"Ron Parsons" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Gary L. Drescher" wrote:

"Ron Parsons" wrote in message
...
My understanding is that in the Alaskan population, 1 in 4 is a
licensed
pilot.

If that were so, then 25% of licensed US pilots would be Alaskan (the
population there is over 600,000). Unless Alaskan pilots fly much less
often than pilots elsewhere in the US, we'd therefore expect at least 25%
of
aviation fatalities to be in Alaska, since flying there is at least as
dangerous as flying in the rest of the US. In fact, though, only 4% of
fatal US aviation accidents occur in Alaska (according to the NTSB
database).

Only if you presume the level of competence to be the same. I'd suggest
that bush flying in Alaska weeds out the marginal ones.

Yes, it weeds them out by killing them. That's why the fatality rate for
flying in Alaska is much higher than the US average--not several times
lower, as would be required to explain why only 4% of fatal crashes occur in
Alaska if 25% of US pilots were Alaskan (although 25% of US pilots being
Alaskan is already very implausible on the face of it).

In any case, the pilot database at landings.com lists 11,179 Alaskan pilots
with current medical certificates. That's 1 in 57 Alaskans. Just out of
curiosity, what made you think it was 1 in 4?

Based on the nature of flying in Alaska, I would suspect that the
percentage of commercial pilots is higher than the lower 48 as well.

According to Alaska's Department of Labor, there are about 3,000
professional pilots
there (http://www.labor.state.ak.us/research/odb/02/ak02.xls),

Would a "professional pilot" be one whose primary income is derived as a
pilot?

For purposes of the labor statistics we were discussing earlier, I'd assume
the definition is along those lines.

--Gary


--
Ron