ORGASMO

Dude, not everyone buys a cobalt for swooping. I have had 3 Atair canopies and I do not swoop. I like them for the openings, ability to open at high speed, and great for wing suiting. They will come back from a loooonnnngg spot, and they are very stable in turbulent conditions. Also if you spin one up wingsuiting it usually flies nice and straight without diving while you get yourself unspun. They have tons of flare and can be very forgiving for a fully eliptical canopy. and are a great transition canopy. I have flown both Katana and Crossfire canopies, and I still llike the Cobalt/Alphas better. But thats just my opinion. ORGASMO RODRIGUEZ If your gunna be dumb You better be tough

There is video, I saw it live on USTREAM. It was a monster swoop. Thanks to FLCPA (Albert?) for the live feed and letting us hear the scores in real time, a great idea by somebody! Thanks also to Greg Windmiller for the great commentary on Sat. It would be great if someone was able to live feed from Klatovy! ORGASMO RODRIGUEZ If your gunna be dumb You better be tough

What exactly is the Wings "moded D-bag" ? the pic seems to show an extra "flap" on the bottom of the bag... if so, for what purpose? I just bought a new Wings, didn't get the w/s corners (my main is not overstuffed in the container), but did get a 9' bridle...and not a larger pilot chute as I jump a Cobalt 150 and from what I read they don't like larger pilot chutes. I also use the top of bag stow option as it (in theory) would allow less bag rotation when the stows release. Does placing the bag grommet facing up really aid in a smoother deployment sequence, I have heard conflicting points of view, but the one against was not a w/s'er (anyone?)? It is all being put together today and I will be jumping it with my new-to-me R-Bird tomorrow, weather permitting...weather god has forsaken us here in Atlantic Canada so far this year ORGASMO RODRIGUEZ If your gunna be dumb You better be tough

This was my first thread, I enjoy reading and learning far more than posting and getting the expected "you're a dumb ass and don't even know what you don't know" responses. I realize my "opinion" is not the popular one, however I felt strongly enough on this subject to subject myself to the non agreeable responses in hopes of learning more on the subject, and also hoped it may provoke other jumpers to inform themselves of the very involved and intricate details of AAD functionality and design as it pertains to various containers. Thank you to all who took the time to post and pass on their knowledge, experience and opinions, even you Sparky, sincerely. If we are ever at the same DZ I would not hesitate to buy you a beer and chat more on the subject, as I do not discount your experience or knowledge just because we have a difference of opinions. ORGASMO RODRIGUEZ If your gunna be dumb You better be tough

"I think AAD's _should_ be mandated up to a certain point. Pretty much all DZ's require them for students, some require them up to a certain license. After that, I agree, you should be able to choose on your own - but I also understand why a DZO might not want to see another avoidable fatality at his DZ." Yes, just in case you missed it, I did state that I do agree with mandated use for tandems and students.We are on the same page. "If AAD's really bother you, jump at a place that does not require them. Or get one and don't turn it on. Or get your rigger's ticket and do whatever you please. Your choice." Good advice. I do/will be doing the first two suggestions you made, but have no interest in obtaining a rigger's ticket (yet). Are riggers exempt from mandated AAD use at DZ's or countries where AAD use is mandated? Thank you for your constructive input. ORGASMO RODRIGUEZ If your gunna be dumb You better be tough

"And if you aren't a sheep how come you continue to jump in a situation you find intolerable? Baaaaa Baaaa" This as at least the third time in this thread you have either grossly misquoted me or attributed statements to me that are not mine. Can you please show me where I said "I am jumping in a situation I find intolerable"? Your posts/opinion may carry more weight or be viewed with a greater regard if you did not resort to misquoting or trying to put words in other peoples' mouth to try and make your point. You seem to have tons of experience and knowledge and I am glad you are taking the time to share your opinions,thoughts and information with us on this topic, however misrepresenting what others are saying and refusing to believe anything your fellow skydivers post unless backed up by a "link", "report" or "written statement" only lessens your credibility. A quote from one of your fellow riggers in response to you in the "Cypres2 fire on ground" thread is very well put, Koppel writes to you: "Sparky, you have often asked people to provide information on events that are purported to have occurred. You ask in this case for the report from the manufacturer."........... While I recognise that you are trying to prevent hearsay and rumour from being spread as fact you also need to acknowledge that not every event that occurs ends up with a public report that we can create a link to for all to read and say to ourselves 'see, there it is written from the factory so it must be true' Whilst my own personal experience as a rigger is many years less than your own I have seen with my own eyes enough events occur that have never made it to the general public even though it has been reported to the relevant persons/factories/federations." You are coming across as calling your fellow skydivers at worst liars, and at best unreliable sources of pertinent information. Not a very useful tool for debate. I for one will no longer waste my time replying to someone who has so little regard for their peers. As you have stated before the only opinions that matter are those of the rigging community, so I will wait for the rigging community to come to "agreement" on this topic and accept it, as I am not qualified to even have an opinion. Edit: to underline the sarcasm of my last sentence ORGASMO RODRIGUEZ If your gunna be dumb You better be tough

"As a jumper the only thing you bring to the table is the potential for added liability" No sir, that is not true.I (jumpers collectively) bring the $$$ needed to keep the plane flying and put some money in the DZO's pocket, if there are no jumpers there are no drop zones, business 101 tells you that a business is responsible to their customers, NOT the other way around. Although I have met a few DZO's who wish to see it from your point of view. At the end of the day a DZ only exists because of jumpers. So if we ALL stomp our feet and hold our breath collectively (which will never happen) our wishes would be heard! Or we could all just carry on being sheep and have others make decisions for us that we may not like. I will not be a sheep and tow the "politically correct" line if I feel it is not in my best interest. ORGASMO RODRIGUEZ If your gunna be dumb You better be tough

"Farther up thread you posted this a proof that Vigil was out of control" I did? I see the post you are referring to, however I see no such wording. My entire post follows: "Not directed at you personally Dave, I just thought this was a good piece of information, something I haven't been aware of until it popped up on another thread "Vigil fire" http://viewer.zoho.com/docs/dcWbbA How can ANYONE say that a partially trapped loop is "more serious" than these "incidents" and take action angainst one and not the other? edit: to fix my non working clicky thingy" I still don't see where I said anything about proof or out of control. Constructive discussion should exclude exaggeration and mis quoting. Witnessing your recall skills/comprehension skills I now understand your refusal to believe anything you do not have first hand knowledge of or that someone else may have seen. " Farther up thread you posted this a proof that Vigil was out of control. http://viewer.zoho.com/docs/dcWbbA I posted this and told you they were written by the same person. http://viewer.zoho.com/docs/c6UCg That person was Karel Goorts, Managing Director of Aviacom SA. Any response?" So are you saying that the link I posted is showing a bogus plane crash due to a Vigil mis fire that never happened and was made up by Karl Goortz? Interesting... "The thread starts out with this. That a little thin to call it conclusive. It seems you are just trying to stir shit up. Do you have anything that is documented?" The rest of the opening post of the latest "suspected?" Vigil "mis-fire" "I was starting my setup for a 270 frontriserturn at around 500 feet... When I was in the frontrisers my Vigil fired and the Reserve came out!!! The Main collapsed and when it opened again the main twisted around the reserve.... That was in around 350 feet!!!somehow it worked out that it came to an Biplane, with my reserve in the back and a twisted Main in the front, which always wanted to make it to an Downplane!!! The unit was shipped in for inspection. No results yet." Are you also trying to imply that the OP of the latest Vigil "mis-fire" thread is Karel Goortz? or was put up to making a bogus claim of a Vigil mis-fire by Karel Goortz? Or that the OP or the person who relayed this information as first hand knowledge is making the whole thing up? Just to try and take some heat off Aviacom? Do you have any first hand knowledge of this? or maybe a link I can click on to see it in writing? ORGASMO RODRIGUEZ If your gunna be dumb You better be tough

and ANOTHER good reason not to mandate use of AAD's, that also underlines the un-level playing field and sketchiness in the AAD market. How many "incidents" are needed before common sense prevails. Argus' problems are starting to pale in comparison to Vigil's. That makes 3 "mis-fires" (quick count) this month alone! Wondering if I should hold my breath waiting for a response/reaction from the PIA, or if Vigil's "auto response" of "unit worked as designed, nothing wrong here" will satisfy everyone AGAIN. Can't wait to read all the responses of people trying to defend them now! http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=4121579;sb=post_latest_reply;so=ASC;forum_view=forum_view_collapsed;;page=unread#unread ORGASMO RODRIGUEZ If your gunna be dumb You better be tough

Not directed at you personally Dave, I just thought this was a good piece of information, something I haven't been aware of until it popped up on another thread "Vigil fire" http://viewer.zoho.com/docs/dcWbbA How can ANYONE say that a partially trapped loop is "more serious" than these "incidents" and take action angainst one and not the other? edit: to fix my non working clicky thingy ORGASMO RODRIGUEZ If your gunna be dumb You better be tough

"AADs are a comprimise between successful operation and being non-invasive. Early AADs, which were unpopular, not widely used, and generally frowned upon had the problem of being too invasive. They fired at odd times, and even when the firing 'seemed' right, the exact circumstances were never very exact, the speeds and altitudes when the AAD would honestly fire were 'loose'. Jumpers didn't like any of it, so they didn't jump them. " They fired at odd times It would appear after doing any kind of research that this is not just an issue with "EARLY AAD's" it is STILL happening, and with ALL brands of AAD's ORGASMO RODRIGUEZ If your gunna be dumb You better be tough

My mistake. Your words from post #1 in this thread led me to believe otherwise. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Quote -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For what it's worth, this is my choice in gear due to recent events..... Container: Wings, AAD: Argus (they are going CHEEEEAAPP) Reserve: PD or Smart Just above that I stated "I am in the market for new gear" so no, I do not own one as of yet, hopefully by next week, I will be an Argus owner.(tecnicallities I know) however it does matter when you look at context.I only made my decision to go with Argus after reading all I could find on this topic.I have taken the very unpopular stance and instead of running away from Argus and bashing them, I decided to take advantage of the situation and save ALOT of money. I am NOT a disgruntled Argus owner.I think that should be clear if you are trying to read into my mindset (good luck with that btw ) Also in regards to your previous post, "the rigging community is the only one that counts", it is more than pertinent to point out that the consensus of the "rigging community" is far from unanimous. "I'd rather see the toggle whipper and the scared student both have AAD fires and two-outs, than see the toggle whipper get away with it, and the scared student go in under the malfunctioning main alone. See?" Good point! This is the kind of discussion I was hoping to see, valid points from others more knowledgable then myself. "If that's not good enough for you, build your own, or just don't jump one" This illustrates the other main point of my argument. It should be a personal choice to AAD or not to AAD!! But this is not an acceptable decision in many places. Because an AAD does not make you 100% bulletproof,and has a failure rate that can cause death (however small it may be) we should be given the leeway to choose how we roll the dice, we are allowed that leeway when it comes to the dicision to jump or not jump! ORGASMO RODRIGUEZ If your gunna be dumb You better be tough

"call me Cypres Fan if you want, I have my reasons... But I also now believe that some competitors are as good as the Cypres as long as they are operated within their parameters. I just don't like too many parameters of the Vigil, it is personal, and for the moment the Argus seems to be a very good unit, but still need to get a better cutter (still just my opinion)" That is a very good unbiased opinion from a self proclaimed "cypres fan" ! very refreshing Thank you! the key word is "parameters" they need to be addressed and changed. For anyone else who thinks I am a "Cypres basher" not true at all, I have jumped with a Cypres and would again.I have no brand loyalty to any AAD manufacturer.I just want to see fair competiion in our industry, competition is good for everyone! well Airtec may not see it that way. In the end ALL incidents and mis-fires have the possibilty for a fatal outcome, trying to say that this failure mode is more serious than that failure mode is not logical nor does it help solve the problem at hand. ALL AAD'S have some sort of failure mode don't let politics/loyalties cloud your vision/judgement, treat all manufacturers equally!! ORGASMO RODRIGUEZ If your gunna be dumb You better be tough

"I haven't read this entire thread because it seems like another round of the same-old same-old, an Agrus jumper wants to start pointing fingers at other AAD manufacturers." Nope not the same-old, same-old, you see not ALL is as it seems to you.I do not own an Argus or any other brand of AAD "I've got news for, the 'rigging community' is the only one that counts" I think the general skydiving community would strongly disagree with that egotistical statement. "That's a simple case of an AAD working as designed, and the user making a mistake. In the case of a student, the 'user' is the instructor who put too big of a student on too small of a canopy for a student cypres, and then did not properly train them with regards to hard turns below 1000ft." "Working as designed"? then there is a fundamental flaw in their design and that should be changed. "too big of a student on too small of a Canopy"? where did you learn such information.This is NOT the case, and shows the same "I know it all" attitude that "the rigging community is the only one that counts" but then again you probably ARE a rigger and likely know better about an "incident" I witnessed first hand than I do myself.You're rigging certificate comes with a crystal ball? The student in this incident weighed less than 180 lbs, let;s give him 20 extra pounds out the door which would make his w/l 0.83, is that too high a w/l for PD Navigator? "In either case, the error is with the user, not the AAD." Wrong again! The error is in the design/programming.AAD's were designed for use in skydiving equipment, NOT the other way around!!! When Cypres and Vigil test units that fired when not wanted and say "the unit worked as designed, no problem here".....It's bullshit, if they work as designed and people are still having "incidents" CHANGE THE FUCKING DESIGN!!!! as it is not condusive to the reality of the skydiving environment we all live in. ORGASMO RODRIGUEZ If your gunna be dumb You better be tough

"Hmm. Have you seen an incident where a Cypres or Vigil cutter fired, but failed to cut the loop and trapped part of it? " No I haven't, however I have heard of a Cypres firing while a jumper was performing a HP turn, the jumper died. Is this "as serious" as the "incident" you are referring to with thed partially trapped loop? No product banning after that one. I have also heard of Vigil(s) firing in the door of an aircraft, thus causing the "possibilty" of the reserve going over the tail and taking out the whole lead of jumpers.Is THAT "as serious" ? Again no product was banned after that incident. ORGASMO RODRIGUEZ If your gunna be dumb You better be tough

"No pissing contest but you haven't looked very hard. Here are 4 links that will give all the SB you can read in one setting" But we are talking only about "incidents" not SB's, not all "incidents" are folowed by a SB. If you were commenting based on the belief I was interchanging "incidents" for SB's my apologies for the misunderstanding. "If you were working when this "incident" then you would know if the DZ filled out a report of what happened and sent it to Airtec. If no one did and you are just now bringing it up how would anyone know about it." As I stated the unit was sent in to Airtec and reported to have worked as it was programmed.No action or SB needed.Again I am wondering if you may be confusing "incident" with SB. "Anyone who is not aware that something happened in Thailand that involved AAD’s is living under a rock. It was on both of the AAD’s web pages; stories were published in most of the magazines worldwide and talked about in every skydiving forum." I will believe you on this, I somehow did not read about it.Also I could only find one thread on it, on this site.So I will accept that this is common knowledge. "I believe the “incident” you are referring to was on 2 Mirage systems and was due to sloppy rigging not the AAD cutter." Which may or may not be the case when an Argus fails to completley sever the closing loop. The fact sloppy rigging is a factor, is another reason I am against mandating their use for experienced skydivers. "All of the “incidents” you referenced to my knowledge lack one thing. They were not reported to anyone. Having something happen and posting about it on dz.com does not count as reporting it. " I can only verify that the "incident" I witnessed first hand was reprted to Airtec.The other 2 I refered to from other posters, I cannot verify if Airtec was contacted, maybe the quoted posters could verify this information, if they are reading.Although I cannot imagine a person having their Cypres or Vigil fire and not have it sent in or get a new cutter. "As for the “general skydiving community” a good portion of them know little if anything about their gear and how it works. They don’t even pact the damn thing. It’s like they don’t care or are to laze to learn." I agree totally, and a good part of why I started this thread, was hoping to induce some "debate" "sharing of information/ideas" and hoping that the positive side of this situation (Argus ban) may be that some skydivers may take notice of what is happening and start to get to know the gear they are jumping with.Also to voice my opinion on what seems to be more a political/business driven decision and show reasons why I feel this way....ie: citing "incidents" from both Cypres and Vigil to help show that given the same circumstances neither has been banned, only Argus. ORGASMO RODRIGUEZ If your gunna be dumb You better be tough

"Lots of things are an "incident" by strict definition, but it does not matter in the context of "what the hell is going on with AADs?" I'd like to think that we can only talk about incidents that matter in this thread. If you want to discuss a different design strategy for student AADs, that could be interesting, but not relevant to this thread." All "incidents" matter, they provide details and insight on how the unit(s) actually fuctions in given scenarios, that is information that we all can use.Should we not discuss them and hide them away for fear it may look poorly upon the manufacturer? The thread is "what the hell is going on with AAD'S?" These "incidents" and many others are "what's going on" who are you to decide which are relevant to the thread or not? and wich ones are "important" enough to discuss? They all have possibility for disasterous outcomes given the right set of variables...most skydiving "incidents" come from not one single fuck up, but usually a series of events/errors. "I didn't check out your references to other "incidents that matter", but after seeing what you consider what is important, I suspect I would not agree" Again, I never made any such distinction in any of MY posts about "incidents that matter" only "incidents" YOU added the qualifier. Any incident where an AAD fires when not wanted/or is not benificial to the user is an "incident" and one worth study and possible discussion.Discussion can lead to advancement and progression,You may be opposed to change it is normal as you age.Fight it! "There is a problem in relying on hearsay. As said before, claims that Airtek would intentionally falsify results before receiving a unit don't make sense. If people were inclined to cover their ass as suggested, they would wait until after the unit was in their possession. Sure, it is possible, but there is no where near enough info provided for it to be considered more than wild rumor." Where did I EVER say Airtec falsified ANYTHING! Please re-read and direct that comment to the appropriate poster.(in another thread IIRC) "No, it fired in the air, and the container failed to open. The AAD can only cut the loop, what happens after that is a different discussion." Dude the title of the thread is "Cypres-2 fire on ground" the OP seems legit enough he has 29ys in and 6200 jumps according to his profile, as a youngin myself, I generally find the old timers don't lie or spread bogus info about AAD "mis fires", however I could be wrong and the OP could be off his rocker....maybe you know something about the gear and AAD the OP does not? Do you work for Airtec? (that would explain your cheer leading stance in other threads) from the "Cypres 2 fire on ground" thread post by sundevil777 : Do you know for sure the closing loop was not in one piece? Is it possible that the closing loop was cut by some means other than the cypres cutter? Was it confirmed that the cypres cutter had activated (that is a visual check, right)? Was the cutter returned to Airtek? Normally these questions don't come up, but when the unit itself doesn't show the activation we can't help but wonder. Sounds like the expected semi unbelieving words of a Cypres "fan" In regards to your reply about the Thailand "incidents" where the cypres 1 unit's only shut down.... I am not attacking Airtec as you seem to feel.That "incident" was included to highlight the Vigil firing(s), the Cypres 1 "shut downs" were just a side note,Your defensiveness for Airtec would suggest your rent/food/health depend on them. ORGASMO RODRIGUEZ If your gunna be dumb You better be tough

"I am sure I have done more research on AAD’s in the past 15+ years then you have. I am not aware of any “incidents” not known to the rigger community involving any of the AAD’s on the market today. If you feel you have information I don’t please share. If not maybe you should quit waving a red flag and shouting “fire” in a crowded theater." Dude reel it in, this isn't a pissing contest to see who has read more on the topic, I concede if it means that much to you.You and the "rigger community" are not the "general skydiving community". Please read and try to comprehend, I have said it more than once now... "I know of a few Cypres "incidents" that the general skydiving community is unaware of...." I can't type it any slower for you. On the topic then about the "rigging community", is it protocol for all riggers to get a notification from the AAD manufacturers EVERYTIME one of their units fires, for whatever reason? and if this is the case why do you riggers not feel it is important to share this information with their customers or the "general skydiving community"? For what it's worth here is one example of an "incident" I personally know about, you can debate over how many of the "general skydiving community" know this information as much as you like. One "incident" I have witnessed FIRST HAND, was a student cypres fire under a fully fuctioning main while working at a DZ in Spain (between 2006-08), causing a double out scenario (landed fine no injuries)...the student canopy(Nav 240), Cypres said after testing the unit, was flown aggressively enough to cause the cypres fire parameters to be met.This is acceptable because the unit worked within it's parameters.Kinda like the same statement made every time a Vigil goes off when it isn't wanted.You may want to say this isn't an incident because the unit did what it was programmed to do, I say it is an incident because it's firing was not needed and could easily have caused a very serious injury or fatality.Cypres fire while under a fully fuctioning main is defitely an INCIDENT...I cannot give you any links or web site to vet this information, but if riggers are kept in the loop about all firings then you should already be aware of this one. If you want another example read the most recent thread on the Cypres 2 that fired on the ground, on top of page two deadwood relates another similar story, how many of the "general skydiving vommunity" are aware of that one.(latest view count says maybe 1287) not very "general" knowledge, yet anyway. a little further down page 2 stayhigh relates another cypres story most probably haven't heard. or maybe they are just making these stories up to look cool.Is it so hard to believe that there are "incidents" you haven;t been informed of? There are other examples on these forums, just because they are written about on here does not make them "general knowledge" I would also say that the multiple issues Cypres and Vigil both had in Thailand in 2006 are not common knowledge to the average joe skydiver. Billvon touched on that "incident" in this thread page 2. http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?do=post_view_flat;post=2315705;page=2;sb=post_latest_reply;so=ASC;mh=25; and so far it has only 144 views, I may have missed where that incident(s) was published in a major skydiving publication, but it's the only post about it that shows up in a search on here. Are those enough examples of "incidents" not known to the general skydiving community ? Let's define that to be more than half of the jumpers in the world.I'll stop waving my red flag and shouting "fire" now And now Cypres' as well are firing on the ground, and in at least one case reported by deadwood (40yrs/3500 jumps) it seems the Cypres cutter design is not immune to having the container stay closed until getting "bumped" after firing due to size configuration/loop length? on a student rig??? Great!.Maybe some "loose ends" to clear up on the Cypres cutter too. pun intended I am not here to bash any AAD manufacturer, I am only asking for a fair playing field for all.Plain and simple. ORGASMO RODRIGUEZ If your gunna be dumb You better be tough

"They still save far more experienced (non-student) skydivers than hurt or kill them. Even many of the 'reserve container did not open' were from rigging mistakes or tight reserve packjob, and removing the AAD won't make those safer. (Likewise, sometimes airbags don't deploy in an accident) Yes, some problems that needs to be resolved (riggers, gear purchases, AAD makers, etc), but I disagree if you say AAD's making skydiving less safe for experienced skydivers. I never said that AAD's make skydiving less safe, I am saying they have a rate of failure, however small it may be, and that failure rate can kill (and yes, that failure rate has rigging as a human variable that can greatly increase an AAD's failure rate), So as an experienced jumper knowing the risk of jumping without one vs the risk of jumping with one, I should be able to make the decision, wheather you or anyone else disagrees with that decision. In my mind my decision to not jump with an AAD can only adversley effect me directly(unless I burn in on some one), however your decision to jump with one can adversley effect a whole plane load of your friends directly. ORGASMO RODRIGUEZ If your gunna be dumb You better be tough

"Your premise is that AADs are not 100% effective and therefore should not be mandatory (students, some countries), right? Well, parachute systems are not 100% effective either, but you're OK with them being mandatory. Altimeters? Audibles?" My premise is that it should be a personal choice.You can jump without an AAD and live 99%(random % don't bust my balls if it is only 90% based on some one else's superior mathmatical skills) of the time (if you pull your handles) If you jump without a parachute system you will die 99% of the time, your agument is hilarious and lacking simple logic. "Please do us all a favor and tone down the rhetoric, which is neither constructive nor helpful to understanding AAD issues." Rhetoric ??? http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/rhetoric If any one skydiver educates himself further on the AAD topic, it is constructive.You do not have to agree with another's conclusions or ideas to find them helpful. "Furthermore, if you have information on unknown AAD misfires please share them or indicate specifically where they can be found. Your Secret Squirrel bullshit is just that: bullshit. One is neither impressed with your sleuthing skills nor with your 'Chalice of Knowlege' nonsense" As I mentioned in replying to other posts, it is not "Secret Squirrel bullshit" I am saying I know about them because I have taken the time to research them, as you are free to do. I also have been told about others from friends not in North America, should I suspect they are lying just to make a good story around the bonfire?.The "general skydiving community is unaware" becuase they have never been given the information and have never had a desire to research and look for them.Not all "mis fires" and "incidents" are published in Parachutist and not all are posted on here either.Maybe another thread should be started asking for input to help make a data base for ALL "mis fires" or "incidents" from all manufacturers, that way the information is readily available for all to see without having to spend hours and days searching through forums and threads to find incidents from around the world, and keep in mind that Dropzone.com is not used by EVERY SKYDIVER in every country around the world.. would it be so shocking to you that there are "incidents" you do not know about? Go through these forums related to AAD "incidents" and take a look at the number of views each one has, what percent of the general skydiving community do you think those numbers represent, and then ask yourself what are the odds of coming across that information randomly? Do you really think Aviacom has been treated the same way Cypres and Vigil have when faced with "growing pains" as others have called it. Do you think the average skydiver is 100 times more "aware" of Agrus "issues" than previous and recent Cypres or Vigil "issues" ..... the answer is undoubtably YES! now ask yourself why that is. ORGASMO RODRIGUEZ If your gunna be dumb You better be tough

"Why could you not believe it? There was a chance that the failure mode at issue could prevent the jumper from opening his rig with the ripcord." Because they did not ban Cypres or Vigil when they had "incidents", they let them work their shit out. Why THIS time?? "There was a CHANCE this failure mode COULD prevent..." there is a chance Vigil's could start taking down entire plane loads of jumpers, there was a chance at one time that swoopers equiped with a Cypres could be killed due to Cypres stating that their product could not be set off by speeds reached under canopy ......and now recent threads on here about a Cypres fire on the ground and a Vigil fire under fully functional canopy with no aggressive turning.............. no action taken to ban them. THAT'S why I cannot believe the action taken by so many H/C manufacturers against the Argus.Their actions are not consistent with how they treat "incidents" from the other major manufacturers. "If you do know of any “secret” incidents please share them with us. If not you are doing the same thing you are accusing them of doing. Hear say and you heard it from a friend don’t count." Please re-read my post, I never said they were "secret", I said the general skydiving community is unaware of, meaning they have not heard of them.They have not been reported in skydiving publications, but if you care to do the research you can find out about most of them on these forums.My guess is most jumpers have not taken the time to do a thorough research of AAD "incidents" or "mis-fires" and results of or statements made after internal investigations were done. "The AAD in the San Marcos incident was held by the DZO for 9 days after the event when a meeting was held with Jesus M Cavazos, Aviation Safety Inspector with the FFA, Kirk Smith, Master Parachute Rigger representing Aviacom, Eric Butts, Senior Parachute Rigger, Paula Hunt, Senior Parachute Rigger, Marcus Reed, Senior Parachute Rigger, Karel Goortz, Owner of Aviacom, by telephone. After the meeting the unit was shipped to Aviacom." Is this the same protocol and procedure used when a Vigil or Cypres "mis-fires"? "But I can fault you for “falling for the conspiracy theory”. Mr. Goortz has done more to bring this on than anyone else." I may have come across wrong there, I am not saying I HAVE fallen for the conspiracy theory, I am only saying that the unlevel playing feild in the AAD market helps perpetuate that idea.I don't see a conspiracy but I do smell politics and unfair business practices. Mr. Goortz debatably may not be great at damage control or customer service, but that does not make Argus' issues any more unsafe than Vigil's or Cypres' ORGASMO RODRIGUEZ If your gunna be dumb You better be tough

"""You are complaining how the AAD companys handle incidents and yet you are contributing to the general uncertainty by claiming of knowing about incidents the others do not know about. Where you directly involved ? did you hear about them 1st. 2nd. or 3rd. hand ? How reliable is your information ? Do you care to elaborate ?""" I am not complaining about how AAD companies handle incidents.I am only stating that there are numerous cases where both of the other major brands have not worked as adverftised. ("incidents").I witnessed two myself, have heard about others 2nd,3rd hand via friends or via online (Dropzone.com threads ring any bells) because I did not witness them first hand does not make them any less real, do you really think people post about make believe incidents on these forums? Many "incidents" are not known to the general skydiving community simply because they do not care to take the time to do the research, and only the most "sensational" ones are passed around the bonfire. I do not wish to elaborate as you can do your research as I or many other people have done.It takes time and you have to read through a truckload of bullsh*t and "brand cheer leadering" to get to facts, but most of the info is there for anyone to read. I don't waste time spreading rumours or hearsay. I am stating a simple fact that both Cypres and Vigil have had SB's and more than a couple cutter replacements, and "incidents" where they have not performed in a way they were designed/wanted/was in the best interest of the user or his fellow jumpers on that load.However, neither of those companies were slapped with bans.In the end, the AAD market is not a level playing field due to ??? Politics. I am not trying to contribute to uncertainty, I am hoping others will take the time to educate themselves about this issue, what brought it on, how it was handled versus how other "incidents" of the other companies were handled, about their own gear and how it functions, right down to the very last detail, and how a 1 second delay in your reserve opening sequence can be the difference between a canopy over your head and almost getting to line stretch after an AAD fire (side note: when jumping with an AAD due to it being necessary I will be setting the acvtivation altitude 250-500ft higher than the manufacturer set altitude, if I am 1500ft without a canopy I am already in trouble, I would like a couple extra seconds due to a number of variables(pc delay for one), another personal choice I am able to make all on my own) Also I am trying to point out that because no AAD can claim perfection of performance, that maybe it is not just to mandate their use.We are intelligent people for the most part.We are allowed to decide for ourselves to jump out of an airplane or not, but in many places you cannot decide for yourself if you would like to buy "the extra insurance" (Jump with an AAD) As I said before I understand and even agree with mandated use for Tandem/Student status due mainly to the liability issues, but I think after you graduate to A (possibly b) license you should be able to make that call for yourself, especially due to the "inherent failure rate" all models have.The odds of you being the guy it fails on are really slim I agree, however so are the odds of hitting your head on the plane on exit, or any other scenario AAD's were designed to save your ass from. So if the odds are slim both ways we should be allowed to make our own informed decision about which way we wanna roll the dice. ORGASMO RODRIGUEZ If your gunna be dumb You better be tough

I have read everything I can find on the "Argus ban" and related topics and in the process have educated myself quite well on the workings and "working when not needed", "not working", "failing to cut loop", "firing on ground", "firing but not opening container" issues that seem to be plaguing ALL AAD manufacturers lately, (see recent threads in gear and rigging). When this whole "cluster f@&k" of banning the Argus started, I began reading and reading and reading (info is good) and I could not believe the reaction from H/C manufacturers,countries and now even individual DZ's. Even with evidence such as improper rigging, unit not sent to Aviacom immediately for inspection and no investigation results to learn from H/C manufacturers allowing the Argus fell like dominoes....wtf! There are NUMEROUS "incidents" with both Vigil and Cypres NOT performing as ADVERTISED..... I know of a few Cypres "incidents" that the general skydiving community is unaware of....it seems that they have friends in high places helping them to keep such incidents out of the spotlight. Now in light of the recent "incidents" with Vigil and Cypres both firing when they shouldn't (Cypres firing on ground, and Cypres' very strange response, and Vigil firing in air under fully functional main) should H/C manufacturers not ban ALL ADD's until they get their shit together!! Why the hell are skydivers being FORCED (in AAD mandatory areas) to use these UNRELIABLE ADDITIVES to our fully functioning gear and adding an extra risk to an already dangerous sport? I fully agree with Students and Tandem mandated use, because it seems all AAD's have a higher rate of success than failure, however with the knowledge available to Licensed skydivers we should be able to make out own decision to use or not to use. I do not own ANY AAD, but will be purchasing one due to jumping where one is necessary. I am in the market for new gear, and I have made my decision based on all the information I have gained from this recent WITCH HUNT..... I am really pissed that not all are treated equally in the AAD market...it's sickening and as much as I hate falling for "conspiracy theories" this reeks of politics!!!! For what it's worth, this is my choice in gear due to recent events..... Container: Wings, AAD: Argus (they are going CHEEEEAAPP) Reserve: PD or Smart I really hope this SHITSTORM is cleared up soon!!! It looks bad for the whole industry. If anything positive can come from this I hope it is that the average skydiver is better educated about the gear they are using. Open to feedback from anyone else who may have differing views based on recent events and information. That's my rant, I will carry on as if normal now. ORGASMO RODRIGUEZ If your gunna be dumb You better be tough

"Hope you are learn spelling & grammar as part of your course." = learning? People who live in glass houses............ ORGASMO RODRIGUEZ If your gunna be dumb You better be tough

In the video you can see you had twists all the way down to your risers on your main. Again, some advice for you here. If you don't have hard cutaway housings in your risers you should have your rigger install them. Hard housings are cheap insurance to have and they ensure you can still cutaway easily even if you have twist down the risers. in this part I was missing something in translation ===================================== Puedo ayudar quizá a Juan, él está hablando,tubos del metal en sus canalizaciones verticales para contener sus cables del corte,cuál reducirá la fuerza necesaria al corte, si se tuercen sus canalizaciones verticales. Entienda ahora? Usted los tiene quizá ya???? Pida Jason si usted no hace. Buen consejo, excepto alrededor intentar conseguir estable después de corte.tiempo y altitud nunca inútiles en tal grande mono!! ORGASMO RODRIGUEZ If your gunna be dumb You better be tough