Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Airplanes Without Crashes  
User currently offlineC5LOAD From United States of America, joined Sep 2008, 917 posts, RR: 0
Posted (5 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 15038 times:

If this is double posted i'm sure I will be removed promptly, but I was wondering now with AF 447, is there an aircraft (civilian) that doesn't have a crash record at all?


"But this airplane has 4 engines, it's an entirely different kind of flying! Altogether"
85 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineUnited1 From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 6081 posts, RR: 9
Reply 1, posted (5 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 15031 times:



Quoting C5LOAD (Thread starter):
is there an aircraft (civilian) that doesn't have a crash record at all?

I'm almost positive that the A318/A321 have never had a crash and pretty sure that the A319 has never crashed either. I suppose it also depends on how you define crash, if you define it as no fatalities caused by impact you can count the 777 if not I suppose the BA incident at LHR rules the triple out.

Great question....



Semper Fi - PowerPoint makes us stupid.
User currently offlineAndz From South Africa, joined Feb 2004, 8458 posts, RR: 10
Reply 2, posted (5 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 14914 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Of course there is the 380.


After Monday and Tuesday even the calendar says WTF...
User currently offlineTharanga From United States of America, joined Apr 2009, 1865 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (5 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 14926 times:

Maybe this is a good source?

http://www.jacdec.de/statistics/types/Types.htm

It takes some time to interpret. What is a "crash"? You can have fatalities without a crash (from turbulence, it can happen); you can have a hull loss without a crash (something happening on the ground). And of course, you can have a hull loss without fatalities (the A340 has no fatalities, but the AF incident at YYZ was certainly a crash, I'd say)

Looks like the RJs have some nice stats.

For zero hull loss, I see Fairchild Dornier Do 328 and Tu-204, though relatively few were built.

[Edited 2009-07-07 12:52:54]

User currently offlineC5LOAD From United States of America, joined Sep 2008, 917 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (5 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 14891 times:



Quoting United1 (Reply 1):
I'm almost positive that the A318/A321 have never had a crash and pretty sure that the A319 has never crashed either

Are you including the whole A320 family? Didn't a 320 from TAM crash a few yrs back?



"But this airplane has 4 engines, it's an entirely different kind of flying! Altogether"
User currently offlineOzGlobal From France, joined Nov 2004, 2728 posts, RR: 4
Reply 5, posted (5 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 14868 times:



Quoting Tharanga (Reply 3):
Maybe this is a good source?

http://www.jacdec.de/statistics/types/Types.htm

It takes some time to interpret. What is a "crash"? You can have fatalities without a crash (from turbulence, it can happen); you can have a hull loss without a crash (something happening on the ground).

Wow! On this basis, averge fatalities per aircraft built, (after the Concorde with its single crash) the 747 is close to the world's most deadly aircraft.



When all's said and done, there'll be more said than done.
User currently offlineColumba From Germany, joined Dec 2004, 7087 posts, RR: 4
Reply 6, posted (5 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 14859 times:

Dassault Mercure never had a crash in its entire career.

The 777 has a very good record with 1 incident, I don´t recall any incident with the 717/MD 90 as well.
The A318, A319, A321 never had a crash as well same goes for the A330-300 still their "siblings" A320, A330-200, A340 have had some incidents.



It will forever be a McDonnell Douglas MD 80 , Boeing MD 80 sounds so wrong
User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 25838 posts, RR: 22
Reply 7, posted (5 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 14825 times:



Quoting United1 (Reply 1):
pretty sure that the A319 has never crashed either.

Only one A319 has been written off, the NW A319 that was taxied into the jetway (and a NW 757 parked at the next gate) by maintenance staff at LGA in 2003.
http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=20030119-0

A few types with no hull losses (for any reason) to date:

Boeing 717
Boeing 737-600/700/900
Bombardier CRJ-700/900
Embraer ERJ-135/140
Embraer 170/175/190/195
Fokker 70
Ilyushin 96
Tupolev 204

One type long retired but which had no accidents during it's entire career was the Dassault Mercure,although only 12 were built.


User currently offlineNA From Germany, joined Dec 1999, 10804 posts, RR: 9
Reply 8, posted (5 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 14821 times:

My definition of a crash: Aircraft destroyed in a accident while in active service, and on "the move" (in flight, during takeoff or landing).
No Boeing 747SP ever crashed. One was written off due to age after an engine on the ground. All other SP are either dismantled, stored, or are active.
Also no B744F and no A340-200 ever crashed.

Others, but with a lot less than 10 years service imho too young to really count: A318, B773W, A380.


User currently offlineTharanga From United States of America, joined Apr 2009, 1865 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (5 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 14797 times:



Quoting OzGlobal (Reply 5):
Wow! On this basis, averge fatalities per aircraft built, (after the Concorde with its single crash) the 747 is close to the world's most deadly aircraft.

Only because it carries so many people. It's not a great way to normalise the data.

Quoting C5LOAD (Reply 4):
Are you including the whole A320 family? Didn't a 320 from TAM crash a few yrs back?

several incidents on A320.


The site I link claims 1 hull loss for the Embraer E-jets (0 fatalities), but I can't think of when it was. Anybody know? Maybe it was a war-zone loss, like those in Sri Lanka?


User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 25838 posts, RR: 22
Reply 10, posted (5 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 14774 times:



Quoting Columba (Reply 6):
The A318, A319, A321 never had a crash

For the A321 that depends how you categorize the following accident. Many would call it a "crash". It landed on top of a vehicle in Taiwan in 2003 and was heavily damaged and written off, although there were no fatalities.
http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=20030321-0


User currently offlineEMBQA From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 9364 posts, RR: 11
Reply 11, posted (5 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 14758 times:

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 7):
Embraer ERJ-135/140

American Eagle put a E135 through a closed hangar door several years back and Continental Express destroyed a new E145 on a crew training flight.

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 7):
Embraer 170/175/190/195

AeroRepublica put a brand new E190 into the ocean after landing long in heavy rain

[Edited 2009-07-07 13:09:01]


"It's not the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the dog"
User currently offlineLY777 From France, joined Nov 2005, 2720 posts, RR: 2
Reply 12, posted (5 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 14734 times:



Quoting Andz (Reply 2):
Of course there is the 380.

Fortunately, with the number of a/c built...



אמא, אני מתגעגע לך
User currently offlineC5LOAD From United States of America, joined Sep 2008, 917 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (5 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 14708 times:

I see that the MD-90 has had two losses according to the link, but what were they because it shows no fatalities?


"But this airplane has 4 engines, it's an entirely different kind of flying! Altogether"
User currently offlineCodyKDiamond From Canada, joined Nov 2006, 537 posts, RR: 1
Reply 14, posted (5 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 14708 times:

Great topic everyone.

Unfortunately, an MD-90 in China a few years back and one passenger died shortly after.

Off the top of my head (no fatalities):

707-138B
737-100
737-600
737-700 / 700ER
737-900 / 900ER
747-400D (1 attempted hijacking in which unfortunately Captain was killed, acft returned to svc.)
747SP
757-300
767-400
777-200 / 200ER / 200LR
777-300 / 300ER
787

A318/A319/A321
A340-200 / 300 (AF358, no fatalities though) / 500 / 600 / -8000 (-200X)
A380

DC-4E
DC-9-21
DC-10-40 (20)
MD-11/ER


User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 25838 posts, RR: 22
Reply 15, posted (5 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 14688 times:



Quoting EMBQA (Reply 11):
Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 7):
Embraer 170/175/190/195

AeroRepublica put a brand new E190 into the ocean

Has that aircraft been officially declared a hull loss? The Aviation-Safety.Net site shows the status as "unknown".

Quoting EMBQA (Reply 11):
Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 7):
Embraer ERJ-135/140

American Eagle put a E135 through a closed hangar door several years back

Was it a hull loss? That accident isn't listed in the Aviation-Safety.Net site.


User currently offlineCodyKDiamond From Canada, joined Nov 2006, 537 posts, RR: 1
Reply 16, posted (5 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 14670 times:

Was the AeroRepublica E90 repaired?

User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 25838 posts, RR: 22
Reply 17, posted (5 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 14628 times:



Quoting CodyKDiamond (Reply 15):
Off the top of my head (no fatalities):

DC-9-21

Serious accidents can occur without fatalities. I believe it is more logical to look at types without any hull losses, although you can also have such an accident that involve fatalities, such as the Southwest 737-700 that overran at MDW a few years ago and killed a passenger in a car. That counts as a 737-700 fatal accident but since the aircraft was repaired it still has no hull losses.

There was one DC-9-21 hull loss in the following incident:
http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=19730130-1


User currently offlineEMBQA From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 9364 posts, RR: 11
Reply 18, posted (5 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 14598 times:



Quoting CodyKDiamond (Reply 17):
Was the AeroRepublica E90 repaired?

Nope...

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 16):
Was it a hull loss?

OOh yea... it was trashed. I've seen the pictures of it being cut up.

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 7):
Fokker 70

Austrian Airlines OE-LFO has photos in the data base of it being cut up.... plus the most recent pictures are of it sitting in the field. Nothing after that



"It's not the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the dog"
User currently offlineIAD51FL From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 354 posts, RR: 3
Reply 19, posted (5 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 14596 times:



Quoting EMBQA (Reply 11):
Continental Express destroyed a new E145 on a crew training flight.

And now is a cabin trainer at the training center.... so part of it is still around  Smile

Chris



Enjoying the view of KIAH approach end of 27. 29.9758015, -95.2695694
User currently offlineUnited1 From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 6081 posts, RR: 9
Reply 20, posted (5 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 14598 times:



Quoting C5LOAD (Reply 4):
re you including the whole A320 family? Didn't a 320 from TAM crash a few yrs back?

Nope just the 18/19/21....There have been several A320 crashes.



Semper Fi - PowerPoint makes us stupid.
User currently offlineEMBQA From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 9364 posts, RR: 11
Reply 21, posted (5 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 14558 times:



Quoting IAD51FL (Reply 20):
And now is a cabin trainer at the training center

I was amazed when I heard the did that with it. I saw what was left in Hondo, TX back in 1998 or so and it was pretty much cut up. When the wing broke off it also put a big hole in the aft fuselage.



"It's not the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the dog"
User currently offlineXXXX10 From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2000, 777 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (5 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 14392 times:

The TU 144 never had a hull loss in passenger service (two were lost on test flights).

Not that much of an achievement as it only made about 50 passenger flights.


User currently offlineSXI899 From Netherlands, joined Jan 2008, 272 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (5 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 14288 times:



Quoting EMBQA (Reply 19):
Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 7):
Fokker 70

Austrian Airlines OE-LFO has photos in the data base of it being cut up.... plus the most recent pictures are of it sitting in the field. Nothing after that

The aircraft was dismantled and shipped to Fokker Services in Woensdrecht, The Netherlands. There it was repaired, and currently up for sale (MSN 11559): http://www.speednews.com/EquipmentRe...Fokker+Aircraft&Aircraft=Fokker+70

Yorden



Any Type, Any Time, Anywhere
User currently offlineBrilondon From Canada, joined Aug 2005, 4370 posts, RR: 2
Reply 24, posted (5 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 14255 times:

Quoting OzGlobal (Reply 5):
Wow! On this basis, averge fatalities per aircraft built, (after the Concorde with its single crash) the 747 is close to the world's most deadly aircraft.


That is a bit misleadomg when you consider the number of passengers that the aircraft has carried. The 747 stats included the Teneriffe disaster in 1977 which was the worst air disaster in aviation history, yet had nothing to do with the plane.

[Edited 2009-07-07 14:59:41]


Rush for ever; Yankees all the way!!
25 AirframeAS : I believe that there were a couple 737-700 losses either this year or last year.....IIRC.....
26 Nomadd22 : Was 1549 a crash or just a really wet runway?
27 Viscount724 : If you're referring to the Kenya Airways crash after takeoff from Douala, Cameroon a couple of years ago, or the Turkisn Airlines crash approaching A
28 NA : A crash is a crash, no matter if there were human victims or not. Your list includes some mistakes. You forgot the 744F which record is without any s
29 EcuadorianMD11 : You must have read my mind............ Can I put this (highly interesting) discussion into a slightly different light please: How many crashes turned
30 CodyKDiamond : Thank you for your corrections sir, however, I must correct you. The DC-10-40 is a separate airplane that had to obtain separate certifications. Yes,
31 AirframeAS : But it has not seen revenue service nor has it flown yet. So that should be omitted from the list nontheless. The A380 is also a joke as well.....it
32 CodyKDiamond : AirframeAS, I agree the 787 has not flown and maybe should not be truely considered at this point, however, since it is an airplane I included it. How
33 Tharanga : That's pretty rare, but we could make a list (I bet there's an old thread about this topic, though). 737: the rudder issues: US, Pittsburgh; UA, Colo
34 Jbernie : Once the first revenue flight occurs, and revenue flights continue to occur, it counts. The probability of it getting on the list of aircraft type th
35 AirframeAS : The fact remains....it may be an airplane now but it has not flown nor has it seen revenue service. It still needs to be omitted regardless. I'll buy
36 Tharanga : A few more crashes where you could blame the aircraft design itself: Lockheed electra: BN 542, NW 710
37 MEA-707 : " target=_blank>http://www.jacdec.de/statistics/type...s.htm Interesting list, but I think it doesn't show a good way to see how likely an aircraft i
38 Viscount724 : I see no reason not to include the A380. It will soon (in 3 months) have been in service for 2 years. Many other aircraft types in the past have had
39 EDICHC : No airframe crash....just it's sales! Seems to be some ambiguity here regarding the definition of 'crash' here. Some are quoting fatal accidents some
40 Tharanga : Absolutely, the way they normalised it is silly. Penalises a 747 for being large. Agreed. This gets tricky. For comparing aircraft against other airc
41 Ikramerica : Well, actually, 747 pilots are among the world's most deadly since many accidents were due to pilot error, and the 747 has been the target of many te
42 Post contains links Prebennorholm : http://www.jacdec.de/statistics/types/Types.htm tells about six 737NG hull losses to date, so there must have been some "hangar fires" or something si
43 Tharanga : Even in cases of human error, you can learn about aircraft safety. Everybody survived AF358 in YYZ. You can't really blame the crash on the aircraft i
44 Racko : Now that you mention it: Any aircraft that has been more often hit by missiles than the A300? The one that the US Navy mistook for a F-14 and the DHL
45 Alphaomega : The 747 was also a rather large target for terrorists because of its size and passenger load, so just because it was blown up quite a few times, does
46 Tharanga : As statistically idiotic as it is, I have actually wondered on some routes if one airline might be more of a terrorism target than another. I've not
47 PIA777 : WHat about the SWA 737-700 that went off the runway and killed a kid in a car? PIA777
48 Jbernie : That might depend on the route, almost all flights between SYD/MEL/BNE - LAX/SFO/HNL would have been some 747 variant for a while there, it has chang
49 NASBWI : Three accidents, actually. As of right now, the recent crash of KQ's 738 is still unsolved. It crashed soon after takeoff in bad weather.
50 NASBWI : The A380 has been in revenue service longer than the ill-fated GOL 737-800 at the time of its demise (I believe it had only been flying for 2 months
51 Odafz : We can include the following airplanes that did not witness a crash : TUPOLEV TU334 VFW 614 ( 1 loss during test, nut none during regular services) If
52 CPHGuard : It may be penalised for being large, but on the other hand it makes far less take-off's and landings which is the most dangerous part of any flight,
53 Burkhard : How to count the A340-600 that was destroyed in Toulouse when testing the engines? What is its faith by the way?
54 NA : I have added/rectified your list of active 747 accidents, excluding terrorism and war:
55 Post contains links and images Eisenbach : Based on http://www.jacdec.de/statistics/types/Types.htm I compared the number of built airliners with the number of hull losses. I dont't know how ac
56 Emaman : Interesting statistics, you can see a definate trend of improvement towards more modern models. The 747 has faired very well really - when you conside
57 NA : QFs VH-OJK (the one with the oxygen bottle explosion) is in service again. 744s written off (none is attributable to the aircraft type): China Airlin
58 Aero145 : Surprised that no one has mentioned the An-225. IMO belongs on the list when the 787 (which hasn’t ever flown, hello?!) is! The An-225 has also flow
59 Tharanga : That's a helpful way to do it. It shows how all aspects of aviation have become more safe over the years. Because of the original question of the thr
60 DIJKKIJK : How about the 747-300s ? did any of them crash?
61 Tharanga : KE 801 was a -300.
62 KC135TopBoom : Only about 20 airplanes in service. There have been several A-320 accidents, with fatalities, unfortunately. Let me see? Almost 40 years of service,
63 Falstaff : But wait until those planes get older. One of these days the A320 and 737 families will have very high numbers of hull losses because there are so ma
64 Tharanga : I would bet that the A320 family and the B737 NGs have already logged far more hours, miles or segments than the vintage aircraft with high rates of
65 Atomsareenough : Yeah, but that's an incredibly poor metric, because it penalizes large aircraft with a long service history. If you did average fatalities per passen
66 Post contains links Tharanga : These numbers are a bit old and maybe unreliable, but here is "fatal event" per flight segment for different types. http://www.airsafe.com/events/mod
67 AirbusA370 : What about the Sproose Goose?
68 EcuadorianMD11 : Yep, Iberia...........in Quito. Hull loss as in "not economical to patch up anymore". It just overran the runway.........sure, most inconvenient, but
69 Falstaff : yes there is. Just like today's cars, airplanes are safer today than they were years ago. I still say the numbers of crashes will increase as those p
70 Post contains links and images Atomsareenough : That was EY: View Large View MediumPhoto © Zubova Marina That's an interesting data set, but if you do it by flight segment it makes smaller, sh
71 Tharanga : There is no perfect metric. If crashes only happen at take-off and landing, then you should do it by flight segment. If crashes only happen in cruise
72 IgneousRocks : Not doubting the second part of your comment. However, the 772 did 'crash'. It's not really even debatable.
73 Guitarist : I could be wrong on this so excuse me if I am, but I think the VC10 has a pretty impressive record, the only one I can think of being lost was the BOA
74 YULYMX : A333 and A345 pretty sure no fatalities
75 UltimateDelta : Didn't an East African one crash on takeoff at Addis Ababa? I think there may have been a couple of others, but I'm not sure.
76 Aero145 : Well, true, it didn’t crash.
77 Post contains links Tharanga : Looks like a couple fatal incidents in Africa, in addition to those blown up after hijacking, or the Israelis doing a raid on Beirut http://aviation-
78 Spacecadet : I still think it's pretty crazy that any airliner would have a 20% hull loss rate, over any length of time. Think about that. That means any particula
79 Teva : The stats you are refering to, talk about aircraft loss, not necessarily crash. And for an aircraft such as Caravelle, I do not say it is up to today
80 PPVRA : Rio Sul snapped a -145 tail section on a rough landing. No fatalities afaik. The hull must have been a write-off.[Edited 2009-07-08 13:11:49]
81 Viscount724 : No, there were two fatal VC-10 accidents. A Nigeria Airways VC-10 crashed several miles short of the runway at LOS in 1969 killing all 87 aboard. And
82 Post contains links Max550 : Here are the hull-losses for the 707. Many of the losses have been fairly recent, not surprising with such an old model. http://aviation-safety.net/da
83 Post contains images Viscount724 : Two other 743s were written off in non-fatal accidents on the ground. A UTA 743 caught fire during maintenance at CDG in 1985. And a Saudi Arabian 74
84 Post contains links Tharanga : I'll accept that. Fewer of the type will be in operation, but a higher proportion of those remaining will be in odd places. Except the NW DC9s. http:
85 Ikramerica : To be technical, the metal punctured a tire, and the tire ruptured the fuel tank, and to me, it is NOT okay that a blown tire ruptures a fuel tank an
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Children More Likely To Survive Plane Crashes? posted Wed Jul 1 2009 07:52:19 by Elite
Light Aircraft Crashes After Takeoff posted Tue Jun 30 2009 10:44:06 by Andybancroft
What Will Boeing Call Their Next Airplanes? posted Mon Jun 22 2009 18:44:43 by Osloflyer
Biz/First Class Without The View? posted Fri Jun 5 2009 08:37:26 by Richiemo
Aero Commander Crashes At Daytona Beach Pilot Dies posted Tue May 26 2009 08:54:10 by HaveBlue
Are SAS Getting 19 Boeing Airplanes In 2009? posted Thu May 21 2009 02:30:53 by OyKIE
Another Boeing 737-200 Crashes In Congo? posted Wed May 20 2009 17:55:50 by CodyKDiamond
Boeing Airplanes At The Next Paris Air Show? posted Mon May 18 2009 10:57:32 by Hotelima
Airplane W/o Potty Crashes Into Some posted Fri May 1 2009 18:39:32 by 787seattle
"Service" On Airplanes - What Is Your Definition posted Mon Apr 27 2009 10:26:40 by SlimShady