No, that is ridiculous. You mess up in a plane, you go doun. You mess up in a car, 7 people go down. You mess up in a plane, you have 3,000 feet to catch yourself You mess up in a car well... Your engine fails in a plane, you glide to earth. Your engine fails on earth you crash. Anybody can get a licence, but a pilot's licence takes hours of flight time. In a car, there is no control tower...
I think that a car is more dangerous, only cause you have so many other cars on the road. In the air you only have maybe 3-5 plains at a time in one place.
I think that a car is more dangerous, only cause you have so many other cars on the road. In the air you only have maybe 3-5 plains at a time in one place.
I really disagree. Planes don't need to collide with other planes to be destroyed. Also from what I have read, slight problem a plane's components can lead into a crash.
If your car breaks down and ceases functioning, there is not much chance of you dieing (unless it explodes). Even if it explodes, you may have a chance of escaping.
If there is something faulty with a plane, it is not easy to stopover and fix it.
Also, airliners are typically filled with a hundred or more people. Your typical passenger car can carry several people around.
Okay you do have a really good point Kinght .... maybe a plain is more dangerous, but in my case I just started driving so cars are more dangerous to me.
It is proven that more people die in a car crash then a plane. That is after 9/11 of course.
Comparing 9/11 to a regular plane crash is like comparing a car crash to a psychopath in a semi truck driving through a school yard at recess at 100mph.
Statisticly speaking, your chances of being in a fatal car accident are far greater than being in a fatal plane accident.
I am aware of that.
Though we compare single incidents, then planes are more dangerous than cars.
Comparing 9/11 to a regular plane crash is like comparing a car crash to a psychopath in a semi truck driving through a school yard at recess at 100mph.
