The Argus AAD Saga
From Skysurfer
On 15 November 2010, the APF issued a Technical Directive (TD) that said in part:
"In the interest of safety to its members, The APF Technical Advisory Group (TAG) has determined that the Aviacom Argus AAD is not to be used in any equipment used by APF members. All APF members are therefore affected by this Technical Directive (TD)."
This prevented Argus owners who require an AAD to conform with Operational Regulations from jumping. It also precluded members who own one from jumping a rig fitted with one.
This was effectively withdrawn with a superseding Technical Directive of 17 Dec 2010, and the discussion taken to the Parachute Industry Association. An explanatory event history document was posted on the APF website.
On 22 March 2011 the Parachute Industry Association Technical Committee published an "information only" package to their members advising them to re-evaluate their approvals for Argus AADs. This was preceded by Rigging Innovations withdrawing approval, and followed by Sunpath doing the same. The APF advised their members of relevant facts on 22 March also.
What is the Argus?
The Argus is an electronic Automatic Activation Device (AAD) with a control unit, a processing unit and a cutter. It is manufactured in Belgium by Aviacom. It is similar in design and function to the CYPRES and Vigil products.
Aviacom Service Bulletins AMM021206/2
Dated 11 December 2006. Concerns an Argus cutter placed on top of the pilot chute which frayed a loop. No incidents are listed in the SB. A replacement cutter would be shipped on receipt of the old one.
Compliance was listed at "Before next jump for all rigs with the cutter located above the pilot chute" and "At the next repack, but no later than June 30th 2007 for all others."
None of these cutters should have been in service since 30 June 2007.
The Polish Incident
Here is the Incident Report (in Polish). Pictures are included (warning: graphic content).
Raw text of the incident:
Translation via Google Translate:
(sorry about the formatting).
The cutter in this unit is believed to have been subject to the previous directive but not replaced (citation needed).
The Polish Grounding, 19 Mar 2010
all AAD ARGUS devices used in the Republic of Poland and used by tandem pilots and certified in Poland parachuting training organizations are grounded (citation needed)
SB AMMO050910/2
Dated 5 Sep 2010
Exctracts:
The Polish Authorities concluded in a preliminary report that the loop was only fully cut at impact. We formally disagree with these conclusions.
Systems that have a cutter of the manufacturing date August 07 or earlier must have the cutter replaced with a later model at the next repack but no later than 31 December 2010. Cutters manufactured as of September ’07 use a different, hardened steel blade delivering a clean cut by loops with lesser tension.
http://www.argus-aad.com/images/05_09_2010_SERVICE_BULLETIN.pdf
APF Technical Directive 12 July 2010
Australian Parachute Federation Technical Directive TD 03-2010 states in part:
The Technical Advisory Group (TAG) have determined that the Aviacom Argus AAD is not to be used in any equipment used by a student or novice parachutists. B Licensed jumpers and above are not affected by this Technical Directive (TD).
At the completion of this investigation one of the following may occur.
- The suspension listed in the TD will be removed.
- The suspension listed in the TD will be will be extended until further notice.
- A new TD that applies to all parachute equipment may be implemented.
Argus fires in descending aircraft, Evora Portugal, 4 Sep 2010
An Argus in Student mode was fired in a Pilatus Porter on descent (descent rate of over 5000' per minute). The loop was only partially cut, and the display unit cable was damaged. This was not noticed until the rig was in the air once more with a student, the instructors riding the plane down instead of jumping. The blank display unit was not noticed by instructors prior to emplaning.
It took seven weeks to return a field incident report to Aviacom for investigation. The unit returned to Argus for investigation did not match the serial number of the unit listed on the field incident report.
The cutter involved was also the subject of the Aviacom service bulletin AMM021206/2 12 Dec 06! and had not been replaced. (Citation needed).
From the preliminary incident report:
CUTTER BLOCKAGE
The cutter activated under unusual circumstances eg not during freefall. At time of activation the student was leaning against the left side of the wall while the plane had a high rate of descent. It is known that this presses the body and rig to the side of the aircraft subsequently compressing the pilot chute significantly. (Fig. 7 & 8)
This plus a clearly too long loop caused that the cutter had to perform outside its parameters as the pilot chute pressure was significantly less and the loop was slack.
There is no doubt that in freefall the cutter would have performed as it should. The created cutter error can almost be put under the category “packing table error”’ as the unit was not in freefall and the pilot chute was able to compress making the loop to lose its tension.
Had the loop been short enough, the compression would have been minimal, resulting in a fully cut loop and an open parachute in the aircraft. As response to this incident and pending further tests Aviacom brought out a preventive Service Bulletin SB AMMO050910/2.
- need more content here.
APF Technical Directive 15 Nov 2010
Australian Parachute Federation Technical Directive TD 04-2010 states in part:
On the 3rd September 2010 a second incident occurred in Portugal, reporting with similar issues, though without such extreme outcomes to the incident.
Action:
In the interest of safety to its members, The APF Technical Advisory Group (TAG) has determined that the Aviacom Argus AAD is not to be used in any equipment used by APF members. All APF members are therefore affected by this Technical Directive (TD).
APF_TD_04-2010_Issued_Nov_15th_2010_Argus_AAD.pdf
Who is the "TAG"?
The Australian Parachute Federation (APF) Technical Advisory Group (TAG) comprises Director Safety (Paul Osborne), Director Aircraft Operations (Grahame Hill), Director Instructors (Don Cross), Chair (Jack Cross) and CEO (Brad Turner).
The TAG is not currently expressly named on the APF website.
http://www.apf.asn.au/APF-Zone/APF-Appointees-and-Comittees/default.aspx
Leading claims from manufacturers
Aviacom Argus: "The Argus is the most versatile and most reliable AAD ever made!"
CYPRES: "Our Goal: 100% Reliability and 100% Safety"
Vigil: "Like any other AAD on the market, the purpose of the Vigil® is to save lifes."
Testing the Argus
ParaConcepts test
Kirk Smith, of Para Concepts (lllinois, USA) http://paraconcepts.com/ conducted some testing. Although initial expectations were that it would not cut a "slack" loop, it did so.
Youtube videos of Argus testing
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RIiDp7bVOYE Nov/Dec 2006 2-04-2010
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ncVd7dy-IA4&feature=related Argus tests 1-3 26 March 2010
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TmNhTEnp0LQ Argus Cutter tests March 2010
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLY8-zJm8kE Argus live tests Air65, November 2010
The letter from Aviacom
This was apparently sent to many skydivers.
Click here for a PDF.
In part:
As you are aware by now, the Australian Parachute Association has grounded the Argus AAD. The APF jumped to conclusions, based on rumours, half-truths and misinformation. We formally protested against this decision with the APF - their silence was deafening - and afterward we filed a complaint with the Australian Civil Aviation Safety Authority; the CASA.
...
With the summer coming up in the southern hemisphere, our customers will now jump without any safety device at all.
We cannot see how banning an AAD will improve the safety of skydiving in Australia. A perfectly good cutter cannot make up for ignorance, bad rigging or poor instruction. All an AAD does is under certain conditions cutting a loop at a certain speed at a certain altitude.
CYPRES failure rate of up to 20%?!
Document titled "AIRTEC CYPRES AAD FACT SHEET"
Not an Airtec document.
"There are 696000 CYPRES Discs out there, less than 400 of them are not as strong as the others"
Disc Update 22 Nov 2010 Backup link
In spetember 2009 we were contacted by a rigger in Texas who reported that a CYPRES disc tore in the web area between two of the holes, while repacking a Wings container.
The report was immediately investigated...
Dated Nov 22, 2010
The BPA rescind
On Nov 26, the British Parachuting Association published the following notice.
http://www.bpa.org.uk/file_uploads/File/Safety%20Info/S%20INFO%201-10%20.pdf backup link
In part:
Following their meetings of the 25th November 2010, the Riggers’ Sub-Committee and the STC have now decided that rigs fitted with Argus AADs may now be put back into service provided the Argus AAD is fitted with a cutter manufactured after the beginning of September 2007 and may only be fitted to equipment authorised by both the AAD manufacturer and container manufacturer and fitted in a manner acceptable to them.
The above Committees made their decision following much in depth discussion. The AAD manufacturer was also present at the meetings. The BPA is not in a position to be able to carry out in-depth research or testing of equipment used within sport parachuting. That is the responsibility of the equipment manufacturers.
APF TD 05/2010
http://www.apf.asn.au/ArticleDocuments/142/APF_TD_05-2010_Issued_Dec_17th_2010_Argus_AAD.pdf.aspx
Issued 17th December 2010. Continued use of the Aviacom Argus AAD in Australian Parachuting Equipment.
Argus SB AMMO050910/3
http://www.argus-aad.com/images/PDF/sb_ctr.pdf
This Service Bulletin replaces SB AMMO050910/2
"Argus Cutter with manufacturing date Aug. 07 or earlier and manufactured for the Argus AAD by Nobel Energetics" are eligible for a free replacement.
The Texas Incident
There's a thread at dropzone.com with some clues:
They refer to a USPA Newsletter report:
"A senior rigger in Texas recently reported to USPA that a reserve container did not open after the Argus automatic activation device (AAD) activated the cutter during a skydive when a jumper deployed his main canopy at a low altitude. The jumper landed uneventfully under his main canopy, removed his container and dropped it on the hangar floor to be packed. The reserve container remained closed until the packer had nearly finished packing the main bag into the container. As the packer was closing the main flaps, the reserve pilot chute launched. Investigation revealed that the AAD had activated the cutter at an undetermined altitude but it severed the reserve closing loop only partially. The reserve pilot chute launched only after additional strands of the closing loop broke and the closing loop opened up at the finger trap part of the loop. The rigger contacted Aviacom, manufacturer of the Argus AAD, regarding the issue, and the company asked that the unit be shipped to the factory in Belgium for testing."
The Initial Incident Report entertains "pencil packing", low deployment on a wingsuit jump and a loop "lacking in the recommended treatment of silicon by the manufacturer". The AAD was not fitted in accordance with the harness manufacturer's instructions.
Rigging Innovations withdraw approval
SB #1548 21 Mar 2011
http://www.rigginginnovations.com/support/sb/SB-1548.pdf
"Over the past three years and particularly in the last several months, there have been documented reports from the field of Argus AAD firings where there was a failure to cut the reserve locking loop. Aviacom, the manufacturer of the Argus, has been contacted concerning these incidents, and to our knowledge to date, they have not yet identified the root cause of the problem, nor have they suggested a solution...
...Rigging Innovations no longer approves any procedures to install the Argus AAD in Rigging Innovations products, and hereby rescinds any prior approved procedures to do so."
Sunpath withdraws approval
Nearly word-for-word with the Rigging Innovations release, although the cutter is located in a different location:
"Even though the cutter is located below the reserve pilot chute on Sun Path Products, Inc. harness/containers, this failure to cut the reserve‐closing loop fully could cause a significant delay, which could result in a fatality.
http://sunpath.com/docs/SPSB006-3.22.11_0.pdf
Mirage Systems Withdraws approval
Nothing official yet, just a dropzone.com post: http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=4082436;sb=post_latest_reply;so=ASC;forum_view=forum_view_collapsed;guest=77936417
What happens next?
Awaiting Aviacom report.
Unanswered questions
Please email if you have a citation.
- Was the loop in the Polish incident impregnated with silicon?
- Same re Portugal.
- Has an AAD manufacturer ever admitted a failure of the device to do its job?
