# Most Dangerous Means of Transportation? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [August 1, 2010, 2:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-dangerous-means-of-transportation/548793 "2010-08-01T14:56:22Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [August 2, 2010, 9:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-dangerous-means-of-transportation/548793/41 "2010-08-02T21:04:25Z")
> [@ChrisBooth12](#): > > Is this per trip or per mile? Excellent point. I vote that we remand this to the OP for resubmitting. ---
**Author:** ![SpoilerVirgin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/4491bb/32.png) [@SpoilerVirgin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SpoilerVirgin)\ **Post date:** [August 2, 2010, 9:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-dangerous-means-of-transportation/548793/42 "2010-08-02T21:23:38Z")
> [@ajdebosco](#): > > …there were a plethora of wreckless drivers… I don’t mind the _wreckless_ drivers – it’s the _reckless_ ones you have to worry about. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![snailboy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/97f17d/32.png) [@snailboy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/snailboy)\ **Post date:** [August 2, 2010, 10:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-dangerous-means-of-transportation/548793/43 "2010-08-02T22:18:33Z")
> [@BrotherCadfael](#): > > > [@Zsofia](#): > > > > Yeah, if what you took away from Mythbusters is that elevators are dangerous then you didn’t pay enough attention to the episode. It was a giant pain in the ass for them to get an elevator to fall at all in the first place. > > I did not say that elevators are the most dangerous means of transportation… but that _falling_ elevators were. I didn’t know falling elevators were a mode of transportation. I don’t spend much time in the big city though. The falling ones are labelled as such, right? ---
**Author:** ![pulykamell](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pulykamell/32/3166_2.png) [@pulykamell](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pulykamell)\ **Post date:** [August 2, 2010, 11:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-dangerous-means-of-transportation/548793/44 "2010-08-02T23:13:28Z")
> [@snailboy](#): > > I didn’t know falling elevators were a mode of transportation. I don’t spend much time in the big city though. The falling ones are labelled as such, right? Heh. Just what I thought reading that. I’d say a submarine sinking in the deep ocean or a zeppelin engulfed in fire are marginally more dangerous than a falling elevator. ---
**Author:** ![HawksPath](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/f07891/32.png) [@HawksPath](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HawksPath)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2010, 12:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-dangerous-means-of-transportation/548793/45 "2010-08-03T00:22:08Z")
Does anyone know how personal aircraft such as the Cessna fall on the danger scale? ---
**Author:** ![Shagnasty](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9dc877/32.png) [@Shagnasty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shagnasty)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2010, 12:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-dangerous-means-of-transportation/548793/46 "2010-08-03T00:48:52Z")
> [@HawksPath](#): > > Does anyone know how personal aircraft such as the Cessna fall on the danger scale? It is surprisingly difficult coming up with a way to analyze that in a way that will satisfy people. The most general answer you can give is that single-engine small planes are more deadly than personal cars on a per mile basis but much safer than motorcycles. That varies a lot by the plane and the level of risk the pilot is willing to assume. The sheer number of private planes out there that are many decades old and still in active service is a comforting thought however. ---
**Author:** ![rowrrbazzle](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rowrrbazzle/32/414_2.png) [@rowrrbazzle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rowrrbazzle)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2010, 12:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-dangerous-means-of-transportation/548793/47 "2010-08-03T00:56:26Z")
This cable transport across a 900-foot-deep gorge in Guayabetal, Colombia is a candidate. [In Colombia, a rope and a prayer (w/ slideshow)](http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/world/3997647.html) I saw some program that included a segment on this. One of the dangers not mentioned in the article is a woman getting her long hair caught in the pulley. ---
**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:** [August 3, 2010, 12:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-dangerous-means-of-transportation/548793/48 "2010-08-03T00:57:55Z")
Balloons don’t have the best record in the world. My w.a.g. would be because any loss of lift is self-accelerating- sinking into denser air compresses the balloon and cuts lift even more. ---
**Author:** ![Ionizer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/5daacb/32.png) [@Ionizer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ionizer)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2010, 1:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-dangerous-means-of-transportation/548793/49 "2010-08-03T01:01:54Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > The space shuttle has a terrible glide ratio, much worse than an airliner. I can’t find the figures now, but that is what Chronos is referring to. > > It’s pretty close to 1:1, but that doesn’t tell the whole story, either. Basically, it spends most of the re-entry falling, to build up airspeed, then uses that airspeed to swoop closer to horizontal right at the very end so it can land. falling to _build up_ airspeed? Huh? I am pretty certain this is not quite right as the speed must be _reduced_, drastically, (from orbital speed/energy) to land at ~minimal speed to keep brake damage minimal, on first try as well (no go-round with this). I am fairly confident that at no time does the Orbiter need to _gain_ airspeed in a normal approach/landing (unless there is something unplanned of origin, like bad met data which almost caused one Orbiter to eat dirt, now an infamous Wayne Hale story). Its usually more of a concern to lose just-enough energy (and not a drop more!) initially and not overshoot too far than to have to gain energy/airspeed with no effective/efficient way to turn it into distance and so land short (if that makes sense). Is the Space Transportation System considered safe if it is not man-rated? Does it not require special ‘permission’ (waivers, per se) to even have any person ride it uphill? Often many, many waivers, iirc, but I am not fully understanding of the ‘waiver’ things. But Shuttle is ‘safe’? Is time spent with ‘engines running’ (particularly those towering solids!) a significant part of the equation-of-safety? Just checking… 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Chimera](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/8e8cbc/32.png) [@Chimera](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chimera)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2010, 2:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-dangerous-means-of-transportation/548793/50 "2010-08-03T02:34:05Z")
The single deadliest form of transportation on a per-capita basis is [this](http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://infolab.stanford.edu/~prasanna/dmc/collapse/drstrangelove.jpg&imgrefurl=http://infolab.stanford.edu/~prasanna/dmc/collapse.html&h=475&w=336&sz=42&tbnid=QC6uEmLnIlevjM:&tbnh=267&tbnw=189&prev=/images%3Fq%3Ddr%2Bstrangelove%2Bimages&hl=en&usg=__pfDR5SvdmYIsN78E432CG4O4t2A=&sa=X&ei=_H9XTO-sNNL9nAe1zfy-Aw&ved=0CBkQ9QEwAA) ---
**Author:** ![Siam\_Sam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/d78d45/32.png) [@Siam\_Sam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Siam_Sam)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2010, 3:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-dangerous-means-of-transportation/548793/51 "2010-08-03T03:57:32Z")
Bangkok motorcycle taxi. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2010, 5:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-dangerous-means-of-transportation/548793/52 "2010-08-03T05:10:31Z")
I would guess it’s some offroad recreational vehicle like a dirt bike, a four wheeler, or a snowmobile. They’re frequently driven in dangerous conditions. ---
**Author:** ![Peremensoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ce7236/32.png) [@Peremensoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peremensoe)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2010, 5:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-dangerous-means-of-transportation/548793/53 "2010-08-03T05:51:01Z")
> [@Heracles](#): > > > [@Chronos](#): > > > > Although, come to think of it, most of the miles the Shuttle travels aren’t really “traveling”, in the sense of going from a starting place to a destination. The Shuttle’s destination is just low earth orbit, which is only a few hundred miles, tops, from its starting point. So by that measure, it’s again one of the most dangerous, and might even beat motorcycles. > > Actually, the destination is the landing strip. Which in most cases is at KSC, only a few km from the launch pad… And when you drive to the grocery store, is your “destination” your own driveway? No, it’s the store. I think **Chronos** had the right idea. The Shuttle’s _travel_ was round trips between the planet’s surface and orbit. Those are the destinations which made its movement purposeful. The repeated circlings of the earth, maintaining orbit, aren’t travel in the same sense. Rocks do the same thing. ---
**Author:** ![ajdebosco](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecd19e/32.png) [@ajdebosco](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ajdebosco)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2010, 12:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-dangerous-means-of-transportation/548793/54 "2010-08-03T12:34:48Z")
> [@SpoilerVirgin](#): > > > [@ajdebosco](#): > > > > …there were a plethora of wreckless drivers… > > I don’t mind the _wreckless_ drivers – it’s the _reckless_ ones you have to worry about. 😉 Absolutely right.:smack: Thanks SV Not many people ride horses for transportation anymore, but I’ve heard being a jockey is among the most dangerous professions among the sporting set. Big heavy creatures, little people hanging on for dear life, thundering hooves, thrown shoes, broken legs, ..:eek: ---
**Author:** ![billfish678](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@billfish678](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/billfish678)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2010, 12:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-dangerous-means-of-transportation/548793/55 "2010-08-03T12:38:22Z")
How bout this trifecta of danger? On a per trip, per time traveled, and per distance covered how about BASE jumping? ---
**Author:** ![Sailboat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sailboat/32/461_2.png) [@Sailboat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sailboat)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2010, 2:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-dangerous-means-of-transportation/548793/56 "2010-08-03T14:44:49Z")
Human cannonball. ---
**Author:** ![Shamozzle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shamozzle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shamozzle)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2010, 2:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-dangerous-means-of-transportation/548793/57 "2010-08-04T02:32:12Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > Eh? The Shuttle lands at about 250 mph; faster, but not greatly so, than an airliner. Shuttle landings are off the hook: The rate of descent is insane, the thing is basically falling out of the sky. But here’s the kicker: there’s no “go around”. If the pilot screws up the approach, that’s it. Splat. Check out this amazing [video](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=py7E9fIase4). From 26,000 ft to landing in around two minutes. ---
**Author:** ![Rick](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/9f8e36/32.png) [@Rick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rick)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2010, 3:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-dangerous-means-of-transportation/548793/58 "2010-08-04T03:40:52Z")
> [@engineer\_comp\_geek](#): > > I’d have to say the H.L. Hunley submarine was the most dangerous form of transportation. It killed most of one crew and all of another during training and killed a third crew when it went on its first mission. > > That’s close to a 300 percent mortality rate. Or, in other words, it’s roughly 3 times more dangerous than flying in a kamikaze plane. I think you win the thread. ---
**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:** [August 4, 2010, 2:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-dangerous-means-of-transportation/548793/59 "2010-08-04T14:01:47Z")
> [@Siam\_Sam](#): > > Bangkok motorcycle taxi. I’ll see you and raise a Bangladesh ferry. 😛 ---
**Author:** ![Irishman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/b487fb/32.png) [@Irishman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Irishman)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2010, 4:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-dangerous-means-of-transportation/548793/60 "2010-08-04T16:08:46Z")
**Chronos** said: > [@](#): > > It’s pretty close to 1:1, but that doesn’t tell the whole story, either. Basically, it spends most of the re-entry falling, to build up airspeed, then uses that airspeed to swoop closer to horizontal right at the very end so it can land. That doesn’t sound right. **Ionizer** has it correct, the Shuttle spends the entire reentry trying to lose speed. That’s why there are those giant “S” curves as part of the glide path. It does have a steep glide path. The training airplane they use to practice is a converted jetliner where they throw the engines in reverse. **Ionizer** said: > [@](#): > > Is the Space Transportation System considered safe if it is not man-rated? Does it not require special ‘permission’ (waivers, per se) to even have any person ride it uphill? Often many, many waivers, iirc, but I am not fully understanding of the ‘waiver’ things. But Shuttle is ‘safe’? Is time spent with ‘engines running’ (particularly those towering solids!) a significant part of the equation-of-safety? Just checking… 😉 The Shuttle is man-rated. I am not sure what kind of waivers or indemnity clauses astronauts have to sign, if any. I am fairly certain that as part of the job description, they are covered by insurance plans or some government fund. I am sure the candidates are informed as well as anybody on the risks associated. With regards to “waivers” for the Shuttle Program, these are not the same thing as personal waivers of liability. Rather, these are various levels of organization accepting that some item or feature does not strictly match the requirements as defined in the documentation system. For example, suppose the drawing for an aluminum plate calls out the plate being anodized to protect it from corrosion. However, minor scratching occurs that cuts through the surface finish. It is not possible to reanodize the part. Rather, one can apply a chemical that will bond to the exposed metal and do a similar job (alodyne). Now the drawing does not specify alodyne, it specifies anodize - and the features of each are somewhat different. However, if the intent is purely surface protection and the differences do not matter, then the program can accept that deviation from the drawing and still consider that part “good”. This is handled with a form that is a type of “minor waiver”. Waivers can fall at various levels of decision making depending upon potential effects. With regards to Shuttle risk analysis, I’m not fully versed on what goes on, but there are different stages of flight and different risk assessments for those stages. Launch has one set of risks because of the SRBs and main engines. Orbit has a different set of risks due to micrometeorites and orbital debris. Reentry has different risks due to things like the plasma generated. Each of those risks is assessed on its own merits, and the design has been intended to mitigate the risks through redundancy of systems and other means. **Lumpy** said: > [@](#): > > Balloons don’t have the best record in the world. My w.a.g. would be because any loss of lift is self-accelerating- sinking into denser air compresses the balloon and cuts lift even more. If by “loss of lift” you mean a leak. Balloons have to have an internal pressure at least as great as the external pressure, or it won’t inflate. The lift comes not from a pressure difference, but from weight difference due to the density being less. If flying a hot air balloon, for instance, you can lose lift because the air cools. That increases density, which means less volume for the same mass of air. But I wouldn’t consider that the surrounding air compressing the balloon. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-dangerous-means-of-transportation/548793.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-dangerous-means-of-transportation/548793.md?page=4)