모두
← Back to Squawk list
4 recent plane crashes highlight pilot safety
As it has progressed in the past couple of weeks, the news media is digging on GA (www.thv11.com) 기타...
Sort type: [Top] [Newest]
"Statistically, it's far safer to fly than it is to drive" -- Unfortunately that comparison is only true if you're flying commercially. It's commonly quoted that GA flights have about 7 times more accidents per mile than driving.
Interesting statistic.
An outdated statistic from Calif Highway Patrol: Los Angeles freeway see one accident per 1,000,000 vehicle miles driven- that equates to 80-90 accidents per day.
What qualifies as an 'accident' in the statistics? Engine failure on takeoff? Engine failure on the road doesn't qualify as an 'accident' unless the disabled vehicle is struck.
Airplanes and autos: apples and oranges?
Staying home is statistically safer than traveling.
just saying.
An outdated statistic from Calif Highway Patrol: Los Angeles freeway see one accident per 1,000,000 vehicle miles driven- that equates to 80-90 accidents per day.
What qualifies as an 'accident' in the statistics? Engine failure on takeoff? Engine failure on the road doesn't qualify as an 'accident' unless the disabled vehicle is struck.
Airplanes and autos: apples and oranges?
Staying home is statistically safer than traveling.
just saying.
Can you cite this? It seems a little extreme...
My source is John and Martha King's training courses. The full statistic that they cite as recently as at the 2013 AOPA Summit conference a couple weeks ago is: commercial flight has 7 times fewer fatal accidents per mile travelled than automobile; general aviation has 7 times greater fatal accidents per mile travelled than automobile (related: motorcycle has a similar number of fatal accidents per mile as GA).
You can also see Andrew's post on Quora for his independent substaniation of these numbers, though his ratio round out to slightly different (1/6th and 19x): http://www.quora.com/How-safe-is-general-aviation-versus-car-travel I imagine that the numbers vary slightly depending on which year of data you analyze, and John & Martha are just trying to simplify the numbers to make them easier to remember.
You can also see Andrew's post on Quora for his independent substaniation of these numbers, though his ratio round out to slightly different (1/6th and 19x): http://www.quora.com/How-safe-is-general-aviation-versus-car-travel I imagine that the numbers vary slightly depending on which year of data you analyze, and John & Martha are just trying to simplify the numbers to make them easier to remember.
Thanks for the references. I notice the base assumption for inclusion in the statistics is fatality. Do the statistic change when including a) fatal only, b) fatal or injury, and c) fatal, injury, non-injury events?
I would think that crashes dealing with 2 dimensions tend to be more forgiving than those in 3.
I would think that crashes dealing with 2 dimensions tend to be more forgiving than those in 3.
Seems rational, dear friend Jess Lawson.
Any details on the basis of traffic density ?
Don't you think higher density should off set bad figures ?
Another aspect is how many people die due to fault of others, humans and machine ?
Example,in car accidents , one person responsible for 1 or 2 or 4 persons . For a bus, one responsible for 20 or 30 persons.
But in case of air accidents , how similar figures stand ?
This can be yet another way to look at !
For the present, I am NOT referring to strict pre qualification requirements , both of men and machines in the two kinds of traffic.
;-)
Any details on the basis of traffic density ?
Don't you think higher density should off set bad figures ?
Another aspect is how many people die due to fault of others, humans and machine ?
Example,in car accidents , one person responsible for 1 or 2 or 4 persons . For a bus, one responsible for 20 or 30 persons.
But in case of air accidents , how similar figures stand ?
This can be yet another way to look at !
For the present, I am NOT referring to strict pre qualification requirements , both of men and machines in the two kinds of traffic.
;-)
There's surely some dependency, but it's probably not very useful to try to compare those other aspects in a question that is just trying to compare the mode of travel.
In both types, human failure seems to far outnumber mechanical failure, but the precise ratios are different.
I would assume collision with another aircraft while inflight is so extremely infrequent vs car collision with another car while on the highway. (The skies are much less dense than highways, making it very difficult but not impossible to strike another aircraft while in cruise.) However, maneuvering around an airport is going to be far more likely to cause a collision due to increased traffic density, as would driving your car on city streets near your origin/destination.
In both types, human failure seems to far outnumber mechanical failure, but the precise ratios are different.
I would assume collision with another aircraft while inflight is so extremely infrequent vs car collision with another car while on the highway. (The skies are much less dense than highways, making it very difficult but not impossible to strike another aircraft while in cruise.) However, maneuvering around an airport is going to be far more likely to cause a collision due to increased traffic density, as would driving your car on city streets near your origin/destination.
Dear friend Jeff Lawson, let us agree on one thing, if you like.
The two kinds are different in many many ways .
So let us NOT compare them.
Let us try to make both modes of travel SAFE. As much as we can, singularly and collectively.
Right ?
The two kinds are different in many many ways .
So let us NOT compare them.
Let us try to make both modes of travel SAFE. As much as we can, singularly and collectively.
Right ?
