Karina

Yeh

Swedish Parachuting Association (Material comition is a part of it)

Swedish Parachute Association

Hej!

Jag tänkte bara berätta vad status är när det gäller räddnings- utlösaren Vigil och dess användning i Sverige. Vigilen är ännu så länge inte typgodkänd och i dagsläget ser det ut att dröja ytterligare en tid innan den kan bli det.

MK har ända sedan de allra första enheterna dök upp på marknaden testat olika Vigiler i tryck-kammare och har även haft en tät dialog med Advanced Aerospace Design (AAD), tillverkaren av Vigil.

För närvarande anser vi att Vigilen brister på följande punkter. (Hoppas att det går bra med engelsk text; det är det formatet jag har listan på eftersom AADs personal inte pratar svenska.)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

The Materiel and Equipment committee has tested 3 Vigils, first one "beta unit" and later on two of the latest revision and we have decided not to approve it because of the following reasons.

A)  We think the tolerances are too wide. The manual claims +/- 80

    meter for the firing altitude. This is not accurate enough

    in our opinion. The first device that we measured also did not

    meet the company's own specifications, i.e., the device fired

    outside the given (already large) tolerances.

    We later did more measurements on 2 separate units which

    Advanced Aerospace Design sent us. This time the tolerances

    were acceptable. However, we still feel that a bracket of

    160 meter around the predetermined firing altitude is too

    much.

B )  We feel that the statement that the Vigil has an unlimited

    life time is unrealistic. Electronic components age. Especially

    in such a harsh environment as being used in a rig that is

    subject to very varying temperatures, vibrations, etc., this

    claim is simply not true. To us, this is not something a serious

    producer of a life-saving device promises. This in combination

    with the fact that no periodic maintenance is mandated in not

    acceptable.

C)  We have our doubts when it comes to the sensitivity to moisture.

    The box is not sealed with a rubber gasket and all the compo-

    nents are in open air once the box has been opened. This may

    prove not to be an issue but we don't think enough precautions

    have been taken.

D)  We don't think the electronics are mechanically shielded enough.

    It is fairly easy to damage the electronics while replacing the

    battery or the cutter. Some people *will* remove the circuit

    board when the unit is open and may cause all sorts of damage.

E)  The problem with sensitivity to electrostatic discharges may

    have been solved but there are still other issues with the

    electronics construction that we think are sub-standard.

    For example, the fact that the manual says that the unit can get

    stuck in some state where you have to open the unit and tempo-

    rarily remove the battery in order to make it work again.

    This is kind of like rebooting your computer by unplugging the

    power supply and indicates an electronics design that is flawed.

F)  There are other, recently added, notes in the manual that are

    really strange. Firstly, you are now strongly discouraged from

    using a negative landing altitude adjustment. That is, you can

    no longer adjust the Vigil for a landing altitude below the

    take off altitude. This was okay before.

    We recently did some tests on the scenario when you adjust for

    a *higher* landing altitude and the Vigil cannot handle that

    correctly either. The Vigil appears to have a problem knowing

    where the "zero-level" is when you do these types of adjustments.

    For example, if you adjust the unit to a landing altitude that

    is, say, 300 meters above your take-off altitude. Fly up well

    above this altitude but cancel the jump (clouds!) and go back

    down with the plane. The Vigil then fires when you pass the

    300 meter level (intended landing site) if you exceed only 20

    m/s in descent rate.

    You are also strongly recommended to turn the unit off if you

    are descending with the airplane, even if you are using it in

    "Pro" mode. This was okay before. Not very convenient.

    These two remarks clearly indicate that they have not been able

    to develop algorithms that are good enough to handle these

    situations. Simply put, the code in the unit is not ready yet!

G)  When discussing the tolerances and the firing altitude with

    people at Advanced Aerospace Design they claimed that the unit

    has to fire 80 meters above the desired activation altitude in

    order to compensate for "the burble on the back". This is simply

    a ridiculous statement and just shows to us that they have not

    done their signal-processing homework yet.

    If their statement were true, how would the unit work for a

    tumbling jumper or one in a head down position? It all just does

    not add up and shows that they haven't figured out the signal

    processing yet.

H)  We also see a slight problem with the "3 units in one" concept.

    Either you have a student that by accident happens to turn his

    Vigil on in the Pro mode, which will make it fire much too low.

    Or, perhaps worse, you have an experienced jumper who accidentally

    turns his unit on in "student" mode and is surprised by a rather

    unexpected activation up high.

    The "three in one"-concept is a design choice made by Advanced

    Aerospace Design and some people may argue it's a good one. We

    simply see a potential problem here that needs to be addressed

    in some way. This alone does not stop the Vigil from being type

    approved, we are just pointing it out.

I)  Finally, a note on the mounting of the units in the rigs. It is

    not adequate to simply say that the same mounting that works with

    the Cypres works with the Vigil since AAD claims that *any* type

    Spectra loop can be used. There were problems in the past with

    this and that is why there is the "Cypres loop" material available

    now.

J)  AAD says that they are constantly improving the design and fixing

    any problems. However, with no mandatory service interval there

    is no procedure for updating all units in the field. With the

    exception of the total recall this spring due to a severe problem

    with sensitivity to electrostatic discharges, a unit that is out

    there does not get updated.

    However, AAD keeps updating the on-line manual for the Vigil,

    imposing more restrictions on how it can be used. This information

    is not relayed directly to customers in the field. What was okay

    to do one week may all of a sudden be "strongly discouraged" the

    next week and the only way to know is to keep checking the on-line

    manual.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Jag kan tillägga att SFF alltid har haft en försiktig hållning till att typgodkänna nya "manicker". Vi låter gärna andra länder vara experiment-verkstad först. I fallet med Vigilen har detta visat sig vara en klok idé för incidenterna runt om i världen duggar fortfarande tätt.

I dagsläget väntar vi och ser. De punkter som nämns ovan måste i alla fall ha åtgärdats på ett tillfredsställande sätt innan vi tillåter Vigilen på svenska hoppfält.

Lev väl!

/Håkan Andersson, MK

Does it help?

По просьбе Лехи комментирую данный материал:

Заявленные пункты были полученны мной от главного риггера Шведской материальной коммисии Хокана Андресона и переведы Лехой на русский язык.

Эти выдержки - диалог Хокана с AAD и результаты тестов шведской испытательной лаборатории Парамеканик. Это те пункты которые не устраивают шведский материальный комитет и на эти вопросы AAD не дало комитету четкого ответа на данный момент.

В конце этих выдержек Хокан поясняет:

"Я хочу отметить, что Материальный комитет всегда был очень осторожен к любым новым видам "механизмов". Мы предоставляем возможность другим странам быть "подопытными кроликами". В случае с Вигилом это оказалось правильным решением, так как инциденты по всему миру продолжают встречаться. В настоящее время мы ждем и изучаем обстановку. Пункты названные мной выше должны быть отлажены достаточно, прежде чем мы разрешим использование Вигила на территории Швеции."

От себя хочу добавить, что данные пункты никак не очерняют Вигил как страхующий прибор, а лишь указывают на те недостатки, которые были замечены в ходе тестирования Вигила в Швеции.

Проскочившее заявление "Верить или нет" считаю некорректным. Эти пункты можно принимать во внимание при принятии персонального решения о использовании прибора.

Меньше всего я бы хотела, чтобы этот пост послужил "антирекламой" для Вигила. В настоящий момент я пишу статью для "Скайдайвер" посвященную этой проблеме.

Любые последующие диалоги с AAD приветствуются (и на мой почтовый адрес в том числе).