![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Why am I using the composite automobile numbers when highway numbers
are much higher (more dangerous)? Why am I using *any* set of numbers? If we can pick and chose the numbers we want, we can 'prove' virtually anything. It made the most sense to me, when comparing 'travel by car' to 'travel by GA plane' to use the figures for *all* cars vs. *all* GA planes. Please feel free to break out 'self-piloted' GA numbers from the total number of hours, the total number of deaths and the total number of injuries if you so wish...but when you analyse the question 'Will you be safer on a 1000 mile trip if you travel by car or by GA airplane?' *Even if* you use the '50% higher' figures you want to use, you will STILL find that If 'safety' = 'probability of arriving at your destination without injury or death', then travel by GA plane (personal flying), is *still* safer than travel by car. If 'safety' = 'probability of not getting killed before reaching your destination', then travel by car is safer than travel by GA (personal flying). It depends on which definition you want to use. What is 'safe'? Just for giggles, I asked that question ("Which of these two definitions would you personally use in determeing if something was safe or not?") to 8 non-aviator co-workers today. 6 of them said 'Injured or killed' (which favors GA) and 2 of them said 'killed' (which favors cars). The numbers don't lie tho...to say that aviation is 'less safe' than car travel, one has to use a particular definition of 'safe'. You may feel it is the 'better' definition. I don't. Cheers, Cap "Mike Rapoport" wrote in message link.net... Let's look at the 'miles per incident' rates for various events: Event Automobile Plane -------------------------------------------------------- Deaths 36,837,209 8,029,030 Injuries 495,000 1,742,969 Accidents 251,429 2,614,453 Total Casualties 488,437 1,432,087 Now, from these statistics, it is pretty clear that your chances of dying in a GA plane are significantly higher (per mile) than in an automobile. But they are both quite low. But, your chances of being a 'casualty' (being injured *or* killed) is *much* greater in a car than in an airplane. There is one casualty for every 488,000 miles in a car...only one for every 1,432,000 miles in a GA plane. Additionally, you are *10 times* as likely to be in a car wreck (again per mile) than in a plane wreck. But again, they are still pretty low. Why are you using the composite light GA numbers when personal flying has an accident rate 50% higher? Mike MU-2 |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
What's minimum safe O2 level? | PaulH | Piloting | 29 | November 9th 04 07:35 PM |
Baghdad airport safe to fly ?? | Nemo l'ancien | Military Aviation | 17 | April 9th 04 11:58 PM |
An Algorithm for Defeating CAPS, or how the TSA will make us less safe | Aviv Hod | Piloting | 0 | January 14th 04 01:55 PM |
Fast Safe Plane | Charles Talleyrand | Piloting | 6 | December 30th 03 10:23 PM |
Four Nimitz Aviators Safe after | Otis Willie | Naval Aviation | 0 | July 28th 03 10:31 PM |