Forum menu
Its the evident safety procedures that make flying feel dangerous
I think it's the precariousness of your situation and the helplessness. You're miles up in the air, which is dangerous to start with, and you have no control.
Stats don't mean much to people's subconscious, and lack of control always makes it worse.
The previous owner had fitted a little fire extinguisher under the passenger side of the dash. Its surprising how many passengers were made nervous by that
It's because most cars don't have one, and they take the fact that you think you needed one as indication that you think the car is likely to catch fire.
You have a 1 in 30,000,000 chance of having a plane crash and even then you've a 50:50 chance of surviving.But you have a 1 in 45,000 chance of having a car crash.
If you were to make two journeys a day of the same mileage in both a plane and a car, it's far more likely you'd have an aircraft accident than a car accident.
When compared correctly like for like (instead of two holiday flights a year vs. commuting daily in car), flying is by far the most dangerous form of public transport.
Tucker, you got any data to back that up with?
When compared correctly like for like (instead of two holiday flights a year vs. commuting daily in car)
I'm not sure what you are getting at here. Are you comparing miles for miles?
The question is, how do you compare the two, because they're not really similar are they? You don't drive your car to America or Australia, or to Marseilles for a day meeting do you?
You could compare the risk of taking a typical car-based holiday with a typical plane based holiday, I suppose, since that's a typical decision point. Or you could compare say flying down to London from Edinburgh vs taking the train.
If you were to make two journeys a day of the same mileage in both a plane and a car, it's far more likely you'd have an aircraft accident than a car accident.
That's funny, I'm seeing stats here which indicate:
Plane: (1997) Air fatality: 1 for every 2,000,000,000 person-miles [url= https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_safety ]Wiki source[/url]
Car: (2012) 1.1 for every 1,000,000 vehicle miles [url= http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/Pubs/811552.pdf ]Source[/url]
Granted person and vehicle miles aren't the same, [s]but that can only make the car stat. worse.[/s] These are US stats.
So, travelling any distance, you're more than 2000x more likely to die in a car?
A worthy spot to place this, I feel..
[img] 
[/img]
CF, that is clearly fake. The aircraft in the last frame is a 747, Ryanair do not fly those - totally implausible.
Did any one else think that they gave the head of security fella all the toys - radios, shades, binoculars, shiny red fireman's helmet etc so that he would just bugger off and let the adults get on with the serious stuff?
[img] 
[/img]
Calm as Hindu cows
Did any one else think that they gave the head of security fella all the toys - radios, shades, binoculars, shiny red fireman's helmet etc so that he would just bugger off and let the adults get on with the serious stuff?
What, the British bloke?
He looked like a character out of a TV show: loves wearing uniforms and saying things like 'one zero' instead of ten. I bet he has a tool holster on his belt as well.
That's him.
"Big Flo one mile from impact"
Realy?
Its the evident safety procedures that make flying feel dangerous - being asked to consider a crash every time you fly
And from a conspiracy theory point of view, probably all part of the keeping people under control.
Dunno why but I always watch the life jacket demo - pull the straps when you leave the aircraft (I bet 90% would do that immediately, in the aisle), pull another tab to activate the light that activates on contact with water (huh?).
All moot, because of the numerous air accidents, how many have actually landed adequately safely on water to be able to pull on a life jacket? Very very few, and of the only one I can actually recall in recent years, it landed in a bay of a major city with plenty of boats about. Anywhere else, you're shark food.
Yes, amazing that the engine carried on running - maybe because the throttles were intercepted by the remote control?
This is my favourite in that respect.
The point is, with air travel, the most dangerous parts by far are landing and take off. So discount mileage completely.
If you did two take off and two landings every day, and a car commute, you are far more likely to die in an air crash. I have seen data to support that, just don't ask where (but I do read a lot of air and rail crash data).
I will have a rummage next week see what I can come up with.
Edit: Very quick Google, it's not a state secret after all (although there is a multi-trillion pound air travel business trying hard to push another set of data of course).
OK, never seen this before, but it shows what I'm talking about
[url= http://www.numberwatch.co.uk/risks_of_travel.htm ]Linky to stats[/url]
Air travel very nearly 3 times more risky than car travel.
So using your 'logic'; pilots who drive to work should all be killed almost instantly.
Air travel very nearly 3 times more risky than car travel.
Bit of a dodgy claim that. Air is only riskier on one of three measures. Per journey. Even then given that a typical adult might make several car journeys a day I'd still say flying is safer.
Depends on the country as well. The latest 10 year fatality figures for British Commercial Aviation is 0 fatalities per billion km. Seems pretty safe to me.As per a [url= https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:ezAx96pTTkcJ:www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/SN03760.pdf+&hl=en&gl=uk&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESgPyQjmJd2mkkEC-_N33VOggBmoCzpBWAuV-mqESwZfd4V9g0AkBWnryN-xKic5tJzE5PLEg3wOW2gMUCCvCq9GGMlm0tH_LfFQaS7IHQ3J0L_oZJSL8mwUE9jQN0rPnB1_Bd6p&sig=AHIEtbRKNb0GtWMwVp23JS-8Dx5YtxPoog ]parliament briefing paper[/url]