If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Daily Beast)   For people who can barely control their fear of flying as it is, the Malaysian airliner disappearance has reinforced their conviction that planes are nothing more than thin metal tubes of certain death   (thedailybeast.com) divider line 57
    More: Interesting, Malaysia, Air Accidents Investigation Branch, Flight MH370, accident investigation, Bermuda Triangle  
•       •       •

1529 clicks; posted to Main » on 31 Mar 2014 at 9:35 AM (16 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



57 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-03-31 02:47:06 PM

dittybopper: BetterMetalSnake: Also, a critical failure in a car doesn't mean certain death.

Doesn't mean certain death in an aircraft, either.


I don't count failures on the runway as critical, though they may be fatal in many cases. My car could violently explode on my driveway, but I don't count those either.
 
2014-03-31 03:06:17 PM

BetterMetalSnake: dittybopper: BetterMetalSnake: Also, a critical failure in a car doesn't mean certain death.

Doesn't mean certain death in an aircraft, either.

I don't count failures on the runway as critical, though they may be fatal in many cases. My car could violently explode on my driveway, but I don't count those either.


How about complete engine failure due to bird strikes?

Or what about completely running out of gas?

How about turning your Boeing 737 into a convertible?

I'd consider those all to be critical failures, and of the 3 incidents, there was but a single death involved.
 
2014-03-31 03:24:07 PM

BetterMetalSnake: I don't count failures on the runway as critical, though they may be fatal in many cases. My car could violently explode on my driveway, but I don't count those either.


If you're going to put me in a situation where something important (but not terribly improbable) is going to break, I'd much rather be in a modern airliner in cruise than a car on a freeway.
 
2014-03-31 04:20:43 PM

Sybarite: This claim, regularly made by airlines, is based on a calculation of fatalities vs. distance traveled. It's a really effective way to dilute the number of air travel deaths because planes by their very nature make much longer journeys than cars, trains, etc. A more accurate comparison would be deaths vs. number of journeys made. Airline deaths per 100 million passenger journeys is right around 55. That number is 4.5 for cars and 2.7 for trains.


So why were there over 1000 extra deaths after 9-11 from people who would normally fly (a relatively short distance, say New York to Chicago) and drove instead? One long drive should equal one plane ride in this case, right? I guess this implies that you're relatively safe driving short distances (say, around town) - you're going slowly in urban areas and unlikely to be really fatigued. Highways are probably more dangerous because of the speed and multi-car collisions. Car fatalities/number trips is heavily weighted toward short-distance urban trips.

Like someone said above, I"d love to see deaths/passenger hours or some such.
 
2014-03-31 05:23:41 PM

Cynicism101: Like someone said above, I"d love to see deaths/passenger hours or some such


From wiki:

i1294.photobucket.com

Sybarite: Airline deaths per 100 million passenger journeys is right around 55. That number is 4.5 for cars and 2.7 for trains.


I'm gonna go ahead and run with this:

upload.wikimedia.org

Data from the 1990s indicates you're exaggerating the airline deaths per million passenger journeys by nearly a factor of five.
 
2014-03-31 05:28:14 PM

Cynicism101: One long drive should equal one plane ride in this case, right?


Using the data above, it would appear that at that time an airplane was about three times as likely to kill you on any given trip as a car, but a car was a little more than 4 times as likely to kill you in any given hour as a plane.

Leads me to believe that cars are far and away the superior mode of transportation for trips under 5 minutes.
 
2014-03-31 10:06:34 PM

costermonger: Cynicism101: One long drive should equal one plane ride in this case, right?

Using the data above, it would appear that at that time an airplane was about three times as likely to kill you on any given trip as a car, but a car was a little more than 4 times as likely to kill you in any given hour as a plane.

Leads me to believe that cars are far and away the superior mode of transportation for trips under 5 minutes.


Good thing since it frequently takes more than 5 minutes for planes to take off, circle the airstrip, and land again.
You could get some touch-and-gos at a short strip in pretty quickly if there was no other traffic I guess.
My grandfather has been flying for 60+ years and has always reminded me that regardless of your destination, there's less traffic 'up here' than 'down there'.
 
Displayed 7 of 57 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report