Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

[deleted] t1_j9npbny wrote

[deleted]

0

frisch85 t1_j9o0wbl wrote

3

Icy_Comparison148 t1_j9o9fl5 wrote

That’s all well and good but it’s not applicable to General Aviation like the King Air that crashed here. Most people in America will never fly in lighter aircraft. King Airs are pretty decent though. But it’s not the same as flying in Delta.

9

paleo_joe t1_j9qss88 wrote

The gusts of wind from the squall line that went through Little Rock at the time of the crash were strong enough to blow over a 50 pound door that I had leaned against a wall. I don’t understand why the pilot did not wait 15 minutes for the storm to pass. I imagine a Delta crew would have.

2

frisch85 t1_j9o9ymm wrote

Which everyone who actually reads the content I've linked would know.

−1

Icy_Comparison148 t1_j9oh0hf wrote

You sited a safety record for aviation that is built in the backs of Part 121 airline flying. In an article about King Air crashing, flying under probably part 135, which is much different and much less risk adverse than part 121 airline flying. You might as well cited the risk of being bitten by an ant in the arctic.

2

frisch85 t1_j9ohp3r wrote

Fair enough, so tell me what are the chances of dying from flying?

−2

Icy_Comparison148 t1_j9ot4kr wrote

Depends on what you fly. Flying GA has been shown to be somewhat comparable to riding a motorcycle. But, statistics, numbers only tell a piece of the story.

3