Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

waffles-n-gravy t1_itqqu2l wrote

Reply to comment by happydgaf in TIL that flight recorders must be able to withstand an acceleration of 3400 g for 6.5 milliseconds and that this is roughly equivalent to an impact velocity of 270 knots (310 mph; 500 km/h). by IchBinKoloss

It could be done, it's a money issue.

−37

happydgaf t1_itqt9up wrote

You can just say you have no idea how and leave it at that. If you had any idea how heavy and cumbersome and dangerous ejection seats were you’d understand what an impractical idea it is on a commercial liner

23

waffles-n-gravy t1_itqtyjy wrote

Everyones downvoting me, but I refuse to believe that a planet about to send people to mars, can't really figure out a way to keep planes from killing everyone in a crash. Of course I don't know how to do it, I also don't know how to build rockets to mars, but that doesn't mean someone out there isn't smart enough to do it.

−28

happydgaf t1_itquvbg wrote

“About to send people to mars” uhhh yea that’s not happening for a long time. We haven’t even been back to the moon since the 70’s. Just because the idea exists doesn’t make it worth investing in. The safety rate of planes makes the idea of 150+ ejection seats completely absurd. Do you realize how heavy these would be and you want them to have enough energy to stay in the air? Do you want to be able to afford airline flights? You’re missing very basic parts of why this would never take place.

13

waffles-n-gravy t1_itqwkt3 wrote

Well, lucky for the rest of us some people out there dream up ways to do the impossible, like inventing airplanes in the first place. If everyone thought the way you do we would still be living in caves.

−4

happydgaf t1_itr04ae wrote

Living in caves? Bro thinks just because something is way too cost inefficient and bad idea overall that we shouldn’t keep designing safety features. There are better methods. Even fighter pilots can be career endingly injured after one ejection from the immense G forces applied to the body ejecting from a jet. There have been parachutes deigned into the bodies of small aircraft like Cessna’s that will safely float a plane to the ground in the event of a catastrophic failure. At least this train of thought has a more realistic application than 150 explosive charged ejection seats ripping off the roof of a 747…

9

Skulldetta t1_itr9o8l wrote

They're not installing 150 ejection seats in airliners because they think it's impossible, they're doing it because they know it's a shit idea. Same reason why they don't have parachutes under every seat. What the hell do you think would happen if an untrained and unprotected civilian was blown out of a pressurized cabin at high speeds and high altitude? This is real life, not an episode of Wile E. Coyote & The Road Runner lmao.

6

OneBlueHopeUTFT t1_itrc0nz wrote

Now if only you’d manage to do the impossible and stop talking when you have nothing intelligent to say.

2

kingzilch t1_itqv98a wrote

Nobody's sending anyone to Mars. Quit listening to Elorn Mursk.

3

waffles-n-gravy t1_itqwnyo wrote

Fuck Elon, but it will happen

−1

kingzilch t1_itrsw0z wrote

I mean, maybe eventually, but no one is about to go to Mars any time soon.

2

Citysurvivor t1_itr0q9n wrote

It's not a money issue. Even a profit-driven aviation industry still cares about safety to some degree, because the public is deathly afraid of flying and any perception of danger leads to cancelled tickets and lost profits.

It just so happens that there are better ways to make a plane safer than to implement ejection seats, which (by the way) tend to break bones and ligaments in the spine. Maybe it would be better to prevent the need to eject from a plane in the first place.

5