Better drivers?

"FLAV8R" wrote:
....
I find that I'm much safer in a plane than in a car.
....
Can anyone back up the stats, I know I have seen them printed somewhere
before.

This probably isn't what you are thinking of, but it is tbe only study I've
found on the web that compares the accident rate of various modes of
transportation and normalizes the data:

http://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/...omparisons.pdf

For my own comparative purposes, GA flying appears to be ~7 times more
likely to lead to a fatal accident than driving (rounded average of columns
1 and 4 in table 5; all the other columns use measures not relevant to my
own situation).

Andrew Sarangan wrote:
I am not sure if I agree. The only car accident I ever got into was
because I was looking up at the clouds trying to figure out which
direction the wind was blowing from, and rear ended the car in front.
That's when I realized that looking up at the sky is something I have
been doing routinely while driving.

Let's see, so you are easily distracted from the task of driving by
irrelevant things, if you are the same way while flying, you probably
aren't a very safe pilot either.


There is very little similarity between the decision making processes
involved in driving and flying. Weather is a leading cause of aviation
accidents. It is just a minor incovenience when driving. Flying fast is
good, and slow is bad. The opposite is true with driving.

Not true. Driving 35 on the high way is just as dangerous as driving 75
in a housing area. Just like flying, driving needs to be done at the
correct speed for the conditions. The only time this wouldn't be true
is if you were the only animated object on or near the road. Also
flying too fast can be as dangerous as driving too fast.


Running out
of fuel in an airplane could be bad, but in a car it is just an
inconvenience. Flight planning is a must. Driving plan... I have driven
all across the country and never did anything that even comes close to
a 50NM flight plan.

Just because the things that are important to make decisions about while
driving aren't the same as they are while flying, doesn't mean the
ability to make good decisions is any different for either activity.


--
Chris W
KE5GIX

Gift Giving Made Easy
Get the gifts you want &
give the gifts they want
One stop wish list for any gift,
from anywhere, for any occasion!
http://thewishzone.com

Chris W wrote:

Peter Duniho wrote:


Given that I've seen no evidence that pilots on the whole are better
at avoiding crashes in airplanes than they otherwise would
statistically be expected to be, I see no reason to think they would
be better drivers. That is, if they can't even be better-than-average
in flying than they'd be expected to be, why would one expect them to
be better-than-average in anything else?


How on earth could the average person preform better than average? By
definition that is impossible.


You've obviously never been to Lake Wobegon.


Matt

"Chris W" wrote in message
news:zoEig.52763$9c6.36774@dukeread11...
How on earth could the average person preform better than average? By
definition that is impossible.

I have no idea what you mean.

I am a better than average computer programmer, but a less than average
baseball player. Obviously being an "average person" (or even "less than
average person") does not preclude me also being a "better than average"
person.

Pete

"cpw" wrote in news:1149889787.502247.107120
@i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:

I apologize if this topic has been beaten to death in the past. I am
wondering if there are any statistics on whether pilots are safer
(automobile) drivers than the general public. It has seemed to me that
my pilot training has improved my driving skills in several ways:
situational awareness, planning ahead, general safe driving practices,
etc. Anybody have any opinions (HAH!) in the group?

I know I am a better driver for the simple reason that I've been
riding a motorcycle for 20 years and am still in one piece.

But no, I don't fly.....yet.... I hope that I'll do well. I'm
a stickler for procedure and rules, but have no problem making
stuff up on the fly when necessary.

Brian
--
http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
Quake "predictions": http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html
Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?

Chris W wrote in news:rBEig.52766$9c6.23723@dukeread11:

Andrew Sarangan wrote:

Snipola
There is very little similarity between the decision making processes
involved in driving and flying. Weather is a leading cause of aviation
accidents. It is just a minor incovenience when driving. Flying fast is
good, and slow is bad. The opposite is true with driving.

Not true. Driving 35 on the high way is just as dangerous as driving 75
in a housing area. Just like flying, driving needs to be done at the
correct speed for the conditions. The only time this wouldn't be true
is if you were the only animated object on or near the road. Also
flying too fast can be as dangerous as driving too fast.
Snipola

I agree. One of my pet peeves is people not accelerating on the
acceleration ramp. Yes, that's the proper name for it. Not "on
ramp". That's what I was taught in drivers ed and my experince
since confirms this. You are supposed to accelerate to the speed
of traffic BEFORE merging. Many accidents occur at "on ramps"
where traffic is going at vastly different speeds. Trying to
merge onto a freeway moving at 75 while still only doing 35 is
a very bad thing.

Brian
--
http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
Quake "predictions": http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html
Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?

In article ,
"Peter Duniho" wrote:

None of which supports your orginal thesis or even validates your
approach.

What approach?

Your approach of trying to make a claim/proof/whatever about pilots as
drivers based on aircraft accident rates without any basis for a relationship
between the two.


You and Jose seem to be under the misimpression that I'm trying to prove
something here.

You attempted to make *something*.

You attack my statements on that basis

No. I disagreed with your argument based on its flaws. Not on you
or your intent.

, when in fact you
are completely wrong about my intent. Your argumentative replies are
irrelevant.

your intent is irrelevant. My intent is irrelevant.

--
Bob Noel
Looking for a sig the
lawyers will hate

"cpw" wrote in message
oups.com...
I apologize if this topic has been beaten to death in the past. I am
wondering if there are any statistics on whether pilots are safer
(automobile) drivers than the general public. It has seemed to me that
my pilot training has improved my driving skills in several ways:
situational awareness, planning ahead, general safe driving practices,
etc. Anybody have any opinions (HAH!) in the group?


Of course current pilots are going to have less accidents. They have been
screened by a FAA approved AME for any number of medical issues that could
affect their ability to drive or could result in a sudden incapacation. How
could they possibly NOT be safer? Right? If they weren't, what would be the
point behind all the various classes of medicals and stuff?

--
Geoff
The Sea Hawk at Wow Way d0t Com
remove spaces and make the obvious substitutions to reply by mail
When immigration is outlawed, only outlaws will immigrate.

"Bob Noel" wrote in message
...
Your approach of trying to make a claim/proof/whatever about pilots as
drivers based on aircraft accident rates without any basis for a
relationship
between the two.

If the fact that a person is a pilot is relevant to whether they are a good
driver or not, surely the question of whether they are a *good* pilot is
also relevant.

Conversely, if it's your claim that their abilities as a pilot are
irrelevant to their abilities as a driver, then the only logical conclusion
is that the question of whether they are a pilot at all is also irrelevant.

Which is what I originally said in the first place.

[...]
You attack my statements on that basis

No. I disagreed with your argument based on its flaws. Not on you
or your intent.

When you say that my proof is invalid, you necessarily make the assumption
(ie the basis for your comments) that I am trying to prove something. Given
that I'm not trying to prove anything, your claim that my proof is faulty is
irrelevant.

Pete

I find that I'm much safer in a plane than in a car.

"find" implies knowledge - results of investigations and such. Perhaps
more apt would be "believe" (unless you have had a sufficient number of
car crashes =and= airplane crashes from which to draw valid conclusions).

The statistics show the 50,000 drivers die per year.
I believe the number for airplane accidents is around 900

Numbers are meaningless without appropriate normalization. Per mile?
Per year? Per passenger? Per flight? Per dollar?

Jose
--
The price of freedom is... well... freedom.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.