X45

How safe are planes compared to 20 years ago? Can they be even safer?

A few followup questions: 1) What would have to be done for them to glide better? 2) Why are the engines placed right by the fuel tanks? Doesn't it make sense to separate them? Pretty much I'm just interested in how the aviation industry works, wether there's a world standard and that sort of thing. How much are planes checked for structural integrity (no cracks, loose screws, etc). Statistically, surely, planes should be safer now than in 1987, no?

Public Comments

1. Right... Coarse planes can be safer, but they are very safe now. 1.more streamlined 2.because they are no
2. I don't know too much about Aviation but I do fly every week and haven't crashed yet (knock on wood)
3. My wife flys every week to the uk and spain and back again for the last three years and thats says that some one really unlucky to have a problem flying its safer than crossing the road so stop worrying and enjoy!!!!
4. I think technology has really helped. The advent of new processes and materials like carbon fiber. As for the engines being close to the fuel tanks, there is really no choice. If you fly on a commercial airliner, you are basically flying a huge gas can. Where would they store the fuel if it wasn't for the integral wing? I have been working for Boeing for 19 years and have seen processes change in order to make airplanes safer and better for the flying public. The processes we employ to put the airplane together and the engineering involved are proven to keep airplanes in the air for thousands of cycles (takeoff and landings). Typically a Boeing airplane can last 25-30 years with normal wear and tear. There are standards in place and a company like Boeing gets a type certificate so they can build each model of airplane. The 787 is no exception. It will go under a barrage of flight testing. Nothing will be overlooked. It is during this flight testing stage that improvements will be made to the design. Once the design is finalized and flight testing is complete, the FAA certifies the airplane and awards Boeing a type certificate to build the 787. That is what is going through with the Airbus A380. All these flights show casing the aircraft are also showing its reliablity for takeoffs and landings. New planes like the 787 to show that they can survive for 30 years and thousands of cycles are put through testing in what we call an "ironbird". Previous models like the 777 are setup with sensor all over the fuselage and wings and the airplane is twisted, turned and bent simulating years of abuse. Inorder to check the integrity of the wing, it is bent to the point of failure. It is quite an impressive display (see link). I was lucky to view this first hand. The other link is another is a video that shows Ray Craig one of our test pilots dealing with a 737-900 when his number 2 windows comes open on takeoff.
5. They are somewhat better. Required annual inspections assure that an airplane is in as good a condition as when new. Most problems arise from error on someone's part -- either the pilot, or some controller, or a mixture of both, and these are hard to fix. But better computer systems will help.
6. They are safer. Yes they could be safer. Hang on, this will be a bit of a long answer. The improvements to safety in aviation are due to a number of factors, all of these factors are still a constant concern, and have to be continually evaluated. Factor number one........ Pilot error. In spite of everything done to make the pilot community as safe as economically possible (yes economics are everywhere), there are tradeoffs to be made. The cost of paying pilots is a major one for all airlines, and they want their pilots out flying as much as possible. This limits the training time to the minimum mandated by the FAA (or other national governing bodies elsewhere). Companies do a cost/benifit analysis of training vs risks, and decide where to put their dollars. This being said, pilots are getting safer all the time. Automated systems are decreasing pilot workload and giving the crew more available brainpower to retain situational awareness. In addition, concepts like CRM (Crew Resource Management) have made a real difference in use of onboard resources. Changes in operational cycles have helped as well. After the American crash at Little Rock in the 90's, the FAA revisited crew rest standards and made some changes. Factor number two..... Equipment. New planes are getting safer all the time. Increased computerized internal monitoring of systems can now detect a problem and tell the pilots long before a situation becomes critical. Terminal Collision Avoidance Systems (TCAS) tell crews of potential conflicts long before visual contact with conflicting traffic. Enhanced Ground Proximity Warning Systems ( EGPWS) have a global map of terrain and warn of problems well in advance. And, quite simply, the technology is getting better. Could both of these be improved? Yes, but economics are a constant consideration. We could expand simulator training (at thousands of dollars per sim hour) and we could put in heavy, expensive, additional gear. While there are ICAO standards worldwide, most aircraft are designed with the U. S. in mind. We're a huge market. As far as structural integrity, many types of NDI (non-distructive Inspection) have been developed. Dye penetration, mag flux, boroscoping and others. Aircraft are periodically checked in intense tear-down type inspections with these and many other checks. Follow up #1 Glide performance. This is a question of wing shape and weight. Unfortunately, in a plane you want to go .8 mach, you kinda have to have a swept wing. The glider ideal of a long, thin straight wing just doesn't work. Follow up #2 Engine placement. Actually not all engines are wing mounted. The DC-9 series of aircraft for example mount their engines on the tail. This mandates extra fuel lines which add to wieght. In addition this means all engine maintenance must be done from a stand. This slows work and requires the purchase and maintaining of extra exuipment. For all engines, howerver, they tend to be mounted in self-contained pods, with shutoff valves to kill fuel, pnuematics and hydraulics in the event of a fire. The designs literally will let an engine pod fall off the aircraft before starting a wing fire. All in all, we are much safer than in '87, and getting safer.
7. Probably half of the commercial aircraft flying today ARE ALREADY 20 years old.
8. All aircraft flying to differnt countries have to fulfill that countries FAA, CAA, CASA etc rules & regulations, but to answer your question, an aircraft takes off & lands this is considered 1 cycle, after so many cycles the aircraft has to undergo maintence procedures called checks, starting at a check all the oils, hydraulics, to window heating to lighting to emergency checks, the more the aircraft does in its cycles, hte more intense those checks get, until finally the aircraft is stripped & checked for corrosion, fatigue, etc and once given the all clear, put back together again. and so begins the pattern all over again. If an ircraft part fails, then the reason for that failure is given to every company of who flies those aircraft around the world and how to rectify that problem. You also have to remember, that really there has been no great changes in the way things have been done (except to reduce the safety measures taken to prevent accidents from areas because it reduces profit margins) the B747, B767, B737 are still flying today & they are way older than 20 years, the A320 comes closer to being 20 than the boeing group. All that really has been updated is the computing side of things, fly by wire is now in instead of fly by cabling. Boeing is very old fashion & spent years, just playing with what they had, and has been left behind in aircraft design, whilst Airbus has been inovative working for a future, putting into practice dreams of the yesteryear into reality, hence the montrosity that is let loose in the sky A380 So in short, are aircraft safer today than 20 years ago. No. It is just the same because the techniques used to ensure safety haven't changed in all that time - except to be built upon.