>
>
> Palindrome wrote:
>>
>> Sam Nelson wrote:
>>>> A major air disaster then suddenly every minor aircraft technical
>>>> difficulty starts making the headlines.
>>>>
>>>> This is very much non-news.
>>>>
>>>>
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/7578428.stm
>>>>
>>>> Remember, the most dangerous part of your flight is the drive to and
>>>> from the airport.
>>>
>>> There's a flaw in this claim: namely, it implicitly asserts that
>>> everyone is an average driver. If I drive mind-numbingly badly, then
>>> I'm far more likely to be killed while driving than if I drive
>>> competently. Strictly statistically, the claim may be true, but on a
>>> per-person basis, it matters how competently I drive. The questions
>>> insurers ask about your accident history and driving experience prove
>>> that.
>>>
>>> Driving a car, I am to some extent or other in control of my own
>>> destiny. Sitting in a seat in a plane or train, I'm just a piece of
>>> self-loading freight at the disposal of pilots, ATCs, and ground crew.
>>> I'm so far from understanding the likely sources of danger that I
>>> cannot
>>> manage the risk That's why all the fuss is made about aircrashes---the
>>> people killed had absolutely no way to choose what happened, once
>>> they'd
>>> got on the plane.
>>
>> "Some extent". Sitting in a car, waiting at lights, you are just as much
>> a target at the disposal of others.
>>
>> The "fuss" is that any air crash usually results in a loss of life
>> orders of magnitude greater than any single road accident. Whereas road
>> vehicle designers have put a lot of effort into safety cages,
>> impact-survivable fuel-tanks, etc - there doesn't seem to have been much
>> attempt at making a plane crash survivable. The effort has all gone into
>> reducing the possibility of a crash happening.
>
> Yes, motor vehicles are much more fail-safe then aircrafts. Many problems,
> such as a tyre puncture, engine fire and even collisions are survivable
> in cars, but not in aircrafts.
ITYF that punctures and tyre failures happen regularly in passenger
aircraft, with little effect. Engine fires don't happen often at all, but
providing they aren't caused by (or cause) some other catastrophic event
which affects the aircraft's ability to fly, they are of little consequence.
It's incidents such as Sioux City, where the fan disc exploded and damaged
all the hydraulic systems that cause problems.
Collisions at the speeds aircraft travel would not be survivable in a car
either ;-) two fiestas hitting at a closing speed of 1000mph .. wouldn't be
a lot left.
>(By and large). It is also ludicrous to count
> statistics as deaths per mile, since you would never drive a car to China
> or Australia. (By and large). The statistics should be counted as deaths
> per time unit spent on the activity.
It's all relative isn't it?
Mike P
