No, I mean some numbers that seem to have a history that go through multiple
airplanes. When each airplane is assigned that number, it has several
accidents that eventually end up with a totaled airplane. I think that in
many cases, it might be that usage of a particular model of aircraft is more
"likely" to have an incident or accident, and may be part of the reason. For
example training aircraft may have more accidents/incidents. If they keep
assigning the number to airplanes (say a 172) that end up being used for
training, then they "may" have more accidents. However, I think some seem
like they are jinxed, as having multiple incidents/accidents not related to
any training activity, with different airplanes and owners that end up with
the same tail number over time.

Having said all that, I'm not really all that superstitious. It was mainly
an observation of some tail numbers.

- Steve

"Peter" wrote in message
...

"Stephen McNaught" wrote

On a side note; there are some tail numbers that I would insist on
never
having, if you look at the history of the various airplanes that have had
them. I think some numbers just might be jinxed.

You mean ones with "13" in them?