My question is - Why do hospitals not use helicopters in the big city more often to avoid traffic delays and accidents ? It is a known fact traffic delays medical service to the injured party and greatly increases the risk of death and permanent injury . Now I am not saying to get rid of all ambulances but I do believe we should replace at least 80 percent of them in all major cities with helicopters and before you say where would they land , well the roof , of course .
Does anyone agree and if so how much would this cost ?
2007-05-05 11:26:19 · 3 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Government
they would land on top of the appartment buildings in cities such as New York and Chicgao
2007-05-05 12:04:27 · update #1
Helicopters is good for emergency medical cases rather than ambulances. However, the cost of helicopters is very expensive and most people could afford paying the exorbitant fees. Maybe, for the rich people they could use helicopters for their medical care.
2007-05-05 11:32:01 · answer #1 · answered by FRAGINAL, JTM 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It already costs about a hundred bucks for an ambulance ride... how much more for a helicopter ride.
And where would the copter land when the accident is on the busy highway? Light poles and powerlines and 5 lanes of parking lot traffic going one way and 5 or 6 lanes of parking lot traffic trying to get past the accident and continue the other way.
I personally think helicopters are a much better idea for rural areas where the people are farther away from the hospital and there are great wide open fields for the copters to land in.
2007-05-05 18:39:15 · answer #2 · answered by scruffycat 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Where are you going to land it? The roof of what? House roofs are slanted.
Powerlines and cars stop them from landing on the road safely, and cities have real small yards.
2007-05-05 18:29:31 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋