AIRTEC CYPRES AAD FACT SHEET how many Cypres deaths are you aware of?

[councilman24 37]

The distinction is that reserves have failed to open after proper function of a AAD. That is why we are trying to gather anomoly data on table deployments of reserves with mains still in. It is the AAD's fault? Not at all. Is it rigging, rig design, mismatched components assembled, etc? We don't know. All an AAD does is start the deployment. If the rig/reserve fails that's not a death caused by an AAD error.

One ARGUS failure mode is to trap the loop and in some cases PREVENT a ripcord from being able to open the reserve.
Don't turn it on? Jumper error. Let it turn off after 14 hours? Jumper error. Misset the altitude offset? Jumper error.

Nothing to see here. Let's move on to see why reserve activated at 750' aren't opening. But remember, the TSO standard is 3 SECONDS or more. 300' is an ALTERNATIVE standard if 3 seconds can't be ment on low speed deployments.

I'm old for my age.
Terry Urban
D-8631
FAA DPRE

[mjosparky 4]

Quote

You forgot to mention anything in your rant about the unexplained fatalities. These make up most of the Cypres fatalities...

What are your thoughts on those?

There are no unexplained fatalities just the rants of Argus trying to defend their company by attacking Cypres and Vigil. That is my thought on that subject.
Did you read the documents and do any research into their validity or accept them at face value?
On 2 of the dates they list there was not a fatality anywhere in the world.
As for Brook, she died because she did not deploy a canopy. Her Cypres fired and I would blame the container for causing the hesitation in deployment.
You are the one that doesn’t make any sense.
As I have posted before, if you are going to come on the net and rant and rave about something you should first know what you are talking about. I don’t believe you do.


This horse has been beat to death and I am done with it.

Sparky

My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

[Skybear 0]

There is no source of the information mentioned in the document nor is the author known. This alone let me questions the whole content.

[RiggerLee 61]

You clearly do not get it. You keep trying this shit over and over again. When are you going to catch on? This is a small tecnical forum. For the most part, with the exception of nubies that wonder in here, it's the same small group of people reading this board. When are you going to catch on that most of us are older in the sport then you, smarter then you, and better informed then you. I remember when the cypres came out. I remember when Pirose went in. I remember most of those incedents and some others that didn't even make your list. Hell, I packed one of them.

None of us are going to buy in to your smear campaine any more then we buy into airtecs propoganda. And we will call you on your BS every time. It's not going to fly here. Now don't get me wrong. I like debate. I don't mind contraversy. But if you want to make a statement here you had better be ready to defend it. We deal in facts here not hype.

As to the subject at hand. I think every one shoud read it. I think it should be published in parachutest. It's probable the best example I've ever seen of the greatest danger we face. It shows exactly how slimy scum bag lawyers bully and scare companies into giving in and settleing in law suits. This is what we must fight against. And the sad thing is that you, a skydiver, have bought this hook line and sinker.

Lee

Lee
lee@velocitysportswear.com
www.velocitysportswear.com