13 ms·
With 3 million flights a year in the US, there's no way the cost is possibly justified by any reasonable cost-benefit analysis. > Nobody died in a crash of a U
by jessriedel 9y ago
With 3 million flights a year in the US, there's no way the cost is possibly justified by any reasonable cost-benefit analysis.
> Nobody died in a crash of a United States-certificated scheduled airline operating anywhere in the world in 2016...it is the seventh straight year that nobody died in a crash on a United States-certificated scheduled airline operating anywhere in the world.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/danielreed/2016/12/28/in-the-last-7-years-you-were-more-likely-to-be-run-over-by-a-car-than-to-die-in-an-airline-crash/#4c5d0ec4428a https://www.forbes.com/sites/danielreed/2016/12/28/in-the-la...
- GordonS 9y agoHow often do planes actually crash? Is it often enough to get statisically significant data about survival rates in the event of an evacuation? Also, evacuation after a crash is not the only safety issue - there is deep vein thrombosis, for example.
- jessriedel 9y agoThere isn't nearly enough real-crash data for something as specific as seat widths, but the FAA gets lots of info about this stuff by simulating evacuation procedures with real people. http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/2006/03/how_did_airbus_ace_its_airplane_evacuation_test.html http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/20...
- obsurveyor 9y agoAll the more reason to do research into making sure there isn't a safety issue here. Stats like this just make people and companies complacent until the next tragedy strikes.
- jessriedel 9y agoResearch isn't free. It's very possible an order of magnitude estimate would show that the risks of seat narrowing couldn't possibly outweigh the benefits.