Pilots are actually way more likely to die then you think. You’re just thinking of commercial airlines. But the smaller planes go down a lot more often.
small planes go down often. that is because these are hobby pilots who don’t have enough training, practice, and oversight. but we are talking about JOBS here and professional pilots are one of the best trained, constantly retrained and scrutinized groups in the world.
yes, ton of jobs involve small plane. but when there is an accident of small plane, it is usually the hobby pilot for the reasons stated.
sure, there are some bush pilots in america, but the data in that usa today article make no sense. they compare some deaths to a sample of 37k pilots. there are about 300k holders of cpl or atpl in usa. i don’t trust that article at all, it is tabloid bullshit.
I have no idea what USA Today article you’re talking about. Or why you continue to just spout nonsense. There’s tons of crashes involving things from tours to surveys to crop dusting to flight instructors, that’s way more common you might think, even small transport. Pilot death is very high compared to other jobs. This is an incontrovertible fact.
I don’t see any article linked by op and I don’t see any article linked by you so I don’t know what the fuck you’re talking about. If you’re having a conversation with a different individual who linked an article then talk about it with them. If you want to talk about with me then you should look at yourself.
The second half your comment is so brain dead I’m not even going to dignify it with a response.
Just because something is outside of your personal knowledge or experience doesn’t mean it’s wrong. You have access to the internet with plenty of information available on these topics. Strange to just assume the information is entirely incorrect without bothering to look into it.
Pilot surprised me as well. Thank you for the link. Here is the pilot section:
2. Commercial pilots
This does not include pilots of passenger planes for major airlines like you might use to travel for work or vacation. These folks navigate planes or helicopters to carry cargo and, in less common and less hazardous roles, lead air tours or navigate air ambulances. Nearly all deaths and injuries were caused by catastrophic crashes, which is why the nonfatal injury rate for the profession ranked low, at 297th.
so, lets have some arbitrarily chosen group and then generalize the findings on some other group to make a headline. that’s how you do the tabloid, kids.
Just because something is outside of your personal knowledge or experience doesn’t mean it’s wrong.
just because you saw cool picture on the internet does not mean you have personal knowledge. i actually do have some knowledge, which is why i reacted.
in 2025, there were 300056 (three hundred thousand) pilots with either cpl or atpl - these are pilots legally allowed to accept reward for piloting a plane.
so it would seem that the tabloid story in usa today drawing some conclusion out of 37k “workers” - roughly 8 times smaller number, has very loose connection to reality.
I openly said you can take issue with the data collection, but the link makes clear they’re talking about specific commercial pilots. My understanding is that the cpl and atpl do not expire. I have no idea how many of those people are in the workforce anymore, or in aviation at all, much less the specific segment in question.
Even if you took that stat and spread it over all of aviation it’d still be more than cops, but just for fun here’s an article using data from the bureau of labor and statistics. They happen to link pilots with flight engineers, but the pattern still holds:
https://usafacts.org/articles/how-many-police-officers-die-in-the-line-of-duty/
You can disagree with whatever data collection or collation you want, but acting like the meme is misleading seems disingenuous, especially when you consider the brevity of the format.
I openly said you can take issue with the data collection
thank you for your permission. my issue is more with studying small subset of the data carefully chosen to support your theory and then presenting it as if it applied to the whole group.
but the link makes clear
the link makes it anything but clear. it ultimately admits that the sample is manipulated, but doesn’t say how and why.
Even if you took that stat and spread it over all of aviation it’d still be more than cops
But Truckers? Come on that’s a pretty easy one to figure out. Traffic deaths are probably the majority (most cop deaths are traffic deaths, not getting shot). Truckers also work around large moving trucks, and forklifts that have a massive solid steel counterweight on the back that will not notice when is grinds your pelvis into hamburger against the nearest warehouse column or concrete loading dock.
Garbage men also spend a lot of time on the road(traffic deaths) and are constantly working around equipment that also won’t notice, even a little bit, when they tear off a limb or crush a whole body.
yeah, it is pretty easy to speculate.
verifying that speculation is another story, and “funny” image comparing manipulated data to non-existent ones is not the best way to do it.
wtf are pilots doing on that list? it has to be one of the safest professions, unless you count military ones and even then i am not sure it applies.
garbage men? are they fighting radioactive mutated rats, or what?
this comics is garbage (i mean this one piece, not talking about the author).
Pilots are actually way more likely to die then you think. You’re just thinking of commercial airlines. But the smaller planes go down a lot more often.
small planes go down often. that is because these are hobby pilots who don’t have enough training, practice, and oversight. but we are talking about JOBS here and professional pilots are one of the best trained, constantly retrained and scrutinized groups in the world.
There are a ton of JOBS involving those little tiny planes.
yes, ton of jobs involve small plane. but when there is an accident of small plane, it is usually the hobby pilot for the reasons stated.
sure, there are some bush pilots in america, but the data in that usa today article make no sense. they compare some deaths to a sample of 37k pilots. there are about 300k holders of cpl or atpl in usa. i don’t trust that article at all, it is tabloid bullshit.
I have no idea what USA Today article you’re talking about. Or why you continue to just spout nonsense. There’s tons of crashes involving things from tours to surveys to crop dusting to flight instructors, that’s way more common you might think, even small transport. Pilot death is very high compared to other jobs. This is an incontrovertible fact.
i am talking about the article that was linked in this thread as the source of the data.
of course it is, darling. hey, there is johny and jimmy, both are pilots and jimmy died last year. the mortality among pilots skyrocketed into 50%!
I don’t see any article linked by op and I don’t see any article linked by you so I don’t know what the fuck you’re talking about. If you’re having a conversation with a different individual who linked an article then talk about it with them. If you want to talk about with me then you should look at yourself.
The second half your comment is so brain dead I’m not even going to dignify it with a response.
this one is easy. i don’t. you started talking to me. and i don’t feel it was very useful.
don’t worry you don’t get it. stay in school and maybe one day…
Just because something is outside of your personal knowledge or experience doesn’t mean it’s wrong. You have access to the internet with plenty of information available on these topics. Strange to just assume the information is entirely incorrect without bothering to look into it.
Here is a random article that comes up and links to a full database on the topic: https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2023/03/02/most-dangerous-jobs-america-database/11264064002/
You can certainly argue with data collection and such, but most related lists are pretty similar.
Pilot surprised me as well. Thank you for the link. Here is the pilot section:
Oh it includes helicopter pilots, suddenly I’m not neatly as surprised
so, lets have some arbitrarily chosen group and then generalize the findings on some other group to make a headline. that’s how you do the tabloid, kids.
just because you saw cool picture on the internet does not mean you have personal knowledge. i actually do have some knowledge, which is why i reacted.
in 2025, there were 300056 (three hundred thousand) pilots with either cpl or atpl - these are pilots legally allowed to accept reward for piloting a plane.
so it would seem that the tabloid story in usa today drawing some conclusion out of 37k “workers” - roughly 8 times smaller number, has very loose connection to reality.
I openly said you can take issue with the data collection, but the link makes clear they’re talking about specific commercial pilots. My understanding is that the cpl and atpl do not expire. I have no idea how many of those people are in the workforce anymore, or in aviation at all, much less the specific segment in question.
Even if you took that stat and spread it over all of aviation it’d still be more than cops, but just for fun here’s an article using data from the bureau of labor and statistics. They happen to link pilots with flight engineers, but the pattern still holds: https://usafacts.org/articles/how-many-police-officers-die-in-the-line-of-duty/
You can disagree with whatever data collection or collation you want, but acting like the meme is misleading seems disingenuous, especially when you consider the brevity of the format.
thank you for your permission. my issue is more with studying small subset of the data carefully chosen to support your theory and then presenting it as if it applied to the whole group.
the link makes it anything but clear. it ultimately admits that the sample is manipulated, but doesn’t say how and why.
it would be more than “no data”? 😂
https://hostux.pics/images/2026/08/25/Screenshot-from-2026-08-25-14-27-0984d2800ddf65be81.png
one number manipulated, one non-existent, but the conclusion is one is bigger than the other?
the “meme” is tabloid trash. brevity of the format is not an excuse, no one forced the author to present misleading data.
10800 forestry workers in the us in 2024: https://www.bls.gov/ooh/farming-fishing-and-forestry/forest-and-conservation-workers.htm 53 deaths (https://www.bls.gov/news.release/cfoi.t03.htm) = a death rate of about .5%, 1 in 200.
826,800 police workers in the us in 2024: https://www.bls.gov/ooh/protective-service/police-and-detectives.htm
132 deaths (https://www.bls.gov/news.release/cfoi.t03.htm) = a death rate of about .02%, less than 1 in 2,000.
Edit math and spelling, but check for yourself. Still the difference in magnitude is obvious and always has been.
cool, but that doesn’t really address my complain about pilots. i don’t trust these numbers.
It is on the same website. Not always the same year.
Working pilots: https://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/cwc/flying-too-high-workers-fatalities-in-the-aeronautics-field.pdf
80.5 per 100k/ year
Police: https://www.bls.gov/iif/factsheets/fatal-occupational-injuries-police-2018.htm
13.7 per 100k/year
No matter what year you find stats for, pilots outweigh police for death risk. Prove me wrong.
Only guess on pilots is heat attack.
But Truckers? Come on that’s a pretty easy one to figure out. Traffic deaths are probably the majority (most cop deaths are traffic deaths, not getting shot). Truckers also work around large moving trucks, and forklifts that have a massive solid steel counterweight on the back that will not notice when is grinds your pelvis into hamburger against the nearest warehouse column or concrete loading dock.
Garbage men also spend a lot of time on the road(traffic deaths) and are constantly working around equipment that also won’t notice, even a little bit, when they tear off a limb or crush a whole body.
Don’t be an ass, try thinking sometime.
yeah, it is pretty easy to speculate. verifying that speculation is another story, and “funny” image comparing manipulated data to non-existent ones is not the best way to do it.
same to you.