![]() |
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 |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Clustering can reduce the rate for one year and elevate it for another
year. However, the report shows that accident rates have been declining for the past 10 years, which is a significant point. Jose wrote: I read on AvWeb today the '05 Nall Report is out, and apparently 2004 was a historic low for aviation accidents. This led me to question what next year's report will look like after considering the spate of GA accidents that we've all read about in the last year or so. Maybe it's just a question of perception? Or, are pilots just getting too complacent when they strap into their aircraft? Or maybe it's just a statistical artifact. Shift a few accidents from December to January, and shift a few others from next January to this December, and you have a banner year for airplane crashes caused simply by the artificial boundaries of the sample set. Sometimes random events cluster for no reason. In fact, it is highly unlikely that they would =not= cluster. Jose -- Money: what you need when you run out of brains. for Email, make the obvious change in the address. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Andrew wrote:
Clustering can reduce the rate for one year and elevate it for another year. Right, Jose mentioned this in his reply to my OP However, the report shows that accident rates have been declining for the past 10 years, which is a significant point That IS good news. I'm curious to see how/if '05 follows to the overall trend. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Andrew Sarangan" wrote in message oups.com... Clustering can reduce the rate for one year and elevate it for another year. However, the report shows that accident rates have been declining for the past 10 years, which is a significant point. Jose wrote: I read on AvWeb today the '05 Nall Report is out, and apparently 2004 was a historic low for aviation accidents. This led me to question what next year's report will look like after considering the spate of GA accidents that we've all read about in the last year or so. Maybe it's just a question of perception? Or, are pilots just getting too complacent when they strap into their aircraft? Or maybe it's just a statistical artifact. Shift a few accidents from December to January, and shift a few others from next January to this December, and you have a banner year for airplane crashes caused simply by the artificial boundaries of the sample set. "Shift" as in reporting a December accident as if it occured in January? |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Shift" as in reporting a December accident as if it occured in January?
No, shift as having an accident in December instead of January. Jose -- Money: what you need when you run out of brains. for Email, make the obvious change in the address. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
NTSB: USAF included? | Larry Dighera | Piloting | 10 | September 11th 05 10:33 AM |
ASRS/ASAP reporting systems - how confidential? | Tim Epstein | Piloting | 7 | August 4th 05 05:20 PM |
Boeing Boondoggle | Larry Dighera | Military Aviation | 77 | September 15th 04 02:39 AM |
Enola Gay: Burnt flesh and other magnificent technological achievements | me | Military Aviation | 146 | January 15th 04 10:13 PM |
USAF = US Amphetamine Fools | RT | Military Aviation | 104 | September 25th 03 03:17 PM |