Mailing List lml@lancaironline.net Message #36876
From: terrence o'neill <troneill@charter.net>
Sender: <marv@lancaironline.net>
Subject: Re: [LML] Re: response to Terrence O'Neill's posting...
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2006 23:57:46 -0400
To: <lml>
Barry,
    This is off-topic, but I'll check it out.  I ran the statistics 15-20 years ago, soending weeks collecting and analyzing the data, when airline companies were touting 'safe passenger miles', which is a false statistic.  A loaded airliner is not safer than an empty one.
    Is your '10 times the fatalities per year" in terms of per aircraft hour flown?  Or per mile flown?
 
    My original complaint -- was that we blame (Lancair) pilots instead of the airplane design.  I believe that Lancair pillots as a group are equal to or superior to most ofther types.  But I injferred that Safety-wise,  all aircraft are designed with 'safety' not at the top of the priorities list, and have serious faults.  In the Lancair case, it's the lack of a restoring pitch force at a stalled AOA, and too-light pitch control... all of which is well documented. 
 
The non-answer responses have all been complaints that airline pilots don't need baby-sitting (I said the FAA baby-sat the airliners meaning complete control when in  motion etc.... no reference to the pilots at all.  And now we're all upset about my coments about how safe ariliners are compared to GenAv.  Irrelevant, to the aerodynamic safety of our GenAv and Experimentals designs.
 
    So, Barry, what is your comment about the stability and controllability at stall-region AOAs, of the early Lancairs?
 
  Make Experimentals aerodynamically safer!
 
Terrence
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, July 24, 2006 11:43 AM
Subject: [LML] Re: response to Terrence O'Neill's posting...


On Jul 23, 2006, at 2:43 PM, terrence o'neill wrote:

The intent was to say that the airlines are not much safer than GenAv in spite of the fact that they have all these extra benefits:


Unfortunately, while I wish this was true, statistics do not bear it out.  General aviation experiences about 10 times the fatalities per year compared to air carriers.   This does not factor in that GA (surprisingly, on the face of it) flies about twice as many total hours as air carriers (approx. 30 million v. about 15 million) with more take offs and landings where 50% of all accidents happen.  Regardless, dead is dead.

Anecdotally, think of how many people you know or have heard of dying in GA accidents and compare that to how many people you know have died in airliners.  I personally (thankfully) do not know of a single person killed in an airline crash.  

Don't tell your wives this, but statistically speaking, GA is significantly more dangerous than driving...



Fly safely!


Barry



Subscribe (FEED) Subscribe (DIGEST) Subscribe (INDEX) Unsubscribe Mail to Listmaster