Comment on Fatal Damage by zulumike
Perhaps a couple, but I think there would have been surprisingly few. Don't forget, the RFC lost an awful lot of pilots in take-off or landing accidents, and for those who died in combat, many would have been too low to use a parachute anyway, or would probably have been disabled from using theirs due to injuries sustained during their dogfights or encounters with enemy artillery.
And of course, even if they had managed to use their parachute - the unlucky ones who would have had to use them close to, or over the frontlines would probably have bought the farm anyway, either by being shot at by the opposing side, or by being unlucky enough to land in no-man's land...
Perhaps the parachutes might have been able to save one in five or one in ten, but certainly not much more.
And don't forget, of course, that the 'cumbersome' concern did have some validity in the beginning! Many aircraft designs of the time were barely powerful enough with all of the necessary hardware crammed in, so adding the weight of a parachute (15-20 kg per person) might have detracted even more from a marginal performance, enough to have a severe impact on the manoeuverability or speed, certainly in the case of some of the fighter designs. In the case of a Camel, for instance, a parachute would have accounted for about 9% of its payload, and in the case of a DH.9, 5%.
Not to mention that these early parachutes weren't as efficient or reliable as the ones we are used to - something the pilots of the Luftstreitkräfte found out to their cost...
Still, even if only a tenth of the RFC's losses could have been saved, that would still account to about 950 men...
And of course, even if they had managed to use their parachute - the unlucky ones who would have had to use them close to, or over the frontlines would probably have bought the farm anyway, either by being shot at by the opposing side, or by being unlucky enough to land in no-man's land...
Perhaps the parachutes might have been able to save one in five or one in ten, but certainly not much more.
And don't forget, of course, that the 'cumbersome' concern did have some validity in the beginning! Many aircraft designs of the time were barely powerful enough with all of the necessary hardware crammed in, so adding the weight of a parachute (15-20 kg per person) might have detracted even more from a marginal performance, enough to have a severe impact on the manoeuverability or speed, certainly in the case of some of the fighter designs. In the case of a Camel, for instance, a parachute would have accounted for about 9% of its payload, and in the case of a DH.9, 5%.
Not to mention that these early parachutes weren't as efficient or reliable as the ones we are used to - something the pilots of the Luftstreitkräfte found out to their cost...
Still, even if only a tenth of the RFC's losses could have been saved, that would still account to about 950 men...