jurgencamps 0 #26 October 3, 2006 Do the Cypres, Vigil and Argus have a different cutter? I remember a test were the reporter stated "fridge A" = better than "fridge B", but what he didn't knew, it was the same fridge sold under a different name. Jurgen Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dragon2 0 #27 October 3, 2006 QuoteDo the Cypres, Vigil and Argus have a different cutter? Yes they do. Cypres has a single cutting edge (bolt cutter), Argus has 2 (cylindrical cutter). Don't know about Vigil. ciel bleu, Saskia Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gjhdiver 0 #28 October 3, 2006 Quote For the time being I see one AAD firing in a situation where 2 other AAD's didn't fire. I also see one AAD's cutter not cutting the loop after it has fired (for whatever reason) while another AAD brand's cutter did cut the loop when the loop was rigged in the same way as it was on the Argus. Perhaps this will shed a little light on the cutter issue. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
USPA 0 #29 October 3, 2006 Quotethe testing conditions were the same for all three AAD's. Wrong Peter, learn to understand test scenario's. They way the test was setup, this cannot be verified. Also it cannot be verified they were jumping a production unit. Lastly the test setup (pocket of unknown material on unspecified, any case wrong placement) makes the result irrelevant. Not even speaking of the lack of data. We all know this rigger has some issues. QuoteSince 500 test jumps are virtually impossible Hmm, Aviacom may disagree, since they did alot more live test jumps. This rigger didn't do ANY dedicated test jump. NOT EVEN ONE. Quotewas rigged in the same way as it was on the Argus This is simply not the case, or in any case cannot be verified. He's comparing apples and oranges. This is also the reason why the dutch authorities have distanced themselves from this rigger. From what I've heard he didn't impress alot of people in Paris also.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
BKR 0 #30 October 3, 2006 I think you might open your eyes. This is what Aviacom said. I am sorry, but when (in the same conditions of testing) Airtec and AAD cutters cut the loop and Aviacom didn't, it seems to be a problem. For your record, Basik, R.I., Strong and now PdF has banned the Argus from their equipments till further informations and testings. It seems to be enought for me.Jérôme Bunker Basik Air Concept www.basik.fr http://www.facebook.com/pages/Le-Luc-France/BASIK-AIR-CONCEPT/172133350468 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
USPA 0 #31 October 3, 2006 Look, jerome, Like I said before and will again. As a manufactorer I understand you have to make sure you can't be sued, so as a business decision I understand the bulletin. But then, if you truly can't see the conditions of testing were completly different and unreproducible for both the cutter tests, further discussing has no use. I am not skilled in developing skydiving equipment. I am in preparing experimental setups, in other words make gathering data usefull. The data generated (or lack of thereoff) by Jo Oosterveer is trash and random. Since tension on all loops could be completly different, knots could be of different sizes and tapes on different places conditions aren't equal. Also 1 cutter was tested in chamber, while other was tested clutterd in a pouch. This is only tip of the iceberg, commenting only on the way this "homeplay" (almost hoax) was setup. If you want to get into details on proper cutter function you should look at the reply of argus further in this thread commenting on cutter design differences. I want to be very clear on this. I do not yet endorse Argus, I have it in my rig and I trust them enough to use it myself. This is attributed on a reasonable part on the conversations I've had with the people behind Argus. For me to endorse Argus fully to my students Argus has to prove itself in the field first. So far Argus is the ONLY AAD ever without an incident in the field, off course this is also because they are new. What I am truly pissed about is that it only takes 1 out of control rigger to trash a new manufactorer this way, without any true arguments if you pop the hot air bubble. But now I'm beginning to rant....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
billvon 2,400 #32 October 3, 2006 >What I am truly pissed about is that it only takes 1 out of >control rigger to trash a new manufactorer this way, without any true >arguments if you pop the hot air bubble. Every new advance, from the throwout pilot chute, to the ZP main, to the 3-ring, to the Nova, has had its proponents and opponents. One rigger's not going to have much effect. Give it time; field use will provide us with more experience and more data to make good judgements about the Argus and Vigil. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BKR 0 #33 October 4, 2006 I agree concerning the way the rigger has handle the tests, it should be better organized. Only one point took my attention, the way different brands cutters cut the loop. Those loops have been set the same way, no tension at all (I watched the entire video). There is also a lot of things I cannot talk about on a forum.Jérôme Bunker Basik Air Concept www.basik.fr http://www.facebook.com/pages/Le-Luc-France/BASIK-AIR-CONCEPT/172133350468 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gjhdiver 0 #34 October 4, 2006 QuoteI agree concerning the way the rigger has handle the tests, it should be better organized. Only one point took my attention, the way different brands cutters cut the loop. Those loops have been set the same way, no tension at all (I watched the entire video). There is also a lot of things I cannot talk about on a forum. And there is also the fact that the Argus loop was placed incorrectly with a knot inside the cutter under no tension as described in the document I attached to a thread in an earlier post in this thread. It's dishonest to design a test that you you know that the unit can't pass, then fail it, and refuse to correct or duplicate it. To date, there's been no failiures of the Argus in the field, but as it's new, it's perfectly reasonable for manufacturers to wait on approving it until they have seen more data. Waiting for approval is a whole different situation from being banned from use, as Vigil are with RI products, and from some drop zones in the UK for unexplained misfires. The Argus isn't banned from RI and Strong, it's just waiting on approval from them. The Argus website http://www.argus-aad.com has all the manufacturers that have seen the unit and allowed it to be installed, available for review with the original documentation from the companies. These are not insignificant players in the sport market, Wings, Jump Shack, Javelin, Vector etc. It's early days yet, and I'm sure that the others will follow if the Argus continues to perform as well as it currently does. No one can fault these companies for being cautious in today's legal environment. Just don't mistake "not currently approved" for "Banned". I have an Argus in all my rigs. I'll be your test bitch. 200 jumps so far. How's about that ? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BKR 0 #35 October 4, 2006 You play with wording, when it is not approved to be installed, it seems to me it is banned. This could change when everything will be clearup. Concerning the knot, no, it has not been insert into the cutter hole. I have seen the complete video and it is not the case.Jérôme Bunker Basik Air Concept www.basik.fr http://www.facebook.com/pages/Le-Luc-France/BASIK-AIR-CONCEPT/172133350468 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Liemberg 0 #36 October 4, 2006 QuotePerhaps this will shed a little light on the cutter issue. Thanks, it certainly did. Then again, I haven't seen the DVD Jerome talks about so I haven't got the faintest clue if the knot being pulled inside the hole is the cause of "the failure". I can envision it being the case though. Jerome seems to think it isn't. Usually there are no knots in that part of the loop that is directly above or below the cutter, so a cutter that fails to go through a knot yet cuts through a standard loop under the normal tension should be a non-issue, IMHO... However: In the past I have seen video of another brands AAD cutter cutting right through a steel ripcord cable - maybe "overkill" but sometimes peace is reached through superior fire power; so who knows?... The fact that temperature and humidity were not recorded doesn't invalidate the findings where the three AAD's were compared, albeit only once. I think we can all agree that, whatever those readings were, they must have been the same for all three AAD's... "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
Liemberg 0 #37 October 4, 2006 QuoteThey way the test was setup, this cannot be verified. Also it cannot be verified they were jumping a production unit. Look Paul, If I take three different AAD's in the same belly pouch for "a spin around the block" you can cry "unscientific" and call the findings irrelevant but that doesn't change the findings - whatever they may be... QuoteWe all know this rigger has some issues. Not being impartial doesn't seem to be one of them - could have only sent the Argus on the "spin around the block" now couldn't he? OTOH one of those issues may well be that at that riggers DZ a well known skydiver had a premature reserve opening that killed him when he operated his AAD outside the parameters of what the manufacturer said that was possible with extreme canopy piloting. And THAT manufacturer had been forwarned by another extreme canopy pilot who had done some testing of his own - testing that (how ironic!) was discarded as "unscientific" with the manufacturer activly preventing publication of the results in USPA's "Parachutist". When a rigger worth his salt finds something whether he is doing "a personal test" or just doing a repack + inspection or looking over a system after it has been used, he reports his findings if it is possible that there may be issues involving other systems than the one were "the anomaly" was found. Of course there's a potential for conflict with the manufacturer who may not like the findings. However, lots of service bulletins have started this way. I am not looking forward to situations where for instance reserves don't open after the loop has been cut and the rigger decides not to report what has happened since he knows beforehand that the manufacturer wil say that the thing wasn't packed the way it should have been and then invariably tries to crucify the bearer of the news... Luckily that didn't happen with the Mirage recently when a few people on the same jump went low, several loops were cut and several reserves didn't open - though it may well be that with a different packjob those systems would have worked as intended. QuoteThis rigger didn't do ANY dedicated test jump. NOT EVEN ONE. So if I send an altimeter up with the plane to see if it is still good I'm not actually testing that altimeter??? Go figure... "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
USPA 0 #38 October 4, 2006 Peter, having a vork, a spoon and a knife avaible. Then using the vork to eat your soap, doesn't make the spoon defect. If you don't get this comparison you don't get the test. (certainly if you want to sustain your comments on another fatality, in which you either forgot some facts or don't have them all). Speaking of the test jumps, the manufactorer indicates beforehand this particular unit wouldn't function the way Jo wanted too on the said setup. Not really an amazing conclusion.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
USPA 0 #39 October 4, 2006 QuoteI think we can all agree that, whatever those readings were, they must have been the same for all three AAD's And once again you demonstrate your inability to grasp the invalidities of the report. Only 2 AAD's cutters were compared. Both in completly different circumstances, with an unequal setup of the loop.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
BKR 0 #40 October 4, 2006 QuoteQuoteI think we can all agree that, whatever those readings were, they must have been the same for all three AAD's And once again you demonstrate your inability to grasp the invalidities of the report. Only 2 AAD's cutters were compared. Both in completly different circumstances, with an unequal setup of the loop. You are wrong, I have seen a video with the 3 main brands of cutters (Airtec-AAD and Aviacom) only Aviacom failed. Those 3 cutters have been set exactly the same way, with the same no tension on the loop. Sure, no tension is unusual, but both cuts one didn't.Jérôme Bunker Basik Air Concept www.basik.fr http://www.facebook.com/pages/Le-Luc-France/BASIK-AIR-CONCEPT/172133350468 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
phoenixlpr 0 #41 October 4, 2006 Where is the video? Is that online? thanks. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gjhdiver 0 #42 October 4, 2006 QuoteYou play with wording, when it is not approved to be installed, it seems to me it is banned How about this. If I don't have a driver's license, I can't drive, but I'm not banned from doing so once I get a license. If I've been banned from driving, I can't get a license and I can't drive. Fair enough ? Now, I've spoken to representatives of the companies you mention, and the Argus is not banned in the sense that it can never be placed in their products. It's currently under evaluation to see if it's compatible with them, which is completely normal. The Argus went through this procedure with us at Wings before we allowed it to be installed. If it passes inspection with these other compaines, it will be allowed to be fitted, as it is in every other major rig. If it doesn't meet their standards, it won't. It really is that simple. That they haven't finished their evaluation yet shouldn't lead you to any false conclusions. That's not playing with words, it's just a statement of the facts. I think this matter is pretty much settled now though. There doesn't appear to be anything wrong with the Argus that would cause much concern. I shall now retire from the thread victorious in my own mind. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,400 #43 October 4, 2006 >when it is not approved to be installed, it seems to me it is banned. ??? This makes no sense. You have probably never jumped at Otay before, and have not filled out a waiver; you can't jump there until you do fill out the waiver (and have your reserve checked etc.) Would it be accurate to say that you are banned from Otay? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BKR 0 #44 October 4, 2006 French Skydiving Federation has set a mandatory statement. Argus is not allowed into the rigs I have noticed. Peoples who have such AAD must remove them from their rigs So, for myself it is not allowed or "banned" into these equipements. We can say, banned or not allowed, whatever, result is the same.. grounded. I am not English fluent but enought to say, you cannot jump with this AAD into these equipements. Maybe the word wasn't perfectly exactly good.Jérôme Bunker Basik Air Concept www.basik.fr http://www.facebook.com/pages/Le-Luc-France/BASIK-AIR-CONCEPT/172133350468 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dragon2 0 #45 October 4, 2006 OK so you mean, in FRANCE the Argus is grounded? France is not the whole world ciel bleu, Saskia Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BKR 0 #46 October 5, 2006 France is not the whole World I agree and it is not grounded for all rigs. Only those listed above.Jérôme Bunker Basik Air Concept www.basik.fr http://www.facebook.com/pages/Le-Luc-France/BASIK-AIR-CONCEPT/172133350468 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Liemberg 0 #47 October 5, 2006 Quote Quote I think we can all agree that, whatever those readings were, they must have been the same for all three AAD's And once again you demonstrate your inability to grasp the invalidities of the report. Only 2 AAD's cutters were compared. Both in completly different circumstances, with an unequal setup of the loop. Go re-read the report... @ Texel they did 2 things: 1. They took 3 different brand AAD's in a weight vest, jumped with them from 13000ft - opened at 3000ft and made a 270 degree turn with them from 700ft under a 2,56 loaded canopy. The Argus fired there, while the other 2 gadgets (Cypres2 and Vigil) didn't. However it did not cut the loop that was inserted in its cutter. 2. After that they took a discarded 2 pin tandem cypres1 into an FXC test chamber with one cutter rigged like the loops had been rigged during the jump and (since they had 2 cutters obviously) a loop without any tension at all) into the other cutter. QuoteJo Oosterveers report: we decided to rig up a 2 pin Tandem Cypres (end of life time 31-08-2006) the same way as described above. We also stuck a loop not pre stretched without any tension at all in the second cutter. Using a certified and calibrated FXC test chamber we went to 7000 ft and started the free fall. At approx. 1900 ft both cutters fired and fully separated from the loops at both sides. Maybe that is entirely unscientific but as the saying goes: "It aint rocket science..." "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
USPA 0 #48 October 5, 2006 it aint rocket sience, but you can't compare a bull with a cow and say the bull is malfunctioning cause it ain't giving milk. I wasn't even talking about the test on the AFF jump, since it is irrelevant. Experimental unit doing wat was predicted it was supposed to do. (fire in standard mode on a extreme swoop jump mounted in front)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 #49 October 5, 2006 Quoteunit doing wat was predicted it was supposed to do. I thought cutters were supposed to cut when prompted by an electrical current, severing the loop. To carry on with wild and far fetched analogies (since you are letting all sorts of cattle in): Suppose you had 2 chain saws - one can be used on oak, pine, mahogany - even to massacre half the state of Texas. The other one get's stuck on a branch. Maybe used the wrong lubricant, maybe sawing at the wrong angle, maybe only suited to trim the hedge. Now all of a sudden there's a bush fire, you are a smoke jumper and you have to cut down a tree RIGHT NOW, to prevent the fire from spreading to the next valley. FOR THE TIME BEING, which one would YOU want to take with you on this assignment? Of course, that judgment may change in time and you learn that chain saw number 2 works just fine - always use Aeroshell w50, saw at 45 degree angle, whatever. OR you bought yourself a nice hedge trimmer - but you don't own a garden... OR: you are jumping a system with the cutter underneath the pilot chute but above the freebag, you pull your reserve near "the basement" and as your pilot chute is launched but before the reserve bridle is pulling your cutter is prompted by an electrical current. There's no more tension on the loop since your pilot chute just left and your cutter clamps itself on the loop, right above the grommet on top of your freebag. Congratulations - you just turned a cutter into a temporary locking pin... Of course I'm not saying that this above scenario CAN happen, just telling Aviacom SA that THEY should convince "US" that it cannot. And my definition of "cannot" is different from "highly improbable" - try "physically impossible" - whining that Jo is mean to them, Jerome has but a small factory and most of the world doesn't know where Holland is doesn't convince ME. If Aviacom SA wants to beat Airtec there is at least ONE thing they can do better than Airtec did in the past when they were told that highly loaded canopies in extreme maneuvers could prompt a reserve opening and they chose that shooting the messenger was the best option... And now I return to my den, licking my wounds and mourning over another internet-discussion lost... "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
kermietje 0 #50 October 7, 2006 So all who have an argus in their rigs can no longer jump in France? I take care of two teams, who were going to train a few months in GAP next year..But no worries, if we can´t train in France we´ll go in Spain.As stated by Saskia, dragon2, "La France" is not the world, is it...Lets fly, thats what it is about no... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
