I did a similar search a while back to try to get an idea of what types of mechanical things caused fatal accidents. I looked at all fatal RV accidents with a probable cause listed over the last decade, and found that in almost every case of a fatal engine failure, there was a distinct human mistake involved; ie fuel mismanagement, taking off with known engine problems, or a grossly incorrect installation. Even then, there was often a subsequent, avoidable loss of control. I basically wanted to get an idea of what mechanical issues could kill me, and make sure I address them as much as possible. It was admittedly a little reassuring to see how rare it is that one just falls out of the sky with no warning, and a good reminder that practicing emergency scenarios is hugely important.
Chris
Something that most EAA Tech Counselors pay very close attention to is fuel system...fuel system...fuel system. If the fuel system is assembled per proven design and with good construction practices the chance of an off-airport mechanical accident goes waaay down.
Did I mention you should make sure your fuel system is well constructed?
Hi,
I did a very basic analysis of the NTSB database regarding RV airplanes related to the completed RV's.
Note:
This is only a very basic analysis: completed / total accidents / fatal accidents
...
Couple of things I noticed. The -9 has a low percent fatal when in an accident. (No "acro"?) Difference between -7 & -8, and the -7 & -6, percent accidents fatal.[/QUOTE]
I wonder if it has more to do with the lower stall speed? If you have a problem in the -9, you will be descending much slower rate and your airspeed will also be much slower.
In the event of a loss of control, accident, all bets are off.
Even though these data plots are incomplete, I would like to see them compared to a 172, PA28, and SR20/22.
As a small step towards normalizing the data to include flight hours, perhaps an estimate would be to normalize it based on years since model was introduced?
Of course everyone flies their airplanes at different rates (hours/year) but on average it would probably skew the data closer to the accidents/flight hour number.
I don't know how to approach this, but I think it's important to separate accidents in Phase I (and maybe even first flight & first ten hours) vs total. From what I understand of the accident stats, the risks in the first few hours probably skew the overall averages.
Dan