The absence of really bad aviation news

[McGinty]

As a long time observer of this Rumours & News thread on Pprune, let me say how wonderful it has been over the last 6 months or so to see how little activity there has been on this thread compared to many years past.

No longer are we picking through the horrific photos of crash sites, attempting to put together the destroyed skins of planes and passengers.

We should celebrate the substantial improvement in aviation safety that has evolved over the last 10-15 years or so.

Yes, we would like to come and join this thread to dig out the secrets underlying the latest aviation disaster, and are maybe disappointed at the lack of any deplorable incident for each of us to apply our Sherlockian investigative skills to.

But this indicates that the aviation world has become so much safer - so many fewer crashes for each of us to wallow over. Thank the heavens for this safer travel world, even if it means that the Rumours & News thread is much less visited because it has become much less interesting in this newly evolved safety era.

[Judd]

But this indicates that the aviation world has become so much safer - so many fewer crashes for each of us to wallow over

Quite so, but keep in mind that not all fatal crashes nor serious incidents hit the media - China for example where there is media censorship.

It is also the close shaves that we rarely hear about -the "there but for the Grace of God go I", sort of incidents. They are always happening but we don't always hear about them.
Example:

18th JUN, CHINAEASTERN, A330, MU774( CDG-KMG), 218 pax on board, 16 crew, when cruise at 39000ft, around 03:04 am, at Russiancontrol area, a/c experienced turbulence. 20 persons were sent to hospital, and2 were seriously injured.

This is the most serious event that pax got injury due turbulence in recent years.

After landing in KMG,a/c received an inspection for serious turbulence and was found 39 damages ineconomy class. No damage was found on important systems external.

It was 5 hours later when landing from the moment the turbulence happened, therefore it’s impossibleto pick up the cockpit voice. According to the crew, they regularly turned onradar for weather observation as at night time. They noticed the weather asearly as from 150 NM away, with green radar return, but later, crew turned theradar off, and did not turn on till about 10 NM away of the weather, on AUTO,yellow on radar return, visual weather was 600 m straight below the a/c, so crew decided to fly over it and then experienced serious turbulence.

Decoding shows: With over speed alarm, Captain disconnected AP, throttle stick changed severaltimes from idle, climb, MAX continuous and TOGA. Dual input, too large actions.A/c pitch altitude was changed several times too, MAX nose-up pitch 24.3 deg,MAX climb rate 12122 ft/min, MAX altitude up to 39472 ft, mini speed at 170 kt,nose-down pitch 12.7 deg, MAX descent rate 12300 ft/min, mini altitude 33848ft. Max indicated speed 319 NM, MAX 0.917.During turbulence, Max bank angle 29deg, Max overload 2.141G, Mini overload 0.336G.
............................................................ .................................................

Try this website for instructive study of what goes on of significant flight safety interest that doesn't always make the headlines.
SKYbrary Aviation Safety

[Kulverstukas]

But in the last 3 years we have 1 missed and two totally unresolved cases.

[A320FOX]

Every airline user and employee has to thank the FOQA programs for this drop in accidents. And even greater the drop if you take in account the number of flights nowdays compared to 10 or 15 years ago.

[3wheels]

Originally Posted by McGinty

- so many fewer crashes for each of us to wallow over

Definition.Wallow....(of a person) indulge in an unrestrained way in (something that creates a pleasurable sensation).

If that's your attitude towards flight safety then I suggest you wallow elsewhere....

[msbbarratt]

Refreshing Lemon Scented Paper Towelette Shortage

Apparently these are running low, flights delayed all over. BA boss about to be fed to the Total Perspective Vortex, just as soon as a piece of cake can be found to power it.

[Hotel Tango]

If that's your attitude towards flight safety then I suggest you wallow elsewhere....

Hmm, reading the entire post, I'd say you've taken that a tad out of context.

[donotdespisethesnake]

I certainly hope that improved safety has resulted in a reduction of major accidents, but one should be careful about drawing conclusions from short term trends. Given the overall low rate of major accidents, there is quite a high probability of periods with none occurring.

[noflynomore]

The absence of really bad aviation news

I'm really not sure it is wise to taunt the Gods of hubris with such rash and over-confident statements.

They'll have their say before too long. Just you wait and see.

[tdracer]

Originally Posted by donotdespisethesnake

I certainly hope that improved safety has resulted in a reduction of major accidents, but one should be careful about drawing conclusions from short term trends. Given the overall low rate of major accidents, there is quite a high probability of periods with none occurring.

If aviation disasters where occurring at about the same rate as they did 50 years ago, given the several fold increase in aviation traffic, we'd have a major accident every week instead of a few per year. That's not a short term trend, and it says volumes about the massive improvements that have been made in aviation safety. The improvements have been pretty much across the board - better aircraft, better aircraft systems, better training and improved CRM, TCAS, GPWS, etc.
Which is not to say we can rest on our laurels - there is still room for improvement. New "unintended consequence' problems are cropping up. For example there have been several recent accidents related to the crew not understanding or properly interfacing with the aircraft automation.

[pattern_is_full]

Definitely a long-term downward trend (although the data will always be "spiky":

http://i.cdn.turner.com/cnn/interact...s/chart_02.jpg

Any way you measure it: fatalities, accidents per flight hour.

[3wheels]

Originally Posted by noflynomore

I'm really not sure it is wise to taunt the Gods of hubris with such rash and over-confident statements.

They'll have their say before too long. Just you wait and see.

So right , now please let us have the benefit of your experience ... how awful...it only took a matter of hours and your wish was answered...

USMC KC-130 down in Mississippi

[noflynomore]

Wish? Wish? That is a most unpleasant, nay, scurrilous interpretation of something that was not even remotely suggested.