0
dgermano

Argus Investigation - San Marcos

Recommended Posts

Quote

>Even IF the ball was introduced at the factory, that's a completely different basis for an investigation . .

Agreed; it's more of a process issue than a design issue.

>How about issuing an immediate 'thorough inspection notice for foreign objects in
>the cutter' for all Argus units, for example?

That would be an excellent idea. And had Aviacom come out with that corrective action, rather than just claiming that nothing at all was wrong, all their cutters work fine and that it's all a big conspiracy, it's likely that this whole mess could have been avoided.

On the plus side, if the various manufacturer's bans on the Argus were enough of an incentive to get them to fix the problem, then all skydivers will benefit.



They couldn't really do that until they'd opened the cutter and found the ball.

According to more than one source, that took an inordinate amount of time, and some pressure from the FAA.

The PIA warning, and subsequent bans were here before Aviacom ever got the cutter to examine, right?

Now, there is always "Once burned, twice wary".

But, in this case, PIA's warning and manufacturers' subsequent bans might have been less warranted than had been originally thought.

But it is pretty easy to see how it happened. It sure seemed like the San Marcos event was pretty damning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

PIA's warning and manufacturers' subsequent bans might have been less warranted than had been originally thought.


The jury is still out. The photos we have are inconclusive with respect to scarring or deformation of the ball. Nor does the Sky Supplies report say definitively that the cutter damage was from the ball.

Mark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

PIA's warning and manufacturers' subsequent bans might have been less warranted than had been originally thought.


The jury is still out. The photos we have are inconclusive with respect to scarring or deformation of the ball. Nor does the Sky Supplies report say definitively that the cutter damage was from the ball.

Mark



That's why I said "maybe".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Lets talk in this thread about why this rig was withheld from the manufacturer



Who withheld the rig? The owner? The rigger at SSM? or someone else? And why?
There seemed to be quite a bit more going on other than just the Argus incident as it's my understanding the rig didn't even have the right repack card and the one that was in it was supposedly pencil packed.
The whole thing from the get go including the rig owner is weird.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Bill did not remove your post, I did. Conspiracy theories are to be limited to Speakers Corner on here, not the topical forums. Anyone trying to engage in them in this forum will find their posts removed.



Eric, here is where the conspiracy theory was started by a poster that is conspiracy seeing a conspiracy in every situation. And this post is still up. The other posts were just a reaction to this.

Sparky

Post #3

Quote

I suspect as aviacom do, something more sinister than a simple misunderstanding, that rig was withheld from aviacom for a reason and meanwhile aviacom have received the most damaging blow any manufacturer can receive.

Why is the attention always away from evident corruption and on semantics and moot points...

If there is something sinister about this ordeal, lets not just let them get away with it! If there is info lets find out, the PIA is formed of companies that agree with one another or at least work together.

According to what we have been told the entity that withheld the evidence is in cahoots with the PIA and the PIA made the announcement.


My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Lets talk in this thread about why this rig was withheld from the manufacturer



Who withheld the rig? The owner? The rigger at SSM? or someone else? And why?
There seemed to be quite a bit more going on other than just the Argus incident as it's my understanding the rig didn't even have the right repack card and the one that was in it was supposedly pencil packed.
The whole thing from the get go including the rig owner is weird.



If you read the report written by Kirk Smith you can see that a local SM rigger (Eric Butts) had the AAD from the time of the incident to the evaluation that Kirk did with the FAA & others present.
The rig was given back to the owner and has not been released for further evaluation.

.
.
Make It Happen
Parachute History
DiveMaker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Re posting this.. Please delete it again Bill! Does Cypres throw you a free unit every time you cover something up for them..




Oh but we never never favour our major advertisers and we never delete posts that we deem damaging to our revenue stream.........

Never. cough cough.
"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rhys, this is your final warning about trying to push a conspiracy theory on this topic in this forum. I challenge anyone to show where any of the moderators "delete posts that we deem damaging to our revenue stream" I don't even know who advertises on here anymore so I have no bias at all in that aspect.
Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Rhys, this is your final warning about trying to push a conspiracy theory on this topic in this forum. I challenge anyone to show where any of the moderators "delete posts that we deem damaging to our revenue stream" I don't even know who advertises on here anymore so I have no bias at all in that aspect.



A problem that should have been addressed before.

Sparky
My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yep shes a squeaky clean world we live in and money does not afffect our decision making and everyone always acts with the utmost integrety..:S

Try reading what I replied to... oops you can't, it was deleted....

Again.

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote


Try reading what I replied to... oops you can't, it was deleted....



I'm fairly certain he can read deleted posts.
"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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

yep shes a squeaky clean world we live in and money does not afffect our decision making and everyone always acts with the utmost integrety..:S

Try reading what I replied to... oops you can't, it was deleted....

Again.




Rhys, I suggest you follow the advise that Phree has provided you with. While you may feel there is a conspiracy on the loose, failure to follow the forum rules in any of the forums on this site will result in action being taken. That goes for everyone, not just you. It's been that way for years and if you cannot follow the rules, like others who couldn't in the past, you will have to find another place on the internet to hang out at.

Please review ALL of the forum rules HERE. If you have any questions feel free to contact any of the moderators.
"It's just skydiving..additional drama is not required"
Some people dream about flying, I live my dream
SKYMONKEY PUBLISHING

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote

Lets talk in this thread about why this rig was withheld from the manufacturer



Who withheld the rig? The owner? The rigger at SSM? or someone else? And why?
There seemed to be quite a bit more going on other than just the Argus incident as it's my understanding the rig didn't even have the right repack card and the one that was in it was supposedly pencil packed.
The whole thing from the get go including the rig owner is weird.



If you read the report written by Kirk Smith you can see that a local SM rigger (Eric Butts) had the AAD from the time of the incident to the evaluation that Kirk did with the FAA & others present.
The rig was given back to the owner and has not been released for further evaluation.

.



I did read it and I think the whole thing is weird. It doesn't ad up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Rhys, I suggest you follow the advise that Phree has provided you with.



I am not creating any conspiracy, I am merely discussing the situation as advised to us consumers, I am a DZO and CI and have a person with a grounded rig ATM.

Aviacom made the allegations, and I wish to discuss them.

If you read my reply, I was replying to that fact that somebody eleses comments have been deleted time and time again and they should not have been so.

Furthermore I would like you to point out which forum rule has been broken.

I am not the only one with this train of thought, there is a poll in the SC about it,Check out the results. It is also being discussed around the world at many, many dropzones. And the swift banning and the feet dragging on reversing the bans based on that fact that a foreign object was found in the unit is not being ignored by us consumers either.

The Cypres safety bulletin in 2008 lied about the outcome of thier faulty product and that was ignored and swept under the carpet while many people lives had been knowingly jeopardised, it is also known that they knew they were lying.

If airtec are allowed to lie in a safety bullitin and that is no big deal, then hey... I am just a paranoid conspiracy theorist.:S

This whole debarcle is an elephant in the room and I wish to discuss it.

If I am not allowed to discuss this subject freely then the very reason for this forums existance is moot and therefore you can ban me if you wish.
"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

This whole debarcle is an elephant in the room and I wish to discuss it.

If I am not allowed to discuss this subject freely then the very reason for this forums existance is moot and therefore you can ban me if you wish



You seem to have no shortage of things to add to so mnay threads, but then you turn around post in this thread like you can't add 2+2.

You're hell bent on pointing fingers at Airtec for concealing problems and convinced that when the mods tell to you to keep in topic (which is the Argus investigation) that it has nothing to do with keeping the thread on track, and everything to do with the mods being in bed with Airtec and keeping anything anti-Airtec off of the site.

There's an easy way to test this theory, and this is where you seem like you can't tell your ass from a hole in the ground, just start a new thread dedicated to the issue of Airtec and their big cover-up. If that thread gets deleted or edited or you get banned, then you know that you're right, and the mods are on the take from Airtec. If the thread is left alone, then you know it's not the mods, and the thread might shed some light as to the validity of your theory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

You seem to have no shortage of things to add to so mnay threads, but then you turn around post in this thread like you can't add 2+2.



thats the pot calling the kettle black.

Quote

You're hell bent on pointing fingers at Airtec for concealing problems and convinced that when the mods tell to you to keep in topic (which is the Argus investigation) that it has nothing to do with keeping the thread on track, and everything to do with the mods being in bed with Airtec and keeping anything anti-Airtec off of the site.



Well lets see.... we know ther was a foreign object in the argus, and now we wait for the manufacturers to respond....

... and we are still waiting.

While we are waiting we can discuss the ethic involved here.

One AAD manufacturer being banned while another is allowed to willingly lie about a serious accident is definately deserving of being in the same thread and while we wait for the manufacturers to repsond we are left to assume and speculate what is gojng on because we are all left in the dark...

face it, the argus acted as it was supposed to and a foregn object inhibited it's function, they were subsequently banned...

meanwhile.... the feet keep dragging and the cypres fly off the shelves.
"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

While we are waiting we can discuss the ethic involved here



The mods seem to disagree, and since it's 'their' sandbox, they get to make (or interpuret) the rules. So you test their motivations by abiding by their rules, stopping the discussion here and starting a dedicated thread. Their reaction to that will tell you if you're right or wrong about the mods being 'in' on some sort of Airtec based cover-up.

Of course, you could just keep banging your head against the wall in this thread, and eventually getting banned, at which point you'll assume that you were right all along, but never really put your theory to the true test of starting another thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jeez Rhys,
don't get your self banned. Just tone it down a little, eh?

If you can find that old posts were ever deleted, then we'll look at the evidence. Just don't keep making the accusation every second post.

And I don't mean posts being deleted in a day or so after posting -- that happens when a thread goes way off the rails and a mod trims out some of the mess. Sometimes the trimming might go a bit far, when a mod is busy and a post with a mix of off topic and on topic stuff gets caught up in the trimming process. But I don't know how exactly that process works.

I don't know if it is worth it, but maybe some mods could add another sticky to the Announcements forum to explain deletion practices as it is one of the more common things for people to get upset about.

Regarding the Cypres 2008 Australian incident, I have mentioned a couple times that Airtec told me that they just couldn't find any email about the incident indicating any sort of injury. But it is fair for you to think they are just covering up, in the same was I think they are probably being honest about that. Recalling many hundreds of units is enough of an embarrassment -- whether or not one jumper was sore and not jumping for a couple weeks (or whatever) after a two out landing.

It might also help if you stuck to fewer topics per post. Even if you truly feel there are a number of different issues to be investigated, don't bring them all up every time.

People are concerned about the whole issue of how AAD's are banned or unbanned, and there's plenty of details we haven't heard about yet. It can go both ways -- suspicion of the PIA members' actions, and suspicion of Argus' actions. (Plus there's that little steel ball, with it's UFO-like fuzzy photos!)

The problem for the mods, I suspect, isn't that these things can't be talked about on dropzone, it's the way you talk about them. You don't need to drag everything in together every time like one big conspiracy. People already know your general viewpoint, but so just cool it a little unless there's something new to add to the conversation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

face it, the argus acted as it was supposed to and a foregn object inhibited it's function, they were subsequently banned...



I own an Argus, and had to pull it from my rig because it was banned, so I know what it feels like to have to sit here and wait.

With that said, this wasn't the first instance of the cutter not fully or completely cutting both sides of the loop. You make it sound like it was an isolated incident that ONE time a cutter gets jammed and container mfgrs are all over it. The truth is, this shit has happened before, just this time, they found a possible cause other than the cutter just failing to fully cut the loop. What about the other incidents where the loop got jammed on one side, and they DIDN'T find FOD (atleast that was reported) in the blade/anvil?

I'm pissed off too, I have a paperweight as it stands right now, but you're trying to blame it all on one incident, not the previous ones.

Say a wing falls off a few planes (lets call them killer 100's), the NTSB finds that it was possibly a defect in design. Now say a wing falls off on another one (same model), and the NTSB has concluded that it was missing some attachment hardware or was not properly seated/tightened. Does that one incident mean that just because it was not the airframe THAT time, that it is a safe frame?

No.
"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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yeah, next thing you know is the ban of unmodified Cypres temp pins, as they are very likely to punch holes in shotbags :|

I don't care, I have my modifed ones 3-in-1 and full protection :D

scissors beat paper, paper beat rock, rock beat wingsuit - KarlM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

and now we wait for the manufacturers to respond....

... and we are still waiting.



Note that Argus' (Aviacom's) own web page has had only minimal updates in the last couple weeks, other than their revised service bulletin. Unless I missed something, they don't even have links to the recent reports on the San Marcos incident.

I'd also like to know what's happening in the background, and I bet there is a lot of digesting the latest "steel (?) ball" news.

But just hearing nothing isn't a conspiracy.

Otherwise one would have to conclude that Aviacom is in on the conspiracy against themselves, since they haven't responded either!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
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.

0