startingout 0 #1 March 14, 2006 Hi, I am fairly new to skydiving. I've done three tandems and an AFF 1 jump. During the ground school we learned about the AAD and cutting away, etc. I was shown that the Cypress works by cutting the closing loop of the reserve container. I also noticed that the cutaway cables hold the main to the harness by running through two loops as well, and cutting away amounts to pulling these cables out through these loops. What I wanted to know is whether it would be possible to create a "Super-Cypress" that cuts away first and then activates the reserve? It seems that the same mechanism on which the Cypress is based could also be used for a computer-activated cutaway as well. Do anyone know of any plans by AAD manufacturers to improve their design in this way. Seems like the next logical advance in skydiving safety to me. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skydiverek 56 #2 March 14, 2006 As Cliff Schumacher put it, every Cypres 1 has that capability. It was never utilized, due to an ever present danger of misfire (at the low altidude). Two out caused by misfire is better that being cut-away at 200 ft (by misfire)... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mostly_Harmless 0 #3 March 14, 2006 I have thought about this as well. But it would seem that the purpose of the 3 ring system is to be able to re-use the equipment after a cut away. Cutting those loops could be more expensive then just replacing the reserve closing loop. Also in my mind I was running through the situations in which cutting away the main and cypress activation would be needed. I came up with a spinning main that passed the parameters at the activation altitude or a bag lock followed by no EP's by the jumper. In the other situations it would seem that there would be no need to cut away the main (unconscious freefall or a no pull)_________________________________________ www.myspace.com/termvelocity Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
topper 0 #4 March 14, 2006 Seems like a reasonable idea in theory but.......... How would the cypress be setup (i.e. what speeds would it auto cut-away at?), how about a slow malfunction? What then happens on a HP canopy in a FR dive or similar? The loops connecting the riser to the cutaway cables is very small no-where near big enough for a cypress cutter. AAD's are built for high speed, no deployment scenarios, if the main isn't deployed there is then no need to cut it away. And on a big personal note, i think there is no need to add complexity. It's just another thing that can go wrong\interfere. Chris Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
labrys 0 #5 March 14, 2006 QuoteWhat I wanted to know is whether it would be possible to create a "Super-Cypress" that cuts away first and then activates the reserve? Under what circumstances would you have it initiate a cutaway? It cuts the reserve loop if you're at 750' and travelling too fast. You wouldn't want to cut-away below 1000 feet so you'd have to change the criteria for the Cypres fire, right? I'm curious to know what new criteria you might think would be an improvement?Owned by Remi #? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
davelepka 4 #6 March 14, 2006 Long story short - Be ready to work all of your own handles, or think about golf or bowling. Really. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
diablopilot 2 #7 March 14, 2006 Ditto. No device will save you from yourself in this sport in the long run.---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
riggerrob 558 #8 March 14, 2006 A "Super Cypres" that would release a drogue, cutaway a malfunctioned main, release reserve, etc. was part of Helmut Cloth's (Airtec founder) original plan, but it quickly got so complicated that it boggled Helmut's mind, so he just concentrated on a device that would open the reserve container. A few obscure military rigs use cutters to release 3-Rings. For example, a military freefall cylinder (1 yard/meter in diameter and 3 or 4 meters long) with a drogue attached to it via a 3-ring riser. The original Canadian freefall cylinder used an Irvin Hitefinder pin-puller AAD. Butler's latest version of the freefall cylinder cuts the white loop on the 3-Ring rise. Some military 3-Ring risers (i.e. MFP built by Irvin Industries of Canada) include quick-replaceable white loops, similar to drogue riser loops. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
johnny1488 1 #9 March 14, 2006 I'm not so sure about that. Johnny --"This ain't no book club, we're all gonna die!" Mike Rome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
startingout 0 #10 March 14, 2006 I didn't know that people have had similar ideas in the past. Though I guess I'm not surprised. I also didn't think about the possibility of a misfire. How common are those? Regarding altitude, I think 750' would be way too low for such a Super-Cypress. At the ground school I was taught that my decision altitude for cutting away or not is 2500'. So, I figure the Cypress would have to automatically cut-away and then activate the reserve by 1500' or something like that. Does that make sense? As for a misfire under an HP canopy, well, at the very worst the startled jumper would simply land the reserve instead of the main. Obviously I'm just starting out, so I will defer to the more experienced skydivers on this. It was simply a potentially useful gear modification that crossed my mind when I was taught how the parachute system works. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
labrys 0 #11 March 14, 2006 QuoteAs for a misfire under an HP canopy, well, at the very worst the startled jumper would simply land the reserve instead of the main. Please find out who the S&TA is at your DZ and explain your theory to him/her or to your next instructor. Owned by Remi #? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
riggermick 6 #12 March 14, 2006 QuoteI didn't know that people have had similar ideas in the past. Though I guess I'm not surprised. I also didn't think about the possibility of a misfire. How common are those? Regarding altitude, I think 750' would be way too low for such a Super-Cypress. At the ground school I was taught that my decision altitude for cutting away or not is 2500'. So, I figure the Cypress would have to automatically cut-away and then activate the reserve by 1500' or something like that. Does that make sense? As for a misfire under an HP canopy, well, at the very worst the startled jumper would simply land the reserve instead of the main. Obviously I'm just starting out, so I will defer to the more experienced skydivers on this. It was simply a potentially useful gear modification that crossed my mind when I was taught how the parachute system works. Question for ya! Do YOU wan't a machine making life and death decisions for YOU when you are fully cognezent (sp?) and functional? Think long and hard about that one! Skydiving is all about personal responibility and our need to overcome our operating environment BY CHOICE!! I for one choose to make life and death decisions about me on my own terms, remember Skydiving is NOT a carnival ride it's a personal choice to have fun and to "tempt the odds"!!! If you feel different to this assesment find a new hobby. Mick. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kris 0 #13 March 15, 2006 QuoteAs for a misfire under an HP canopy, well, at the very worst the startled jumper would simply land the reserve instead of the main. Unless something goes horribly wrong. Try again. Adrian Nichols Fatal Incident Thread I would never want a device that could misfire and cut my main away for me. I like the Cypres just how it is.Sky, Muff Bro, Rodriguez Bro, and Bastion of Purity and Innocence!™ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sundevil777 94 #14 March 15, 2006 QuoteDo YOU wan't a machine making life and death decisions for YOU when you are fully cognezent (sp?) and functional? Just need a user awareness sensor added on to the device... Seriously, take it easy on the guy, he should be able to ask such questions without too much abuse. At least he is thinking about how gear works and emergency procedures. Many with a lot more experience that wouldn't even think of asking such a question can't assemble a 3-ring.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 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #15 March 15, 2006 Quote Regarding altitude, I think 750' would be way too low for such a Super-Cypress. At the ground school I was taught that my decision altitude for cutting away or not is 2500'. So, I figure the Cypress would have to automatically cut-away and then activate the reserve by 1500' or something like that. Does that make sense? Much too high to allow an automatic device detach your main. Even if you tend to throw your PC out at 3500 like me, you're coming pretty close to 2500 with some of the slow opening canopies. Back when I was usually paying a packer, it was very typical. Most were packing for comfy openings. And of course if you delay even a second (mis clutch the PC?), very likely to trigger the cypress. (and yes, the pressure downward on opening altitudes is a bit at odds with the 2500ft decision altitude recommended for A jumpers) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
riggermick 6 #16 March 15, 2006 QuoteQuoteDo YOU wan't a machine making life and death decisions for YOU when you are fully cognezent (sp?) and functional? Just need a user awareness sensor added on to the device... Seriously, take it easy on the guy, he should be able to ask such questions without too much abuse. At least he is thinking about how gear works and emergency procedures. Many with a lot more experience that wouldn't even think of asking such a question can't assemble a 3-ring. You're right! For some reason tonight I've been in a ball busting mood, but my reasons still stand on their own merit! Apologies to the original poster. Mick. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
startingout 0 #17 March 15, 2006 Hi guys, I just want to emphasize that no one needs to apologize to me for their criticisms of my question. I am not taking any of this personally. I realize that I am just starting out in this sport, and still have a lot to learn. As I said before, I was simply asking a question about what I thought could be an improvement to the equipment, and was curious to hear what other people thought about it. If anyone wants to jump in with additional thoughts, I'd be glad to hear 'em Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites diablopilot 2 #18 March 15, 2006 QuoteI'm not so sure about that. You do realize that was a spoof right? ---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites meatbomb 0 #19 March 15, 2006 QuoteYou do realize that was a spoof right? Really??? I want my $1500 back! They said I would never die! I can't imagine jumping without it now! --- Swoopert, CS-Aiiiiiii! Piccies Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jurgencamps 0 #20 March 15, 2006 CREEPS from SCARETEC? Mmm 1 April? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jakee 1,257 #21 March 15, 2006 QuoteAs I said before, I was simply asking a question about what I thought could be an improvement to the equipment, and was curious to hear what other people thought about it. I've got to agree with kris. Having a device on my rig that could automatically detach my main would scare the crap out of me.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites startingout 0 #22 March 16, 2006 Has anyone read the latest fatality report on dz.com? Despite my lack of experience in this sport, I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with the posters who thought my idea of a combination cutaway and reserve deploy AAD is a bad one. I understand that this concept was previously abandoned by the designer of the Cypres because of technical difficulties. I also understand the points brought up by the various posters regarding potential hazards with such a system. But I don't think that this suggests there is something wrong with the idea itself. Rather, it seems that AAD is still a fairly young technology, and like all other technologies, this one will change and improve with time. Maybe this guy who recently died has only himself to blame for not executing emergency procedures properly. Imagine telling that to his family at the funeral! We are human after all, we *all* make mistakes, but that doesn't mean that you deserve to pay for such mistakes with your life. Maybe an improved AAD, that could cutaway and fire the reserve, and respond not only to altitude and speed but also to G-forces say, would have saved this person's life. If he was really at fault, then the DZO could simply ground him at the DZ, and make him undergo retraining before allowing him to jump again. Sounds like a better alternative to me. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites USPA 0 #23 March 16, 2006 It's not bad to have your own ideas. Most skydivers who are interested in the material, have thought off the "cutaway AAD", but most, if not all have abandoned it. Also keep in mind that insight en knowledge grows, with experience and realize that most people here have alot more experience and insight than you do. Not to "diss" you, but something to keep in mind. Like stated before, it is impossible to set the firing parameters for such a device. If you want to save the jumper with a spinning mal incident, you have to have a device that fires under a good canopy situation also. So the first problem is a cutaway-AAD simply can't tell if a canopy is ok or not. You stated earlier "the worst that could happen is a startled skydiver that lands his reserve instead is main". This is simply wrong. There are lots of scenarios in which a misfire of a cutaway-AAD would result in death. Also, don't forget, skydiving IS dangerous, it IS a high risk activity and probably the most dangerous thing you'll ever do. If you jump long enough, you'll realize that if you look at the ratio "skydive related" funerals with "non skydiver related" funerals you'll attend, it will shift towards the first one. And if someone makes a mistake that costs his life, then that is exactly what it is. If you don't accept making a mistake could cause you and other your lives, you shouldn't be jumping. (with a FS jump not tucking your PC in the pouch enough, unwanted opening after exit, kills both you AND the videoguy). edited for spelling errors.The trouble with skydiving; If you stink at it and continue to jump, you'll die. If you're good at it and continue to jump, you'll see a lot of friends die... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Liemberg 0 #24 March 16, 2006 QuoteHaving a device on my rig that could automatically detach my main would scare the crap out of me. That goes for most of us, I gues. But in the not so distant past, having a device that could automatically open the reserve scared the crap out of a lot (if not most) experienced skydivers. Now AAD's are widespread and even mandatory in some places for some categories of jumpers. The fact that it isn't there now and that it has a whole bunch of design parameters that are extremly difficult to meet, doesn't mean it is out of the question. I don't think that a device that can register an opening shock on the main followed by a spinning mal and cutting the loops on both risers above (say) 750 feet and automatically switching of below that altitude, combined with say, a skyhook type setup is inconceivable. Economically viable, marketable, "do we really need this?" etcetera are different questions... Of course, it would violate the K.I.S.S. principle bigtime but compared with say rockets or GPS devices it might be "simple" technology... "Whoever in discussion adduces authority uses not intellect but memory." - Leonardo da Vinci A thousand words... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites CygnusX-1 42 #25 March 16, 2006 Quotebut that doesn't mean that you deserve to pay for such mistakes with your life. Yes it does. That's called "survival of the fittest". And to Liemberg, all of these things are technically possible (see below) for sake of discussion. But I agree it would be pretty hard to sell such a system to the general public, myself included. Hey, I don't even have a RSL. 1) register an opening shock on the main Easily done with an accelerometer. Inexpensive ones are sub $5 (US). 2) followed by a spinning mal Could be done using the same accelerometer or a simple digital compass $15 in parts maybe. 3) and cutting the loops on both risers Standard-type cutter. ($30-40) 4) above (say) 750 feet and automatically switching off below that altitude All just software. So we have a system for $60 in parts + about $100 in engineering labor to design. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 Next Page 1 of 2 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
diablopilot 2 #18 March 15, 2006 QuoteI'm not so sure about that. You do realize that was a spoof right? ---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
meatbomb 0 #19 March 15, 2006 QuoteYou do realize that was a spoof right? Really??? I want my $1500 back! They said I would never die! I can't imagine jumping without it now! --- Swoopert, CS-Aiiiiiii! Piccies Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jurgencamps 0 #20 March 15, 2006 CREEPS from SCARETEC? Mmm 1 April? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,257 #21 March 15, 2006 QuoteAs I said before, I was simply asking a question about what I thought could be an improvement to the equipment, and was curious to hear what other people thought about it. I've got to agree with kris. Having a device on my rig that could automatically detach my main would scare the crap out of me.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
startingout 0 #22 March 16, 2006 Has anyone read the latest fatality report on dz.com? Despite my lack of experience in this sport, I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with the posters who thought my idea of a combination cutaway and reserve deploy AAD is a bad one. I understand that this concept was previously abandoned by the designer of the Cypres because of technical difficulties. I also understand the points brought up by the various posters regarding potential hazards with such a system. But I don't think that this suggests there is something wrong with the idea itself. Rather, it seems that AAD is still a fairly young technology, and like all other technologies, this one will change and improve with time. Maybe this guy who recently died has only himself to blame for not executing emergency procedures properly. Imagine telling that to his family at the funeral! We are human after all, we *all* make mistakes, but that doesn't mean that you deserve to pay for such mistakes with your life. Maybe an improved AAD, that could cutaway and fire the reserve, and respond not only to altitude and speed but also to G-forces say, would have saved this person's life. If he was really at fault, then the DZO could simply ground him at the DZ, and make him undergo retraining before allowing him to jump again. Sounds like a better alternative to me. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
USPA 0 #23 March 16, 2006 It's not bad to have your own ideas. Most skydivers who are interested in the material, have thought off the "cutaway AAD", but most, if not all have abandoned it. Also keep in mind that insight en knowledge grows, with experience and realize that most people here have alot more experience and insight than you do. Not to "diss" you, but something to keep in mind. Like stated before, it is impossible to set the firing parameters for such a device. If you want to save the jumper with a spinning mal incident, you have to have a device that fires under a good canopy situation also. So the first problem is a cutaway-AAD simply can't tell if a canopy is ok or not. You stated earlier "the worst that could happen is a startled skydiver that lands his reserve instead is main". This is simply wrong. There are lots of scenarios in which a misfire of a cutaway-AAD would result in death. Also, don't forget, skydiving IS dangerous, it IS a high risk activity and probably the most dangerous thing you'll ever do. If you jump long enough, you'll realize that if you look at the ratio "skydive related" funerals with "non skydiver related" funerals you'll attend, it will shift towards the first one. And if someone makes a mistake that costs his life, then that is exactly what it is. If you don't accept making a mistake could cause you and other your lives, you shouldn't be jumping. (with a FS jump not tucking your PC in the pouch enough, unwanted opening after exit, kills both you AND the videoguy). edited for spelling errors.The trouble with skydiving; If you stink at it and continue to jump, you'll die. If you're good at it and continue to jump, you'll see a lot of friends die... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Liemberg 0 #24 March 16, 2006 QuoteHaving a device on my rig that could automatically detach my main would scare the crap out of me. That goes for most of us, I gues. But in the not so distant past, having a device that could automatically open the reserve scared the crap out of a lot (if not most) experienced skydivers. Now AAD's are widespread and even mandatory in some places for some categories of jumpers. The fact that it isn't there now and that it has a whole bunch of design parameters that are extremly difficult to meet, doesn't mean it is out of the question. I don't think that a device that can register an opening shock on the main followed by a spinning mal and cutting the loops on both risers above (say) 750 feet and automatically switching of below that altitude, combined with say, a skyhook type setup is inconceivable. Economically viable, marketable, "do we really need this?" etcetera are different questions... Of course, it would violate the K.I.S.S. principle bigtime but compared with say rockets or GPS devices it might be "simple" technology... "Whoever in discussion adduces authority uses not intellect but memory." - Leonardo da Vinci A thousand words... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CygnusX-1 42 #25 March 16, 2006 Quotebut that doesn't mean that you deserve to pay for such mistakes with your life. Yes it does. That's called "survival of the fittest". And to Liemberg, all of these things are technically possible (see below) for sake of discussion. But I agree it would be pretty hard to sell such a system to the general public, myself included. Hey, I don't even have a RSL. 1) register an opening shock on the main Easily done with an accelerometer. Inexpensive ones are sub $5 (US). 2) followed by a spinning mal Could be done using the same accelerometer or a simple digital compass $15 in parts maybe. 3) and cutting the loops on both risers Standard-type cutter. ($30-40) 4) above (say) 750 feet and automatically switching off below that altitude All just software. So we have a system for $60 in parts + about $100 in engineering labor to design. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
