I think the main reason life jackets are on board are to make pax feel more comfortable. I personally feel alot more comfortable in the knowledge that I have a lifejacket when I fly over the sea than if I didnt.
I struggle to understand how any pilot/crew member would ask about the relevance of a lifejacket on board an aircraft? OK, maybe if the aircraft NEVER flew over a drop of water it would be fine to get rid of them, but otherwise they are a vital piece of safety equipment on board any aircraft.
Why not ask the same question over at PPRuNe?
But I really cannot let this one go......
I never said it was irrelevant
Ifty who in the post previously wrote
I fail to understand the relevance of this discussion
Ponder on this .....
A Formula One car can impact a wall at high speed catch fire and the driver can walk away.
A few years ago the driver would have died instantly. Someone said let's take the design emphasis off the engine and think of the driver.
In our own general motoring, Car Manufacturer's designed crumple zones, airbags, abs brakes. If we were to go without questioning a car design, we'd all still be relying on the seat belt.
They put a ballistic parachute on a Cirrus ????? Someone thinking outside the box there, bet you they'll be the norm in a few years.
Meanwhile we all sit in a high tech multi million euro aircraft, and underneath your seat you have a life jacket and a safety card in you pocket in front of you.
Have you never wondered that maybe they could do something else here ?
What would you do if you survived a ditching in the middle of the Irish Sea only to find there were no life jackets on board? I dont think youd be very happy
Very true, but how many commercial aircraft have ditched in the Irish Sea v how many fly over it every minute ?
I would never consider flying over any sea in a GA aircraft without one.
I think the main reason life jackets are on board are to make pax feel more comfortable.
You hit the nail on the head, but ever wonder are they really all you'll need.
I'll now shut up. You can all post away and have the last word I wont reply cause I know when I'm beaten........ and in a hundred years time when goin on Holidays to Mars on Ryanspace or Space Lingus the cabin crew will be still be showing you how to put on your nice life jackets.
To Infinity and Beyond ......with your nice life jacket of course Buzz.
While I promised my last word on this, you've dug it up again.
My Dear Friend
NO ONE on that plane was saved or aided by the shaggin wearing of a life jacket.
Look at the pictures they are all on the wing waiting for the flotilla of boats that are all in attendance.
Here is a comment from the same web page that you kindly directed me
Suprising number of people appear to have left the aircraft without their life jackets looking at the photos.
This ditching or you or anyone will convince me they are of any benefit in a commercial accident.
Maybe the fact that pilot skill and the aircraft ability to remain floating is of much more design significance than the donning of those shaggin lifejackets !!!!!!
Now you have me all worked up again.
When has a commercial airliner sucessfully ditched on water and had the passengers exit out on the slides?
Aircrafts disintegrate when they hit the water !!
This one didn't in spectacular fashion.
I used to crack up when I saw the sketch on the airline safety card (located in the pocket in front of your seat) with the 747 floating in the Ocean with its slides out like Chitty Chitty Bang Bang
With all the news photos this week you must've been splitting your sides.
Billy Connolly once asked a pertinent question.......You are on a flight from London to Glasgow....the plane is going down, and you have a life jacket ????? does everyone shout up at the pilot "Jeeze Jimmy aim for a puddle will ya?"
Well the Clyde would now seem to be a better option than urban Glasgow.
Trigger, I enjoy winding you up!!
C'mon, it doesn't take much imagination to envisage slightly different circumstances where life jackets could have been a huge deciding factor in the number of survivors. If the aircraft sank faster, if they had been thirty minutes from rescue rather than five. Many of them were actually wearing jackets and the arriving ferries seemed to think it important to throw their own jackets to the people on the wing.
The final report will reveal how much time was available to the crew to prepare for ditching and to what extent the passengers were briefed. I think this event will ensure that life jackets and associated procedures and briefings will be emphasised even more and will be with us for a long time to come.
Now, you'll be surprised to hear I actually agree with you. If someone could devise a cheap lightweight easily maintained and tamper proof smoke hood we'd both be happy.
Look if you want to pick holes in what I've ranted about I'm easy pickings. Of course they are of benefit, and Mr Crow you are correct one life is enough to justify their existance, but ........
It's the over emphasis on their safety significance, untill this brave buachaill put it down in (on) the river, really the stats are not there to rely on them being the sole passenger safety aid !!!
As for winding me up ! maybe I'm winding the lot of ye up !!!!
Progress at last !!!! Excellent safety design consideration by our airlines, move em further away from the passenger cause they are being nicked.
Wont continue with this again or I'll be chewed up again. But if as you said on another thread re Wexford coast ditching some light aircraft have underwing lilo's, that's real design thinking, not putting whistles on life jackets. Uh oh I'm slipping again I'll shut up.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests