"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
ups.com...
Which is safer flying or driving?

Fatalities per million trips Odds of being
killed on a single trip:
Airliner (Part 121) 0.019
52.6 million to 1
Automobile 0.130
7.6 million to 1
Commuter Airline (Part 135 scheduled) 1.72 581,395 to
1
Commuter Plane (Part 135 - Air taxi on demand) 6.10 163,934 to 1
General Aviation (Part 91) 13.3
73,187 to 1




Actually, Jay, it does not look that bad. There are a lot of GA accidents
that are not applicable to your envelope of operation, even BEFORE you take
out the stupidity factor.

I took a couple of hours and looked at the fatalities in the NTSB database
just for 2006 for GA and "non-commercial" operations.

The analysis is done by hand, and quickly, so there may be an error in the
count of a couple here or there but it is probably pretty close.

Of the total fatalities (130), there are probably less than 40 that apply to
the sort of flying that you claim to do. So you should be able to multiply
the safety probability by more than 4 (or reduce your risk by a factor of
more than 4.... maybe something closer to 300,000 to 1).



The "cause" categories, below, are strictly MY OWN inference based on the
factual or preliminary NTSB report, since none of these accidents have an
"official" cause determined as of yet. The categories are *exclusive"... no
fatality appears in more than one category... IE: an helicopter doing
photography will show up in "Helicopters" and NOT in "Low level work".


Total: 130

Helicopters: 23
IFR and IMC: 23
Probable VFR into IMC: 7
VFR at night: 8

Takeoff from unprepared surface: 1
Hand-propping: 1
Aerobatics involved immediately befo 5
Testing new aircraft/installation: 1
Low level "work" (spraying, photography, etc.): 11


Mid-air collision: 3
Training: 1
Non-work Low level manoeuvres/stupidity: 5

Engine failu 8

Yet to be explained, Experimental: 3
Yet to be explained, certified: 16
Yet to be explained, large: 14 (3 accidents)

The last category, the 14 fatalities are the result of only 3 accidents
involving larger aircraft.
http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?e...08X00173&key=1 involved 6 in
a Beech 200 upon landing after a rather bizarre go-around.
http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?e...02X00149&key=1 involved 4 in
a Citation jet landing, and ,
http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?e...03X00158&key=1 was 4 in a
business twin, also related to landing.

....and in spite of protestations from the group, IFR in IMC appears to be a
dangerous activity for GA.