This article was posted in another Flyertalk thread and I pointed out my problem with it there...

This article says you can't statistically assess the MD11 because its had less than a million flights, but concorde has the worst safety record in the world after its 80,000 flights. No dice.

The night before the crash of the Concorde, BA announced they found cracks in ALL of their Concordes. But not to worry BA and AF said, the Concorde is fine.

I posted in the "in the news" forum, that BA was pushing thier customer's luck.

Sadly, it seems like AF and BA are doing just that. We've had in just the last 10 days out of a fleet of 13 planes(now only 12)

1 Hull loss
7 planes with cracks on their wings
1 diversion
1 grounding due to refueling fault
1 grounding due to engine trouble

Why are any of these planes still in service?

Doesn't all of this add up to an unacceptable safety risk?

Maybe all their bad luck has came and gone?

I am still waitlisted for a double berth on this deal ... £955 off, AND the QEII, and BA Corcorde, and Orient Express, AND Norway Fiords, what a trip! All for less than £1500.

. http://www.concorde.co.uk/specialindex.htm

No dice indeed: that article had holes you could drive a Concorde through.

james -- I apologize for missing your comments on an earlier thread in reference to the concorde. There are so many threads regarding this matter, it is difficult to keep track of them all. If you could provide a link to the previous thread, it may be interesting to go back and read through your comments.

Judging from your comment, it is apparent that we all comprehend articles differently.

I posted the article simply because it provided an interesting take. Is it surprising that we -- the aviation community -- find holes in a journalist's reporting? Good Lord, I hope not! (I still have vivid memories of the CBS "expert" holding a model of a DC-9 when describing the characteristics of Swissair 111.)

However, I think it brings up an interesting point regarding the number of cycles and statistics. To me, the article is concurring with your statement about the MD-11. After all, it says "At first glance, the MD-11... appears to be the least safe subsonic aircraft now flying... However, a more careful examination tells a different story."

My take on the article is simply that it shows how skewed statistical analysis can be regarding aviation safety. It says, despite 77 crashes the 737 has a fantastic safety record because of the commonality of the aircraft. Using similar analysis, Boeing concluded that the concorde went from the safest to worst aircraft with one crash.

In essence, it is simply stating what we all learned in our Research Analysis coursework -- you can make the numbers illustrate whatever you want them to illustrate. It is exactly what Boeing did in its analysis.

Who was it that said:

"There are lies, **** lies, and STATISTICS"

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

UBB censor got it ... typed D*MN

Benjamin Disreali authored the quote -

There are three kinds of lies, lies, d*mn*d lies, and statistics.