What is Digg?281 Comments
- Elderon, on 10/22/2007, -3/+121They don't give everyone parachutes because most accidents where the plane crashes happen so fast that 1, noone would be able to exit the plane anyways. 2) wouldn't it affect the pilots ability to control the plane if they are also trying to worry about all the people jumping out the side? 3) People might try and force themselves out of the plane if they knew they all had parachutes.
- dagnabbit, on 10/22/2007, -3/+108Exactly. Remember that plane full of skydivers that went down earlier this month? They all died. And they were freaking skydivers.
- reeder, on 10/27/2007, -7/+74I think the question should be why don't they have redundant parachute systems for the entire airplane, not individuals.
- Zarokima, on 10/22/2007, -1/+56The plane is going 400 mph. You're in the plane traveling with it. You're going 400 mph. Terminal velocity means the fastest it falls uninterrupted, not the fastest it can possibly go ever under any circumstances.
- HunterTV, on 10/21/2007, -2/+53I actually wondered about this with respect to high skyscrapers after 9/11. People can't get past the fires on the stairwell... base jump? They would be high enough for that after a certain floor height right? It sounds ridiculous to have parachutes in a skyscraper, not to mention dangerous landing on/near buildings, etc., but ***** it, I'd rather give it shot than burn to death or die in a collapse.
- atdigg, on 10/22/2007, -1/+50Nevertheless the plane hits the ground at different speed than the terminal velocity for humans, I think this is what he meant.
- Shigglyboo, on 10/22/2007, -3/+44when I was a kid I tried to exit an airplane because I couldn't find a parachute. it was pretty funny, parents came after me asking where I was going, I informed them I did not wish to go into the sky without a parachute.
- Briandrews15, on 10/22/2007, -4/+41I love when people need to feel smart so they go for every chance they find to correct people; especially when they're not smart and are flat out wrong about the correction.
- schnikies79, on 10/22/2007, -2/+34Thats a free fall, you can be accelerated past 120mph. If you put on a jet pack at 30,000ft and aimed straight down, you would go faster than 120mph.
- marvinmatthew, on 10/21/2007, -1/+32I think there's a bit of a difference between an ejection seat and a parachute.
- ChromaVita, on 10/22/2007, -0/+31You should get on the plane in full sky diving gear and watch the people around you freak out.
- deadbaby, on 10/21/2007, -1/+31It would be useless. Planes mostly crash on landing & takeoff. Not enough height for a parachute to work. When planes do crash in flight at full altitude it's almost always a cataclysmic failure such as an explosion which, again, makes parachutes useless. I guess the most obvious reason is that commercial air travel is incredibly safe.
- mwrl, on 10/22/2007, -3/+31Many cargo class military aircraft don't carry any because it is safer to crash the aircraft then jump out. Speed is everything. If your going too fast you would be uncontrolable and pass out, if you jump and have the parachute open right away it would be ripped apart.
- Zenas, on 10/22/2007, -1/+28Oh, please, it's torture enough to sit through the seatbelt and life jacket instructions.
- thefirstenemy, on 10/20/2007, -2/+28Wouldn't the terrorists just shoot holes in the parachutes?
- DeskFlyer, on 10/20/2007, -1/+21http://www.evacuchute.com/
- raisputin3, on 10/21/2007, -0/+20Actually, when I travel I carry my skydiving gear (my rig, which is the assembly consisting of Harness, Container main and reserve parachutes) with me. There is no way in hell that I would check a piece of gear that costs over $3,000. Airlines are well aware of skydivers and that we carry our parachute rigs with us when we travel typically and don't give us grief *most* of the time.
- DeskFlyer, on 10/22/2007, -1/+19They do, just not for anything large, heavy, and/or fast. Try imagining inventing a parachute system for an aircraft that weighs over 100,000 pounds that can deploy at a high velocity without ripping the entire airframe/parachute apart, bring the plane safely to the ground, and also ensuring that it is light and compact enough to be installed on a commercial airliner. Oh, and make it affordable for the airlines too. :o
- bigboy101011, on 10/22/2007, -3/+21weight
- sanman, on 10/21/2007, -6/+23Don't forget that if there were parachutes onboard, you could do something to harm the plane, and then bail out with your parachute.
I don't think airport security would let you board an airline if they saw you carrying your parachute pack with you. - mrASSMAN, on 10/22/2007, -0/+17Yep, terminal velocity only refers to gravity and air resistance..
- RedHairedMan, on 10/21/2007, -1/+16You are a bad man, and I salute you!
When I was a kid I argued all the flight with my mom that the big things on the wings were canons in case air pirates attacked. - tomj88, on 10/21/2007, -1/+15when I was a kid I asked the mother of this kid who had been feeling ill all the flight if she had ever been in a plane crash. He promptly threw his guts up
- KingBunny, on 10/22/2007, -1/+15I'm going to guess it's for the same reason that my car doesn't have an anti-meteorite laser on the roof, which activates when I press a button.
(Would hardly come in handy compared to the cost, and even then, the chance of me knowing when to press the button is slim to nil) - wittyname, on 10/21/2007, -2/+15I just bring my own.
- inobla, on 10/20/2007, -3/+16Lessca is getting dugg down, but there is some historical precedence to back up the possibility. Yes, this means it has happened before, but they never found out for sure what happened to the hijacker after he jumped.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D._B._Cooper - turpenine, on 10/20/2007, -2/+14try a few $k per seat extra. Each seat already costs $100k+ because of how much stress they have to hold.
- Misogyny, on 10/20/2007, -0/+12Cirrus Aircraft have a parachute option. They are small (four passenger) general aviation planes though.
- Dundasbro, on 10/20/2007, -3/+15YOU NEED TO TURN OFF THE CAPS LOCK BEFORE ANYONE WILL GIVE A ***** ABOUT WHAT YOU HAVE TO SAY.
- drmangrum, on 10/22/2007, -0/+12Also, it would be cost prohibitive to keep 400 parachutes on board. Parachutes take up a LOT of room. so unless you want the price of your ticket to double you live with the very, very, VERY low chance of dieing in a plane crash.
- Valor, on 10/22/2007, -1/+12This is silly.
Cruising altitude is what 30,000'? You wouldn't be conscious to deploy your chute at that altitude regardless of the chance for the wind-shear to damage you on disembarkation. You're likely dramatically safer with a trained professional trying to bring down the plane than jumping out of it as a complete novice.
In almost any situation where the pilot's abilities and training aren't going to matter, your chute won't matter either. - wbeavis, on 10/22/2007, -1/+12Parachutes? It's 2007 people. I want a friggin jetpack as my form of escape from a midair flying car accident. Two thousand and seven. Promises were made.
- blazes816, on 10/20/2007, -2/+12Every time I've ever skydived my parachute has been full of holes. And it works fine.
- Jozer99, on 10/20/2007, -0/+10Did ANYBODY read the article? The guy addresses this. Can you imagine how big and strong a parachute would need to be to stop a 747 going 400 mph? The materials don't exist to do it, not to mention the expense and space requirements would be prohibitive.
- Affect, on 10/21/2007, -0/+10Yeah, it's a comfort measure only. It's not like crashes are planned. "Ladies and Gentlemen, we are cruising at 30,000 feet, to your left you can see the Grand Canyon. Oh yes, we will likely crash at 1700. Stewardesses, please prepare the cabin for a 200 person jump."
Push come to shove, bring your own. Show those f@#$ers whats up. - supermanred, on 10/20/2007, -1/+9I don't think that's feasible. The strain from the shute would either rip the fasteners off the plane, or rip the plane to shreds. It is after all made of thin aluminum, velcro and some gum.
- unearth, on 10/20/2007, -0/+8@Phyltre: I would like to see it too, but this would be very different from a normal innovation. You would need to redesign the entire plane in order for it to withstand the stresses produced by the parachutes, and I don't just mean move a couple parts from here to there. It would need to be a flying reinforced tank, moreso than commercial airliners already are.
- fusama, on 10/20/2007, -0/+8don't forget the duct tape
- jcardinal, on 10/20/2007, -2/+10Why not just gas everyone to sleep so they don't feel anything when they crash?
- roland, on 10/20/2007, -1/+9then the mexicans would use them to jump the fences.
- raisputin3, on 10/20/2007, -1/+9Actually, when I freefall, it is typically around 123-127mph. Body position has a lot of effect on how fast you will fall. If I go head to Earth, I have achieved 187mph, but I typically fly belly-to-Earth, and that is definitely closer to the 120mph mark.
- omgroffles, on 10/20/2007, -0/+8Clear of the plain?
I know landing in trees can sometimes save lives, but I didn't know that was standard procedure - flygirl62, on 10/20/2007, -0/+7Perhaps. But it simply isn't cost-effective if you take into account how often it would *actually* be used in a situation where it would save lives.
As many have said, most accidents occur during takeoff or landing and there is seldom any notice. This incredibly expensive system would be of no use in the most common accidents and, given the reocrd of airline safety, the number where it *would* have a CHANCE of helping are extremely few. - raisputin3, on 10/20/2007, -0/+7So that is why we consistantly jump between 13,500 and 15,000?? I didn't know I couldn't breathe above 10k...interesting....Guess I am just special when it comes to being able to breathe unbreathable air because there is a lack of oxygen...
- Jozer99, on 10/22/2007, -0/+7Read the article. The main reason is that there are very few commercial airline accidents that would have been helped by the availability of parachutes. The majority of airline accidents happen during takeoff or landing, giving only a couple of seconds of warning before the plane crashes. You can imagine the time it would take to get people off the plane with parachutes, I would guess more than 10-15 minutes for a 747 full of people.
- DrywallThief, on 10/20/2007, -4/+11Ummm... mmkay...
- TenebrousX, on 10/20/2007, -1/+8FTA:
"Unfortunately, the size and weight of jetliners make any commercial application extraordinarily difficult (a fully laden 747 weighs nearly a million pounds)" - thechr0nic, on 10/20/2007, -0/+6What was not said, is that the plane full of skydivers were on the way back from an event, and didnt have their gear on.
They were mearly in transit, with no intention of actually diving from the plane.. so it should read, a plane full of passengers went down. - inactive, on 10/20/2007, -1/+7please tell me you're joking.
- tomj88, on 10/20/2007, -0/+6sorry for the double posting... *stupid digg comment system*
-
Show 51 - 100 of 276 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is