19 Fatalities in less than 3 months

[Dick Smith]

In the latest issue of Flight Safety Australia magazine, on page 52 under “Selected Australian accidents/incidents 1 October – 19 December 2023”, it shows 19 fatalities in that time.

This seems an extraordinary number. What do others think?

[Mach E Avelli]

I think the GA fleet is getting old and tired and maintenance is perhaps now being skimped because of high parts and labour costs.
Also, the approach to training needs to get back to ‘old school’ whereby stick and rudder skills take precedence over some of today’s more touchy feely emphasis, the so called ‘non technical skills’ . This is not saying NTS isn’t good, just that it seems an inordinate time spent on that in the early stages of training and testing would be better spent on basics…the “pull back and the cows get smaller - keep pulling and they get too big too soon” stuff.

[lucille]

In the latest issue of Flight Safety Australia magazine, on page 52 under “Selected Australian accidents/incidents 1 October – 19 December 2023”, it shows 19 fatalities in that time.

This seems an extraordinary number. What do others think?

Maybe a 3 month window distorts the statistics? Year on year may be better and flight hours per fatality number may also be relevant. Mark Twain had it right on statistics.

[B2N2]

In the USA we had 37 fatal accidents in the same time frame.
Statistics and statistics and damn lies and fabrications.
Unless we know what the total number of aircraft and flights were over the period.
Then compare those numbers with same timeframe previously.
19 could be high, could be low.

[Jabberwocky82]

Microsoft Power BI (https://app.powerbi.com/view?r=eyJrIjoiNjY1ZjY0MjItZDUwMi00YTQyLTkyYjctMzQ4MDM3M2QwN Dc2IiwidCI6Ijk3MzFmOTg3LTg1MDEtNDk5Ni1iZDI3LTBhMGEyY2Y2YzhjY iJ9)

[Sandy Reith]

As others have said “ …and damned lies.”Unless there’s more facts and a much longer timeline we are only guessing. As regards that old saw about ageing aircraft, beloved by the CASASTROPHE, we know that some accidents have been RAAUS registered aircraft and I think latterly one each a Cirrus and a helicopter.
Personally I wouldn’t swap my two pre 1970 aircraft to feel better about safety, more likely the reverse in reality.
My question would be just what does age matter? Arguably overhauled engines are more reliable than in the past and there’s lots of young airframes in terms of hours in service, including mine.
Besides I’d be thinking most fatalities occur due to the pilot, not the aircraft.

[Runaway Gun]

In my crusty old opinion, students are spending more time 'heads in' looking at colourful displays, ADSB outputs, moving maps etc, programming autopilots and GPS's.
Sure, I'm jealous of the newer technology, but their lookout and Situational Awareness suffers. The 'avoid the stall' theory also works on paper, but the instant they pull too hard or skid around the corner, they are entering unchartered territory. Full opposite aileron or a swift application of hard back elevator is a natural reaction, and they rarely get a second chance to learn why its the wrong thing to do.

[jonas64]

It's a bit like the ridiculous road death toll stats the media and police churn out every holiday period, where they expect a reduction in the overall number of deaths every year, and yet completely fail to take into account the half million or so people that get added to our population every year (and proportionate increase in number of cars on the road). I guess reporting per capita just wouldn't look as damning, would it? Likewise with aviation, without at least knowing the number of flights from one period to another, the information is meaningless.

[jonas64]

In my crusty old opinion, students are spending more time 'heads in' looking at colourful displays, ADSB outputs, moving maps etc, programming autopilots and GPS's.
Sure, I'm jealous of the newer technology, but their lookout and Situational Awareness suffers. The 'avoid the stall' theory also works on paper, but the instant they pull too hard or skid around the corner, they are entering unchartered territory. Full opposite aileron or a swift application of hard back elevator is a natural reaction, and they rarely get a second chance to learn why its the wrong thing to do.

I don't know. I reckon most students still get their start on a 152 or PA-28 or similar, where the equipment hasn't much changed since the 70's.

[Squawk7700]

In the USA we had 37 fatal accidents in the same time frame.
Statistics and statistics and damn lies and fabrications.
Unless we know what the total number of aircraft and flights were over the period.
Then compare those numbers with same timeframe previously.
19 could be high, could be low.

37 fatal accidents or 37 fatalities?

[Lookleft]

Before the finger gets pointed at "kids nowadays" and the age of the equipment it would be interesting to know the age of the pilots.

[NZFlyingKiwi]

I don't know. I reckon most students still get their start on a 152 or PA-28 or similar, where the equipment hasn't much changed since the 70's.

That's true to some extent, I guess particularly in the club environment, although a lot of the bigger schools these days are using Diamonds and G1000 equipped 172s and so on. But even in the oldest 152 you've got iPads and smart phones and all that sort of stuff.

[lucille]

So, from an article in The Australian by Robyn Ironside dated January 25, 2024.

the first paragraph copy and pasted,

…..” Aviation accidents in Australia fell to their lowest level in 17-years in 2023, despite a number of shocking crashes, including three mid-air collisions.

Data provided by the Australian Transport Safety Bureau showed there were 139 accidents reported last year, the lowest since 2006, and well down on the 10-year average of 209 a year.

They included 19 fatal accidents, compared to an average of 21 a year, resulting in 33 deaths – slightly above the ten-year average of 30.5 a year.

ATSB chief commissioner Angus Mitchell said tragically several crashes involved multiple fatalities (http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nation/light-plane-crashes-into-rural-property-near-canberra-at-least-one-dead/news-story/288bc3ee6325afe81f4395974e5cc7b9), but the increase in lives lost was “statistically irrelevant”.……..”


The last sentence answers Mr. Smiths question…

[nomess]

I think the GA fleet is getting old and tired and maintenance is perhaps now being skimped because of high parts and labour costs.
Also, the approach to training needs to get back to ‘old school’ whereby stick and rudder skills take precedence over some of today’s more touchy feely emphasis, the so called ‘non technical skills’ . This is not saying NTS isn’t good, just that it seems an inordinate time spent on that in the early stages of training and testing would be better spent on basics…the “pull back and the cows get smaller - keep pulling and they get too big too soon” stuff.
The fleet is getting old however looking at many of the investigations underway, many still seem related to crew. Is numerous investigations in progress, many on here sided more with engineering issues across most of these, however I have my doubts, which leads to your second point. We will await the final report.

I think you are correct, the large chunk of new ticket holders have learnt from advanced technology in front of them, they then head up north, in which it is steam gauges only. That is a frustration a charter owner raised with me not that long ago, it’s all fancy screen stuff, his fleet has none of that, and he said is stands out on a check flight. The ‘old school’ training program is near impossible to get these days. I could probably name you less than half a dozen outfits, across the whole country, that would offer such an experience. The future is sausages, fancy screens, and non existent stick skills.

[tail wheel]

Be interesting to know the class of aircraft involved. I haven't looked at the accident statistics but I think many were ultralight or home built rather than VH registered? I also suspect the number of GA and private hours flown by VH registered aircraft has been in serious decline in recent years?

[Lead Balloon]

The increase in lives lost in 'community service flights' was statistically irrelevant, until it was politically expedient to pretend it wasn't by inventing a subset of private passenger operations.

The numbers can be and are manipulated to mean whatever anyone wants them to mean.

I suppose if you squint really hard you could find an aging aircraft issue in the numbers, but I'll be jiggered if I can.

[Mach E Avelli]

So, from an article in The Australian by Robyn Ironside dated January 25, 2024.

the first paragraph copy and pasted,

…..” Aviation accidents in Australia fell to their lowest level in 17-years in 2023, despite a number of shocking crashes, including three mid-air collisions.

Data provided by the Australian Transport Safety Bureau showed there were 139 accidents reported last year, the lowest since 2006, and well down on the 10-year average of 209 a year.

They included 19 fatal accidents, compared to an average of 21 a year, resulting in 33 deaths – slightly above the ten-year average of 30.5 a year.

ATSB chief commissioner Angus Mitchell said tragically several crashes involved multiple fatalities (http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nation/light-plane-crashes-into-rural-property-near-canberra-at-least-one-dead/news-story/288bc3ee6325afe81f4395974e5cc7b9), but the increase in lives lost was “statistically irrelevant”.……..”


The last sentence answers Mr. Smiths question…
Lives lost may be “statistically irrelevant “ in that most light aircraft crashes only kill one or two occupants. Compared with the road toll, a few bugsmasher prangs are hardly newsworthy, though the media love beating up such events. More people get killed by lightning strikes and bee stings.
What WILL cause a stir will be the loss of a large transport aircraft. That’s not a case of ‘if’ but ‘when’. “Statistically ”, the longer we go without a major crash, the closer we get to having one.
The resulting statistics will make it into the wider world of international safety analysis and show that we aren’t the best in the world like some of us think we are.
lies, and damned statistics…

[Lead Balloon]

Microsoft Power BI (https://app.powerbi.com/view?r=eyJrIjoiNjY1ZjY0MjItZDUwMi00YTQyLTkyYjctMzQ4MDM3M2QwN Dc2IiwidCI6Ijk3MzFmOTg3LTg1MDEtNDk5Ni1iZDI3LTBhMGEyY2Y2YzhjY iJ9)
Where do e.g. the Sea World helicopter tragedy fatalities show up in that? It's probably my fat thumbs, but I can't seem to click on the correct buttons to see where and how those fatalities are categorised.

[MickG0105]

Where do e.g. the Sea World helicopter tragedy fatalities show up in that? It's probably my fat thumbs, but I can't seem to click on the correct buttons to see where and how those fatalities are categorised.
You need to clear a bit of the clutter.

Under Occurrence Class, select Accident. Under Injury Level, select Fatal. Down on the timeline, select 2023. The result should be 19 occurrences in total, and you'll then be able to see an occurrence marked on the map near Southport.

If you then clean up the filters and select Activity > Aircraft Type > Destination Airport, you can see the Sea World crash has been categorised under Commercial Air Transport.

https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1918x958/screenshot_20240312_082232_chrome_6e39d554ecab235ac0d06ad12f 5eea569a329ef2.jpg

[MickG0105]

... “Statistically ”, the longer we go without a major crash, the closer we get to having one.
…
An often commonly held view but definitely not supported "statistically".

[Lead Balloon]

You need to clear a bit of the clutter.

Under Occurrence Class, select Accident. Under Injury Level, select Fatal. Down on the timeline, select 2023. The result should be 19 occurrences in total, and you'll then be able to see an occurrence marked on the map near Southport.

If you then clean up the filters and select Activity > Aircraft Type > Destination Airport, you can see the Sea World crash has been categorised under Commercial Air Transport.

https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1918x958/screenshot_20240312_082232_chrome_6e39d554ecab235ac0d06ad12f 5eea569a329ef2.jpgThanks, Mick.

So where does it specify the number of fatalities in that accident?

[MickG0105]

Thanks, Mick.

So where does it specify the number of fatalities in that accident?
There doesn't appear to be that level of drill down.

[Dick Smith]

Remember that the USA has a population of over 341 million people compared to Australia’s 26.6 million. Over that 3 month time period, Australia’s 19 fatalities works out at 0.71 fatalities per million people, whereas the USA works out at 0.16 fatalities per million people. In other words, Australia had over 4 times as many fatalities per capita as the USA.

[MickG0105]

... In other words, Australia had over 4 times as many fatalities per capita as the USA.
Over a quite specific, statistically unrepresentative period of just shy of three months.

[43Inches]

I agree with Dick in part, not because of relative population, but in regard to relative Aviating population. The number of active pilots at all levels in the USA, the amount and density of traffic and airports, military airspace, weather phenomenon, elevation, and so on is far above Australias pitiful aviation scene. Australia should have an accident rate 1/10th that of the USA, but it does not. I do blame in part the rule set and abomination of what is Australias regulator and government decisions in relation to Aviation infrastructure. Safe skies are empty skies as far as Australia is concerned.

[SIUYA]

Mick.....the information is there.........accessing it is the trick.

Once you get to the Sea World (YSWD) blue bar under the destination aerodrome selection, right clicking the blue bar will present you with a --> goto Drill through --> Data Table and that provides information on the accident (eg., fatalities).

[Dick Smith]

And the US has far worse weather conditions and higher terrain than Aus.
Yes. It is a short sampling period but still very strange.

[Sandy Reith]

I agree with Dick in part, not because of relative population, but in regard to relative Aviating population. The number of active pilots at all levels in the USA, the amount and density of traffic and airports, military airspace, weather phenomenon, elevation, and so on is far above Australias pitiful aviation scene. Australia should have an accident rate 1/10th that of the USA, but it does not. I do blame in part the rule set and abomination of what is Australias regulator and government decisions in relation to Aviation infrastructure. Safe skies are empty skies as far as Australia is concerned.
Couldn’t agree more, in so many ways the regulatory environment has cruelled what should be a healthy competitive GA industry. For example, we’ve lost hundreds of flying schools and experienced instructors due to the inordinately complex and expensive requirements of CASA. The uptake of IF ratings has built in disincentives such as not permitted with C5 and Basic C2 medicals.
Then there’s all the invented permissions for which CASA charges exorbitant fees and the wrong principle that the independent regulator should recoup a large proportion of its expenses from the industry.

[MickG0105]

...
Yes. It is a short sampling period but still very strange.
No more strange than the US recording 99 fatalities from 66 accidents for the September quarter last year while, for the same period, we recorded 2 fatalities from 1 accident (3 from 2 if you include the G-2468 homebuilt gyrocopter crash).

[dr dre]

Over a quite specific, statistically unrepresentative period of just shy of three months.

For the decade 2010-2019 the US suffered an average GA fatality rate (https://www.statista.com/statistics/1031953/us-general-aviation-fatalities/#:~:text=Fatalities%20from%20general%20aviation%20in%20the%2 0U.S.%202000%2D2020&text=There%20were%20a%20total%20of,down%20from%20414%20in%20 2019.) per year of 405, Australia (https://www.atsb.gov.au/sites/default/files/media/5777724/ar-2020-014_final.pdf) 32.

So 1.19 per million people for the US, 1.20 for Australia.

Using flight hours flown for GA - USA 10.3 per million (https://gitnux.org/general-aviation-accident-statistics/#:~:text=In%20the%20United%20States%2C%20general,100%2C000%2 0flight%20hours%20that%20year.) flight hours, Australia 8.5 per million (https://www.atsb.gov.au/sites/default/files/media/5777724/ar-2020-014_final.pdf) (graph on page 12).

[Traffic_Is_Er_Was]

Surely it's the number (and type) of accidents that result in fatalities, rather than just the bald number of fatalities that is the important metric if you are trying to discuss (or imply) systemic failures?

[MickG0105]

For the decade 2010-2019 the US suffered an average GA fatality rate (https://www.statista.com/statistics/1031953/us-general-aviation-fatalities/#:~:text=Fatalities%20from%20general%20aviation%20in%20the%2 0U.S.%202000%2D2020&text=There%20were%20a%20total%20of,down%20from%20414%20in%20 2019.) per year of 405, Australia (https://www.atsb.gov.au/sites/default/files/media/5777724/ar-2020-014_final.pdf) 32.

So 1.19 per million people for the US, 1.20 for Australia.

Using flight hours flown for GA - USA 10.3 per million (https://gitnux.org/general-aviation-accident-statistics/#:~:text=In%20the%20United%20States%2C%20general,100%2C000%2 0flight%20hours%20that%20year.) flight hours, Australia 8.5 per million (https://www.atsb.gov.au/sites/default/files/media/5777724/ar-2020-014_final.pdf) (graph on page 12).
Certainly that's a much more representative dataset. It would be interesting to see how the most recent few years look against that longer term trend.

I am getting a sense of déjà vu all over again with this topic. I'm sure it has been kicked around in the past with some discussion about the higher percentage of instrument rated pilots in the GA community in the US when compared to Australia.

[dr dre]

I am getting a sense of déjà vu all over again with this topic. I'm sure it has been kicked around in the past with some discussion about the higher percentage of instrument rated pilots in the GA community in the US when compared to Australia.

As a thought would 1 October to 19 December being spring and summer in Australia mean more recreational flying happening vs the start of winter in the US, therefore more flying activity?

[B2N2]

37 fatal accidents or 37 fatalities?

Accidents, didn’t count total number.
Doesn’t matter to the point I was trying to make.

[Lead Balloon]

Mick.....the information is there.........accessing it is the trick.

Once you get to the Sea World (YSWD) blue bar under the destination aerodrome selection, right clicking the blue bar will present you with a --> goto Drill through --> Data Table and that provides information on the accident (eg., fatalities).Shouldn't need right clicking and 'drill throughs' or clearing of a bit of 'clutter' or whatever to get to the number of people whose lives were lost in a tragedy.

If the number of passengers killed in commercial helicopter operations in the last few years are statistically irrelevant, I wonder why we bother with ATSB. Just wait until the statisticians decides there's some statistically relevant trend and then arc up an investigation.

[MickG0105]

As a thought would 1 October to 19 December being spring and summer in Australia mean more recreational flying happening vs the start of winter in the US, therefore more flying activity?
Yes, there's undoubtedly something to that hypothesis. On the flip side, there might be something to be said for the prevailing flying conditions during that period in either hemisphere; might the onset of the northern winter present more hazardous flying conditions than the onset of the southern summer?

Bottomline is that you need to careful when comparing statistics, very much more so when you start looking at smaller subsets.

[MickG0105]

Mick.....the information is there.........accessing it is the trick.

Once you get to the Sea World (YSWD) blue bar under the destination aerodrome selection, right clicking the blue bar will present you with a --> goto Drill through --> Data Table and that provides information on the accident (eg., fatalities).
Okey doke, thanks for that. I keep forgetting the right click trick for touch screens.

[SIUYA]

LB said:

Shouldn't need right clicking and 'drill throughs' or clearing of a bit of 'clutter' or whatever to get to the number of people whose lives were lost in a tragedy.

If the number of passengers killed in commercial helicopter operations in the last few years are statistically irrelevant, I wonder why we bother with ATSB. Just wait until the statisticians decides there's some statistically relevant trend and then arc up an investigation.

I'm in total agreement LB. The ATSB Database is user-unfriendly and not at all straightforward to use or query, and I'm really not sure why it needed to be that way.

[Squawk7700]

An often commonly held view but definitely not supported "statistically".

A statistician would say that each event is mutually exclusive, however that is definitely not the case when you’re talking about aircraft manufacturers and operators of said aircraft with pilots and moving parts.