"James Wilkinson Sword" wrote in message
news
On Mon, 05 Dec 2016 18:15:42 -0000, harry
wrote:

On Sunday, 4 December 2016 17:48:30 UTC, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Sun, 04 Dec 2016 09:06:48 -0000, harry
wrote:

On Saturday, 3 December 2016 21:04:49 UTC, James Wilkinson Sword
wrote:
On Sat, 03 Dec 2016 08:34:05 -0000, harry
wrote:

On Friday, 2 December 2016 09:24:18 UTC, Bod wrote:
On 02/12/2016 08:54, harry wrote:
On Thursday, 1 December 2016 04:48:02 UTC, Rod Speed wrote:
harry wrote

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=deyMNPbaRpA

Astonishing.

****ing hell.

Wonder how many will end up dead learning to fly one.

**** all I spose, bet they arent cheap.

Bet the parachute is completely useless most of the time.

The "parachute" is his fuel tank ****-fer-brains.
Parachutes take at least 200' to deploy.

I've done a jump and was told at the time that the minimum height
to
properly deploy is 500ft.

Emergency parachutes have special features.

There are bungees to rip the pack open.
There is a big spring to throw the canopy out.
There is a drouge chute to pull the main canopy straight.
They are very small and lightweight.
They can only be used once.
You may well break a leg on landing but at least survive.

In practice virtually nobody gets out and survives below 2000'
They have to release their seat belts and open the canopy and get
out.
But above all they have to make their mind up to do it.

You're talking about having to exit a plane. If you're already
floating in midair and open a chute, you need only 500 ft.

As this fellow's only at 50 feet or so, a parachute won't save him

Maybe a different kind of parachute?

--
Why is there only one Monopolies Commission?

The only thing that would save him at fifty feet would be an ejector
seat..... I don't see one.

What about a huge airbag?

Not feasible either.