For those who would rather drive than fly

[WebmasterAlex]

I found this kind of interesting:

Definitive Statistics comparing Driving with Flying

The following article is based on a study done by Sivak and Flannagan published in the January-February 2003 issue American Scientist.

Since 95% of accidents occur during takeoff and landing, risk of flying depends almost entirely on the number of flights involved in the trip. The length of the trip is not significant; a long flight has pretty much the same risk as a short flight.

But with a car, the risk of fatality depends upon how many miles are driven.

To make a direct comparison between the risk of fatality driving with the risk of fatality flying, we need to figure out how many miles of driving is equal to the risk of taking one flight.

To calculate this, Sivak and Flannagan chose the safest possible driving, which is driving on an Interstate highway in a rural area. This distance calculates out to 10.8 miles. In other words, the risk of driving about 10.8 miles on a rural Interstate highway is equal to the risk of a one domestic flight on a major U.S. airline.

In terms of time, at 55 MPH, 11 minutes 47 seconds of driving equals the risk of taking a flight. Since the average airline trip is 694 miles and takes about an hour and a half, 11 minutes 47 seconds of driving has the same risk of fatality as the average airline flight. But it also means that 11 minutes 47 seconds of driving equals flying eight hours to Europe or flying fourteen hours to the Orient.

Don't forget that these stats involve rural Interstate driving. If flying were compared with driving on urban or suburban roads and streets, a trip of just one to two miles would be equal in risk to one flight. This means the risk you face every two to four minutes of non-interstate driving equals the risk of one flight.

Another view compares the average airline trip (694 miles) with driving the same distance. For a trip of 694 miles, driving is 65 times more risky. Driving a trip longer than 694 becomes more risky (because the risk when driving increases constantly per mile) while the risk of a longer flight is about the same as the average flight.

Let's consider a trip from New York to Los Angeles: it is 261 times safer to fly than to drive the 2821 miles.

Notice that these figures INCLUDE the fatalities of the passengers on the hijacked 9/11 flights. What if terrorism increases? How much would terrorist have to increase for flying to become as risky as driving? Sivak and Flannagan figure disastrous airline incidents on the scale of those of September 11th would have to occur 120 times over a10-year period, or about once a month for flying to become as risky as rural interstate driving.

The relative safety of domestic flying on the major airlines over driving is so strong that the flying will remain safer unless terrorism in the air were to reach - in spite of today's security measures - almost unthinkable levels.

Researchers can find the full text of the Sivak and Flannagan article at:
http://www.americanscientist.org/Issues/Macroscope/macroscope03-01.html

 

[CamColt]

Will you stop trying to confuse me!

 

[Rutt and Tuke]

 

[iNTeNSeBLue98]

Too much thought involved, but thanks for the info.

 

[flaps]

Interesting, WebmasterAlex. I've always figured flying was much safer than driving, although I've never been on a plane in my life.
Seems kinda obvious. Thanks for the post, though. It was interesting.

 

[BarryHom]

Well, Alex made me confused.

Now explain the difference between LIM and LSM coaster launches.

 

[Boston Tea Party]

Talk all you want, I still need my DRUGS!

 

[Jolie C]

Flying is faster and safer, but driving is more fun.

 

[sugermouse]

Thanks for the posting! Its about time some posted something like this. People are so afraid to fly, and they should be afraid to drive to the airport! Good posting!

KEEP FLYING AMERICA!

 

[2Tomorrowland]

Yeah, but in a car, you don't free fall for a couple of miles before you go SPLAT!



I'd rather fly. It's fast and it's fun.

 

[MosMom]

I can't take 3 weeks worth of crap for my 1 week vacation on a plane though.

 

[BigOnDis]

Does the study take into account the survivabilty of the "accident"? Would you not be more likely to survive an automobile accident than a plane accident? If so, then how many miles and how many accidents could you get into before it all averages out? I have no idea, I am just asking the question.

Personally I fly all the time for business, but my wife refuses to fly, so we have had this discussion a couple of times. Guess what, we still drive to WDW every time we go.

 

[WebmasterAlex]

Actually BigonDIS that's what really impressed me. The study only covers fatalaties! Obviously the chances of being injured in a car accident are many many times greater.

 

[disneymom3]

It's not fear that stops me from flying, it's the hassle. We just have a lot more fun in our car!

 

[AirForceRocks]

With us, it's more of a money issue. Flying for four v. driving for four. Plus, now that we have a TV in the car, the kids really enjoy the trip, rather than simply tolerating it.

 

[Margie J]

Interesting article Alex. For years stats have suggested that flying is much safer than driving. This article presented it in an interesting way.

Does the study take into account the survivabilty of the "accident"? Would you not be more likely to survive an automobile accident than a plane accident?

If most people driving to WDW are going a long distance I'd suspect that would be mostly highway driving. In addition, it's driving on unfamilar roads in some cases. A crash on the highway involves, potentially, a much higher impact and far less survivability. If you do survive you may be severely injured, probably permanantly.

I'll fly, thank you. The driving in Orlando scares me enough.