I'm sure Colyn was referring to my experience with the Lightspeed (III) system that failed 3 times in less than 400 hours (I'm on my 4th one, making 3 failures, not 4, but I'll stay with 4 for the purpose of discussion).  Regardless, 4 failures would have made for a per-hour failure rate of 1%, much, much worse than his .001% that he says is the fleet average.  Okay, but the sample size is very small, making the statistic very weak.  If we add one other plane to the statistic, another ES that I know of that has over 1,000 hours on dual Lightspeeds with no failures, the number now is 4 failures in 2,400 hours, or an hourly failure rate of 0.17%, 6 times "better."  Still not good, but it illustrates the weakness of coming to a conclusion from such a small data set.

Gary

Colyn posted:

So to get to GA accident rates we as a fleet have free of failures that
could contribute to a fatality (on all systems including the pilot) 99.999%
of the hours flown.

A system that fails 1% of the hours flown is about 1000 times more dangerous
than that.

Something to think about when selecting components.