# Is Flying REALLY The Safest Way To Travel? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [May 14, 2018, 11:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-flying-really-the-safest-way-to-travel/814172 "2018-05-14T23:15:06Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![kayaker](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kayaker/32/441_2.png) [@kayaker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kayaker)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2018, 12:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-flying-really-the-safest-way-to-travel/814172/41 "2018-05-15T12:34:02Z")
The thing that scares me about flying is that “where do they bury the survivors” question.:dubious: ---
**Author:** ![FlikTheBlue](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fliktheblue/32/10972_2.png) [@FlikTheBlue](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FlikTheBlue)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2018, 12:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-flying-really-the-safest-way-to-travel/814172/42 "2018-05-15T12:43:30Z")
Give me a commercial flight flown by a professional any day of the week. When I’m taking a trip that includes a flight I find the actual flight the least stressful part of the trip because I know it’s the part where it’s least likely something will go wrong. Here’s the things I consider, apart from the numbers themselves. 1. The pilots are all well trained, which is a lot more I can say for many of the idiots on the road. 2. The planes are all looked after by professional aircraft mechanics. 3. There are air traffic controllers assisting the pilots with take off and landing. 4. If something does go wrong, there is time for the pilot to react, whereas with a car that say has a blowout things might be perfectly fine one second and then bam, dead the next in a head on collision. 5. Someone else is in charge, so I don’t have to worry about staying constantly alert. ---
**Author:** ![Llama\_Llogophile](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/49beb7/32.png) [@Llama\_Llogophile](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Llama_Llogophile)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2018, 12:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-flying-really-the-safest-way-to-travel/814172/43 "2018-05-15T12:55:04Z")
> [@Machine\_Elf](#): > > Not just “most of the time” - more like “virtually all of the time.” Turbulence can throw unbelted passengers around the cabin, and the plane itself is absolutely fine. Scary as hell no doubt, but as long as you’re wearing your seat belt your risk is low. I realize you’re agreeing with me, but this sort of undercuts what I was saying. To clarify, I’m talking about what pilots might call “light chop” being recounted later by passengers as a terrifying roller-coaster ride in the sky. Way before we get to people being tossed around the cabin by actual severe turbulence (which does happen, but rarely), passengers frequently perceive minor bumps as terrible, worrisome, metal-bending horror rides. Not to blame the passengers - as I say, they have little to go by. I’m just making the point that it’s nearly always exaggerated well before we get into actual bad turbulence. > [@](#): > > This speaks to my annoyance, which is related to abrupt control inputs by the pilots. The best ones make gradual control inputs, as if they were a chauffeur doing their professional best to give you a smooth ride while you spread Grey Poupon on your sandwich. OTOH, the worst ones are wanna-be fighter pilots, and they make you wonder if you’re dodging traffic with their snap rolls and violent pitch changes. Particularly unsettling is when we’re decelerating after touchdown, and suddenly they stomp much harder on the brakes, making me wonder if there’s a runway incursion up ahead. Fair enough, some pilots are smoother than others. But two nitpicks: Sometimes relatively aggressive braking is necessary because of runway length, density altitude, runway contamination, aircraft weight or a combination of factors. Also, people frequently perceive thrust reverser activation as a problem of some sort. That maybe we’re changing our mind to go around, or that we employ the naval aviator technique of going to full throttle at ground contact in case of a missed wire. Nope, just normal thrust reverse. Second, people often throw around “snap roll” without knowing what it means. It’s an actual [aerobatic maneuver](https://www.popularmechanics.com/adventure/sports/a6585/how-to-snap-roll-a-stunt-plane/) that is NOT the same thing as simply rolling the plane quickly about the longitudinal axis, as many mistakenly think. It’s essentially a horizontal stall, it’s very abrupt and can only be done safely in specialized airplanes. I realize you were using the term colloquially, but I try to educate people on the difference because I hear it a lot. ---
**Author:** ![FlikTheBlue](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fliktheblue/32/10972_2.png) [@FlikTheBlue](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FlikTheBlue)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2018, 1:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-flying-really-the-safest-way-to-travel/814172/44 "2018-05-15T13:03:27Z")
> [@Nava](#): > > How many people get run over by a flying plane? Outside of the set of The Incredibles, I mean. While admittedly rare, didn’t this happen once at an airport in the Caribbean (I think either St. Martin or St. Bart) where people watch the planes land from the beach right next to the runway? ---
**Author:** ![Nava](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/da6949/32.png) [@Nava](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nava)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2018, 1:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-flying-really-the-safest-way-to-travel/814172/45 "2018-05-15T13:06:40Z")
But was the plane _in flight_? ---
**Author:** ![The\_wind\_of\_my\_soul](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ecc23a/32.png) [@The\_wind\_of\_my\_soul](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_wind_of_my_soul)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2018, 1:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-flying-really-the-safest-way-to-travel/814172/46 "2018-05-15T13:17:47Z")
> [@russian\_heel](#): > > 1. The thought of the spectacular horror of dying in a plane crash far outweighs that of a car crash for most people (see . . . 9/11) . . ,thus while statistically way smaller, the thought of dying is a plane crash haunts most people more than that of a car crash .As a matter of fact IMO the UNLIKEINESS of dying in a plane crash makes the thought of it even more horrifying in some strange way (I’m glad I’m not THAT guy! OR look at how many Americans dies of Ebola a few years ago v the Flu—what got all the headlines?) I’m glad you mentioned this, since it’s a factor that seems to be left out of many conversations. I hear claims about how silly it is that people seem to be scared of dying from a shark attack, or a terrorist attack, or a plane crash, when you’re far more likely to die from a car accident, or a heart attack, or a drug overdose. But that’s presuming all deaths are equal, and some deaths seem way more scary than others. Me, I’m scared of high-rise buildings and and underground Metro stations, because I envision a fire or a bomb or a gunman and a whole bunch of people unable to escape because of the limited number of exit points for the large number of people. Is this how I’m most likely to die? Hell no. But the idea of being unable to escape, while knowing that if I don’t escape I’ll die, is absolutely one of the scariest scenarios my mind conjures up. ---
**Author:** ![FlikTheBlue](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fliktheblue/32/10972_2.png) [@FlikTheBlue](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FlikTheBlue)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2018, 1:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-flying-really-the-safest-way-to-travel/814172/47 "2018-05-15T13:28:17Z")
> [@Nava](#): > > But was the plane _in flight_? This was the incident I was thinking about. > **[Woman dead after being hit by jet blast at Caribbean beach](https://nypost.com/2017/07/13/woman-dead-after-being-hit-by-jet-blast-at-caribbean-beach/)** > > A thrill-seeking tourist was killed on a Caribbean island after the powerful blast from a departing plane blew her off her feet, according to a report. The unidentified 57-year-old New Zealand woma… She wasn’t technically run over, but it’s close enough. ---
**Author:** ![Lumpy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lumpy/32/446_2.png) [@Lumpy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lumpy)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2018, 1:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-flying-really-the-safest-way-to-travel/814172/48 "2018-05-15T13:39:10Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > Airplanes are much safer per passenger-_mile_, but the stats change if measured per passenger-_hour_ (though not nearly enough, I think, to make planes less safe). This does have a little relevance: Hours spent in travel is more relevant for certain purposes, both business and personal. > > IIUC that favorable-for-aviation figure would be even more more favorable if expressed (as would seem more appropriate) in passenger-km rather than vehicle-km. There’s also the effect that planes carry more passengers per vehicle than cars; so if an airplane is somewhat safer than a car per vehicle-hours, that difference gets magnified when you calculate by passengers. One could probably demonstrate a similar effect for commercial bus lines: slightly safer per vehicle due to driver vetting and training and higher maintenance standards; then magnify by larger passenger loads. ---
**Author:** ![kenobi\_65](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kenobi_65/32/13178_2.png) [@kenobi\_65](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kenobi_65)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2018, 2:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-flying-really-the-safest-way-to-travel/814172/49 "2018-05-15T14:32:13Z")
> [@golffan1963](#): > > Alive, yes, but it also makes me wonder how many times—over the hundreds of thousands of miles I flew—might I have been at risk, and simply not known? Conversely…how many times, over the hundreds of thousands of miles you’ve driven / ridden in a car in your life, have you been at risk, and simply not known? If you drive regularly, every day, your path is constantly crossing the paths of distracted drivers, drunk drivers, drivers whose vehicles aren’t properly maintained, and more. We have “close calls” while driving all the time – the guy who barely stops in time, the guy who goes to change lanes right into you, but realizes at the last moment that you’re there, the truck driver who doesn’t realize that there’s a car in his blind spot, etc. And, by and large, either we’re entirely unaware of these close calls, or they cause a momentary adrenaline-filled moment, which we forget about entirely by the end of the day. It seems like your trepidation is based on a gut feel you have, rather than any actual statistics (because you’ve already stated that you’ve seen the stats, and you feel this way anyway), and there isn’t anything that we can say that’ll change your mind. ---
**Author:** ![am77494](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/d2c977/32.png) [@am77494](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/am77494)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2018, 2:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-flying-really-the-safest-way-to-travel/814172/50 "2018-05-15T14:42:19Z")
I have participated in and chaired many formal risk review sessions and I believe that there is a psychological / evolutionary aspect to this. Let me give some background : So in risk analysis you can score an event by its probability (chance of occurrence) and impact when it does occur. There is a third aspect I.e. ease of mitigating the event if it occurs, but we will talk about that later. Now probability in its simplest terms can be High/Medium/Low and similarly impact can be H/M/L. So different permutations of the risks can be (Probability Impact) : HH, HM, HL, MH, MM, ML, LH, LM, LL All the above risks except LH is instinctively understandable by humans. LH are the risks which Humans buy insurance for like death / floods / fire / Etc. LH risks are also very innate and we are all genetically programmed for a fight or flight response. So if you hear movement in a bush, many will immediately have their fight or flight response triggered and adrenaline being pumped. Or if you see a snake or a spider (even though chances are it is harmless) the same response is triggered. Logic or reasoning may over time win but it’s hard to fight evolution. The second part is mitigation of an event if it occurs. This is the feeling you have when you buy a gun for self protection or a fire extinguisher. While a fire extinguisher and a gun offers limited mitigation of the bad events, the sense of impact of that event disproportionately decreases in the human mind. ---
**Author:** ![Machine\_Elf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/82dd89/32.png) [@Machine\_Elf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Machine_Elf)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2018, 2:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-flying-really-the-safest-way-to-travel/814172/51 "2018-05-15T14:49:21Z")
> [@Llama\_Llogophile](#): > > Sometimes relatively aggressive braking is necessary because of runway length, density altitude, runway contamination, aircraft weight or a combination of factors. Pilots can (and obviously should) brake as hard as is necessary. The unsettling thing is _sudden changes_ (a spike in the [jerk function)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerk_(physics)) in the amount of braking a good 10 seconds after touchdown, which seems to suggest that something has caught the pilots by surprise, e.g. a deer on the runway or a sudden realization that the far end of the pavement is much closer than they would like. A gradual increase to the same large level of decel, if circumstances permit it, would be much more pleasant. > [@Llama\_Llogophile](#): > > Second, people often throw around “snap roll” without knowing what it means. It’s an actual [aerobatic maneuver](https://www.popularmechanics.com/adventure/sports/a6585/how-to-snap-roll-a-stunt-plane/) that is NOT the same thing as simply rolling the plane quickly about the longitudinal axis, as many mistakenly think. It’s essentially a horizontal stall, it’s very abrupt and can only be done safely in specialized airplanes. > > I realize you were using the term colloquially, but I try to educate people on the difference because I hear it a lot. Thanks for the clarification. As with my description of sudden changes in braking, I was referring to sudden changes in roll rate (i.e. “snapping” the yoke to left/right, then snapping back to center when the desired bank angle is reached). Large roll rates are fine, but the yoke should never be moved suddenly (unless the pilot is in fact dodging traffic). ---
**Author:** ![MandaJo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ac91a4/32.png) [@MandaJo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MandaJo)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2018, 3:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-flying-really-the-safest-way-to-travel/814172/52 "2018-05-15T15:02:53Z")
> [@rat\_avatar](#): > > The average driver believes that they are above average, this is called the above-average effect or superiority bias. > > [https://www.psychologicalscience.org/news/motr/when-it-comes-to-driving-most-people-think-their-skills-are-above-average.html](https://www.psychologicalscience.org/news/motr/when-it-comes-to-driving-most-people-think-their-skills-are-above-average.html) > > There 3.38 road fatalities per 1 billion vehicle-km on US Interstates compared to 0.05 for commercial aviation. > [@CookingWithGas](#): > > “[And all the children are above average.](http://changingminds.org/explanations/theories/lake_woebegon.htm)” > > Regardless of the reality of your own driving skill, your logic is not valid. You are assuming that most fatalities are the fault of the person who is killed or their equipment. Bad drivers kill good drivers and passengers every day. > > And finally, commercial pilots have a lot more training and experience and more rigorous certification for what they do than you have had for driving. If the best qualification you have is that you are not drunk, I’m going with the pilot. > [@Voyager](#): > > You should have an idea of what kind of pilot you are getting, since they are licensed and supervised a lot better than drivers. And there is a copilot also. > You might not be drunk, but that guy roaring the wrong way down the interstate is. > Is your car maintenance done to the level that airplane maintenance is done? Does your car have the redundancy of a plane? If one of your engines goes out in the middle of a freeway moving 70, you don’t have another to allow you to keep moving. Guys, I’m not making an argument that I’m a super-safe driver or anything like that. It’s not personal, it’s math and basic risk assessment. From the point of view of a passenger, there is an imbalance of information. I don’t know anything about how dangerous a particular flight is, so my only reference is the global average. But I do know a few things about my own situation: 1) I’m not drunk 2) I’m wearing a seatbelt and 3) I’m driving a car built in the last five years, with modern airbags and crumple zones. All of those things have a significant statistical impact on how dangerous it is to drive. I don’t know how much, and I would be shocked if they made driving \*\*safer \*\*than flying, but they would certainly narrow the odds. Yes, of course good drivers can be in fatal accidents, but that doesn’t mean driving home drunk at night in the rain on a motorcycle at above the speed limit with no helmet is exactly as dangerous as driving a car the same distance, sober on a sunny day and with your seatbelt securely fastened. So it follows that the former is a lot more dangerous than flying relative to the latter. Y’all seem to be arguing that wearing a seat belt, staying sober, and having good airbags makes no statistical difference in how dangerous it is to travel by car. If so, we’ve wasted a lot of money on pushing those three factors so heavily. ---
**Author:** ![Icarus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/icarus/32/72_2.png) [@Icarus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Icarus)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2018, 3:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-flying-really-the-safest-way-to-travel/814172/53 "2018-05-15T15:11:38Z")
> [@am77494](#): > > I have participated in and chaired many formal risk review sessions and I believe that there is a psychological / evolutionary aspect to this. > > Let me give some background : So in risk analysis you can score an event by its probability (chance of occurrence) and impact when it does occur. There is a third aspect I.e. ease of mitigating the event if it occurs, but we will talk about that later. > > Now probability in its simplest terms can be High/Medium/Low and similarly impact can be H/M/L. So different permutations of the risks can be (Probability Impact) : HH, HM, HL, MH, MM, ML, LH, LM, LL > > All the above risks except LH is instinctively understandable by humans. LH are the risks which Humans buy insurance for like death / floods / fire / > Etc. > > LH risks are also very innate and we are all genetically programmed for a fight or flight response. So if you hear movement in a bush, many will immediately have their fight or flight response triggered and adrenaline being pumped. Or if you see a snake or a spider (even though chances are it is harmless) the same response is triggered. Logic or reasoning may over time win but it’s hard to fight evolution. > > The second part is mitigation of an event if it occurs. This is the feeling you have when you buy a gun for self protection or a fire extinguisher. While a fire extinguisher and a gun offers limited mitigation of the bad events, the sense of impact of that event disproportionately decreases in the human mind. This, to me, is a distillation of this whole discussion (and applies to a whole host of other issues) - the human propensity to be ruled by fear over reason. The OP has a level of fear associated with flying that no amount of statistics or discussion will overcome. As with so much else, emotion and logic do not exist in the same brain-space. You cannot argue logic against emotion, etc. So, the OP asks “Is Flying REALLY The Safest Way To Travel?”, to which the answer is a resounding and unqualified “YES”. But, a more pertinent question would be, “Can \*\*golffan1963 \*\*accept that flying is really the safest way to travel, based on statistics?”, to which the answer is a resounding “NO”. ---
**Author:** ![Llama\_Llogophile](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/49beb7/32.png) [@Llama\_Llogophile](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Llama_Llogophile)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2018, 3:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-flying-really-the-safest-way-to-travel/814172/54 "2018-05-15T15:12:18Z")
> [@Machine\_Elf](#): > > Pilots can (and obviously should) brake as hard as is necessary. The unsettling thing is _sudden changes_ (a spike in the [jerk function)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerk_(physics)) in the amount of braking a good 10 seconds after touchdown… That’s often the anti-skid functioning. And some planes’ brakes are just more grabby than others. One of the jets I’ve flown had an anti-skid system that felt a bit wonky. Not at all like a car where you get a sort of “crunchy” feeling, but rather the brakes would noticeably release and re-apply, usually on one side at a time. It could be disconcerting, but that was normal operation. But when it is pilot initiated it’s likely from attempting to exit the runway at a certain taxiway, sometimes at the request of ATC. And / or LAHSO (“land and hold short operations”), which require stopping at a certain point rather than rolling to the end or taking a taxiway of the pilot’s choice. ---
**Author:** ![Icarus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/icarus/32/72_2.png) [@Icarus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Icarus)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2018, 3:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-flying-really-the-safest-way-to-travel/814172/55 "2018-05-15T15:26:10Z")
> [@MandaJo](#): > > Guys, I’m not making an argument that I’m a super-safe driver or anything like that. It’s not personal, it’s math and basic risk assessment. > > From the point of view of a passenger, there is an imbalance of information. I don’t know anything about how dangerous a particular flight is, so my only reference is the global average. But I do know a few things about my own situation: 1) I’m not drunk 2) I’m wearing a seatbelt and 3) I’m driving a car built in the last five years, with modern airbags and crumple zones. > > All of those things have a significant statistical impact on how dangerous it is to drive. I don’t know how much, and I would be shocked if they made driving \*\*safer \*\*than flying, but they would certainly narrow the odds. > > Yes, of course good drivers can be in fatal accidents, but that doesn’t mean driving home drunk at night in the rain on a motorcycle at above the speed limit with no helmet is exactly as dangerous as driving a car the same distance, sober on a sunny day and with your seatbelt securely fastened. So it follows that the former is a lot more dangerous than flying relative to the latter. > > Y’all seem to be arguing that wearing a seat belt, staying sober, and having good airbags makes no statistical difference in how dangerous it is to travel by car. If so, we’ve wasted a lot of money on pushing those three factors so heavily. All this may be true, one may be in the upper 1% of the safest drivers statistically (by definition, someone has to be, bell curves and all that). But what if the entire range of worst to safest drivers is still, statistically on average, far below the range of safety for flying, that the two ranges are far apart and separated? I don’t know the answer to that. It would be an interesting angle to explore. “Is safe driving as safe as air travel?” It would require a lot of definition of terms and statistical analysis, to be sure. ---
**Author:** ![MandaJo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ac91a4/32.png) [@MandaJo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MandaJo)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2018, 3:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-flying-really-the-safest-way-to-travel/814172/56 "2018-05-15T15:43:29Z")
> [@Icarus](#): > > All this may be true, one may be in the upper 1% of the safest drivers statistically (by definition, someone has to be, bell curves and all that). > > But what if the entire range of worst to safest drivers is still, statistically on average, far below the range of safety for flying, that the two ranges are far apart and separated? > > I don’t know the answer to that. It would be an interesting angle to explore. “Is safe driving as safe as air travel?” It would require a lot of definition of terms and statistical analysis, to be sure. It doesn’t even have to overlap to be meaningful, though. Let’s say it’s twice as safe if you are sober, wear a seat belt, and have a new-ish car. If driving saves you $1000, that increase in safety might be enough to make driving seem like a better option. On the other hand, if you know you’re going to drive in an old car with a parent who refuses to wear a seatbelt, or if you will be riding with a driver you don’t trust to be sober, then flying is so much safer than driving that maybe it’s worth the $1000 to be safe. ---
**Author:** ![glee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/b5a626/32.png) [@glee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/glee)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2018, 3:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-flying-really-the-safest-way-to-travel/814172/57 "2018-05-15T15:44:13Z")
> [@MandaJo](#): > > From the point of view of a passenger, there is an imbalance of information. I don’t know anything about how dangerous a particular flight is, so my only reference is the global average. But I do know a few things about my own situation: 1) I’m not drunk 2) I’m wearing a seatbelt and 3) I’m driving a car built in the last five years, with modern airbags and crumple zones. It’s good that you are a safe driver. However (as mentioned earlier): - pilots are sober - planes have a co-pilot - planes have very high maintenance standards > [@MandaJo](#): > > All of those things have a significant statistical impact on how dangerous it is to drive. I don’t know how much, and I would be shocked if they made driving \*\*safer \*\*than flying, but they would certainly narrow the odds. **Only for your good self**. The odds are based on millions of journeys, so your sensible habits have no visible effect on the statistics. Between 1979 and 2014: An average of 940 people were killed in drink driving related accidents in Great Britain each year. An average of 3,681 people were seriously injured in drink driving related accidents in Great Britain each year. Approximately 85,000 people are convicted of drink driving related offences each and every year in England and Wales alone. > [@MandaJo](#): > > Yes, of course good drivers can be in fatal accidents, but that doesn’t mean driving home drunk at night in the rain on a motorcycle at above the speed limit with no helmet is exactly as dangerous as driving a car the same distance, sober on a sunny day and with your seatbelt securely fastened. So it follows that the former is a lot more dangerous than flying relative to the latter. If a drunk driver hits you head on (or smashes into you while you’re stationary), it doesn’t matter how well you drive. Some car drivers: - drive drunk - break the speed limit - take their eyes off the road - drive cars with shoddy brakes / bald tyres / poor steering - show off - get road rage > [@MandaJo](#): > > Y’all seem to be arguing that wearing a seat belt, staying sober, and having good airbags makes no statistical difference in how dangerous it is to travel by car. If so, we’ve wasted a lot of money on pushing those three factors so heavily. It **certainly** makes it personally safer. And if everybody did those things, the roads would be much safer. So the money hasn’t been wasted. Sadly some drivers ignore the correct way to drive and that is why flying is safer than driving (as proved by the statistics.) ---
**Author:** ![MandaJo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ac91a4/32.png) [@MandaJo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MandaJo)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2018, 3:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-flying-really-the-safest-way-to-travel/814172/58 "2018-05-15T15:52:52Z")
My visible self has an impact on my personal risk. Drunk drivers are a lot more likely to be involved in wrecks involving at least one drunk driver. That doesn’t mean that it can’t happen it can–of course it can. But take two people. One drives home drunk 3 days a week for 15 years. The other never drives drunk. You seem to be arguing that they both personally have the exact same chance of being in a drunk-driving related accident, because the drunk could hit the sober person. Does that make sense to you? For my own personal risk assessment, I should use the things I know about my own personal risk. So maybe the random chance of getting breast cancer is very low, but if I have a gene that makes it much more likely–I should get a prophylactic mastectomy even though the odds of a random woman getting breast cancer don’t justify the risks of surgery. Cell phone insurance is a terrible idea–obviously, they are making money on it most of the time, or else they wouldn’t offer it. But I know something they don’t know–I am a clumsy, careless person, so I have cell phone insurance and it’s paid off over 15 years. ETA: all those positive factors about planes are already baked into the stats on plane travel. We’ve already calculated them. But the driving stats include people who engage in really, really risky behaviors. Those can be taken out of the equation for a lot of people. I doubt they would make flying less safe than driving, but they would narrow the gap. ---
**Author:** ![markn\_1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f9ae1b/32.png) [@markn\_1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/markn_1)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2018, 3:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-flying-really-the-safest-way-to-travel/814172/59 "2018-05-15T15:57:10Z")
**Dr Strangelove** ’s stats in post #22 says that flying is 750 times safer than driving. I don’t think any driver, no matter how safe, can be 750 times less likely to have an accident than the average driver. ---
**Author:** ![CookingWithGas](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cookingwithgas/32/485_2.png) [@CookingWithGas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CookingWithGas)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2018, 4:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-flying-really-the-safest-way-to-travel/814172/60 "2018-05-15T16:02:31Z")
> [@Icarus](#): > > This, to me, is a distillation of this whole discussion (and applies to a whole host of other issues) - the human propensity to be ruled by fear over reason. Quite evident looking at the stock market. > [@MandaJo](#): > > […]I do know a few things about my own situation: 1) I’m not drunk 2) I’m wearing a seatbelt and 3) I’m driving a car built in the last five years, with modern airbags and crumple zones. > > All of those things have a significant statistical impact on how dangerous it is to drive. The word “significant” has a specific technical meaning in statistics and I don’t know (and I don’t think you know either) whether your statement is true in this case. > [@](#): > > Y’all seem to be arguing that wearing a seat belt, staying sober, and having good airbags makes no statistical difference in how dangerous it is to travel by car. If so, we’ve wasted a lot of money on pushing those three factors so heavily. Those things make you safer than not doing them. I do them too, and we all should. (I used to work in car safety engineering.) But the thread is about whether driving is safer than flying. You also said that you “would be shocked if they made driving safer than flying…” I would be shocked too, but it would be a large effort to sift through accident statistics to filter for those factors. Here’s the thing about statistics. They provide predictable results for populations but not for individuals. Nobody can tell you whether it is safer for 200 **Manda JO** clones to drive from NYC to Dallas tomorrow than it would be for them to all take United Flight 1795. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-flying-really-the-safest-way-to-travel/814172.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-flying-really-the-safest-way-to-travel/814172.md?page=4)