fine. The only problem that I can see is that there was a delay for a number of months with delivery of units after product information was released. That made some people mad and made others think the delay was an indication of problems with the unit. Scott C."He who Hesitates Shall Inherit the Earth!" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jmfreefly 0 #65 December 15, 2003 Agree with your comments. Just a point though, one 'real-world save' doesn't have statistical significance. But, drop tests is where the 'significant' data is going to be collected, and Vigil has done these. I haven't seen how many/etc. or results, but the video on their website is cool. As for the Astra, I think there were two problems it couldn't overcome. 1) the bad connotation because of fxc's prematures, even though the unit was entirely different and 2) weren't they a different form factor? (as in.. didn't mount the same as a cypress). The new MAPAAD (or something like that) will most likely not succeed because of #2. Requiring significant design changes to rigs to accomodate the unit will do them in. j Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pbla4024 0 #66 December 15, 2003 MPAAD. I heard it will enter production at January 2004. Price about 600 EUR. I sent few photos of MPAAD ready rig some time before. Fido Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jmfreefly 0 #67 December 15, 2003 Quote **The Vigil is not affected by this and does not recalibrate inside a plane. Well, I guess I am confused by this response. I believe the issue that Cypress states is based on trying to decide which one of the two of the following is happening: 1) The jumper is ascending (and therefore pressure is dropping) vs. 2) The barometric pressure is dropping significantly while the jumper is on the ground. My understanding is that the worry is that if a jump plane climbs very slowly and then immediately drops below dz elevation (valley), then the unit wouldn't register the pressure change as a takeoff, but a 'change in the weather'. If the unit thinks the pressure change was only weather related, not change-in-height related, it would keep calibrating (and therefore re-calibrate itself below the dz height, leading to ultra low AGL deployment altitude over the dz). I guess I am not convinced that this risk doesn't exist with the vigil. Again, the bottom line is 'don't let your jump plane do that'. I think the instances where this can occur are few and far between. Quote (Kim) You answered this yourself and you were right. No extra filters. If you ever get your Vigil wet enough to need to replace the filter, contact me and I'll get you replacements ASAP. Yeah, I just misread the manual I guess. Quote **Not as long as the plane doesn't exceed a vertical speed of 20 meters/sec (60 ft/sec). Airtec advices 13 meters/sec (40 ft/sec). But, err on the side of caution and switch it off. Or, ask your pilot to fly less than 50 ft/sec. Ok, my guess is that should be noted explicitly in the instructions. One would think that pilots wouldn't go nuts coming back down with jumpers, but we have had a premature fire (granted it was an FXC) on a student's ride back down. Thanks for the answers. If you get any more info about the first point, I'd like to hear it. j Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sdctlc 0 #68 December 15, 2003 Quote Agree with your comments. Just a point though, one 'real-world save' doesn't have statistical significance. But, drop tests is where the 'significant' data is going to be collected, and Vigil has done these. I haven't seen how many/etc. or results, but the video on their website is cool. I agree that for a true stastical analysis you need at lest three (3) but the more the better, obviously! That said I did think about, but did not note in my post, the amount of "test" data that had to be generated by the company. I assumed that the general consensus would be that for the unit to be released it had to have gone through a considerable level of testing. After reading some of the reasoning for peoples reluctance towards or in some cases "anti" Vigil stance it seems that the level of testing and R&D that went into the unit did not count. Some people seem to be against the unit based on a delay due to a lawsuit while others spoke of a rumored problem with a "BETA" unit. I thought beta units were made to do R&D. Dont they have the ultimate purpose of helping the manufacturer to a point where a production unit can be generated?? The end result that we are looking at now is that the Vigil is here and it will be subjected to both real world use and the free-market! Some people are going to buy it ASAP others are going to wait and see what happens. I hope the unit performs as well as the cypress has over the last 12+ years. Did the cypress have glitches, sure. Were there people against it (cypress) when it came out, sure. Some of the same things happened when the Cypress was released as is happening now with the vigil. Time is going to tell but good luck to the company! Scott C."He who Hesitates Shall Inherit the Earth!" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jmfreefly 0 #69 December 15, 2003 Quote I agree that for a true stastical analysis you need at lest three (3) but the more the better, obviously! Not to get into statistics, but the number depends on the sample size.. not just the number of fires. Ultimately though, more real world data (live people walking and talking and praising the vigil) should help. Quote After reading some of the reasoning for peoples reluctance towards or in some cases "anti" Vigil stance it seems that the level of testing and R&D that went into the unit did not count. Some people seem to be against the unit based on a delay due to a lawsuit while others spoke of a rumored problem with a "BETA" unit. I thought beta units were made to do R&D. Dont they have the ultimate purpose of helping the manufacturer to a point where a production unit can be generated?? Well, true, the Beta units were not available in the US early enough, and that was because of a possible patent infringement lawsuit by SSK on their cutter. That doesn't mean that the unit didn't go through Beta tests, though. It just didnt happen in the US.. There were European Beta testers that served this function. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dave1216 0 #70 December 16, 2003 So can i assume that the Cypress II has had more documented saves that the Vigil? The Cypress II, although based on the original Cypress is a new product. The batteries last longer, meaning that the power efficiency must be better. Is anybody worried about the Cypress II like people are about the Vigil? Secondly, The Vigil has been tested by x & y. Has it been tested by intermediate jumpers & students? I know i'm not as stable as an experienced jumper with thousands of jumps. Lab testing (simulation), although useful for development, i do not trust as part of the 'testing' stage. Having said that, i am about to place an order for a vigil. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
