4 ms·
Statistics is probably the wrong word. If a safety incident happens you'll hear about it. They're so rare across the board that they almost always make the ne
by edrxty 6y ago
Statistics is probably the wrong word. If a safety incident happens you'll hear about it. They're so rare across the board that they almost always make the news and the max is especially exposed in this regard. I wouldn't be worried about it from a personal safety perspective. That said, if you must or are just curious, stats and incident reports can be found here:
http://www.airsafe.com/events/models/rate_mod.htm http://www.airsafe.com/events/models/rate_mod.htm
- xiphias2 6y agoIt didn't make me feel safer for the MAX flights :) I guess I have to wait for the number of flights with MAX to go over 1-2M flights to feel safe enough to fly on.
- edrxty 6y agoThat's a better way of putting it. What I mean to say is the events are rare and the number of recertified MAX miles flown is still quite low. I fly ga so my risk tolerance is different but if you want to wait a year that'll give you a better picture of the situation. Napkin math says about 5 million flights should give it a better risk profile on a per trip basis than the drive to the airport (risk for flying is better defined per trip than per mile).
- rob74 6y agoThis site looks a bit more serious and has information on more non-fatal incidents: https://aviation-safety.net/database/types/Boeing-737-8-MAX/index https://aviation-safety.net/database/types/Boeing-737-8-MAX/... However, the airlines that continue flying the 737 MAX now have a shared interest with Boeing to not make it look unsafe, so I guess that future minor incidents that may occur will be kept under wraps as far as possible. OTOH, if something really worrying happens, it's likely to leak out anyway, after all the pilots' lives are in the balance too...
- histriosum 6y agoNo, future "minor incidents" will not be kept "under wraps". The FAA has strict guidelines on what is and is not reportable, and those guidelines arent skirted by any commercial operator of a size that would be flying 737s. The commercial aviation industry, particularly in the US, has a stellar safety record over the past several decades. This track record isnt a fluke, it's the result of systemic safeguards that the carriers, FAA, and manufacturers have put in place. When there are problems, the root cause is found, and it is fixed not just in one carrier but in all of them. No system is perfect, but the conspiratorial thinking and tone here is just not justified.
- sofixa 6y ago> The FAA has strict guidelines on what is and is not reportable, and those guidelines arent skirted by any commercial operator of a size that would be flying 737 Like it has strict guidelines on when a new version of a plane needs to be recertified and what specific tech needs specific certification and testing ( if failure can crash the plane, and if failure is possible at more than X rate). Boeing completely ignored that when self-certifying the 737Max, so what makes you think airlines will listen to the FAA more? > The commercial aviation industry, particularly in the US, has a stellar safety record over the past several decades. This track record isnt a fluke, it's the result of systemic safeguards that the carriers, FAA, and manufacturers have put in place. Baring the latest huge safety problems, like the 737Max.
- rob74 6y agoI wasn't saying that incidents that have to be reported won't be reported, but for minor things at the limit between what is and is not reportable, the decision-makers at the airlines will be more willing to ignore them. Sorry if the tone sounds conspiratorial, but after the whole affair with Boeing, the FAA and also the airlines failing to properly address the 737 MAX's MCAS issue before it was far too late, I have grown a little bit skeptical of the system you describe...