Archived Stories Ultralight Safety Ultralight Accident Data | Ultralight Accident Data |
|
|
"To satisfy the Government of Canada's regulatory policy for the imposition of additional regulations, a clear problem or risk must exist and the benefits of the regulation must outweigh the costs...:" (from the draft report of the Category IV Medical Standards Working Group, prepared by Larry Cundy, Chief Personnel Licensing)
To my knowledge, there has been no clear definition of a problem or risk associated with ultralight activity. The perception is that ultralight activity is more dangerous than general aviation activity. The press sensationalizes ultralight accidents; provincial coroners recommend rules and regulation to prevent accidents; Transport Canada personnel speak of a comfort level. The purpose of this study is to analyze data that is available for both ultralight and general aviation activity and to document the reality of ultralight activity. The number of ultralight aeroplanes on the register is over 4,000. Of that number, about 400 are classified as Advanced Ultralight Aeroplanes (AULAs). The advertising and publicity given to AULAs gives the impression that most ultralights are now advanced. The data shows otherwise; fully 90% of ultralights registered in Canada are basic ultralights. The performance of ultralights, both basic and advanced, is comparable to the performance of general aviation aircraft available in the 1930's and the 1940's because of the limits of the category. The customary way of presenting accident rates in general aviation is accidents per hours flown. Since Transport Canada does not have a data collection process in place for the collection of this data from ultralight pilots and for ultralight aeroplanes, a comparison of accident rates between ultralight and general aviation activity using this method cannot be made. Ultralight accident rates are customarily reported as accidents per registered ultralight aeroplanes. Transport Canada does have data on the number ultralight aeroplanes registered and the number of ultralight accidents reported. This same data is also collected for general aviation aircraft. Using the accidents per registered aircraft for both ultralight and general aviation activity allows a valid comparison between the two segments of aviation (a comparison of apple to apples.) Also by using this type of data, the criticism that there are ultralights on the registry that are not being flown can be discounted. The same criticism applies to general aviation aircraft that are registered and not being flown for a variety of reasons.
Table 1 - This data shows a comparison of ultralight accident rates compared with the same data for general aviation. In 1987, there was one accident for every 70 ultralights flying, this gives an accident rate of 0.014. In 1996 there was one accident for every 145 ultralights flying, which yields an accident rate of 0.007. Compare that to the figures for general aviation where in 1987 there was one accident per 47 aeroplanes, an accident rate of 0.021, and in 1996 there was one accident for every 63 aeroplanes flying, an accident rate of 0.016. In the ten years covered by this data, the accident rate for ultralight aeroplanes is lower than for general aviation, in many years by half. Accident Rate - Accidents per Aircraft Registered, Ultralight and General Aviation
Accident data from the Transportation Safety Board of Canada; Registration data from Transport Canada Safety and Security Table 2 - To eliminate the variable of unreported accidents for both ultralight and general aviation activity, a comparison was made using fatal accidents (all of which are reported). Table 2 shows the results of that comparison. The accidents rates for ultraights varied from a high of 0.0020 to a low of 0.0005. The rates for general aviation varied from a high of 0.0029 to a low of 0.0016. Again, ultralight activity shows a lower rate of fatal accidents than general aviation. Accident Rate - Fatal Accidents per Aircraft Registered, Ultralight and General Aviation
Accident data from the Transportation Safety Board; Registration data from Transport Canada Safety and Security See part 2 continued.... |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
Main Menu
