Hooknswoop 19 #1 April 4, 2003 http://www.pia.com/SSK/cypres/cypres06.pdf SSK has announced the release of the Cypres II. Hook Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nacmacfeegle 0 #2 April 4, 2003 Thanks Hook. Any ideas what the new and groovy CypresII will do for us? I'd like to see... Maybe longer battery life? Longer service intervals? Longer active life?-------------------- He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. Thomas Jefferson Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hooknswoop 19 #3 April 4, 2003 The relase, at SSK's web page, says more about what will be the same, loop cutter, firing altitude, etc, than what will be different. In fact, it doesn't say anything about what will be different. I'm guessing an aluminum case, less maintanence requirements, water resistant, and possibly download-able to PC dive information. Pure speculation on my part though. Hook Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nacmacfeegle 0 #4 April 4, 2003 "possibly download-able to PC dive information" Useful, but would it be practical? You'd need some sort of port on the control unit, otherwise you would have to open the reserve to update your logs.... One thing I suspect may be true...they won't be any cheaper! -------------------- He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. Thomas Jefferson Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Faber 0 #5 April 4, 2003 Quote they won't be any cheaper! They wont before ourlifes makes a price dumpYou could use an FXC or Kappen,if your life aint a cypress worth Stay safe Stefan Faber Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cpoxon 0 #6 April 4, 2003 Also, don't forget the new competitor, the MPAAD Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
samp76 0 #7 April 4, 2003 Could someone post the link for the release of the cypres II that is on ssk's website. I search but could not find it. -Sam- Let go of the NUT!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hooknswoop 19 #8 April 4, 2003 QuoteCould someone post the link for the release of the cypres II that is on ssk's website. The link is in the original post. Hook Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kevin922 0 #9 April 4, 2003 Quote "possibly download-able to PC dive information" Useful, but would it be practical? You'd need some sort of port on the control unit, otherwise you would have to open the reserve to update your logs.... One thing I suspect may be true...they won't be any cheaper! You have heard of wireless haven't you? :) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AggieDave 6 #10 April 4, 2003 Quote You have heard of wireless haven't you? :) Yes, have you heard of battery drain?--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pbla4024 0 #11 April 5, 2003 CYPRES is too expensive and out of date. MPAAD forced Airtec GmbH to do something. They are not used to market competition. There are three test jumpers at our DZ, I could try ask them for their opinios. Enjoy picture of MPAAD. Greetings from Czech republic. Fido Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JumpHog 0 #12 April 5, 2003 The big problem that I see with the MPAAD is that all of the rig manufaturers will have to modify their rigs in order to use this new AAD. This means cutting another window into the backpad for the MPAAD display, since it doesn't have an external display unit, like the CYPRES. It took many years, for the existing manufacturers to modify their rigs to accept CYPRES', when they hit the market, and that modification was much easier. Also, how many people are going to want to buy a new container in order to use this new AAD. CYPRES' have been proven to be a near-perfect design, and I think any new company will have a hard time competing. I think Airtec had the right idea by updating their CYPRES'. I have been waiting for a while to see when they would come out with a CYPRES II. Over the past 14 years, microprocessor technology and battery technology has improved drastically. Also, add to this the new generation of pond-swoopers, who don't want to ruin their expensive CYPRES when they get wet. I'm hoping to see a waterproof, smaller, lighter, more-compact CYPRES, with a longer battery life, at a lower cost. I guess we'll just have to wait and see. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sundevil777 94 #13 April 5, 2003 I also wonder if the unit can be felt (uncomfortable) against your back.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 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BBKid 0 #14 April 5, 2003 The only problem I can see with the mpaad is that some people will be jumping rigs larger than the computer! Jeez that is one big ol' mutha... Nick --------------------------- "I've pierced my foot on a spike!!!" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tombuch 0 #15 April 5, 2003 QuoteI think Airtec had the right idea by updating their CYPRES'. I have been waiting for a while to see when they would come out with a CYPRES II. Over the past 14 years, microprocessor technology and battery technology has improved drastically. Also, add to this the new generation of pond-swoopers, who don't want to ruin their expensive CYPRES when they get wet. I'm hoping to see a waterproof, smaller, lighter, more-compact CYPRES, with a longer battery life, at a lower cost. My choice for improvements would be a publicly recognized quality control program such as the FAA TSO. I'd also like to see the "brain" of the unit available for analysis by a source other than the manufacturer. I love my Cypres, and I'm generally happy with the manufacturer, but I'd be much happier if the unit met a better defined standard, with better quality control, and greater public confidence. Tom Buchanan Sr. Parachute Rigger Author "JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy"Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
slotperfect 7 #16 April 7, 2003 I haven't heard a thing about the new unit either, even after asking around. My hopes are for a smaller processing unit to take up less room in smaller rigs, and aluminum case to guard against breakage, and a means of inspecting serviceability by Riggers at repack other than a "functional check" by turning it on and watching it count down. My 2 cents.Arrive Safely John Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nacmacfeegle 0 #17 April 7, 2003 "My choice for improvements would be a publicly recognized quality control program such as the FAA TSO. I'd also like to see the "brain" of the unit available for analysis by a source other than the manufacturer. " Yep, I'd like to see something along these lines too. It shouldn't be too difficult to get it asssessed by an independent consultant and assigned a reliability figure. This sort of analysis is required on a lot of our control systems and also for things like ATC and aeronautical systems. Shouldn't be a big issue to get a TUV rating (German reliability analysis).-------------------- He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. Thomas Jefferson Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BoobieCootie 0 #18 April 7, 2003 That MPAAD sure looks like an MP3 player don't it Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pbla4024 0 #19 April 8, 2003 I hope I could sent picture of MPAAD in rig next week. Fido Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
diverdriver 5 #20 April 8, 2003 QuoteMy choice for improvements would be a publicly recognized quality control program such as the FAA TSO. I'd also like to see the "brain" of the unit available for analysis by a source other than the manufacturer. Wow, is my thinking completely off on this? I thought since the Cypres was installed in the reserve container and could effect the operation of the reserve that it did meet some TSO standard or had approval from the FAA. Boy, was I that far off on this? Chris Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skymedic 0 #21 April 8, 2003 Good point on that Chris...time to send an Email to SSK... marc Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
councilman24 36 #22 April 8, 2003 Yes, your that far off. It's not TSO'd, or tested to any other standard that I know of. Some of the Europeans may have required some testing. FXC's, sentinals, and KAP's weren't TSO'd either. Whether AAD's even had to be maintained according to manufacturers directions legally was an item of debate until FAR 105 got rewritten. AAD's are now the ONLY non TSO'd device that is requlated by FAR's, maintenance according to manufacturer is mandated. Even the requirement for a master rigger ticket AND approval from Airtec for modifying a rig to take a Cypres was a grey area under FAR's. There was the one rigger, whose name I don't remember, who was cited for dozens of FAR violations for simply putting an AAD in an already modified container with only a senior rigger ticket. PIA and USPA fought and got all of those counts removed. The one that stuck and he got fined for was installing an AAD NOT maintained to the manufacturers recommendations. That citation, which I think he didn't fight, was the only LEGAL guidance on maintaining an AAD until the new 105.I'm old for my age. Terry Urban D-8631 FAA DPRE Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
diverdriver 5 #23 April 8, 2003 Wow, thanks. Good point. I guess I assumed too far since I knew Part 105 required Mx on the AADs according to the Manufacturer. Figured there had to be a TSO too. Very interesting. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pbla4024 0 #24 April 15, 2003 Rig prepared for MPAAD. Any questions? Fido Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pchapman 262 #25 April 15, 2003 QuoteRig prepared for MPAAD. Any questions? Yeah - The MPAAD is supposed to have the closing loop fit right through it, and be mounted next to the backpad with a window added. But what about the aluminum plate that's typically in containers to provide a base for the closing loop & cypres washer?? Some can be fairly big, which would make it difficult to orient the MPAAD so one could see whatever controls it has thru a window. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
