Its an interesting proposition. Perhaps somewhat of a paradox.
flying is great, so in my book it's worthwhile. It's not a question anybody else can answer for you.
Absolutely and whole heartedly agree.
In the last 3 months I've had several near misses whilst driving my car (not all my fault I'll add
), but none in an aeroplane, no forced nor stupidly baulked landings. But I've driven for upwards of 50hours, and flown only 12 in that time with less sky-users. How many motorcycles were involved in my near misses? None that I remember. There may well be many out there. I was always told when considering purchasing a motorbike 'its not if you crash, its when you crash'. So perhaps bikes are more dangerous than cars - there will inevitably be statistics on this.
But to compare motor vehicles to aeroplanes? I'm not sure this is usefully possible. As with all things mechanical there are risks. Aeroplanes have a more rigorous maintenance regime, and servicing schedule; a greater depth of training for the 'driver' and imposed operating limitations both of which are risk 'mitigators'. Would I take my car for a service after every 50 hours of driving, or do a check with a driving instructor every two years - not bloody likely.
So are aeroplanes safer than cars? I opine that they are in general, but only due to the systems and procedures that are in place to mitigate the risks of anything going wrong.