The second most dangerous form of transport...?

Nomis21

Spook_ie wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xTPxZ1n4M-M

Perhaps OP wants to highlight the dangers of distracted walking, which may or may not involve vehicle accidents?

No not at all.

What I am saying is that you are more likely to get killed worldwide walking than you are traveling in a car...

Alkers

magicbastarder wrote: »

to clarify - if a cyclist loses control and crashes into a wall on a bend - cycling accident.
if a motorist crashes into a cyclist - generally, would be a motoring accident.

If a motorist crashes into a cyclist, that will still be recorded as a cycling-related injury for the statistics. You don't think that the poor stats we have around cyclist safety in Dublin are ignoring all the incidents which were caused by trucks and cars? This is important for policy makers, designers etc as the vulnerability of cyclists, pedestrians and motorcyclists contributes significantly to the injury and fatality rates and can be improved by segregating these forms of transport from other vehicles, ensuring vehicles are travelling slowly when likely to be near vulnerable road users etc.

For motorcycles, it's around 50+% of fatalities and serious injuries that are caused by other motorists, other than the biker. All of these are still recorded as motorcycling injuries and fatalities.

cnocbui

Sleeper12 wrote: »

Space shuttle is definitely the most dangerous. More deaths from that percentage wise than any other other form of transport

Wrong.

Balloons tied to a garden chair is at least an order of magnitude more dangerous. Even more dangerous than the OP's incorrect no. 1.

Alkers

Sleeper12 wrote: »

Space shuttle is definitely the most dangerous. More deaths from that percentage wise than any other other form of transport

Probably stacks up reasonably well on a per km travelled basis!

magicbastarder

Simona1986 wrote: »

If a motorist crashes into a cyclist, that will still be recorded as a cycling-related injury for the statistics. You don't think that the poor stats we have around cyclist safety in Dublin are ignoring all the incidents which were caused by trucks and cars?

oh, of course not. the stats will record what mode of transport any injured/killed parties are using.
what i was trying to get at is the notion that 'being in danger' is not exactly the same as 'being dangerous'.

cnocbui

I think we need legislation that dictates that every cyclists headstone be engraved with: He was always right.

BailMeOut

L1011 wrote: »

Concorde had one fatal crash in 30 years service, even at 100 passengers a flight it built up plenty of passengers during that time

Plus the crash was caused by a bit failing off a DC10!

With One Crash, Concorde Ranks Last in Safety

cnocbui

BailMeOut wrote: »

With One Crash, Concorde Ranks Last in Safety

So Concorde wasn't a plane then.

In the case of that Concorde, it's a bit like saying it's an intrinsically unsafe plane because it was shot down with a missile.

L1011

BailMeOut wrote: »

With One Crash, Concorde Ranks Last in Safety

Figures are still not comparable with other forms of transit.

Regardless, I would be absolutely certain that there's plenty of general aviation aircraft with figures five to ten times worse due to how rarely they're used.

The Rutan Long-EZ, the Bede BD5J and the Beechcraft Bonanza - which was nicknamed the 'doctor killer' due to how many private pilots died - all come to mind quickly.

BailMeOut

L1011 wrote: »

Figures are still not comparable with other forms of transit.

Regardless, I would be absolutely certain that there's plenty of general aviation aircraft with figures five to ten times worse due to how rarely they're used.

The Rutan Long-EZ, the Bede BD5J and the Beechcraft Bonanza - which was nicknamed the 'doctor killer' due to how many private pilots died - all come to mind quickly.

Did these planes operate as a commercial airliners?

Conversely if the 737 is the safest aircraft then RyanAir are now safest airline in world Ryanair is the world's safest airline after Southwest's mid-air tragedy

L1011

No, general aviation slightly confusingly means non commercial scheduled. So private or air-taxi at best. The Bonanza may have done the latter.

There are very few airframe or pilot error fault incidents anymore - pilot suicide has accounted for more than those on modern aircraft in recent even if MH370 is excluded.

Ryanair have had one write off and zero fatalities in a very lengthy operational history; Southwest had no *passenger* fatalities until yesterday... Hijacker and someone on the ground did die before then

AndrewJRenko

cnocbui wrote: »

I think we need legislation that dictates that every cyclists headstone be engraved with: He was always right.

Hilarious - why don't you go along to this guy's funeral and tell your joke there, after you have a little dance on his grave. See how well your joke goes down with his family.

You know that cyclists have families, right?

magicbastarder

to be fair to cnocbui, as (s)he seemed to be responding to my post; i *am* always right.

clarification - i'm not always right, but i'm never wrong.

Nomis21

Nomis21 wrote: »

The correct answer is walking based on Worldwide accident data. Pedestrians do not damage cars but more people die by walking accidents than in any vehicle.

Care to post the data?

tabbey

Nomis21 wrote: »

RIGHT!

After Motorcycles, walking accounts for the most accidents.

In the 1970s or 1980s, therewas a TV safety ad for pedestrians, featuring Frank Thornton ? which went like:
So when you take this vehicle on the road, proceed at all times with great caution!

BowSideChamp

Nomis21 wrote: »

Motorcycle is the most dangerous but there is another form of transport that comes a close second.

Can you guess what that is...?

I'd say space travel is the most dangerous