Speaking of parachutes... why do you get a life-jacket on a plane?

[N_Molson]

Plus if you open a door, there is an explosive decompression of the cabin. Not a good idea. If you take the time for pressure equalization, it will be too late anyway. And the people will be weakened, get unconscious or die because of hypoxia and cold.

And what it is, I think, the ultimate argument : you'll make small children jump from 30,000 feet, including newborns ? And aged people ? No way. Giving parachutes to the healthiest adults would be unethical.

Going that way, there could be ejection seats only for the pilots, no big technical problems... But who would accept to climb into the plane, then ?

 

[T.Neo]

At least this is a step in the right direction:

Ballistic parachutes are an interesting idea, and perhaps a useful application in some cases, but probably not in others (ballistic parachute on an A380?).

Plus if you open a door, there is an explosive decompression of the cabin. Not a good idea. If you take the time for pressure equalization, it will be too late anyway.

Depends. Maybe you can equalise the pressure at a rate that is not too slow, nor dangerously fast. But it could still have effects (maybe on people's ears and stuff).

On the other hand, one wonders what effect the airflow outside the cabin would have...

 

[Turbinator]

Yesterday we humans were a viral infection. And today you seem so concerned about saving our 'souls' ... why the radical change of heart in the last 24 hours?

It's a same theme, preservation of life. In the first case, the preservation of the tree, in this case of people on planes.

 

[N_Molson]

Or fill the plane with Soyuz SA (you can remove the heat shield)... Of course, you're going to loose in capacity. :lol:

 

[Hielor]

Air France Flight 4590 - 109 souls

As already pointed out, the passengers of 4590 most certainly did not have time to evacuate via parachute, and the low altitude that they were at for the duration would've likely prevented successful parachute deployment anyway.

You have also failed to respond to the people who've pointed out that in an attempted evacuation at that altitude, you'd pass out from hypoxia before you even got to the door (can't exactly carry the oxygen mask with you), and even if you did make it out the door you'd pass out from hypoxia, die from hypothermia, and probably be splattered from airspeed before you got low enough to open your chute.

It's a nice thing to think about in theory, but in reality, parachutes wouldn't be particularly helpful for untrained passengers.

 

[Jarvitä]

Or, they could install separate, "paranoid class" seating with proper ejection seats, inflatable g-suits, flare guns, the whole deal. You'd have to be declared physically fit to use the ejection seat and pass an exam on wilderness survival in order to qualify. If it proved popular and profitable, it'd become the norm eventually. Or maybe it would help people realise just how ridiculously they're overreacting about the 1 in N chance of an airline disaster.

 

[FADEC]

Why is it that you get a life-jacket on a plane?

Because the majority of crashes (about 80%) do happen shortly after take off or shortly before landing and a lot of airports are in range of water. The Hudson River landing is a good example.

That is like getting a parachute on a ship.

No, it isn't. A Ship does not fly. But a plane does either land or crash on water in certain cases. Hudson River landing again.

How many lives would have been saved if people where given parachutes on planes, instead of life-jackets?

Practically none.

I can understand why people are asking those questions. But if one takes a closer look, it turns out to be nonsense.

Passengers are not used to parachuting usually. Also, as said before, about 80% of all crashes happen shortly before landing or shortly after take off. It's mostly just seconds between cause and crash. Even if you would have a plane full of experienced parachutists, it would not make any difference. Let alone talking about "ordinary" passengers at any age, with bodily defects, no experince with parachutes and no relation to it at all.

Jumping out of a plane with a parachute safely requires training and courage, and a situation and plane that is made for parachuting. You can't just open the doors, equip the passengers with parachutes and prepare them for an upcoming crash. Most crashes happen that quick that most passengers and not even the cabin personnel does realize what's going to happen within the next few seconds.

How many lives did life-jackets save on planes?

I don't think there are numbers. But life-jackets did safe lives whilst parachutes make no sense.

 

[Ark]

Going that way, there could be ejection seats only for the pilots, no big technical problems... But who would accept to climb into the plane, then ?

Now there's a fun idea.

"Ladies and gentlemen, it appears that the starboard wing has come detached from the aircraft, so...we're going to leave now. Thank you for flying Delta"

:lol:

 

[jedidia]

"Ladies and gentlemen, it appears that the starboard wing has come detached from the aircraft, so...we're going to leave now. Thank you for flying Delta"

I remember a joke where the captain's final words were "thank you to the swimmers, and good bye to the non-swimmers", which actually goes quite well to illustrate why live vests are a good idea.

If I'm not mistaken, most plane disasters happen on altitudes too low for parachutes to be effective anyways.

 

[SiberianTiger]

Solution: watch between 6:30 and 7:55

 

[Ae7flux]

Ballistic parachutes are an interesting idea, and perhaps a useful application in some cases, but probably not in others (ballistic parachute on an A380?).

Coincidently, just this morning I was thinking about the idea of implementing a ballistic parachute on an airliner. Damn difficult, granted, and initially costly, but surely not impossible. You'd probably need some exotic materials (ultra high tensile cables - just get them off the space elevator) and some fancy control systems if you're using multiple chutes and multiple deployments which I assume you would, but none of that is the stuff of science fiction any more.

Of course I'm not an engineer so I may just be dreaming (If you are feel free to correct me).

 

[Grover]

all ill say is that if you found the plane had crashed in the Caribbean, and the jet was on fire for some reason (just humour me, ok?) youd be glad you had that life jacket, youd float for a few hours before tiring, rather than only a half-hour

but parachutes? nah, then youd need parachute training before you flew. better to put your life in the hands of the airlines safety (which is the #1 nowadays) and the pilot's skill

 

[N_Molson]

Coincidently, just this morning I was thinking about the idea of implementing a ballistic parachute on an airliner. Damn difficult, granted, and initially costly, but surely not impossible. You'd probably need some exotic materials (ultra high tensile cables - just get them off the space elevator) and some fancy control systems if you're using multiple chutes and multiple deployments which I assume you would, but none of that is the stuff of science fiction any more.

You need a hardpoint to attach the parachute (airliners have a thin hull), and room to store the parachute. Also, a multi-parachutes design could prove more efficient.

 

[Richy]

This ballistic parachute thingy was already discused in an other forum. The problem is, you've more fancy technology that can fail. What if one of the chutes pyros triggers unintentionally while inflight? Or what if it fails to open when needed? Actually, you're adding just more that can go wrong this way.

To parachuting out of a plane: I think it's easier to collect all the passangers near the landing site, than search and collect them spread over a vast area. Imagine some jungle, desert or the pacific, where people are bailing out from cruise altitued. Good luck finding them again!

 

[Sky Captain]

What is the heaviest item that is ever safely landed with a parachute? That would give a good ballpark estimate how big airliner could be given ballistic parachute.

 

[Chub777]

Think about it. A plane flying at around Mach 0.8 and 40,000 feet. Imaging bailing out with those conditions. Not to mention the temperature and the chances of "human strikes". Also life jackets help when the plane crashes into the ocean.

 

[Ae7flux]

You wouldn't necessarily need hard points. Remember the point is to get the passengers down in one piece - the plane is expendable. (I even considered blowing of the wings but maybe I've just been watching too much Mythbusters.) You could, for example, have a sling under or built in to the skin. And having multiple chutes would reduce the effective scale factor.

As for reliability: I seem to remember that when airbags were first introduced people were terribly worried about them going off accidentally. Now nobody gives it a second thought.

 

[Chub777]

How about the a mechanism separates the forward, mid and rear sections of the aircraft (just like Soyuz) and have parachutes on those? Or what about Vostok style?

 

[Ae7flux]

Sky Captain - I Googled your question and found that NASA are already on the job.http://thefutureofthings.com/pod/6724/ares-super-chute-tests.html Only 50 000 lbs so ann A380 is still a way off but an a320 might be doable.

 

[Ark]

You need a hardpoint to attach the parachute (airliners have a thin hull), and room to store the parachute. Also, a multi-parachutes design could prove more efficient.

I saw a little documentary recently about those parachutes for small planes. The aircraft in the picture was basically designed around the parachute, complete with structural reinforcements and breakaway panels on the outer skin. They actually use a small solid rocket motor to deploy the thing.

While it's an awesome idea for small private planes, I don't think you could scale the thing up for an A380. If you did, there would have to be four or five large chutes, which would be a good idea to provide some sliver of hope in the event of a breakup.

Which brings us back to cost verses benefit, are they going to sacrifice seats for paying passengers to put in a parachute system? Especially when every passenger that walks away injured is a lawsuit waiting to happen?