Edit: I argued with myself, then decided to change everything. I removed all that, because I figured I was just being confusing.

Your (now deleted) argument made sense. For technical reasons, it should say "If equipped creature would be destroyed, regenerate it and sacrifice Crash Kit", a la Mossbridge Troll.

Thanks Dude, switched to the better wording. I'm glad to hear I make sense, even when I'm confusing myself. For those that are curious, I was having a problem with whether or not this effect should be top down or not. I kept wanting to change it to "Sacrice ~: Regenerate equipped creature." because it was better design... but you don't choose whether or not to save someone's life with a crash kit...

Funny thing is, this still bugs me. I couldn't tell you which way is 'right'.

The difference is relatively minor I'd say - you're not likely to leave it equipped to a creature you don't want to regenerate anyway.

I'm not understanding, top down, why can't you choose not to use a crash kit? I mean, morally sure - you ought to. But as an all powerful planeswalker (or whatever you are now that planeswalkers are a thing, a brane walker, whatever) surely you could choose to just let the poor guy die? Or is this some kind of physically attached and automated thing? Which, thinking about it, this is mirrodin, I guess it easily could be.

Well, yeah, as a high and mighty planeswalker, you can do what you want. A lot of the cards in New Mirrodin, though, I think of as story pieces. If Esrael, Agricultural Lead has a crash kit, and she's going to die, she uses it.

I admit, the differences are minor, in both directions. I just can't help overthink things through. Either way is an equally acceptable choice, and that drives me nuts.

Oh, it also occurred to me that I designed a cost resourceful artifact. I'm pretty sure some Johnny out there will thank me. Probably one that likes Krark-Clan Ironworks and bounce spells a bit too much.