Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
BBC says that there are reports of one person dead and 30 injured. From a potential 300 passengers (not including crew) and bearing in mind just how badly these can go, I'd say that's pretty damn miraculous. It won't bring back the dead, or heal the wounds of the injured, but there could well have been and maybe once the cause is found, should well have been a lot more casualties and injured.
Mandorallen turned back toward the insolently sneering baron. 'My Lord,' The great knight said distantly, 'I find thy face apelike and thy form misshapen. Thy beard, moreover, is an offence against decency, resembling more closely the scabrous fur which doth decorate the hinder portion of a mongrel dog than a proper adornment for a human face. Is it possibly that thy mother, seized by some wild lechery, did dally at some time past with a randy goat?' - Mimbrate Knight Protector Mandorallen.
Excerpt from "Seeress of Kell", Book Five of The Malloreon series by David Eddings.
"You need not fear us, unless you are a dark heart, a vile one who preys on the innocent; I promise, you can’t hide forever in the empty darkness, for we will hunt you down like the animals you are, and pull you into the very bowels of hell." Iron - Within Temptation
Watching it now, 2 dead and dozens injured reported. I'm familiar with the runway that the crash happened on. It juts out into San Francisco bay and is surrounded by a seawall made of rock and is approximately 15 feet above the water. From the video and pictures I've seen so far it looks like the 777 landed short, tearing the tail off the aircraft when it impacted the seawall.
Solve a man's problem with violence and help him for a day. Teach a man how to solve his problems with violence, help him for a lifetime - Belkar Bitterleaf
All accounted for. Two dead. Serious Hard Landing. Guessing the aircraft was fueled with JP8 by the fire damage. If it was JP4.......
Proud Member of the Infidels of OIF/OEF
No longer defending the US Military or US Gov't. Just going to ""**feed into your fears**"" with Duffel Blog Did not fight my way up on top the food chain to become a Vegan...
Warning: Stupid Allergy
Once you pull the pin, Mr. Grenade is no longer your friend
DE 6700
Harlequin 2500
RIP Muhammad Ali.
Jihadin, Scorched Earth 791. Leader of the Pork Eating Crusader. Alpha
Aviation's a dangerous gig whether you're running the show or chilling in back. Considering how common place flying is, it's easy to forget that till these regrettable incidents remind us.
I beg of you sarge let me lead the charge when the battle lines are drawn
Lemme at least leave a good hoof beat they'll remember loud and long
KalashnikovMarine wrote: Aviation's a dangerous gig whether you're running the show or chilling in back. Considering how common place flying is, it's easy to forget that till these regrettable incidents remind us.
More people die in car crashes than in plane crashes though, aviation is not that dangerous really.
Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios
Its quite safe till its not.
Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines
Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.
KalashnikovMarine wrote: Aviation's a dangerous gig whether you're running the show or chilling in back. Considering how common place flying is, it's easy to forget that till these regrettable incidents remind us.
More people die in car crashes than in plane crashes though, aviation is not that dangerous really.
KalashnikovMarine wrote: Aviation's a dangerous gig whether you're running the show or chilling in back. Considering how common place flying is, it's easy to forget that till these regrettable incidents remind us.
More people die in car crashes than in plane crashes though, aviation is not that dangerous really.
Statistically it is the safest way to travel, however many many more people drive every day then fly. I would argue though I lack the math to back this up, that if you got percentages on the rate of car accidents that had fatalities vs. not, and the rate of aviation incidents that had fatalities vs. not you'd get a more accurate picture.
The Colonel and I were doing our walk around/pre-flight check early one morning for some basic hop around stuff in So Cal and out to Nevada, pretty normal flight and he says to me "You know why we baby and inspect this bird like we do right KM?" "Well sir it's to make sure we get home in one piece." "Right, every time we go wheels up this ****** is going to do her absolute best to obey physics and return to the ground in the most expedient manner possible, the only thing that keeps us alive is being perfect. Our mechanics need to be on the ball, and we need to be on the ball just as much making sure everything is exactly as it should be. When you do your weight and balance, I accept your numbers, I don't check you, you're my crew chief, I trust you with my life because when I'm on the stick you're trusting me with your life, we're trusting each other to be the best at what we do, but if your numbers are off, or some of our cargo comes loose and shifts in flight because your tie downs weren't on the ball we can die. Conversely one small mistake on the stick and we can end up a smoking crater in Sonoran desert. Perfection isn't an option, or a choice, it's survival for any man or woman who wears wings."
If you can't tell that speech stuck with me as an impressionable young Lance Criminal, I later found that the skipper had an odd tendency to wax poetic before his second cup of coffee.
Post Script to that:
About a month later LA Center (ZLA) almost navigated us into a mid-air collision over the hills outside San Diego, and the Colonel reminded me of this conversation. "See? Failing in perfection in this job at any level can and does get people killed. Thankfully our perfection was stronger then that idiot at Center's need to be an inbred mouth breather."
Does remind me of that old joke though, what's the similarity between ATC (Air Traffic Control) and Pilots? If the pilot screws up, the pilot dies. If ATC screws up, the pilot dies.
I beg of you sarge let me lead the charge when the battle lines are drawn
Lemme at least leave a good hoof beat they'll remember loud and long
KalashnikovMarine wrote: Statistically it is the safest way to travel, however many many more people drive every day then fly. I would argue though I lack the math to back this up, that if you got percentages on the rate of car accidents that had fatalities vs. not, and the rate of aviation incidents that had fatalities vs. not you'd get a more accurate picture.
Not to mention, what region you look at for fatal car accidents matters a feth of a lot too.
I'd wager that percentage-wise, flying vs driving is about pretty even in terms of overall safety when you look only at North American car fatality rates.
Go look at the fatality rates however in places like say India or Taiwan etc... and sure, flying really does start to look about a million times safer than driving!
Of course many more people die driving... but I think the fact that so many get killed when aircraft do crash, and the image of such a thing happening is so strong and visceral, that it has that much more impact. And I guess why so many are afraid of flying - funny I was reading about a motorbike racer, Ben Spies, who put off international racing for years because he was afraid of flying. So... someone who races a motorbike at 200mph, skating inches above tarmac, and in one of the most dangerous motorsports.. the human imagination is a funny thing some times!
On a separate note I do wonder how many of the air-death statistics are caused by light aircraft however, with poorer skilled pilots, less stringent legislature and planes that are not as well maintained..
Pacific wrote: Of course many more people die driving... but I think the fact that so many get killed when aircraft do crash, and the image of such a thing happening is so strong and visceral, that it has that much more impact. And I guess why so many are afraid of flying - funny I was reading about a motorbike racer, Ben Spies, who put off international racing for years because he was afraid of flying. So... someone who races a motorbike at 200mph, skating inches above tarmac, and in one of the most dangerous motorsports.. the human imagination is a funny thing some times!
He is in control on that motorcycle though.
A lot of the fear of flying comes from the fact that unless you are the pilot, it is completely out of your hands.
I've been in two Blackhawk crashes....one I mention before on here with a Barn Owl...and the other was pilots practicing penicle (sp) landing and we had a compression stall.....was not a fun ride afterwards....
Proud Member of the Infidels of OIF/OEF
No longer defending the US Military or US Gov't. Just going to ""**feed into your fears**"" with Duffel Blog Did not fight my way up on top the food chain to become a Vegan...
Warning: Stupid Allergy
Once you pull the pin, Mr. Grenade is no longer your friend
DE 6700
Harlequin 2500
RIP Muhammad Ali.
Jihadin, Scorched Earth 791. Leader of the Pork Eating Crusader. Alpha
Pacific wrote: Of course many more people die driving... but I think the fact that so many get killed when aircraft do crash, and the image of such a thing happening is so strong and visceral, that it has that much more impact. And I guess why so many are afraid of flying - funny I was reading about a motorbike racer, Ben Spies, who put off international racing for years because he was afraid of flying. So... someone who races a motorbike at 200mph, skating inches above tarmac, and in one of the most dangerous motorsports.. the human imagination is a funny thing some times!
On a separate note I do wonder how many of the air-death statistics are caused by light aircraft however, with poorer skilled pilots, less stringent legislature and planes that are not as well maintained..
In terms of international airlines though, when was the last time we had a major accident, that resulted in a major loss of life. Technology of aircraft, and training of pilots is so good these days that its very rare to see an accident. The times when you do have had little/no fatalities. Hudson river is a good example, or the BA 777 accident similar to this. Of course you will get a set of circumstances come together that will result in a crash, and unfortunately 2 people have died in this one.
Also, yes if you are a passenger, safety is out of your hands...but at the end of the day, I can do nothing to stop the oncoming car cross the center line, crashing into me and potentially killing me, and thats the risk I might take every time I step into a car.
Source: The Aircraft Crashes Record Office (ACRO), a non-government organization based in Geneva, compiles statistics on aviation accidents of aircraft capable of carrying more than six passengers, excluding helicopters, balloons, or combat aircraft.
Not trying to throw the discussion either way, but seeing some numbers might be helpful.
Thanks for that D-Usa, would be interesting if you could break it down futher to internatonal airlines, as I suspect a lot of that would be small aircraft?
Apart from 2004, the trend seems to be that the amount is decreasing.
KalashnikovMarine wrote: Statistically it is the safest way to travel, however many many more people drive every day then fly. I would argue though I lack the math to back this up, that if you got percentages on the rate of car accidents that had fatalities vs. not, and the rate of aviation incidents that had fatalities vs. not you'd get a more accurate picture.
The most meaningul measure is the deaths per kilometre travelled. That is, you have to ask 'if I'm travelling 1,000 miles to get to my destination, what are my odds of dying if I fly, drive, or ride a bike?'. Well they've measured that, and flying is very safe relative to other methods.
Deaths per billion kilometres Air: 0.05 Bus: 0.4 Rail: 0.6 Van: 1.2 Water: 2.6 Car: 3.1 Space Shuttle: 16.2 Bicycle: 44.6 Foot: 54.2 Motorcycle: 108.9
So, if I was to ride a bike 1,000 kms, I'd have a 0.010890% chance of dying. If I was driving my chance of death would be 0.000310%. If I flew, my chance of dying would be 0.000005%.
Also the space shuttle is safer than motor bikes, which is weird until you consider the distance travelled by a space shuttle in an average flight.
That said, the statistics are a little misleading to us humble Western folk, and exactly why can be figured out when you look at the horrific casualty rate for travelling by foot. See, in the very congested cities of the developing world, with poor road design and barely enforced traffic rules, people get hit by cars all the time. Travelling by foot there is dangerous (something that'd make intuitive sense to anyone who's tried to cross a road somewhere in India, China or similar locations). So the casualty rate for travelling by foot gets dragged way higher than it would be if they were just measuring safety in the West.
Cars I'd think would be the same. Here we have typically newer cars with typically higher safety standards, and we're driving on roads that have been designed and re-designed until they meet safety regs. In much of the developing world, and from my experience also London, that isn't the case. So much like pedestrians, car casualty rates get dragged up by poorer safety in the developing world.
Now, airlines in some of the dodgier parts of the world have poorer crash records than in the developed world. But I'd wager the difference wasn't nearly as stark as the difference in foot and car travel. And so I'd say that if the above survey was taken just for travel in the developed world, you'd see airline deaths drop by just a little, while deaths for the rest would likely drop considerably more. I doubt that'd be enough stop airlines being the safest form of travel, but maybe the difference between planes and cars wouldn't a ratio of more than 50 times.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2013/07/08 05:14:46
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
KalashnikovMarine wrote: Statistically it is the safest way to travel, however many many more people drive every day then fly. I would argue though I lack the math to back this up, that if you got percentages on the rate of car accidents that had fatalities vs. not, and the rate of aviation incidents that had fatalities vs. not you'd get a more accurate picture.
Not to mention, what region you look at for fatal car accidents matters a feth of a lot too.
I'd wager that percentage-wise, flying vs driving is about pretty even in terms of overall safety when you look only at North American car fatality rates.
Go look at the fatality rates however in places like say India or Taiwan etc... and sure, flying really does start to look about a million times safer than driving!
Having seen how people drive in china and Vietnam, I'm shocked the fatalities aren't higher than they are.
Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines
Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.
d-usa wrote: Source: The Aircraft Crashes Record Office (ACRO), a non-government organization based in Geneva, compiles statistics on aviation accidents of aircraft capable of carrying more than six passengers, excluding helicopters, balloons, or combat aircraft.
The bold part skews the numbers quite a bit since "capable of carrying more than six passengers" covers a lot of light aircraft. Many of those planes don't usually carry more than six passengers (for weight and space reasons) or operate commercially, but they'd still be included. So those accident numbers probably include a lot of cases of a pilot and a couple passengers flying into the side of a mountain because they were too stupid to check their charts properly, or thinking the warnings about never entering a thunderstorm don't apply to them. If you limit it to just commercial aviation (or only fly with people who aren't reckless idiots) the risk is pretty much nonexistent.
Also, "accident" in aviation terms includes anything that damages the plane, which doesn't necessarily cause any injuries or deaths. For example, landing gear up is a stupid mistake that's going to cost you a lot of money to replace your engines and the scraped up metal on the bottom of the plane, but it very rarely hurts anyone. But since there was damage it's still counted as an accident.
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices.
Coming from a "government money taught me how to fly planes" perspective, I have no idea how the feth that happens short of literally everyone being asleep. Way too short and way too slow. NTSB says the engines were good.
Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios
Smacking your tail on a wall certainly doesn't seem mechanical.
Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines
Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.
I think one of the big questions is if the data on the displays matched what was happening. From what I have gathered so far both pilots said all the right things during the landing, and verbalized the right speeds. But what they said they were doing didn't match what was actually happening while they gave verbal confirmations of their actions.
Templars - 4500pts
Excoriators - 1500pts
Catachan 1074th- 2000
Zeal is its own excuse 
