It sounds stupid and smart at the same time

Some smaller planes do infact have parachutes but larger aircraft are pretty heavy so you would need a REALLY BIG parachute which would make the aircraft even larger than they already are which would need larger amounts of fuel, larger runways and a larger overall airport.

The ideal solution would be to design the passenger compartment to be a jettison able compartment. Like an escape capsule, the compartment would be pressurized, light weight , and buoyant. There are drawbacks although. The compartment would not be steerable and could hit power lines, building etc however I'd rather take my chance with a parachute escape system than slamming into ground in an airliner). Furthermore, a jettison able passenger compartment is useless in takeoff and landing crashes... which is the vast majority of crashes. Also does not help in cases of mid air collisions or situations where there is not enough time to deploy such a system... like slamming into a mountaintop shrouded by clouds. A jettisoning compartment system is technically possible but the reason airlines do not have them is cost. The cost of redesigning an airliner with a jettison able passenger compartment and related systems would be enormous!!! As would be replacing every existing airline in service with one of these new aircraft. Keep in mind 747s were designed in the 1970s and still fly today. It's more economical to keep such aircraft flying than replacing with a new one (in most cases) Having to replace every aircraft in an airline fleet ... The airlines would go bankrupt. Hate to say it but it is more cost effective to let people die in crashes and let insurance pay the settlements than it would be to implement jettisoning passenger compartments. Maybe a soft padded Nerf airplane that bounces would be less expensive.

Me too always think about that

Most of the time Plane flies above the Ocean...so there's no use of Parachute inthis case

How come people are not noticing that 😆😆

Pardon but could you please explain me the meaning of C&H?

@@shivanshsrivastav9037 Cyanide and Happiness. It's a very popular series of web comics, they do animated cartoons as well. They're mostly on the dark side of humor though. Might not be to your taste, but hey, who knows?!

@@YeOldeKamikaze Thanks for the explanation. I will definitely check it out.

And they say airplanes are the safest way to travel Lol

@@MybeautifulandamazingPrincess because way less people die in commercial jets

@@pantac4493 Compared to cars right? That's what you mean, well that's mostly a myth

@@MybeautifulandamazingPrincess In 2021, 137 people died due to an airplane crash. Meanwhile 3700 people die in a car accident every day

@@sk8jackass1 That's because there way more cars on the road everyday than commercial planes flying. Clearly there will be more car crashes. But go analyze how many plane crashes have occurred, way more than I'd feel comfortable with Also cars have a much higher survivability rate. Compare how many people have survived car crashes to how many have survived plane crashes or forced landing's, and the statics start to look less favorable for commercial flight. Fact is if something goes wrong while you're on a commercial planes, it's over

How does a flying plane get rid of unruly passengers *"delaying which plane?"*

@@samugote like a plane the joke too went right over your head...

@@samugote Huh?

@@kamisama2616 lmao perfect timing

@@samugote u don't need a parachute...you just need a brain

In short, you're a liability if they suddenly take care of you lmao

Buy why doesn't the PLANE have a parachute? Like one giant parachute that deploys and potentially stops the plane from crashing

@@cjohnson9211 That's a workable idea. The plane must be stabilized and the parachute deployed before the plane reaches the critical point. Decisions. Turn and land at the nearest airport or deploy the parachute. Hope they look into it, and develop the safety feature for it.

@@cjohnson9211 a parachute system big and strong enough might just be impractical. I recall seeing a video about that right here on YT.

That's why we are all told to brace lol

Yes that meme😂

Same 😂

Such unexpected reference 🤣🤣🤣

@@shubham.1172 yep

over 6000 times?! that is a jump a day for 16 years and a half with no days off you either added a zero by mistake or u do several jumps a day as an instructor or something or maybe u just had a very long career especially that u mentioned DC30, maybe a military career (not hating here, genuinely curious) would like to know how one can accumulate that amount of jumps

you should buy lottery ticket or something

@@UV0023 😂😂

@@UV0023 I mean he can jump multiple times in one day right?😂 Lol even if the number is cap we get he jumped alot

@@UV0023 maybe, it were his job? Taking person that want to do skydiving and guide them, so he should go together, i dunno about how much dive you take in a years if you a skydiver instructor.

Genius idea

I can see it working..

MONEYYYYYY! is the major deal as told in the video.

@@chayanka_kaushik if it becomes a standard for planes than it wouldn’t cost airlines as much due to economies of scale. The military uses similar systems like this to deploy troops or cargo.

@@motubak1622 I understand. I'd love aircrafts to be like that but you see passengers are not very trained for such a jump compared to a military personnel. A commerical flight flies very high in the sky and jumping off from that point will freeze and choke them to death. So they'll need a special suit and a O2 tank before jumping. People are not trained for such calamities and will panic making the entire operation futile and impossible to conduct successfully. Also if you're suggesting to equip the seat and make the passengers wear a suit during the flight then that would not be a very comfortable flight. Airlines are competing for a luxurious and comfortable experience. Assuming everyone just jumps off the plane they're not trained for, everyone will be scattered and rescuing all of them upon landing won't be easy. Someone might land on a sea or a tree or get stuck in a powerline. It'll be a bigger mess than staying put inside the flight until the captain safely lands the flight for which he is professionally trained for. This sounds more economical and safer.

idk why nobody is talking about this 😆

yeeeap 😂

Yes it is... he's an Indian using AI text to speech

There's no problem with opening the door ! Just SLOW THE AIRPLANE DOWN FIRST, then opening the door would be EASY. There should be parachutes stowed beneath your seat and the overhead luggage compartment should be massive enough to store all your carry on luggage.

Fit the airplane itself with multiple parachutes

Thank you

You wouldn't be able to open the door and everyone would be laughing at you in your pressurised suit.

@@richardyewchuk1508 You can't just slow an airplane down when it has no engine. You could possibly stall it for a few seconds, but I'd like to see 200 people who've just had their eardrums burst from a rapid depressurisation escaping an unpressurised plane without any sort of breathing apperatus in those precious few seconds. You'd have to have some kind of massive door like in a C-130 and force passengers to wear pressurised diving suits 24/7.

Nope. Biggest fear would be getting your eyelid caught on a nail

I think it will be if parachute won't even open 🙂

How many more cars is there then planes.. ??

@@rockysanchez8203 I never calculated that, but obviously alot more cars exist than airplanes.

But people survive from car crashes

@@kunalsingh1944 That's true, but I also enjoy the views on planes better, and flights get you to your destination faster than a car would.

@@bracebrooks967 yes and more fuel means more pollution but, hey it is super duper fast

Because the weight would rip the parachute. And it wouldn't stay balanced

First off, the shape, size and weight of the plane is totally different than a capsule re-entering the atmosphere. There is a thing called air pressure which allows the plane to glide through it like how fins on a shark glides through water. This affects the trajectory of how a plane will fall due to the wings and rudders the planes have. (For example, have you ever stuck your hand out the window of a moving car and realized that if you have your hand flat against the air you can feel the air pushing your hand as opposed to having it cutting through the air at a straight position?) A parachute requires that an object falls directly downward without spiraling out of control because if a parachute some how gets twisted in mid air and isn't catching the air pressure that allows it to billow out then of course it's not going to save anything. Also, a plane is not meant to land with the nose downward neither. I'm sure that's been painfully obvious from the many crashes that have occurred before, but I'm assuming you're thinking that a plane can fall downward in a horizontal position which I can assure you will be impossible due to the momentum the plane might already have from traveling forward. Try folding an paper airplane and then have it drop from a horizontal position with the nose facing forward. See how that plays out. I'm sure you'll realize that the paper airplane will glide towards the ground instead of falling flat on it's belly. There is a lot of physics and logic that goes into play with this and why you never see a plane utilize a parachute. I'm not a rocket scientist or anything but a little bit of critical thinking and knowledge of how things work will help determine that this indeed is a terrible idea for a plane.

Easy, too expansive.

@@kaydens6964 Not for everyday. Duh!!

@@lemmetellyousomething679 expensive

Great idea.

Because they need to stop at train intersection anyway ... (sarcastic joke) the fact that our society is still at is beginning and intelligence is lacking in so many aspect , we just need to evolve more i think . The general human intelligence is so low that leader can make decision like this to get more money in their pocket and nobody cares , thus , make us human , even more a general lower intelligent society

Because if there's an accident the bus driver won't be able to go around and get everyone out of their seatbelt. And the seatbacks alone are enough to take in the shock to the passengers in case of a crash kind of like airbags.

@@emfromthechi Wouldn't be a problem to have seatbelts that open automatically after a crash

@@benfrese3573 easier said than done.

no, planes (all planes) glide extremely well and only experience turbulence in extreme weather or sudden temperature drops : they technically glide the majority of the flight assisted by the engines.

@@AuralVirus basically exactly what I said which is why I agree parachutes aren’t needed

so its better to accept death than have a parachute just in case?

@@emman5138 I suspect having a parachute handy wouldn't make much difference. There's also the matter of getting out of the airplane. When it's at altitude, the pressure inside ensures it's impossible to open the doors.

I eat crayons

Pizza is better than pasta

Im sorry, the average person will learn about parachutes how? Parachute landing falls etc?

the issue is how to get training

The windows on a plane taste like clear

Isn’t it funny that families cannot sue an airline if a loved one dies in a crash, because they only get as much is 100 grand? And isn’t it even funnier that your life insurance policy is null and void if you die in a plane crash

@@yell0wberry this is incorrect. life insurance almost always covers commercial flight crashes, and you absolutely can sue an airline due to a crash. The 100k figure is in IMF SDR and outdated (it's more like 170k USD at current rates), and is the figure for strict liability. You can sue for higher damages if you can demonstrate that the airline was at fault through negligence. In most cases, the airlines settle with passengers for something substantially higher than the 170k.

@@AmbientMorality With your technical explanations, I was almost ready to agree with you 100%, however, I guess you need to take a closer look at the fine print of most life insurance policies, go ahead and I’ll wait (you’re not going to find a credible life insurance company that does a payout if someone dies in a plane crash)

@@yell0wberry I genuinely don't see where that is? There's definitely aviation exclusions, but those are generally limited to private pilots/students actually controlling a plane.

@@AmbientMorality All I’m saying is the last two life insurance policies I had, I was enough of an oddball to actually read the fine print, and both policies indicated that the policyholder was disqualified from collecting insurance if they died in a plane crash, died courtesy of a suicide, or died courtesy of participating in a felony crime. Perhaps the policy has been updated, I’ll go through the fine print once again just to make sure (not that the policy holder could possibly collect insurance if they’re dead, LOL)

Glad you liked it!

That's an interesting idea. However, there are limitations to that as well. Commercial planes are extremely heavy objects going at a very high speed. A whole-plane parachute that supports that kind of mass would have to be extremely large in size and consequently, very expensive. Interestingly, this idea of whole-plane parachutes is actually implemented in some small planes.

@@Scienceabc Yup - you'd need a parachute that took up half of the volume of the plane.

@@Scienceabc i was thinking the same why dont they use two big parachutes one on the tail and one above the cockpit..... you can dump the fuel and the crash impact wont be that hard and you can save some lifes

@@MarkMichalowski that's not true. Apollo capsules carried chutes and they didn't take up half of the volume of it.

@@i-heart-google7132 Apollo capsule weights 100 times less than a commercial airplane, and was designed to withstand the forces entering atmosphere at almost 10 times the speed of sound. Jet plane built to withstand a parachute landing would be like a nuclear submarine, and could not even fly.

I haven't. But I still know they are useless.

Nope.

Did you stop watching the video the second he said that? Because he explained a workaround right after.

Why is this? Do skydivers use ballistic chutes?

Rule no.1 of the internet: everyone's an expert.

people willingly pay for driving lessons, why not a 1st time flier simulated parachute training a month prior to flight or when convenient but license must be obtained - we put far more safety into cars that people pay for willingly -you can tell me a millionaire if offered a parachute for £500 would turn it down when flying business?/1st class?.

@@AuralVirus Well let's see here: A: Parachutes are bulky and space is at a serious premium on a plane, where are you going to store them? B: To jump out of a plane you must be low enough to not need oxygen & flying slow enough to survive the jump - not likely in an in flight emergency. C: You need to exit using a door behind the wings so only part of the exits on a plane would work & when people panic at the word parachute you can bet they'll use the wrong door. D: Finally, there's the simple fact that learning to parachute is more complicated than the simple class / simulation you're suggesting. Also, people lose their minds when airport security takes too long - what on earth would make you think they'd accept being made to pay & take the time for a parachuting class prior to flying (which isn't cheap even without the cost of the class). Shall I go on?

why would you make people take a test an hour before the flight? obviously as a first time flyer they would have to gain a "licence" not different to aplying for a passport just with a simple profeciency test in how to deply and land - it's a proventative measure that may save some - if a plane crash everyone dies, with chute even if 1 survived it would be worth it, likely more would.@@swbigfan1

Either they weren't paying attention on video or they are just really dumb to think they have better chance of staying alive by jumping from plane at a height that even the pro skydivers wouldn't attempt to jump from.

No it doesn't. It explains why they would work with some extra investment from airlines.

@@KamikazeCommie501 Nope. You clearly weren't watching the video. To invest in parachutes for every passenger, you'd literally end up with such an overbuilt plane that it wouldn't be feasible. Plus it definitely did say that jumping from height, fighting with panicky passengers, the build of complex parachutes, none of it is feasible for commercial airlines.

@@AndoCommando1000 'feasible' = too expensive. That's not an argument, it's an excuse. How much are the airline companies paying you?

@@KamikazeCommie501 the video literally explains that not everyone is trained to skydiving, so not only the ticket prices would be expensive, the investment would be redundant too

Glad you enjoyed it!

Still better than a 99% death rate …

better than becoming paste on the ground

Landing in a swimming pool during a Swedish bikini team party?

It would take few minutes or an hour for backup and they might rescue few. It's better than letting everyone die.

better than serious death on air plane.. 😂😂😂

That's another good option.These airlines know these but business is more important than lives.Until we all unite and threaten their business then you will see positive answers.

@@sportsgeek4335 do either of you two geniuses have even the slightest idea of how ejection seats work?

@@CharlieNoodles I swear these people think a parachute glides down like a feather like in a cartoon and an ejection seat is like a carnival ride... Ejecting everyone? gg you just injured 300 spines with one button press, the old and frail probably died and probably more injuries and death will follow when they land. Sounds like a great idea

@@qtrg5794 not to mention what happens to the children in those seats or the infants sitting in their parents laps or sleeping in the bassinet lol. But these fools only seem to be thinking about themselves so for everyone else it’s your lookout.

@@CharlieNoodles well then everybody die so much better. If the pilots know thet they cant land the plane then just die instead of find a way to survive. As an enginieer i belive there would be some way to survive.. Just so much money to invent and use that.

IF they still have contact with ATC, most plane carashes will be accompanied by sudden loss of contact with them

can u explain about what happen to the china eastern arlines that crash vertically?

The 130 people onboard MU5375 would not appreciate what you have said. This is not the first time a pilot deliberately crashing a passenger jetliner

@@cococly parachutes in a plane wouldn't really help with that situation, unless you want the passengers to be able to open doors mid flight (which sounds like a terrorism target)

What if the plane is above mid atlantic.. How the sliding will save anything??!! Its possible if the plane is over land and the altitude is good

Airplane's structure don't need chute because structure itself is chute. 🙂 that's what he said in the end. "Airplanes can gliding" So they don't need parachute for it.

@@rajanlagah4529 planes don't always glide well

What works on an aircraft weighing 3600lbs isn’t necessarily going to work on a plane that weighs 1,200,000lbs. Slight difference there

A commercial aircraft doesn't have the structural integrity to support that. The drag from the chutes would tear the fuselage apart. If you built it that strong, it'd be too heavy to fly using a conventional turbofan engine.

still likely flying too high.

That’s not a commercial airplane made to carry lots of people

@@mattmcrae using a parachute requires training. and the last part if you didn't see it's almost impossible to have a plane full of panicing passengers line up to jump out.

@@sheilaolfieway1885 four people should be managable though... still your comment about training is valid.

@@sheilaolfieway1885 How much training?

And paratroopers in the militery wouldnt need hogher levels of fitness and training than average infantry if anyone could just use a parachute

Bhai 100-200 extra lele

Most of crashes happens during take off or landing or very rapidly. Even all pasangers have educations and the plane has big doors. They probably wouldn't make it until the impact. Only option I believe is to add evacuation seat for each passenger seat like in military but it is another if

Come back to earth dude..🙆🏻‍♂️

​@@speedbird9313 You never tried flying? It's better in the air... What kind of bird are you, earth-bound Speedbird? An ostrich maybe, which cannot fly?

@@illestothvisualz9148 I dont fly that much, I just fix them..And try to deal with crazy muppets like yourself on occasion😆

short parachute training? wtf are you on? and that parachute door better be as big as the entire plane

Do you know how large a parachute would need to be to slow down a fully loaded a380?

@@vernethall7958 Innovation. Obviously they'll make a lighter but stronger one.

The plane would need to come to a complete standstill in the air and lose all of its forward momentum in order to deploy it. Otherwise that parachute will be torn right off.

No the plane could have two VTOL engines at the bottom to slow the descend - very large powerful engines.

@@alexman8800 are you.... Serious?

Dealing with the same thing. Maybe it's a part of getting older?

@@jgavpercussion I don't know, but even thinking about the hundreds of fights I took, while I was at 33,000 feet in the air, gives me knots in my stomach. Even as I sit comfortably in my recliner, the thought of flying terrifies me. I honestly can't see myself every getting on a plane again, and I don't understand why I now feel this way.

@@danieldevito6380 I feel you, its roughly the same with me, Ive flown a lot when I was a kid and even last year ( 8 times last year) but I am SO scared now that I will never see myself in a plane again, unless I for some reason have to.

Hm, that's actually interesting. Have you guys thought about that a lot? I mean we all know the sensation to get think about a subject too much and list all the things that can go wrong?

@@benfrese3573 Not at all. In fact, I remember when I had flown down to Atlanta back in 2015, me and my step father watched the movie Flight right before leaving for the airport and it still didn't bother me. This fear of flying just suddenly came on and I haven't been able to shake it. At least I can take solace, if I never fly again, in the fact that I was able to fly all around the country, MANY times, before becoming afraid.

deaths from plane crashes are already very rare? wayyy more likely to die in a car crash than a plane crash

@@AmbientMorality Yes. This is very true

Deaths from plane crashes are extremely rare already...I mean commercial planes

@@Edy.10 Yes Eddy, that's true. And so is survival of a plane crash. It's extremely low too. We can do better. We've sent men to the moon and back. This is something that can be done if we decide and determine to.

@@TheGreenBrain Completely agree, my dude

🌹🌹🌹

It's crazy how some people take it as the most brilliant idea.

Thanks Shakespeare 🤡

Are you saying the mounts would rip?

@@mandrakecarnival8952 Pretty much yeah

Doesn't mean it can't be done. Few years ago, nobody believed humans could fly. Look at us now.

@@TheGreenBrain "Can be done at all" and "can be _reasonably_ done" are very different. As the guy said, the plane in question would have to be designed with this very thing in mind, which means, it would have to have much stronger structure, which means more weight, more fuel consumption, etc. Making such a plane and still making it flyable would leave much less room for actual passengers while being much more costly to use. There probably could be something like that done, but it would be several times more costly than a normal plane, while being much less useful. Not much point.

A parachute would rip this instantly? There are already planes with parachute systems, adding them to commercial jets is a viable option.

You will still die either to unable to breath due to low air pressure, extremely cold temperatures, diseases, chaos, etc.

No

That would be an engineering nightmare to make such a design reliable and safe. It would cost a fortune and its return would be minimal. It would be useless for incidents during landing and take off and incidents where the plane controls are compromised. Also what about the pilots?

Dude, just become a president, and ride in Air Force one with all those cool features. Your average cheap plane cant have all that fancy stuff.🤣🤣

@@beigefox6579 Air Force One does not have anything like that. Entirely too complex and likely adds more risk than it reduces

@@AmbientMorality Airforce One has an escape mechanism for the president. Doesnt have to be exactly what OP posted, but as long as the "secret cabin" can eject, its will serve the same purpose.

@@beigefox6579 no it doesn't...

🤣🤣

We usually add references in the description of our videos. The references of this video are now added as well. Thanks for your feedback!

@@Scienceabc welcome:)

Sorry, we missed your second question about luck. What do you mean exactly? Are you interested in a scientific breakdown of what's considered 'lucky'?

@@Scienceabc yes I mean what actually luck is(mathematically and scientifically) like what are the odds of winning a game which has a role of luck as well as hardwork. Since most of the discoveries are accidentals so what role luck plays in someone's life

That's a good one. We will try to talk about this in one of our upcoming videos. Thanks for the suggestion!

finnally a fresh idea. or bubble inflates just before landing chute. or fuel can it be used somehow to save ppl , power something ...hardly , not for a hot air balloon..dump ignite explode to stop falling passangers with small chutes, or wingsuits instead.

Well said. Like most things in life the idea is very simple but few people bother to think about practicality.

yea in the uk psratroopers and parachute trained sas are elite (paratroopers) and special forces (sas) groups they require special training snd are rewuired to pass higher standards than infantrymen

Doesn't matter. You get trained to safely land. A beginner can easily use a parachute to survive. Upon lading he might break a leg or two which is still better than dying. And the emergency unit will go to the location of incident to rescue people. Better than nothing. Only thing matters here is money.

@@dolme4789 Have you thought what ordinary people think when jumping for the first time?

@@dolme4789 I agree, I just kind of said the same thing. Didn't see your comment, I just got pissed on the OP for that dumb statement that a passenger couldn't do it when it's clearly most passengers could do it

better than burning alive with your baby with no other possibility ...

What is that idea?

A container that is a structure by itself that holds all passenger seats, and has a big parachutr. I think?

yes except it's too expensive for the plane companies, and would literally be cheaper for them to just let the passengers die and pay insurance then to have a whole new fleet of these airplanes.

@@ExponentMars we get it "capitalist company would rather kill people than lose money" but if thats the case why have oxygen masks for an emergency?

That "best idea ever" pops up every few months, because of course, random internet people believe that engineers never had that idea and never tested it. Making a detachable capsule greatly reduces the resistance of the entire plane structure. The plane would split in half during landing because instead of having a strong and flexible one piece structure, it would require several moving parts and all the forces that the plane experience would be focused on those points. Then there is the second problem, when would you detach the capsule? 99% of the problems happening mid-flights still lead to a safe landing, including loss of engines. Pilots are trained to do emergency landings and even in case of engine failure, they will more often than not save the plane. The moment you detach the capsule, you no longer have any control over where and how it lands. Even with a perfect parachute reducing the speed of the capsule to almost nothing, the capsule would still most likely violently crash and kill the passengers. Third problem: once you detach the capsule, where are you going to land the rest of the plane? You will no longer have any control over the trajectory of the plane carcass itself and could end up destroying a city. Then the last problem, the parachute itself. A capsule with 200 passengers would weight at the very least 30-40tons, moving a 800km/h. There is not a single fabric that could withstand such forces. Mankind invented flight over 100years ago, millions of engineers have worked on plane safety over the years, if you think you can outsmart them and come up with unique life saving solutions, you are delusional at best.

when are you that high but there's no way an emergency landing can work

Based! Chocolate rain rules.

Hmm that's what he said in the end. Airplanes can gliding and they don't need parachute for it. Wake up

@@rajanlagah4529 not when they lose wings or any other part that keeps them on the air

@@rajanlagah4529 chinese Boeing crash has entered the chat

@@ubobu3613 deploying a parachute with an aircraft in a vertical dive like that would simply rip the parachute off, so no it wouldn’t save the plane.

What you fail to take into account is that those plane mounted parachutes are only available for light aircraft. Something the size of a jet airliner is just too big and too fast for a parachute system to be successfully deployed.

You are agreeing with that statement right?

They should make license to fly. You can't board airplane before you learn how to parachute. LMAO

@@ronironi6912 Not really, you just only give people who are trained a parachute :) The others can go with "no risk no fun"

@@benfrese3573 Haha. Good idea. Plane will have free parachute. But only passanger who have the license, will be given parachute lol. It will force people to learn how to use it lmaooo

@@ronironi6912 that would be an exceptionally dumb idea. Do you know how expensive parachute training is?

that would be indeed cool, you can also have some that are not working properly but it only shows after deployment (like the ones colored red have holes) - that way you can have a good laugh at those idiots and the survival goes into a second round

I don't know where you're getting that from. All the other reasons are perfectly valid and sufficient on their own. Even if it didn't cost any money whatsoever, you would never see parachutes on a commercial plane. It just doesn't make sense.

God created the unseen laws of gravity and the law of lift which supercedes the law of gravity 😀. Many other laws are in the Bible 😉

I loved your idea

How much weight, bulk, and drag did it add?

@@Rokomarn None, his plan is genius, 100% safe

In most cases those passengers died instantly when their bodies were exposed to 800km/h winds and sudden pressure drop. If not, they'd be unconcious, and propably died of hitting plane parts or other debris, hypothermia or lack of oxygen within one minute. But yes, they would still be strapped to their seats.

You mean a parachute built right into the seat itself with a pull strap coming out of the seat where the parachute is stored inside? What a great idea.

@@richardyewchuk1508 Lol nope it's not.

@@hakimdiwan5101 R/WOOOOSH

@@byAuracle What?

Exactly the most important part all the "smart" commentors are missing People are either only care about them having more percentage of living than others or what to do post-crash