So flying IS dangerous .....

[Heliport]

.......... or so the stats say.

The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics recently released a list of the top 10 most dangerous jobs in America for 2002. Pilots were in #3.

In the report, examined by CNN and Money Magazine, pilots and navigators collectively were listed as having the third most dangerous jobs, following timber cutters and fishers.

The CNN/Money article, cites the survey as claiming that commercial pilots died on the job at the rate of 70 per 100,000 workers.
According to the report, recent National Institute for Occupational Health and Safety stats indicate Alaskan pilots have a fatality rate four times higher than those in the lower 48 and therefore greatly influenced the data collected.

The report also listed the average pay for each category and said money doesn't match the risk. "Even though pilots flying small planes have a much higher fatality rate than pilots flying big airline jets, they're not financially compensated for the added danger; non-jet pilots average about $52,000 a year in pay while jetliner pilots make about $92,000," the report said.

#1 place went to timber fellers who suffered 118 fatalities per 10,000 workers and fishermen were in #2 71.

[BlenderPilot]

Now if you take into account that most of the fatalities they are taking into account, take place in the helicopter sector . . . . .

Then somebody said something about, not being remunerated for the extra risk, I wonder how much can you get paid to risk dying when money isn't an issue for you?

[Hilico]

1. Several years ago the Guardian published research showing that travelling in a helicopter was as safe as being a fireman in London during the Blitz. I was so impressed, I cut it out and kept it.

2. A very experienced chap in the heli industry said he had seen a thorough, balanced study showing that heli flying was eight times as dangerous as fixed-wing, "which I believe".

3. I've seen Government statistics that report the risks of travel based on time of exposure rather than distance covered - which penalises the faster methods. At the time, HMG had the knives out for rail; draw your own conclusions, about HMG in particular and statistics in general.

4. You know what my first purchase will be if I win the lottery, don't you?

[leemind]

> 4. You know what my first purchase will be if I win the lottery, don't you?

First Class Rail ticket on Virgin Trains???
:D

[Hilico]

Leemind, don't be so utterly ridiculous.

A second-hand 206 would be far cheaper.

Come to that, so would a new one.

In fact, so would a new AS332.

[Barannfin]

I know what i would buy, maybe a ride in a fighter jet, like the russians are doing, cause it looks like I cant take the concord anymore. Just wanna go faster than the speed of sound once in my life(not in bed ;) )

Anyways, back on topic here, does anybody know if we actually are 8 times more likely to have an accident then our stuck wing brethren? Or does anybody have information comparing the two? It was a pretty sobering article for me, I have worked the top 2 most dangerous jobs, and now im trying to get into #3 apparently. Hope its not a trend of me going down the list, dont really have a desire to work some of those jobs.

[old heliman]

Barannfin, statistics are what you want them to be and in any case they vary according to the part of the world and type of flying being considered.

Broadly speaking, in the UK it is true that for public transport helicopter flying, the fatal accident rate is gigher than for jet aircraft BUT it is broadly simil;ar to light turboprop rates. For example there has been (touch wood) only one fatal offshore accident in the past 10 years - the S76 that had the blade failure last year.

Most onshore accidents over here have been to private helicopters or ones not being flown for public transport. There are some exeptions to this but not many.