sdennison wrote:
Well stated but the reality is?
The reality is what its always been and always will be concerning the passenger egress issue. It's always a judgment call. You have to consider, as the issue relates to small children that as you have suggested, if egress becomes necessary, there is always the possibility that a youngster might not make it out, go through the process of parachute deployment, and make it to a safe landing.
All this having been considered, as is the case with ALL airplanes not just a Warbird, the ultimate and most useful way to deal with potential bail out is to minimize the risk down to an acceptable risk factor. You boil this down a bit further and it becomes apparent that providing the passenger chute or no chute, with a safe flight involves the providing of an aircraft in tip top condition and a pilot flying it safely within the aircraft's flight envelope.
In the end analysis, there isn't any magic bullet to guarantee complete safety for any passenger, even a child as is being discussed.
All you can do is as I have said, provide as safe an environment as humanly possible
minimizing the risk factor.
FWIW, I guess I've given a ton of rides to youngsters in T6's, T34's etc. without incident.
Well said, the point in this discussion is to have the pilots use your rational. I question, from the pilots I know who take kids for rides, do they use this train of thought.
Not limited to kids, I have opted to fly in a Mustang, T-6, T-34, Harvard without a chute. But I am a 61 year old fart and somewhat a fatalist. However, I have a lot of flying I want to do and am going to change some of my viewpoints. The kids, however, don't have that perspective. A parachute in the rear seat of a Mentor does not make a child seat in a Dodge Caravan.
Dudley Henriques
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
