Premature Vigil fire at Connecticut Parachutists, Inc

[fugozzie 0]

On Saturday August 12th, 2006 there was a premature Vigil fire at Connecticut Parachutists, Inc in Ellington, CT. Here are the facts:

Routine Tandem, exiting a Caravan from 13,500ft. Weather was 80-85deg, sunny, low humidity,winds 5-10. Tandem Master deployed at 6,000ft AGL. Freefall and deployment were normal and uneventful. Canoy descent was normal until approx 1200-1500ft AGL. While in level flight at a normal descent rate, the Vigil fired for no apparent reason. Reserve Pilot chute and bridle were deployed, however, there was not enough drag to extract the free bag and canopy. This resulted in a reserve pilot chute in tow under canopy. Tandem Master landed without incident.

[flyer299 0]

Please be sure to post what Vigil has to say about this? I assume the unit is being checked by Vigil.

[Lucky... 0]

Was the TI aware of the fire? Reason I ask is that a tandem rig and 2 people are so massive that I don't know if it would alarm? If so, did TI grab the pilot? Sounds as if not, which makes me wonder if he was aware.

[fugozzie 0]

We are contacting manufacture, will post any finding as they come in.

[EddieJ710 0]

at my home DZ, i can think of 3 instances right off the top of my head where vigils fired ON THE GROUND when the rigs were put into a van to be taken home and the door was closed. i guess it was the change in pressure inside the van. either way, that is a very scary thought. wouldnt want that happening when the door is opened at altitude, now would we? i dont trust them. there is only one word you need to know about aad's......CYPRES

[riggermick 6]

wouldnt want that happening when the door is opened at altitude, now would we? i dont trust them. there is only one word you need to know about aad's......CYPRES

[billvon 2,426]

>i guess it was the change in pressure inside the van.

Possible, although the AAD would have to read pressure and react very fast to the change. (Although they do advertise how fast their AAD reacts . . . )

>either way, that is a very scary thought. wouldnt want that happening
>when the door is opened at altitude, now would we?

While I can see a slamming trunk momentarily raising the pressure altitude to 700 feet (i.e. activation altitude) I can't see any way opening an aircraft door at 12,000 feet could _reduce_ cabin pressure to 700 feet. Although in a well-sealed aircraft (like a normally pressurized aircraft) slamming a door shut at a low exit altitude (say 2000 feet) might be an issue.

[skydivepete 0]

Anymore news about this incident?

[everymansaved 0]

yeah, i just bought two, it would be nice to know this kind of thing

God made firefighters so paramedics would have heroes...and someone can put out the trailer fires.

[fugozzie 0]

Once I have more facts I will post them. I have no further information at this time.

[gjhdiver 0]

Quote

there is only one word you need to know about aad's......CYPRES

Nonsense.

I had a recently checked and maintained Cypres misfire on me personally. No reason could be given for it by Airtec, and I got it back with a new cutter and battery, and essentially, a "good luck".

I also had two other units just quit on me during/after normal jumps.

Less than a month ago, I turned a plane around for one of my AFF students whose Cypres suddenly started displaying error codes.

Adrian Nicholas's Cypres fire on a low final essentially cost him his life.

The point of this ? Don't kid yourself into believing that any unit is foolproof.

Personally, I use the Argus now. I'm of the belief that the new kid on the block can learn from, and not have to repeat, the problems of the other units. Time will tell.

[fly_girl 0]

Quote

Adrian Nicholas's Cypres fire on a low final essentially cost him his life.

From what I understood, the Cypres acted exactly as advertised as he exceeded the activation speed, so it's not a relevant case when you're talking about AAD misfires.

[gjhdiver 0]

Quote

Quote

Adrian Nicholas's Cypres fire on a low final essentially cost him his life.

From what I understood, the Cypres acted exactly as advertised as he exceeded the activation speed, so it's not a relevant case when you're talking about AAD misfires.

That wasn't the point I was trying to make there. The point was that there is no foolproof AAD available.I doubt that there ever will be either. Adrian Nicholas was killed under a set of circumstances that nobody foresaw, by a device whose function was to save his life in an emergency. Also, the manual for his unit stated at the time that you couldn't exceed activation parameters under an open canopy as far as I remember, so he had no reason to expect it to fire.

Now there are AAD's with swoop modes available. Cypres and Argus are two that I know of. They switch off after they detect an open canopy in those modes. Don't have to be a rocket scientist to predict what could happen there in the event of a low breakaway.

AADs are a case of exhanging one set of risks for another that you presume (rightly or wrongly) are less liklely to occur. The risks don't appreciably change between manufacturers. The essential ingredient is that you hand over a large part of your decision making to a machine, in return for a perceived sense of security. Most of the time it works out OK. That's a discussion for another thread though.

[bofh 0]

Quote

Now there are AAD's with swoop modes available. Cypres and Argus are two that I know of. They switch off after they detect an open canopy in those modes.

The speed cypres does not work like that according to the paper I've read. They just increased the activation speed.

[mjosparky 3]

Quote

I had a recently checked and maintained Cypres misfire on me personally. No reason could be given for it by Airtec, and I got it back with a new cutter and battery, and essentially, a "good luck".

Could you fill us in on how it "misfired"?

My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

[dragon2 0]

Quote

Adrian Nicholas was killed under a set of circumstances that nobody foresaw,

Not true, I know of at least 3 cases of a cypres fire during a swoop BEFORE Adrian's accident.
One was at a swoop competition where some competitors were trying to get out of the AAD rule, afraid of a fire. They were only allowed to turn their AAD off after a fire during that competition.

ciel bleu,
Saskia

[gjhdiver 0]

Quote

Quote

I had a recently checked and maintained Cypres misfire on me personally. No reason could be given for it by Airtec, and I got it back with a new cutter and battery, and essentially, a "good luck".

Could you fill us in on how it "misfired"?

Certainly. I turned it on, it booted up correctly. I put my gear on, and as I was walking to the plane, I heard a pop and my reserve deployed on the ground. There was no-one in the plane, there were no planes transmitting nearby, and the RF shield was installed on the unit. If it had happened 15 minutes later, I would have been floating on the outside of an Otter. The unit went back to Airtec in Germany for examination, but no reason could be found for the misfire. I just got it back with a new set of batteries and a new cutter. That unit never misfired again, but it did break down twice more in freefall and switch itself off. That unit has timed out now and now is in use as a paperweight. It hasn't managed to fuck that job up yet, but I'm keeping a close eye on it.

[mjosparky 3]

Thank you, I had not heard of an incident like that before.

My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals