Why no separate activities for hiking vs backpacking?

That cant be right.

You cant have same pace and same HR it is not possible and same calories burnt.

Either you are super efficient at backpacking (congratulations) or you are using optical HR (and HR is wrong)... 

2572376 said:

as you have never needed to use it, you dont actually know it will work.

It will work. It runs a self-test every time it is started and is regularly serviced. The system has saved over 4,000 lives in more than 28 yesrs so far. And not a single failure.  
www.cypres.aero/.../ 

But apart from that, you apparently did not understand my statement.

And you dont understand how electo/mechanical systems work and fail. I have searched around and there have been several failures for a variety of reasons.  I am also very sure that the system is very reliable, but it isnt 100%. The failures just havent killed anybody yet, or have been spotted before they killed anybody.

You seem to think because something passes its self tests, its going to work.That is not the case. It may fail after you check it. It is built out of components, uses batteries, they can fail, it severs  a loop, the cutter may fail. No electormechanical system is 100%, things break down eventually. 

You cant prove an electomechanical system will work at some point in the future 100%

Bu you can prove it doesnt. The first time it fails, you have proved it, and as I said, there have been failures.

They also said the titanic couldnt sink. !!

Would I use one should I be stupid enough to jump out of a plane...................of course I would.

From the CYPRES Site you quoted.

To the current knowledge of Airtec GmbH & Co. KG Saftey Systems as of today:

Since 10th January 1991 no CYPRES failed to activate when the conditions were given. Therefore CYPRES showed a level of reliability within the reach of 100% at that time.
However, this statement is based solely on historic experiences. Regardless of any advertising or other written, verbal, or perceived claims to the contrary no conclusions about the future properties of CYPRES can be drawn based on those historic experiences. In particular the level of reliability can differ considerably in the future. The level of reliability might be significantly lower than during the time period mentioned above.

As an electro-mechanical device the possibility of CYPRES malfunctioning cannot be excluded. Such may cause injuries or death. We accept no responsibility for damages and consequences resulting from any malfunction

As I said, you don't understand my statement. Any system can fail. Life in itself is deadly. If you walk out of the house and fall down the stairs, you can be dead. I want to jump another 15 years. And with every jump I will do everything to never need the system. The keyword is preparation.

That isnt what you said at all. You said.

I jump off the plane. I have a rescue system called "CYPRES". That opens the parachute at a height of a good 200 meters if I haven't done it by then. I've never needed it in 25 years. If I had needed it, something would have been wrong in my planning or parachute maintenance. I would never count on it. No skydiver does that. Even if I know that it works 100%.

As I showed previously, the CYPRES guys dont agree with you.

You also said it opens the parachute. It doesnt do that either. Again the CYPRES guys dont agree with you.

The CYPRES is strictly a backup device which may or may not save your life or prevent serious injury. The CYPRES does not open or deploy a parachute. It simply cuts a loop, which should allow the parachute opening sequence to begin. Because of many variables, this opening sequence may or may not occur at all, or in time to save your life or prevent injury. In an emergency, nothing, including the CYPRES, replaces your responsibility to activate your reserve parachute in a timely manner. If you, your family, relatives, or friends are not willing to accept these risks, please discontinue the use of CYPRES, and seriously consider taking up a safer sport!

I think you need to spend more time working out how your safety systems work because its pretty clear you dont.

Actually thats not what they say at all. you didnt take the rest of the sentence.

Since 10th January 1991 no CYPRES failed to activate when the conditions were given. Therefore CYPRES showed a level of reliability within the reach of 100% at that time.

When the conditions were given. As I said, it has failed for a variety of reasons, just hasnt killed anybody yet.

I have no issue with CYPRES being a wonderful safety device which of course should be used.

But when you come here arguing about things and making statements like "Even if I know that it works 100%."

Then argue against what you said by saying "Any system can fail." its annoying.

Either its 100% or it isnt, you cant sit on both sides of the fence.