X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2006 19:15:32 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from mxsf31.cluster1.charter.net ([209.225.28.130] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.1c.2) with ESMTP id 1332407 for lml@lancaironline.net; Tue, 01 Aug 2006 17:27:29 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=209.225.28.130; envelope-from=troneill@charter.net Received: from mxip12a.cluster1.charter.net (mxip12a.cluster1.charter.net [209.225.28.142]) by mxsf31.cluster1.charter.net (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id k71IofRm015961 for ; Tue, 1 Aug 2006 14:50:41 -0400 Received: from 68-184-229-22.dhcp.stls.mo.charter.com (HELO axs) ([68.184.229.22]) by mxip12a.cluster1.charter.net with SMTP; 01 Aug 2006 14:50:40 -0400 X-IronPort-AV: i="4.07,203,1151899200"; d="scan'208,217"; a="694589900:sNHT63292972" X-Original-Message-ID: <006b01c6b59b$62befd40$6401a8c0@axs> From: "terrence o'neill" X-Original-To: "Lancair Mailing List" References: Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Safety statistics and other mythology X-Original-Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2006 13:50:38 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0068_01C6B571.78AE2B50" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2905 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0068_01C6B571.78AE2B50 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Abnigating untoward exigencies, delightful. T. ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Sky2high@aol.com=20 To: Lancair Mailing List=20 Sent: Tuesday, August 01, 2006 01:31 PM Subject: [LML] Re: Safety statistics and other mythology Hmmmmm........ A new soap opera: As the Thread Turns Brent's view of statistics (the plural of statistic) is from an = engineer's perspective. Lorn didn't go far enough. Terrence used 20 = year old information and threw in some strongly held personal views. = Others have sought to explain certain sub-sets of the universe of air = accidents by comparing dissimilar groupings. If you have gotten to this paragraph perhaps you will continue. Note = that statistic is defined in an online dictionary as follows: 1.. A numerical datum.=20 2.. A numerical value, such as standard deviation or mean, that = characterizes the sample or population from which it was derived.=20 While it took me eleven years to get a simple BS (yes, that is the = correct expression) in Math, the middle years (1960's) were devoted to = computers, with some time spent writing programs on vacuum tube and = transistor computers to turn vast quantities of #1 into a wide variety = of #2 (yes, #2). Interestingly, statistics alone should not be our real = concern. LML contributors so far have tried to perform the function of the = insurance companies (Lorn, jump in any time). To wit, assigning a = probability to an event which causes the death of an aircraft occupant = when the reported statistic is grossly limited to gigantic = subpopulations such as GA and Commercial Aviation. There are = mathematical methods to determine the probability of heads on the next = coin toss and even more complex event outcomes based on intervening = conditions. I wonder if this is where Brent meant a lower branch of = math? After all, a form of this math is applied to "theoretical" = physics (Lorn, hit'm with the random nature of #1 above) to help explain = various natural wonderments. I gave up on studying probability theory = when the conditions got too complex. The insurance companies have not given up on conditional probabilities = (this must be what they call actuarial science). Their motive is = straight forward - What premium should be charged to some population so = that when certain covered events occur, less is paid out than taken in. = When a person obtains insurance coverage for an air event that leads to = death and destruction (crash among others), the company tries to limit = the population so that their motive is met. For example, a = transitionally trained pilot with a minimum number of hours in similar = type that is retrained each year and is young enough without too many = DUI's can get such protection while someone falling outside that = population is eliminated or must fit into a population where higher = premiums are paid. If you are still with this piece, please note that the probability of = your immediate demise is far more complex than using general aviation = population statistics combined with the wing design of the airplane = flown. There are so many ways to go. For example, in the greater = population, the category "home accidents" is a killer, but since you = built your plane and still have all your fingers and toes the chances = are you won't perish that way (Hmmmm, an opinion, not a statistic). Now, to get personal I must describe the subpopulation I exist in - I = drive a performance car without side airbags and use speed to get out of = dicey situations, I frequently travel expressways in excess of 75 mph = (65 Kts) on a motorcycle, I am overweight, I eat and drink almost = anything in moderation, I operate dangerous home garden manicure = equipment, I fly a hi performance airplane that I built in my garage and = I don't challenge Mother Nature too much. I also avoid flying commercial = airlines, especially those that keep turning up with drunk pilots or are = based in certain exotic locations. Oh, I clean my own guns and I don't = allow terrorists to board my aircraft either. =20 So, is the probability less or greater that I will perish in my = Lancair or of that because I am a member of the GA population? I don't = care because I am a special case. Besides the advanced institutional = care I receive and ever higher med doses, I respect the flight = characteristics of my airplane. And that alone apparently puts me in a = different population from those that think they are still flying a = Cessna whilst directing their hi-perf experimental craft about the sky. Risk analysis is different for the individual or the insurance company = because of very different interests. Statistics are useful to the = latter and not particularly useful to the former. Scott Krueger AKA Grayhawk Lancair N92EX IO320 SB 89/96 Aurora, IL (KARR) Abnegate Exigencies! ------=_NextPart_000_0068_01C6B571.78AE2B50 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Abnigating untoward = exigencies,=20 delightful.
T.
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Sky2high@aol.com=20
Sent: Tuesday, August 01, 2006 = 01:31=20 PM
Subject: [LML] Re: Safety = statistics and=20 other mythology

Hmmmmm........  A new soap opera: As the Thread Turns
 
Brent's view of statistics (the plural of statistic) is from an=20 engineer's perspective.  Lorn didn't go far enough.  = Terrence used=20 20 year old information and threw in some strongly held personal = views. =20 Others have sought to explain certain sub-sets of the universe of = air=20 accidents by comparing dissimilar groupings.
 
If you have gotten to this paragraph perhaps you will=20 continue.  Note that statistic is defined in an online = dictionary as=20 follows:
 
  1. A numerical datum.=20
  2. A numerical value, such as standard deviation or mean, that=20 characterizes the sample or population from which it was derived. =
While it took me eleven years to get a simple BS (yes, that is = the=20 correct expression) in Math, the middle years (1960's) were devoted to = computers, with some time spent writing programs on vacuum tube = and=20 transistor computers to turn vast quantities of #1 into a wide variety = of #2=20 (yes, #2).  Interestingly, statistics alone should not be our = real=20 concern.
 
LML contributors so far have tried to perform the function of the = insurance companies (Lorn, jump in any time).  To wit, assigning = a=20 probability to an event which causes the death of an aircraft occupant = when=20 the reported statistic is grossly limited to gigantic subpopulations = such as=20 GA and Commercial Aviation.  There are mathematical methods to = determine=20 the probability of heads on the next coin toss and even more complex = event=20 outcomes based on intervening conditions.  I wonder if this is = where=20 Brent meant a lower branch of math?  After all, a form of this = math is=20 applied to "theoretical" physics (Lorn, hit'm with the random nature = of #1=20 above) to help explain various natural wonderments.  I gave up on = studying probability theory when the conditions got too = complex.
 
The insurance companies have not given up on conditional = probabilities=20 (this must be what they call actuarial science).  Their motive is = straight forward - What premium should be charged to some population = so that=20 when certain covered events occur, less is paid out than = taken=20 in.  When a person obtains insurance coverage for an air = event that=20 leads to death and destruction (crash among others), the company tries = to=20 limit the population so that their motive is met.  For = example, a=20 transitionally trained pilot with a minimum number of hours in similar = type=20 that is retrained each year and is young enough without too many=20 DUI's can get such protection while someone falling outside that=20 population is eliminated or must fit into a population where higher = premiums=20 are paid.
 
If you are still with this piece, please note that the = probability=20 of your immediate demise is far more complex than using=20 general aviation population statistics combined with the wing = design of=20 the airplane flown.  There are so many ways to go.  For = example, in=20 the greater population, the category "home accidents" is a killer, but = since=20 you built your plane and still have all your fingers and toes the = chances are=20 you won't perish that way (Hmmmm, an opinion, not a statistic).
 
Now, to get personal I must describe = the subpopulation I=20 exist in - I drive a performance car without side airbags and use = speed to get=20 out of dicey situations, I frequently travel expressways in excess of = 75 mph=20 (65 Kts) on a motorcycle, I am overweight, I eat and drink almost = anything in=20 moderation, I operate dangerous home garden manicure equipment, I fly = a hi=20 performance airplane that I built in my garage and I don't challenge = Mother=20 Nature too much. I also avoid flying commercial airlines, = especially=20 those that keep turning up with drunk pilots or are based in = certain=20 exotic locations.  Oh, I clean my own guns and I don't allow = terrorists=20 to board my aircraft either.  
 
So, is the probability less or greater that I will perish in = my=20 Lancair or of that because I am a member of the GA = population? =20 I don't care because I am a special case.  Besides the=20 advanced institutional care I receive and ever higher med doses, = I=20 respect the flight characteristics of my airplane.  And that=20 alone apparently puts me in a different population from those = that think=20 they are still flying a Cessna whilst directing their hi-perf = experimental=20 craft about the sky.
 
Risk analysis is different for the individual or the insurance = company=20 because of very different interests.  Statistics are useful = to the=20 latter and not particularly useful to the former.
 
Scott=20 Krueger AKA Grayhawk
Lancair N92EX IO320 SB 89/96
Aurora, IL=20 (KARR)

Abnegate Exigencies!
 
 
------=_NextPart_000_0068_01C6B571.78AE2B50--