Goodbye, Farewell, Auf Weidersein

[ragedracer1977]

12 hours ago, M20Doc said:

At the risk of making this too political.

I agree with what you're saying, but when the man who is the president encouraged violence during his many campaign rallies, offers to pay legal expenses for anyone doing his dirty work, and now has offered his first presidential pardon, it proves that there are no consequences for poor behaviour.

Clarence

Strangely, though, the actual violence is nearly all coming from the President's opposition.  

And need I remind you that the Previous administration pardoned actual terrorists and traitors to the country, not just a Sheriff who was convicted by a judge with a grudge.  Not to say that the certain sheriff didn't break the law, because he may very well have done so.  But that particular pardon is much less controversial than pardoning a guy (now a girl!) that literally committed treason, a crime that used to be punishable by hanging - IMO.

[75_M20F]

http://traveltips.usatoday.com/air-travel-safer-car-travel-1581.html

For the vast majority of the population "the drive to the airport is more dangerous....." is absolutely true, so it's not a big lie at all. To most people "flying" means getting dropped off at the terminal and taking Delta Airlines. I believe that's where that saying comes from, kind of being hijacked here. Fake news of sort.

 "The National Safety Council compiled an odds-of-dying table for 2008, which further illustrates the relative risks of flying and driving safety. It calculated the odds of dying in a motor vehicle accident to be 1 in 98 for a lifetime. For air and space transport (including air taxis and private flights), the odds were 1 in 7,178 for a lifetime, according to the table. - (Notice it included PRIVATE flights).

http://www.nsc.org/NSCDocuments_Corporate/2014-Injury-Facts-Odds-Dying-43.pdf

The other issue here is that other "bad" drivers kill other innocent drivers. Its rarely the case of another aircraft causing an accident involving multiple aircraft, therefore if you only fly in good weather, daytime, maintain your equipment, and stay proficient you are absolutely safer than being on the roads. Now, if you are the type to push it on fuel reserves, fly at night, fly in low IMC, flirt with ice,  skimp on maintenance, not staying proficient (any one of those) ... sure you're safer in a car. Those folks that conduct themselves in a "risky" manner are the ones giving GA a "bad" safety record.

[LANCECASPER]

30 minutes ago, ABCDEF said:

1) It calculated the odds of dying in a motor vehicle accident to be 1 in 98 for a lifetime. For air and space transport (including air taxis and private flights), the odds were 1 in 7,178 for a lifetime, according to the table. - (Notice it included PRIVATE flights).

http://www.nsc.org/NSCDocuments_Corporate/2014-Injury-Facts-Odds-Dying-43.pdf

2) The other issue here is that other "bad" drivers kill other innocent drivers. Its rarely the case of another aircraft causing an accident involving multiple aircraft, therefore if you only fly in good weather, daytime, maintain your equipment, and stay proficient you are absolutely safer than being on the roads. Now, if you are the type to push it on fuel reserves, fly at night, fly in low IMC, flirt with ice,  skimp on maintenance, not staying proficient (any one of those) ... sure you're safer in a car. Those folks that conduct themselves in a "risky" manner are the ones giving GA a "bad" safety record.

1) There are 323,100,000 people in the U. S. and only 590,000 are "active" pilots (Before Basic Med that meant that they had a current medical.).

So if you're determining death causes for all of the population and 322,500,000 don't fly small airplanes (granted some of them are passengers), it's understandable that the odds are great that if you never get in a small airplane that you'll never die in one.

The ratio of population to pilots is 547 to 1. If you divide 7178 by that 547 ratio, you end up with 1 in 13 odds for pilots dying in an air transport accident. If you compare that to the 1 out of 98 motor vehicle number, it's about 7.5 times higher risk. But all of this is flawed because that includes all of aviation including air transport and there are also passengers that fly in small airplanes.

The only apples to apples way to determine which is safer is how many fatalities per 100,000 miles happen during driving or flying.

2) The problem is that if you ask 100 pilots if they are safe pilots, they all feel they are. If you are going to use that argument then you have to separate safe drivers and unsafe drivers. Very few car accident fatalities happen with drivers who do everything right, every time, so if you examined their fatalities per 100,000 miles it would show the car being even that much safer. You have to include all drivers and all pilots and just use miles traveled. It takes emotion out of the equation and only leaves logic. 

Insurance companies live by the law of large numbers - the more data you have to sample the higher the accuracy. Their actuaries pore over numbers to try to determine risk within just a fraction of a percentage point. If flying is safer than driving then why is it more expensive for a pilot to get life insurance than just a driver?

 

 

[75_M20F]

1 minute ago, LANCECASPER said:

 

Insurance companies live by the law of large numbers - the more data you have to sample the higher the accuracy. Their actuaries pore over numbers to try to determine risk within just a fraction of a percentage point. If flying is safer than driving then why is it more expensive for a pilot to get life insurance than just a driver?

 

Because the insurance company makes more money that way (they are out to make a profit aren't they?). You obviously are a person of means since you have an aircraft, therefore you can certainly afford to pay more. By your logic they would be charging a rate 19 times higher than a non pilot, since that's your claimed death rate for GA pilots. If that were truly the case it would be impossible obtain life insurance.

Your car logic ignores the fact that the safest driver on the road is subject to being killed by an unsafe driver. Not the case in aviation 99.9% of the time, your outcome as a pilot is dependent upon your actions only.

If you are the type to push it on fuel reserves, fly at night, fly in low IMC, flirt with ice,  skimp on maintenance, over load your airplane, not staying proficient (any one of those) ... sure you're safer in a car. It's those "risk" takers that result in over 70% of the GA deaths, don't operate in such in a manner and you are NOT subject to the said risk. Can you not understand that? You seem to determined to think that no matter how "professionally"  one operates they can not change the "odds" of being in a crash.

 

 

 

[mooniac58]

Locking this topic people.  This forum is NOT for political discussion - period.