Originally Posted by
bryris
Do the stats take into consideration that the VAST majority of the GA airplanes flying at anytime are being flown by private pilots with sub 1,500 hours?
If you are trying to make your case, you need to start by not making a statement with NO evidence at all to support it, other than your personal opinion. In fact, you are completely wrong with that assumption. You do realize that all the aircraft Netjets, Citation Shares, Avantair, et all are flying are all considered GA.... and that is just to name a few of the larger more well known GA operators.
My posting was a reply to the person who said there were NO stats.
That being said. One section of the Nall report only compares accident rates with hours. In other sections it compares single vs. twins, IFR vs. IMC, CFIT and various other factors. You can play "what If" games all day and it won't change facts.
Instead of trying to poke holes, why not visit the site, and read the report. The end result is lower time pilots are a higher risk... perhaps you are correct, and that the old 172 is in poor condition... The difference is, the pilot with more experience would have refused the airplane.... while the low time guy became a statistic.
Originally Posted by
bryris
PLUS: All these crashes happened with pilots that fall in that ATP bracket at the helm. There must be something else then.
The report doesn't say there are NO ATP accidents, it says the rates are lowest from those holding ATP tickets.
Spin away