since 47 = events & years, once in 47 years is roughly 2% chance per year - thats pretty unlikely, if not freakish.

like i said David, however you refuse to try to counter this argument, 1 event in F1 is equal to roughly 6 hrs racing including practice and qualifying. 1 season in F1 is between 10-20 events (19 atm but this is at the high end if you look at history)

1 event at Reno = several days (for arguments sake lets say 4?) at least 6 hrs per day qualifying = minumum 24 hrs qualifying, which is what you'd get in a season in F1 if you had 12 races in a particular year

After the days qualifying a working week of races (5 days x 6hrs per day) = minumum 30 hrs racing which is equal to a 15 race season in F1.

However you look at it, you cannot say one event at Reno is equatable to one event in F1, but then I fully expect you to repeat '2 deaths per 5 events' as if every time someone got in a plane to race 2/5 times they would die as that's all you have come up with so far. Why not try to argue my point seeing as you wanted to play statistics? I have shown fairly that actually the racing at Reno to be comparably dangerous to F1 and others have added that some motorsports are certainly more dangerous (Isle of Mann TT)

:grin: yes well sorry David I didn't know they forced you to go and watch at gunpoint you have my sympathies. Read what you just wrote! People put themselves knowingly in danger of their own free will because they have accepted the risks and want to watch the racing, is that clear enough for you?

Here's a quote from one of the families of the victims : 'They would have wanted the races to continue...'

It isn't 2% per year, it's 2% over a span of about 4 days.

Sorry, but that is complete BS. They're not spending 6 hours per day racing at Reno. The crash was in the middle of a 6 lap race. The unlimited course is 8.4 miles. At 400mph the race should last 7.6 minutes. 6 hours of racing per day would be 47 races per day. I'm going to need more than your word that they're running 47 races each day at Reno.

Until then we're going to consider a Reno event to be roughly equivalent to an F1 event.

No one is accusing them of being smart.

The people who put themselves in danger at Reno have no idea what sort of risk they are taking. That has been shown beyond any reasonable doubt on this very thread.

Which happen once a year....so it's 2% a year

Oh the irony...

No, it's not per year. They're not at an air race for the other 361 days of the year, so that time is irrelevant. It's 2% over 4 days.

Bongo, I have a BA in mathematical sciences. What are your qualifications for discussing statistical analysis?

That happens a quite lot. Commercial, private, Military - Planes crash.


It is a freak accident, it's never happened before, 1/47 is misleading, it's too small a number. You could theoretically have 100 more Reno air races and it never happen again.

You really want to know how much of a freak then work it out. Assuming it was caused by the trim tab failing.
You'll need,
the probability of the same failiure happening again.
the probability of it happening at the same point in the race, (so you'll need to know what percentage of the race is run directly in front of the crowd)
the probability of the same result from the failiure (we already know that this happened to P-51 'voodoo chile' and the result was he went up to 9,000 feet, not into the crowd)
Then add all these together. That's the probability of it happening again.
It's an enormous number.
So again, how is it not a freak accident? None of the other deaths were caused by the same set of circumstances. You're assuming all deaths have the same cause, they don't.

The deaths are the result not the cause, you can't measure the result and then use it as an argument for cause.

Boy talk about a huge waste of money. I hope at least you attended a discount school. What did that math degree earn you vs. cost? Whats your degrees analysis say about that?

Sent from my SCH-R910 using Tapatalk

2% over a span of 4 days qualifying + 5 days heat racing per year

We? you mean you I guess? (and only you so far) So because you are unwilling to look at the actual numbers you go with a grotesquely simplified set that supports only your argument, and is no less BS than mine. I freely admit that using numbers in this way is at the least misleading and at the worst just plain false, that's been my point all along. How is looking at it your way more correct than mine?

So to continue to give you examples - lets factor in all the time starting up, time taking off, time landing, and the fact it is heats (many short races) + all the extra aerobatics and displays that go on in between for varying amounts of time, again landing/ taking off I could be wrong but to me it seems plausible that there are planes zipping around above people for at 4-6 hrs per day. We can keep going forever with the imaginary numbers David.

Again with the insults - towards the victims no less.
How do these people harm you in any way, shape or form? what is the cause of your malice about this?

So who has commented in this thread who has been to Reno and how have they shown you beyond reasonable doubt that they don't understand the risks?