That 727 accident was not the result of a stall. I suspect that most of the others on that list were also not stall related. I've lost count of how many times I've asked for stall related accidents.
Are you having trouble comprehending what I have asked for?
Perhaps I am. Asiana didn't stall, at least not in the conventional sense. Asiana crashed because the airspeed dropped dangerously low before the aircrew attempted corrective action. The 727 crashed because the airspeed dropped dangerously low before the crew attempted corrective action. Perhaps I'm being simplistic, but sounds the same to me
Setting aside the inconvenient fact that the original glass cockpit aircraft - 757/767 and A310, have never had a stall caused crash that wasn't due to bad air data (which you've chosen to ignore), explain this:
The Airbus report (which, BTW, mirrors similar reports from Boeing) says that Gen 1 aircraft (round dials) never got below 2/million fatal crashes. Gen 2 aircraft (round dials) did better, but never got below ~0.7/million fatal crashes. Gen 3 (glass), once the numbers became statistically significant, never got ABOVE 0.5/million (and are currently running ~ 0.2/million), while Gen 4 (glass plus) again once the numbers became statistically significant, has never been above 0.2/million and currently has,
aghast! increased over the last few years from ~0.05 to ~0.10.
Oh the humanities!!!!
So, again, what is your justification for saying the accident rate is getting worse?