Crash rate ?

Discussion in 'Hangar Flying' started by Speedboat100, Aug 15, 2019.

Help Support HomeBuiltAirplanes Forum by donating:

  1. Aug 15, 2019 #1

    Speedboat100

    Speedboat100

    Speedboat100

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2018
    Messages:
    357
    Likes Received:
    19
    Location:
    Europe
    Hello !

    I am concerned about the crash rate of a certain aeroplane type in use in 50 countries made around 1 thousand.

    What is the acceptable crash rate by manufactured aeroplane.

    Is every 16th plane crashed a clear sign of something ?

    Or is it really normal when flying hours are high ?
     
  2. Aug 15, 2019 #2

    Tiger Tim

    Tiger Tim

    Tiger Tim

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2013
    Messages:
    2,817
    Likes Received:
    1,570
    Location:
    Thunder Bay
    Depends on the type of flying I guess. The Concorde had a massive accident rate compared to, say, the 737 if you look purely at percent hull losses.

    I’m scratching my head thinking of what could have lost one in sixteen though. Maybe something that’s been around forever and operating in “get ‘er done” environments like the de Havilland Beaver though that would hardly be the airplane’s fault. What plane did you have in mind?
     
  3. Aug 15, 2019 #3

    TFF

    TFF

    TFF

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2010
    Messages:
    11,315
    Likes Received:
    3,120
    Location:
    Memphis, TN
    You have to be more specific. Type of planes. Qualities of fabrication. Quality of engines. Quality of pilot.
     
  4. Aug 15, 2019 #4

    Speedboat100

    Speedboat100

    Speedboat100

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2018
    Messages:
    357
    Likes Received:
    19
    Location:
    Europe
    I compared it to italian Tecnam P92 as both are trainer planes for beginners....and plane with bigger rudder ( P92 ) had 32% less accidents.

    Both use the same engine.

    The other is a low wing chech design.
     
    Last edited: Aug 15, 2019
  5. Aug 15, 2019 #5

    BJC

    BJC

    BJC

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2013
    Messages:
    9,121
    Likes Received:
    5,933
    Location:
    97FL, Florida, USA
    Can identify the airplane that you are concerned with, and can you quantify “bigger rudder”?


    BJC
     
  6. Aug 15, 2019 #6

    Speedboat100

    Speedboat100

    Speedboat100

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2018
    Messages:
    357
    Likes Received:
    19
    Location:
    Europe
    Yes the rudder and stabilizer is way smaller and plane's fuselage is shorter in the accident prone plane.

    The fatality rate in the plane I am investigating has almost 3 x than the P92 compared to their amount in circulation.

    Which is very alarming.
     
    Last edited: Aug 15, 2019
  7. Aug 15, 2019 #7

    Aerowerx

    Aerowerx

    Aerowerx

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2011
    Messages:
    4,697
    Likes Received:
    1,243
    Location:
    Marion, Ohio
    If I was the manufacturer of the plane, the acceptable crash rate would be somewhere around 0.0 crashes per 1,000,000,000 planes built, if caused by defects or design flaws!:D
     
    Derswede likes this.
  8. Aug 15, 2019 #8

    TFF

    TFF

    TFF

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2010
    Messages:
    11,315
    Likes Received:
    3,120
    Location:
    Memphis, TN
    If they are both training aircraft, you also need to look at the program systems they teach. If one is more high performance and transition training is not good, could be a problem. If one is a training plane and one is a homebuilt, is there a difference in purpose that looks might be hiding.
     
    SVSUSteve likes this.
  9. Aug 15, 2019 #9

    SVSUSteve

    SVSUSteve

    SVSUSteve

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2007
    Messages:
    3,803
    Likes Received:
    896
    Location:
    Indianapolis, IN
    Also whether the crashes were fatal. There’s a lot of variability in that.
     
  10. Aug 15, 2019 #10

    SVSUSteve

    SVSUSteve

    SVSUSteve

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2007
    Messages:
    3,803
    Likes Received:
    896
    Location:
    Indianapolis, IN
    Cirrus before the insurance companies got bellicose anyone? It’s been a marvelous improvement and the Cirrus owners association deserves a lot of credit.
     
  11. Aug 15, 2019 #11

    Dana

    Dana

    Dana

    Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2007
    Messages:
    8,479
    Likes Received:
    2,883
    Location:
    CT, USA
    Also need to be sure you're looking at the accident rate per flying hour, not fleet size.
     
  12. Aug 15, 2019 #12

    SVSUSteve

    SVSUSteve

    SVSUSteve

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2007
    Messages:
    3,803
    Likes Received:
    896
    Location:
    Indianapolis, IN
    There’s also the point that the X/100,000 hours is a half *** guess because no one has accurate numbers for operation of most aircraft types.
     
    BoKu likes this.
  13. Aug 15, 2019 #13

    Speedboat100

    Speedboat100

    Speedboat100

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2018
    Messages:
    357
    Likes Received:
    19
    Location:
    Europe
    Yes an accurate analysis would also need to address the flying hours. Still almost 3 x more fatalities pro plane rises a suspicion.

    I brought this up because I was banned ( for a week ) for calling this aeroplane type a "sling" on local FB group.
     
  14. Aug 15, 2019 #14

    Wanttaja

    Wanttaja

    Wanttaja

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2013
    Messages:
    1,179
    Likes Received:
    1,346
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    As others have mentioned, there are many factors that will effect the relative accident rates. Engine type is a strong driver in accident rates, for example, and wing position affects the rate of fatalities.

    The RV-7 has a fleet accident rate about half that of the RV-6, yet it doesn't mean the RV-6 is unsafe. TONS of other factors involved.

    Post the exact types you wish compared, and I'll take a quick look at the US statistics.

    Ron Wanttaja
     
    Last edited: Aug 15, 2019
    N804RV and SVSUSteve like this.
  15. Aug 15, 2019 #15

    litespeed

    litespeed

    litespeed

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 21, 2008
    Messages:
    1,349
    Likes Received:
    226
    Location:
    Sydney
    Also some aircraft designs are so much more likely to be fatal than others in the same circumstances.

    Engines and flight regimes aside- some crash a lot better than others.
    A good example is Jabiru- they have built thousands and yes they occasionally come down- normally poor maintenance, piss poor piloting or running out of fuel (pilot again).

    But you really have to try to kill yourself in one. Unless you break up in flight- one case from flying into a storm system- cant blame aircraft for stupidity. The other couple I know of where complete stall and crashing straight onto the nose- Lawn dart.

    But a heap of cases where it looks nasty but the aircraft took the big hits and protected the cockpit and they were alive and normally ok. Some aircraft will happily kill you out of spite, some will not take much abuse and some you really have to F....k it up to kill yourself.

    The same goes with injuries, some are much more likely to injure the pilot than others for any given situation.
     
  16. Aug 15, 2019 #16

    Speedboat100

    Speedboat100

    Speedboat100

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2018
    Messages:
    357
    Likes Received:
    19
    Location:
    Europe

    Okei Ron I mean the Ev97 Eurostar. 5 dead in Finland.

    I think its rudder and wide fuselaga has something to with these..and straight wing. Rudder looks small.

    It seems to have 56 kg/m2 wing loading too which is almost 4 x more than in an Lazair.
     
  17. Aug 15, 2019 #17

    litespeed

    litespeed

    litespeed

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 21, 2008
    Messages:
    1,349
    Likes Received:
    226
    Location:
    Sydney
    To be fair,

    Almost anything has a higher wing loader than Lazair.

    It is completely different class of aircraft, much faster, much more power and much higher speeds for stall etc.
     
  18. Aug 15, 2019 #18

    Dana

    Dana

    Dana

    Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2007
    Messages:
    8,479
    Likes Received:
    2,883
    Location:
    CT, USA
    Well, a Lazair has an extremely low wing loading, so not a fair comparison.
     
    SVSUSteve likes this.
  19. Aug 15, 2019 #19

    Speedboat100

    Speedboat100

    Speedboat100

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2018
    Messages:
    357
    Likes Received:
    19
    Location:
    Europe

    Tecnam P92 has only 46 kg/m2.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tecnam_P92
     
  20. Aug 15, 2019 #20

    litespeed

    litespeed

    litespeed

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 21, 2008
    Messages:
    1,349
    Likes Received:
    226
    Location:
    Sydney
    OK the Tecnam has a lower wing loading than the Eurostar.

    So could be expected to be a bit hotter. But it still easily fits the category .
     

Share This Page

arrow_white