Another Cavalon

Which rather proves my point.

In the UK, where everything is reported, the non-fatal to fatal ratio is something like 12-1, not 2-1....
Then, it seems there are plenty of non-fatal incident data, at least in the UK.
 
“Accident” means an occurrence associated with the operation of an aircraft which, in the case of a manned aircraft, takes place between the time any person boards the aircraft with the intention of flight and such time as all such persons have disembarked, or in the case of an unmanned aircraft, takes place between the time the aircraft is ready to move with the purpose of flight until such time it comes to rest at the end of the flight and the primary propulsion system is shut down, in which:

  1. a person is fatally or seriously injured as a result of: * being in the aircraft * direct contact with any part of the aircraft, including parts which have become detached from the aircraft * direct exposure to jet blast, except when the injuries are from natural causes, self-inflicted or inflicted by other persons, or when the injuries are to stowaways hiding outside the areas normally available to the passengers and crew
  2. the aircraft sustains damage or structural failure which adversely affects the structural strength, performance or flight characteristics of the aircraft, and would normally require major repair or replacement of the affected component, except for engine failure or damage, when the damage is limited to a single engine, (including its cowlings or accessories), to propellers, wing tips, antennas, probes, vanes, tires, brakes, wheels, fairings, panels, landing gear doors, windscreens, the aircraft skin (such as small dents or puncture holes) or minor damages to main rotor blades, tail rotor blades, landing gear, and those resulting from hail or bird strike, (including holes in the radome)
  3. the aircraft is missing or is completely inaccessible.
The FAA has a similar definition of an accident in the USA TyroGyro.

From 1/1/2010 to 1/1/2020 there were 98 gyroplane accidents reported to the NTSB and 24 of them were fatal.

It is my observation that many accidents are not reported.

I have friends in the UK who have shared accident cover up incidents with me so it appears to me based on my limited research; your data may be flawed.
 
Ya, that looks pretty close to what the FAA considers reportable, which is certainly not "everything".
And, as Vance points out, just because all these things are supposed to be reported does not mean that they always actually are.
 
It is my observation that many accidents are not reported.

I have friends in the UK who have shared accident cover up incidents with me so it appears to me based on my limited research; your data may be flawed.
As you know, I have always shied away from any formal statistical analysis of non-fatals, because:

a) they're vastly under-reported on the global scale, and no-one can vouch that any particular country is "perfect" either.
b) there are too many of them, and its too big a task for an individual to undertake.
c) we know very well the phases and causes:- take-off, take-off, take-off, landing, take-off, take-off, take-off, landing, taxi... etc...

FWIW, I have just researched my own country again, and find (for AutoGyro/Rotorsport and Magni)

52 reports, plus 1 outstanding fatal, plus 10 "record-only" investigations (only from mid-2019 to late-2021)

A total of 63
of which 4 were fatal (3 if you discount the bizarre civilian ground incident in 2009)

out of a current UK fleet-size of 235.

So more like a 20-1 non-fatal to fatal ratio.

Nothing like 2-1 which someone mentioned up thread.

I cannot comment on what this "means", or how it compares to other countries and the global picture. The comparable data just doesn't exist.

Save that the UK probably has better reporting standards than many other places.
 
Nothing like 2-1 which someone mentioned up thread.
That was the recollected ratio of my data, not to imply that such mirrored real-life. Many of the minor prangs I hadn't bothered with.
 
Top