3 3
df8m1

New AAD made in USA

Recommended Posts

377

Fascinating posts, especially for us engineer-jumpers. Designing an advanced tech AAD is damned complex, far more than I had realized. Things have come so far since the SSE Sentinel days.

The market is small, the product liability risk is high and no matter how well you design it, users will inevitably ignore instructions, install it wrong, skip scheduled maintenance etc. Plaintiff's lawyers will sue you regardless of liability releases, user error and lack of product defect.

Sure glad somebody is willing to take AAD design to the next level. I wish them the very best and look forward to becoming a customer.

377



After reading your post I am having second thoughts!! ;)

I guess if it were easy everyone would be doing it lol... And you are correct about the market being small, especially when compared to the development costs. When I talk to potential investors about the market size the standard answer is "it's too small".

A comment was made pointing out the military market... Currently the USA pays around $5,000 for a military Cypres, and the military are tired of that. At that price point, yes, it is worth doing.. but the military is looking to drastically lower the cost of AADs, and they order sparatickly in little batches which is not ideal..

I won't speak for the other AADs, but our military and sport AADs are quite different. The military has requirements that the sport does not need, and the sport has requirements that the military does not need. Each system is designed and validated for the end user market so it is like developing two separate AADs, with two different revenue streams to pay for their creation.There is a reason why the current AAD technology has not been updated in 25 years lol...

Fortunately we are at the fun part now. I have been test jumping an Alpha unit and we are building drop test dummies that are brave enough to get out at 500 ft to test the Static Line AAD, and 1,500 ft for the sport AAD. The cutter is coming along nicely and summer is right around the corner.. or so they say..

But seriously, we do appresheate everyone's words of encouragement. Sometimes I stop for a moment and ask myself, what the hell am I doing?! :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi,

I have two questions:

1. What types of (formal) software verification/validation techniques are used in the development process?
2. Is your hardware in any way redundant? For example: The used microprocessor/FPGA fails/crashes/restarts during freefall ... what is then happening?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Monosa

Hi,

I have two questions:

1. What types of (formal) software verification/validation techniques are used in the development process?
2. Is your hardware in any way redundant? For example: The used microprocessor/FPGA fails/crashes/restarts during freefall ... what is then happening?



Good questions!!

I don't really want to get into too much detail as to our processes and such, but I will attempt to walk the line so to speak lol..

I am not a programmer so I am out of my area, but in regards to validating the algorithms, making sure they respond predictably and consistently, for example after a change is made, we have "gold standard" data files that we rerun in place of sensor data which allow us to identify any differences in the performance of the code. The processor thinks it is reading data real time, as if it were in the air. If there is the slightest difference in the out put we will see it.

The programmers also asked me to make special test data sub sets and that can be injected at any point during a test, even garbage data to simulate a bad sensor reading. This is a very time consuming process that has to take place every time a change is made. Nothing really special about the process.. This is of course in addition to use of best coding practices and external debugging and validation software.

As for redundant hardware, and how it would react to a malfunction.. The only actively redundant component (at this point) is the baro pressure transducer, and that is mainly due to the hardware being used for multiple applications. (One application uses one transducer, another uses the other)... One benefit to having two is we can compare the readings during the self test.. If they differ too much, then a fault code will be set and the AAD will shut down. If the baro pressure transducer that is being used drops out during a jump, the other one will be used until the jumper has landed, at which point it will shut down.

The system monitors every communication action on every buss, and records faults if there is a momentary problem detected. With the Sport AAD, the baro transducer is on a different buss than the other sensors, so if, lets say, the accelerometer froze and did not release the buss mid jump, then the AAD would go into limp mode, and become a good old fashioned speed and altitude AAD, relying on the baro sensor for the remainder of the jump. Same would go if the baro sensor froze, then the back up one would be used until landing. The alternative is to just shut down, which we may end up doing for simplicity sake. Just because something can be done, doesn't mean it is the best course of action for every situation. We are testing different ways to deal with different scenarios, and evaluating them as part of the development process.

If the processor were to crash and reboot there are a lot of different things that "could theoretically" happen, the most likely would be that the power would turn off and that is that... The worse case is if it "hiccups", where it stops looking at the data for a period of time, then comes back on line and sees a dramatic difference in readings and reacts unpredictability. That is why we do the testing mentioned above, to see how it reacts and put in place checks to detect the hiccup.

The unsaid concern is "will/can/would it fire when it should not?". The firing circuits are designed with several layers, requiring a sequence of events to take place in the correct order, in order for the cutter to fire. In my mind that is the best defense if the processor should really shit the bed. That being said, there are other ICs on the the boards that have processing capability that could be used as a check for the main, which is something that we have talked about. That however adds more complexity, but it may be worth it.. Aircraft have three computers for this very reason.

It is the "what ifs" that keep me up at night.. The systems programmer has worked on guided missile systems, military radar systems, and autonomous vehicle systems. He has said that this AAD is more complex than anything he has worked on before lol.. It has to almost think!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
df8m1

*** He has said that this AAD is more complex than anything he has worked on before lol.. It has to almost think!



hmmm I always figured AADs were fairly simple devices. I mean, basically they are just reading barometric pressure to calculate altitude, taking multiple samples at fixed intervals and then comparing speed against a preset trigger value (around 885' for most AADs). Seems like an exceedingly simple device. I guess I was wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Westerly


hmmm I always figured AADs were fairly simple devices. I mean, basically they are just reading barometric pressure to calculate altitude, taking multiple samples at fixed intervals and then comparing speed against a preset trigger value (around 885' for most AADs). Seems like an exceedingly simple device. I guess I was wrong.



It all depends on the operational range of the AAD. If the goal is to mimic a mechanical AAD, then the current AADs do that very well, there is one for every individual discipline, but when used outside that discipline the performance may not be a good match. For example a wingsuit and a speed AAD.

But if you want one that will handle multiple disciplines on the same jump, guard against firing in an aircraft, reduce the chances of a two out because you set the firing altitude higher, etc, with out sacrificing performance at any point during the jump, then it gets a little more complicated lol..

The current AADs work well when used within their specific performance windows, and I would say that covers probably 80% of the sport jumpers, but does not meet the new military requirements. The military is requiring higher performance AADs that will not fire in an aircraft.

The trick is to make the complex as simple as possible. Ten years ago we covered a 4X8 white board with logic written in small print. Today, we are exceeding the functionality of all that logic with refined logic that takes up less than 1/4 of that space. Our process is to identify function, for example, to delay reserve deployment if a main deployment was detected in an effort to prevent two out at 900ft because the jumper was low and sniveled big time... Then come up with a process that will achieve that, (not worrying about complexity at that point). Test the logic using test data in a simulation, and over time refine the logic over several iterations.

We are still in the testing the logic phase for a lot of this system, so things may seem overly complex and awkward, (for lack of a better term). Two months from now I will probably look back at the logic I am playing with now and say to my self why the hell did I do it that way??! lol

The process can seem messy and can make some people uncomfortable lol.. I guess that is why manufactures keep things behind the curtain.. I think there is value in the questions and comments.. Monosa's post has me thinking again about some things that I set aside until we were ready for them.. I think it is better to have a lot of options and choose wisely, then to not have any choice.

Fixed speed and altitude works for the majority, I think everyone else shouldn't have to compromise. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

hmmm I always figured AADs were fairly simple devices. I mean, basically they are just reading barometric pressure to calculate altitude, taking multiple samples at fixed intervals and then comparing speed against a preset trigger value (around 885' for most AADs). Seems like an exceedingly simple device. I guess I was wrong.



Keep in mind that the most important job the AAD can do is not fire when it's not supposed to. (True of 3-ring releases too.)

In the bad old days, there were plenty of AAD's - KAPs*, Sentinels, FXC's - that were dead simple. They were mostly mechanical and relied on changing air pressure working directly on a bellows. They misfired all the time - but with round reserves it wasn't as big a deal, and you got to know how to turn them off under canopy to avoid problems. When it came time to fire, they were pretty reliable in that they fired when they were supposed to.

The big advantage modern AAD's have is they almost never fire when they are NOT supposed to, even when you do pretty stupid things to them (like put them in a trunk and slam it, or pressurize the airplane that you are in, or forget to turn them off.)

(* - the KAP fired on every jump, so they really didn't have any "misfires" as we define them today.)
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
df8m1

The systems programmer has worked on guided missile systems, military radar systems, and autonomous vehicle systems.



Happy to hear that ... so he knows how to write reliable software. :)
Was programming language(s) is/are used?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Monosa

r.

Was programming language(s) is/are used?



Sorry for the delay..

I believe C, or some form of it anyway... The cool part is the firing software is not part of the operating system software, so we can put the firing software on any hardware platform that has the instrumentation we need and can supply data at the required rate. To demonstrate this they are going to install it on a smart phone.. For jumpers this means nothing, but to a competitor who would be interested in buying the firing software, it makes it really easy to integrate into their AAD platform.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quick question I hope...

In regards to offsetting DZ altitude... As far as I am aware, every AAD currently available requires the user to set the off set before every jump, or in other words, the offset clears upon landing and will need to be reset before the next jump if the jumping back into the same DZ from the same airport.

I do not recall hearing people grumbling about having to off set the DZ altitude for every jump, and there has to be a few DZs that take off from one location and the DZ is at a different altitude.

Would it be preferable to have the offset remain until either the jumper clears the off set or the AAD is turned off? Or is requiring it to be set on every jump not a big deal?

Thanks in advance :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's where even a low-resolution GPS would have been useful. Upload local topology data to the AAD and have it automatically figure out the elevation directly below you regardless of the take off location B|

To answer your question, CYPRES has a dropzone offset adjustment, which is reset after one jump, and an activation altitude adjustment, which is persisted. Vigil has an altitude correction function, which is persisted. If you have only one adjustment, it should be permanent until changed by the user. Adding a one-jump offset might be useful to those doing demos. I've never needed it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
mxk

That's where even a low-resolution GPS would have been useful. Upload local topology data to the AAD and have it automatically figure out the elevation directly below you regardless of the take off location B|

To answer your question, CYPRES has a dropzone offset adjustment, which is reset after one jump, and an activation altitude adjustment, which is persisted. Vigil has an altitude correction function, which is persisted. If you have only one adjustment, it should be permanent until changed by the user. Adding a one-jump offset might be useful to those doing demos. I've never needed it.



Thanks for the input. I was not sure if Vigil retained the "off set" for a different DZ landing altitude.

This AAD will have a preset reserve activation of 1000 to 900 ft, and will automatically increase the activation altitude proportionate to speed above XXX ft/sec to compensate for the additional distance traveled during reserve deployment due to the higher speed. The goal is to have an open reserve at a consistent altitude regardless of the jumpers descent rate at the time of reserve deployment. The Max increase will be 250Ft which would be at the Max TSO Placarded speed.

This automatic increase in altitude above XXX Ft/Sec speed is to help prevent jumpers going in at reserve line stretch after an AAD fire at extreme free fall speeds.

Now I know there are people probibly screaming at their monitors that automaticly increaseing the Resereve activation altitude will increase the chance of a two out situation. To address that, this AAD is able to detect a main deployment, and if it has detected a main deploument it automaticly adjusts the Reserve fire altitude to a lower "point of no return" altitude which again is dependent on the jumpers descent rate. If they have a high speed bag lock, they will not have as much time to deal with it as they would with a lower speed malfunction.

The Smart Reserve Activation altitude in intended to allow as much time for a normal AAD fired reserve activation to occur, prevent a reserve fire from low pitch and snively canopy, and allow the jumper as much time as allowable to clear a malfunction before the AAD fires the Reserve should it be necessary.

Now that I have gone off into the weeds.. My original thinking was to maintain the DZ Offset until manually cleared or the AAD is turned off. The key aspect with this AAD, as with any piece of equipment, is to not only know how to use it, but to know what it is going to do.

It is starting to get exciting now that I am at the point where I have to nail down the little details..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thought I would take a moment and post an update...

I have been jumping a rev-1 alpha military EEAAD all summer collecting jump data and evaluating battery performance.

Last April all of the AAD manufacturers were invited to come and meet with Army Research to discuss the performance requirements for the EEAAD, and to “pitch” each of our AADs.. It sounds like the Army has started the RFP process over and is adding the features that they liked from each AAD to the requirement, so we are in a holding pattern until the new requirement comes out.

Although the military EEAAD is our primary focus at present, for obvious reasons, the sport version is not to far behind. Based on what we have learned testing this summer, some changes will be made to the sport version, specifically to enhance battery life, as the military and sport operational requirements are different.

This summer has been fun, and I have had a lot of great conversations with many people about this AAD and AADs in general. On several occasions it was brought up that it would be great if an AAD was capable of cutting away a main if it spun up (regarding super tiny canopy test jumpers).. When I tell them that this AAD platform as two separate firing circuits, and with the right program, could handle that no problem, they get real quiet lol… It is like they were asking for the impossible and I say “our AAD platform could do that”, and they don’t know how to react lol..

Algorithm enhancement is down to fine tuning, splitting hares almost in some ways.. My focus is on reliability, performance, and simplicity; it’s nice when all three can be increased with the same change.

Now that winter is almost here and jumping is reduced to only “as required”, the focus goes back to hardware and data analysis. Data from every jump is run through the simulation so I know on a weekly basis if a problem has been identified, so the algorithms are always up to date. I also will continue to generate custom data sets to create specific situations in order to see how the algorithms handle them.

It won’t be much longer now :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It would be nice to have an AAD that allows for user selectable altitude and speed deployment. Most AADs already allow for altitude adjustment, and some adjustment of the speed based on settings (e.g. student, pro, CP). Mind as well just make it full custom. Type in the altitude and speed you want in increments of 5 MPH / 25'. That way if you want to wingsuit, you can drop the speed to say 60 MPH. If you want to swoop, you can just bump it back up to 100 or whatever you want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That is a work around for the current AADs. This one is very different.. "dynamic" comes to mind when describing it, but I am not sure that is the right term..

If you read back though the thread, I have described how the firing altitude is arrived at and self adjusts within a window of speed and altitude in the effort to get a canopy over head by around 500ft.

If it detects a main deployment just before the primary firing hard deck, then it will delay firing until the point of no return hard deck, which is dependent on the descent rate of the jumper. The point of no return hard deck is based on a lower canopy over head altitude. This delay gives the main as much time to open without automatically getting two out, or gives the jumper as much time as possible to deal with a malfunction in an effort to avoid firing a reserve into a main malfunction unless that is the only option left.

It can also determine if the jumper is under canopy or is flying a wingsuit so there is no need to sacrifice performance in one phase of a jump in order not to fire when it shouldn’t in another.

There is no need for Pro, Expert, Wingsuit, etc settings.. I also don’t see a need for a Student Mode or model. The only Mode it would need to be put in would be Tandem, if I decide that I want to offer it for tandems; the only difference being the firing altitudes for tandems.

Now I can only imagine the dressing down I am going to get for not wanting (at the present) to offer student or tandem AADs lol…

Thank you for your suggestions! Do you have any questions regarding how I have previously addressed the reasons for wanting manually adjustable settings?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Westerly

It would be nice to have an AAD that allows for user selectable altitude and speed deployment. Most AADs already allow for altitude adjustment, and some adjustment of the speed based on settings (e.g. student, pro, CP). Mind as well just make it full custom. Type in the altitude and speed you want in increments of 5 MPH / 25'. That way if you want to wingsuit, you can drop the speed to say 60 MPH. If you want to swoop, you can just bump it back up to 100 or whatever you want.



I actually think that so much flexibility in an AAD is a horrible idea. If that was possible you'll have all sorts of misconfigured AADs and a spike in misfires. People don't know how to turn off their VISOs, why should we play with AADs settings that freely and dangerously? Multimode AADs and user selectable altitude are already a possibility. And despite that simplicity there were misfires.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Deimian

***It would be nice to have an AAD that allows for user selectable altitude and speed deployment. Most AADs already allow for altitude adjustment, and some adjustment of the speed based on settings (e.g. student, pro, CP). Mind as well just make it full custom. Type in the altitude and speed you want in increments of 5 MPH / 25'. That way if you want to wingsuit, you can drop the speed to say 60 MPH. If you want to swoop, you can just bump it back up to 100 or whatever you want.



I actually think that so much flexibility in an AAD is a horrible idea. If that was possible you'll have all sorts of misconfigured AADs and a spike in misfires. People don't know how to turn off their VISOs, why should we play with AADs settings that freely and dangerously? Multimode AADs and user selectable altitude are already a possibility. And despite that simplicity there were misfires.

First I would like to say that I really do appreciate every thought and comment and encourage everyone to post them.

I am in the camp of most people should not be allowed to mess with AADs... What could possibly go wrong lol..:o

Predictable performance is a big deal. If someone is jumping a reserve that takes longer than 3 seconds to open, I'd say they have other problems that need to be delt with...

Needing different firing speeds during a jump is a different, and very real problem all together.. Confidence in the AADs ability to correctly identify the flight mode that the jumper is in, is paramount. I think that a wingsuit pilot should be able to swoop the pond without sacrificeing activation performance during any phase of the jump... And I am doing it without an audible...;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Deimian

***It would be nice to have an AAD that allows for user selectable altitude and speed deployment. Most AADs already allow for altitude adjustment, and some adjustment of the speed based on settings (e.g. student, pro, CP). Mind as well just make it full custom. Type in the altitude and speed you want in increments of 5 MPH / 25'. That way if you want to wingsuit, you can drop the speed to say 60 MPH. If you want to swoop, you can just bump it back up to 100 or whatever you want.



I actually think that so much flexibility in an AAD is a horrible idea. If that was possible you'll have all sorts of misconfigured AADs and a spike in misfires. People don't know how to turn off their VISOs, why should we play with AADs settings that freely and dangerously? Multimode AADs and user selectable altitude are already a possibility. And despite that simplicity there were misfires.

Well if they offer a wingsuit AAD, then most of the demands for AAD modes will be met. But to date, aside from the really overpriced and quite strange Cypress WS AAD, there are no WS AAD modes. Set your AAD to pro and you risk no fire on a WS. Set it to student and you risk a two-out if you swoop. Why not have an AAD mode that activates at 60 MPH instead? It will allow canopy work that is within the realm of what most WS fliers would be doing, but not so low that it would risk a two out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Westerly

******It would be nice to have an AAD that allows for user selectable altitude and speed deployment. Most AADs already allow for altitude adjustment, and some adjustment of the speed based on settings (e.g. student, pro, CP). Mind as well just make it full custom. Type in the altitude and speed you want in increments of 5 MPH / 25'. That way if you want to wingsuit, you can drop the speed to say 60 MPH. If you want to swoop, you can just bump it back up to 100 or whatever you want.



I actually think that so much flexibility in an AAD is a horrible idea. If that was possible you'll have all sorts of misconfigured AADs and a spike in misfires. People don't know how to turn off their VISOs, why should we play with AADs settings that freely and dangerously? Multimode AADs and user selectable altitude are already a possibility. And despite that simplicity there were misfires.

Well if they offer a wingsuit AAD, then most of the demands for AAD modes will be met. But to date, aside from the really overpriced and quite strange Cypress WS AAD, there are no WS AAD modes. Set your AAD to pro and you risk no fire on a WS. Set it to student and you risk a two-out if you swoop. Why not have an AAD mode that activates at 60 MPH instead? It will allow canopy work that is within the realm of what most WS fliers would be doing, but not so low that it would risk a two out.

If I think of the foundation of design and operating philosophy of the current AADs like a family tree, even though the three AADs that are available today have their own branch, they are all running parallel in that at their foundation, they are using the same information to base decisions on. This approach was sufficient 20+ years ago.. but today with High performance canopy piloting and Wingsuits as individual disciplines, as well as potentially blended, the limited functionality leaves little recourse but to try to "split the difference" in the firing speed, which has the propensity to make it inert to in one phase of the jump or another.

My approach is vastly different, and my branch will be 90 degrees off of the trunk of the AAD family tree. My target markets are the wingsuits and HP canopy pilots.

You mentioned price and I see it this way.. It comes down to the value proposition.. This AAD will not be cheep, but it will be within range of the current WS AAD, only it will offer a lot of advanced functionality for that price. What are you buying for the money?? is it polished 20 + year old technology (which still works fine for the types of jumps it was developed for), or is it up to date with increased capability that is compatible with today's disciplines?

This AAD will be able to handle any type of jump from an aircraft without modes and without operational compromise or peripheral devices that indicate if the AAD is doing what it is supposed to do, (not that their is anything wrong with that, I just see it as unnecessary).

This AAD collects enough data, that if properly processed, you can generate a 3-D image of the jumper throughout the jump.

I look at it like the current AADs are equivalent to flip phones, and this AAD is a smart phone. Each will have their place in the market.

Technology has changed a lot in 20 years. I am just applying it to an AAD and utilizing its capability.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
df8m1

*********It would be nice to have an AAD that allows for user selectable altitude and speed deployment. Most AADs already allow for altitude adjustment, and some adjustment of the speed based on settings (e.g. student, pro, CP). Mind as well just make it full custom. Type in the altitude and speed you want in increments of 5 MPH / 25'. That way if you want to wingsuit, you can drop the speed to say 60 MPH. If you want to swoop, you can just bump it back up to 100 or whatever you want.



I actually think that so much flexibility in an AAD is a horrible idea. If that was possible you'll have all sorts of misconfigured AADs and a spike in misfires. People don't know how to turn off their VISOs, why should we play with AADs settings that freely and dangerously? Multimode AADs and user selectable altitude are already a possibility. And despite that simplicity there were misfires.

Well if they offer a wingsuit AAD, then most of the demands for AAD modes will be met. But to date, aside from the really overpriced and quite strange Cypress WS AAD, there are no WS AAD modes. Set your AAD to pro and you risk no fire on a WS. Set it to student and you risk a two-out if you swoop. Why not have an AAD mode that activates at 60 MPH instead? It will allow canopy work that is within the realm of what most WS fliers would be doing, but not so low that it would risk a two out.


You mentioned price and I see it this way.. It comes down to the value proposition.. This AAD will not be cheep, but it will be within range of the current WS AAD, only it will offer a lot of advanced functionality for that price.

Sure, but what does that even mean? AADs only have one function: to save your life if you dont pull. That's pretty much it. As such, I just buy whatever AAD is the cheapest (which is the Mars unit) because they all do the same thing. It's like choosing between brands of seat belts. No one really cares as long as they keep your ass in the seat during a crash.

That said, if you made an AAD that had student, pro, CP, tandem AND wingsuit modes, that might make it a bit more valuable. But even so, I dont think people would shell out $500 extra when you consider that current AADs are still quite reliable for most applications.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Westerly



Sure, but what does that even mean? AADs only have one function: to save your life if you dont pull. That's pretty much it. As such, I just buy whatever AAD is the cheapest (which is the Mars unit) because they all do the same thing. It's like choosing between brands of seat belts. No one really cares as long as they keep your ass in the seat during a crash.



You are not a race car guy are you? lol.. the seat belts in "daily drivers" are pretty much the same as you pointed out, but a 5 point race car seat belt is very different, as it is designed for a wide variety of extreme conditions..

I like you seat belt comparison.. the current AADs do just fine for the type of jumping that they were designed for (and I have consistently said that ;)), just like standard seat belts do just fine for every day driving, which they were designed for..

But like a race car 5 point harness that is designed for wider range of extreme conditions, this AAD is designed for wingsuit and HP Canopy flight conditions, and can do both without specific modes that only let you chose one or the other.

Is it overkill for your type of jumping?... sounds like it..:)

Westerly


That said, if you made an AAD that had student, pro, CP, tandem AND wingsuit modes, that might make it a bit more valuable. But even so, I dont think people would shell out $500 extra when you consider that current AADs are still quite reliable for most applications.



This is a good conversation as I can see that I am going to have to figure out how to better covey that this AAD will handle "pro, wingsuit, and CP" conditions without needing separate "modes".. they are all handled in one "mode' (to keep the terminology consistent)

I am in the camp that "Student Mode" AADs are not a good thing, but that is a different topic for a different thread..

I do not recall ever hearing of a Tandem AAD not doing the job, so I see no need, at this point, to have a Sport Tandem SKU on the shelf.. There will be military tandem AADs for sure, but until the sport market indicates that the demand is there for an advanced tandem AAD, I think the current AADs have it covered.

This is a competition race car level product, and you are correct that most of the jumpers are covered by the current AADs. Jumpers that are strictly looking at price have three other options, the ones that want more performance will have an option soon.:P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Westerly


Sure, but what does that even mean? AADs only have one function: to save your life if you dont pull. That's pretty much it. As such, I just buy whatever AAD is the cheapest (which is the Mars unit) because they all do the same thing. It's like choosing between brands of seat belts. No one really cares as long as they keep your ass in the seat during a crash.

That said, if you made an AAD that had student, pro, CP, tandem AND wingsuit modes, that might make it a bit more valuable. But even so, I dont think people would shell out $500 extra when you consider that current AADs are still quite reliable for most applications.



Have you even read 1/3 of this thread before you decided to jump in with your normal posting routine.

DF8M1 has explained in great detail in this thread what he envisions for his prospective product, and the differences in operation compared to AAD's that are currently in the market.

I own a MARS too, we all know that it is a cheaper purchase option, but really thanks for the contribution to the discussion. :S
"The restraining order says you're only allowed to touch me in freefall"
=P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)

 

On 10/25/2018 at 10:39 AM, df8m1 said:

It won’t be much longer now :)

 

On 11/1/2018 at 10:33 AM, df8m1 said:

the ones that want more performance will have an option soon.:P

 

Any updates on "soon"? I'm going to need a new AAD or two soon, wondering if I should wait a bit?

Edited by BrianM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account. It's free!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
3 3