ypelchat 0 #1 October 21, 2003 My dealer ordered 5 Vigils AAD, a long time ago, and none have been delivered yet. What's going on with them? Yves. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
scottjaco 0 #2 October 21, 2003 I heard they were being sued by Airtec because the cutter is made by the same company that makes the cypres and cypres2 cutter. Airtec is pissed that the maker of the cutter is "double dipping" by selling the cutter to both companies. The Vigil is suppose to be $1000 bucks anyway, just get a cypres2...... scott Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Casch 0 #3 October 21, 2003 Why get Cypres2? Just because Vigil and Cypres2 are near the same initial price? Vigil requires no maintenance, only a new battery every 4 years or 700 jumps. There is no life time for the unit, only for the cutter, 20 years. It would seem to me that the Vigil is much more cost effective. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AggieDave 6 #4 October 21, 2003 QuoteIt would seem to me that the Vigil is much more cost effective. And the Cypres has one hell of a good track record, established over time, through many conditions, not just through a company's testing.--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Casch 0 #5 October 21, 2003 QuoteAnd the Cypres has one hell of a good track record, established over time, through many conditions, not just through a company's testing. Which I understand completely and can not blame anyone for choosing CYPRES over Vigil. Every company has to start somewhere, and I feel that Vigil will develop a good track record just like CYPRES did. And if this happens, Airtech is gonna have to figure out how to compete Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
scottjaco 0 #6 October 21, 2003 I understand your fustrations..... It took me a long time to finally shell out the $1,225 + tax for the cypres2. By the way, it also lasts for 4 years without needing a battery. I like the idea of having my AAD checked every 4 years. I'm not so crazy about the 12 year lifespan limit. I figure in 12 years I'll be able to afford a new one! I think the display for the Vigil is a bit thicker, it may not fit as well into the display pocket of your rig. I haven't seen one in a rig yet. Another thing that bothered me about the Vigil is that this product has no track record, the cypres has been around since '91 and all of the functions in the original cypres are carried over to the cypres 2. The cypres 2 is the same as the original cypres.....it just has a better battery and it's smaller and waterproof. I hear everyone talking about the Vigil but how can people trust it? Also, I hear they are putting a bunch of ProTrack features into w/ an infared diode to hook it up to a computer like a ProTrack. Why do I want this? I already own a ProTrack and I would rather Vigil spend the money on the AAD instead of adding a bunch of bells and whistles. Only time will tell. If they had maintained the $600 dollar price that Vigil was charging for the BETA models then I could see a reasonable argument for skydivers and DZ owners to equip their rigs with the Vigil. Now that Vigil has jacked up the price to nearly what the Cypres 2 costs, why bother? scott Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
phoenixlpr 0 #7 October 21, 2003 QuoteI like the idea of having my AAD checked every 4 years. And so? Both units are digital and performing self check on turning on. Both can require maintenance. QuoteI figure in 12 years I'll be able to afford a new one! What is the reason to replace something if its working? QuoteThe cypres 2 is the same as the original cypres.....it just has a better battery and it's smaller and waterproof. Do you think theyve just replaced battery? It should be a new generation electronics. Think you might not able to find the same electronic components than 10 years before. QuoteI hear everyone talking about the Vigil but how can people trust it? You can trust like others did with Cypress in `91 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhreeZone 20 #8 October 21, 2003 >You can trust like others did with Cypress in `91 It took till the mid 90's before Cypres became fashionable for experienced jumpers. Sure they were in student rigs early on, but most experienced jumpers stayed away for the first 3-4 years of Cypres being on the market. And they are not maintence free, the rigger doing the repack has to do the testing. All that its doing is allowing the manitence to be done locally at every repack. Too bad the testing hardware/software cost is passed on to the rigger. Most riggers/lofts are going to look to get that cost back so just be aware that that could happen.Yesterday is history And tomorrow is a mystery Parachutemanuals.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freakydiver 0 #9 October 21, 2003 That would be like competing tape companies suing Sony for selling tape heads to multiple production houses. -- (N.DG) "If all else fails – at least try and look under control." -- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Harksaw 0 #10 October 21, 2003 I dont know much about the lawsuit, but in Airtec's Paragear article they say they have patented the concept of cutting the reserve closing loop for AAD deployment. I thought this was the reason they were suing the makers of the Vigil. Can anyone shed some light on this? I didn't think you could sue someone who sold you something for selling to someone else unless there was some contractual agreement.__________________________________________________ I started skydiving for the money and the chicks. Oh, wait. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tombuch 0 #11 October 21, 2003 Quote Too bad the testing hardware/software cost is passed on to the rigger. Most riggers/lofts are going to look to get that cost back so just be aware that that could happen. What hardware/software is required, and at what cost?Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhreeZone 20 #12 October 21, 2003 Taken from their FAQ's: Is annual rigger check necessary? I thought the functionality do not have to be checked by riggers? So why should the riggers buy this module and software? The rigger can buy an IR bi-directional communications module and associated software. This costs 521 EUR. It is made for riggers to check the functionalities. This depends local legislation if it is necessary. We advise to do an annual check I read that a rigger should check the Vigil yearly. Is this mandatory or is it OK to continue to jump when the unit shows no signs of problems? Riggers can do an annual check in a pressure chamber and results can be downloaded through the IR port and a report can be printed. No need to return the unit to a factory. Most countries have an annual inspection program for parachutes. It can be done together with these tests. So about $650 plus a pressure chamber and a computer.Yesterday is history And tomorrow is a mystery Parachutemanuals.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sundevil777 102 #13 October 21, 2003 How do you think this will this be interpreted? "Can" is used instead of "Must'. So will it be considered maintenance recommended or required by the mfg? Does the FAA require that we follow all "recommended" or "required" maintenance? edit to add: I think it is a good idea to check it thoroughly at the mfg. A small percentage of units sent to SSK need some repair, presumably many of those self-check OK. Maybe a self test can't do everything. I'm going to be in a bad mood in 3 years when I have to send mine in, but I still think it is a good idea.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
Hooknswoop 19 #14 October 21, 2003 QuoteDoes the FAA require that we follow all "recommended" or "required" maintenance? FAR Part 105: (c) If installed, the automatic activation device must be maintained in accordance with manufacturer instructions for that automatic activation device. If riggers fell like it can be interpreted by the FAA as "manufacturer instructions", then they will require the inspection/maintenance. If not, then it probably won't get done unless the owner wants it. Derek Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sundevil777 102 #15 October 21, 2003 So you think it is clear that riggers are not "instructed" to test the unit just because they can? It seems to me that many riggers would not want to risk their ticket by deciding for themselves which way to interpret "can". Would that leave jumpers with the possibility of riggers not wanting to repack a rig because they can't test it? I guess the answer is probably maybe, unless the FAA issues an opinion on this matter or the mfg is clearer with their "instructions". So as a question to riggers, what would you do?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
Hooknswoop 19 #16 October 21, 2003 QuoteSo you think it is clear that riggers are not "instructed" to test the unit just because they can? No, I think it is very unclear. The manufacturer will have to clarify their statement: "Is annual rigger check necessary? I thought the functionality do not have to be checked by riggers? So why should the riggers buy this module and software? The rigger can buy an IR bi-directional communications module and associated software. This costs 521 EUR. It is made for riggers to check the functionalities. This depends local legislation if it is necessary. We advise to do an annual check I read that a rigger should check the Vigil yearly. Is this mandatory or is it OK to continue to jump when the unit shows no signs of problems? Riggers can do an annual check in a pressure chamber and results can be downloaded through the IR port and a report can be printed. No need to return the unit to a factory. Most countries have an annual inspection program for parachutes. It can be done together with these tests." QuoteIt seems to me that many riggers would not want to risk their ticket by deciding for themselves which way to interpret "can". I wouldn't want to risk the jumper's life or my ticket. In rigging, always err on the side of safety. QuoteWould that leave jumpers with the possibility of riggers not wanting to repack a rig because they can't test it? Very possible that rigger will require that it be sent back the manufacturer to be tested/inspected, similar to the Cypres, before they will pack a rig with it installed. QuoteI guess the answer is probably maybe, unless the FAA issues an opinion on this matter or the mfg is clearer with their "instructions". I think the manufacturer will find it easier to sell their ADD if it is spelled out clearly exactly what the 'requirements' vs. 'recommended' inspections/maintenance is. QuoteSo as a question to riggers, what would you do? Require the inspection/maintenance unless it is not required and maybe even then. Derek Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
