Mxsmanic wrote:
Jim Logajan writes:

And idea how many of those Cirrus and Cessna 172 accidents involved
fatalities?

A quick look at the NTSB database reveals 85 fatalities for Cessna 172s since
January 1, 2008, and 48 fatalities for Cirrus SR-22s since that same date.

There are 26,163 Cessna 172s registered currently, and 3,746 Cirrus SR-22s.

The fatality rate during this period on a per-aircraft basis is therefore
0.00324 for Cessna 172s and 0.01281 for Cirrus SR-22s. The rate for the SR-22s
is thus nearly four times higher than that for Cessna 172s.

I've been looking at fatality rates in regards to homebuilt aircraft.
There's a strong correlation between the cruise speed of an aircraft
with its fatality rate. This is obvious...twice the speed at impact
means the occupants are subjected to four times the energy. The Cirrus
is faster than the 172, hence passengers will be subjected to more
energy in a crash.

Planes don't all CRASH at cruise speed, of course. But generally
speaking, faster airplanes have faster approach speeds and hence there's
more energy to be absorbed at impact.

For instance, compare the fatality ratio for the Lancair IV vs. the
Zenith CH 701. The Lancair's rate is about seven times higher.

The other factor is that Cessna 172s are commonly used as trainers, and
training accidents are usually more in the "fender bender" line. For
example, there were 155 Cessna 172 accidents in 2007. In over half the
cases (81), the NTSB report says the purpose of the flight was
instruction. Of those, only four resulted in fatalities.

Ron Wanttaja