3 3
df8m1

New AAD made in USA

Recommended Posts

15 hours ago, gowlerk said:

Skydivers get very emotional about AADs.

Yes they do lol. Jumpers and brand loyalty go hand in hand :)

And I will admit I got a little "ruffled" by that one lol.:tongue: 

That kind of challenge is actually good for me though, as it gives me a chance to practice addressing the concerns, (in this instance doubts) regarding the technical aspects of this AAD from a technical and marketing position which is something that I will have to be able to do on the spot and without hesitation. I am a lot better at building things then selling them lol.

Keep the challenges coming!!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, df8m1 said:

A thought just occurred to me. If the cell phone companies only manufactured the first flip phones that only call and text, then I bet after 25 years of refinement of that (now basic) functionality I bet the batteries would last for years too lol.  What most people don’t realize is that the smart phone designers have been able to maintain the same size case because they were able to make the electronics smaller so there is more room for a larger capacity battery lol.

They still make basic flip phones. I use one. 

And yes, the battery lasts and lasts (not years, but still a long time). 

 

This is a fascinating product. 
I'm not in the market for an AAD for a while, but I think this one would be worth considering when the time comes. 
How would the 'shelf life' on the batteries be? 
1000 jumps would last me a long, long time (longer than current AADs last). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/24/2020 at 6:12 AM, ChrisHoward said:

So there is the M2 apparently. I am not going to use that as any Standard Bench mark, especially considering it's relatively short field history (I will wait until one lasts its 15 years 1st).

 

Mars has been making AADs for more than 20 years. They are by no means new to the market. They just havent been making the M2 AAD for 20 years, but they have had other versions for other markets. I was wrong on the 10k number, it's 15k as Mars states. However, as has been said previously, all current AAD manufactures (Cypress, Mars, Vigil) are making AADs which do not require service for a minimum of 10 years. As a result, 10 years is the de facto standard because literally everyone that is making an AAD at this very moment is operating to that specification.

However, I was not aware his product had field replaceable batteries so that moots my point. My concern was more with the returning of the AAD than with the actual battery itself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
On 12/1/2019 at 1:36 PM, df8m1 said:

I am always surprised how fast time goes by when one is having fun lol.. I didn’t mean to go this long without an update, so I will bring everyone up to speed.

My team and I have been focused on the military AADs (Static Line and Manned Free Fall) fine tuning the hardware and firing algorithms, and I am pleased with how each AAD is turning out. I am trying to be mindful of the workload, as I do not want to burn my team out, so the evolvement has been slower but steady.

Now that my confidence in the military AADs is high, I will be turning my attention to the Sport AAD hardware and firing algorithms. It was my initial intention that the military and sport hardware would be the same, but the features that the military is asking for require hardware and software that is not of value to the sport market, and in an effort to keep the cost of the sport AAD down and reduce power consumption, dedicated sport AAD hardware is needed.

Fortunately, the changes are mostly elimination of components, such as the BLE, and changing out the 32MB Micro SD-card with smaller but less power hunger onboard memory, so the revision design effort will not be bad. It just takes time to make the changes and have them reviewed, update based on the results of the review, resubmit for design review, yada yada.. Very important process, but can take some time.

I also have been making some changes to little things from a “fit and finish/feel/perception” perspective. So far the changes have increased quality feel and performance while reducing the cost. Details are important to me and I am glad we are taking our time to get it right.

After taking with many jumpers of varying backgrounds, it is very apparent that the skydiving industry is not ready to embrace some of the things that I wanted to carry over from the automotive industry, mainly the remote monitoring of the AAD self test results. Infrastructure challenges aside, jumpers are just not ready for that, so I am shelving that feature for the sport AAD. One positive side to doing that is I can eliminate the BLE circuitry and code; however there will still be a Micro USB connector in the interface.

As if all that is not enough, I am also looking at different business models in an effort to identify which ones make the most business sense as we come closer to going to market. There are a lot of moving parts and the right strategic partner can increase the success dramatically. I keep telling myself  “if this was easy everyone would be doing it” lol..

 

How are you going to differentiate between a canopy opening and wingsuit operation that looks like a canopy opening? It is entirely possible, and not even that hard honestly, to replicate what appears to be an opening canopy using a wingsuit. I can dive my wingsuit to a vertical speed of 120 MPH and then over the course of 600' flare up to a 20 MPH decent rate and hold at that rate for several seconds. On a graph annotating only decent rate, the two scenarios would look quite similar. That's why altimeter manufacturers struggle with correctly identifying when the canopy opens with wingsuit use. Many of the digital altimeters out there have a wingsuit mode, but with a large wingsuit they still dont work and they misjudge the opening altitude all of the time because there is no way for them to differentiate between a canopy and a wingsuit when flying a wingsuit that has the ability to gain altitude. With only one sensor indicating only air pressure, the device has no way to determine anything other than fall rate. The only company out there that has had success with this issue that I know of is the AON X2 because it uses GPS to determine canopy opening info so it can measure on all three axis. However, even at that the altimeter misjudges opening altitude sometimes. Even my own AAD sometimes misjudges opening altitude. It does a much better job than most digital altimeters do, but even it gets tricked on rare occasion if I am flying a large race suit and doing flares.

Edited by 20kN

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, 20kN said:

How are you going to differentiate between a canopy opening and wingsuit operation that looks like a canopy opening? It is entirely possible, and not even that hard honestly, to replicate what appears to be an opening canopy using a wingsuit. I can dive my wingsuit to a vertical speed of 120 MPH and then over the course of 600' flare up to a 20 MPH decent rate and hold at that rate for several seconds. On a graph annotating only decent rate, the two scenarios would look quite similar. That's why altimeter manufacturers struggle with correctly identifying when the canopy opens with wingsuit use. Many of the digital altimeters out there have a wingsuit mode, but with a large wingsuit they still dont work and they misjudge the opening altitude all of the time because there is no way for them to differentiate between a canopy and a wingsuit when flying a wingsuit that has the ability to gain altitude. With only one sensor indicating only air pressure, the device has no way to determine anything other than fall rate. The only company out there that has had success with this issue that I know of is the AON X2 because it uses GPS to determine canopy opening info so it can measure on all three axis. However, even at that the altimeter misjudges opening altitude sometimes. Even my own AAD sometimes misjudges opening altitude. It does a much better job than most digital altimeters do, but even it gets tricked on rare occasion if I am flying a large race suit and doing flares.

His design has accelerometers instead of just pressure sensors. That changes everything in terms of what mode of flight can be detected.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/25/2020 at 5:34 PM, wolfriverjoe said:

They still make basic flip phones. I use one. 

And yes, the battery lasts and lasts (not years, but still a long time). 

 

This is a fascinating product. 
I'm not in the market for an AAD for a while, but I think this one would be worth considering when the time comes. 
How would the 'shelf life' on the batteries be? 
1000 jumps would last me a long, long time (longer than current AADs last). 

Thank you for your encouraging comments! I too am excited about this AAD lol. :D

The manufacture shelf life speck is 10 years for reference.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, 20kN said:

How are you going to differentiate between a canopy opening and wingsuit operation that looks like a canopy opening? It is entirely possible, and not even that hard honestly, to replicate what appears to be an opening canopy using a wingsuit. I can dive my wingsuit to a vertical speed of 120 MPH and then over the course of 600' flare up to a 20 MPH decent rate and hold at that rate for several seconds. On a graph annotating only decent rate, the two scenarios would look quite similar. That's why altimeter manufacturers struggle with correctly identifying when the canopy opens with wingsuit use. Many of the digital altimeters out there have a wingsuit mode, but with a large wingsuit they still dont work and they misjudge the opening altitude all of the time because there is no way for them to differentiate between a canopy and a wingsuit when flying a wingsuit that has the ability to gain altitude. With only one sensor indicating only air pressure, the device has no way to determine anything other than fall rate. The only company out there that has had success with this issue that I know of is the AON X2 because it uses GPS to determine canopy opening info so it can measure on all three axis. However, even at that the altimeter misjudges opening altitude sometimes. Even my own AAD sometimes misjudges opening altitude. It does a much better job than most digital altimeters do, but even it gets tricked on rare occasion if I am flying a large race suit and doing flares.

 Respectfully, the conditions that you described regarding "mimicking a main deployment" is based on a very narrow section of what is really going on, and is not what a deployment looks like data wise. 

I get asked this question all the time and I have not been able to figure out a way to answer it to any satisfaction without providing direction to the other manufactures, who as you pointed out, are struggling with that capability. 

This is why my power consumption is higher then a "standard AAD" or altimeter. As Sundevil777 pointed out, I am measuring more aspects then the standard AADs or altimeters currently do. Sundevil777 and I have chatted about when I was at his DZ testing a while ago. 

Like I said before, "if it was easy, everyone would be doing it".  I get challenged all the time about this aspect. The standard response I get is "I will never trust it unless I can see the code to judge for myself", and I reply, "I am sorry to hear that. Good thing there are three other AADs you can chose from" .

The algorithms that determine if the jumper is in the plane or has exited, the canopy and wingsuit detection, main deployment detection, good canopy detection, and cutaway detection are very complex and rely on a lot of data. The actual firing command is pretty basic, as one would imagine, as it is still just speed and altitude, it is the situationall justification conformation and authorization to fire that is so demanding processing wise. It has been stated in this thread several time “that it is more important that it does not fire when it should not, then fire when it should”.

My programmer has made the firing software stand-alone so I can be ported to another hardware platform that has the necessary instrumentation and processing horsepower. Hypothetically, one of the current AAD manufacturers could buy it from us, but the current AAD hardware platforms are not capable of running it, so they would have to build a new hardware platform, or buy ours. We have even joked about making it run in an I-Phone lol.

It is not fair to the current AADs or Altimeters to compare how well they handle the very challenging task of identifying the flight mode progressions that skydivers go through to this AAD because they really are very different devices, which use different approaches.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, wolfriverjoe said:

Do you ask those folks if they trust the CYPRES or Vigil? 
And if they've seen the code for those?

I have made an effort not to bring up any manufacturer by name. Those who are hard core, die hard supporters for one manufacturer tend to stand out from the statements or arguments they make, and nothing I or anyone else for that matter, will ever say anything that will change that. (Not that there is anything wrong with lobbying for one manufacturer or another as long as there is not direct evidence of the AAD they are supporting is deadly for lack of a better term).

That being said... you nailed it lol.. 

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.

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.

3 3