T1bubba
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2001
- Posts
- 317
Do you not understand why any valid statistical study needs to be corrected for volume? That's why the airline industry uses CASM and RASM, not just comparing overall costs.matt1.1 said:AP study much more factual than your contradictional account of a biased view without supporting evidence of a respresentative sample concerning older pilots.
Older pilots owning aircraft and flying a typical <100 hour year verse younger pilots attaining private pilot through CFI ratings flying >250 hours per year is the same kind of anecdotal evidence you provided above which is not as yours is not as accurate as the AP study.
The anaylsis is good it just contradicts the older view point.
If the U.S. had 500 GA accidents last year and the Bahamas had 10, you couldn't draw the conclusion that the U.S. was 50 times more dangerous to fly in (numbers made up to illustrate a point). You have to know how much flying was going on for the comparison to be valid.
There may be plenty of studies out there that show older pilots are more dangerous, but this isn't one of them.
The auto safety advocates are another group that constantly ignores volume corrections. They say that the number of auto accidents has started to rise since the national 55 mph speed limit was raised. They never mention the fact that the rate of accidents per mile driven has continued to decline.