![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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). False. You can't just change the numerator, you must also look at the denominator - that is, you need to then remove all the non-accident flights outside the envelope. Simple example - assume that 10% of the pilots are female. There are 312 accidents, and they happen to be distributed 10% female, 90% male. If you're female, are you really ten times safer because you can discount the 90% of male accidents? Jose -- The price of freedom is... well... freedom. for Email, make the obvious change in the address. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
UAV's and TFR's along the Mexico boarder | John Doe | Piloting | 145 | March 31st 06 06:58 PM |
Air Force One Had to Intercept Some Inadvertent Flyers / How? | Rick Umali | Piloting | 29 | February 15th 06 04:40 AM |
Nearly had my life terminated today | Michelle P | Piloting | 11 | September 3rd 05 02:37 AM |
Parachute fails to save SR-22 | Capt.Doug | Piloting | 72 | February 10th 05 05:14 AM |
USAF = US Amphetamine Fools | RT | Military Aviation | 104 | September 25th 03 03:17 PM |