(no subject)

posted by [identity profile] albatros.livejournal.com at 02:44pm on 10/08/2003
Yes, well, if you tell politicians or director-level ATC people this, they'll say that 99.99...% of people travel safely every day, or that you've less chance of having an accident per mile by air, than any other form of transport.

However, I'm disgusted by remarks like this when they're used to defend negligence cases. When someone 'loses their life', it's 100% of their life, not 1% of 100 peoples' lives.

I'll stand down from the lecturn now...
[parent entry] [link] [reply]
 

(no subject)

posted by [identity profile] phil99.livejournal.com at 03:15pm on 10/08/2003
Yep, that's what gets my goat too. OK, air travel is safer than any other mode of travel, statistically. This doesn't mean that they can sit back on their laurels and relax.

When a single air crash can kill 500 people, more if an airborne plane hits land and populated areas, safety has to be the only consideration.

I would hope that nobody would ever use a statement like "99% of people travel safely by air, it's only these poor souls who perished because they were unlucky" to defend crap safety. It's feeble.

It's a subject close to my heart, I find air travel and safety to be fascinating and what with my (kindof) ambitions of becoming an Air Traffic geezer I've taken a real interest in it.
[link] [parent] [reply]

May

SunMonTueWedThuFriSat
      1
 
 2
 
 3
 
 4
1
5
 
 6
 
 7
 
 8
 
 9
 
 10
 
 11
 
12
 
 13
 
 14
 
 15
 
 16
 
 17
 
 18
 
19
 
 20
 
 21
 
 22
 
 23
 
 24
 
 25
 
26
 
 27
 
 28
 
 29
 
 30
 
 31