Comments on: Reduce Your Odds Of Dying In A Plane Crash

By: Chris

Chris — Fri, 23 Jul 2010 16:21:42 +0000

Since the point of the graphics is to discuss fatalities, shouldn’t the focus be on the number of fatalities rather than the number of fatal accidents?

By: Tanya

Tanya — Sat, 29 May 2010 21:20:05 +0000

I liked the visualization a lot, but if I start to think carefully and analyze the info…
It is like biased statistical review..
You cannot rank mortality for different planes without taking into account how many passenger they carry…of course one crash of a huge airplane will have more deaths then several crashes of small planes… and in this case pictures are working to enforce the wrong perception,… as I see it.

If you wanna make a person a fool – give him/her just a piece of all available information…

By: Brian

Brian — Wed, 24 Mar 2010 14:11:30 +0000

You need to include relative proportions rather than absolute proportions in your plane crash data (i.e. plane crashes per # of flights). Or better yet, include both.

By: cuvy

cuvy — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 13:21:10 +0000

So, what are the stats on people dying in car crashes while driving from/to an airport to catch a flight?

By: Collin Webster

Collin Webster — Tue, 12 Jan 2010 12:01:00 +0000

Aeroflot never used DC-9. Perhaps you meant DC-10 (Aeroflot Cargo).
The Clipart for DC-9 is a Fokker F-70.
See Wikipedia for further information.

By: gifts for her

gifts for her — Wed, 25 Nov 2009 11:13:30 +0000

The number of accidents per destination apparently was not set in relation to the number of flights and the number of accidents per model was set in relation to the number of planes in service (I hope not currently but overall) but not to the time of service of each of these planes. The latter especially means that newer planes seem safer just because they didn’t have so much time to crash.

By: Karl Wohlgemuth

Karl Wohlgemuth — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 15:16:35 +0000

Are you aware that driving a car for more than 20 km is already more dangerous than a direct flight? If you have arrived at the airport by car you have already survived the most dangerous part of the journey. So why even think about plane crashes? ;-)

By: Richard Whitehouse

Richard Whitehouse — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 01:46:30 +0000

Yeah, this is just pure statistical crap. There is no referencing – you imply that the USA has the highest risk, where as it is actually the case that it just has more flights per year. Without any reference to per flight or per mile, this diagram is useless, and represents a complete and utter lack of understanding in the source matter.

By: Capt Tom Bunn LCSW

Capt Tom Bunn LCSW — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 20:45:31 +0000

Many things have changed in the last fifty years of aviation. We transitioned from props to jets. We have ILS to provide precision guidance to the runway. We have automatic landing which takes pilot error out of landing in bad weather. We have the Ground Proximity Warning System to warn when headed toward a crash. We have TCAS to prevent mid-air collisions.

When you go back too many years, you mush together aviation as it is today with how it was years ago. Few, if any, who see this site will be interested in history. Rather, they want to know about CURRENT safety. When the focus of these statistics goes back before 1990, that is far too removed from the level of safety we have today. So your presentations fail to reflect what people want to know that can help them make a decision when flying.

By: jemauvais

jemauvais — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 15:33:25 +0000

@Salo

“Thanks muchly for your work on the aviation deaths, but wouldnâ€™t the country of origin be more relevant to the likelihood of a crash than the destination country?”

Actually I think the country of destination is equally relevant. Crashes due to mechanical issues should be an issue with the originating country but crashes due to pilot error or poor instrument approach design would be more relevantly linked to the destination rather than the origin of the flight.

American Airlines Flight 965, Korean Air Flight 801, and USAF IFO-21 are examples of what I mean.