Re: Angry [More Info]
- From: "Gary Drescher" <GLDrescher@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 31 Dec 2005 09:05:29 -0500
"Hilton" <nospam@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:yKjtf.1620$Hl6.445@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Allow me to quote a couple of sentences from the latest Nall Report
> (2004):
> "Accidents in such conditions, for example, adverse weather or at night,
> are more likely to result in fatality."
> "...only 14.0 percent of daytime accidents resulted in fatalities. At
> night, more than one in three (36.1 percent) was fatal."
That's not a meaningful comparison, though. A higher proportion of
fatalities among nighttime accidents could result from a lower rate (per
hour) of nonfatal accidents rather than a higher rate of fatal accidents.
However, the fatality rate at night is indeed higher (and for night IMC,
it's higher still). But I don't know whether that's due to a greater danger
following an engine failure or electrical failure, or instead due to the
danger of, for example, maneuvering accidents during circling approaches
under a low ceiling. If the latter, the increased danger could be eliminated
by avoiding such approaches at night.
--Gary
.
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- Angry [More Info]
- From: Hilton
- Re: Angry [More Info]
- From: Ron Rosenfeld
- Re: Angry [More Info]
- From: Dylan Smith
- Re: Angry [More Info]
- From: Ron Rosenfeld
- Re: Angry [More Info]
- From: Dylan Smith
- Re: Angry [More Info]
- From: Ron Rosenfeld
- Re: Angry [More Info]
- From: Dylan Smith
- Re: Angry [More Info]
- From: Ron Rosenfeld
- Re: Angry [More Info]
- From: Hilton
- Angry [More Info]
- Prev by Date: Re: Angry [More Info]
- Next by Date: Re: Another ADIZ violation?
- Previous by thread: Re: Angry [More Info]
- Next by thread: Fear and Loathing at the Airport [was: re: Angry [more info]]
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|