Safest Airlines Announced
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Chamonix
Posts: 291
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Safest Airlines Announced
German Aviation Magazine "Aero International" has announced the Worlds 50 Safest Airlines.
Based on statistics collected from 1973-2004 and factored with the mileage flown by each particular airline.
1. Finnair
2. Qantas
3. Cathay Pacific
.......
7. Ryan Air
8. Easyjet
.......
50. Turkish Airlines
Based on statistics collected from 1973-2004 and factored with the mileage flown by each particular airline.
1. Finnair
2. Qantas
3. Cathay Pacific
.......
7. Ryan Air
8. Easyjet
.......
50. Turkish Airlines
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: what U.S. calls ´old Europe´
Posts: 941
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How do you ´factor´ if the number of accidents is zero for several airlines ? Zero divided by any flight mileage stays zero.
Obviously this is the ´mileage between accidents´ number.
Anyway I just flew one of the six Airlines listed, THY (3 times), and am still alive. So much for statistics
Obviously this is the ´mileage between accidents´ number.
Anyway I just flew one of the six Airlines listed, THY (3 times), and am still alive. So much for statistics
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Thailand
Posts: 942
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Appropo THY: Many years ago an engineer from THY helped me change a gear box on a military flying machine. He was one of the most proffesional and helpful men I have had the pleasure to meet!
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: 'An Airfield Somewhere in England'
Posts: 1,094
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is absolute rubbish. How can Finnair be 'more safe' than Cathay Pacific, Ryanair and easyJet if none of them have had any accidents? You will note that I do not include Qantas as they in fact have had a very spectacular accident in Bankok when a 747 ended up on a golf course. Yet somehow they have ended up as number 2! There was, as I recall, a drive not to write the aircraft off lest it become the first ever hull loss in the airline's history. Any airline that has not had an accident has to be further up the safety tree, and by definition in equal position with those other airlines that are accident-free.
With MY reputation?
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Not fussed, as long as it's "Child Friendly"
Age: 52
Posts: 195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As a slight aside from this, has anyone in the UK seen the new Qantas TV ad, which mentions their safety record? Is it just me, or does anyone else see this as a dangerous route to go down? Something to do with putting all their eggs in one basket?
Or is that just me?
Or is that just me?
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: here and there
Posts: 280
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
more to that on www.jacdec.de
Paxing All Over The World
phonix: Yes indeed. I started a thread about it in (I think) PAX about a month ago. Responses from crew (including from Qantas) were horrified by the marketing people doing this. No crew likes to have this said in adverts.
I half heard a BA advert on TV at the weekend and I thought I heard a claim about saftey but did not hear it for clear and so must listen out for another. If BA have started this too, then it is very sad. But, as I said, I am not SURE that is what was said.
I half heard a BA advert on TV at the weekend and I thought I heard a claim about saftey but did not hear it for clear and so must listen out for another. If BA have started this too, then it is very sad. But, as I said, I am not SURE that is what was said.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In Frozen Chunks (Cloud Cuckoo Land)
Age: 17
Posts: 1,521
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes well who decided on 1973 as a good start date?
Look what happened in 1972 and earlier...
06.15.1972 Cathay Pacific Airways Convair CV-880 Fatalities 81 /81 Pleiku, Vietnam VR-HFZ
(and earlier still.....) Cathay Pacific Airways Douglas DC-4 Fatalities 10:18
Hainan, China VR-HEU
Isnt it funny how the survey was just after this date....
And Finnair....: 1961
Finnair Douglas DC-3 Fatalities 25:25
Koivulahti, Finland OH-LCC
11.08.1963 Finnair Douglas DC-3 Fatalities 22:24
Mariehamn, Finland
We have already heard about QF (which didnt actually kill anyone), what about the rest?
Just shows that Statistics can be manipulated any way...............
Look what happened in 1972 and earlier...
06.15.1972 Cathay Pacific Airways Convair CV-880 Fatalities 81 /81 Pleiku, Vietnam VR-HFZ
(and earlier still.....) Cathay Pacific Airways Douglas DC-4 Fatalities 10:18
Hainan, China VR-HEU
Isnt it funny how the survey was just after this date....
And Finnair....: 1961
Finnair Douglas DC-3 Fatalities 25:25
Koivulahti, Finland OH-LCC
11.08.1963 Finnair Douglas DC-3 Fatalities 22:24
Mariehamn, Finland
We have already heard about QF (which didnt actually kill anyone), what about the rest?
Just shows that Statistics can be manipulated any way...............
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,852
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For the complete list go to: http://www.aerointernational.de/
Click on "UNFALLSTATISTIK" on the left hand side.
Click on "UNFALLSTATISTIK" on the left hand side.
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: London
Posts: 186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The absence of KAL and China airlines can only be because they don't make the top 50. More interesting, I would have thought, though the statistical basis of this exercise is still dubious, to list the "best" through to the worst, rather than simply arranging the most used 50 airlines according to accident rate.
Two other observations. Qantas mentioning their safety record is dodgy. It may be legend, but in the early 1960s a US airline chairman was boasting of his safety record only to be informed as he left the podium of a major fatal accident. I always understood that since then it was regarded as v bad form to refer to your own safety record.
And then, on being asked about Qantas safety record a few years ago, a UAL executive responded that it would take them 25 years to fly as many miles as they do in one. And I believe there was a major fatal in 1968 or so with one of the subsidiary Qantas airlines, but that is not included in the stats.
Also, plotting the number of fatalities against passenger revenue kilometres can be misleading. THY, in the famous crash outside Paris in 74, had double the number of expected pax because a strike at Heathrow had led to the cancellation of a BEA flight and their transfer to that flight. THY therefore took a major hit statistically for reasons nothing to do with the operating circumstances. Much more sensible to plot numbers of fatal crashes against cycles. More faithful to the reality, and it would result in a completely different ranking. There are 100 more caveats, though, and any statistician will tell you that this sort of ranking is highly unscientific.
Two other observations. Qantas mentioning their safety record is dodgy. It may be legend, but in the early 1960s a US airline chairman was boasting of his safety record only to be informed as he left the podium of a major fatal accident. I always understood that since then it was regarded as v bad form to refer to your own safety record.
And then, on being asked about Qantas safety record a few years ago, a UAL executive responded that it would take them 25 years to fly as many miles as they do in one. And I believe there was a major fatal in 1968 or so with one of the subsidiary Qantas airlines, but that is not included in the stats.
Also, plotting the number of fatalities against passenger revenue kilometres can be misleading. THY, in the famous crash outside Paris in 74, had double the number of expected pax because a strike at Heathrow had led to the cancellation of a BEA flight and their transfer to that flight. THY therefore took a major hit statistically for reasons nothing to do with the operating circumstances. Much more sensible to plot numbers of fatal crashes against cycles. More faithful to the reality, and it would result in a completely different ranking. There are 100 more caveats, though, and any statistician will tell you that this sort of ranking is highly unscientific.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: where should i be today????
Age: 57
Posts: 342
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There used to be a website, which I think was called "am I going down". Yes I know it sound a bit dodgy but, if you entered all the information such as airline, route, travel dates etc it would work out the propbability of the unthinkable happening based on previous airline records.
No sure if it still exists but it was 'good fun' comparing data.
No sure if it still exists but it was 'good fun' comparing data.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: North America
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The top four or so, no doubt, an excellent safety record. I do feel you must take into account the US carriers. The number of operations these ailines perform in 30 minutes, are more than most of the top three in one day.
In any event I just hope no airline PR or ops departments pay any attention to this. A slipperey slope.
In any event I just hope no airline PR or ops departments pay any attention to this. A slipperey slope.