Safety: Planes vs Bikes

On page 12 of 72 of the below listed Recent Trends in Fatal Motorcycle
Crashes -

"In 2004, motorcycles made up nearly 2.4 percent of all registered vehicles
in the United States and accounted for only 0.3 percent of all vehicle miles
traveled. In comparison, motorcycle riders accounted for 5.3 percent of
total traffic fatalities in 1995 and have increased to 9.4 percent of the
total traffic fatalities in 2004. Per 100,000 registered vehicles, the
fatality rate for motorcycle riders (69.33) in 2004 was 4.6 times the
fatality rate for passenger car occupants (15.05). Per vehicle mile traveled
in 2004, motorcycle riders (39.89) were about 34 times more likely than
passenger car occupants (1.18) to die in a motor vehicle traffic crash."

So, motorcycle riders are 34 times more likely to die per mile then in a
car. I believe the analysis on GA to cars is about 6 to 8 times more
likely. Looks like there is your answer.

Also, have you noticed how the general public freaks out over GA, however
they don't seem even seem to worry to much if at all when they go bicycle
riding or boating, which combined has about 3 times the fatalities as GA
does.

Alan.



From Recent Trends in Fatal Motorcycle Crashes:
http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/nrd...006/810606.pdf

There were 10 billion vehicle miles traveled on motorcycles in the US
(Table 5). There were 4,000 fatalities (page 10). Therefore there is
an average of one fatality per 2,500,000 miles driven on a motorcycle.

BTW, motorcycles registered in the US has gone from 3.6 million in 1990
to 6.4 million in 2003.

From the Nall Report at http://www.aopa.org/asf/publications/05nall.pdf
There was 1.2 fatal accidents per 100,000 flight hours. (page 5)

Therefore if you assume the average motorcycle travels an average of 30
mph, the accident rates are equal. (2,500,000/(100,000/1.2))

"Charles Talleyrand" wrote:
Don Tuite wrote:
"Charles Talleyrand" wrote:

I fly a small airplane (a Cessna 150) that is well
maintained. I fly over forests in good weather and
typically during the day. My biggest fear is the engine
quits over the forest and I have no place to make a
deadstick landing except the tops of large trees.

I drive a moderate motorcycle (a Honda Nighthawk 750) at
moderate speeds through my small town and through the
surrounding forests. My biggest fears are either that I
will slide on a patch of dirt on the road and crash or
someone will hit me with their car through inattention.

I've been asked several times which of these things is
more dangerous. Can anyone provide some statistics on
this?

Per mile, per hour, per year? What kind of gear do you
wear? We know you do a BFR every other year; when was the
last time you took the MSF experienced rider course? How
old are you?

Here's the NHTSA's "Recent Trends in Fatal Motorcycle
Crashes: An Update," from June of this year:

http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/nrd...Rpts/2006/8106
06.pdf

And here's the 2005 Nall Report on General Aviation
accidents.:

http://www.aopa.org/asf/publications/05nall.pdf

My guess is that personal factors even out and the risk
for any one of us is about the same.

And an awful lot of GA ;pilots are/have been bikers. I
wish there were statistics on how many.

Excellent post. Much Thanks

Here is another interesting article. Data is a little older,
but the factors contributing to accidents and death are
interesting.

http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs...nium/00075.pdf

or user friendly http://tinyurl.com/sydlc

| IMPAIRED RIDER, Recent Findings. Motorcycle operators
| involved in fatal crashes have higher intoxication rates
| than operators of all other motor vehicles. In 1997 almost
| 30 percent of all fatally injured motorcycle operators were
| intoxicated, with a blood alcohol concentration of .10.
| An additional 11 percent had lower alcohol levels. Almost
| half of the motorcycle operators who died in single-vehicle
| crashes were intoxicated (1). These data have changed very
| little during the past 10 years.

| LICENSING, Key Issues. Most states require riders to obtain
| a special operator’s license before driving a motorcycle on
| public streets and highways. There is, however, ample
| evidence that many motorcyclists ignore these requirements.
| NHTSA statistics show that, during a 10-year period ending
| in the mid-1990s, 42 percent of the motorcyclists involved
| in fatal accidents in the United States were either
| unlicensed or improperly licensed.

IMHO, these 2 items can be mitigated by the rider, decreasing
statistical likelihood of becoming a motorcycle fatality or
gaining serious injury.

There are always risks to any activity. An appropriate risk
assessment will help mitigate the risk and gain greater
likelihood of success.

One cannot avoid all accidents, but there are many that can be
avoided. It is best to avoid those that are caused by one's
own foolishness and be on the lookout for those caused by
others.

--
HPT

In article ,
Jose wrote:

Another way to approach the question/answer is to consider the residual
risk after taking appropriate steps to mitigate the risk. The hazards
associated with an engine failure in flight can be mitigated by several
steps - flying a twin...

Careful, mitigating one risk breeds another.

By definition, residual risk includes new risks created by mitigation steps.

--
Bob Noel
Looking for a sig the
lawyers will hate

Grumman-581 wrote:
On 24 Aug 2006 16:52:30 -0700, "Charles Talleyrand"
wrote:

I've been asked several times which of these things is more dangerous.
Can anyone provide some statistics on this?


Personal experience is that I've broken more bones on motorcycles than
I have in aircraft... So far, 5 bones on motorcycles, only 2 in an
aircraft... Most of the motorcycle incidents required me to be carried
away from the accident... I walked / hobbled away from the aircraft
incidents... As a side note, in both the motorcycle and the aircraft
incidents, I was wearing a full coverage helmets that sustained quite
noticeable damage... The damage to the motorcycle incident helmets
were considerably more severe though...

So you've established that you are a better pilot than you are a
motorcyclist, but you aren't very good at either. :-)

Matt (no broken bones from either riding or flying)

NrDg wrote:

"Charles Talleyrand" wrote in message
ups.com...

I fly a small airplane (a Cessna 150) that is well maintained. I fly
over forests in good weather and typically during the day. My biggest
fear is the engine quits over the forest and I have no place to make a
deadstick landing except the tops of large trees.

I drive a moderate motorcycle (a Honda Nighthawk 750) at moderate
speeds through my small town and through the surrounding forests. My
biggest fears are either that I will slide on a patch of dirt on the
road and crash or someone will hit me with their car through
inattention.

I've been asked several times which of these things is more dangerous.
Can anyone provide some statistics on this?


What I have heard and believe myself is that the risk of death is similar
for both activities on average. Hazards are different. Private pilots tend
to do themselve in with their own mistakes. Riders get got by others a lot
more.

It has been a while, but my recollection is that the Hurt report doesn't
bear out the claim that motorcycles are more often done in by others. I
believe more than 50% of the motorcycle fatalities involved only the
motorcyclist.

Matt

By definition, residual risk includes new risks created by mitigation steps.

Yes, but it is easy to omit the new risks when considering the alternatives.

Jose
--
The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

BrianNZ wrote:
Peter R. wrote:
"vincent p. norris" wrote:

Half a century has passed since then, and I have never again been
asked if I fly, when taking out insurance.

Oh, they still ask.


I dread the day when insurance becomes compulsory.

Same here. I don't have any life insurance and don't need any.

"High Plains Thumper" wrote in message
...
BrianNZ wrote:
Peter R. wrote:
"vincent p. norris" wrote:

Half a century has passed since then, and I have never
again been asked if I fly, when taking out insurance.

Oh, they still ask.

I dread the day when insurance becomes compulsory.

Like in US or Japan?

Or the UK. In fact, Europe as a whole (as opposed to a hole).


--
Beav

VN 750
Zed 1000
OMF# 19

I have no statistics but you couldn't get me on a bike.
--
Gene Seibel
Tales of Flight - http://pad39a.com/gene/tales.html
Because I fly, I envy no one.


Charles Talleyrand wrote:
I've been asked several times which of these things is more dangerous.
Can anyone provide some statistics on this?

-Thanks
-Charles Talleyrand

alank wrote:
So, motorcycle riders are 34 times more likely to die per mile then in a
car.

So far, so good.'

I believe the analysis on GA to cars is about 6 to 8 times more
likely. Looks like there is your answer.

Yes, but that is ALL of GA. It includes instruction, corporate, and
self-flown business travel, all of which are much safer than personal
flying. In fact, EVERY part of GA is safer than personal flying,
including cropdusting.

Once you compare motorcycle riding to personal flying, they're about
the same in terms of fatalities. Motorcycles do cause more injuries.

Michael