Boeing vs Airbus vs McD accident statistics

GogglesPisano

Pawn, in game of life
Joined
Oct 20, 2003
Posts
3,939
Total Time
enough
The AF thread led me to a little research. It appears Boeings come out slightly ahead overall. A330/340data is missing.

Safety ranking:

1) Saab340
2) MD80
3) 767
4) 757
5) 737
6) 727
7) A320 series
8) F100
9) Brasilia
10) DC9
11) BAe 146
12) L1011
13) A300
14) A310
15) B747
16) DC10
17) F28
18) Brandeirante
19) MD11 (I can vouch for that POS)
20) Concorde

Airlines are also ranked.

http://www.airdisaster.com/statistics/

Of course, statistics can be misleading. Highly-trained First World pilots vs politically-connected Third World pilots; Flying in Africa vs the US or Europe, all factors.
 
Last edited:

MD11Drvr

Still Learning
Joined
Apr 21, 2005
Posts
398
Total Time
Enough
Dang! No love the MD-11 Goggles, Good machine in the right hands. But I ahve to agree not exactly user friendly.....
 

Rez O. Lewshun

Save the Profession
Joined
Jan 19, 2004
Posts
13,422
Total Time
X>X
What about that POS the CRJ?

How are those numbers derived?
 

~~~^~~~

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 21, 2001
Posts
6,137
Total Time
7,500+
One flaw in his chart is that he does not treat the DC9 as a type, but splits it with its derivative MD80.

The DC9 is no where near as "safe" as a 757 or 767, but you'd never know that from his chart.

Dare I say it, after the DC8, Douglas built jets in Long Beach and did their engineering was done via service difficulty reports and crash investigations. I'm not sure why repeated failures of the ground lift dumper actuation system, hydraulics, and marginal control in some parts of its flight envelope are tolerated. I now mistrust any airplane where the green band for take off pitch trim limitations is set via a slide rule.

Type IV was a big deal on many airplanes, yet the only airplane that I've seen a real effect on when that goo gums up the elevator servo tabs is the MD80, where the book never even mentions it.... and why did a jet with a hugely revised engine not get EEC's?

~ Douglas rant almost over ~

As far as the DC9 goes, many of those losses were due to not having EGPWS, the 767 fleet stats reflect terrorist acts, and sampling error for the smaller carriers ... interesting statistics, but maybe not as informative as someone might think on first blush.
 
Last edited:

GogglesPisano

Pawn, in game of life
Joined
Oct 20, 2003
Posts
3,939
Total Time
enough
Dang! No love the MD-11 Goggles, Good machine in the right hands. But I ahve to agree not exactly user friendly.....
I admit I was a little harsh. The flight deck is dark, drab and dreary. The FMS is slow. It handles like a garbage truck half full of water. Only 200 copies were made and every cockpit is different.

On the other hand, it is powerful and you can always get down if you're high. And it's built like a tank.
 

Andy Neill

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 26, 2001
Posts
2,293
Total Time
6200
I found it amusing in light of the "4-engine Boing or I ain't going" remark made on another AF thread. Here it shows the 747 as being the worst of the original Boeing products and even worse than the Airbi.
 

Redmeat

People Mover
Joined
Aug 12, 2005
Posts
641
Total Time
Ubecha
I found it amusing in light of the "4-engine Boing or I ain't going" remark made on another AF thread. Here it shows the 747 as being the worst of the original Boeing products and even worse than the Airbi.
This and the AF accident reminds me of the NW 747 that had the lower rudder do a hardover in cruise and stayed there. The crew had to use asymmetrical thrust to stay lined up on approach.

The investigation found that the loads of the hardover had twisted the entire vertical stabilizer.

That's what I like about aluminum...it bends...ALOT...before it breaks.

I'm not a mechanical engineer, nor am I a chemist...but I'm pretty sure the carbon fiber composite tail on an Airbus wouldn't 'twist' given the same scenario. The AA A300 in 2001 comes to mind...
 
Last edited:

pdub20s

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 7, 2006
Posts
858
Total Time
..
I found it amusing in light of the "4-engine Boing or I ain't going" remark made on another AF thread. Here it shows the 747 as being the worst of the original Boeing products and even worse than the Airbi.
Thats because Kalitta keeps crashing them....
 

MD11Drvr

Still Learning
Joined
Apr 21, 2005
Posts
398
Total Time
Enough
I admit I was a little harsh. The flight deck is dark, drab and dreary. The FMS is slow. It handles like a garbage truck half full of water. Only 200 copies were made and every cockpit is different.

On the other hand, it is powerful and you can always get down if you're high. And it's built like a tank.

Hey Goggles I think its fair to say though everything else you fly after the MD-11 will be easy.
 

GogglesPisano

Pawn, in game of life
Joined
Oct 20, 2003
Posts
3,939
Total Time
enough

Wojo

Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2002
Posts
12
Total Time
2200
I admit I was a little harsh. The flight deck is dark, drab and dreary. The FMS is slow. It handles like a garbage truck half full of water. Only 200 copies were made and every cockpit is different.

On the other hand, it is powerful and you can always get down if you're high. And it's built like a tank.
Huh? I've got equal hours in the 737-700 and the MD-11. The MD-11's cockpit is MUCH, MUCH better than the 737s or the 757s for that matter - a lot more room and a LOT quieter. The FMS in the MD-11 is just about the exact same speed as the 737 and a lot more user friendly.

Accident rates? Yeah, the 737 is cake to fly - only a complete dufus could have problems even in 30 kt crosswinds, the MD-11's quite a bit tougher.
 

flyn96

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 25, 2003
Posts
280
Total Time
9:02pm
Have to throw a GO SAAB in there! Simple (aside from the CT7 & Prop), tough, gets ir done!
 

LearLove

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 27, 2001
Posts
4,451
Total Time
12000+
what a crock of sh!t list. another example of numbers or stats that mean nothing. an aircraft is only as "safe" as its crew and the type of operations it is used for.

this same kind of stuff happens in the bicycle industry. big companies like specialized and trek make marketing charts like stiffness to weight ratio charts for frame materials (ti, steel, al, carbon) and state how their material/flavor of the year is best according to this and that number. the funny thing is if your using this criteria (stiffness to weight) to build your frame then balsa wood would be your best material. I've been riding/racing/wrenching on and selling bikes since i was 12 and have yet to see one built from balsa wood.
 

yournextFO

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 1, 2005
Posts
119
Total Time
enough
What is this based on? Flight hours? Number of flights? Hull losses? Number of fatalities? What about pilot error vs design/mechanical flaw? Certainly, the kind and area of operation would also have an effect. Not to mention that serious accidents are rare enough (fortunately!) that it only takes one or two to hugely influence the data.

Gotta love statistics.
 

flyn96

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 25, 2003
Posts
280
Total Time
9:02pm
Click on the link a read.

What is this based on? Flight hours? Number of flights? Hull losses? Number of fatalities? What about pilot error vs design/mechanical flaw? Certainly, the kind and area of operation would also have an effect. Not to mention that serious accidents are rare enough (fortunately!) that it only takes one or two to hugely influence the data.

Gotta love statistics.
 

flyn96

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 25, 2003
Posts
280
Total Time
9:02pm
what a crock of sh!t list. another example of numbers or stats that mean nothing. an aircraft is only as "safe" as its crew and the type of operations it is used for.

this same kind of stuff happens in the bicycle industry. big companies like specialized and trek make marketing charts like stiffness to weight ratio charts for frame materials (ti, steel, al, carbon) and state how their material/flavor of the year is best according to this and that number. the funny thing is if your using this criteria (stiffness to weight) to build your frame then balsa wood would be your best material. I've been riding/racing/wrenching on and selling bikes since i was 12 and have yet to see one built from balsa wood.
Actually there are several types that have been plagues by issues regardless of who's flying them, so yes some aircraft are safer than others. EMB-110 and the F-28 stand out, also the DC-10 was not blessed in its early years, ie AA ORD engine falling accident and United 232
 

jws717

registered abuser
Joined
Feb 8, 2004
Posts
572
Total Time
loads
WOW! I always felt like i was gonna die jumpseating on the Saab.
I guess i was wrong.
 

PeanuckleCRJ

Hurrrrrrrr
Joined
Jul 21, 2004
Posts
1,684
Total Time
mucho
All that vibration and such disguises very well how safe it is. :)
 
Top