c5marine

Of 60 ranked airlines, here are the ten with the worst safety records, including the number of hull losses since 1983, and how many fatalities they caused:

#10 SkyWest Airlines: 3 hull losses; 22 dead

#9 South African Airways: 1 hull loss; 159 dead

#8 Thai Airways International: 5 hull losses; 309 dead

#7 Turkish Airlines: 6 hull losses, 188 dead

#6 Saudia: 4 hull losses; 310 dead

#5 Korean Air: 9 hull losses; 687 dead

#4 GOL Transportes Aéreos: 1 hull loss; 154 dead

#3 Air India: 3 hull losses; 329 dead

#2 TAM Airlines: 6 hull losses; 336 dead

#1 China Airlines: 8 hull losses; 755 dead





Full Story:

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/worlds...171800816.html

NFeldberg

This study is way off. It says that the group responsible for the study JACDEC used 30 years worth of incidents. Some of the airlines in the study haven't even been around that long. The JACDEC website is very confusing and the data is messy and hard to follow. Im sorry, but airline safety lists should be issued by those with real knowledge and authority to do so. The two fellas who run this site have limited to no credibility in my opinion. They are pushing a book.

jsmeeker

Something is very very off with that.

American Airlines has had some hull loses in that time frame, even if you exclude those lost in 9/11/2001. How many died in that A300 that crashed in October (I think it was October) of 2001? They had a plane break up on landing at LIT. People died there, though not the whole plane. One in Jamaica. (dunno about deaths). I could keep looking, but I am not sure I need to.

redtigeriii

I cringe when I see articles like this, especially on a big website such as yahoo news. Even though most airlines are extremely, extremely safe to travel on compared to other forms of travel, it perpetuates this irrational notion that a plane is about to fall out of the sky at any minute and that air travel is unsafe. Fear is a powerful motivator and will likely lead to the article getting a lot reads.

NFeldberg

The Sky West incident they are obviously referring to was an ATC failure that had a US Air 737 land on top of the Sky West airplane. It had nothing to do with the airlines safety. 12 died on the Sky West plane and 22 died on the 737. The other Sky West accident was a collision with a Mooney. The Mooney pilot strayed into SLC airspace. 10 were killed on the Sky West flight bringing the total Sky West deaths to 22. None of these accidents were Sky West's fault. In fact, the lack of adequate ATC collision protection was also to blame in SLC.

gglave

I'd also add that it would be interesting to see the numbers reconciled against the numbers of takeoffs and landings. I bet SkyWest is VERY safe when you take that into the mix, considering every SkyWest flight I ever take is two hours or less...

DXjr

And that, on average, there's about 1,700 flights a day (But some days get close to 2,000.)

NFeldberg

They are very safe. The JACDEC data is completely false in just about every aspect of airline safety. What I see are two guys morbidly obsessed with airplane crashes who really have nothing better to do then put out misleading information to sell their book. Korean Air is also a concern. It looks like they reference accidents from the 80s when a Captain at Korean Air was the absolute authority. The other pilots were not allowed to question his decisions which ultimately lead to a crash as they 747 strayed into Russian airspace and was shot down. Since then, Korean is probably one of the safest airlines in the World. In the early 90s they finally corrected their cockpit communications by hiring U.S pilots to implement a form of CRM (crew resource management) The other Korean air incident was a bomb.

stewaran

Didn't air France lose a concord and a 777 ( maybe it was an A330? or A340) on way back from south America fairly recently? I would guess that gets into the top 10!

marble

I had a quick look at the data. Searched for UK airlines but apparently there are none. Looked up US airlines and noticed that Delta is recorded as never having had a fatality. Looks like rubbish to me.

Ahuch

I don't see any airlines from Burma or Nepal on here... must be skewed

pinniped

Most of these articles seem like rubbish to me. Or there's an underlying grain of true data followed by a misuse of it to create an inaccurate conclusion.

Wasn't the one GOL hull loss caused by a collision with a private jet flying at the wrong altitude somewhere out over the Amazon?

kkjay77

They only improved in the 2000s.
KE801 crashed in Guam occurred in 1997 and KE8509 crash in London occurred in 1999.
Both of those incidents happened because of pilot error.

They are as safe as anyone now, though.

kkjay77

Yes, that and the Corcorde too.
BTW, it was A330 that crashed from Brazil to France.