sundevil777 102 #26 March 23, 2011 QuoteCylindrical was to may it so that if the cutter was installed at a 90 degree angle on accident by the maker it would still cut the loop is how I had it explained to me by a few people. Thanks, that is interesting. It would be really, really poor design practice to have it even possible for that to happen. It can be done by 'keying' features that are integrated into the shape of parts, and if that keying feature is built into stamping/forging/casting tooling, then it can't be screwed up. QuoteI hope Argus pays for the cost but no matter what it might be several months until they have made enough replacement cutters to meet the demand for all the units in the field if its determined to replace all the cutters. Of course not only do they have a new cutter design, but they must obviously be different at the connection to the box. Perhaps the entire cypres cutter is patented, and they refuse to sell it to others at a reasonable cost?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
mjosparky 4 #27 March 23, 2011 They have had a problem with cutters since at least 2006. That seems to be more than enough time to fix the “problem”. Anyone who is still willing to champion them is not paying attention to the facts. Here are some links to read through. Sparky http://www.pia.com/piapubs/ServiceBulletins/SPSB0063.22.11.pdf http://www.pia.com/piapubs/ServiceBulletins/SB-1548.pdf http://www.pia.com/TechnicalArgusDocuments/2-11%20ARGUS%20PICS.pdf http://www.pia.com/TechnicalArgusDocuments/2sept2009pressrelease.pdf http://www.pia.com/TechnicalArgusDocuments/2septaccidentreport.pdf http://www.pia.com/TechnicalArgusDocuments/05.09.2010%20SERVICE%20BULLETIN%20Revised.pdf http://www.pia.com/TechnicalArgusDocuments/APF_TD_03-2010_Issued_July_12th_2010_Argus_AAD.pdf http://www.pia.com/TechnicalArgusDocuments/ARGUS%20Cutter%20Review.pdf http://www.pia.com/TechnicalArgusDocuments/BPA%20Safety%20Information%201-10%20re%20Argus%20AADs.pdf http://www.pia.com/TechnicalArgusDocuments/Incident_Report-Argus_022111.pdf http://www.pia.com/TechnicalArgusDocuments/Poland%20Report.pdf http://www.pia.com/TechnicalArgusDocuments/Portugal%20Data.pdfMy idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
virgin-burner 1 #28 March 23, 2011 Quote Cylindrical was to may it so that if the cutter was installed at a 90 degree angle on accident by the maker it would still cut the loop is how I had it explained to me by a few people. I hope Argus pays for the cost but no matter what it might be several months until they have made enough replacement cutters to meet the demand for all the units in the field if its determined to replace all the cutters. Per one of the dealers Airtec and their CYPRES units are already on backorder for 1-2 week prior to the announcements this week. Quote i heard the cypres-guys took the week off; they're curing the hangover from the party over the good news! “Some may never live, but the crazy never die.” -Hunter S. Thompson "No. Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try." -Yoda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
piisfish 140 #29 March 23, 2011 at least your batteries are cheap... send it to Antarctica, I heard they work over there scissors beat paper, paper beat rock, rock beat wingsuit - KarlM Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ibx 2 #30 March 23, 2011 QuoteYou guys realize the issue is just with the cutter, right? The cutter is not manufactured by Aviacom - they purchase them from another company. There are lots of makes and models of cutters on the market - if Aviacom and the cutter manufacturer cannot sort out the problem with these cutters, they can easily switch to a different model, or even a different manufacturer. Cutters are easily replaced in the field. I think you see this a little wrong. One of the major development concerns of airtec when they began developing the cypres was the cutter. A lot of R+D went into this, as the task is not as easy as it might seem. To this day every cypres cutter is manufactured under laboratory conditions. As the Argus issue proves more than anything else, it takes more than copying an idea to make a reliable life saving device. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DiverMike 5 #31 March 23, 2011 I finally saved up enough money to get a used Dolphin with an Argus. To date, Altico hasn't banned the Argus and I have a few options to consider: 1. Remove the Argus and a. Jump without an AAD. b. Don't jump at all this year until I have saved up to buy a CYPRES. 2. Leave the Argus in and a. Check it before every jump so I don't bring a plane down. b. Continue to pull high and decide by 2000' if I am cutting away and going silver (as I was trained). To me the AAD is only there if I am incapacitated or stupid. I can try to prevent stupid. For the same reason I jump off a perfectly good diving board. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
piisfish 140 #32 March 23, 2011 Quote2. Leave the Argus in and a. Check it before every jump so I don't bring a plane down.that is how it should be done with every rig, AAD equipped or not. Check your gear !!scissors beat paper, paper beat rock, rock beat wingsuit - KarlM Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
councilman24 37 #33 March 23, 2011 Your rigger may not be willing to pack it with the Argus in it even if Altico hasn't banned it. From the Technical committee on PIA's website. ".......At least one manufacturer has elected to no longer approve any procedures to install the Argus AAD in any of their products. Since they have also rescinded any prior approved procedures to do so, it could be a violation of 14 CFR Part 65.129(e), if a certificated parachute rigger were to pack any of their harness and container systems with an Argus AAD installed. Further, it could be a violation of 14 CFR Part 65.129(b) if, because of the installation of the Argus AAD, a parachute were to be deemed by the FAA to not be safe for emergency use." bold added While I'm sure some riggers will continue to pack an Argus, I'm also sure many will not.I'm old for my age. Terry Urban D-8631 FAA DPRE Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,070 #34 March 23, 2011 >Your rigger may not be willing to pack it with the Argus in it even if Altico hasn't >banned it. From the Technical committee on PIA's website: >"it could be a violation of 14 CFR Part 65.129(b) if, because of the installation of the >Argus AAD, a parachute were to be deemed by the FAA to not be safe for emergency >use." If that's the case, then riggers, using exactly the same logic, may not be willing to pack ANY AAD. After all, any AAD can be deemed by the FAA to not be safe for emergency use. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
-ftp- 0 #35 March 23, 2011 QuoteThey have had a problem with cutters since at least 2006. That seems to be more than enough time to fix the “problem”. Anyone who is still willing to champion them is not paying attention to the facts. Here are some links to read through. Sparky WOW! Those are some scary reads! Thanks for that. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DiverMike 5 #36 March 23, 2011 I think you are misreading the bulletin. If the manufacturer approves it (Altico still has) then it is not in violoation of 65.129e, to wit: (e) Pack, maintain, or alter a parachute in any manner that deviates from procedures approved by the Administrator or the manufacturer of the parachute. In addition PIA is taking liberties with 61.129(b) since the FAA has not to date deemed any container packed with an Argus as being "not safe for emergency use". In fact, adding this hypothetical possibility to the technical bulletin was a poor decision. I can think of hundreds of other scenarios the FAA could implement that would make using an Argus illegal. Including a hypothetical possibility based on future FAA action is misleading. There is absolutely no reason pertaining to BSR's, FAR's or manufacturers procedures or recommendations that indicate a rigger shouldn't pack an Argus in a Dolphin. Yet. (... waiting for various shoes to drop- I contacted Altico and they haven't responded...) For the same reason I jump off a perfectly good diving board. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #37 March 23, 2011 Glad I bought a C2 instead of the Argus.... People on here bitched at me about not liking new AAD's. There is a reason, and this is one of those reasons. Yes, it might be an easy fix... But I have seen company's fold over less than this."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BrianM 1 #38 March 23, 2011 QuoteQuoteYou guys realize the issue is just with the cutter, right? The cutter is not manufactured by Aviacom - they purchase them from another company. There are lots of makes and models of cutters on the market - if Aviacom and the cutter manufacturer cannot sort out the problem with these cutters, they can easily switch to a different model, or even a different manufacturer. Cutters are easily replaced in the field. I think you see this a little wrong. One of the major development concerns of airtec when they began developing the cypres was the cutter. A lot of R+D went into this, as the task is not as easy as it might seem. To this day every cypres cutter is manufactured under laboratory conditions. As the Argus issue proves more than anything else, it takes more than copying an idea to make a reliable life saving device. I'm not saying this isn't a serious issue. It is. I was simply addressing the comments that every Argus is now a worthless paperweight. I think it's a tad premature to make that claim."It's amazing what you can learn while you're not talking." - Skydivesg Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
councilman24 37 #39 March 23, 2011 Unless a rigger themselves decide that it makes the rig not safe and chooses to not put their name on it. I do that all the time with all of the components of a rig. Another rigger may disagree with my opinion about any component.I'm old for my age. Terry Urban D-8631 FAA DPRE Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chris74 0 #40 March 23, 2011 A new weapon for Buzz-lightyear ! May the force be with you Xophe Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
theonlyski 8 #41 March 23, 2011 Quote There is absolutely no reason pertaining to BSR's, FAR's or manufacturers procedures or recommendations that indicate a rigger shouldn't pack an Argus in a Dolphin. Yet. (... waiting for various shoes to drop- I contacted Altico and they haven't responded...) Just called Altico, they're putting their SB together for distribution as I was talking to him."I may be a dirty pirate hooker...but I'm not about to go stand on the corner." iluvtofly DPH -7, TDS 578, Muff 5153, SCR 14890 I'm an asshole, and I approve this message Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DiverMike 5 #42 March 23, 2011 My rigger just called me (I didn't even know he had my phone number). He too talked to Altico and confirmed the SB. I started talking about 'should' and 'could' and what was mandatory. He told me I spend to much time on DZ.COM and to just take it out. Bye-bye AAD. For the same reason I jump off a perfectly good diving board. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mr.B 0 #43 March 23, 2011 Quote so i have one, and i have a Mirage, what are all you Argus owners planning on doing with yours now that they are worthless? :( I don't have an Argus, but if I had one, I would test drop the fcuker cheers, Bart Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
theonlyski 8 #44 March 23, 2011 Quote I don't have an Argus, but if I had one, I would test drop the fcuker I would, but I think if they resolve the cutter issue and start trading cutters in, they'll be a little less likely to take a fired one. Just pulled mine out of the rig. Oh well!"I may be a dirty pirate hooker...but I'm not about to go stand on the corner." iluvtofly DPH -7, TDS 578, Muff 5153, SCR 14890 I'm an asshole, and I approve this message Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
piisfish 140 #45 March 24, 2011 Quote I was simply addressing the comments that every Argus is now a worthless paperweight. I think it's a tad premature to make that claim.OK, so it's an expensive and hopefully temporary paperweight. So much for the people who think a 12year old CYPRES is an expensive paperweight...scissors beat paper, paper beat rock, rock beat wingsuit - KarlM Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kellja2001 0 #46 March 24, 2011 Quote A new weapon for Buzz-lightyear ! May the force be with you Xophe How did a Vigil appear in this thread? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jurgencamps 0 #47 March 24, 2011 QuoteI think you see this a little wrong. One of the major development concerns of airtec when they began developing the cypres was the cutter. A lot of R+D went into this, as the task is not as easy as it might seem. To this day every cypres cutter is manufactured under laboratory conditions. As the Argus issue proves more than anything else, it takes more than copying an idea to make a reliable life saving device. The cutters for the cypres and the argus are made by the same manufacturer. So maybe we can blame that company. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skydiverek 63 #48 March 24, 2011 QuoteThe cutters for the cypres and the argus are made by the same manufacturer. So maybe we can blame that company. I don't think so. This is what I found: 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 Dynamic-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. 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". Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bofh 0 #49 March 24, 2011 Quote 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". If it is a secret, then it can not be patented. The whole idea with patents is that you get a law protected monopoly on an invention as a compensation for publishing how it works. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chris74 0 #50 March 24, 2011 It was a Vigil 1 grounded by the the French authority. PS: I am still jumping a Vigil 2 so don't misunderstand the pic. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
