Argus AAD Service Bulletin

[chutingstar 1]

FYI...received this today from Argus.

Dear Argus relation,

An Argus fired on the ground after we shipped it to a dealer.

We discovered a bug in the May 06 batch, due to last minute software update that obviously went wrong.

We prefer to err on the side of caution. Therefore we stopped shipping right away and 40 units of the May batch that already had been shipped were recalled on the 27th of May. All concerned dealers and skydivers have been informed by phone and/or email

The recalled units were shipped to: USA, Japan, UK, Hungary, Poland and The Netherlands.

These units will be upgraded as soon as we receive them and be shipped back to the owners after testing.

The Evaluation units and the April production batch are not concerned by this service bulletin.

We may be overreacting, but we will not compromise the safety of the skydivers. Shipping will start again by 8 June.

For more information, please call: +32 2 785 02 80 or mail to: [email protected]

Kind regards,

Karel Goorts

Managing director

Aviacom SA



Serial numbers

0506021101325
0506021101332
0506021101349
0506021101356
0506021101363

0506021101387
0506021101394
0506021101400
0506021101417
0506021101714

0506021101721
0506021101738
0506021101745
0506021101752
0506021101769

0506021101776
0506021101783
0506021101806
0506021101813
0506021101820

0506021101851
0506021101875
0506021101899
0506021101905
0506021101912

0506021101929
0506021101936
0506021101943
0506021101950
0506021101967

0506021101974
0506021101981
0506021101998
0506021102001
0506021102018

0506021102025
0506021102032
0506021102056
0506021102063
0506021102070

ChutingStar.com

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

We discovered a bug in the May 06 batch, due to last minute software update that obviously went wrong...

...we will not compromise the safety of the skydivers.

It sounds like they did compromise safety, with an inadequately tested software change. And that is a frightening thing. Ack! I've screwed things up before with poor software testing, but nobody's life was on the line with my work.

[FrogNog 1]

I don't want to stick up for Argus, and I don't want to put anyone else down, but there is really no statistically valuable quantity of information here to prove that Argus made a mistake that nobody else has. What we know is that Argus _reported_ making a mistake.

I agree with JohnRich that it "sounds" like they did compromise safety. But I'm still taking the long-term view: after any AAD has been around for a number of years, I'll look at the in-use safety record (as best as it can be determined) and choose from there.

Before any AAD has been around a number of years, I feel any user of it is a test jumper. (And I must admit the term "test jumper" is not black-and-white.)

-=-=-=-=-
Pull.

[bob.dino 0]

Quote

We discovered a bug in the May 06 batch, due to last minute software update that obviously went wrong.

There is no such thing as a good "last minute software update" in a life-saving device. Any and all code changes should result in a complete retesting of the product.

/software engineer.

[gjhdiver 0]

[replyIt sounds like they did compromise safety, with an inadequately tested software change. And that is a frightening thing. Ack! I've screwed things up before with poor software testing, but nobody's life was on the line with my work.

[diablopilot 2]

Quote

I'm happy to see a manufacturer step up and admit a fault and get a recall out ASAP.

But didn't you know that skydivers have to rely on them?

----------------------------------------------
You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

[gjhdiver 0]

Quote

Quote

I'm happy to see a manufacturer step up and admit a fault and get a recall out ASAP.

But didn't you know that skydivers have to rely on them?

Er what ? Me confused.

[mjosparky 3]

Quote

I had a perfectly functioning Cypres misfire on me.

Circumstances of the “misfire”?

Quote

All three reacted differently to the same set of circumstances.

All three were programed differently and none of them were programed to handle going from 24/25K to severl 100 feet below sea level in a matter of just a few sec.

My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

[gjhdiver 0]

Quote

Quote

I had a perfectly functioning Cypres misfire on me.

Circumstances of the “misfire”?

Quote

Just returned from service, walking to the plane and it suddenly flew off my back. 10 minutes later, I would have been floating. No-one was in the plane, it wasn't running, and no-one was transmitting anywhere near. I also had the RF shield installed. The unit was flown back to Germany, and returned with a new cutter and battery, but no explanation. The unit diagnostics couldn't tell them why it had decided to fire, so I got it back unchanged.

It never did it again, though it did break down twice more and refuse to boot, as did my other Cypres I. Both those units are aged out now. I'm moving to another make of AAD in the next month for my rigs.

• Quote

Share this post

---

Link to post

Share on other sites

[gjhdiver 0]

Quote

All three were programed differently and none of them were programed to handle going from 24/25K to severl 100 feet below sea level in a matter of just a few sec.

My point was just that all thre had differing parameters to deal with the event. Out of the three, I liked the Vigil response the best, and the Cypres I the least.

[mjosparky 3]

Quote

Quote

All three were programed differently and none of them were programed to handle going from 24/25K to severl 100 feet below sea level in a matter of just a few sec.

My point was just that all thre had differing parameters to deal with the event. Out of the three, I liked the Vigil response the best, and the Cypres I the least.

Thank you for your reply on both questions. Information is currency that one may need later.

My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals