We hear it all the time, but is it true? What numbers are the basis of this?
Is it total number of deaths per year? If so, then that’s a crock because there are more people in a car every year than in an airplane. Also, I may take 1 flight per year but something like 500 car rides. We need to normalize the data. I seem to recall hearing about a normalization to “passanger-miles”, but even that seems a bit biased to favor airlines since most of the flying risk is during take-off/landing and not during the long stretches of cruising. Maybe it should be risk per “passanger-trips” or something like that.
And then there’s the risk involved in an accident. Odds are that a person will survive a car accident. Odds are that a person will not survive a plane accident.
I agree. There are too many things which make the situations non-comparable.
I would like to see a comparison done of people who flew from NY to Miami, vs. people who drove from NY to Miami. That would provide some useful information.
But comparing the thousand miles I drive in a month vs. the thousand miles I covered in a flight — that’s apples and oranges, buddy.
This was actually discussed in one of my psych classes. We found that the death rate was higher cars than planes. (I no longer have the text, so I can’t give an exact cite). However, flying is perceived as more dangerous. This is because car accidents are rarely big news. For example, a local fatal car accident was on the second page of the local news section of the paper. On the other hand, the recent plane crash in Queens was national news.
Thats just like when they say,its more likley to get in a crash a mile from home,than anywhere else.
Well of course,you make more trips from you house,than anywhere else
Thanks KneadToKnow, I missed those when I tried the search function. Basically, it seems that you can play the statistics in many ways. My sense is that, overall, the statistics may suggest flying is safer but, like Keeve said, there still is an aspect of “apples & oranges” to the data.
[Dennis Miller]
Y’know, flying may be safer statistically than driving. But how many plane creashes do you see where people get out and exchange insurance info?
[/Dennis Miller]
It’s one of flying’s “dirty little secrets” that flying is safer than driving. Really, it’s just a little white lie. Flying is very, very safe indeed.
Actually, 80% of flying accidents do not involve fatalities. In this thread from about a year and a half ago I posted some stats I got from the AOPA site.
Oops. It’s I meant to say that it’s one of flyin’s “dirty little secrets” that flying is really not safer than driving. This revelation came out either in Flying or AOPA’s Pilot magazine in an article called “Flying’s Great Lie” or something like that. According to the article, driving actually is a little safer than flying.
Okay so when we say that flying is safer than driving, we’re fudging a little. But 80% of aircraft crashes are surviveable and flying is extremely safe. Fewer collisions, too.
Of course, the usual comparison is between driving and commercial flying, you gen-av nuts (as indicated by the magazines cited) make flying unsafe to even think about.
That’s an interesting example of how statistics can be somewhat “twisted”. Both rail and air companies state that respectively train/plane is the safest mean of transportation. Only train companies base this statement on the number of lethalities/number of travels and air companies on the number of lethalities/km (or mile) covered.
lucwarm’s point is the one that’s always bothered me about this statistic. I’m a fairly good driver, have a relatively safe car, never drive drunk, and have never been in an accident. Now, granted, there’s nothing stopping some drunk from swerving into my lane and sideswiping me some day, but still – he and I are lumped into the same pool of statistics when figuring out how safe driving is. Whereas when you get in a plane, you have zero control over how safe the flight will be. It’s all in the hands of the pilot.
I think that’s what people react to when they say that they feel flying isn’t safe. Statistically, it may be safer, but practically speaking, you are giving up all control over the situation, unlike when you are driving and have some control. If I wake up in the morning and see that the roads are too icy, I may choose for safety’s sake not to drive to work that day. But if I’m in a plane and the wings are too icy, I have to rely on the pilot’s judgement about whether or not to fly. This is something that the statistics do not take into account.
The problem with the “giving up control” theory is that generally people aren’t afraid to ride in buses or on trains, where one also must give up control. Depending on the carrier, they may fear the trip will be unpleasant or fear crime (a risk exaggerated by media coverage) but I’ve never heard someone say they were afraid for their safety riding a train.
I think the reason for most who are afraid to fly is that it involves FLYING. That is, they are doing something that seems utterly unnatural. In reality, traveling at 60mph in a car or train is just as unnatural, but being on the ground it doesn’t seem so, or at least not as unnatural as flying.
I remember an analysis printed in the Wall Street Journal a year or two ago. Most of the danger from flying is in taking off and landing, with cruising being much safer. Most of the danger in driving a car is on two-lane roads, with cruising on the Interstate being much safer. Also, driving at night is several times more dangerous than driving during the day.
The article’s conclusion was that, in general, cars are safer for trips of up to several hundred miles (about 300 IIRC), but commercial jetliners are safer for longer trips. This assumes you can get a non-stop flight. The danger of flying is approximately proportional to the number of hops. Small commuter-type turboprops are more dangerous than jetliners.
What about little propeller-driven aircraft? I took a float-plane trip maybe ten months ago, and I was surprised to find that, unlike my regular anxiety on a big passenger jet, I found the tiny (six seats, including pilot) plane to be not frightening at all. I have no idea if it’s because I could see the pilot and watch what he was doing, or something else, but I found the experience shockingly enjoyable given my white knuckles on 747s. What’s the safety record for those small types of aircraft? Was my sense of relaxation misplaced?
It’s an interesting question - why are so many people afraid of flying?
I think that “lack of control” is important, but I agree that it doesn’t explain everything.
Here are a few thoughts of mine, in no particular order:
Catastrophes - where most or all of a plane’s passengers are killed - are more frequent than for rail or bus accidents, and are also widely reported.
Total lack of control.
People are aware that a small failure can lead to a total disaster. In daily life, small failures are common. Thus, an airplane crash seems more likely.
Getting back to the “apples and oranges” issue, I would like to add that I have driven thousands of miles on some of the busiest and most dangerous roads and highways in the United States. I have seen dozens of car accidents, including fatalities. I have been in more than one near accident, and I have been in a couple minor “fender-benders.”
Based on my experience, I believe that well over 90% of all auto accidents could have been avoided by any individual participant if he or she had driven more defensively - by leaving plenty of space in front; steering clear of drivers who are obviously in “aggressive” mode; having an “out” whenever possible, etc.
