AAD Statistics

up to date:
Cypres saved over 2000
Vigil saved 81
Argus saved 22
All according to manufacturers websites.

Shouldn't we know how many fails there was? Was there?

I really hope this is not a taboo subject.

What concerns me more is that these numbers mean there were 2100 times when people failed to save themselves by pulling the ripcord.

So if these people had gone in does that mean that the reserve "failed" because it didn't open itself?

I turn my AAD on in the morning and forget that I have one.

Let's not get so involed with our skydive that we forget the number one thing that let's us keep jumping.

What is a fail?

If the AAD fired but too low because of turning it on at an off altitude?
Missfire at high altitude?
Not fireing at all (yes)?
Missfire in airplane?
If it fired correct but person backflying causing delay?
Fire due to low turn?

Your post suggest that manufacturer can always evade admission of unit failure to cut reserve loop at pre set altitude - because of too many factors involved and no "witnesses".

Is post-fatal-unit-data public or what?

Are you worried about AAD's?.

There are quite a few different AAD's out there. They are a back up, nothing else. The primary AAD is the jumper. The AAD should be irrelevant on every skydive, and if you depend on one for survival, then you need to quit skydiving now.


There is often no reliable data to say exactly when an AAD has activated, or in fact whether it was relevant to events that occurred.

After a fatal accident the unit is often damaged to the point of making accurate analysis impossible. Any relevant data about the AAD would be contained within the fatality report, which is a public document.

Having said all that, AAD's when used properly, are very reliable. If they weren't, they would be a big liability to safety, and jumpers would not use them.

Jumping an unreliable AAD would be Russian roulette because it would kill you in the end.

personally, I'd like to see an unbiased/3rd party report of AAD statistics.

I'd say a "failure" is when the unit was used correctly and did not work.

* Jumper set the altitude incorrectly? The jumper failed, not the AAD.

* AAD fired in the plane/trunk/ cause of radio? AAD failed.

* AAD fired the reserve and the jumper tangled in the PC? AAD worked, jumper failed.

* AAD didn't work because the jumper didn't replace the battery? Jumper failed.

But we all know (at least I thought we all knew) that AAD's can and do fail.

It would be great to have failure info.... Lets say an AAD has 500 "saves" but has misfired 100 times and failed to fire in 50.... That's not an AAD I would want.

Quote

Shouldn't we know how many fails there was?

Like when Tommy Piras failed to turn his on?

Quote

Quote

Shouldn't we know how many fails there was?

Like when Tommy Piras failed to turn his on?

No. Fails like AAD fails to cut reserve loop at preset altitude, life not saved.
And apparent answer is: "Yes, we should know but we can't"

That's it if you're lazy to read.

Quote

Quote

Quote

Shouldn't we know how many fails there was?

Like when Tommy Piras failed to turn his on?

No. Fails like AAD fails to cut reserve loop at preset altitude, life not saved.
And apparent answer is: "Yes, we should know but we can't"

That's it if you're lazy to read.

Maybe I am "lazy to read".

Lighten up, Francis.

Quote

Quote

Shouldn't we know how many fails there was?

Like when Tommy Piras failed to turn his on?

So are you implying that he did turn it on, and that the facts were changed after the incident, in favor of manufacturer?

Quote

Quote

Quote

Shouldn't we know how many fails there was?

Like when Tommy Piras failed to turn his on?

So are you implying that he did turn it on, and that the facts were changed after the incident, in favor of manufacturer?

No.

Quote

So are you implying that he did turn it on, and that the facts were changed after the incident, in favor of manufacturer?

No.

Can you shed some light on what you are trying to say, please?

Not even the AAD manufacturers have complete data on their products. Remember, some AAD's don't need new parts when they activate. And for those that do often the information is just not supplied to the manufacturer, let alone a third party.

They work most of the time. If it was SUPPOSED to fire and didn't or the reserve didn't open in time , well you were dead anyway. If it fires and it wasn't supposed to, either its bad or its just a pain. But it's the cost of wearing one.

There were two big arguments against AAD's before the CYPRES; one they're two big/heavy and two they aren't reliable enough in terms of firing when they aren't supposed to.

CYPRES came out and the arguments were price and still "I don't want something that can open my reserve when I don't want it to." The first one is always there. The second one turns out to be rare. We all expected newer AAD's to kill someone eventually.

Pre CYPRES we had a friend bounce after being knocked unconcious exiting on a DZ 20 some way at the 1985 Freek Brothers. Lots for folks said they were going to get an AOD (the acronym at that time) or at least start jumping a hard helmet. Not ONE AOD or helmet was bought because of that. We knew/know the risks and accepted them.

IT'S SKYDIVING. Before AAD's you were DEAD once you left the airplane unless you took a POSITIVE action. Few situations in life are so certain. With AAD's you now have a chance to live. But no guarentee. Just read your parachute owner's manual! If you want a guarentee your not going to die skydiving stay on the ground.

Imagine what the fatality statistics would look like if we had ADDED all the canopy piloting deaths TO the bounces instead of SUBSTITUTING them. AAD's starting saving lives when people starting killing themselves under open parachutes.

Very good answer Wendy. When there is a problem with an AAD it's not that simple to determine what has happened. There is so many factors contributing to a firing. Too many people react emotionally and are prompt to blame such and such company without knowing instead of trying to stay calm and get a well written technical report.
I know that a complete report takes time for having had myself to do an expertise once in a case of a fatal accident. Expect also to never get a certitude about what happened.
This is not only right for AADs but also right for airplane accidents.
But there is a way to know more about what happened:
The only company which provides an interface to customer to download figures and diagram altitude-time of the last 16 minutes recorded on an AAD is Vigil. When an AAD fires or anything "wrong" happens in the air, it is very interesting to see a diagram of what has happened. On the altitude-time chart, one can see dot of different colors for start of the dive, opening altitude and firing within fraction of a second including altitude.
On a Vigil a red dot is the start of the dive, the yellow dot is the opening and the blue dot is the firing if any.
The chart or diagram shown in the attachment illustrates an actual firing of a Vigil 1 at Perris Valley in 2005.
The firing was due to a low pull, too many people above me at the separation (not an excuse ) (no. 17 on the Vigil web site). The firing occurred at 1099 ft (1100ft) since I was in an upward position while my main parachute was beginning to deploy. Therefore there was no differential pressure between chest and back equivalent to 260ft. This is why the Vigil 1 fired at that altitude (840 ft is the firing altitude when flat on your stomach) and in an upward position it is 840 ft + 260 ft = 1100 ft. The chart shows that if I had pulled a fraction of a second sooner, the firing would have been inhibited.
The result : a beautiful biplane which I landed without any problem. The green curve is the altitude-time curve. The yellow curve is the speed-time curve. Even if the speed curve is referring to sudden changes of pressure, the AAD software does a sampling and rounds up the data to "decide" if the firing speed is met or not.
This diagram was available using my software and interface provided by Vigil as an option. This diagram therefore wasn't done by Vigil. I got it from a computer.
Protrack can also provide the same type of chart if using their software and interface.
Since on Dropzone.com we are restricted at 200k picture, the picture in attachment was the best I could provide.
Note: I am also using the capability of the Vigil interface and software for using the chart to determine how long it takes for my main to open.
Sabre 2-170 340 ft (average on 10 jumps)
Katana 170 600 ft (average on 10 jumps)

And I'm saying nothing more than
"we should be able to see this - in every case recorded"

and every case should be recorded, and seen on demand.
But it's not so simple, is it (.) too bad

Quote

Quote

So are you implying that he did turn it on, and that the facts were changed after the incident, in favor of manufacturer?

No.

Can you shed some light on what you are trying to say, please?

......................................................................

Occum's Razor

Rumour has it, that his last video shows Tom Piras riding in a jump-plane, joking about having this fancy new electronic gadget (Cypres 1), but not remembering how to turn it on.

Tom Piras was the best Cypres salesman!

Quote

up to date:
Cypres saved over 2000
Vigil saved 81
Argus saved 22

I don't like the word 'saved' in this context. These were AAD fires - many of them were not 'saves'. Otherwise the figures suggest that an average of 110 people would have been killed annually by no-pulls in the 19 years since the Cypres was first available - and presumably most of those 2,100 fires have actually occurred since AAD use became the norm, which is a significantly shorter period of time.

According to Airtec - these were saves

Quote

Even though we don't hear of all the other rescue situations, we are still very proud of the estimated number of more than 2,000 skydivers who have been saved by CYPRES.

_______________

Quote

figures suggest that an average of 110 people would have been killed annually by no-pulls in the 19 years

Maybe those 2000 wouldn't jump at all without Cypres?
Now that would ruin your stats :)

Meaning not at all to argue, but only to continue to discuss -

Who decided if it is a "save" or not?

If these 2000 CYPRES saves were "saves" according to the jumper who got "saved", maybe it does mean that 2000 more people would have died over the period in question.

If someone reported it as a "save", maybe it really was.

Do you think that every single activation is reported to Airtec and they call them all "saves" even if they were not?

I suspect that not all activations are reported, which might make the 2000 number actually be lower than it really is.

The nature of the jumping population now is pretty different from the nature of the jumping population 25 years ago, so I wonder how meaningful it is to compare the "no pull" rates from then to the "save" rates from now. I know lots of people now who simply won't jump without an AAD. Back then, everybody had to have the confidence that they could save their own life. Now it is not so clear as that. So, as format says, maybe a lot of these "saves" wouldn't have been jumping at all were it not for the AAD.

But, they are jumping, and if they are reporting these events as "saves" maybe they really are.

now there's statistics:

http://viewer.zoho.com/docs/c6UCg

and

http://viewer.zoho.com/docs/dcWbbA