pasha_justas

If lifeguard watches your drowning and do nothing - yes, it is crime. If lifeguard makes artificial respiration in wrong way and man dies - it is crime too. Most common mistake is meaning that Vigil is "fucking rip of" Cypres because Cypres was first electronic AAD on the market. Users expect from Vigil the same behavior witch Cypres has. And they make very dangerous mistake. These are very different AADs. Each other has its unique logic with its positive and negative sites. If you don't break manufacture rules - all be OK if unit is serviceable. These rules are described in the manuals. But most users are very lazy to read manuals and when something goes "in wrong way" they are very surprised. :(

Vigil fires as designed not because of bad filter the pressure info. That's why because of Vigil has very low activation altitude (150 ft) if compare it to Cypres activation altitude (1500 ft). In other words if you jump below 1500 ft Cypres will keep silence opposite to Vigil witch will fire and give you additional chance. This is plus for Vigil. Sadly, other site of coin is misfiring between 150 - 1100 ft if unexpected pressure hop occurs (such as door opening). This is minus for Vigil. At this time there isn't ideal AAD algorithm on the market witch based on pressure measurement. But good thing is you are free in your choice: either Vigil or Cypres. :)

Sorry, I can't agree. Neither Cypres nor Vigil can't work successfully in the pressurized aircraft. Cypres manual, page 31: http://www.cypres.cc/index.php?option=com_remository&Itemid=89&func=startdown&id=190&lang=en Resume: In Cypres case your AAD will kill you silently. It just won't save you after pressurization. (If you don't like to read manuals, of course. Only in this case.) Because it will recalculate and decrease ground level during pressurization. If you have some hesitates about manual items, you may ask Airtec directly. They have very friendly and pleasant Support also Vigil has. :) P.S. I'm Vigil user at this time.

English is not my native language. I mean this: http://www.vigil.aero/files/images/ENGELS___DP_JUN_2010.pdf I agree with you that AAD doesn't have gyros.

I see 2 ways to get true: 1) make an experiment in the chamber (like myth busters ;)) 2) make request to Airtec directly. By email for instance.

No. You are not right. Only Vigil has additional altitude correction. This fact is wroten in the manual and mentioned in the investigation report. Please, read it again more carefully. I have never met any mentions about any additional altitude correction for Cypres in official documents. If you have such, please refer on them here. In opposite case it will stay only your asssumption.

No they are not unnoticed: http://viewer.zoho.com/docs/dcWbbA If you would prefer to know official investigation information without compilation about Cessna-206 T/N N2537X crashing, please read official report here: http://www.docstoc.com/docs/63545688/NTSB-_-DEN08FA078pdf Shortly. In that incident both units worked as designed. Vigil fired first because its activation altitude by default is greater (840ft + 260ft correction = 1100ft by manual) then Cypres has (750ft by manual) and there were activation conditions for Vigil firing. After Vigil fired aircraft falling speed had been decreased by spare parachute opening and speed was not enough for Cypres activation at Cypres activation altitude.

Could you give more information about this incident? What did manufacturer answer?

Yes, you're right but not completely too. Ok, lets make all points clear. According to the YouTube comments: Sensor was seted up on the cockpit but not on the pilot body. If cockpit is damaged it absorbs part of impact power and pilot is testing much less deceleration if he could in opposite case. It is base of passive safety. According to Airtec "Design and Test Report" http://www.sskinc.com/cypres/ts120cv3b.pdf Information from Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G-force

I agree with you fully. Because Airtec made impact stress test for Cypres-1 and Cypres-2 with acceleration approx. 20g. Here is "Design and Test Report": http://www.sskinc.com/cypres/ts120cv3b.pdf Read chapter "4.5. Environmental testing." As you well know death acceleration range for human is 16g. However Cypres keeps functionality even after 20g. So, may be Russian skydivers are iron people? Nelyubin, what do you think about Russian health? Or would be better to say in Russian: "Ne nado nam lohmatit babushku"?

I just paid my attention to the next interesting quote from Airtec answer: http://www.skycentre.net/index.php?s=&showtopic=10801&view=findpost&p=207079 FYI EPROM can be partially erased by electrical influence only. Any mechanical influences (e.g. impact) can caused full damage of chip or do nothing. In this case destructions of chip can be easily detected visually. As for me, it is very dilettantish assumption for the official statement.

see Post#24. Nelyubin said that the Cypres was sent to the Airtec in complete set. That means with cutter. You're right. And in this case Cypres must have appropriate log message in the logbook. However it isn't in considering incident despite cutter was activated and loop was severed. When: 2011/02/26 (see Post#1) Rig: Rent rig. I don't know its manufacturer. Was the reserve the correct size for the pack tray: yes, as far as I know. If you understand Russian, you may read more here: http://www.skycentre.net/index.php?showtopic=10801

Should it be funny? Or are you seriously? In case 'yes': you may try to make some rip similary to Cypres-2 by your own hands. Without original software of course. If you are novice in software development, you can try to steal Airtec soft. This is easy, isn't it? I'm upset. :( Trolls are everywhere. Even on this forum.

Exactly. It is very strange incident. When Vigil-I misfired on the ground in 2006, manufacturer honestly made statement about registering of cutter activation conditions in the AAD memory. http://www.vigil.aero/files/VigilStatementAUG06_000.pdf For now they replace units with old softwar version with new one at a charge. http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=4112995;sb=post_latest_reply;so=ASC;forum_view=forum_view_collapsed;;page=unread#unread Cypres-2 incident in Russia looks like sad mistery unlike Vigil-I misfiring.

Error code 1111 or 2222 according to Cypres-2 manual.