4 ms·

This was invented in the 80s. I read about it in Popular Science. The purpose of the detachable cabin at that time was to allow the cabin (with its passengers)

This was invented in the 80s. I read about it in Popular Science. The purpose of the detachable cabin at that time was to allow the cabin (with its passengers) to parachute to safety in case of an eminent crash. Why planes do not have whole plane parachutes to this day is disturbing enough, but now they come along to re-patient what is essentially the same idea, but instead to save small bit of money by loading the cattle faster is pretty disgusting.

arethuza 11y ago
"Escape capsules" have been used in military aircraft since the 1950s: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Escape_crew_capsule https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Escape_crew_capsule
seanherron 11y ago
In what modern situation would a whole plane parachute actually help save lives? The vast majority of the (extremely rare) commercial aircraft disasters occur during takeoff or landing, when a parachute would provide little utility due to the distance the aircraft is from the ground. Other notable recent disasters had either instantaneous destruction of the aircraft (Metrojet 9268, Malaysian 17) or were caused by pilot error or murder/suicide (Germanwings 9525, Colgan 2407). Perhaps the only incident I can think of where a parachute may have helped was US Airways 1549, where a bird strike caused loss of power to both engines. In that case, however, sufficient safety controls existed to enable landing on the Hudson river, and the aircraft functioned as designed (engines broke off when hitting water, the aircraft floated long enough to ensure safe evacuation of all passengers, life rafts deployed, etc). I would argue a parachute would probably have resulted in loss of life as a giant A320 parachute falling uncontrolled on to New York City would probably kill people crashing in to a building. Rather than focus on superfluous, impractical safety measures, commercial aircraft designers have instead spent time on things that actually save lives, such as Traffic Avoidance and Ground Proximity warning systems. Note that parachutes do exist for smaller planes, where the risks and benefits are substantially different. A good example is the Cirrus SR-22. It seems that most cases of deploying the parachute on the Cirrus is due to pilots running out of fuel, a failure which is extremely improbable in commercial aviation.
- tzs 11y ago
  > Perhaps the only incident I can think of where a parachute may have helped was US Airways 1549 [...] Another is United 232, the Sioux City crash during a landing where all hydraulics had been lost, leaving the pilots with only differential thrust to steer with. Perhaps TWA 800, if I'm recalling correctly that the explosion basically decapitated the plane leaving the passenger section largely intact. Also maybe Aloha 243. That plane was able to land after a large chunk of the cabin blew out with no fatalities other than a crew member who was sucked out during the initial blow out, so like USAir 1549 a parachute would not have saved any lives in that particular incident. In that type of incident, though, it probably would have been a good option. Such incidents leave the pilots with a plane that is flying at the moment, but that has severe structural damage leaving them with no idea what maneuvers they can do without tearing it apart and no idea if it is even going to hold together in stable level flight. That would probably be an incident where your probabilities would be better with popping the 'chute.
  - seanherron 11y ago
    Those all happened at least 20 years ago - I was looking at things that have happened in recent history.
Bluestrike2 11y ago
A lot of light aircraft carry whole-plane parachutes, but there's a huge difference between light aircraft and commercial jetliners. One of the heaviest loads ever dropped was a Minuteman missile in the 70s at about 86,000 pounds. NASA's Ares test drops were for a 72,000 pound load. The 787-9's maximum take-off weight is about 557,000 pounds. A 747 is worse. The 787 would require multiple round chutes with a total area equivalent to 4.8 football fields. A detachable cabin might lower the overall weight considerably, but it's still significantly more than the heaviest loads that have ever been dropped. Engineering a cabin to be detached in a controlled manner at the gate, sitting nicely on the ground with nary a care in the world, while still a difficult engineering problem, is considerably easier than engineering a cabin that can be rapidly detached at altitude safely. It would be hideously more complex, and in all likelihood, that complexity would increase the potential for a catastrophic accident while airborne. Planes are kept relatively simple, despite their actual complexity, for a reason. So it's unlikely that whole-plane parachutes would actually save lives with jetliners. Light aircraft incidents are much more common, and they're small enough to benefit significantly from a parachute.

arethuza 11y ago

"Escape capsules" have been used in military aircraft since the 1950s: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Escape_crew_capsule https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Escape_crew_capsule

seanherron 11y ago

In what modern situation would a whole plane parachute actually help save lives? The vast majority of the (extremely rare) commercial aircraft disasters occur during takeoff or landing, when a parachute would provide little utility due to the distance the aircraft is from the ground. Other notable recent disasters had either instantaneous destruction of the aircraft (Metrojet 9268, Malaysian 17) or were caused by pilot error or murder/suicide (Germanwings 9525, Colgan 2407). Perhaps the only incident I can think of where a parachute may have helped was US Airways 1549, where a bird strike caused loss of power to both engines. In that case, however, sufficient safety controls existed to enable landing on the Hudson river, and the aircraft functioned as designed (engines broke off when hitting water, the aircraft floated long enough to ensure safe evacuation of all passengers, life rafts deployed, etc). I would argue a parachute would probably have resulted in loss of life as a giant A320 parachute falling uncontrolled on to New York City would probably kill people crashing in to a building. Rather than focus on superfluous, impractical safety measures, commercial aircraft designers have instead spent time on things that actually save lives, such as Traffic Avoidance and Ground Proximity warning systems. Note that parachutes do exist for smaller planes, where the risks and benefits are substantially different. A good example is the Cirrus SR-22. It seems that most cases of deploying the parachute on the Cirrus is due to pilots running out of fuel, a failure which is extremely improbable in commercial aviation.

tzs 11y ago
> Perhaps the only incident I can think of where a parachute may have helped was US Airways 1549 [...] Another is United 232, the Sioux City crash during a landing where all hydraulics had been lost, leaving the pilots with only differential thrust to steer with. Perhaps TWA 800, if I'm recalling correctly that the explosion basically decapitated the plane leaving the passenger section largely intact. Also maybe Aloha 243. That plane was able to land after a large chunk of the cabin blew out with no fatalities other than a crew member who was sucked out during the initial blow out, so like USAir 1549 a parachute would not have saved any lives in that particular incident. In that type of incident, though, it probably would have been a good option. Such incidents leave the pilots with a plane that is flying at the moment, but that has severe structural damage leaving them with no idea what maneuvers they can do without tearing it apart and no idea if it is even going to hold together in stable level flight. That would probably be an incident where your probabilities would be better with popping the 'chute.
- seanherron 11y ago
  Those all happened at least 20 years ago - I was looking at things that have happened in recent history.

Bluestrike2 11y ago

A lot of light aircraft carry whole-plane parachutes, but there's a huge difference between light aircraft and commercial jetliners. One of the heaviest loads ever dropped was a Minuteman missile in the 70s at about 86,000 pounds. NASA's Ares test drops were for a 72,000 pound load. The 787-9's maximum take-off weight is about 557,000 pounds. A 747 is worse. The 787 would require multiple round chutes with a total area equivalent to 4.8 football fields. A detachable cabin might lower the overall weight considerably, but it's still significantly more than the heaviest loads that have ever been dropped. Engineering a cabin to be detached in a controlled manner at the gate, sitting nicely on the ground with nary a care in the world, while still a difficult engineering problem, is considerably easier than engineering a cabin that can be rapidly detached at altitude safely. It would be hideously more complex, and in all likelihood, that complexity would increase the potential for a catastrophic accident while airborne. Planes are kept relatively simple, despite their actual complexity, for a reason. So it's unlikely that whole-plane parachutes would actually save lives with jetliners. Light aircraft incidents are much more common, and they're small enough to benefit significantly from a parachute.