chutingstar 1 #1 March 21, 2011 This was sent to me by Mirage via the newsletter e-mail on 18March2011: News: Mirage Systems will no longer be supporting or authorizing the use of Argus's in our containers. We will keep you posted with further information in the upcoming bulletin from the PIA. And then a follow-up from Jeannie at Mirage today after asking for a bulletin or more info: We will send out more info shortly, but at this time we are no longer authorizing the use of Argus's in our containers. MikeChutingStar.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
theonlyski 3 #2 March 22, 2011 Thanks Mike, that's two major manufacturers saying the Argus is no longer allowed... any idea if others are following suit?"I may be a dirty pirate hooker...but I'm not about to go stand on the corner." iluvtofly DPH -7, TDS 578, Muff 5153, SCR 14890 I'm an asshole, and I approve this message Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chutingstar 1 #3 March 22, 2011 I hope not. I think they are jumping the gun given the history of AAD incidents from all manufacturers. I know Aviacom, the FAA and an independent DPRE are involved in the investigation among others. And we'll have much better info once that is completed. Hopefully sooner rather than later. MikeChutingStar.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
theonlyski 3 #4 March 22, 2011 QuoteI hope not. I think they are jumping the gun given the history of AAD incidents from all manufacturers. I know Aviacom, the FAA and an independent DPRE are involved in the investigation among others. And we'll have much better info once that is completed. Hopefully sooner rather than later. Mike Yeah, no kidding. I believe my Argus cutter has a DOM similar to the one that failed to fully cut the loop fully in Texas."I may be a dirty pirate hooker...but I'm not about to go stand on the corner." iluvtofly DPH -7, TDS 578, Muff 5153, SCR 14890 I'm an asshole, and I approve this message Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
spootch 0 #5 March 22, 2011 Quote Quote I hope not. I think they are jumping the gun given the history of AAD incidents from all manufacturers. I know Aviacom, the FAA and an independent DPRE are involved in the investigation among others. And we'll have much better info once that is completed. Hopefully sooner rather than later. Mike Yeah, no kidding. I believe my Argus cutter has a DOM similar to the one that failed to fully cut the loop fully in Texas. LOL better install that cutter below the molar bag! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Fledgling 0 #6 March 22, 2011 Quoteany idea if others are following suit? I believe Argus has already been grounded in more than one country so far. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
koppel 3 #7 March 22, 2011 QuoteThanks Mike, that's two major manufacturers saying the Argus is no longer allowed... any idea if others are following suit? One manufacturer so far... RI, with another that looks like following suit, Mirage. Nothing on the Mirage website as of now. Once they release a Service Bulletin or publish something official for the masses then it becomes fact. It may sound like nit-picking but I guess that is what the FAA does.I like my canopy... ...it lets me down. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
leadgenx 0 #8 March 22, 2011 QuoteQuoteany idea if others are following suit? I believe Argus has already been grounded in more than one country so far. In Poland ARGUS had been grounded for a year after a girl jumper died when loop was not cut properly. On the 15th of March ARGUS was allowed to be used after replacing cutters produced before 2008. Now I doubt it was a good decision.Free speech includes the right not to listen, if not interested. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
riggertj9 0 #9 March 22, 2011 Rigging Innovations has a service bulletin on their home page. Mirage Systems as of this morning (03/22/2011) has not released an official service bulletin but has announced their intentions to pull authorization of the Argus AAD in multiple mediums. So technically the Argus AAD is still authorized for installation and use in a Mirage harness/container as of this moment but with multiple announcements to pull that authorization, so it is coming. Update: Sunpath has also pulled their authorization for installation of the Argus AAD. Here is the Service Bulletin: http://sunpath.com/docs/SPSB006-3.22.11_0.pdf Here is RI's Service Bulletin: http://www.rigginginnovations.com/support/sb/SB-1548.pdf Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BMFin 0 #10 March 23, 2011 Quote News: Mirage Systems will no longer be supporting or authorizing the use of Argus's in our containers. We will keep you posted with further information in the upcoming bulletin from the PIA. And then a follow-up from Jeannie at Mirage today after asking for a bulletin or more info: We will send out more info shortly, but at this time we are no longer authorizing the use of Argus's in our containers. Mike Out of curiosity, since Im not fully aware of US regulations, I ask this: What kind of effect does this action from manufacturers have? I mean isnt this just an advice from manufacturers that they dont consider argus as reliable ? In other words every jumper should still be able to make their own decisions about this since this is not an FAA regulation or anything binding ? EDIT: With a quick glance on the Sunpath bulletin I found this: "it could now be a violation of 14 CFR Part 65.129(e) if a certificated parachute rigger were to pack a Sun Path Products, Inc. harness and container system with an Argus AAD installed." This brings me to another question: Does the MFG have free hands on deciding what products are suitable with theirs and what not ? If so, I see potential legal issues in terms of competition law.. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
theonlyski 3 #11 March 23, 2011 QuoteOut of curiosity, since Im not fully aware of US regulations, I ask this: What kind of effect does this action from manufacturers have? I mean isnt this just an advice from manufacturers that they dont consider argus as reliable ? In other words every jumper should still be able to make their own decisions about this since this is not an FAA regulation or anything binding ? No, we (as riggers) are not allowed to go against the manufacturers recommendations. If Mirage wanted to say that you can only use Vigils with a DOM of 2010 or later, thats the rule. Individual jumpers, well... they might be able to get away with it, but someone somewhere is going to get screwed because of it. The DZO cannot let you jump (what is now considered by the manufacturer) unairworthy gear, the pilot can get in some serious trouble as well. I wouldn't be surprised if some of the DZ's have riggers out checking gear this weekend, to make sure that none of the now illegal configurations are being used. ETA: QuoteThis brings me to another question: Does the MFG have free hands on deciding what products are suitable with theirs and what not ? If so, I see potential legal issues in terms of competition law.. Yes, the H/C mfg has final say on combinations of gear. Even down to the canopies used."I may be a dirty pirate hooker...but I'm not about to go stand on the corner." iluvtofly DPH -7, TDS 578, Muff 5153, SCR 14890 I'm an asshole, and I approve this message Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BMFin 0 #12 March 23, 2011 Quote Yes, the H/C mfg has final say on combinations of gear. Even down to the canopies used. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coercive_monopoly http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tying_(commerce) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Competition_law Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CrazyAl 0 #13 March 23, 2011 One thing I'm really curious about is if these manufactures sold customers complete rigs with Argus's in them, and then they demand them be taken out.. Should they not give there customers refunds on the AADs.. Hard to indorse something and then claim no accountability? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
theonlyski 3 #14 March 23, 2011 QuoteQuote Yes, the H/C mfg has final say on combinations of gear. Even down to the canopies used. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coercive_monopoly http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tying_(commerce) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Competition_law So, I can take a Dual Hawk student harness and strap it up to a Sigma container?"I may be a dirty pirate hooker...but I'm not about to go stand on the corner." iluvtofly DPH -7, TDS 578, Muff 5153, SCR 14890 I'm an asshole, and I approve this message Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DiverMike 5 #15 March 23, 2011 QuoteI wouldn't be surprised if some of the DZ's have riggers out checking gear this weekend, to make sure that none of the now illegal configurations are being used. Correct me if I am wrong, but the service bulletins I have seen indicate the AAD 'should' be removed prior to the next jump. Nothing I have seen indicates it 'must' be or that it is mandatory that it is immediately removed. Isn't it technically legal to use the AAD until the next repack of the reserve where it would be illegal to pack it? For the same reason I jump off a perfectly good diving board. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
theonlyski 3 #16 March 23, 2011 QuoteQuoteI wouldn't be surprised if some of the DZ's have riggers out checking gear this weekend, to make sure that none of the now illegal configurations are being used. Correct me if I am wrong, but the service bulletins I have seen indicate the AAD 'should' be removed prior to the next jump. Nothing I have seen indicates it 'must' be or that it is mandatory that it is immediately removed. Isn't it technically legal to use the AAD until the next repack of the reserve where it would be illegal to pack it? The way I read and interpret it, jumping the rig with it installed is in violation of the manufacturers recommendations. You MIGHT be able to fight it, but I don't want MY ass on the FAA's block."I may be a dirty pirate hooker...but I'm not about to go stand on the corner." iluvtofly DPH -7, TDS 578, Muff 5153, SCR 14890 I'm an asshole, and I approve this message Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wolfriverjoe 1,340 #17 March 23, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteI wouldn't be surprised if some of the DZ's have riggers out checking gear this weekend, to make sure that none of the now illegal configurations are being used. Correct me if I am wrong, but the service bulletins I have seen indicate the AAD 'should' be removed prior to the next jump. Nothing I have seen indicates it 'must' be or that it is mandatory that it is immediately removed. Isn't it technically legal to use the AAD until the next repack of the reserve where it would be illegal to pack it? The way I read and interpret it, jumping the rig with it installed is in violation of the manufacturers recommendations. You MIGHT be able to fight it, but I don't want MY ass on the FAA's block. Nor do most pilots. The pilot in command has ultimate responsibility for the airworthiniess of the gear being jumped out of "his" plane. And it's his ass (ticket really, but the same thing) on the line. Nit pick the difference between "should" and "must" all you want. If I'm the PIC, you will do it on the ground or you will remove the Argus from the rig. Period."There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BMFin 0 #18 March 23, 2011 QuoteSo, I can take a Dual Hawk student harness and strap it up to a Sigma container? No, because obviously the student harness is an essential part of the whole harness container system. However you can fit the Dual Hawk system with a HOP-330 for example. I havent given much thought to this, but I find the issue someworth debatable. Imagine if Javelin and UPT issued bulletins that only PD canopies are to be used with their gear. Soon PD would be in monopoly. Im not saying that "banning" argus is wrong. It may very well be justified. All im saying is that I find it interesting that manufacturers are given (by law) the sole power to decide what gear to use with their products. To me it seems a TSO (technical standard order) would be the more appropriate istitution to make such decisions. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
piisfish 135 #19 March 24, 2011 QuoteHowever you can fit the Dual Hawk system with a HOP-330 for example. I havent given much thought to this, but I find the issue someworth debatable. Imagine if Javelin and UPT issued bulletins that only PD canopies are to be used with their gear. Soon PD would be in monopoly.If you fit a canopy or parts which are not approved by the manufacturer, it might work very well, or even better, but in case of problem, should you go to court, you will stand alone with the manufacturer guidelines against you.scissors beat paper, paper beat rock, rock beat wingsuit - KarlM Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BMFin 0 #20 March 24, 2011 QuoteIf you fit a canopy or parts which are not approved by the manufacturer, it might work very well, or even better, but in case of problem, should you go to court, you will stand alone with the manufacturer guidelines against you. Obviously yes and thats how it should be. My point is that in the US the manufacturer is given by law the power to actually inhibit people even using this "non approved" gear in the first place. They are not allowed to use this gear even on their own risk. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
piisfish 135 #21 March 24, 2011 QuoteMy point is that in the US the manufacturer is given by law the power to actually inhibit people even using this "non approved" gear in the first place. They are not allowed to use this gear even on their own risk.it is not a US question. It is a manufacturer question. If Parachutes de France, TSE, Basik, PArachute Systems et al. want to prohibit the use of such or such part on their rigs, it is their right. If you want to install a XYZ AAD which is prohibited by the manufacturer, you can. But once again you will stand alone. You will go against established rules. DZ's might try to prevent you from jumping your rig. If you do so, don't get caught, don't go in, and don't break a plane. Also it is bad procedure anyways for a rigger to pack "against" manufacturer's manual and SB's. This would make the rig "not legal" to be used.scissors beat paper, paper beat rock, rock beat wingsuit - KarlM Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BMFin 0 #22 March 24, 2011 Quote it is not a US question. It is a manufacturer question. It is a US question You see, in the US you will brake the law if you install that XYZ AAD on your rig. (against mfg approval) In another country you simply take your own risk. However, you wont be doing anything illegal. Thats the difference. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AndyMan 7 #23 March 24, 2011 Quote In Reply To In Reply To Yes, the H/C mfg has final say on combinations of gear. Even down to the canopies used. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coercive_monopoly http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tying_(commerce) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Competition_law So, I can take a Dual Hawk student harness and strap it up to a Sigma container? An odd example, since I know of a few very large Strong tandem centers that use Sigma harnesses. _Am__ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
riggerrob 558 #24 March 27, 2011 Under American law (and most other countries) a rigger or skydiver may chose a TIGHTER standard than the manufacturer's instructions/service bulletins, manuals, etc., but if he adopts a LOOSER standard, he is operating illegally. He may get away with ignoring a service bulletin, technical bulletin, ariworthiness directive, federal air regulation, etc. but if he ever gets hurt, his medical insurance will not cover him and he risks a fine from the Federal Aviation Administration. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sundevil777 93 #25 March 27, 2011 Quoteif he ever gets hurt, his medical insurance will not cover him What makes you think that is true?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
