How the fuck are ferry and train so high? Must be including suicides for trains, not really use how the ferry gets so much though. Heart attacks on long distance ferry trips? But then would expect similar from planes.
My guess for ferries would be that most ferry trips are very short. That means less total travel per trip, so for the same risk per trip it gets much higher risk per distance.
As someone who lives on an island, and regularly takes a sea ferry though unprotected waters, (ie not through a bay or harbor, waves have 100s of miles to build) that stat makes sense to me.
Id guess a lot of that could be attributed to people falling and injuring themselves.
As my dad would have said, “Landlubbers don’t respect the Sea.”
That floor may be shifting 6+’ in one direction or another, and people without their sea legs will be getting up for the head, snack bar, or just to walk off the seasickness, then falling as the boat shifts.
And theres a lot of metal, and protruding metal (bulkheads, cleats, even just the metal floors and walls, etc). Even when the sea is calm as glass, the boat can still shudder or bounce randomly as it hits a random bit of turbulence. And its common for small kids to be running around or, say, an elderly person walking with a cane, not holding onto a railing to take a spill.
Finally, theres generally going to be a wait for advanced medical treatment, until you make it to port. Ive seen one person med evac-ed out, by helicopter, so its possible, but that was a crewman who’s arm was amputed by machinery. For the average concussion/ broken bone, theres only so much the ships medic can do, and you’re waiting til the ferry is docked for an ambulance.
The other risk is lost at sea incidents. Ferries tend to have pretty good fencing/ railings to prevent people falling overboard, but people do dumb shit. Like climbing or straddling those railings. And if its even 15 minutes before someone reports you, at 12mph, thats already 3 miles the boat’s traveled, making a large (and constantly growing) search area to find you in, and you’re a tiny speck spot in a vast sea. I know our ferries have only had one in my lifetime (and it was deemed a potential suicide- solo traveler who turned out to have no arrival plans like lodging arranged, went missing off anight ferry)
I think with a train is if it happens… thats a lot of death you know?
Motorcycle accidents have become very frequent in some twenty years in my region, with Thailand being on top.
Where I live, people are buying up motorcycles because they’re cheap and gives them more mobility than a car and most forms of public transportation they deem as frustratingly slow. But with them having little or no formal driving education, coupled with DUI, do have a lot of accidents happening.
what’s going on with ferries…
also how much does it change if you take out the Staten Island Ferry?
Quite a few crappy ferries sink weekly in South East Asia, usually overloaded way beyond safety margins.
Probably same with busses. Half a century old going down a mountain with no barriers.
You’d figure the extra passengers would make the ratio go down you know?
The extra passengers make the ferries go down in the first place, so there’s that…
On the other hand, most ferry trips aren’t that long, distance-wise.
I guess it depends how many billion people were on the ferry when someone died
Unexpected - I thought flying would be by magnitudes safer than anything, but it’s in the same magnitude as bus, and not even train is x10. I always thought that all those safety regulations were unnecessary, just compensating for some psychological factor of how it FEELS dangerous due to overreporting, history and other factors. But apparently, they are needed so it just remains barely safer than other forms of public transportation.
Pretty sure trains are much safer for passengers. But they get more suicides on the rails.
The stat is for passenger deaths. People jumping in front of the train are not passengers, so don’t count for that.
I think what’s likely to be a big cause of train passenger deaths is the derailments they sometimes have in India. Those trains tend to be extremely overcrowded so one derailment can cause a lot of deaths.
Worth noting that this data shows flying to be two orders of magnitude safer than travel by car. I think what this showed me is that train, subway, and bus are all somewhat safer than I expected, rather than that air travel is less safe than I expected.
so you’re saying i should buy a motorbike? nice. On my way!
Well, nice knowing you all 😂
But how do they die? How many are killed by other drivers?
I’ve wanted a motorcycle for decades. NHTSA’s stats on motorcycle accidents send very mixed signals:
- Thirty-four percent of motorcycle riders in fatal crashes in 2023 had no valid motorcycle licenses. -In 2023 motorcycle riders in fatal crashes had higher percentages of alcohol impairment than drivers of any other motor vehicle type (26% for motorcycles, 24% for passenger cars, 20% for light trucks, and 4% for large trucks).
- Forty-one percent of motorcycle riders who died in single-vehicle crashes in 2023 were alcohol-impaired
- Motorcycle riders killed in traffic crashes at night were two and a half times more frequently alcohol-impaired than those killed during the day (38% and 15%) in 2023.
- In States without universal helmet laws, based on known helmet use, 51 percent of motorcyclists killed in 2023 were not wearing helmets, as compared to 10 percent in States with universal helmet law
So basically, have a license and training and don’t drink. Helmets are good for your health.
…
Twenty-four percent of motorcycles in fatal traffic crashes in 2023 collided with fixed objects, compared to 16 percent for passenger cars, 12 percent for light trucks, and 4 percent for large trucks.
Don’t ride with a loonitick.
In 2023 there were 3,419 fatal two-vehicle crashes each involving a motorcycle and another type of vehicle. In 46 percent (1,588) of these crashes, the other vehicles were turning left while the motorcycles were going straight, passing, or overtaking other vehicles.
Well, that sucks :(
Yeah, speaking as a rider from the USA it’s a mixed bag. If you ride safe (licensed and know what you are doing, not drunk, wear a helmet, and assume you are invisible) it’s orders of magnitude more safe than the statistics say. Sadly, there are a lot of reckless riders dying on bikes.
Still, a ton of drivers will absolutely drive like you are invisible and just plow into you. You also have to ride carefully and be constantly aware of your bike and your surroundings. Plan for bad situations as you see them forming even though most of the time nothing happens. Small mistakes can be negated by four wheels but won’t be forgiven on two.
I didn’t start until the pandemic, which gave me an opportunity to work remotely for a time and save money. I have enjoyed riding. The motivation to be present in the moment for the sake of safety is a bit zen for me. In a car I feel like I can arrive at work deep in thought about the horrors of the world and not even remember how I got there. Admittedly, as I got more comfortable on the bike, my mind can still wander but it’s easier to snap back and focus on not dying on the bike.
Still, a ton of drivers will absolutely drive like you are invisible and just plow into you.
I’ve had this experience in a miata and Fiero. Low roofline + small car = invisibility cloke :(
Yeah that’s always key to these stats and it’s never reported. If you’re not drunk when you get behind the wheel of a vehicle the safety by a lot.
This is especially true of motorcycles, where in Western countries they often go hand in hand with the time honored pastime of, “Let’s all ride our Harleys to the bar and get absolutely sideways, and then ride our Harleys to another bar.” I do know for sure that a large portion of motorcycle wrecks in general are single vehicle incidents, i.e. the rider ran out of skill and simply ate shit into a ditch, tree, guardrail, or the nearest Jersey wall.
I’d also be interested to see the source to determine what the geographical range of this is, i.e. whether or not it includes Southeast Asia where basically the entire population conducts all of its affairs from the back of a small motorbike.
At the end of the day, if you slam into something on your bike you’re pretty much guaranteed to be worse off than slamming into the same thing in a car or a bus. But you’re still not getting me off of mine.
It doesn’t change the stats in the slightest, you’re more likely to die on a bike, it doesn’t really make any difference who’s at fault if you’re dead. 90% of the accidents being caused by unobservant car drivers won’t save you.
You are more likely to die riding a bike than other forms of transportation but riding responsibly and defensively will absolutely change the severity of the stats.
A driver could still plow through you and you are still more likely to die - I’ll absolutely concede that. You are just way, way more likely to die if you don’t know how to ride (unlicensed), are impaired by alcohol or something, wear no helmet or other gear, and/or ride recklessly or carelessly.
It does because if you know you aren’t going to drive your bike when drunk (and other reckless driving factors) you will be safer than the numbers indicate.
90% of the accidents being caused by unobservant car drivers won’t save you.
You have a source for this or did you make up this 90% number on the spot? Would be nice to have actual numbers on this since elsewhere in the thread someone else is saying over half of motorcycle fatalities are single vehicle accidents, which means it’s biker could potentially have done something to avoid it.
and they refuse to wear helmets.
In what backward country are you not obligated to wear a helmet?
I’ll be honest, this will be skewed heavily by most motorcycles are not designed for two or more people
And most motorcyclists know that, and NEVER have any passengers, which self-selects for the risk takers heavily.
Also heavily skewed by the fact that most motorcycle deaths are not caused by the driver, but by other road users not looking, and doing stupid shit like taking a turn blind at 50mph then running the motorcyclist over.
I’ve been riding motorcycles Since I was 12. I’m in my 50’s. I’ve never had a road accident, despite having ridden crotch rockets for a few years. I’ve had a few dirt ones, but without major breakage.
I have very rarely carried someone, especially because many passengers will intuitively counteract your leanings.
I’m now considering quitting, because I’m aware that I don’t have the reflexes or 360° degree awareness I used to have.
A lot of people shouldn’t be riding, they have a car mentality.
So according to this chart, any time I get in a car, I have a 1 in 137,362,637.36264 chance of dying?
That’s a lot better than than I thought. I’ll take those odds.
Every mile you drive you have a 1 in 137,362,637.36264 chance of dying. So if you drive to the sun and .474 of the way back you are guaranteed ti die (if you are bad at probability)
I guarantee you will die if you get in whatever car you have and make it even 1% of the way to the sun, regardless of how good you are at probability.
You don’t know what mods I have made to my car
Get in, loser, we’re going to the sun.
in the style of Fast and the Furious 9
Fairies are 3rd on the list.
Shhh! They prefer Fey-Folk.
I wonder how these stats would change if there weren’t cars on the road. I mean its pretty obvious if a car and a motorcycle crash the motorcycle’s gonna have it worst.
The numbers would go down by half, which is meaningful, but also way less than you’d want it to. I can’t be arsed to pull up the NHTSA data url right now, but I use the factoid all the time when I talk to people about my riding: give or take 54% of motorcycle deaths are single vehicle accidents. Of those, the vast majority involve alcohol or speeding. So if I avoid alcohol I cut my chances by a large factor.
Speeding is slightly fuzzier, because the statistics are built from crash reports by police, and you can never know if they take the word of a witness that a motorcycle passed at a 4mph difference in speed, which, c’mon, is not the same as someone whizzing down a canyon road at 20mph or more over the limit.
but I use the factoid all the time
My favorite “factoid” is that the -oid part originally means “resembling,” like a humanoid is something that only looks human, so technically a factoid would be something that only resembles fact. However, I’m not a dirty prescriptivist and I understood perfectly what you meant, so please carry on.
Presciptivism is where it’s at, broseidon! I use factoid for when something seems like a fact, but you can’t verify it right then. I know the internet often uses it for something quoted so much that people take it as fact even though it’s false.
Wikipedia just hates us all. I don’t want it to be a brief truth, waaah!
I hate the concept of “brief truth”. The Germans probably have a word for it. things can stop being true. Everything is a brief truth on a long enough timeline. By this definition “the moon exists” is a factoid because very briefly from now (on a cosmological timeline) that’s practically already false. Bah!
motorcycle vs. motorcycle is gonna be like medieval jousting
Didn’t you know? This is what me and my buddies get up to on Saturday nights.
Motorcycle cops think they’re hot shit because they can weave between a bunch of cones. Amateurs. Lets see you try to work the throttle, brake, and clutch on a dirtbike while also wielding a 10’ long piece of PVC pipe with a boxing glove on the end of it.
Or an average day in south east asia
I’d consider those driving motorcycles to be more prone to take risky maneuvers.
Wonder how the graph would change if they drove like regular commuters to the destinations (e.g. not weaving at traffic lights, not speeding for the thrill, no wheelies and other stunts).Weaving in at traffic ligths, aka lane splitting is significantly safer for the motorcyclist, since at a red traffic light the most probable accident is getting rear-ended, which is way deadlier for a motorcyclist.
I’d be interested to know if motor scooters/Vespas were lumped in with motorcycles. I’d wager a 99cc scooter has a lower mortality rate than a crotch rocket or a Harley.
What country? Why is bicycle missing?
America, because nobody else has nearly the fatality rate per mile. SEA has more fatalities per capita, but that’s because they have 100x more bikes per capita.
The average american motorcyclist only rides as a hobby, they drive a car the rest of the time, and they’re either driving a racing bike or a 900 lb Harley. This isn’t a recipe for competent riding.
I guess because it’s insignificant or the graph only includes motored vehicles.
This chart sucks because you typically put way less miles on a bike, so a single death in 10000 miles, balloons when you try to make it per billion.
I’d like to see total deaths by vehicle type, to contrast the skew
You say it’s bad because it normalizes by distance traveled, but you don’t say why normalizing by distance is bad. It makes perfect sense to me as it treats all modes of transportation equally. It allows you to approximate the answer to, “if I have to travel a set distance to my destination then which mode of transportation is safest?”
Because people don’t take an airplane when traveling 3 miles. It’s really not fair to compare a device designed to haul hundreds of people thousands of miles across oceans with something designed to carry a single person a few blocks. Airplanes and bikes aren’t substitutes for each other.
It’s like comparing my garden trowel with a commercial excavator. Yeah, thr excavator moves more dirt more quickly, but you don’t use one to weed a garden or use a trowel to grade a building site.
They literally are substitutes. If planes didn’t exist then more people would ride motorcycles for very long distances. They may even take their motorcycles on ferries to make their trips possible if they have to.
You gonna bike across an ocean? You gonna take an airplane to the grocery store?
Pick your destination, now ignore all forms of transport that are obviously unsuitable. Now off you go.
Should include walking/cycling but health benefits are harder to factor in as I am pretty sure the risk of death is lower than the health benefits.
None of the other listed modes of transportation would be used to cross the ocean (depending on how generous you want to be with “ferry”).
But for domestic travel, no planes would mean more trips by automobile. And inevitably, some of this would translate to more motorcycles.
No, clearly not. But I’ve already explained how they are substitutes and you just ignored my point.
Not that they need to be substitutes in the first place. Any mode of transportation is going to be more or less dangerous than any other mode of transportation, and that alone is enough to compare them. You don’t need to be able to literally substitute a plane for a motorcycle in every situation to analyze the differences in the danger between them.
I’d still measure both by ability to move dirt if my objective is to move dirt. This chart compares modes of transport; if your purpose for riding a bicycle is pleasure or cost or whatever then you can make your own personal adjustments, but if you want to decide what’s the safest way to do a daily 10 mile commute then this chart will give you that.
You gonna do a 10-mile commute on an airplane?
You use the lines of the chart that are relevant to the kind of journey you want to make. This should not need explaining.
You’re just being argumentative for its own sake.
plenty of people use planes to travel to nearby destinations that just don’t have road or waterway access
It projects that motorcycles are dangerous by distance driven, however you drive a moyoorycle way less than a car, so I would like to compare to actually death numbers. Because I might do 1000 miles in my car in a week, but only 20 on my motorcycle. So am I more at risk? Or no, because I’m traveling 100x less miles. That’s what I mean.
But that’s the whole point of normalizing by distance traveled. If you drive your motorcycle 100x less and it still kills you, then that’s evidence that driving motorcycles is more dangerous than cars.
I’d need to correlated with amount of deaths per vehicle and actual stats of real motorcycle distances.
I understand there is no safety cage and inherently less protection. But there is a skew here.
Like if we add deaths by riding a shopping cart and it happens once in one mile, then you have a billion deaths by this charts logic; The stats get skewed in small sample sizes.
There is not an evident skew, and you haven’t been able to articulate the source of one.
The number of miles motorcycles are ridden and the number of motorcycle deaths is unfortunately not a small sample size, so your shopping cart example isn’t really a great analogy.
2022 study, motorcycles accounted for 3.7% of all vehicles sold but only 0.7% of all miles travelled. It is too small a samples size to be a good comparison.
0.7% of all miles travelled is still a pretty fucking large number, infact, according to these numbers 0.7% off all vehicle miles in 2022 was still was 224 Billion miles
I feel the chart is a way of comparing “how safer is it to drive from Houston to Orlando by motorcycle than by flying”. It’s not meant to say “a person is X% likely to die in a motorcycle accident across their lifetime vs. % by airplane”.
Keep in mind these are motorcycles specifically it looks like, not pedal bikes or e-bikes.
