To: Jeff Chandler
Any crash caused by those factors cannot count as black marks against the safety of an aircraft model. True, but I would expect those issues to be more-or-less equal among different models and manufacturers. A country with crappy aircraft maintenance won't keep their A320s pristine while ignoring their 737s.
I think the fatality rate is still a meaningful indicator because other variables would tend to balance out across the spectrum.
151 posted on
06/02/2009 2:10:26 PM PDT by
TChris
(There is no freedom without the possibility of failure.)
To: TChris
A country with crappy aircraft maintenance won't keep their A320s pristine while ignoring their 737sBut a carrier would.
152 posted on
06/02/2009 2:11:55 PM PDT by
Jeff Chandler
(The University of Notre Dame's motto: "Kill our unborn children? YES WE CAN!")
To: TChris
I think the fatality rate is still a meaningful indicator because other variables would tend to balance out across the spectrum.That's pure speculation. With so few deaths per so many miles for both manufacturers, anything other than death rate per miles flown caused by design flaw (whose recommended fix wasn't ignored) is not usable data.
And that goes both ways. If stats make Boeing look bad, those stats better be meaningful, not a bunch of incidents thrown together like gumbo.
154 posted on
06/02/2009 2:26:44 PM PDT by
Jeff Chandler
(The University of Notre Dame's motto: "Kill our unborn children? YES WE CAN!")
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson