4 ms·

I doubt those lowballs were your first picks for the numbers here, but nonetheless I respect that you put forth some elbow grease so I'll reciprocate by grabbin

I doubt those lowballs were your first picks for the numbers here, but nonetheless I respect that you put forth some elbow grease so I'll reciprocate by grabbing some better data. The first Duck Tour business started in 1946 [1] - they're still in business. You can read the NTSB report on the 1999 incident here [2]. The PDF (on the right side panel) has far more information. It includes information such as each year having more than 250 ducks transport more than a million passengers on tours averaging 90 minutes. It's reasonable to assume that that number has been increasing over time, but the millions in the 90s at least gives you a decent ballpark. And so like I expect you were finding with more reasonable estimates, these vehicles are hardly dangerous. And the NTSB also did not find the boats themselves unsafe, though that they could be made to be safer in case of accidents. They stated the cause of the accident was "inadequate maintenance." The other issues, which the media is obsessing on today, were listed as contributing to the magnitude of the incident, not causes of the incident. The cause then, like now, was human error. The 1999 boat was sent out to sea with with a 4.5" hull access plug removed. The mechanic, who was new to the job, forgot to put it back in. The operator did nothing to evacuate the craft, and so on. [1] - http://amusementtoday.com/2015/05/original-wisconsin-ducks-celebrates-70-years-of-operation/ http://amusementtoday.com/2015/05/original-wisconsin-ducks-c... [2] - https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/AccidentReports/Pages/MAR0201.aspx https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/AccidentReports/Pages/MA...

learc83 8y ago
>having more than 250 ducks transport more than a million passengers That wasn't the number for DUKWs that was the number for all amphibious passenger vehicles. >It's reasonable to assume that that number has been increasing over time That's really a reasonable assumption considering the vehicles are 70+ years old. >but the millions in the 90s at least gives you a decent ballpark Again that's all amphibious vehicles, nothing about DUKWs, but let's assume they are. 1 million passengers. The DUKW in Missouri had 30 passengers, so let's assume the average trip is half full. 1 million passengers / 15 ~= 67k trips * 1.5 hours per trip ~= 100k hours per year. There have about 40 fatalities caused by DUKWs in the last 20 years. 100k hours * 20 years = 2 million hours. 20 deaths per million hours operated For cars we have ~0.625 deaths per million hours operated. 32 times more deadly per hour. Remarkably close to my first estimate. Your #1 link estimates that there are 300 operational DUKWs in the US today. That's going to include reserves that are only operating during busy seasons/weekends etc... But let's assume they are all active for 6 hours per day on average (which is way too high). You still get a fatality rate per hour about 5 times higher than cars. And again, tour boats and tour buses are much safer than cars, so the comparison will be much worse. >And the NTSB also did not find the boats themselves unsafe They did. Here is their recommendation: “Without delay, alter your amphibious passenger vessels to provide reserve buoyancy through passive means, such as watertight compartmentalization, builtin flotation, or equivalent measures, so that they will remain afloat and upright in the event of flooding, even when carrying a full complement of passengers and crew.” “The Safety Board considers that the major consideration in assessing the ability of passengers to escape from a sinking DUKW is the overhead canopy.” >The other issues, which the media is obsessing on today, were listed as contributing to the magnitude of the incident, not causes of the incident. Of course they aren't the cause. A canopy isn't going to cause a boat to sink.
- TangoTrotFox 8y ago
  These vehicles have been operating since 1946. That's 72 years, not 20. The reason I gave you the hours and population is because you then figure out 'person hours' without having to make any assumptions other than average rate of travel to go from deaths/mile to deaths/hour - which I expect is a stat you can actually probably also find out. This was the NTSB's conclusion on the accident. "The National Transportation Safety Board determines that the probable cause of the flooding and sinking of the DUKW No.1 was a missing access plug, which, in turn, was caused by inadequate supervision of company personnel and inadequate management oversight of amphibious passenger vehicle maintenance. Contributing to the sinking was a flaw in the design of DUKWs, that is, the lack of adequate reserve buoyancy that would have allowed the vehicle to remain afloat in a flooded condition." The accident was not caused because the vehicles were unsafe. It was caused because of human error. The things you're talking about are factors that contributed to the sinking. Without the main problem (human error) there would be no problem. And, lo and behold, human error was also the cause in this most recent incident as well.
  - learc83 8y ago
    >These vehicles have been operating since 1946. That's 72 years, not 20 I only have fatalities for the last 20 years if that wasn't clear. If you want to go back into non-digitized local newspaper archives across the country to find out if there were any other deaths as well as try to figure out how many were operating 70 years ago, be my guest. That doesn't change that fact that over the last 20 years, DUKWs are much deadlier per hour than cars, and it's even worse when compared to buses and tour boats. >The reason I gave you the hours and population is because you then figure out 'person hours' Fine. 1.5 million person hours * 20 years = 30 million person hours 40 deaths / 30 million person hours = ~1.3 deaths per million person hours The best answer I can find for how long the Average America spends in a car per day times number of drivers times days give me 199,685 million person hours per year, and 37k vehicle fatalities last year = 37k/199685 = 0.19 deaths per million person hours About 6 times deadlier. Tour boats and buses are much safer than cars so adjust accordingly. In the UK (only place I could find the data in hours) water transportation has 50 deaths per billion hours. 0.05 deaths per million person hours, Making DUKWs 26 times deadlier than the average UK passenger boat. >The accident was not caused because the vehicles were unsafe. It was caused because of human error. The things you're talking about are factors that contributed to the sinking. Without the main problem (human error) there would be no problem. This is completely meaningless. Human error is the cause of almost all traffic accidents as well, yet some cars are still unsafe because of the behavior of the car once human error takes place. Assume that the NTSB finds that a defect in a new bus called the Explodo will trap all it's occupants inside and cause it to catch fire in the event the driver hits an obstacle at greater than 20 miles per hour. Are you going to argue that the NTSB isn't really saying the bus is unsafe because human error is necessary to trigger the defect? No you're not. Look, I get it. You pride yourself on making evidence based judgments. However, in this case you did some quick math and misjudged the danger, but now you're digging in and sticking to an indefensible position. You're letting your emotions influence your position--behaving exactly like the journalists you were original railing against.

learc83 8y ago

>having more than 250 ducks transport more than a million passengers That wasn't the number for DUKWs that was the number for all amphibious passenger vehicles. >It's reasonable to assume that that number has been increasing over time That's really a reasonable assumption considering the vehicles are 70+ years old. >but the millions in the 90s at least gives you a decent ballpark Again that's all amphibious vehicles, nothing about DUKWs, but let's assume they are. 1 million passengers. The DUKW in Missouri had 30 passengers, so let's assume the average trip is half full. 1 million passengers / 15 ~= 67k trips * 1.5 hours per trip ~= 100k hours per year. There have about 40 fatalities caused by DUKWs in the last 20 years. 100k hours * 20 years = 2 million hours. 20 deaths per million hours operated For cars we have ~0.625 deaths per million hours operated. 32 times more deadly per hour. Remarkably close to my first estimate. Your #1 link estimates that there are 300 operational DUKWs in the US today. That's going to include reserves that are only operating during busy seasons/weekends etc... But let's assume they are all active for 6 hours per day on average (which is way too high). You still get a fatality rate per hour about 5 times higher than cars. And again, tour boats and tour buses are much safer than cars, so the comparison will be much worse. >And the NTSB also did not find the boats themselves unsafe They did. Here is their recommendation: “Without delay, alter your amphibious passenger vessels to provide reserve buoyancy through passive means, such as watertight compartmentalization, builtin flotation, or equivalent measures, so that they will remain afloat and upright in the event of flooding, even when carrying a full complement of passengers and crew.” “The Safety Board considers that the major consideration in assessing the ability of passengers to escape from a sinking DUKW is the overhead canopy.” >The other issues, which the media is obsessing on today, were listed as contributing to the magnitude of the incident, not causes of the incident. Of course they aren't the cause. A canopy isn't going to cause a boat to sink.

TangoTrotFox 8y ago
These vehicles have been operating since 1946. That's 72 years, not 20. The reason I gave you the hours and population is because you then figure out 'person hours' without having to make any assumptions other than average rate of travel to go from deaths/mile to deaths/hour - which I expect is a stat you can actually probably also find out. This was the NTSB's conclusion on the accident. "The National Transportation Safety Board determines that the probable cause of the flooding and sinking of the DUKW No.1 was a missing access plug, which, in turn, was caused by inadequate supervision of company personnel and inadequate management oversight of amphibious passenger vehicle maintenance. Contributing to the sinking was a flaw in the design of DUKWs, that is, the lack of adequate reserve buoyancy that would have allowed the vehicle to remain afloat in a flooded condition." The accident was not caused because the vehicles were unsafe. It was caused because of human error. The things you're talking about are factors that contributed to the sinking. Without the main problem (human error) there would be no problem. And, lo and behold, human error was also the cause in this most recent incident as well.
- learc83 8y ago
  >These vehicles have been operating since 1946. That's 72 years, not 20 I only have fatalities for the last 20 years if that wasn't clear. If you want to go back into non-digitized local newspaper archives across the country to find out if there were any other deaths as well as try to figure out how many were operating 70 years ago, be my guest. That doesn't change that fact that over the last 20 years, DUKWs are much deadlier per hour than cars, and it's even worse when compared to buses and tour boats. >The reason I gave you the hours and population is because you then figure out 'person hours' Fine. 1.5 million person hours * 20 years = 30 million person hours 40 deaths / 30 million person hours = ~1.3 deaths per million person hours The best answer I can find for how long the Average America spends in a car per day times number of drivers times days give me 199,685 million person hours per year, and 37k vehicle fatalities last year = 37k/199685 = 0.19 deaths per million person hours About 6 times deadlier. Tour boats and buses are much safer than cars so adjust accordingly. In the UK (only place I could find the data in hours) water transportation has 50 deaths per billion hours. 0.05 deaths per million person hours, Making DUKWs 26 times deadlier than the average UK passenger boat. >The accident was not caused because the vehicles were unsafe. It was caused because of human error. The things you're talking about are factors that contributed to the sinking. Without the main problem (human error) there would be no problem. This is completely meaningless. Human error is the cause of almost all traffic accidents as well, yet some cars are still unsafe because of the behavior of the car once human error takes place. Assume that the NTSB finds that a defect in a new bus called the Explodo will trap all it's occupants inside and cause it to catch fire in the event the driver hits an obstacle at greater than 20 miles per hour. Are you going to argue that the NTSB isn't really saying the bus is unsafe because human error is necessary to trigger the defect? No you're not. Look, I get it. You pride yourself on making evidence based judgments. However, in this case you did some quick math and misjudged the danger, but now you're digging in and sticking to an indefensible position. You're letting your emotions influence your position--behaving exactly like the journalists you were original railing against.