mattjw916 2 #26 October 13, 2005 Yeah... every AAD will have teething issues. I don't base my potential decision to buy one on whether or not some random gov't agency (read politicians) in a foreign country "approves" it for use. Having taken a close look at the Vigil and talked extensively to people in the know about them, they appear very impressive. My next AAD will be a Vigil.NSCR-2376, SCR-15080 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mattias 0 #27 October 13, 2005 Yes, all AAD's have had problems, I remember reading some serious stuff about the Cypres when it came out in the early 90's. I do not know why Germany didn't let the vigil through just know they didn't at first and now they do. Sweden has not yet certified the Vigil (as far as I know) as there was a ton of issues that had not been addressed or disregarded by the developer. The Swedish Parachuting Association is run by skydivers so it is not, in principal, a government agency and the people in charge of certification are a serious bunch of people. I can compile the email I got earlier this year from SFF if any one is interested, just have to check if I havn't missed anything first… I am sure the Vigil will be a good competitor to Cypres, but I am not sure when that will happen. Argus? Is that the Vigil spin off?_______________________________________ What goes up, must come down... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mattjw916 2 #28 October 13, 2005 QuoteI am sure the Vigil will be a good competitor to Cypres, but I am not sure when that will happen.I'd say it already is, in the states at least. As more and more Cypres AADs hit their EOL, I'm guessing we'll see a lot more of them.NSCR-2376, SCR-15080 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mattias 0 #29 October 13, 2005 I will state here for the record, I do not like AAD (the company who manufacture Vigil), just so you know. Personally I think that is sad, consumers should know what they buy, if they did I think the sales of Vigil would drop. I am inclined to compare this with the “non-airworthy Sabre 107” story that is floating around here. I am sure Vigil saves lives, Cypres too but both have misfires Vigil more so (I believe) at the moment but it is still cracking its’ teeth so that will probably be fixed, after another recall… However in a few years I am quite confident we will see more misfires and malfunctions from the Vigil due to lack of maintenance. Anyone who truly believes that the electronics in the Vigil will survive 20+ years in a skydiving environment is probably a sales rep. for AAD. -Let the ranting begin!_______________________________________ What goes up, must come down... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skydiverton 0 #30 October 13, 2005 QuoteI will state here for the record, I do not like AAD (the company who manufacture Vigil), just so you know. Personally I think that is sad, consumers should know what they buy, if they did I think the sales of Vigil would drop. I am inclined to compare this with the “non-airworthy Sabre 107” story that is floating around here. I am sure Vigil saves lives, Cypres too but both have misfires Vigil more so (I believe) at the moment but it is still cracking its’ teeth so that will probably be fixed, after another recall… However in a few years I am quite confident we will see more misfires and malfunctions from the Vigil due to lack of maintenance. Anyone who truly believes that the electronics in the Vigil will survive 20+ years in a skydiving environment is probably a sales rep. for AAD. -Let the ranting begin! Agree with you. Lets reopen this thread in say 5 or 10 years from now. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Using your droque to gain stability is a bad habit, Especially when you are jumping a sport rig Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MikeForsythe 0 #31 October 13, 2005 QuoteAnyone who truly believes that the electronics in the Vigil will survive 20+ years in a skydiving environment is probably a sales rep. for AAD. Well, I am not a sales rep. and tell me why you think that? Cypresses have been solidly lasting 12yrs. and that is with 15yr. old technology. Today, to engineer electronics to reliably last 20yrs. in harsh environments is easily obtainable.Time and pressure will always show you who a person really is! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhreeZone 20 #32 October 13, 2005 Have you talked to SSK/Airtec about just how many pieces and parts get replaced on an average maintence check? I've talked to them about how many LCD's they replace due to bleed out, how many on buttons get repaired due to the switch wearing out. Over time they find certian parts are not as great as others so they update them at each maintence cycle. Things like a certian coating on wires not lasting as long as others so they get rid of the older wires that might crack. Taking that out of the picture removes the ability to have minor things addressed constantly and either will force the users to be uninformed (current cripe about CYPRES is they don't tell you exactly wat they repaired/replaced if anything but thats another rant) about all the little minor bugs out there, or that a mass recall is going to have to happen to replace everyones unit again. Currently I know that everyone is not informed about all the minor bugs on a Cypres, but at least with a CYPRES you get them repaired at 4 years. I also forsee an issue if supplies start to run dry on a certian part (hence part of the reasoning for the CYPRES2) in a few years and Vigil needs to make slight modifications to a chip or part and it requires a slight tweek in the firmware. Having it in the hands of a local rigger to place firmware on an AAD could lead to the wrong version getting on a certian version of hardware and who knows what effect that will have. Trying to find parts to repair a VCR made in 1990 is near impossible and I'll bet they made of just one model of a VCR then they have made total numbers of AAD's.Yesterday is history And tomorrow is a mystery Parachutemanuals.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tso-d_chris 0 #33 October 13, 2005 QuoteHowever in a few years I am quite confident we will see more misfires and malfunctions from the Vigil due to lack of maintenance. Anyone who truly believes that the electronics in the Vigil will survive 20+ years in a skydiving environment is probably a sales rep. for AAD I sell Vigil and CYPRES2, and will likely sell Argus when they are released. The Vigil will not suffer from a "lack of maintenance." A Vigil can be maintained same as a CYPRES. The difference is that Vigils are not required to be sent to the factory for arbitrary maintenance. If it is not working, it will not pass its self test, same as a CYPRES. Do you really believe that if something goes wrong with a CYPRES it is always going to occur exactly at the 4/8/10 yr marks? If it doesn't (and it probably won't) then the CYPRES is just as likely to fail as the Vigil (neither unit is prone to failure). IMO all the maintenance checks do for the CYPRES is make the unit temporarily unusable while not in rig, cost the jumper money, and give the jumper a false sense of security. If something is found to be not working properly during routine factory maintenance, it is highly unlikely that it failed between removal from the rig and the factory check. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MikeForsythe 0 #34 October 13, 2005 Quote Have you talked to SSK/Airtec about just how many pieces and parts get replaced on an average maintence check?Yes I have. Do you know what the percentage of reliability Airtec has on the units? And remember to exclude negligent damage. My statement still stands: Today, to engineer electronics to reliably last 20yrs. in harsh environments is easily obtainable.Time and pressure will always show you who a person really is! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mattjw916 2 #35 October 13, 2005 I agree, the US puts satellites up constantly and most of them last a long, looong time without scheduled maintenance. Granted there is a lot redundancy built into them but the fact still remains that they have some over 20 years old. Do they still work? Yes. Are they as good as the new ones? Nope. You don't have to do periodic maintenance on today's air bag systems in cars either. If they don't pass their self-test and the light comes on, you take it in for diagnosis/repairs. No biggie. I really don't see the Vigil being any different. Before someone says I think that old Cypreses are junk due to some misconstrued comments by select individuals in another thread, I have a Cypres 1, and it's not exactly brand new either.NSCR-2376, SCR-15080 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
HydroGuy 0 #36 October 13, 2005 Relative Workshop has endorsed the Vigil. Bill Booth has one installed on his rig. I would like to hear the reasoning behind his decision...as he is probably much more informed than anyone else on this board. The Cypress 2 is water resistant...that was my deciding factor as some beach jumps are definately in my future. Waterproof Vigils have a slated release date of December...but who knows if they'll be able to hold that schedule. I'd bet the whole Adrian thing has Vigil/AAD doing some re-evaluating of their own right now.Get in - Get off - Get away....repeat as neccessary Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mattias 0 #37 October 13, 2005 Quote Currently I know that everyone is not informed about all the minor bugs on a Cypres, but at least with a CYPRES you get them repaired at 4 years. Ah! Here is the thing; a Cypres does a self diagnostic every time you switch it on, just like the Vigil. It will complete the self test and start regardless of small shifts in tolerances or leakage currents or what ever. (I know little about how electronics work, but I know a wee bit more about how materials behave). As the AAD gets older these shifts will drift even more due to changes in the material and probably other effects and in the end you could end up with a potentially dangerous AAD. I would feel a lot better if I knew that most of these "out of specs" components got tested and replaced in a regular maintenance cycle. Sure, failures do happen even in properly handled, maintained and used equipment but if you do not put them through some sort of screening the only way you find out that your equipment doesn’t work would be when it misbehaves. I would hope that the self test would pick it up, but if it doesn’t (which I think is probable when it comes to small shifts in sensor response or other drifts in specs) then you suddenly fly with faulty equipment without knowing about it until it was too late._______________________________________ What goes up, must come down... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mattias 0 #38 October 13, 2005 Quote*snipp* Bill Booth has one installed on his rig. I would like to hear the reasoning behind his decision...as he is probably much more informed than anyone else on this board. So would I! But until I do I will remain a whement sceptic. Does anyone know what company is behind the Argus, and where it is based?_______________________________________ What goes up, must come down... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
matthewcline 0 #39 October 13, 2005 So, you actually dislike the time frame (or lack there off) for factory maintanence? Not so much the actual VIGIL AAD?An Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #40 October 13, 2005 QuoteI would feel a lot better if I knew that most of these "out of specs" components got tested and replaced in a regular maintenance cycle. If it does become necessary for the Vigil to have standard maintenence cycles, it will show up on the early production years. Someone buying one this year can ride behind and watch. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billbooth 10 #41 October 13, 2005 Why do I jump a Vigil? To be totally honest, I get a better deal on Vigils because I am involved in Vigil USA, which markets them. That said, I think the Vigil is a "next generation", better designed, better built unit. So, even if they were both the same price to me, I would still choose Vigil. That said, I jumped a Cypres for 12 years, would have no hesitation jumping one today, and have nothing but admiration for Helmut Cloth, the designer of the Cypress. However, I believe that Joe Smolders, who designed the Vigil, has made significant improvements to the electronic AAD. That's why I chose to get involved with Vigil. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sundevil777 102 #42 October 13, 2005 QuoteQuoteHowever in a few years I am quite confident we will see more misfires and malfunctions from the Vigil due to lack of maintenance. Anyone who truly believes that the electronics in the Vigil will survive 20+ years in a skydiving environment is probably a sales rep. for AAD I sell Vigil and CYPRES2, and will likely sell Argus when they are released. The Vigil will not suffer from a "lack of maintenance." A Vigil can be maintained same as a CYPRES. The difference is that Vigils are not required to be sent to the factory for arbitrary maintenance. If it is not working, it will not pass its self test, same as a CYPRES. Do you really believe that if something goes wrong with a CYPRES it is always going to occur exactly at the 4/8/10 yr marks? If it doesn't (and it probably won't) then the CYPRES is just as likely to fail as the Vigil (neither unit is prone to failure). IMO all the maintenance checks do for the CYPRES is make the unit temporarily unusable while not in rig, cost the jumper money, and give the jumper a false sense of security. If something is found to be not working properly during routine factory maintenance, it is highly unlikely that it failed between removal from the rig and the factory check. Consider that the Cypres can also be just fine for the customer, functioning without a hitch, and then when SSK does the full series of tests including high/low temp, vibration, etc it fails to meet the standards. Does this mean it would have necessarily failed to save the life of the owner if needed? No, but it does mean that the mfg is not comfortable with the self test being the only check on the proper function of the unit. The self test can't check things to the same extent as can be done at the factory. 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 series makes me not want to trust the Vigil's self test as the only check during its lifetime. Perhaps the Vigil's self test is much more complete than the Cypres', but I don't think so. The self test cannot simulate a jump (simulate the pressures on the transducer) to test the entire system, it just is a partial check of the health of the electronics.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
Mattias 0 #43 October 13, 2005 Seems I have been out of the loop a bit. Just read an email stating that the Vigil is certified in Sweden, however some sort of 4 year check, al la cypres, will be mandatory. I do not know when this happened however but it couldn't have been to long ago... The 4 year service check seems to be a good idea._______________________________________ What goes up, must come down... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mattias 0 #44 October 14, 2005 QuoteSo, you actually dislike the time frame (or lack there off) for factory maintanence? Not so much the actual VIGIL AAD? Yup, that is one of the reasons. The other problem was a model tested by the Swedish PA which repeatedly misfired in a situation were it shouldn't. (simulation of descent below a preset landing zone in an aircraft) This was due to poorly written software, do not know if it has been rectified. I am sure AAD have fixed this but they kept telling the Swedish PA that the problem didn't even exist. This could be some sort of culture clash but it makes me wonder._______________________________________ What goes up, must come down... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,990 #45 October 14, 2005 >Anyone who truly believes that the electronics in the Vigil will survive >20+ years in a skydiving environment is probably a sales rep. for AAD. Our systems survive 15+ years on top of a truck, which is a considerably worse environment than a skydiver's rig will see. (How many skydiving rigs get 2 feet of snow on them, or hit by flying gravel?) Now, that's not to say that the Vigil is just like an Omnitracs. The system has to be designed to tolerate the environment it's in. However, there's no reason to think that a system that's not maintained every 4 years is significantly more unreliable than one that's not. The issues are: -How does it fail? If it is designed to fail inactive, then a lot of the problems go away. You turn it on, and if it gives you an error code you have to send it in to the factory. Even if it failed once every 5 years it would still need less maintenance than a cypres. -What causes the failures? If it's component drift (i.e. offset/gain drift on the pressure sensor, dryout of electrolytics) that can be compensated for in software or by design. If it's a threshold thing, like a FLASH gate that leaks and leaks until you see a flipped bit, then you can protect against that a variety of ways (like checksums and alternate code spaces.) If it's mechanical failure due to repetitive stress that's harder to plan for. -Are the failures detectable? In aviation, reliability isn't often as much an issue as notification of failure. VOR's are vulnerable to electronic noise, weather, and terrain obstruction; that means pilots can't always rely on them. But as long as they get a little red flag that tells them they can't rely on it, then they won't blindly trust the CDI and go flying into a mountain. So detecting a failure is critical. There are easy ways to do this; a simple (but expensive) way to almost guarantee failure detection is to have three redundant systems, and require all three to agree or the system is disabled and an error flag is set (error code or red light or whatever.) -How often do they occur? Reliability prediction is pretty accurate nowadays, and you can get pretty good MTBF estimates if you are willing to do long term HALT testing and periodic sampling of fielded units. In terms of the Vigil and the Argus, their performance in the field will determine how they're accepted and what their perceived quality is. They have an uphill battle, but recent cypres issues (the swoop thing) are starting to pull Airtec's stock down slightly. It will be interesting to see what happens. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skybeergodd 0 #46 October 14, 2005 Quantum Leap is using Vigils and by next year all our student and tandem gear will be vigil equipt and so far we have only had a posative experience with them. I have personally delt with several cypres' that have come back from 4 and 8 year checks only to be installed and within a week the control head cable has gone bad and I even had 2 cases where the cypres came back the LED display broke and with the way theu are packaged and boxed in those padded boxes it is hard to believe that damage happened in shipping. Thats just a couple of my experiences and with that being said...I do own 3 cypres' and think they definitly save lives and are a good unit, however when they reach the 12 year mark they will most likely be replaced with vigils. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest 1010 #47 October 14, 2005 QuoteQuantum Leap is using Vigils and by next year all our student and tandem gear will be vigil equipt and so far we have only had a posative experience with them. [...] (If not too personal) How many units does this involve, all your student and tandem gear? Thanks. You can have it good, fast, or cheap: pick two. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skybeergodd 0 #48 October 14, 2005 15 student rigs and 7 tandems.....plus we also have 5 experienced jumpers now using vigils. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jurgencamps 0 #49 October 14, 2005 What misfiring? Firing at 1000 ft or ...? Please explain me what went wrong or at least explain the test. Get facts before you start slamming somebody. BTW My car needs maintenance somewhere between 15,000 and 30,000 km, my first car every 5000 km. Is this normal? A Vigil also needs maintenance, but not at a scheduled timing. Jurgen Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mattias 0 #50 October 14, 2005 QuoteWhat misfiring? Firing at 1000 ft or ...? Please explain me what went wrong or at least explain the test. Get facts before you start slamming somebody. "Units that have been corrected for higher landing altitude [than take off] fired when you passed that altitude going down in the plane, even if you where only exceeding 20 m/s" -From an email sent to AAD by the SPA. The unit tested was manufactured prior to october 2004, it was tested in a preasure chamber at various descent speeds and preset landing altitudes. The unit fired when descending below the pre set landing altitude. And it did this repeatedly. (This is from memory of what was said at the Swedish PIA symposium this winter.) When pointed out to AAD that there were some flaws in the software, AAD claimed that the problem didn't exist. They were probably in the process of correcting this I would imagine, hence the culture clash comment._______________________________________ What goes up, must come down... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
