Which is the better AAD?

[MikeRMontagne 0]

Some simple advice, which AAD is the better, Vigil or Cypress, for better price, longest lasting, less service frequency/ maintence interval's, ect ect If that isn't going to futher constipate any anal retentives who haven't got anything better to do this morning, JR.

Be Brave, embrace the fear,
even if your not, pretend to be.
No one can tell the difference

[piisfish 135]

first of all, it is not the morning everywhere

My personal choice is the Cypres, but the Vigil is also a good product, which turns out to be cheaper.

The main thing to be aware of is that different AAD's work differently, they have disctinct user's manual for a reason, and they need to be read and understood, and you need to act accordingly.

There are arguments for and against each and every AAD, the eternal Ford/Chevy argument...

If you prefer to decide based on price and scheduled maintenance and defined lifetime, go for the Vigil.

I prefer to go FOR scheduled maintenance and lifetime warranty.

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

[sundevil777 94]

Quote

Some simple advice, which AAD is the better, Vigil or Cypress, for better price, longest lasting, less service frequency/ maintence interval's, ect ect If that isn't going to futher constipate any anal retentives who haven't got anything better to do this morning, JR.

I suggest that your goal of lonest lasing/less service freq/maint intervals is only a good idea if cost is your primary criteria.

Try reading this:

http://www.cypres-usa.com/The_philosophie_of_reliability.pdf

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

[sundevil777 94]

Quote

I prefer to go FOR scheduled maintenance and lifetime warranty.

Quite right! There are very good reasons to want to have the unit checked out, unless cost is all important, and even then, given history of AAD performance, it can be a false economy.

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]

Cypres.
At carrying out of regulations the manufacturer changes the electronic block when parameters of the gage of pressure became incorrect. On it to you won't inform. You will never know that the year, two, three jumped with the faulty device.

Vigil
You always will check up as the gage of pressure of your device works.

[billvon 2,428]

Could you perhaps rephrase that a bit? It didn't make much sense.

[riggerpaul 1]

Quote

Quote

Cypres.
At carrying out of regulations the manufacturer changes the electronic block when parameters of the gage of pressure became incorrect. On it to you won't inform. You will never know that the year, two, three jumped with the faulty device.

Vigil
You always will check up as the gage of pressure of your device works.

Could you perhaps rephrase that a bit? It didn't make much sense.

It made sense to me, even though it took several reads. Clearly, english is not his first language.

I believe that what he said is that if you send a CYPRES for service, and they replace something, perhaps the sensor, you'll never be told, and you'll never know that your sensor had been out of whack for who knows how long.

If you own a Vigil, you can always look at the raw data coming off the sensor, because it is available in the menus.

Now, I don't agree with his liking the Vigil, but it wasn't that difficult to figure out what he said.

[billvon 2,428]

Ah, I get it now. Thanks.

[millertime24 8]

"Better" is a subjective term which will vary from person to person (ie. Who makes a better pizza Puzza Hut or Dominos?)

The best choice for ME was Vigil. Ill list several reasons and explain how this influenced my decision.

1. No factory maintenance cycles. According to Vigil's website:

Quote

The actual technologic evolution is our partner. As in your car, no maintenance is required as for the electronics, unless a red flashing signal appears on the dashboard. The Vigil® concept works in the same way. When you switch on the unit, it performs all necessary internal checks on all parameters automatically. If one parameter is out of specifications, the unit will indicate it in clear language on the screen and will not switch on. In those conditions a factory check up is mandatory.

I like this. It makes perfect sense. If it isn't broke there's no need to fix it. On top of that, when you turn the Vigil unit on it displays in clear language what it has just checked as well as giving me the option to check what the sensor is reading during the startup. A Cypres counts down from 9999 (I think), stops at some point then finishes counting to zero. That tells me nothing.

2. Their less expensive. There's several parts as to why this is true. At initial purchase a Vigil II is $1320 http://www.chutingstar.com/newgear_en/vigil-ii.html. A new Cypres 2 runs you $1450 http://www.chutingstar.com/newgear_en/cypres-2.html.

Now lets talk about lifetime cost of each unit. Providing your Vigil never has an error code requiring maintenance then you will NEVER have to pay the company to check it through its lifetime. Cypres REQUIRES you to have a facory check it at the 4 and 8 year marks (respectively). Airtec's website doen't list the price but I seem to remember it being around $200 per check (thats and extra $400).

Batteries. For Vigil II they're $60 for Cypres 2 $80.

Life. A Vigil lasts 20 years. A Cypres lasts 12.5 years. I read better value for my dollar here.

3. (Dont laugh here) How it feels in my hand. Ive held both a BRAND NEW Cypres and a BRAND NEW Vigil. The VVigil feels more robust and less flimsy. This is what I want in MY rig.

To sum it up, I look at my AAD as an insurance policy (one I should never need to cash in on). I turn it on when I get to the dz and never give it a second thought through the day. Ive even been known to NOT turn it on, jump all day then realize it wasn't on when I get home and un-rig my wingsuit. That being said, I in no way rely on this device. That is what steered my decision to the less expensive AAD (the fact that I believe, barring unforseen scenarios, that Ill never need it)

I am in no way telling you that one AAD is better than another. I'm giving you my OPINION (and take that for what you paid for it) as to what led me to the AAD I purchased.

-Caveat. I WILL NOT argue in this thread to the tune of "one is better than the other". If further explinations are wanted I will give them in the context of "why Vigil is best for me". Cypres is also a fine unit with an outstanding reputation. It just isn't for me.

Muff #5048

[DSE 3]

I chose Vigil. I have 3 CYPRES units in my rental/loaner rigs. I have Vigils in my personal rigs. Customer service was the primary reason for choice.
As far as which is better...I think they each have their upsides and downsides.
I'm not sponsored by either company, I voted with my dollars. 3 CYPRES, 3 Vigils.

[sundevil777 94]

There is no more cost for batteries on the cypres II. They do not need to be replaced at 2 years, and are included as part of the $160 maintenance.

It is very tempting to see the lack of a mandatory costly maintenance check as an advantage for some AADs, but consider that the start-up self test function simply cannot confirm the accuracy of the unit (it can't provide a change in pressure to the sensor to simulate a jump), and can't confirm that it will withstand environmental (temp/vibration) extremes. All the self test can do is confirm that the electronics still work (to the extent they can self diagnose) and that there is continuity to the cutter. The self test is just not good enough for a device where accurate function is so critical.

Given the fact that some units with no self-test errors have to be sent back for a major overhaul after failing the std maintenance test (perhaps failing the vib, temp, or accuracy tests) series makes me not want to trust the Vigil or Argus self test as the only check during its lifetime.

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

...
It is very tempting to see the lack of a mandatory costly maintenance check as an advantage for some AADs, but consider that the start-up self test function simply cannot confirm the accuracy of the unit (it can't provide a change in pressure to the sensor to simulate a jump), and can't confirm that it will withstand environmental (temp/vibration) extremes. All the self test can do is confirm that the electronics still work (to the extent they can self diagnose) and that there is continuity to the cutter. The self test is just not good enough for a device where accurate function is so critical.
...

You speak about that that isn't known to you.
Gage Vigil always can be checked up independently. Independently to check up gage Cypres it is impossible. Read instructions. In one you are right. Cypres the obligatory regulations are required.

[sundevil777 94]

Quote

Quote

...
It is very tempting to see the lack of a mandatory costly maintenance check as an advantage for some AADs, but consider that the start-up self test function simply cannot confirm the accuracy of the unit (it can't provide a change in pressure to the sensor to simulate a jump), and can't confirm that it will withstand environmental (temp/vibration) extremes. All the self test can do is confirm that the electronics still work (to the extent they can self diagnose) and that there is continuity to the cutter. The self test is just not good enough for a device where accurate function is so critical.
...

You speak about that that isn't known to you.
Gage Vigil always can be checked up independently. Independently to check up gage Cypres it is impossible. Read instructions. In one you are right. Cypres the obligatory regulations are required.

You are wrong.

A Cypres can be checked independently. It can be subjected to a simulated skydive in a chamber just like any other AAD. It can be done very close, on both sides of the firing parameters.

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

[riggerpaul 1]

Quote

Quote

Quote

...
It is very tempting to see the lack of a mandatory costly maintenance check as an advantage for some AADs, but consider that the start-up self test function simply cannot confirm the accuracy of the unit (it can't provide a change in pressure to the sensor to simulate a jump), and can't confirm that it will withstand environmental (temp/vibration) extremes. All the self test can do is confirm that the electronics still work (to the extent they can self diagnose) and that there is continuity to the cutter. The self test is just not good enough for a device where accurate function is so critical.
...

You speak about that that isn't known to you.
Gage Vigil always can be checked up independently. Independently to check up gage Cypres it is impossible. Read instructions. In one you are right. Cypres the obligatory regulations are required.

You are wrong.

A Cypres can be checked independently. It can be subjected to a simulated skydive in a chamber just like any other AAD. It can be done very close, on both sides of the firing parameters.

But that requires a chamber, something most people do not have.

The Vigil allows any user to see what the pressure sensor reads and verify it against reality. The pressure reading is one of the values presented in the INFO section of the Vigil menus.

(Not saying I like the Vigil. Just saying that you can verify that the sensor seems to be reading a valid pressure.)

[sundevil777 94]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

...
It is very tempting to see the lack of a mandatory costly maintenance check as an advantage for some AADs, but consider that the start-up self test function simply cannot confirm the accuracy of the unit (it can't provide a change in pressure to the sensor to simulate a jump), and can't confirm that it will withstand environmental (temp/vibration) extremes. All the self test can do is confirm that the electronics still work (to the extent they can self diagnose) and that there is continuity to the cutter. The self test is just not good enough for a device where accurate function is so critical.
...

You speak about that that isn't known to you.
Gage Vigil always can be checked up independently. Independently to check up gage Cypres it is impossible. Read instructions. In one you are right. Cypres the obligatory regulations are required.

You are wrong.

A Cypres can be checked independently. It can be subjected to a simulated skydive in a chamber just like any other AAD. It can be done very close, on both sides of the firing parameters.

But that requires a chamber, something most people do not have.

The Vigil allows any user to see what the pressure sensor reads and verify it against reality. The pressure reading is one of the values presented in the INFO section of the Vigil menus.

(Not saying I like the Vigil. Just saying that you can verify that the sensor seems to be reading a valid pressure.)

What matters is the difference in pressure readings from the zero/ground point (not the absolute value of the ground pressure) and how the unit uses that data. Having the ground pressure reading is not useful, and should not give anyone confidence in the unit. It is not a substitute for a complete thorough functional test of the type that is done during cypres maintenance.

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

[davelepka 4]

Quote

Just saying that you can verify that the sensor seems to be reading a valid pressure

You can verify that it seems to reading a valid static pressure, but that says nothing for the sensor's ability to measure the change (or rate of change) of the pressure during a skydive.

The simple fact is that between Cypres and Vigil, the Vigil is the one with the reputation for firing when you don't really want it to fire. The parameters may have been met according to the sensor, but without filters to refine the info, you get things like Vigils firing when you open the door or the plane, or close the trunk of your car.

No AAD is perfect, they all have incidents where they did not work as designed, or the design turned out to be faulty. The Cypres has had the fewest of the these instances despite the fact that it has been on the market 3 or 4 times as long as the Vigil, and probably has 10, 20, or 30 times the jumps.

Like most things in skidiving, there are no guarantees, it's all an odds game. At this point, the odds are with Cypres.

[Nelyubin 0]

Quote

Quote

Just saying that you can verify that the sensor seems to be reading a valid pressure

You can verify that it seems to reading a valid static pressure, but that says nothing for the sensor's ability to measure the change (or rate of change) of the pressure during a skydive.

The simple fact is that between Cypres and Vigil, the Vigil is the one with the reputation for firing when you don't really want it to fire. The parameters may have been met according to the sensor, but without filters to refine the info, you get things like Vigils firing when you open the door or the plane, or close the trunk of your car.

No AAD is perfect, they all have incidents where they did not work as designed, or the design turned out to be faulty. The Cypres has had the fewest of the these instances despite the fact that it has been on the market 3 or 4 times as long as the Vigil, and probably has 10, 20, or 30 times the jumps.

Like most things in skidiving, there are no guarantees, it's all an odds game. At this point, the odds are with Cypres.

Yes, a chance not to open fire when needed in Cypress, is much higher than that of other devices http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?do=post_view_flat;post=4085713;page=1;sb=post_latest_reply;so=ASC;mh=25;
Nobody asked the question why in all cases Cypres ?

[riggerpaul 1]

Quote

Quote

Just saying that you can verify that the sensor seems to be reading a valid pressure

You can verify that it seems to reading a valid static pressure, but that says nothing for the sensor's ability to measure the change (or rate of change) of the pressure during a skydive.

The simple fact is that between Cypres and Vigil, the Vigil is the one with the reputation for firing when you don't really want it to fire. The parameters may have been met according to the sensor, but without filters to refine the info, you get things like Vigils firing when you open the door or the plane, or close the trunk of your car.

No AAD is perfect, they all have incidents where they did not work as designed, or the design turned out to be faulty. The Cypres has had the fewest of the these instances despite the fact that it has been on the market 3 or 4 times as long as the Vigil, and probably has 10, 20, or 30 times the jumps.

Like most things in skidiving, there are no guarantees, it's all an odds game. At this point, the odds are with Cypres.

Please don't think I am defending the Vigils. In point of fact, I don't like them and don't trust them.

I was only confirming that what Nelyubin said about seeing something from the sensor was true.

Sundevil seemed to be denying that.

I made no claim as to the validity of what is presented in that menu.

But you cannot even see anything about the sensor reading with other AADs, and seeing something just might be better than seeing nothing.

I very much doubt that many people look in the first place. But if you look, and the value is nuts, you have a pretty good idea that the device is not working correctly.

With other AADs, all you have is your trust in the self-tests.

I don't think it would be a bad thing if all the AADs presented, as part of the start up display, their idea of what the ambient pressure is. At least you could verify that if you wanted to.

I don't claim that it tells you everything you need to know about the sensor of the device, but it is better than not saying anything at all, isn't it?

[sundevil777 94]

Quote

I don't claim that it tells you everything you need to know about the sensor of the device, but it is better than not saying anything at all, isn't it?

It is just a little bit better, but also can create trouble. Does the vigil manual give guidance on how far off of the actual pressure it should read for it to be OK? It really isn't important that the sensor be accurately 'zeroed' so that it can give the correct pressure, but if a user is going to look at that number and make some conclusion (the unit is good or possibly bad), then you must have the allowable tolerance - even though that absolute pressure reading doesn't really matter...and on it goes in a circular argument type of fashion.

I strongly suspect that any of the AADs on the market already confirm that the sensor is showing a reasonable value. Perhaps someone with insider knowledge can confirm that. Anyway, self tests can't do nearly as much as some would like for them to do, which is the reason that periodically a really thorough functional fire/no fire test right next to the limits of speed/altitude, and confirming that temp/vibration doesn't kill it is a really good idea.

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

I don't claim that it tells you everything you need to know about the sensor of the device, but it is better than not saying anything at all, isn't it?

It is just a little bit better, but also can create trouble. Does the vigil manual give guidance on how far off of the actual pressure it should read for it to be OK? It really isn't important that the sensor be accurately 'zeroed' so that it can give the correct pressure, but if a user is going to look at that number and make some conclusion (the unit is good or possibly bad), then you must have the allowable tolerance - even though that absolute pressure reading doesn't really matter...and on it goes in a circular argument type of fashion.

I strongly suspect that any of the AADs on the market already confirm that the sensor is showing a reasonable value. Perhaps someone with insider knowledge can confirm that. Anyway, self tests can't do nearly as much as some would like for them to do, which is the reason that periodically a really thorough functional fire/no fire test right next to the limits of speed/altitude, and confirming that temp/vibration doesn't kill it is a really good idea.

We essentially don't read the instruction?

[riggerpaul 1]

Quote

Quote

I don't claim that it tells you everything you need to know about the sensor of the device, but it is better than not saying anything at all, isn't it?

It is just a little bit better, but also can create trouble. Does the vigil manual give guidance on how far off of the actual pressure it should read for it to be OK? It really isn't important that the sensor be accurately 'zeroed' so that it can give the correct pressure, but if a user is going to look at that number and make some conclusion (the unit is good or possibly bad), then you must have the allowable tolerance - even though that absolute pressure reading doesn't really matter...and on it goes in a circular argument type of fashion.

I strongly suspect that any of the AADs on the market already confirm that the sensor is showing a reasonable value. Perhaps someone with insider knowledge can confirm that. Anyway, self tests can't do nearly as much as some would like for them to do, which is the reason that periodically a really thorough functional fire/no fire test right next to the limits of speed/altitude, and confirming that temp/vibration doesn't kill it is a really good idea.

From the Vigil II Manual -

AAD NV/SA recommends that the local atmospheric pressure be checked and compared to the pressure indicated by the Vigil® once a year, if more than 10 mbar difference is noticed, then a new calibration should be performed by a Vigil® qualified expert.

Again, I am not in any way fond of the Vigil family of devices. I am only saying that they have this thing, and they have given quidance on how to know if it is somewhere close to right.

We agree that self-tests are not enough, and we agree that periodic maintenance/evaluation is beneficial for any critically important device to operate properly.

Unless you are saying that the readout is somehow bogus, I can only believe that having the information available is better than not.