HoldtheIce 0 #1 November 12, 2010 I was cruzing the USPAs website just now and noticed a Safety Notice published from Airtec about the CYPRES AAD. You can see the notice here... http://www.uspa.org/Portals/0/Downloads/SB_CYPRES_2010_10_29.pdf It basically reminds riggers that to make the AAD functional, the Reserve closing loop must be routed thru the CYPRESS cutter. If the closing loop isn’t routed thru the cutter, the AAD can’t deploy the Reserve if needed. My first reaction to this was….NFW? This can’t be for real. Must be early April Fool’s joke. Are you telling me that some riggers are so bleeping stupid this error was actually discovered…..so Airtec and the USPA had to publish a Safety Notice???? Unbelievable!!! ~Mikey CCause they know, and so do I, The high road is hard to find A detour to your new life, Tell all of your friends goodbye Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,080 #2 November 12, 2010 The incident that was likely the cause of the notice: http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=3969437;sb=post_latest_reply;so=ASC;forum_view=forum_view_collapsed;;page=unread#unread Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
labrys 0 #3 November 13, 2010 QuoteIf the closing loop isn’t routed thru the cutter, the AAD can’t deploy the Reserve if needed. Nope. "If the closing loop isn’t routed thru the cutter", the AAD can’t cut the closing loop. AADs do not deploy reserves. AADs cut closing loops. A lot of things have to happen after the closing loop is cut to result in a good reserve deployment.Owned by Remi #? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
HoldtheIce 0 #4 November 13, 2010 Yes, ok technically speaking....... I think you got my point. Nuf said! ~Mikey C. Remember....stupid killsCause they know, and so do I, The high road is hard to find A detour to your new life, Tell all of your friends goodbye Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
labrys 0 #5 November 13, 2010 QuoteYes, ok technically speaking....... No, not "technically speaking" It's "reality" speaking and "experience" speaking. I hope you don't get to see an AAD cut a closing loop without time for a reserve to deploy. The AAD can do its job well within parameters and still make what might have been a 4 foot crater into a 2 foot crater.Owned by Remi #? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
HoldtheIce 0 #6 November 13, 2010 I agree, I hope I don't get to see an AAD cut a closing loop without time for a reserve to deploy. ~MCause they know, and so do I, The high road is hard to find A detour to your new life, Tell all of your friends goodbye Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
labrys 0 #7 November 13, 2010 QuoteI agree, I hope I don't get to see an AAD cut a closing loop without time for a reserve to deploy. Right on... and remember that the only way you can avoid that situation being a likely issue for you is to pull, pull at the correct altitude and pull after that no matter what.Owned by Remi #? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skydiverek 63 #8 November 13, 2010 QuoteI agree, I hope I don't get to see an AAD cut a closing loop without time for a reserve to deploy. ~M http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HYIUjKGxagI http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?do=post_view_flat;post=2101957;page=1;mh=-1;;sb=post_latest_reply;so=ASC Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Baksteen 84 #9 November 13, 2010 Quote Quote Yes, ok technically speaking....... No, not "technically speaking" It's "reality legally" speaking and "experience" speaking. Fixed it for you Can't even call them "damm l*wyers" or they'll sue the ass of you..."That formation-stuff in freefall is just fun and games but with an open parachute it's starting to sound like, you know, an extreme sport." ~mom Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
labrys 0 #10 November 13, 2010 QuoteFixed it for you Inserting your opinion about legal issues into my statement doesn't "fix" it. I made a comment about the reality of the AADs function and it stands.Owned by Remi #? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
timmyfitz 0 #11 November 13, 2010 QuoteMy first reaction to this was….NFW? This can’t be for real. Must be early April Fool’s joke. Are you telling me that some riggers are so bleeping stupid this error was actually discovered…..so Airtec and the USPA had to publish a Safety Notice???? Humans do make mistakes from time to time. I guess you are not human. It doesn't matter how good anyone is, do anything long enough and mistakes can be made. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pinkfairy 0 #12 November 13, 2010 Murphy's law: If something can go wrong, then at some point it will. Therefore it makes sense to minimize the chances of it going wrong, like by issuing service bulletins like the one from Airtec. There was a rigger over here in Norway who lost his licence from the norwegian air sports association. Why? Because he had incorrectly closed the slinks on a reserve of a rig he assembled. Even I can close and tack slinks. People make mistakes, they don't read manuals and are generally much more dangerous than the equipment itself.Relax, you can die if you mess up, but it will probably not be by bullet. I'm a BIG, TOUGH BIGWAY FORMATION SKYDIVER! What are you? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chuckakers 426 #13 November 13, 2010 QuoteIf the closing loop isn’t routed thru the cutter, the AAD can’t deploy the Reserve if needed. If the unit isn't turned on, it can't save your life if needed either. Blue Skies Forever, Tom Piras World Champion Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
millertime24 8 #14 November 14, 2010 QuotePeople make mistakes, they don't read manuals and are generally much more dangerous than the equipment itself. What you describe is not a mistake. It is negligence. To the OP, I fully agree. Even a high/drunk rigger would not likely NOT route the closing loop through the cutter (this is phisics 101 people).Muff #5048 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,080 #15 November 14, 2010 >What you describe is not a mistake. It is negligence. Use whatever term you like. People make mistakes. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
millertime24 8 #16 November 14, 2010 Quote>What you describe is not a mistake. It is negligence. Use whatever term you like. People make mistakes. I could make a "mistake" while doing a brake job on my car. Does that make me any less liable if I run over your child because of that mistake? My point is riggers should be up to date on all the gear they are dealing with, and an oversight such as NOT routing the reserve closing loop inside the cutter is just plain negligenceMuff #5048 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
grimmie 186 #17 November 14, 2010 Quote Quote >What you describe is not a mistake. It is negligence. Use whatever term you like. People make mistakes. I could make a "mistake" while doing a brake job on my car. Does that make me any less liable if I run over your child because of that mistake? My point is riggers should be up to date on all the gear they are dealing with, and an oversight such as NOT routing the reserve closing loop inside the cutter is just plain negligence More than one rigger has misrouted an AAD set up. A molar strap was left on a reserve and packed once that I know of.Know your gear. Choose your rigger wisely. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mjosparky 4 #18 November 14, 2010 QuoteQuote>What you describe is not a mistake. It is negligence. Use whatever term you like. People make mistakes. I could make a "mistake" while doing a brake job on my car. Does that make me any less liable if I run over your child because of that mistake? My point is riggers should be up to date on all the gear they are dealing with, and an oversight such as NOT routing the reserve closing loop inside the cutter is just plain negligence And you are full of shit. Being "up to date" on gear does not prevent mistakes. Making mistakes while tying your shoes or packing a reserve does not constitute negligence. Before you start throwing around words like “libel” and “negligence” on an open forum maybe you should find out what in fact happened. SparkyMy idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Liemberg 0 #19 November 14, 2010 Its an American lawyer thing, methinks. Like Boeing's famous reminder a couple of years ago after that 737 the Turkish Airline crew flew into the ground near Amsterdam while on automatic landing that it wouldn't hurt looking out of the window while at least one person was actually not filling in forms or stuffing papers in a bag, but flying the airplane... "Whoever in discussion adduces authority uses not intellect but memory." - Leonardo da Vinci A thousand words... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,080 #20 November 14, 2010 >I could make a "mistake" while doing a brake job on my car. Yes, you could. So could your mechanic. Or you could just not do the brake job and have your brakes fail. >Does that make me any less liable if I run over your child because of that >mistake? Nope. Like I said, use any legalese you want. You made a mistake. > My point is riggers should be up to date on all the gear they are dealing >with, and an oversight such as NOT routing the reserve closing loop inside >the cutter is just plain negligence. If you're a lawyer I would imagine that would be an important semantic distinction. The result, though, is the same - and most skydivers are not lawyers. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bluetwo 0 #21 November 14, 2010 Some of you are actually arguing about this? ....ok I like the choose your rigger wisely statement best of all._______________________________________ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
fcajump 164 #22 November 15, 2010 Quote Tom Piras The only thing good that came out of that was an almost overnight world-wide acceptance of Cypres AAD's by more experienced jumpers. Unfortunately sometimes it takes "a name" to prove that "it can happen to someone as good (better) than me..."In one very bad day he (inadvertently) probably saved more lives than all the analysis we've done here since. JWAlways remember that some clouds are harder than others... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
masterrigger1 2 #23 November 15, 2010 Quote AADs do not deploy reserves. AADs cut closing loops Some cut the loop, others pull the pin.....FXC 1200 is a pin puller that is still used. Quote AADs do not deploy reserves. AADs cut closing loops Again, see above! So, how do you "deploy" a reserve? The answer is that you pull a handle, which pulls the pin, and etc..... The bottom line is that a deployment of a reserve parachute is a chain of events that either can be started by cutting the loop or pulling the pin. The intent of both methods are the same:... to start the deployment of the reserve. Period! MELSkyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NovaTTT 2 #24 November 15, 2010 QuoteQuoteThe intent of both methods are the same:... to start the deployment of the reserve. Agreed, but pulling the reserve handle is a positive response while an AAD firing is a (skydiver) passive response. Through fault or misfortune, an AAD firing indicates a skydiver failed to save himself. With positive action one anticipates positive results - one expects the reserve to begin deploying when the handle is pulled. The AAD is designed to initiate the deployment sequence but it cannot be considered fail-safe or infallable, regardless of a successful firing. There are too many variables at work, from gear to rigging to body position to etc. etc., which is why, IMO&E, an AAD should be regarded as the last hope, not the final savior. BSBD - don't go in with handles in place."Even in a world where perfection is unattainable, there's still a difference between excellence and mediocrity." Gary73 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
huge 0 #25 November 15, 2010 QuoteThrough fault or misfortune, an AAD firing indicates a skydiver failed to save himself.Did the skydiver save himself by pulling the reserve handle if the reserve was packed by sombody else? If skydiver chooses to jump with AAD equipped rig, with said AAD switched on, I considered them to have what you call positive response - they took preventive action to ensure they have one more chance even if they fail under stress, are knocked out, etc. In my books it is way better to have AAD fire than go in with no pull. I don't say that they did brilliant job counting on the AAD, but hey, at least they *may* have one more chance. Hell, maybe in case somebody is waiting for AAD fire rather than taking action on their own those people should just cash out while they are ahead on go bowling instead. QuoteThe AAD is designed to initiate the deployment sequence but it cannot be considered fail-safe or infallable, regardless of a successful firing. People keep repeating this about AADs while they don't seem to remember that same is also true for your reserve and rigger who packed it. Quotedon't go in with handles in place. I couldn't agree more. Know your gear, how to use it, how it works and how to maintain it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
