How to survive a plane crash

On Jan 20, 8:36*am, Roland Perry wrote:
As best I understand it, on a deaths per passenger mile basis, or most
any other reasonable measure, the Concorde ranks far worse than any
other passenger airliner ever put into routine commercial service.

But only as a result of one accident. On that basis perhaps the IC225 is
the UK's most unsafe train (Hatfield and Great Heck).

Unlikely, they do a hell of a lot of passenger miles. My guess (out of
units on BR and successors) would be Class 201 - there were only seven
of them, they worked suburban-ish routes, and they killed 49 people at
Hither Green in 1967.

(Would take some further ruminating to decide whether the Shuttle or the
Concorde should count as the more totally useless waste of taxpayer
funding.)

What's interesting to think about is that Concorde was designed and
built to service a boom in air travel and a need that never materialised
(because of an earlier economic downturn). I wonder what projects we are
gung-ho about today will be the white elephants of the 2030's? Crossrail
and HS2 are prime candidates.

Crossrail I very much doubt, simply because public transport projects
in central London - even if they fail to meet hoped-for ridership -
are always going to find themselves well-used at rush hour. The
Jubilee line opened around the time of the worst prior postwar
recession, with only half the route complete, but still attracted
plenty of rides (many from the existing suburban line that was folded
into it, as with Crossrail).

HS2 is more likely, although it would require both an environment-
driven change in mindsets that made high-speed travel in general
unacceptable *and* a massive decline in medium-to-long distance rail
usage that took away the need for new capacity.

--
John Band
john at johnband dot org
www.johnband.org

In message
, at
02:56:09 on Tue, 20 Jan 2009, John B remarked:
As best I understand it, on a deaths per passenger mile basis, or most
any other reasonable measure, the Concorde ranks far worse than any
other passenger airliner ever put into routine commercial service.

But only as a result of one accident. On that basis perhaps the IC225 is
the UK's most unsafe train (Hatfield and Great Heck).

Unlikely, they do a hell of a lot of passenger miles.

But there aren't very many, and it's basically just one route.

My guess (out of units on BR and successors) would be Class 201 - there
were only seven of them, they worked suburban-ish routes, and they
killed 49 people at Hither Green in 1967.

The small number of those units would be very telling too (I was only
really considering current stock).

I wonder what projects we are gung-ho about today will be the white
elephants of the 2030's? Crossrail and HS2 are prime candidates.

Crossrail I very much doubt, simply because public transport projects
in central London - even if they fail to meet hoped-for ridership -
are always going to find themselves well-used at rush hour.

That assumes there's the employment to create a rush hour.

HS2 is more likely, although it would require both an environment-
driven change in mindsets that made high-speed travel in general
unacceptable *and* a massive decline in medium-to-long distance rail
usage that took away the need for new capacity.

A lot will depend on the fares. If, as some suggest, we'll all be living
on about a third of our current incomes, there won't be much call for
it.
--
Roland Perry

On Jan 20, 11:05*am, Roland Perry wrote:
I wonder what projects we are *gung-ho about today will be the white
elephants of the 2030's? Crossrail *and HS2 are prime candidates.

Crossrail I very much doubt, simply because public transport projects
in central London - even if they fail to meet hoped-for ridership -
are always going to find themselves well-used at rush hour.

That assumes there's the employment to create a rush hour.

We still had a rush hour in 1934-38, so you'd need to postulate
something *really* insane to handwave that away.

HS2 is more likely, although it would require both an environment-
driven change in mindsets that made high-speed travel in general
unacceptable *and* a massive decline in medium-to-long distance rail
usage that took away the need for new capacity.

A lot will depend on the fares. If, as some suggest, we'll all be living
on about a third of our current incomes, there won't be much call for
it.

Yes, that's the kind of *really* insane thing you'd need to postulate.

--
John Band
john at johnband dot org
www.johnband.org

In message
, at
07:05:22 on Tue, 20 Jan 2009, John B remarked:
I wonder what projects we are *gung-ho about today will be the white
elephants of the 2030's? Crossrail *and HS2 are prime candidates.

Crossrail I very much doubt, simply because public transport projects
in central London - even if they fail to meet hoped-for ridership -
are always going to find themselves well-used at rush hour.

That assumes there's the employment to create a rush hour.

We still had a rush hour in 1934-38, so you'd need to postulate
something *really* insane to handwave that away.

Capacity was much smaller then.

HS2 is more likely, although it would require both an environment-
driven change in mindsets that made high-speed travel in general
unacceptable *and* a massive decline in medium-to-long distance rail
usage that took away the need for new capacity.

A lot will depend on the fares. If, as some suggest, we'll all be living
on about a third of our current incomes, there won't be much call for
it.

Yes, that's the kind of *really* insane thing you'd need to postulate.

Haven't you noticed all those shops going broke, car factories closing
for *four* months, banks being nationalised to stop them going broke...
and it's only just begun.
--
Roland Perry

"Mark Brader" wrote in message

... I can't think when the last fatal accident occurred on a
British airliner in Britain (eg, the British Midland Kegworth crash).

That was 1989. There's been nothing on that scale since then, and
only one crash of a big jet and that was with no passengers aboard.
After that it depends on what you count as an airliner. Here are
all the accidents I could find on www.planecrashinfo.com since
Kegworth in Britain with 5 or more deaths. Wording of details is
mine. Curiously, one of them had the same cause as the Kegworth
crash, which you would think would be rather unusual.

I present this table just for information and not to promote any
particular conclusion. As far as I'm concerned, air and rail travel
both have superb safety records and comparing them is pointless.

Agreed -- in both cases, getting to/from the station/airport by road is
much more dangerous.