2 ms·
Think it's difficult to make much of the data even with a filter. A lot of other incidents are due mainly to pilot error, bad weather conditions or inadequate m
by notahacker 3y ago
Think it's difficult to make much of the data even with a filter. A lot of other incidents are due mainly to pilot error, bad weather conditions or inadequate maintenance, but the aircraft don't altogether escape blame for those types of incident. Actual incidents known to be down entirely to bad aircraft design are exceptionally rare amongst late generation aircraft (but some of the more mysterious crashes might be).
The ATR figures are inflated by their flight cycles info being years out of date (and based on knowledge of what ATR supplied to commercial databases, likely incomplete), but you'd also expect them to be higher than some of the other aircraft types purely because of how they're used (flown into smaller airstrips in hilly regions). At the other end of the scale, the 747-400 performs excellently with only two passenger crashes, but it's also had four fatal freighter crashes not counted. I bet the calculated "rate" includes freighter flight cycles though
But above all, airliner fatal crashes are exceptionally rare, and some of the near misses and non-fatal incidents are more indicative of design flaws
- NikkiA 3y agoMy first reaction on seeing the fokker stats was 'well, yeah, it's heavily used in the Alps and Himalayas, of course it's had a lot of incidents' Ironically, the 727s numbers are probably skewed in the opposite way to the 747 - there were loads of passenger incidents with the 727, but it's been somewhat of a workhorse for freight in the developing world over the last 40 years.