Garuda to USA!

[Limewood]

Garuda who have lifted their game in recent years will be flying to USA in 2017

 

[Buzzard]

Could be an inexpensive way to get there. We wait and see.

 

[UP4014]

Yeah, no thanks. Think I'll pass.

 

[Dr Ralph]

Garuda who have lifted their game in recent years

Couldn't disagree more.

I have far too much wine stock piled in my cellar to be dying young at the hands of Garuda.

 

[UP4014]

But will be good to keep other airline fares in check.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Couldn't disagree more.

I have far too much wine stock piled in my cellar to be dying young at the hands of Garuda.

evidence?

The last international accident for GA I'm seeing is 20 years ago, 3 killed. The last domestic incident 10 years ago, 21 killed.

Pretty enviable compared to total passenger deaths on some of the majors.

 

[Cruiser Elite]

Save you breath MEL - it's a fruitless cause - FTR - I flew GA J last XMAS and TBH the exp equal to SQ / CX / - people who have never flown GA recently or ever are entitled to their opinions - hopefully many will not want to fly them - depressed demand usually equates to lower prices - if I ever need to buy comm tix tpac I would certainly look at them.

But again my opinion no more meaningful than any others.

 

[UP4014]

evidence?

The last international accident for GA I'm seeing is 20 years ago, 3 killed. The last domestic incident 10 years ago, 21 killed.

Pretty enviable compared to total passenger deaths on some of the majors.

I guess you won't mind flying them then. Each to his or her own. It's not just total passenger deaths, it's total passenger deaths per mile flown or take off.

https://aviation-safety.net/database/operator/airline.php?var=6125

 

[Quickstatus]

Based on the fact that most passengers have no regard for airline track record, I'd expect that they will do well. Maybe snare some business from PER, DRW. Price is king.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Based on the fact that most passengers have no regard for airline track record, I'd expect that they will do well. Maybe snare some business from PER, DRW. Price is king.

Malaysia Airlines being the perfect example. GA at least turned the corner.

 

[dajop]

I guess you won't mind flying them then. Each to his or her own. It's not just total passenger deaths, it's total passenger deaths per mile flown or take off.

https://aviation-safety.net/database/operator/airline.php?var=6125

As a passenger I am not that concerned about the two incidents registered on the database since 2007. Both related to ground incidents in unoccupied aircraft.

Still to fly them long haul, but within Indonesia on safety grounds I would take Garuda any day over the alternatives - including other domestic carriers, road travel and ferry travel.

 

[UP4014]

As a passenger I am not that concerned about the two incidents registered on the database since 2007. Both related to ground incidents in unoccupied aircraft.

Still to fly them long haul, but within Indonesia on safety grounds I would take Garuda any day over the alternatives - including other domestic carriers, road travel and ferry travel.

Agree, Garuda is the safest domestic carrier.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

I guess you won't mind flying them then. Each to his or her own. It's not just total passenger deaths, it's total passenger deaths per mile flown or take off.

https://aviation-safety.net/database/operator/airline.php?var=6125

no matter how various bodies/media try to put a figure on safety the fact is that accidents are so statistically small that any ranking is virtually meaningless... there simply aren't (thankfully!!) enough accidents to base any sort of meaningful statistical figure.

To a large part safety is about the present, what the airline is doing right now.

 

[Quickstatus]

no matter how various bodies/media try to put a figure on safety the fact is that accidents are so statistically small that any ranking is virtually meaningless... there simply aren't (thankfully!!) enough accidents to base any sort of meaningful statistical figure.

To a large part safety is about the present, what the airline is doing right now.

Statistics don't mean anything anyway. What's 1:10000 vs 1:1000 vs 1:100 from a meaningful point of view. As someone said to me once everything is 50:50. Either It's going t happen or its not. And it's never "not going to happen to me". So the risk is therefore zero.

Its the "won't happen to me" mentality. It permeates the travel insurance sector. No insurance, Gets injured then sets up gofundme and then pleads for people to get travel insurance.

Hw do we know if an airline is safe?. What metric do we use?. What does "safe" mean?. There is really no way of knowing whether a particular system/function/procedure is safe. Nothing specific is published. All we hear are the anecdotal stories peddled by usually uninformed journalists.

There are ways of quantifying rates of error. Critical Airline systems are supposedly rated for an error rate of 1x10^8 according to conference I went to. We can look back and do an audit

The FAA says GA is now ok. How would I know. Gut feeling?.

We we don't choose an airline based on some published safety metric because there are no contemporaneous data and if there were we would not look at it anyway. Picking an airline based on historical safety is not necessarily accurate either.

 

[trooper]

Well said. We could all refuse to fly ANY airline that had ever had a crash.... wouldn't get far.

QANTAS? yeah.. its been a while... but if they are going to claim to have been operating since the 1920's, they have to own up to the fatal crashes for their WHOLE history... can't have it both ways....

"Safe" means... perfectly safe. Therefore nothing in human history has been "safe"...:mrgreen:

P.S. Total passenger deaths per mile flown? Isn't that the metric that makes the Apollo program look quite safe?

 

[Quickstatus]

Crossing the road is carries a certain risk or getting run over by a maniac or by a bus.