Vigil Status report

[wimdevos 0]

Maybe the pilot did some pressurized tests ?

Vigil Manual 2.0.7:
If you enter a plane with a pressurized cabin, please notify the pilot that he is not allowed
to do any pressurized tests below the Vigil activation height or below 2460Ft (750 meters)
with a pressurized variation higher than 45mph (20m/sec) (Student), to avoid any misfire.

[pchapman 261]

As a comparison to the Vigil manual quote, the current Cypres manual does not specifically mention pressures inside the potential firing zone, but just says:

"When using a pressurized aircraft, make sure that the cabin remains open when the turbines are started up. Leave a window, a door, or the ramp open a bit until after liftoff. This will ensure that cabin pressure cannot build up above the air pressure on the ground."

That's the only direct reference to pressurization. It also states:

"An aircraft must never descend to altitudes below the elevation of the airfield of departure."

(There are a couple other statements about descending below the landing elevation, if the Cypres has a landing altitude offset entered.)

[livendive 8]

Quote

If you think about it the Vigil did what it was supposed to do.It is possible, if the pressurization controls were set incorrectly,to take the cabin pressure of the aircraft to ground level.The aircraft pressurization system took the Vigil through it firing altitude.As for the Cypress shutting down maybe they thought of that when they wrote the code.

My understanding has always been that the CYPRES code is designed to not fire if parameters outside of its "normal" algorithm confuse it. That makes sense from a liability standpoint. If I were the owner of Airtec, I'd rather there be an accident report that states "the deceased died because he failed to open a parachute at a safe altitude" than "the deceased died because his CYPRES malfunctioned". Assuming that all electronic gadgets will have some failure rate (regardless of how small), I'd also prefer this mode of failure in my own equipment. I'd rather wear an AAD that occasionally doesn't fire when it should than one that occasionally does fire when it shouldn't. I'm not a big "brand name" guy on much of anything, but in my mind Airtec owns the AAD market, and I won't jump anything other than a CYPRES until all those willing to try Vigils get the field-testing out of the way.

Of course just to be honest, I have to admit that the only time I jump an AAD right now is on tandems. I do plan on getting an AAD for AFF jumps though, and when I do, it'll be a CYPRES.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[brianfry713 0]

Quote

does anyone use the Astra - I see it advertised but never seen one in person. I like the idea you can turn off easily.

I've seen a few people use them and dropzone's that have them on their rental gear. Depending on where the control unit is mounted, it shouldn't be too difficult to slide open the plastic cover and turn the switch to off. I've even seen some people that have the control unit mounted on the front of their rig, attached to a lift web or something, to make this even easier.

BASE 1224, Senior Parachute Rigger, CPL ASEL IA, AGI, IGI
USPA Coach & UPT Tandem Instructor, PRO, Altimaster Field Support Representative

[mdrejhon 8]

Quote

I've even seen some people that have the control unit mounted on the front of their rig, attached to a lift web or something, to make this even easier.

One of my home dropzone videographers (and my carpool partner) has his Astra mounted in this manner.

[Ron 7]

Quote

My CYPRES I expires in August and I was thinking of getting a Vigil. This recent incident is giving me second thoughts. Does (whatever the Vigil company is called) have a response about the 4 Vigils that fired?

I think the Vigill did what it was designed to do. It was in a weird situation and its default is to fire.

The CYPRES1's were in the same situation and they decided to shut down and not fire. I think this is a safer default than firing.

The CYPRES2's worked fine. They did not sense the issue and a big deal and did nothing.

Based on that only...I'd rather have a CYPRES2, then a CYPRES1 then a Vigil.

I'd rather it not get "spooked" and if it did get spooked not fire as a defult. I think thats safer.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[tdog 0]

Quote

Quote

My CYPRES I expires in August and I was thinking of getting a Vigil. This recent incident is giving me second thoughts. Does (whatever the Vigil company is called) have a response about the 4 Vigils that fired?

I think the Vigil did what it was designed to do. It was in a weird situation and its default is to fire.

The CYPRES1's were in the same situation and they decided to shut down and not fire. I think this is a safer default than firing.

The CYPRES2's worked fine. They did not sense the issue and a big deal and did nothing.

Based on that only...I'd rather have a CYPRES2, then a CYPRES1 then a Vigil.

I'd rather it not get "spooked" and if it did get spooked not fire as a defult. I think thats safer.

Reading another thread about the Cypres 1 units that locked up... There is an activation window in the Cypres that goes from 750 to 120 feet - and any time within that window you are sensed to be going greater than activation speed - the unit will fire.

The representative of the Cypres units posted that the equivalent of 78 MPH was indeed reached, it just happened below the 120 feet threshold - thus the Cypres brand units did not fire.

So, I guess, to me, Vigil did what is was supposed to do, it was not confused - it saw 78 MPH below firing altitude, without a bottom end of 120 feet. The only thing that saved all the Cypres brand units from firing was the 120 foot bottom end of the activation window.

I now have greater confidence in the Vigil unit then I did a few days ago - because equivalent pressurization of 78 MPH was reached below 750 feet - thus - the unit fired within it's design parameters.

So I guess the newest question on the table for me is... Why did Cypres choose 120 feet as a bottom end? Should Vigil have done the same? There is some logic process out there that the designers used that saved Cypres' butt in this case - but who knows, could have equally bad repercussions for a completely different scenario.

[Ron 7]

Quote

The representative of the Cypres units posted that the equivalent of 78 MPH was indeed reached, it just happened below the 120 feet threshold - thus the Cypres brand units did not fire.

Actually, the guy posted that the unit saw an altitude BELOW ground level. -2300 feet according to the post and shut down. The Vigil saw the same event and decided to fire. The CYPRES2 saw the same event and did nothing.

Quote

There is (was) a “fail safe” intention behind this as these units were designed years ago. They did not “freak out”, they followed a logic path and shut off at ~1100 mbar. Below departure altitude, there is absolut no reason to activate, no matter how fast the cabin is pressurized.

It *seems* to be a difference in how each unit responds to the same stimuli.

The CYPRES1 seeing no need to fire below ground level, shut off and shut down.

The Vigil (if it was the reason) decided to fire.

The CYPRES2 did nothing.

I would rather the device know its not needed to fire and do nothing, than shut down. But I would also rather the unit shut down instead of fire.

Now maybe the Vigil was not designed to "default fire" and it is another issue. I'll wait to see what Vigil says.

Either way my personal choice would be for it not to fire and be fine (CYPRES2), followed by not fire and lock out (CYPRES1), than fire (Vigil).

You may have other rankings...But I would rather an AAD not fire than misfire. Since in my eyes an AAD is a backup that should not be needed...Instead of something that could fire and cause problems.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[skydiverek 54]

Quote

Why did Cypres choose 120 feet as a bottom end? Should Vigil have done the same? There is some logic process out there that the designers used that saved Cypres' butt in this case - but who knows, could have equally bad repercussions for a completely different scenario.

I wondered the same 2 years ago, and asked the question here on dz.com:

"I have always wondered - why? What's the reason for not activating below 130'? I know at that altitude the reserve will not have time to open fully, but if you are gonna go in, why not have it deployed by CYPRES anyways, maybe it is gonna snag the tree, or something?"

...and got good answres like:

"It may be better, from a liability point of view, for the cypres to appear to be off after a fatality rather than have the cypres fire too low to save the jumper's life. Bryan Burke has claimed that, in that situation, the cypres will switch off rather than remain on; I have not verified that yet (and can't until I have a timed-out cypres to experiment on.) "

and

"This logic would inhibit a misfire possibly say during a hook turn. Not that hook turns were prevelent during the design and development period of the early Cypres."

and

"No matter how reliable they are, there's always the chance one will mis fire. There's absolutely no point in it firing under 100', it won't do you any good any way, so why have the risk of an accidental deployment right when you're about to land."

(Think Adrian Nicholas. THAT'S WHY the new Cypres Speed will NOT fire below 300 feet.)

[Herckydude 0]

Actually, the guy posted that the unit saw an altitude BELOW ground level. -2300 feet according to the post and shut down. The Vigil saw the same event and decided to fire. The CYPRES2 saw the same event and did nothing.

I think TDog is right. And just in response to Ron: you have to pass 120 ft before you pass -2300 ft. Everything which happens below below 0 ft in not important in skydiving. That's the business of the undertakers. Vigil still fires below 120 ft, Cypress doesnt. Anyway, nice discussion, everybody has his toughts and his ideas. Just one thing: if we don't give newcomers a chance we would still be jumping rounds. That's why I bought a Vigil, I was convinced it was a good product and I still am. I have seen it work twice.
Congrats to the 400, pitty we have to wait soooooo long for the video Saskia. But she too has the right to party I suppose.

[sundevil777 93]

That is the std way to mount an Astra.

Unfortunately, I think the Astra is a lousy alternative. I have repeated below my thought from an earlier thread:

If only the Cypres was as rugged as the Astra, we would have the best of both worlds.

If you do a search at rec.skydiving (remember they came out in the mid 90's), you will read of many first hand and eyewitness accounts of misfires, and other problems. I know this because I also hoped that it was a viable alternative to the Cypres when I bought new gear last summer-I quickly realized why they actually do have a bad reputation.

Consider this, the unit can be reset/recalibrated at whatever altitude that an intermittent circuit (power)/glitch/switch movement/whatever happens. However, the Cypress will shut itself off if it had an interruption of power-you would have to go through all the button pushes to turn it back on, and then it would fail/not calibrate itself while climbing.

FXC actually claims the lack of a "time consuming" on-off procedure as an advantage! I think it is simply a dumb engineering decision to have a switch so obviously vulnerable to inadvertent actuation. I think it likely the misfire at 10K mentioned earlier was due to the unit somehow being turned off and then on at 9K. The cypress simply can't suffer this failure because of the "time consuming" on-off procedure-it has a purpose!

Also, the ability to easily field test the astra in a chamber is not worth very much. I suggest reading more about the tests that are done to the Cypres during the 4 & 8 year checks. The Cypres is put through a whole lot more testing than just a "fire/no-fire" test at some approximate descent rate in a chamber. I won't be happy when I have to send mine in for the check, but I understand that it is worth doing and can't be accomplished in a simple chamber at your local DZ.

The 12 year life is also unfortunate, but I wonder if the Astra has the type of capacitors and other electronic devices that are known to predictably degrade and fail over time.

If you want to consider alternatives, we have a lot left to know about the new Mpaad. I think it also benefits/suffers from the advantage/disadvantage of not being thoroughly checked at the factory periodically. I also think it might be uncomfortable against the back and may be more vulnerable to damage from tossing your rig down on the floor.

The popularity of the Astra did not suffer because of brand loyalty or snobbery or unfounded rumors. At the time of its introduction, there was a lot of hope that the Astra would be all that it promised. The marketplace decided the fate of the Astra for reasons that should not be ignored.

People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

[tdog 0]

Quote

-2300 feet according to the post and shut down. The Vigil saw the same event and decided to fire.

Has anyone said when the Vigil fired??? I bet the Vigil fired long before the plane hit -2300 feet in pressurization, it fired when it perceived a 78 MPH pressure change below 750 feet...

So, in order of events, I bet this is what the different software systems saw.

Step 1 - at 120 feet, the Cypres 1 and Cypres 2 went back to non-activation window.

Step 2 - somewhere below 120 feet the Vigil saw 78 MPH and fired. At the same time the Cypres 1 and 2 were in "we really don't care mode - this is out of our fire window".

Step 3 - At the bottom end of the pressurization the Cypres 1 units saw a hugely unrealistic altitude and thought, "Something must be broken, this ain't right" and locked out saying, "Send me to the doc". The Cypres 2 and Vigil both have more advanced systems and did not lock out.

Note - I don't think the Cypres 1 locking out after it sees something so far out of the norm is such a bad thing... It is a good fail safe... From what it sounds, both Cypres models would have fired before the 1's locked out - if it was within the activation window.

[billvon 2,396]

>That's why we pay all this money for the thing. I think : Vigil is OK.

Well, given that I do such jumps with some regularity, I would prefer an AAD that does not fire when an aircraft is pressurized. It looks like the Cypres 2 is less likely to fire (or have other problems) than a Cypres 1 or a Vigil, which is a good thing in my book.

Of course, that's not a factor in most normal jumping, so for most people the Vigil should be fine.

[Herckydude 0]

I fully agree

[billvon 2,396]

>Has anyone said when the Vigil fired???

The last Vigil fired in an unpressurized cabin at about 2000 feet.

[Mountainsky1 0]

Has anyone thought about the fact that you can replace the cutter on the Vigil and be back in business in a relatively short period of time.

Both of the Cypres products will have to be completely downloaded, sent to the factory, reset,
and shipped to the owner for instalation.

MJ

[bliston 0]

If your AAD fires (assuming its not a misfire), I think taking a bit of time to ponder why your dumbass was so low might not be the worst thing in the world.... The cypres "reflection time" doesn't strike me as big reason to choose another device.

Ben

Mass Defiance 4-wayFS website


sticks!

[Ron 7]

Quote

Has anyone thought about the fact that you can replace the cutter on the Vigil and be back in business in a relatively short period of time.

My CYPRES1 has a removeable cutter...So unless it locks out thats all I would have to do as well. And AFAIK ALL CYPRES2's have removeable cutters.

Quote

Both of the Cypres products will have to be completely downloaded, sent to the factory, reset,
and shipped to the owner for instalation

CYPRES1's not the CYPRES2's had a problem. In this case the VIGIL guys had to get a cutter and repack while they CYPRES1 guys could still jump (Sans CYPRES), and the CYPRES2 guys could still jump even with an AAD.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[Elisha 1]

Quote

...while they CYPRES1 guys could still jump (Sans CYPRES)

You sure about that? The World Team website states that all participants must have an AAD...although I don't remember if it said working/operating or not.

[Ron 7]

Quote

And just in response to Ron: you have to pass 120 ft before you pass -2300 ft. Everything which happens below below 0 ft in not important in skydiving. That's the business of the undertakers. Vigil still fires below 120 ft, Cypress doesnt

But the fact the Vigil fires below 120 feet being good is a matter of opinion. I personally think it does not matter.

The thing that does matter to me is an AAD that misfires. We have not determined if this was a "misfire" or if the Vigil performed exactly like it was designed to fire. I hope we find out at some time. Airtec has already answered.

Either way I think a misfire is bad and a default of "fire when confused" is bad as well.

Lets say that two devices have a misfire or confused rate of 1/1000 events. (pretty good if you ask me). One is designed to shut down and the other is designed to fire when "confused".

Now with a device with a design of NOT firing when confused . I have 3800 jumps and out of those I maybe was AAD fire altitude 3 times and since I have never had an AAD fire I have "needed" an AAD a total of zero times. So my chance of needing the AAD and it not firing is incredably small.

Now take a device that has a plan of firing when confused. With a ratio of 1/1000 I would have 3.8 possible misfires already.

I would rather have an AAD that does not fire when confused over an AAD that fires when confused anyday.

Or in other words, Id rather have an AAD that does not work on the rare occasion that I needed it, than one that fires and CAUSES a problem.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[PhreeZone 15]

With the field replaceable cutter from Airtec you are back in the air as soon as you can get repacked essentually. You do not have to send it in and have not needed to since at least mid-1995 for 1 pin versions. The 2 pin field replaceable model was released in Sept of 99 - http://www.cypres-usa.com/2-pin_fr.htm

Its even in the Cypres owners manual on how to change it:

6.3 Changing the release unit
A release unit which has fired can be changed in general by any rigger or packer. This is
possible, when the CYPRES is provided with the field replaceable cutter. It can be
recognised by the plug on the release element cable. A CYPRES with an "old" cutter
must be returned to our Service-Center in the US hostessed by SSK Industries, Inc. or
your local CYPRES dealer.

Cost for a field cutter is $115 for a 1 pin or $230 for a 2 and it can be installed by any rigger in the field as long as the unit is set up for it.


This functionality is not new or unique to the Vigil.

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[Ron 7]

Quote

You sure about that? The World Team website states that all participants must have an AAD...although I don't remember if it said working/operating or not.

Well at this event you had to have an AAD. But you could still jump without one at most places. So here you might not have been able to jump, but in most cases you could be on the next load...The Vigil guys had to get a repack and a new cutter. (Which is less of a pain than sending the unit back yes, but still a "locked" CYPRES does not cause a danger like a reserve being opened.)

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[wimdevos 0]

Vigil Manual 2.0.7 page 19:

The Vigil is now ready for use and is in a stand-by status (recalibrating itself every 32 sec).
During take off the Vigil will go to an active status (64 calculations per sec.) above 150
feet or under -150 feet (+ 46 m or – 46 m) in a time of max. 32 sec.

At or under ground level pressure the Cypres identify a bigger pressure problem and shut off, the Vigil go to active status and fires?

[Elisha 1]

Quote

Vigil Manual 2.0.7 page 19:

The Vigil is now ready for use and is in a stand-by status (recalibrating itself every 32 sec).
During take off the Vigil will go to an active status (64 calculations per sec.) above 150
feet or under -150 feet (+ 46 m or – 46 m) in a time of max. 32 sec.

At or under ground level pressure the Cypres identify a bigger pressure problem and shut off, the Vigil go to active status and fires?

They wanted to take into account those Death Valley jumpers? I don't know.

[Capt36 6]

>Everything which happens below below 0 ft in not important in skydiving.

Before you close your mind any more than you already have......
click, and see what happens "below 0 ft".......

http://www.aerialextreme.com/stockvideo/CaveBASE2003_300k.wmv

Practice random acts of kindness, and senseless beauty...

And, give money for Mr Douglas! www.mrdouglas.org