Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
Miss-Bomarc
Aug 1, 2009

ErIog posted:

Why would the pilot pull the chute if they felt like they had enough control to glide down?
The assumption is that the badass superpilot who can keep the aircraft under absolute control with one wing and no engine will, if given an airframe chute, turn into a complete retard who'll pop the chute the first time a passenger farts sideways.

That said...

My Lil Parachute posted:

To me the main argument against mandatory parachutes is - there are a huge number of aircraft already out there and their design simply never allowed for such a modification. In many cases the retrofit would be prohibitively expensive - how would you add a chute to a Piper Cub?
Exactly. And it's not "hate all fun", it's "regulatory capture". Companies that make airframe parachutes think that mandatory parachutes are a swell idea.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Miss-Bomarc
Aug 1, 2009

hobbesmaster posted:

Would you attach a parachute to your bike so you can slow down in case your brakes fail?
If my bike travelled 210 miles an hour at 3000 feet altitude, I might consider it :rolleye:

Miss-Bomarc
Aug 1, 2009
This thread has successfully convinced me that seatbelts in cars are a stupid idea because if we didn't have them we'd be better aware of the risk and drive so slowly that harmful accidents would not occur!

  • Locked thread