4 ms·
You have to multiply by the respective probabilities of both of these things happening to arrive at the expected number of deaths. 0.01*(35/97) would be signifi
by hackerlight 4y ago
You have to multiply by the respective probabilities of both of these things happening to arrive at the expected number of deaths. 0.01*(35/97) would be significantly bigger than 0.000001*(97/97), as a hypothetical example.
That said, planes have had years of safety R&D which helps get that number down to 0.000001, and maybe the same could have been done with blimps if they were given the opportunity?
- jodrellblank 4y agoThe Graf Zeppelin, one of the Hindenburg's contemporaries, flew regularly accross the Atlantic, flew into the Arctic Circle and exchanged mail with a ship there, was the first vehicle to fly around the world and set a round the world speed record, was the first vehicle to cross a million miles flown, did 590 flights, carried 34,000 passengers, and did so with no harmful accidents and no fatalities, despite losing four engines on one flight and needing a forced landing. Yes I imagine something similar could have been done in the last 70 years if they'd kept being built en-masse. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LZ_127_Graf_Zeppelin#/media/File:LZ_127_Graf_Zeppelin_over_Rio.jpg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LZ_127_Graf_Zeppelin#/media/Fi...