That plane footage from Taiwan
- Thread starter robfosters
- Start date
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Jul 2005
- Posts
- 17,613
- Location
- Bristol
Such hard ironing!
Man, understanding probability is hard...
Not really.
If your involved in a plane crash your probably gonna die
If your involved in a car crash your probably gonna live
But if your going to die in any sort of crash it'll most likely be a car crash
Last edited:
Which is irrelevant without the rest of the facts...
What?
Now your just arguing for the sake of it.
Are you really saying your more likely to survive a plane crash. Than a car crash. Really?
![[TW]Fox](/data/man-of-honor/2009.png){kind=avatar}
My point is look at the radical difference in numbers you get by picking a single country and extrapolating, your 9 deaths per incident is suddenly 0.1, a huge difference.
And given nobody was killed on a commercial flight in that period your figures will presumably include helicopters and private planes which the NTSB one doesn't
Last edited:
[TW]Fox;27583450 said:
Those figures are commercial It didn't include the 226 Civil accidents but it would have also included helicopters
Even going from 9-0.1 is still way way off the 0.0006. And those 400 odd incidents were over a 9 year period.
Accident per accident IF you could get a yearly figure for both would be worlds apart.
Like most threads in GD unless its muslim bashing. They seem to stay on point
It's a plane crash not a train crash.
Soldato
- Joined
- 22 Jul 2012
- Posts
- 16,224
- Location
- London
Bloody hell, you guys will find a way to get an argument out of absolutely anything.
Forgive me for bringing this up but when compacting you are you need to write it in this way: you're. Carry on.
Forgive me for bringing this up but when compacting you are you need to write it in this way: you're. Carry on.
Yes I know!
But as a member of the DNA I should be forgiven.
Last edited:
It's an art. It's not easy. Sometimes it takes a real effort.
But we get there in the end.No we don't, you do though.
I would imagine that every death was onboard a helicopter - a completely different risk profile.
The number of people killed on a commercial scheduled flight in or originating from the UK in the last 10 years is 0.
When you extrapolate that, as you are trying to do with road casualty figures, you get worldwide air deaths of nil which is obviously wrong. The purpose of the question was to demonstrate why you cannot compare global air casualties with (British road casualties x number of countries in the world).
Either way, it's completely irrelevant as is your point whilst you continue to refuse to consider probability.
I mean yes, go on then, to answer your question I'd rather be in a car about to crash on a motorway than onboard a Boeing 777 about to be hit by a missile during the cruise phase of the flight but what is the relevance of this answer? It tells us nothing about the relative safety of either form of transport.
Soldato
- Joined
- 22 Jul 2012
- Posts
- 16,224
- Location
- London
Not quite as harrowing as the 747 carrying tanks out of Afghanistan.
I too am petrified of flying (only in the last 4-5 years). I really must stop watching plane crash videos
