News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Boeing 737 Max: Automated Crashes [video] by Xixi on Monday December 30, 2019 @11:56AM (#21914727)
Indeed I looked into it a little bit more and found that planes are about three orders or magnitude safer than cars [1] (fatality per miles traveled). So even assuming that the MAX is two orders of magnitude less safe than the 737 NG (based on limited data), it would still be an order of magnitude safer than traveling by car.

[1] I found 11 fatalities per trillion miles for planes, and 12.5 fatalities per billion miles for cars (in the US).

Re:Boeing 737 Max: Automated Crashes [video] by ulfw on Monday December 30, 2019 @12:18PM (#21914937)
But how does travel per million miles make sense? Nobody decides to fly from Singapore to Sydney or drive. It's just not comparable.

It's hard to find a good statistic that would make modes of transport comparable. But if I'd pick one I'd pick time spent (are 10 hours on a plane more or less safe than 10 hours in a car)

Re:Boeing 737 Max: Automated Crashes [video] by swfsql on Monday December 30, 2019 @04:20PM (#21916813)
If someone has crash statistics for planes/cars by time spent in a plane/car, please ping me to it! I'm super curious

edit: nvm I found it on wikipedia, for United Kingdom 1990–2000: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aviation_safety#Transport_comp...

air/car deaths/h = 4.2x so... on this metric, not like "1000x safer"

Re:Boeing 737 Max: Automated Crashes [video] by acqq on Monday December 30, 2019 @05:21PM (#21917190)
> air/car deaths/h = 4.2x

That number confused me (I expected to be zero point something).

For the reference, the actual numbers in Wikipedia are: deaths per billion hours traveled: air = 30.8 ; car = 130

30.8 / 130 ~ 0.24

Re:Boeing 737 Max: Automated Crashes [video] by swfsql on Monday December 30, 2019 @07:02PM (#21917830)
You're right, I got it the other way around; car/air deaths/h = 4.2x
Re:Boeing 737 Max: Automated Crashes [video] by Gibbon1 on Tuesday December 31, 2019 @03:57AM (#21919799)
I saw a statitic that the 737 Max is around 4 deaths per million miles. Vs 0.2 for the 737 NG. So 20 times more.

Take that 4.2/20 and you have 0.21. Or flip it around the 737 Max is 5 times more dangerous than a passenger car. That's drunk driver territory.

Re:Boeing 737 Max: Automated Crashes [video] by ulfw on Tuesday December 31, 2019 @05:10AM (#21920035)
Yep. And the sad thing is:

it’s rarely the CAR that kills you. It’s other drivers or your own negligence.

In the 737max case it’s Boeing that killed you.

Re:Boeing 737 Max: Automated Crashes [video] by kansface on Monday December 30, 2019 @06:26PM (#21917620)
Just considering safety, per trip is what I personally care about - the total odds I will die going by plane or by car. Often, this means flying through a hub which we would not visit by car so the numbers would be really hard :-/
Re:Boeing 737 Max: Automated Crashes [video] by FabHK on Monday December 30, 2019 @07:36PM (#21918028)
I ran some numbers a while ago.

Airplanes are faster than cars, and the average trip is longer. So, even if the pax fatality rate per distance is much better for aircraft (a factor of 200 to 1000, say), the fatality rate per trip is not that much better (a factor of 2 to 10, say).

Some more notes:

- That is for part 121 aviation (airlines). General aviation fatality rates are much worse (you're 15 times more likely to die in a small plane than in a car for the same distance, and 250 times more per trip...)

- An airliner also carries many more pax. The above numbers are per pax; if you base it per vehicle, then a plane is only about 5 times safer than a car for a given distance, and about 20 times more likely to crash than a car per trip.

- About 4% or so of all B747 or A300 ever built have been complete hull losses. (Newer planes are safer, presumably, but also haven't been around that long, so the statistics are not entirely trivial to compare.)

Re:Boeing 737 Max: Automated Crashes [video] by WWLink on Monday December 30, 2019 @01:25PM (#21915491)
Re:Boeing 737 Max: Automated Crashes [video] by PunksATawnyFill on Monday December 30, 2019 @02:54PM (#21916126)
I find the whole "most accidents happen within X miles of home" argument so tired. That's like saying "most electrons are found within the vicinity of their nuclei."

I'd be more interested in knowing where FATAL accidents occur, on the suspicion that most people do not live on highways and local streets are traveled at lower speeds.