4 ms·

In case someone asks "childish question" why airplanes do not have parachutes, of course they could have those, but the cost of design and implementation on suc

In case someone asks "childish question" why airplanes do not have parachutes, of course they could have those, but the cost of design and implementation on such large scale of tens of thousands of planes, outweighs any outcry caused by few crashes that occur per year. Hence no law that would force airlines/airplanes to implement those and airlines/airplanes are last when it comes to lavishly spending money out of their free will, even if it means saving one extra life.

coatmatter 9y ago
> the cost of design and implementation on such large scale of tens of thousands of planes, outweighs any outcry caused by few crashes that occur per year Or it would remove money from where it could be better spent. There are some light aircraft (such as some experimental ultralights) that do have parachutes. Frankly, I'd prefer to fly in an airliner or other planes that don't have such warning bells and red flags all over. Here's an example: What would the effect be if all passengers who board a plane or cruiseliner were required to wear life jackets before take off just in case of the remote chance of needing to face a disaster over water? And a possibly more controversial example: Helmets and bullet vests can save some lives. At what point should the focus be on legislating on their mandatory use, versus fixing the problems at the source? I'd class parachutes, helmets and bullet vets as PPE in the chart over here - resources and attention is always finite even before we get into the topic of freedom: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hierarchy_of_hazard_controls https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hierarchy_of_hazard_controls
stordoff 9y ago
I'd also wonder if it's a net positive - being forced to stay on the plane and hope that it ends well vs. potentially jumping early when it turns out to not be necessary. Untrained, panicked people jumping out of a moving plane sounds like a recipe for disaster.

coatmatter 9y ago

> the cost of design and implementation on such large scale of tens of thousands of planes, outweighs any outcry caused by few crashes that occur per year Or it would remove money from where it could be better spent. There are some light aircraft (such as some experimental ultralights) that do have parachutes. Frankly, I'd prefer to fly in an airliner or other planes that don't have such warning bells and red flags all over. Here's an example: What would the effect be if all passengers who board a plane or cruiseliner were required to wear life jackets before take off just in case of the remote chance of needing to face a disaster over water? And a possibly more controversial example: Helmets and bullet vests can save some lives. At what point should the focus be on legislating on their mandatory use, versus fixing the problems at the source? I'd class parachutes, helmets and bullet vets as PPE in the chart over here - resources and attention is always finite even before we get into the topic of freedom: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hierarchy_of_hazard_controls https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hierarchy_of_hazard_controls

stordoff 9y ago

I'd also wonder if it's a net positive - being forced to stay on the plane and hope that it ends well vs. potentially jumping early when it turns out to not be necessary. Untrained, panicked people jumping out of a moving plane sounds like a recipe for disaster.