Originally Posted by
Aviatrix
All that's telling us is that they're one of many airlines that haven't had a fatal accident.
Safety is not just about FATAL accidents. And Ryanair has certainly made the headlines with lots of incidents recently. The Memmingen one in September seems to have some similarities with the (unreported) incident that I referred to earlier in this thread - including the pilot's attempt to make up time by landing on the opposite runway.
+1
All you have to do is read the introduction on the top of the page of the referenced site:
These accident rates are not safety ratings. There are many factors that contribute to the safety rating of an airline including, but not limited to, accident history, maintenance and operational procedures, types of training programs, age of fleet and specific routes flown. In addition there are different ways to analyze past accident data.
The emphasis on the first sentence is from the website and not mine.
I don't want to argue about FR's safety record. I have never flown FR and with my typical travel patterns I probably never will. But I have flown some of the smaller *A carriers (OU, CM, etc) and they were perfectly fine and seemed professional and very safe.
[RANT]This should be more about how FR is reacting to seemingly fair and accurate coverage of recent safety incidents. There is a disturbing trend on the Internet of larger organizations attempting to use the threat of lengthy expensive litigation to silence smaller critics. IMO, this is truly foul and needs to be called out. Sites like avherald and pprune (and flyertalk) are online communities and people should to be able to express themselves, even if their opinion is not popular or is based on ignorance.
There is no freedom of speech if your speech has to be acceptable to everyone hearing it.[/RANT]