Safety and Education and Research: the Aviation Surrounds Safety - Essay Example

Aviation Exploratory Essay - Where is really the Safest Place to Sit and Why The one question that really comes to my mind when thinking about aviation surrounds safety. More specifically, where's the safest place on the plane to sit to survive a crash and why. It's really a rather morbid thought, but every time I get ready to plan a trip or know I'm going to be flying the question always comes to my mind. Inevitably, I believe that in the event I am on a plane that crashes, I guess it really won't matter where I'm sitting. So why does the thought always come to my mind I have to admit I have never really set out to research the topic. It seems I fly, arrive and return safely, and like probably the majority of the population, do not consider it at any other time. We all, I believe, assume that safety is present and take for granted that the likelihood that it 'will happen to me'. I know I am not alone in this question. We have all heard friends and family talk about it. The front is safest or the back or over the wings. How do people really know And for that matter is there really any place on a plane that is safe. If you are 40,000 feet in the air and the plane loses power will sitting in the front seat or the last seat really make a difference I would assume probably not. We have all heard about the terrible plane crashes with no survivors. I think that is what probably scares us the most - the sheer number of people that are killed as a result of a single accident. When reading one of those stories, inevitably, it is mentioned that flying is safer than driving. That statistically is easy enough to determine, but it still does not answer my question. The question that has baffled me though is where on the plane to sit. I allow all of the possible scenarios of what could happen to run through my mind. I have just about convinced myself that in the case of a plane at cruising altitude crashing, there is really not much hope of anyone being able to survive. However, all these theories make it apparent that people do survive crashes and the events leading up to the crash must play a part in whether one survives or not. Take offs and landings, in thinking about the question, probably would be the two main situations where your seat placement would be most critical in the event of a crash. Logic is telling me that being in the front in a crash landing is probably the most dangerous place to be, but again that most likely depends on each individual event. However, if speaking in generalities, the back sounds like the safest place to be sitting. Take-offs have me more baffled although if the plane makes it off the ground, again, the front would probably be the most dangerous place to be sitting If I really intend to find the answer to the question sitting here and debating with myself is going to get me no closer to finding the answer to my question. So where do I begin The first place that comes to my mind is the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). The government agency that investigates all the plane crashes seems the logical place to start. I have never been to their website, and, truthfully, do not think they will have the answer to my question posted there, but reading through the pages will hopefully, give me ideas on where to look next. I have already considered the possibility of doing a general search online for airplane safety, and that is what I will do if I do not find useful information or links at the FAA site. However, the thought of such a broad search will probably leave me with millions of sites to sift through. Starting at a known, credible source makes more sense to me, and, if nothing else may shed some light on ways, at least, I can limit a general search. With that I am off to the FAA website. Hopefully, searching FAA will give me their link; and twenty seconds later it did. The first thing I did when I arrived at the FAA home page was to look at how it was set up. Several of the main pages look promising - Data and Statistics, Safety and Education and Research (FAA, 2006). I decided, however, before selecting one of the tabs to see what else is on the main page. There was a section on top requests with a list of topics. Scanning it airport status and delays was first, followed by accident and incident data. That confirmed my original theory that I am not the only person intrigued by plane crashes. Another area I found was frequently asked questions. I decided to follow that link first, not that I think I will find my answer there, but I want to be systematic in my search and that is probably the least likely, of the potential places to look next, pages that will have the answers to my questions. As I suspected, most of the questions involve certification issues, but there is a category listing so I will check and see if there are any promising leads. I chose passengers, the only one that seemed to fit and a list of sub-topics came up. I chose safety. We will see what it finds. It yielded nothing in relation to the topic. So I decided to check out the data and statistics area next to see if they have statistics on surviving crashes and give any indication on where survivors were located. The airlines certainly have that information on their manifests. Two areas are promising- final data findings and a potential new site they have a link for the National Aviation Safety Data Analysis Center (NASDAC). That is the most promising sign I've seen, but before I follow the link I will check out final data section on the FAA website. It will save me having to backtrack later if I run into a dead end. Their data page is complicated asks about incident or accident numbers or you can download an entire year's worth of data. I decided I will try the NASDAC website and see if it is more user friendly. NASDAC is an ancillary part of the FAA. The first paragraph sounds promising. Part of it states "The NASDAC system enables users to perform integrated queries across multiple databases, search the labyrinth of warehoused data, and display pertinent elements in an array of useful formats" ("Welcome to", 2006, screen 1). There was a general study area, so I looked there first, but it was mostly regional studies. So I will see what the data base yields. I have already decided if this page is not helpful I will go back and do a general search. I think the FAA pages are too technical. I found a promising link at NASDAC. It is a link for a British website that has world wide plane crash data called World Aircraft Accident Summary. That was no help. It linked me to the British Civil Aviation Authority and only had a field for accident number and no way to navigate to another screen. I am getting frustrated. I think perhaps I am trying to be too logical about this. I have been working on it for almost an hour and am no closer to finding any useful information. So, I laughed at myself and thought why not try to do it the easy way. I am going to do a general search for 'where is the safest place to sit in a plane' and see what sites come up in the results. I decided it can not be any worse that what I am doing now, which is getting nowhere fast. Typing in that question brought up 191,000 possible answers, which made me laugh. I do not want personal opinion. I want an explanation to back it up as well. I decided the next thing I need to do is briefly scan through the previews of some of the sites and see what looks 'credible'. On the first page are two potential sites to check. First of all I decided to rule out all the blog and chat type websites. I want fact not someone just talking without knowing what they speak. Boeing and CBS news websites seem like my best avenue. I decided to check the CBS site first. I am not exactly sure why I chose this one, but it seems like it may be less biased and 'marketing' related than the Boeing site may be. The CBS site was just a poll and asked me where the safest place to sit was. I told them if I knew I would not be here looking. I will try the Boeing site now. This looks promising the Boeing site in their frequently asked questions has a section entitled "Where's the safest place to sit on a plane" ("Frequently" (2006), screen 1) I am almost afraid to look. If this has my answer and offers me some data to back it up, half my questions will be answered. That was disappointing their response was "While some people believe the safest spot is near the wings or toward the rear of the cabin, there's no evidence to support either theory. One seat's as safe as another, especially if you stayed buckled up" ("Where's the" 2006, screen 1). At first I was really frustrated when I read that answer, but then I began to think maybe that is the answer after all. There is no safe seat. When I originally began thinking about this topic I had surmised that in the event of a crash while the plane was in flight it really would not make a difference. This is exactly what Boeing is telling me as well. However, I always tend to be a bit sceptical, so I have decided to I need to do, at least for now, two more things. First I will check a few more websites on this query and see if I find anything. If that yields no results, I will do a new query. Maybe what I really need to ask is 'In the case of a crash landing or aborted take off where is the safest place to sit' That may be closer to asking the real question I have. I was just about to leave the Boeing site when I saw in the corner a small link for safety statistics. I've attached to graph at the end of the paper. It shows me that yes flying is safer than driving, but still not answering my question. I'm getting closer though. I next tried a travel site I found. There explanation gave me more information that I have found so far. They mentioned numerous studies on the subject. Where are they It is common to believe that it is safer in the back of the plane than in the front of the plane, in terms of surviving a crash. However, detailed studies suggest that there is very little difference, wherever you are located. The strongest part of the plane is where the wings join the body, but there are often fuel tanks around that area which can be a disadvantage in a crash. There is so little difference in survivability rates that where you sit is not really a relevant factor ("Where the", 2005, screen 1). Seeing the quote from the last website I decided to do a search for 'safest seat plane crash study'. It brought up many of the same sites as the previous search, but I scanned the preview area to look for the word study. I found a website that sounded reasonable. It actually turned out to be a relatively well organized website and I even found what I was looking for at; at least a more concrete answer than I had been able to locate. A study was conducted looking 30 airline crashes that they termed 'survivable'. I assume that means it was not my 40,000 feet it is not going to matter theory. The results of the study found that with the exception of accidents during approach and landing. As a general rule, they determined in a crash, statistically it does not matter where you sit. It appears that a more important factor just happens to be the nature of the crash. There are a host of factors that make each unique. What seat is safest in one crash could be the most dangerous in the next. The one exception they did find was during approach and landing crashes. There findings there revealed that being seated in the rear of the plane as opposed to the front or center section was safer. Of the survivable crashes studied two times as many people in this type of crash survived who were sitting in the rear. I've attached their chart to the rear of the paper showing the airline crashes they studied and it has a smaller chart at the bottom specifying where the survivors were sitting. Although this is just one study, I feel that it did at least confirm what had made the most sense to me all along. If there is a major crash the seat location will not really make a difference. However, armed with what I did learn I will stick with the rear of the plane. That is the one section of the plane that has been shown to be safer in certain types of crashes. As the other types of crashes showed that seat placement does not matter, it makes sense to choose the back, then. It will not hurt and it may make a difference. Or..maybe I should take a train. Oh, noderailments. Works Cited "Accident Rate History" (2006). Boeing Airline Website. Retrieved February 23, 2006, from . "Click here." (Undated). Worldwide Aircraft Accident System. British Civil Aviation Authority website. Retrieved February 23, 2006, from . "FAA - Federal Aviation Administration News and Updates." (Feb. 23, 2006). Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) website. Retrieved February 23, 2006, from . "Frequently asked questions (FAQs)." (2006). Boeing Website. Retrieved February 23, 2006, from . "Safest Locations." (Oct. 4, 2004). Aviation Safety Network. Retrieved February 23, 2006, from . "Welcome to the National Aviation Safety Data Analysis Center (NASDAC)." (Feb. 23, 2006). Federal Aviation Administration Safety Data Analysis Center Website. Retrieved February 23, 2006, from . "Where's the safest place to sit on a plane" (2006). Boeing Website. Retrieved February 23, 2006, from . "Where the best seats are." (February 18, 2005). The Travel Insider Website. Retrieved February 23, 2006, from . Figure 1: Airline Accident Rates1 Accident Rate History Figure 2: Safest Location Study2 Date Type Occupants Survivors Phase 1 Safest location 02MAY1970 DC-9 63 40 ER rear 04 APR 1977 DC-9 85 22 ER rear 12 AUG 1985 Boeing 747 524 4 ER rear 11 NOV 1965 Boeing 727 91 48 LA rear 20 NOV 1967 Convair CV-880 82 12 LA rear 13 JAN 1969 DC-8 45 30 LA front 08 DEC 1972 Boeing 737 61 18 LA rear 29 DEC 1972 Lockheed L-1011 176 77 LA front & rear 30 JAN 1974 Boeing 707 101 4 LA center 11 SEP 1974 DC-9 82 12 LA rear 24 JUN 1975 Boeing 727 124 9 LA rear 27 APR 1976 Boeing 727 88 51 LA front 11 FEB 1978 Boeing 737 49 7 LA rear 28 DEC 1978 DC-8 189 179 LA rear 02 JUN 1983 DC-9 46 23 LA center 02 AUG 1985 Lockheed L-1011 163 29 LA rear 15 SEP 1988 Boeing 737 104 69 LA rear 08 JAN 1989 Boeing 737 126 79 LA front 19 JUL 1989 DC-10 296 185 LA center 01 FEB 1991 Boeing 737 89 67 LA rear 20 JAN 1992 Airbus A.320 96 9 LA rear 26 APR 1994 Airbus A.300 271 7 LA center 01 JUN 1999 DC-9 145 134 LA front & rear 03 DEC 1990 DC-9 44 36 TA front 27 NOV 1970 DC-8 229 182 TO front 13 JAN 1982 Boeing 737 79 5 TO rear 22 AUG 1985 Boeing 737 137 82 TO front 15 NOV 1987 DC-9 82 54 TO rear 31 AUG 1988 Boeing 727 108 94 TO front & center 22 MAR 1992 Fokker F-28 51 24 TO front & rear 02 JUL 1994 DC-9 57 20 TO rear 31 OCT 2000 Boeing 747 179 96 TO front & rear Figure 2 Cont'd phase 1 front center rear ER 0 0 3 LA 5 4 13 TA 1 0 0 TO 5 1 5 total 11 5 21 1) Phase: ER = En route, descent LA = Approach and landing TA = Taxying TO = Takeoff and initial climb Read More