Vigil verses Cypress, which would you choose?

[Nelyubin 0]

Impressed by the BASF plant in Mathayme. Cypres It looks like a small workshop for assembling toys

[Skybear 0]

Ever done the Vigil factory tour? Maybe I would be impressed, but they let nobody in.

Airtec looks very unspectacular from outside, and even on some places inside, but the precision and quality of their work is outstanding. Before telling people that it looks like a toy assembly you should better go there and have a look. Call them and ask for a visit, they are very open for visiting skydivers.

[erdnarob 1]

Vigil 2 becomes more and more popular at the point that Canada et USA Champions (Evolution and Arizona Airspeed) chose it. Speaking for Canada, there is in Quebec and Ontario many DZ almost exclusively using Vigil. Why ? because they have overall less problem and they found way easier to manage Vigil 2 from a rig to another (Tandem, Pro, student). Could you imagine the pain in the neck to keep an eye on the date for servicing for the Vigil competitors AADs and found out in the middle of the jumping season that you have to send it back for a costly maintenance. None of that with Vigil, you decide when you want to get it checked just like you do with your car. There are parts of your car which are vital for safety and which have to be checked. And as far as the Vigil 2 tells you in clear language when you switch it on that the three checks (cutter, batteries and electronics) are OK, it is good. Also, Vigil seems to have the best energy saving software among AADs since its batteries are almost good for 10 years. And having the interface + disk, you can yourself download the last 16 minutes and get parameters and graphs from the jumps. Recently, in an very strange skydiving accident in Canada (where the jumper got separated from his rig), the jumper was equipped with a Vigil 2, one could be able to determine what has happened by checking the graphs indicating speeds, change of speeds, time, altitude....in an obvious way. IMO Vigil is way in advance with respect to the other competitor and this for many features it offers. But old habits are hard to give up. What you have been told for more than ten years that a part of your rig needs to be checked regularly while this part is self checking at the switch on, you can start to believe in it.

My Vigil AAD has fired twice under normal firing conditions. It worked exactly as designed. What ever can be going better !

OTOH, do not rely on AAD too much, all of them have had mishaps. The AAD is just a back up device.

Learn from others mistakes, you will never live long enough to make them all.

[sundevil777 93]

It is not possible for a self test to check the accuracy and actual operational capability. It cannot subject the sensor to a simulated jump. It can only check the health of electronics in a static state, and check continuity to the cutter.

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

[billvon 2,400]

>You're talking about cases of misfires Vigil. Please count how many there were.

I can think of about a dozen Vigil misfires due to transient pressurization issues alone.

[Nelyubin 0]

Quote

It is not possible for a self test to check the accuracy and actual operational capability. It cannot subject the sensor to a simulated jump. It can only check the health of electronics in a static state, and check continuity to the cutter.

You say based on their knowledge of the Cypres. You do not even read the instructions for Vigil. You argue that you do not know.

[Nelyubin 0]

Quote

>You're talking about cases of misfires Vigil. Please count how many there were.

I can think of about a dozen Vigil misfires due to transient pressurization issues alone.

I pointed out in specific cases. Made reference to the topic. Please do the same in support of words.

[nigel99 143]

Quote

I take it that's a yes for Vigil, or not?

I was being an arse. Cypress is a tree, Cypres is an AAD. Most people make the mistake.

I think there is a general feeling that Cypres is the market leader with the best product, but that Vigil may be more cost effective. There are a few cases of Vigils firing due to their algorithms not filtering out pressure changes in the same manner as other brands.

I currently jump whatever is in the rental gear, when I come to buy it will be based on price and will either be a Vigil or Cyres as both are good enough for me.

Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

[sundevil777 93]

Quote

Quote

It is not possible for a self test to check the accuracy and actual operational capability. It cannot subject the sensor to a simulated jump. It can only check the health of electronics in a static state, and check continuity to the cutter.

You say based on their knowledge of the Cypres. You do not even read the instructions for Vigil. You argue that you do not know.

A self test cannot do what you seem to want to believe it can, no matter what the manual for a product says.

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

[Nelyubin 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

It is not possible for a self test to check the accuracy and actual operational capability. It cannot subject the sensor to a simulated jump. It can only check the health of electronics in a static state, and check continuity to the cutter.

You say based on their knowledge of the Cypres. You do not even read the instructions for Vigil. You argue that you do not know.

A self test cannot do what you seem to want to believe it can, no matter what the manual for a product says.

You can always make provrkuon a number of of parameters ( speed ,altitude, andmore ... ) comparingthe readings with a digital altimeter ( for example, Neptune) . But you are too lazy to even read the manual.

[erdnarob 1]

Of course it is not possible to have a 100% safe AAD. Everything is relative just like as I said already, nobody can guarantee that your spare tire will not blow up when used. My philosophy is : switch on your AAD and forget. Don't rely on it. But according system analysis engineers from the National research council of Canada Ottawa, if a self checking system (on 3 points...cutter, electronics and batteries) is positive (OK) those three points are OK as long as the software is well designed. That means if for instance, the AAD tells that the batteries are OK, it is very unlikely to find the batteries dead. On the other hand, when the Vigil detects a failure in the cutter, it switched off automatically.
The only thing a system cannot check is the quality of the explosive charge chemicals. Even a just "maintained" AAD can still fail since electronic components are unpredictable.
But I think everybody should go and visit the following site just for info : https://viewer.zoho.com/docs/c6UCg

Learn from others mistakes, you will never live long enough to make them all.

[davelepka 4]

Quote

Of course it is not possible to have a 100% safe AAD

Granted, so let's stop playing the game where one person points to an issue that one AAD had, and another makes a coutner argument that another brand also had an issue.

Given that none are perfect, all we can do is look at the rate of failures or misfires as we know it. Out of documented failures or misfires, I contend that the Cypres has had fewer than the Vigil.

If you look at the rate in terms of failrues or misfires per number of jumps on the brand, than Cypres is a hands down winner based soley on their time in the market and the number of years they were the only game in town. Just the time in the marklet alone puts the number of Cypres out in the field at 10 times the number of Vigils (at least) and the number of jumps at far more than that.

Beyond that, I'm almost sure that even if you figure it at overall misfires or failrues, not compared to the number of jumps, the Cypres still comes up fewer than the Vigil.

Let's consider what I believe to be the largest occurance of Cypres misfires, that being years ago when radio signals 'seemed' to fire Cypres units. Airtecs response was to issue radio resistant (or something) sleeves for the control units, and later adjust the manufacturing to make the sleeves unneccesary. Airtec admitted to the problem, admitted that it was a problem, and came up with a solution.

The biggest problem with Vigils is that they don't filter the pressure info very well, and have fired due to aircraft door openings and car trunk closings. Vigils response was that the units worked as designed, and that jumpers should 'live with it'. They did not admit that the design was a problem, and seek to change it for the better, they just said it worked the way it was supposed to. I guess it was supposed to fire when you open the door of the plane.

Of course Argus takes the cake when their cutters fail, and lock containers shut, and then they essentailly disappear off the face of the earth.

In the end, between the lower failure rate, and the better way Airtec handles problems, I can't see why a few bucks or the need for regualr service is enough for people to go with an alternate product. I think some people are just wired to always go for the 'under dog' or the 'off brand' just because that's how they roll.

If you can't handle the expense of a 4 and 8 year service, and cannot schedule those two events into a 12 year period of your life (in which your rig will need to be down for 24 repacks) you shouldn't be jumping. It's not that much cash, nor that much time or trouble.

[Nelyubin 0]

Quote

Quote

Of course it is not possible to have a 100% safe AAD

...
If you can't handle the expense of a 4 and 8 year service, and cannot schedule those two events into a 12 year period of your life (in which your rig will need to be down for 24 repacks) you shouldn't be jumping. It's not that much cash, nor that much time or trouble.

Quote

Statistics indicate that the use of CYPRES tends to reduce the risk of serious injury or death,
but it does NOT eliminate it, and in certain circumstances it may even increase the risk.

If you or your family are not willing to accept these facts, please discontinue
the use of CYPRES, and seriously consider taking up a safer sport.

You and Airtek try to dictate to other people.

I have started to jump when wasn't Airtek and Cypres. Jumped with various devices. Jumped with Cypres. But time goes. Airtek isn't in time behind modern technologies. They need to repeat a prayer "we very long in the market"

Yes, not your care with what to me to jump.

[Beatnik 2]

I know what I am talking about in regards to my previous post. And I think that you are not grasping it. It is a product comparison and not directly talking about vigil misfires even though that is indirectly being discussed. I know of a few personally that had misfires with vigils but all of that doesn't matter the math doesn't lie about it. However, personal believes and biases can sure make people believe what they want. Quite frankly I am not going to get in a drawn out argument with you cause I can already tell that you have your mind made up regardless of the facts or how to analyze them correctly.

[davelepka 4]

Quote

I have started to jump when wasn't Airtek and Cypres. Jumped with various devices. Jumped with Cypres. But time goes. Airtek isn't in time behind modern technologies. They need to repeat a prayer "we very long in the market"

Yes, not your care with what to me to jump.

You're right, I worded that wrong, and should have written it differently. How about this -

Quote

If you are going to jump an AAD and you can't handle the expense of a 4 and 8 year service, and cannot schedule those two events into a 12 year period of your life (in which your rig will need to be down for 24 repacks) you shouldn't be jumping. It's not that much cash, nor that much time or trouble.

I added the bold portion to clarify what I was saying. I'm not suggesting that everyone should jump an AAD or not jump, my suggestion was that if you choose to jump an AAD, the added cost and effort of ownership of a Cypres over a Vigil should hardly be the decieding factor.

IF you are going to jump, and IF you deciede that you require an AAD to jump, then you should easly be able to manage the cost and effort of owning a Cypres over a Vigil. It's not that much money, nor that much effort.

[Nelyubin 0]

Vice versa. Money in this matter is not important. Term regulation Cypres (for Russia and many other countries) is rarely less than two months. I do not want to to wait so long . As there is no desire to hasten their lazy employees

[Nelyubin 0]

Quote

I know what I am talking about in regards to my previous post. And I think that you are not grasping it. It is a product comparison and not directly talking about vigil misfires even though that is indirectly being discussed. I know of a few personally that had misfires with vigils but all of that doesn't matter the math doesn't lie about it. However, personal believes and biases can sure make people believe what they want. Quite frankly I am not going to get in a drawn out argument with you cause I can already tell that you have your mind made up regardless of the facts or how to analyze them correctly.

Unlike you I have something to compare (you have too little in this sport). Airtek withdraw device units from a malfunction of the control unit, bad batteries, static, bad sensors. They lied that the device is suitable for Swoop (until the man no died). If you do not know about it - it's your problem.

[davelepka 4]

Quote

Term regulation Cypres (for Russia and many other countries) is rarely less than two months. I do not want to to wait so long . As there is no desire to hasten their lazy employees

Now you're taking a problem unique to Russia and using it to advise others about which AAD is best. How long it takes you to get the unit serviced should not be a factor in determining which AAD is best.

For example, I live 2 hours from Aitec's US service factility, and have gotten a Cypres back from a service (including shipping time) in less than two weeks. However, I do not claim that an adavantage to the Cypres is that the service only takes 10 days because it's not 10 days for everyeone, just those that live close to a service center.

Beyond that, even if did take everyone two months to get it back, for some that might be a reasonable time, so again, the time of service for you in your part of the world cannot be used to answer the bigger question of which AAD is best.

[davelepka 4]

Quote

They lied that the device is suitable for Swoop (until the man no died). If you do not know about it - it's your problem.

Actaully, you're the with the problem, and the problem is that you have your facts wrong.

Airtec never said that the unit would not fire during a swoop, they said they didn't believe that canopies at that time were capable of meeting the firing parameters. If you as a jumper were pushing the limits of canopy performance at that time, it's your responsibility to ensure that your equipment was suitable for your actions.

Before speed skydiving or freeflying, nobody ever went faster that 150/160mph in freefall, and that would have only been in a brief dive to a formation. If a pair of goggles or helmet that was made then was to fail during a speed skydive where the jumper is doing 250mph+ for an extended time, is that the fault of the helmet manufacturer, or the fault of the jumper for choosing the wrong equipment for the jump they were going to make.

Quote

Airtek withdraw device units from a malfunction of the control unit, bad batteries, static, bad sensors

Here's the other mistake you keep making. Nobody is claming any AAD is perfect, just that the Cypres is the best bet when compared to the Vigil.

When Airtec had problems, their reposnse was to take action and improve their product so that it would server the community better. They acknowledged the problems publicly, and made corrections.

When Vigil had problems with misfires due to aircraft door openings or car trunk closings, Vigil's response was that the unit worked 'as designed' and that was the end of the story. They did not admit that there as a problem, or seek to repair it.

In the case of all the documented problems that Airtec found, they fixed them and those problems don't exist today. When Vigil discovers that there is a way for their units to fire when you open the door of the plane, they do nothing but tell you, 'That's the way it is'. When Adrian Nichols Cypres fired during a swoop, the unit worked 'as designed', but since jumpers had found a way to make the Cypres less suitable for some jumpers, Airtec developed the Speed Cypres so people swooping like Adrian had an option.

Any idea when Vigil is releasing the AAD that will not fire due to the aircraft door opening?

[Nelyubin 0]

Quote

Any idea when Vigil is releasing the AAD that will not fire due to the aircraft door opening?

Just observe the instruction to the device. Have you tried? Failure to follow instructions and Cypres shoots. I am well known for the case when the MI-8 both shot 4 Cypres.

Quote

Airtec never said that the unit would not fire during a swoop,

They wrote about this in the instructions.

Quote

The Expert CYPRES is designed in a way that it
won't restrict the skydiver in any way. Even extreme
maneuvers during exit and in freefall, CYPRES
will cope with it. Whatever you can think of under
canopy like stalls, spiral turns, down planes,
hookturns with the smallest canopies as well as
any CRW, CYPRES will analyze these movements
without problems. It won't interfere with any normal
activities while skydiving.
Only freefall to very low altitude will cause
CYPRES to take action. In this situation CYPRES
is designed to activate the reserve approx. 4.5
seconds prior to impact

Specifically for you attached the part of the old (before 2010) instructions.

Quote

In the case of all the documented problems that Airtec found, they fixed them and those problems don't exist today.

What do you say about this case? http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=4115858;sb=post_latest_reply;so=ASC;forum_view=forum_view_collapsed;;page=unread#unread

Quote

Beyond that, even if did take everyone two months to get it back, for some that might be a reasonable time, so again, the time of service for you in your part of the world cannot be used to answer the bigger question of which AAD is best.

I do not want to depend on the slowness = bad service of any Manufacturer drivers. Speed of service Airtek beyond reasonable limits. Even the service plane often takes less time.

[billvon 2,400]

>I pointed out in specific cases. Made reference to the topic. Please do the
>same in support of words.

OK. Five fired during WT06 on a descending C130. Seven misfired during one of the DC9 jumps during WFFC 2005. (Fortunately for the latter incident SSK was on site and offered all the jumpers on the DC9 use of a Cypres2 for the duration of the boogie.)

[Nelyubin 0]

No need to cheat. It was right is violated operating instructions manual instrument.
http://www.vigil.aero/files/WorldTeamResponse_005.pdf
P.S. You "forgot" to say that 24 Cypres were blocked and did not work.

[billvon 2,400]

>You "forgot" to say that 24 Cypres were blocked and did not work.

All the Cypres 1's shut down permanently; all the Cypres 2's shut down and then were turned back on with no ill effects.

If my AAD ever sees a transient impossible event, I want it to shut down and not fire, since a misfire might kill me and everyone else on the airplane. Thus my preference for the Cypres over the Vigil. Your preference may differ, which is fine.

(BTW Jo Smolders told me they were not going to fix this issue with the Vigil 2, but they might fix it in the next generation - in which case I'd consider buying one.)

[Nelyubin 0]

Logical conclusion. Must follow the instructions. Know that jumping from an airplane a pressurized with Cypres, Cypres does not work .
In the past time I bought Cypres.

[billvon 2,400]

>Logical conclusion. Must follow the instructions.

Agreed.

>Know that jumping from an airplane a pressurized with Cypres,
>Cypres does not work .

Also agreed. That is better, IMO, than jumping with an open reserve container.