Re: [sparkie] ARGUS REPORT Student Fatality Poland - 25/07/2009

[mjosparky 4]

Having read through this tread in it entirety I find 2 things that are really sad. The first is the fact that a young woman died because she failed to take the steps necessary to save her own life. The second is how many skydivers do not have a basic knowledge of how their gear works. An AAD does not, I repeat, does not open/deploy your reserve. It is designed to do one thing and one thing only and that is to cut the reserve loop if you are going too fast too low. There is no excuse for not understanding a piece of equipment that most of you won’t jump without. It like giving a pacifier to a baby, they thing they have a bottle so they are content.

Sparky

My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

[BobMoore 0]

Quote

An AAD does not, I repeat, does not open/deploy your reserve.

Correct, in the same sense that pulling your ripcord does not, I repeat, does not open/deploy your reserve.

Changing the name of that little box from "Automatic Opener" to "Automatic Activation Device" was dreamed up by the manufacturers' lawyers. They didn't want their clients to be hauled into court to explain why their "Automatic Openers" didn't open the parachute. It's a legal technicality.

"For you see, an airplane is an airplane. A landing area is a landing area. But a dropzone... a dropzone is the people."

[mjosparky 4]

Quote

Quote

An AAD does not, I repeat, does not open/deploy your reserve.

Correct, in the same sense that pulling your ripcord does not, I repeat, does not open/deploy your reserve.

Changing the name of that little box from "Automatic Opener" to "Automatic Activation Device" was dreamed up by the manufacturers' lawyers. They didn't want their clients to be hauled into court to explain why their "Automatic Openers" didn't open the parachute. It's a legal technicality.

It might be a legal technicality but the fact remains that an AAD does not open your reserve. Pulling the reserve ripcord is an action that be initiated by the jumper at any time they choose and make the function of the AAD a moot point. In this case it appears the jumper failed pull that ripcord. That is the lesson that needs to be taken from this incident.

Sparky

My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

[airtwardo 7]

Quote

Quote

An AAD does not, I repeat, does not open/deploy your reserve.

Correct, in the same sense that pulling your ripcord does not, I repeat, does not open/deploy your reserve.

Yup...it's all about TIME.

Especially with the current possibility of some reserve containers not necessarily being conducive to FAST deployments, the higher you deploy and the more time you give yourself, the better off you may be.

Being awake, alive and altitude aware enough to pull your own reserve could give you time to sit-up, throw an elbow and maybe say a prayer.

..going along through a grand like a lemming, hoping Rube Goldberg and his mighty battery pack will save yer ass is stupid.

Last ditch devises should never be your first option.

~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~

[mjosparky 4]

+1
A truth that is being lost in this thread.

Sparky

My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

[LongWayToFall 0]

Yes but when you buy a device that has only one job (not open the reserve, but simply to cut the loop) you have to ask why that simple task was not completed on this jump, and what made the cutter perform differently than any other time.
Pressing the brake pedal in your car isn't a 100% for sure way of slowing your car down, but figuring out failures is a top priority to getting it closer to 100%, even if that is an impossibility.

[jb88ci 0]

i didn't notice in the accident report if they speculated on loop length but Karel did send me a document where it does state, as we know, that a long loop may affect the cutters action.

On that note, i found some video tests on youtube of Argus cutter tests done last month with 0kg of loop tension....

http://www.youtube.com/user/Argus996#p/u

[airtwardo 7]

http://www.youtube.com/user/Argus996#p/u

~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~

[jb88ci 0]

is it possible that the cut loop is frayed because it was flapping in the breeze for 7 seconds at 130 mph?

[mjosparky 4]

Quote

i didn't notice in the accident report if they speculated on loop length but Karel did send me a document where it does state, as we know, that a long loop may affect the cutters action.

On that note, i found some video tests on youtube of Argus cutter tests done last month with 0kg of loop tension....

http://www.youtube.com/user/Argus996#p/u

And here is a test of a Cypress cutter which also has no bearing on this incident.

Sparky

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tF1Ghw2KiMM

My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

[Skybear 0]

Interesting. The loops shown in the videos even seem to be a little frayed. The loop which was attached to the water bottle isn't shown. It would be more interesting to see loop than the water bottle. I saw several loops which were cut by other cutter types, and all provided a clean cut without any frays, no matter which load was put on the loop.

I can't really judge the cutter without more knowledge and facts, but I would feel bad jumping it. Imagine you go to the dropzone, turn on your AAD, do some jumps and then have a misfire on the ground without noticing it. While being on lunch your Argus decides to fire in the packing area, but the container stays closed because the loop is not entirely cut. Then, on the next load you need your reserve, pull the handle and nothing happens, because cutter and loop keep the container closed...

I'd rather jump without an AAD then jump with one that I don't fully trust. Maybe this discussion is because so many of today's jumpers, including me, did not experience the good old times where mechanical AADs were state of the art. Many jumpers didn't like them at all for good reasons. They were difficult to handle, unreliable and expensive in maintenance. After the death of a friend Helmut Cloth decided to design the "perfect" AAD. While knowing that perfectionism can never be reached he put every effort in the development, to come as close as possible to it. He wanted an AAD that was easy to handle, with fixed costs and last but not least 100% reliability. There are more points in the design philosophy which make a difference to other AADs, but I don't want to go into details right now. I justed wanted everybody to be aware of what I wrote down here. I don't want us to get back into times where AADs were less reliable than Cypres 1 or 2, and with Argus I have the feeling that it is still a long way to go.

[koppel 4]

Quote

I don't want us to get back into times where AADs were less reliable than Cypres 1 or 2, and with Argus I have the feeling that it is still a long way to go

If you are saying that Cypres is reliable and Argus is not I suggest that you have a look at the recent recall of Cypres.

I have nothing against any manufacturer, Airtec, AAD or Aviacom. I choose to jump Aviacom's product.

The reality is that ALL of the brands are still in development as the sport is as well.

I like my canopy...


...it lets me down.

[mjosparky 4]

Quote

Quote

I don't want us to get back into times where AADs were less reliable than Cypres 1 or 2, and with Argus I have the feeling that it is still a long way to go

If you are saying that Cypres is reliable and Argus is not I suggest that you have a look at the recent recall of Cypres.

I have nothing against any manufacturer, Airtec, AAD or Aviacom. I choose to jump Aviacom's product.

The reality is that ALL of the brands are still in development as the sport is as well.

I am not saying either one is better. But one tested on a closing loop and one tested on a steel cable. You draw your own conclusions.

Sparky

My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

[JerryBaumchen 1,362]

Hi Sparky,

Quote

one tested on a steel cable.

Make that two; I've seen the cable that a ASTRA cut through.

JerryBaumchen

PS) I think all of them will do it but I cannot say factually.

[Scootersv 0]

Nothing stops you testing cutters on anything your want, just the reality tells me that it's unlikely the AAD's closing loops are going to be made of steel cables in the near future. I believe the reason Aviacom did not perform testing on steel cables as there was no real need for it.

On the side note.
As far as i know neither Airtec or Aviacom manufacture their own cutters. They get their supply probably from the same manufacturer.

[mjosparky 4]

Robison Research Labs. is a company in CA that makes all sorts of cutters. The ones in the picture are timed and fire 0.8 sec after initiation. They make the same type that is fired electrically. They make them with hammer and anvil and with a guillotine blade. The guillotine type is SS and we used them to cut trough Kevlar line. I wouldn’t be surprised if they were the manufactures of the cutters for all AAD’s on the market today. It is pretty much a nitch item.

Sparky

My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

[jurgencamps 0]

Huh

Noble makes the cutters used in the ARGUS and the CYPRES. Both cutters will cut trough a steel cable (VIGILS cutter too).

Cypres the perfect AAD and the rest is rubbish? Please, keep on dreaming.

[Mr.B 0]

Quote

Noble makes the cutters used in the ARGUS and the CYPRES.

Yep - the argus manual states, that they use cutters manufactured by Noble, but could you provide the source of information, that Noble also makes the cutters for Cypres AADs (haven't seen it anywhere on Airtec website/manuals/etc. ). Thanks!


cheers,
Bart

[Skybear 0]

Dynamit-Nobel makes the Cypres cutters. I got the info first hand from Airtec. But the cutters of Cypres and Argus are not identical. The most obvious difference is the design of the blade. Beyond that there are some "secrets" in the design of the Cypres cutter, which are patented by Airtec. So the other manufacturers have to order cutters to their own specifications, including their own "secrets".

[Scootersv 0]

Both cutters used for Cypres & Argus are nearly identical.
I'm not aware of Airtec "patented secrets" though maybe those makes all the difference.

Regardless, I'm just wondering what stopped the cutter (IF THAT WAS THE ISSUE CAUSING THE ACCIDENT, THERE IS STILL BIG IF HERE) perform exactly the same in real situation as per tests done by Aviacom shown in the video. (Unless the design of '07 made cutters are significantly different to what was used in the video) Other than that it's same cutter, same manufacturer, different circumstances. Anything else....?

[Cambalectri 0]

Quote

Both cutters used for Cypres & Argus are nearly identical.
I'm not aware of Airtec "patented secrets" though maybe those makes all the difference.

Regardless, I'm just wondering what stopped the cutter (IF THAT WAS THE ISSUE CAUSING THE ACCIDENT, THERE IS STILL BIG IF HERE) perform exactly the same in real situation as per tests done by Aviacom shown in the video. (Unless the design of '07 made cutters are significantly different to what was used in the video) Other than that it's same cutter, same manufacturer, different circumstances. Anything else....?

The Airtec Cypres2 and the Argus cutters are not the same, they are very different ! However, the cutters from AAD Vigil2 and the Argus are similar...

The Airtec cutter is a wedge-shaped knife and the one from Argus is a cylindrical bullet-type knife !
The Airtec cutter is made by Nobel (Germany) ;
Argus is using the Nobel Energetics Metron, from Scotland.
As for AAD Vigil, I believe, their cutter comes from Richard Stresau Laboratory, Inc...

What is similar with both, the Cypres and the Argus,
the cutter is treaded, but the Vigil is made by crimpling.

[bofh 0]

Quote

Beyond that there are some "secrets" in the design of the Cypres cutter, which are patented by Airtec.

From wikipedia:
"A patent (pronounced /ˈpætənt/ or /ˈpeɪtənt/) is a set of exclusive rights granted by a state (national government) to an inventor or their assignee for a limited period of time in exchange for a public disclosure of an invention." It can not both be patented and a secret.

The only patents I can find from Airtec Gmbh is:
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/result.html?query_txt=%22Cloth,+Helmut%22&sort=relevance&srch=top&search=

[Skybear 0]

About the Cypres cutter:

http://bit.ly/bG0Vni

[koppel 4]

Quote

About the Cypres cutter:

What a demonstration of poor product promotion. It is considered poor business practice to bag others rather than promote the benefits of your own product.

Quote

It looks like after that action she wasn't able to manually open her reserve any more.

The above quote from the link you provided skybear is ridiculous in its content. The whole concept of an AAD firing parameter is that it fires at a point where it would normally be considered too late for the jumper to do so themselves.

For a company that decided to hide an issue with their own product for over a year; they should consider a well known saying about people who live in glass houses....

I like my canopy...


...it lets me down.

[Skybear 0]

Drifting a little off-topic? Maybe the link proves bad business practices, but there is no proof of a bad Cypres cutter in it.

About the recalls: Misfires due to bad sensors in March 2008, and then a recall in April 2008. Did I miss something or when have they hidden a problem for over a year?