5 ms·

A more interesting question is why one is not permitted to bring a parachute on board at one's own expense, and why there are not even token provisions for enab

A more interesting question is why one is not permitted to bring a parachute on board at one's own expense, and why there are not even token provisions for enabling their use in a situation where they might be helpful. Air travel phobia seems to be rooted in the lack of control experienced by the passenger - specifically, in the anticipation of utter helplessness in the event of a crash. A parachute would help with that, even if its role is largely ceremonial.

kgrin 17y ago
I suspect it's a practical concern if nothing else, having to do with mundane constraints like carry-on sizes. Also, as another practical matter, I highly doubt that the folks with severe air travel phobia would be even remotely trained to use a chute (which requires doing it, more than once!)
philwelch 17y ago
D.B. Cooper. Allowing people the means to parachute from airliners only enables hijacking as a means of escape from the law.
- asciilifeform 17y ago
  Then why not have garlands of frag grenades hanging on the ceiling as part of every bank's security system? Why should we enable bank robbers to escape from the law when hijackers cannot? I'd prefer to fly on planes which aren't execution chambers for criminal and witness alike. The market refuses to provide me with this option, however.
  - philwelch 17y ago
    "Then why not have garlands of frag grenades hanging on the ceiling as part of every bank's security system?" Because that would have significant side effects. Since parachutes are pretty much useless on airliners anyway, no significant side effects from banning them.
    - run4yourlives 17y ago
      Which airlines are you flying that seem to have ridiculously spacious cabins?
      - philwelch 17y ago
        I don't understand why you're asking me that--I'm not the one arguing for parachutes.
        run4yourlives 17y ago
        Ah, I re-read your comment. Sorry, I thought you were saying that there was no side effect in allowing them on the plane, to which I was pointing out that space is a serious side effect. lol, it's pre coffee reading that will do me in everytime.
  - run4yourlives 17y ago
    >The market refuses to provide me with this option, however. What are you talking about? The market already provides that option in several forms: 1. Learn to fly and fly yourself. 2. Rent a pilot and a plane and get to where you want to be. You might not be able to afford those options, but they are there.
patrickg-zill 17y ago
Parachute use at high altitudes means you have to either depressurize the entire cabin, or else create some sort of airlock which allows you to get into an unpressurized space so that you can open a door to the outside; which would add a large amount of weight and take up expensive space. The reality is, that you are in fact utterly helpless in the event of a crash.

kgrin 17y ago

I suspect it's a practical concern if nothing else, having to do with mundane constraints like carry-on sizes. Also, as another practical matter, I highly doubt that the folks with severe air travel phobia would be even remotely trained to use a chute (which requires doing it, more than once!)

philwelch 17y ago

D.B. Cooper. Allowing people the means to parachute from airliners only enables hijacking as a means of escape from the law.

asciilifeform 17y ago
Then why not have garlands of frag grenades hanging on the ceiling as part of every bank's security system? Why should we enable bank robbers to escape from the law when hijackers cannot? I'd prefer to fly on planes which aren't execution chambers for criminal and witness alike. The market refuses to provide me with this option, however.
- philwelch 17y ago
  "Then why not have garlands of frag grenades hanging on the ceiling as part of every bank's security system?" Because that would have significant side effects. Since parachutes are pretty much useless on airliners anyway, no significant side effects from banning them.
  - run4yourlives 17y ago
    Which airlines are you flying that seem to have ridiculously spacious cabins?
    - philwelch 17y ago
      I don't understand why you're asking me that--I'm not the one arguing for parachutes.
      - run4yourlives 17y ago
        Ah, I re-read your comment. Sorry, I thought you were saying that there was no side effect in allowing them on the plane, to which I was pointing out that space is a serious side effect. lol, it's pre coffee reading that will do me in everytime.
- run4yourlives 17y ago
  >The market refuses to provide me with this option, however. What are you talking about? The market already provides that option in several forms: 1. Learn to fly and fly yourself. 2. Rent a pilot and a plane and get to where you want to be. You might not be able to afford those options, but they are there.

patrickg-zill 17y ago

Parachute use at high altitudes means you have to either depressurize the entire cabin, or else create some sort of airlock which allows you to get into an unpressurized space so that you can open a door to the outside; which would add a large amount of weight and take up expensive space. The reality is, that you are in fact utterly helpless in the event of a crash.