The risk of dying doing what we love

[Freizeitpilot]

Ultimately every activity carries risk and it’s up to us to assess and effectively manage the risk.  Otherwise we would all be sitting inside a bunker wrapped in bubble-wrap.

 

~ 1% chance of dying every 1000hrs sounds about right for GA, although it is a little sobering.

 

[facthunter]

It's not just what you do , It's HOW you do it. Nev

[pmccarthy]

Can't see lawn bowls there, it would be off the chart.

[BurnieM]

Nothing is absolutely safe and nothing is absolutely dangerous.

Access the risks and take reasonable precautions but do what you enjoy.

Nobody gets out of this place alive.

[facthunter]

A good scare or two will make anyone think of quitting with all the other BS that goes on as well. You should constantly assess whether you are getting the Bang for your bucks you might once have expected. That's a bit separate from risk considerations but it  should all be in the Mix. Weird winds from nowhere and stupid acts by others come high in my list of  real negatives. Everyone thinks they can fly these days. You have to "THINK AEROPLANE" Not just occupy a seat with your brain in neutral.  Nev

[Area-51]

Rock climbing at 116yo is only 12% chance of death every 1000hrs ☹️

Edited June 23 by Area-51

[Freizeitpilot]

A 99% chance of continuing to live whilst flying is far more comforting.

[BrendAn]

4 hours ago, pmccarthy said:

Can't see lawn bowls there, it would be off the chart.

Especially nude lawn bowls. It wreaks havoc on the audience.

[Marty_d]

2 hours ago, BrendAn said:

Especially nude lawn bowls. It wreaks havoc on the audience.

"'Ere, what's Mabel wearing, Stan?"

"I can't quite tell, Ed, but it sure needs ironing!"

[skippydiesel]

The focus is on dying - All very dramatic however nothing can be done for the dead .

 

Far more important is the risk of injury, especially those that leave the person with a permanent disability.

 

I would speculate, that death has quite a ow economic impact. Injury costs a motza and ongoing disability must have a huge impact. 

 

My bet - the above chart would look a lot diffrent if it was about injury, requiring hospitalisation.

[spacesailor]

" however nothing can be done for the dead " .

Unless we end up needing " Soylent-Green " . Then the dead will help the living.

Quater-mass 

spacesailor

[jackc]

Living has elements of risk for death at any time.  I have taken many risks using my personal assessments and still alive to this day.

My biggest worry in Aviation is finding good, dedicated, caring people to work on my aircraft, other than myself. 

[kgwilson]

You can die falling out of bed and statistically a much higher percentage of people die in bed and while asleep than die in light aircraft crashes. So if you want to live go flying and don't go to bed & if you do don't go to sleep.

[Area-51]

Living has a guaranteed 100% morbidity rate

[Thruster88]

The four or five most common ways to die in an aircraft cover about 95% of fatals. All easily avoided for a long life.

[skippydiesel]

What do you think a recreational activities chart, showing relative risk of an injury, requiring hospital attention would look like???

[turboplanner]

2 hours ago, skippydiesel said:

What do you think a recreational activities chart, showing relative risk of an injury, requiring hospital attention would look like???

From memory, horse riding has more injuries than flying.

 

[skippydiesel]

17 minutes ago, turboplanner said:

From memory, horse riding has more injuries than flying.

 

I think you're probably correct.

It's interesting, at least to me, how biased statistics (in this case recreation, death & age) can be used to sway/influence people.

The statistics may be correct but that they reflect a very limited/biased view of the dangers inherent in activities in question.

In this case using the fear that we all have of untimely death, would lead people to believe that certain activates are so dangerous that they should be avoided.

I suspect that if the risk of  injury (resulting in a visit to an emergency department) was the criteria being studied, flying a small aircraft would likly be very low on the scale, horse riding (I have been a rider all my life) on the other hand likly to be high on the scale.

[440032]

On 23/06/2024 at 4:33 PM, pmccarthy said:

Can't see lawn bowls there, it would be off the chart.

35th most dangerous sport in the world, just two places down from JOUSTING.

Lawn Bowls is a really popular game but the most dangerous sport as well. This game is the highest death claimer worldwide. The players are deeply into the game till their last breath. They stop at nothing short of victory, in their pursuit. Those who escape death end up with bruises, torn knees, broken hips, and bone fractures. The game generates extreme stress resulting in strokes and even heart attacks.

 

 

Two guys out playing lawn bowls. One is about to take his shot when he sees a funeral procession go by.

He stops, takes his hat off and bows his head until the procession passes. He puts his hat back on and gets ready to take his shot when his partner stops him and says, "Hang on. I just gotta say I've never seen anyone do that on the green before, that was really touching."

1st guy replies, "Well, we were married for 20 years, it's the least I can do."

[turboplanner]

4 minutes ago, skippydiesel said:

I think you're probably correct.

It's interesting, at least to me, how biased statistics (in this case recreation, death & age) can be used to sway/influence people.

The statistics may be correct but that they reflect a very limited/biased view of the dangers inherent in activities in question.

In this case using the fear that we all have of untimely death, would lead people to believe that certain activates are so dangerous that they should be avoided.

I suspect that if the risk of  injury (resulting in a visit to an emergency department) was the criteria being studied, flying a small aircraft would likly be very low on the scale, horse riding (I have been a rider all my life) on the other hand likly to be high on the scale.

 If you're an administrator in an operation or sport, you need measureable statistics and the statistics need to relate to an avoidable risk (or similar criteria)

When grading your horse riding or flying there should be another cutoff; degree of injury. If you suffer non-life-changing accidents and you wnat to pursue the sport regardless, there's nothing wrong with a broken arm here or there.

On the other hand if you own a hotel, those accidents can cost tens of thousands of dollars in compensation, so there are different criteria.

You also need a grading factor; RPT flying risk per person per hour is extremely low; flying risk per hour in Recreational flying is much higher per hour, so you need a workable target to measure from.

The measurement of these statistics needs to allow you to see when progress is being made or when you are slipping back.

 

[spacesailor]

On the question of " horse riders " , I have personally known . One death & two injuries.  But now we have Princess Ann , questionable ' not ridding.

For flying 

Only a " forum member "  .

Greatly missed .

spacesailor

Edited June 25 by spacesailor

[jackc]

Don’t look to the FAA for FAR Part 103 crash statistics. They have NONE, last time I enquired. That sector of Aviation in the U.S. must be considered ‘disposable’ 🤩

 

[turboplanner]

49 minutes ago, jackc said:

Don’t look to the FAA for FAR Part 103 crash statistics. They have NONE, last time I enquired. That sector of Aviation in the U.S. must be considered ‘disposable’ 🤩

 

Well we operate in Australia and we don't have FAR Part 103, but if you intend flying there you are unlikely to be "enquiring" when there is a database instantly available showing something with 1400 high level injuries. I lost interest in the subject at that point.

[jackc]

And Turbs you fail to quote the link referring to the database in question, rendering your post pointless……👎

[turboplanner]

Pointless is bringing US confusion to Australian students who are never going to operate there.