If all midair collisions were eliminated...

If all GA midair collisions were eliminated, ~99% of GA aircraft fatalities
would still happen.

From Nall Report analysis of U.S. NTSB records:

Total fixed wing GA fatalities:
2002: 518
2003: 555
2004: 510
2005: 491
2006: 488
Total: 2562

Fatalities due to midair collision:
2002: 5
2003: 7
2004: 6
2005: 5
2006: 4
Total: 27

http://www.aopa.org/asf/publications/03nall.pdf
http://www.aopa.org/asf/publications/04nall.pdf
http://www.aopa.org/asf/publications/05nall.pdf
http://www.aopa.org/asf/publications/06nall.pdf
http://www.aopa.org/asf/publications/07nall.pdf

Jim Logajan writes:

If all GA midair collisions were eliminated, ~99% of GA aircraft fatalities
would still happen.

If all GA midair collisions were eliminated, 27 people would still be alive,
based on your own cited statistics. Is saving lives not a sufficient
justification for eliminating midair collisions? Is there are threshold of
deaths below which efforts to eliminate midair collisions are not justified?
What cost is there in attempting to eliminate midair collisions that offsets
the loss of life that they entail?

Mxsmanic wrote:
Jim Logajan writes:

If all GA midair collisions were eliminated, ~99% of GA aircraft fatalities
would still happen.

If all GA midair collisions were eliminated, 27 people would still be alive,
based on your own cited statistics. Is saving lives not a sufficient
justification for eliminating midair collisions? Is there are threshold of
deaths below which efforts to eliminate midair collisions are not justified?
What cost is there in attempting to eliminate midair collisions that offsets
the loss of life that they entail?


Oh man...
Excuse me for biting a troll, guys.

mx?

Exactly HOW do you think you can prevent ANY midair?

The ONLY way I can see is to ground everybody.
That'd work!


--

Richard Lamb
http://www.home.earthlink.net/~cavelamb/


"The clock of life is wound but once, and no man has the power
to tell just when the hands will stop, at late or early hour...
Now is the only time you own. Live, love, toil with a will.
Place no faith in time. For the clock may soon be still."

On Feb 9, 6:59*pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
Jim Logajan writes:
If all GA midair collisions were eliminated, ~99% of GA aircraft fatalities
would still happen.

If all GA midair collisions were eliminated, 27 people would still be alive,
based on your own cited statistics. Is saving lives not a sufficient
justification for eliminating midair collisions? Is there are threshold of
deaths below which efforts to eliminate midair collisions are not justified?
What cost is there in attempting to eliminate midair collisions that offsets
the loss of life that they entail?

Where exactly in his post did he suggest we should be satisfied with
low numbers of fatalities due to mid-air collisions?

I find that information extremely interesting and I'm glad he posted
it. Thanks Jim!

I also find this interesting. I wonder if the ratio of 100/1 would be
the same if one only considered glider-involved accidents. My guess
is we have a disproportionate number of mid-airs. Any way to check?

Matt

On Feb 9, 11:11*pm, "Matt Herron Jr." wrote:
I also find this interesting. *I wonder if the ratio of 100/1 would be
the same if one only considered glider-involved accidents. *My guess
is we have a disproportionate number of mid-airs. *Any way to check?

Matt

Matt

You can do the research...

http://www.ntsb.gov/aviationquery/index.aspx

You can select on Injury Severity and Category (Glider, etc.). Play
with trying "collision" etc. in the event details box (but obviously
you need to check the results/misses).

Darryl

On Feb 9, 11:55*pm, Darryl Ramm wrote:

You can do the research...

http://www.ntsb.gov/aviationquery/index.aspx

You can select on Injury Severity and Category (Glider, etc.). Play
with trying "collision" etc. in the event details box (but obviously
you need to check the results/misses).

Darryl

According to my hand count of accidents in the database, over the past
10 years there have been 60 fatal glider accidents in the US with 68
total fatalities. Three of the accidents and 9 of the fatalities were
due to mid-air collisions, so the numbers are higher for gliders - 5%
of the accidents and 15% of the fatalities. Still, you are 20 times
more likely to die in a single glider crash than a midair - if that is
any consolation.

It is worthwhile looking at the reports as a reminder for extra care
in certain areas. Lots of accidents were on approach (maybe half),
either coming up short or a stall/spin turning base or final. The
next biggest cause was collision with terrain during flight (not
always possible to determine controlled versus uncontrolled). Next
came loss of control/structural failure in flight. There were also a
number of cases of assembly errors, control problems on takeoff and
several where pilot incapacitation was suspected. The rank ordering of
causes is my rough impression.

Unfortunately, too many on the list were friends or people I'd met
along the way. Too many.

Fly safe.

9B

Mxsmanic wrote:
Jim Logajan writes:

If all GA midair collisions were eliminated, ~99% of GA aircraft fatalities
would still happen.

If all GA midair collisions were eliminated, 27 people would still be alive,
based on your own cited statistics. Is saving lives not a sufficient
justification for eliminating midair collisions? Is there are threshold of
deaths below which efforts to eliminate midair collisions are not justified?
What cost is there in attempting to eliminate midair collisions that offsets
the loss of life that they entail?

If the US road speed limit were reduced from 70 to 65 mph, perhaps
30,000 lives would be saved annually. Isn't that worthwhile?

We have apparently decided NOT.

Brian W

In article , betwys1
@sbcglobal.net says...

If the US road speed limit were reduced from 70 to 65 mph, perhaps
30,000 lives would be saved annually. Isn't that worthwhile?

We have apparently decided NOT.




Keywords in your sentences are 'perhaps' and 'apparently'.
You might even claim all roadkills would be saved if US road speed were
to reduced to zero.

In Germany the speed on the autobahn is unlimited, in neighbouring
Belgium the max speed is 120 kph. However in Germany there are less than
half as many killed per 1000 km of highway than in Belgium.

Speed does not kill, failing or absent infrastructure does.



Tom De Moor

"brian whatcott" wrote in message
...

If the US road speed limit were reduced from 70 to 65 mph, perhaps 30,000
lives would be saved annually. Isn't that worthwhile?

Your "perhaps" is bogus.

Since the speed limit was raised to from 65 to 70/75, fatalities went DOWN.

Same thing when it went from 55 to 65.


We have apparently decided NOT.

Considering that about 2/3rds of the annual fatalities (43K annually) are at
intersections, not on highways/freeways, you'll have to come up with a
better scenario.

Matt