This is extremely dubious logic with very bad stats.
Vast majority of accidents happen on regular driven known routes not road trips.
I would expect far better from the FAA.
Vast majority of accidents happen on regular driven known routes not road trips.
I would expect far better from the FAA.
It is possible for this to be true while also simultaneously it being true that road trips are more at risk of accidents than regular routes.
I somehow doubt when correct in absolute numbers lap infants are saving any lives.
Run the model in AI on real cohorts and absolute numbers it’s a wash at best and an urban legend at worse. 5 lives saved over a decade. Toothpicks on a plane likely killed more people than that.
To be clear but the NTSB and the American society of pediatrics have both said the FAAs math here is totally bunk.
I always heard people say most crashes happen close to home and I never thought twice about what they were actually saying.
Then one day it hit me: most people don't regularly drive far from home, so of course of accidents happen close to home.
The data doesn’t support the claim that the vast majority of accidents on a per mile basis occur while driving close to home rather than on road trips. The DOT also appears to have published on the side of “replacing air travel with driving will result in an increase of fatalities,” [1] so you’re not even right about your other claim.
“It is known” is not a good basis of argumentation.
[1] https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2005-08-26/pdf/05-167...