Really bad year for air disasters

[shaithis]

Yes, but when you have survived 9, the odds of surviving the tenth are the same as surviving the first. Each flight has to be considered in isolation.

On average, yes.....

If for instance you are travelling over certain regions or on certain airlines, I am sure that is different. When I spent a while in Russia, the people I were with would not get on an Aeroflot (Aeroflop!) plane because their safety record was appalling. I would bet that flying over the UK is less risky than flying over Bermuda as well

I hate stats.

[scicrazy]

Curious this was posted the day after the BBC Magazine posted "How odd is a cluster of plane accidents?"

Since I can't link yet, here's the tl;dr version

As for the occurrence of three fatal crashes in eight days, David Spiegelhalter, Professor for the Public Understanding of Risk at Cambridge University, has worked out that there is about a six in 10 chance that we should see such a large cluster during a 10-year period, and "the most likely maximum number of crashes of commercial planes with over 18 passengers in any eight-day window over 10 years is exactly three".

The planes all suffered different incidents as far as we know, so by now the airlines will likely be making extra sure not to be the next in the cluster. At least for a while.

[DanceswithUnix]

Indeed, no one is really fussed at all. Even as Biscuit says, having the time for chocolate, this is part of good CRM, as a long crisis might result in people forgetting to take on sugar / water, because they are preoccupied with the stress.

It's an amazing advertisement for SwissAir!

Super video.

The "PAN PAN PAN" bit made me google for how come French words ended up as the international language of things going horribly wrong. I came across: http://www.nmmc.co.uk/index.php?/col...ons/why_mayday which claims it was started by a brit. Sorry for the diversion, but thought I would share that nugget as I can't be the only person who wondered

[TheAnimus]

In case you didn't know, formal usage should be Pan-Pan, Pan-Pan, Pan-Pan. It is for incidents less serious than a Mayday (which should be said 3 times just like you would pan-pan).

Pan's are used for engine failure in multi engine planes, or say if the pilot is lost Pan-Pan, Pan-Pan, Pan-Pan, I don't know where I am! I was always told that if ever I was slightly worried about location, I should pan, if I was feeling too arrogant, I should ask for a 'practice pan', which is something often you will do as part of your routine re-examinations.

I was also taught to always air on the side of Mayday, if you aren't sure. If other people think your Mayday is a bit melodramatic they will let you know.

[DanceswithUnix]

I was also taught to always air on the side of Mayday, if you aren't sure. If other people think your Mayday is a bit melodramatic they will let you know.

French for "broken" vs french for "help me".

Heard the phrase in the past from my dad who also used it three times. Perhaps it is down to who trained you, perhaps military can be bothered with the last half, who knows

[TheAnimus]

It comes down to communication, there is the official method, and how people actually do it.

An aerodrome I sometimes fly out of had someone who was approaching it, obviously going for a standard overhead join, which at that place isn't allowed due to skydivers. There is no official procedure for what I said Traffic North, overhead joins are forbidden, because of the sky divers he changed his heading and announced his intentions with proper RT stuff after that, it's an easy mistake to make, at a facility that has no 'ATC' just a bunch of people sharing the radio, no one has authority. It's a case of people doing what is best for everyone else. Whilst their are official rules for things, they often make understanding harder.

If you had a service, and said pan pan pan, they respond, they clearly understand. The fact is if they said they couldn't read you, or you had no response, you would then try it formally.

Deviating from 'correct' can be very useful. I had a transmission comm failure in an old shed I was flying. Not an issue in Cornwall where the airspace is clear, but the ATC I had service from was a bit worried as it had failed during transmission. So he simply asked me to use my Ident on my transponder to confirm that I was receiving OK, not procedure, but it immediately made it obvious, as I'd just switched to lost comm squawk, which is the formal procedure. A good ground operator, even more the guy kindly called the aerodrome before I arrived, letting them know that they would have defective comm traffic joining.

[Butcher]

Yes, but when you have survived 9, the odds of surviving the tenth are the same as surviving the first. Each flight has to be considered in isolation.

The risk for each flight is considered in isolation yes, however the odds on dying in a particular year (or in your life) are affected by how many times you fly. If you never fly you have a minuscule chance of being in an air crash at some point in your life, whereas if you fly every week you have a much greater chance.

[DanceswithUnix]

If you had a service, and said pan pan pan, they respond, they clearly understand. The fact is if they said they couldn't read you, or you had no response, you would then try it formally.

Very true. My father was in his university air squadron, fun gig if you can manage it, that was long enough ago that he was flying Chipmunks which by the sounds of things had bad enough radios that you had to do the "bravo foxtrot" stuff when saying who you were to stand any chance of being understood. I imagine there is room for some slack these days

The risk for each flight is considered in isolation yes, however the odds on dying in a particular year (or in your life) are affected by how many times you fly. If you never fly you have a minuscule chance of being in an air crash at some point in your life, whereas if you fly every week you have a much greater chance.

I think the point is that if you spend the time you would have been flying in that year doing a riskier activity like crossing the road or driving a car then your chances of being in an air crash might be lower but your chances of surviving the year are worse. A grim way of looking at things, but that's how the numbers work out.