3 3
outdoort

Best AAD 2021

Recommended Posts

Regarding fire/no-fire parameters:

We should remember some incidents where the logic of an AAD wasn't smart enough to realize that it was being fooled by environmental conditions into thinking it needed to fire. Wasn't the C182 door opening incident with a Vigil?  The incidents of units firing when trunk lids closed were Vigils, correct?  The world record big way team suffered from units firing because of pressurization on a C-130, weren't those units Vigils?  My memory is that the original Cypres units turned themselves off, and the Cypres II units didn't do anything (desirable).  It would seem there is more "smarts" in the logic for a Cypres which allows it to realize you actually should try to detect unrealistic data, to recognize the pressure changes aren't realistic for a skydive. 

The other AAD manufacturers had a clear market they were going after when they decided to compete, they cut corners when it came time to the logic. Perhaps my memory is wrong.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Real good posts so far. Thanks. I wanted to mention that I emailed Mars with the question of "lets say the m2's battery doesn't last the 15.5 years that it should? Will it be replaced free?"

The response was short, and in slight broken English, but essentially the response was that they would replace the battery free of charge if it was found after inspection that was the reason the unit would not power on any longer.

Honestly tho, in any of these devices, in 10 plus years if you need a battery change, its possible the batteries in these devices are no longer manufactured, unless its a real common battery they are using in them. No clue what type of battery is in any of them.

 

Again, what sold me on the Cypress wasn't only the track record, but the fact their website hypes their product up with multiple high quality photos of the manufacturing process and how their "attention to detail" is impeccable etc.  They really try their best to show and tell the quality of the manufacturing / quality control.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Again, what sold me on the Cypress wasn't only the track record, but the fact their website hypes their product up with multiple high quality photos of the manufacturing process and how their "attention to detail" is impeccable etc.  They really try their best to show and tell the quality of the manufacturing / quality control.  

You think the site is impressive...? You should visit their factory in Germany if you have the chance..... That's impressive!!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, sundevil777 said:

Regarding fire/no-fire parameters:

We should remember some incidents where the logic of an AAD wasn't smart enough to realize that it was being fooled by environmental conditions into thinking it needed to fire. Wasn't the C182 door opening incident with a Vigil?  The incidents of units firing when trunk lids closed were Vigils, correct?  The world record big way team suffered from units firing because of pressurization on a C-130, weren't those units Vigils?  My memory is that the original Cypres units turned themselves off, and the Cypres II units didn't do anything (desirable).  It would seem there is more "smarts" in the logic for a Cypres which allows it to realize you actually should try to detect unrealistic data, to recognize the pressure changes aren't realistic for a skydive. 

Are any of these issues relevant to someone buying an AAD today?

13 hours ago, sundevil777 said:

The other AAD manufacturers had a clear market they were going after when they decided to compete, they cut corners when it came time to the logic.

As an engineer I don't think this is a fair take. Smarter isn't always better, and simple is not always tantamount to corner cutting. And what do we really know about how simple or complex the algorithms are for any of these devices? If any of that sort of information is available I'd love to see it.

Just now, outdoort said:

Honestly tho, in any of these devices, in 10 plus years if you need a battery change, its possible the batteries in these devices are no longer manufactured, unless its a real common battery they are using in them. No clue what type of battery is in any of them.

You know who does know what type of battery is in these devices? The manufacturers. I would expect that the people and companies designing these lifesaving devices would be competent enough to spec a battery.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
3 hours ago, outdoort said:

Honestly tho, in any of these devices, in 10 plus years if you need a battery change, its possible the batteries in these devices are no longer manufactured, unless its a real common battery they are using in them. No clue what type of battery is in any of them.

 

 

Like the batteries in an original Cypres, the Cypres II batteries are likely NOT simply industry-standard batteries. They probably have some unique set of specifications with ambitious performance requirements, etc. that an industry-standard battery might not meet. By having unique specifications, and therefore a unique "part number", they would then have the opportunity to negotiate with the supplier a long term agreement to continue supplying that battery.

Edited by sundevil777

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, nwt said:

Are any of these issues relevant to someone buying an AAD today?

The history of a product is important. The design had a major flaw that presumably was fixed. Potential customers should know that, especially if they are asking specifically about the relative merit of the different mfgs fire/no-fire parameters.

As an engineer, I know what it is like to develop a new product that already has competitors. Those competitors set a "target" for performance which most design engineers would want to at least equal. The designers of the Vigil had every opportunity to ensure their product was at least as good at deciding when to fire - they could compare it to their competition. To fail at that very basic task leaves this design engineer wondering in what other ways it might be lacking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, sundevil777 said:

The history of a product is important. The design had a major flaw that presumably was fixed. Potential customers should know that, especially if they are asking specifically about the relative merit of the different mfgs fire/no-fire parameters.

What fire/no-fire parameters? I feel like I've asked about them half a dozen times in this thread. Obviously those parameters are different now as compared to what they were when they had the issue. So what's the relevance? Did Cypres get it perfect the first time?

Just now, sundevil777 said:

The designers of the Vigil had every opportunity to ensure their product was at least as good at deciding when to fire - they could compare it to their competition. To fail at that very basic task leaves this design engineer wondering in what other ways it might be lacking.

Strong disagree. I don't know what industry you work in, but looking at a flaw and jumping immediately to technical incompetence seems really naive to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having an AAD firing if I go below landing altitude is a NO-GO for me. And the explanations the manufacturer gives when analysing 3 devices who went under the same circumstances and had different reactions (2 fired, 1 did not) are also important and a case of trust loss in the device and in the manufacturer. 
 

i am not naming them, but in that case, 3 rigs were placed inside a minivan and the AAD’s were still ON. That was a user mistake as the manual stated that they should have been switched OFF. Said minivan drove approximately 300ft up a hill, and down approximately 1000 lower than the departure point. During the descent, 2 units fired and 1 did not.
explanation from the manufacturer was that the 2 units had met the firing parameters by descending too fast at activation altitude. As you claim to be an engineer, I will let you do the maths to calculate the steepness of the hill, knowing that the driving speed of the minivan did not exceed 120 km/h (around 80 MPH). They were never able to explain why the 3rd unit had not fired. 
 

Also, they weren’t able to justify why an AAD should stay in “airborne “ mode for an undefined period of time. I had a customer wondering why his AAD was still ON at home, 2 weeks after his last jump. He lives 2000ft above the DZ. Yes it was user error (should have turned it OFF). But which aircraft stays aloft for 2 weeks ? (I know there are a couple, but hardly ever used for skydiving). 
 

Have another couple of grudges against them which makes me not want to use them. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/17/2021 at 5:04 PM, sundevil777 said:

Regarding fire/no-fire parameters:

We should remember some incidents where the logic of an AAD wasn't smart enough to realize that it was being fooled by environmental conditions into thinking it needed to fire. Wasn't the C182 door opening incident with a Vigil?  The incidents of units firing when trunk lids closed were Vigils, correct?  The world record big way team suffered from units firing because of pressurization on a C-130, weren't those units Vigils?  My memory is that the original Cypres units turned themselves off, and the Cypres II units didn't do anything (desirable).  It would seem there is more "smarts" in the logic for a Cypres which allows it to realize you actually should try to detect unrealistic data, to recognize the pressure changes aren't realistic for a skydive. 

The other AAD manufacturers had a clear market they were going after when they decided to compete, they cut corners when it came time to the logic. Perhaps my memory is wrong.

Exactly.  I remember all of those incidents and this thread has more.  They sent out a whole batch of AAD's without cutters  WTF?  And most of their recalls they always seemed to expect you to pay for their recalls.  And as a rigger, Vigil AAD's are double the pack volume of a Cypres or Mars.  And with everyone nowadays wanting the super tiny rig its a nightmare to pack a gigantic Vigil in them.  Especially if you plan on maxing out the limits on your container size - pick a smaller AAD.  

 

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B2n0hJD01WCqaG1ob3BtT0lSOG1uUWlDZVgzWDFyQQ/view?usp=drivesdk

  • Like 1

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.

3 3