0
jacketsdb23

Ultra Performance Canopies & AAD

Recommended Posts

I've been using a speed cypres 2 with my velo 79 for years. I was/am comfortable with it.

Now that I'm flying a Petra 68 - I've put it in a rig without an AAD. I still have the speed cypres 2 AAD with my velo for work jumps.

I'm interested in opinions and options for an AAD while jumping ultra performance canopies. I like the idea of the AAD shutting off when the canopy is open, like the swoop option on Argus.

However you feel about the need/desire for an AAD on hop n' pops, I think its worth exploring my options.

Argus - Swoop mode (its allowed in Mirage containers - different opinions on effectiveness in the industry)

Cypres 2 (speed) - New Speed Cypres 2 activation speed is 102 mph and it disarms at 330ft. Is this acceptable for flying a canopy at a WL of 3.0? For those of you with lots of data while training with the flysight, what speeds are you hitting?

I do not want/desire an AAD for opening reserve after a cutaway. I only want it until my main canopy is open.

Thoughts and perspective from top canopy pilots who have data on decent rates during swoops? Thanks!
Losers make excuses, Winners make it happen
God is Good
Beer is Great
Swoopers are crazy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Once I go below my 75 I don't turn my cypres on.

The 64 and 67 are way too close to activation parameters for my liking.

Rollout for me is around 500-450 feet. Above where it would shut off. Peak speeds in excess of 96mph vertical.

To me a speed cypres is stacking the odds in my favor, however in this real it's more likely to hurt than help (IMO)

Ian
Performance Designs Factory Team

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks Ian.

I wonder if Cypres would be willing to customize the speed unit to shut off after detecting an open canopy. I'm sure its complicated within the algorithm.
Losers make excuses, Winners make it happen
God is Good
Beer is Great
Swoopers are crazy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The vertical acceleration profile for a well-executed HP turn looks too much like a cutaway+noPull event for my liking. I think that to the extent that any of the current AADs account for the latter, they are likely to fire under the wrong circumstances.

Putting it simply, wingloaded HP landings where the turn is initiated above 1000 ft. (possibly lower) are not compatible with current AADs.

I own 4 rigs -- the only one with an AAD is my "big rig", the Infinity I-44 that I jump a JFX 126 or Safire2 169 in. If I ever put one of my all-sail JVX's in it (which I probably will - those thing pack HUGE), I would not turn the AAD on for that jump. And you can damn sure bet I'm not jumping an AAD with my Leia 66.6 - I can dive that at 110MPH no problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I wonder why vigil and cypres dont offer the shut down/disarm option after open canopy like the Argus swoop mode? Is this to protect for no pull after cutaway Or is the algorithm too challenging?

I suppose the market is probably limited as well, but id buy it if cypres offered it.
Losers make excuses, Winners make it happen
God is Good
Beer is Great
Swoopers are crazy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jacketsdb23

I wonder why vigil and cypres dont offer the shut down/disarm option after open canopy like the Argus swoop mode? Is this to protect for no pull after cutaway Or is the algorithm too challenging?

I suppose the market is probably limited as well, but id buy it if cypres offered it.

Just my $0.02, but I would think that they're trying to make a product that's as black and white as possible vs. one that has shifting parameters that could possibly backfire. I dunno, I'm not a manufacturer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jacketsdb23

I wonder why vigil and cypres dont offer the shut down/disarm option after open canopy like the Argus swoop mode? Is this to protect for no pull after cutaway Or is the algorithm too challenging?

I suppose the market is probably limited as well, but id buy it if cypres offered it.



It took a few swooping misfires on sponsored jumpers and Adrian's death before CYPRES came out with the speed unit, so I don't hold out much hope for them offering anything new anytime soon. Maybe David can shake things up: http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=4719416

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have a c-mode cypres, let's me choose Pro for normal jumps, have Speed mode for when I get to larger turns and I can always leave it off. Not that I'm anywhere close to having that much speed in a dive, just trying to think about where I might be with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jacketsdb23

I wonder why vigil and cypres dont offer the shut down/disarm option after open canopy like the Argus swoop mode? Is this to protect for no pull after cutaway Or is the algorithm too challenging?

I suppose the market is probably limited as well, but id buy it if cypres offered it.



No pull after cutaway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I would argue an RSL is better for that case.

Might look into Argus option. I need to understand the disarming mechanism better in swoop mode. Im ok with it possibly not working if it needs too, but not the other way around.
Losers make excuses, Winners make it happen
God is Good
Beer is Great
Swoopers are crazy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I realize this is non trivial, but g-force sensors could be added. People that approach speeds in excess of activation speed while under high-g load...of course the flat spin needs to be accounted for so it only goes into g-sensor accounting mode after opening.

Trivial!

Methane Freefly - got stink?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm too lazy to go find it right now, but there is a recent thread about the next generation AAD (by the guy who says he is going to make it).

Cliff's notes- many more sensors with the idea of being able to detect when you leave an aircraft, when you open, when you chop etc. Much more advanced than an altitude/speed firing criteria.

Who knows if/when it will come to pass, but it was an interesting read.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1.3.4 «SWOOP» Mode
The Argus releases at 820 Ft. (250 meters) and below if a speed is reached equal or higher than 78
mph (35 m/sec). The Argus stops monitoring and goes to stand-by after it detects an opened
parachute.
Please be aware that this mode is not suitable for wingsuit-flyers!

Does anyone have contact info for someone who can speak with certainty on how this algorithm works? The standby feature appears to be the only difference between standard and swoop modes. Not much else in the manual. This feature is very appealing to me.

edited to add: paraconcepts services argus. Ill ask them
Losers make excuses, Winners make it happen
God is Good
Beer is Great
Swoopers are crazy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Zlew

I'm too lazy to go find it right now, but there is a recent thread about the next generation AAD (by the guy who says he is going to make it).

Cliff's notes- many more sensors with the idea of being able to detect when you leave an aircraft, when you open, when you chop etc. Much more advanced than an altitude/speed firing criteria.

Who knows if/when it will come to pass, but it was an interesting read.




I am one of the "guys making it", and "It" is in process lol...

I have gotten a good amount of input from Wingsuiters, but not much from Canopy Pilots, some but not much.

We will be looking for very experienced Wingsuit and HP Canopy pilots that do not use an AAD, to do some jumps so we can get some data.

We have talked about it internally and I do not see any reason why we can't give the pilot the choice to have our AAD not fire after successful main deployment, (regardless of what happens next), if that is what they want. The AAD will be able to discern the difference between a swoop and other events, but if the pilot does not "trust" it, then I don't see any reason why they should have to if they don't want to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think turning the unit off after deployment is best for swoopers wanting an AAD. RSL is the answer for those wanting a backup after main deployment.

What is the timeline on your new product? Kudos for venturing into the sport AAD world.
Losers make excuses, Winners make it happen
God is Good
Beer is Great
Swoopers are crazy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you add new features, you add complexity to the system. And complexity may result in device not working properly.

I personally would rather my cypres activates every now and then when i don't need it than it fails on the one jump I need it.
I'm guessing that's also the opinion of cypres dudes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jacketsdb23

I think turning the unit off after deployment is best for swoopers wanting an AAD. RSL is the answer for those wanting a backup after main deployment.

What is the timeline on your new product? Kudos for venturing into the sport AAD world.



Alpha testing for Wingsuit and Hi Performance Canopy Pilots will start this summer. We are looking for highly experienced pilots who do not have an AAD to do some "passive" testing and data collection jumps.

If all goes to plan, Beta testing should start this winter.

To address:

"If you add new features, you add complexity to the system. And complexity may result in device not working properly.

I personally would rather my cypres activates every now and then when i don't need it than it fails on the one jump I need it.
I'm guessing that's also the opinion of cypres dudes. "


I am sure that Airtec will appreciate your loyalty;)

I am curious as to how Aritec and AAD will address some of the discipline specific problems, if they do at all. Given that probably 75 to 80% of the market jumps with in the operation parameters of the Vigil or Cypres, I can see them deciding that the cost to address the problems, and additional risk of Extreme Disciplines, given the small percentage of the market, may not be worth dealing with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
michalm21

I just ordered a new cypres 2 but if you have a good solution to the wingsuit scenarios I could swap for your unit in a few years down the road.



The current AADs do fall short at the extremes of Wingsuits and High Performance Canopies, and depending on the flight parameters, the two can mimic one another prety closely.

A Wingsuiter definitely would not want an AAD that shuts off after main opening because I have seen reports of an AAD recording only a couple seconds of free fall after a Wingsuiter exited, so it thought it was a hop & pop! But, that is exactly what a HP Canopy pilot "may" want.

On the other end, HP Canopy Pilots do not want an AAD that has a slow vertical activation speed, but given the speeds that have been stated in this thread which are very close to free fall speeds, or at least speeds that would result in a fatality upon impact, shutting off is about the only option the current AADs have in order to make then worth anything up top, and not kill the jumper while landing.

Our approach, "albeit more complicated;)", allows us the ability to deal with the extremes of the quickly advancing disciplines of our sport. To expect an AAD in which the design is based on technology and the skydiving of the 80s, to be able to be adapted to the disciplines that exist today, as well as those yet to be created, is not reasonable IMOP.

When I started to hear different rig manufactures talking about how the current AADs were designed in the 80s and that modern disciplines can easily exceed the operating parameters of the AADs, I decided to start to listen to my advisers who were all but pleading with me to build a sport AAD, given we are already developing military AADs that use the same technology, it was a "no brainer" so to speak.

For those who are ok with knowing that they may cause their AAD to fire now and then, that is their choice. For everyone else, we are working on a better solution :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Cypres in this video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pLqaMGIqWe4) was a standard version - anyways, also the standard version is not supposed to fire below 130ft. I think it is pretty clear, that the activation altitude seen was well below 130ft - so how much are you going to trust in the parameters set in the Cypres?

I work as an engineer and design safety systems for different machinery. To be clear - if the system I (or my company) design fails, people are very likely to die. And because of this there are very strict rules and standards to be satisified. For example a risk exceeding a certain level will require the whole control system to be built redundantly. That means two sensors, to measure a value, two control/logic units to process the values and two actor/output units to initiate a certain action/reaction. Failures in each of the subcomponents must not cause a dangerous failure and should be detected.
I looked up the patent that describes the functionality of the Cypres unit (http://www.google.com/patents/US5825667) and did not really like what I saw. While there are two sensors (acceleration and pressure) to calculate altitude and speed, differing values do not lead to a shutdown of the unit, but to the value beeing calculated as an average. That means one malfunctioning sensor will not directly be detected but distort the measured altitude, which can lead to a fire outside the set limits. Also as far as I have found out, there is only one CPU built inside, giving another single point of failure.

The Cypres unit was not constructed in compliance with any of the safety standards applicable to machinery or general safety systems - at least I was not able to find out anything. Nobody knows how the Cypres was constructed, how it was checked for failures and how it was tested. For comparison - certain types of machines (also the ones I work on) have to be checked by an external company in order to ensure proper safety and to eliminate design errors. No external company has ever reviewed Cypres (again - at least I was not able to find any reference on the Cypres homepage).

Of course you have to consider the history under real circumstances that shows that the Cypres works very well and a Cypres fire when it should not fire is quite rare. Also given all the AADs on the market, Cypres is definitely the safest unit as it is the only one to rely on two different types of sensors (pressure and acceleration as already mentioned before) - due to the patent Airtec is holding other manufacturers are not allowed to copy this principle. This eliminates the possibility for false fires due to pressure fluctuations and gives a huge advantage to overall safety. (I remember a few incidents when another type of AAD with only pressure sensors fired after the airplane door has been opened during climbing or car doors beeing closed with the rig inside).

After all I have to say everybody has to decide for themselfes if they want to use an AAD, but consider that there can be quite some margin on the activation limits set in the units. Not only you might cause a fire by exceeding the limits but also the unit might cause a fire by misinterpreting the measured values.

P.S.: Anonymous post because the skydiving world is too small (especially in this case) to leave such a controversial opinion somewhere, where it cannot really be removed forever. I will always stand my opinion in person but have learned to be cautious with what you post on the internet and hope you understand.

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.

0