Passengers on airliners do not have parachutes...why?

It's a really simple question, with a really simple answer. The airlines are cheap, and do not care about the lives of their passengers. Why do people fly, and not have parachutes? Make them available, and if people don't want to put them on, then so be it. But, I don't care if you have 50, or 300 people, you should have a parachute. You could even have it be an emergency, one shot parachute, and not a huge dual chute.

Oh, but wait, that takes up precious cargo space, which means less people, and less money...right?

Why is no one asking this question. In all of the years of these disasters, quite honestly, it is the fault of these airlines that they do not provide parachutes in case of a disaster. So what if only one life is saved, is it not worth anything to them?

Because the loss of cabin pressure would be enough to kill you almost instantly.

350 people jumping out of the same aeroplane at the same time is a recipe for red rain?

Not to mention there is not even enough room as it is on these planes. Remember that ONE inch you have to move your seat forward upon landing?

originally posted by: Jonjonj
350 people jumping out of the same aeroplane at the same time is a recipe for red rain?

Maybe a few would survive... That has to be better than everyone dying...

And I understand cabin pressure could be an issue, but couldn't a pilot drop the plane to a lower height and slower speed to make it possible?

The plane would be a smoldering heap by the time everyone got their parachute on.

a reply to: Catacomb

Why do people fly, and not have parachutes?

Optimism?

a reply to: Catacomb

In most airliner crashes, having parachutes on board would not have made any difference, not least because most crashes occur on landing or takeoff.

In the case of a mid-air problem, it is far more prudent to attempt to bring the aircraft down safely and not have 300 people billowing out of the aircraft over god-knows where, with no survival gear. Don't forget, most of the planet is ocean and of the rest, much of it is isolated and inhospitable terrain.

EDIT: To add, if the aircraft broke up in mid-air, such as MH17 for example, no one would even have the chance to don the parachutes through loss of conciousness or being hurled out the aircraft in a split second.

a reply to: jhn7537

But given that a huge amount of aeroplane crises actually result in a positive outcome, would not the option of jumping before the real last moment of possibility cause more deaths?

What this post said ^^

You can't just strap a parachute on and jump. That's why when you go skydiving you have to go through training, and most places make you do a certain number of tandem jumps before they let you go solo. You have to know how to put the chute on correctly, when to pull the handle, how to steer it, how to land... Otherwise it won't do you any good to put it on, because you'd end up seriously injured or dead from the jump.

originally posted by: jhn7537
And I understand cabin pressure could be an issue, but couldn't a pilot drop the plane to a lower height and slower speed to make it possible?

In the case of MH-17 the plane disintegrated at altitude, parachutes would have made no difference.

a reply to: thesmokingman

The Lockerbie disaster had people still alive on the ground...don't tell me everyone would die instantly. That's simply not true, and would only be true in a total catastrophic explosion of immense size.

I actually came up with a solution to this in 1989; All airplanes need to be designed in a way that each seat is a bubble pod/parachute. It would look like a clear, plastic ball. If the plane was going down then the top would blow off the plane and all pods would escape. If they landed in water, they would float and be supplied with oxygen and other emergency supplies.

It could be done no matter what altitude but do you think that elites give two #s about people?

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: jhn7537
And I understand cabin pressure could be an issue, but couldn't a pilot drop the plane to a lower height and slower speed to make it possible?

In the case of MH-17 the plane disintegrated at altitude, parachutes would have made no difference.

Then engineer a solution instead of using 100 year old technology that states, "oopsie, in the case of depressurization, you are all dead."

How about every seat acts as an ejection seat, in the case of a catastrophic failure of the plane? Oh wait...I forgot...that would cost money to R&D, and implement.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
You can't just strap a parachute on and jump. That's why when you go skydiving you have to go through training, and most places make you do a certain number of tandem jumps before they let you go solo. You have to know how to put the chute on correctly, when to pull the handle, how to steer it, how to land... Otherwise it won't do you any good to put it on, because you'd end up seriously injured or dead from the jump.

But if a plane crashes you are likely seriously injured or dead anyways... I don't need training in using a parachute, but I'll take my chances with a parachute and no experience over sitting in my chair and hoping for the best when the plane crashes to the ground

you need to know a bit about parachuting and flight techniques, also people and rescuing them if a problem occurs.

To be able to shuffle 200+ people off an airliner, you need to hold the aircraft straight and level, and slow if you are in an emergency and the aircraft has a problem you aren't able to do that.

Also by the time they are all off you would have scattered these individuals for miles, making search and rescue a bugger.

Peoples parachutes fail and the fall, well they have million dollar law suits.

Its easier and safer if you keep everyone together, bring the aircraft together with the people.

I would continue on but my migraine has kicked in and killing me, will be back later

Wee Mad

Cabin pressure derps - what about those gas masks that fall down in front of sitting passengers. Oh wait they don't have them anymore - don't want anyone to make it out alive and tell the story.

thats something i've always thought about.

originally posted by: Fylgje
I actually came up with a solution to this in 1989; All airplanes need to be designed in a way that each seat is a bubble pod/parachute. It would look like a clear, plastic ball. If the plane was going down then the top would blow off the plane and all pods would escape. If they landed in water, they would float and be supplied with oxygen and other emergency supplies.

It could be done no matter what altitude but do you think that elites give two #s about people?

Something like that is exactly what I am talking about. Why is technology stagnant? Oh yeah, because every penny counts in the pockets of people who DO NOT CARE.

originally posted by: thesmokingman
Because the loss of cabin pressure would be enough to kill you almost instantly.

William Rankin - The man who parachuted through a thunderstorm from 40,000 feet:

en.wikipedia.org...