airdisaster.info

Discussion?

I will repeat the comment that: Albeit newsworthy- it's just another day in the life of US aviation...and I tend to pile on with Tee Vee when he rants.

I am sure the reason he will not represent the passenger is also due to the reason Flyboy or Dummy have never flown me anywhere...supply, demand, the odds of the stars aligning...

I would really like to see them trying to remove an angry British paramedic/more-photography-than-aviation-forum moderator .

In the realm of humour. I have seen various postings of the Airplane! (and Zero Hour!) scene where they have to slap the hysterical passengers (and worse in Airplane) which were labeled as "UA Training Film", and Rex Kramer coming into the airport and using 'Kung Fu' on religious zealots which was lableled as UA Pilot reporting for duty.

And now this (no doubt a forgery):

I would really like to see them trying to remove an angry British paramedic/more-photography-than-aviation-forum moderator .

I don't think they have cranes big enough.

Has anyone even taken notice that although United clearly deserves a flogging in this situation, the actual individuals who dragged the passenger off the plane were employees of the Chicago police department?

I find it odd that seemingly nobody is paying attention to that detail.

A side note: if the tail # of the airplane in question is being reported correctly as N632RW, then I've flown it quite a few times.

Yes, a blatant double post. However, this calls for both weak and high-level parlour talk.

My Yahoo home page gives me not one, but two headlines:

A giant rabbit (perhaps one bound for the record books) has died aboard a United Flight.

And, below it: United had more pet deaths than any other airline in 2016.

I'm sure that these articles from the media will give us balanced reporting of facts and will have a thorough analysis and comparative data, and some use of denominators...If you are hauling more pets than anyone, you'd expect to have more pet deaths than anyone.

Is running a pet through 'the luggage system' (ANYONE'S luggage system) a good idea for their overall health?

No squid nor donkeys involved at this point.

Yes, this needs to go here too.

...According to data provided by the Department of Transportation, United had more "pet incidences," which refers to injuries, deaths, and losses, than any other major airline in 2016. There have been 4 injuries and 9 deaths. Delta, which ranks second for pet incidences, is responsible for 5 deaths and 5 injuries.

However, United has transported more pets (109,149) compared to Delta (81,070). When you break it down by percentage, United's track record for pet incidences is a mere .02%, while Delta's is .01%. When you put it in that context, airlines have a fairly similar, and low, percentage of pet incidences.

Well, I'm impressed that they TRIED to normalize the data.

But alas after doing so well, they crash and burn...Seems to me United is 100% worse than Delta...(OR, maybe the sample size is too small to be meaningful)

PS: As one commenter said..."O-hare airport...oh the ironing"

No-hare airport

Corrected.

Corrected.

Thanks for going the extra mile and checking the media math there...

I guess it's still wondrous that the media TRIED to normalize the data, but came up with a near-total-disaster in that attempt, with Delta being slightly numerically worse.

(Nothing like an Arithmetic Mistake and Checking System)

In reading discussion below one of the articles, some Hawaiian airline apparently had 10X the RATE of deaths as United (not sure what the 10X referred to- the 0.012 figure or the 0.02 figure.)

Yeah, I think there may need to be some context to that analysis and the context may be difficult to come by.

Hawaii is hot... cargo holds can be hot... many animals don't tolerate heat well... put that all in a pot and stir and you end up with a lot of harmed animals. I think the key in that case would be to compare with other airlines that fly the same routes or in places that are climactically similar.

Of course cold can be a problem too so who knows?

Yeah, I think there may need to be some context to that analysis and the context may be difficult to come by.

Hawaii is hot... cargo holds can be hot... many animals don't tolerate heat well... put that all in a pot and stir and you end up with a lot of harmed animals. I think the key in that case would be to compare with other airlines that fly the same routes or in places that are climactically similar.

Of course cold can be a problem too so who knows?

This is part of why my airline is one of a few that has no live animals as cargo program. Too risky, too expensive to deal with, and just an overall pain.

Any Donkeys involved?

...or squids?