World jet airline safety trend

[Not_Karl]

Just like you decided not to ride a bicycle.

Good for him. Bicycle safety isn't improving at all

[Evan]

They were part of an alarming pattern of safety lapses and near misses in the skies and on the runways of the United States, a Times investigation found. While there have been no major U.S. plane crashes in more than a decade, potentially dangerous incidents are occurring far more frequently than almost anyone realizes

A bit of technology and a bit of dumb luck. That's the trend. But it's trending toward an accident waiting to happen...

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2023/08/21/business/airline-safety-close-calls.html?unlocked_article_code=3piDoWEQRe6_B6id91wxQ4nangIm6-x9wQYh6CDa6wTHh092QV2NNyheCLQL3OgjMIqwhicaax7-OqXfn-JfwzVXvJFf8jf0FZ_0pz3p3xfXpxdzfFr9OTgECr1zf06UuqRoNyrVgytBJNz4cRhQXnEhBcm-VV75ViPclY1MCFh7LbesIj5I2nyZFloW--KYqWj9LnTVTLYgfpBX5wMmQBbHeY3s-RHx22CRxjjZHGmGE5tqymFfKKD636Qe-398KKhlfbmcl11vzZkI-WqOphZo88359i4BpjPcuzscJFQt2REzwOo5GYq-gdT7RfDE-VvBmpiOn-ofEEdEMkJkxuD-0CAU1mThlM1Xai9RZmNCHxbkZes&smid=url-share

[orangehuggy]

Using the parameters from the beginning of this post, December 15th marks a new safety record in world aviation.

It is the longest gap ever between major jet airline incidents.

In order to make the data accessible and verifiable I used the following qualifiers:

An incident is “major” if it involves multiple ticketed passenger fatalities.

The word “incident” is used not “accident” or “crash” because several crashes have been intentional, not accidental, also in several fatal events the airplane did not actually crash.

Sports/musical/political/military charters are excluded as these are significantly more dangerous statistically than ordinary airline flying, hence the use of the term “ticketed passenger”.

Propeller planes are excluded even though they are involved in major catastrophes. Their safety deserves in-depth and ongoing discussion and analysis but perhaps in a different thread. The inability to distinguish between airline, ad-hock, on demand charter, air-taxi, private, or unlicensed operations in fatal prop plane events caused them all to be excluded from the data used in this thread.

[Gabriel]

Using the parameters from the beginning of this post, December 15th marks a new safety record in world aviation.

It is the longest gap ever between major jet airline incidents.

In order to make the data accessible and verifiable I used the following qualifiers:

An incident is “major” if it involves multiple ticketed passenger fatalities.

The word “incident” is used not “accident” or “crash” because several crashes have been intentional, not accidental, also in several fatal events the airplane did not actually crash.

Sports/musical/political/military charters are excluded as these are significantly more dangerous statistically than ordinary airline flying, hence the use of the term “ticketed passenger”.

Propeller planes are excluded even though they are involved in major catastrophes. Their safety deserves in-depth and ongoing discussion and analysis but perhaps in a different thread. The inability to distinguish between airline, ad-hock, on demand charter, air-taxi, private, or unlicensed operations in fatal prop plane events caused them all to be excluded from the data used in this thread.

Which /when was the last one?

And do yo make 2 fatalities qualify but not 1 fatality? What's the logic?

[OrthodoxPriest]

Did some math and came up with there being a major incident approximately once every 30 days at the beginning of the last decade to once every 236 days today. Huge improvement!

I would be interested to see the combined total of aircraft incidents per decade so we can see how the improvements have played out over time.

I would expect some major milestones in flight safety that we might see an impact of in the data could be attributed to the move from non-pressurized to pressurized aircraft operating at higher altitudes, the adoption of second-generation jetliners such as the Comet 4, Boeing 707 and Douglas DC-8 (since the two first-generation jets, both the notorious original Comets with their rectangular navigation window fatigue crack problem, and to a lesser extent, the Tupolev Tu-104, were less safe than this later cohort, although the 104 was safe enough by Soviet standards to last into the late 70s), the implementation of cat 3 autoland functionality, the development of modern Crew Resource Management techniques in the 1970s and 80s, the development of windshear detection and improved airport radar to reduce the risk of microburst-related accidents, the implementation of GPWS, EGPWS and TCAS, the intensification of security such as screening of passengers and secured cockpit doors from the 1970s-2000s, and the emphasis on ensuring upset recovery, adhering to stabilized landing criteria, pilot mental health, and the promotion of safety culture following recent tragedies. Actually everything I just mentioned pertained to a tragedy, such as the crash of that Eastern Air Lines Tristar in the Everglade, AF447, the Asiana 777-300 crash at SFO a decade ago, and so on.

[OrthodoxPriest]

A bit of technology and a bit of dumb luck. That's the trend. But it's trending toward an accident waiting to happen...

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...smid=url-share

A lot of it has involved runway incursions or other failures of control in terms of collision risk during takeoff and landing.

[Evan]

I would be interested to see the combined total of aircraft incidents per decade so we can see how the improvements have played out over time.

I would expect some major milestones in flight safety that we might see an impact of in the data could be attributed to the move from non-pressurized to pressurized aircraft operating at higher altitudes, the adoption of second-generation jetliners such as the Comet 4, Boeing 707 and Douglas DC-8 (since the two first-generation jets, both the notorious original Comets with their rectangular navigation window fatigue crack problem, and to a lesser extent, the Tupolev Tu-104, were less safe than this later cohort, although the 104 was safe enough by Soviet standards to last into the late 70s), the implementation of cat 3 autoland functionality, the development of modern Crew Resource Management techniques in the 1970s and 80s, the development of windshear detection and improved airport radar to reduce the risk of microburst-related accidents, the implementation of GPWS, EGPWS and TCAS, the intensification of security such as screening of passengers and secured cockpit doors from the 1970s-2000s, and the emphasis on ensuring upset recovery, adhering to stabilized landing criteria, pilot mental health, and the promotion of safety culture following recent tragedies. Actually everything I just mentioned pertained to a tragedy, such as the crash of that Eastern Air Lines Tristar in the Everglade, AF447, the Asiana 777-300 crash at SFO a decade ago, and so on.

The big wins were digital autopilot and RVSM airspace, EICAS/ECAM, CRM procedures, protected aircraft technology and stabilized approach criteria. The wealth of knowledge learned in investigations concerning human factors such as confirmation bias, tunneling, time compression and somatogravic illusion have also played a significant role. The last hurdle is in getting all pilots up to a standard respect and appreciation for these things. Still too many cowboys out there who scoff at the rules and fly by the seat of their pants. Fine in a cub skimming daisies in flyover. Not acceptable in the big iron if we want these trends to continue.

[bstolle]

Still too many cowboys out there who scoff at the rules and fly by the seat of their pants.

I strongly disagree, Since nowadays basically all airliners and airlines are using flight data monitoring, there's very little possibility for the pilots to do anything that's not within the very narrow 'procedure' window.

Bernt Stolle Capt.ret. Austrian Airlines

My airplane art:
Bernt Stolle - Art for Sale | Fine Art America

[Evan]

I strongly disagree, Since nowadays basically all airliners and airlines are using flight data monitoring, there's very little possibility for the pilots to do anything that's not within the very narrow 'procedure' window.

Bernt Stolle Capt.ret. Austrian Airlines

With all due respect, it’s the ‘very little possibility’ that I am referring to. Over millions of flights, it makes all the difference.

[bstolle]

Well, even if we make only 1 million out of your millions of flights, this would mean at only 1%, 1000 cowboy airline pilots. I don't think that this is the case.
You will never achieve 100%, at anything, especially not with humans involved.
Btw. Did you take your avatar picture?

[Evan]

Well, even if we make only 1 million out of your millions of flights, this would mean at only 1%, 1000 cowboy airline pilots. I don't think that this is the case.
You will never achieve 100%, at anything, especially not with humans involved.
Btw. Did you take your avatar picture?

Yes, I took that picture in a Q400.

[bstolle]

Cool. Wasn't sure if that's a Q400. I did fly the Dash7 and Dash8-100&300 for a few years many years ago.

[Evan]

Cool. Wasn't sure if that's a Q400. I did fly the Dash7 and Dash8-100&300 for a few years many years ago.

The Q400 has those six-blade scimitar props that create the effect in the photo.

[bstolle]

But this effect only occurs with an electronic shutter, correct?

[Evan]

But this effect only occurs with an electronic shutter, correct?

I don’t think you can do this with film. This was taken in 2012. Probably taken with a flip phone camera.