From 'The Economist': http://www.economist...3/01/air-safety

Interesting article, but it seems very familiar to me.

it's really impressive, what you can do with statistics, and how you can interpret them. I think I've read somewhere (was it on these forums?), that depending on how you look at it, the Space Shuttle can be the safest way of transportation (fatalities vs. travelled distance), but also the most fatal one (fatalities vs. journeys), which shows how important it is to take a close look at statistics, and don't forget: Never trust any statisitcs you didn't manipulate yourself!

 

Cheers,

Flo

Never trust any statisitcs you didn't manipulate yourself!

 

Seems to be a well-written article, but this is a valid point. Never forget to fact-check sources :wink:

Good article.

 

Never forget to fact-check sources :wink:

The sources aren't the problem, the interpretation of numbers is. And interpretation of facts is the job of media, later repeating the wrong or the right message often enough so that everybody can start believing.

 

Aviation safety arises from operating potentially dangerous vehicles (high speeds, freezing temps, not enough oxygen and falling out of the sky when being too slow) under tight control and a lot of redundancy. That's not safe by design and sometimes not even by statistics. Well, as long as you don't allow the folks actually selling the tickets to define what's safe and what's not.

 

Funny enough that they even promote those things as 'green'. PR blurbs.

This was a good article. It doesn't matter what transportation you take there can always be incidents. The good thing is that technology has improved safety in every transportation.

Don't leave out the crews, Fridberg. I'd say the training on crew resource management and the enhanced awareness of the ups and downs of human factors also contributed to an increase in safety. Well, and maybe the better seats on later planes. ^_^

I do not let the media interpret information for me.

I see. You are that guy. ^_^

Well, I try to consider all angles before I start spouting my opinions

I do not let the media interpret information for me.

 

I do my best not to either, but it's always a trade-off with how much time I'm willing to invest in a subject to gain enough knowledge to do my own interpreting. For anything aviation or science related I do my best to go to primary sources though.

Sure, I have my few trusty sources I go to first, but for everything else it's aggregated.

Good article !!

Although I have no figures to support this, I think one of the most dangerous factors for potential accidents is the cutting of corners of the airline industry to save money. Although maintenance schedules have been tightened, some pilots are complaining that some companies tend to reduce spare fuel to dangerous levels to save money. Thousands of dollars can be saved on each airliner flight by reducing the amount of spare fuel for emergencies.

 

Another factor is that when disaster strikes, airline executives are not held responsible, so they just take their golden parachutes, bail out, declare bankruptcy, shut down the airline and go start another airline.

 

Henri