bennibluesky

For sure it is possible for electronic devices to operate for more than 20 years. But reliable? Whats reliable? You are comparing devices developed by multi billion dollar market size aerospace industry and products developed by manufacturers in the skydiving industry. Thats an inappropriately comparison, as the capabilities are different. You have to consider every single factor regarding aging of those devices. You simply cant say: It'll work for 20 years. You even cant say: It will work for 4 years. But why do I use an AAD? I could also jump without an AAD 20 years not having any trouble. I do use an AAD to minimize the risk of potential fatal incidents. And I use an AAD which is most likely to operate correctly as it is well maintenanced. To suggest your customers your device will do it for 20+ years without maintenance is probably not more incorrect than telling them it will do it for 4+years but the chance of failure is way higher. And thats why advertising this product is wrong in my opinion. Being on the dropzone every day and witnessing several 10,000s of jumps the past years, I have seen 1 cypres save and ZERO failures. I cant tell you an exact number, but the majority of the people (97%, 99% ? I dont know exactly) are using a cypres. All the rest a vigil or no AAD. Guess what? I saw 2 vigil missfires. 1x Solo jumper on an an straight in approach and one on a tandem in freefall. From the solo jumper I also know the response of the manufacturer, which was everything but satisfying. Those are the facts I do rely on. I am well aware of the fact that it is easier to cut a steel cable than the cypres loop. But its still impressing. Just as impressing as to deliver cutters without blades inside. Every device is made by humans and so it might be imperfect, but there are errors which are, in my opinion, unforgivable. Business competition is a useful thing, but atm I cant see the other AAD manufacturers are near sth to be competitive.

The cost of buying a cypres unit and running it for 12,5 years are peanuts compared to the money you spend when you make 100, 200, 300 or more jumps a year. So I'd chose the one which is most reliable, and for some reasons thats cypres. I've seen a cypres even cutting the reserve steel cable while other AADs fail to just cut the loop or were delivered without any cutter at all. You also get free software updates when you send your unit for maintenance. And I bet every manufacturer who claims that his device will work for 20 years without maintenance is lying. Just because every electronic component is aging and the risk of failure is increasing over time, so I cant see that theres an alternative to sending every unit into maintenance to reduce the risk of failure to a minimum possible. Regarding maintenance: Your flexible, you can send your unit in half a year before or after the the 4 years. If somebody only makes 100 or 200 jumps a year I cant see that theres a problem finding a period of time to send in the unit. Thats how I made my decision...

I think you just didn't got my point.

Im totally aware of the fact, that mistakes are made just because we are human. I've seen lots of signs too, some of them I would consider useful, some not. We dont have a sign "Props rip off heads" although I would consider it useful. I dont understand this sign as a warning that props are dangerous, more of "There is a prop!" as you often cant see them from behind and DZ visitors and non-skydivers are not used to this environment, so maybe thats a good thing. But signs like mentioned by the TE or the ones on the back of a passenger gear saying "Danger, skydiving is a high risk activity, etc..." I consider more like they are a joke. High risk... Guess what.... really? Signs on coffee cups telling you "Caution, hot!", nice to know! Its not about beeing dependent on the crosschecks made by other TI's, its about involving them in your gearcheck. And once again, you involve a professional, not a greenhorn. 4 eyes simply see more than 2 do and realizing and utilizing that has something to to with common sense and using brain. It doesnt have to be a perfect world at all. If you feel bad, not very well, or lazy a day... or even if you are slompy a day, you better dont jump. If you do anyway and thats the cause for an incident, its not an accident its a disaster which you were willing to accept, you act with intend. Thats a difference. Accidents never happen that way, they are always a chain of unhappy circumstances. That is not a skydiving only related trend. We all are considered to be capable of electing our government, but too dump to know that coffee is hot? I dont like this trend at all. It makes it easy to get rid off self-responsibility, doesnt it? We should train and educate ourserlves to be more self-responsive and wide awake as we go through all aspects of life, not just skydiving. I understand your point, that reducing risk is great, I totally agree with that, but you cant achieve this though putting sings everywhere. It may be reasonable in some cases but it has to stop somewhere. Eventually people will sometime throw themselves infront of a car, just for fun. There was no sign telling them "High mass vehicle, may contain enough kinetic energy at high velocities to harm you." Blues

Yeah, maybe he should hang up his rig, in case falling into cypres is a result of stupidity. Still its good that he has that cypres, no question! Dont you think there's a small difference between operating an AAD in your rig and to put up signs trying to cover all possible dangers? Its a TI's job to care for the passenger, if he doesent care to link him, why should he care to active the AAD before he jumps. I've never seen signs on rigs warning that cypres has to be activated to save your life. That would be far more useful, according to your logic. There are way better ways, like TI's crosschecking eachother while getting ready as signing over responsibility to an completely unaware passenger. I'm pretty happy with the fact, that we didn't end up with this insanity and that we give each other the credit to have something like "common sense".

Totally agree with you. Just wanted to express my rejection against this sign.

I'm jumping a KA120 at a WL 1.9 and I just switched from 22" to 26" risers as I like to have my arms all up in rears and got into the lines with the 22", what I didn't like at all. As expected the additional length makes the canopy dive harder and also extends the recovery arc. I also feel like the canopy is more responsive on rears. Dunno if thats just a subjective feeling though.

The life of an unaware passenger shouldn't be put in the hands of a lazy, tired and sloppy TI. Actually nobodys life should be put in such hands. I would call this an occupation fail. If im not willing to handle the responsibility, I'm not the man for the job.

That sign would make me think about my decision on jumping at that specific dropzone as a tandempassenger as I might think that I can't rely on my TI. And as a TI jumping there, I would feel embarassed as I would wonder what my passenger might think about me. I feel responsible for my passenger in a very special way as he or she puts her/his life in my hands. Just as tkhayes already mentioned, I also make them part of my checks. I tell them every single thing im doing in the plane, especially when it comes to connecting the links, I always show them that they are connected. Our procedure also includes that not every TI is getting ready to jump at the same time, thus we are able to check each other. Gearchecks are made pretty loud, so that atleast the TI near you can hear you. Sure people fuck up, but that shouldn't mean you have to install signs everywhere. If a TI fails in such an extreme way, he should hand over his license just as he lands. Its simply not forgivable. If the quantity of failures is so high, that signs for TI are needed, I would rather question the quality of my staff, their training or mental capabilities. Blues

Hey, At my home DZ nobody will let you board the plane with a camera and less than 100 Jumps, thats the minimum including a special camera briefing. And thats a pretty good decision I think. The point is, the camera may distract your focus off from really important things. Thats also the reason why most student canopies have no collapsable slider(or maybe its just not necessary), or why you dont teach an AFF student the whole theory (law, etc) before his first jump. Your mind needs free capacities. And a camera is another factor which will allocate capacity. Skydiving is as extraordinary sport, which requieres extraordinary attention due to its extraordinary environment. Its just like your first driving lesson. You may feel overwhelmed by all the impressions, but once you get experience, you feel comfortable with it and you learn to handle it. And you also learn to handle other things while you're driving. Its the same in skydiving. And to be honest, with 50 jumps you're not experienced in any way. You just learned to survive a normal skydive on your own. Its a good thing we keep an eye on eachother and its also a good thing to avoid unnecessary risks. Blues, Ben