DefenseTech Military.com
  • Categories
  • Full Archives
  • Monthly Archives
  • About Defense Tech
Subscribe to RSS

About Defense Tech

Defense Tech exam­ines the inter­sec­tion of tech­nol­ogy and defense from every angle and pro­vides analy­sis on what’s ahead.

Tip Us Off

Tip for Defense Tech?

SEND IT!

It’s Confidential!

Categories

  • 'Canes
  • Afghan Update
  • Ammo and Munitions
  • Armor
  • Around the Globe
  • Av Week Extra
  • Axe in Iraq (and Elsewhere)
  • Bizarro
  • Blimps
  • Blog Bidness
  • Body Armor Blues
  • Bomb Squad
  • Brownshoes in Action
  • Bubbleheads, etc.
  • Cammo Green
  • Catch the "Buzz"
  • Chem-Bio
  • Civilian Apps
  • Cloak and Dagger
  • Commandos
  • Comms
  • Contingency Ops
  • Cops and Robbers
  • Cyber-warfare
  • Data Diving
  • Defense Tech Poll
  • Defense Tech Radio
  • Dissent Tech
  • Door Kickers
  • Drones
  • DT Administrivia
  • Eat DT's Dust
  • Extra! Extra!
  • Eye on China
  • Fast Movers
  • FCS Watch
  • Fire for Effect
  • FOS Files
  • Friday Funnies
  • Gadgets and Gear
  • Going Green
  • Grand Ole Osprey
  • Ground Vehicles
  • Guns
  • Homeland Security
  • In the Weeds with Eric
  • Info War
  • Iraq Diary
  • Jarhead Jazz
  • JSF Watch
  • Just War Theories
  • Lasers and Ray Guns
  • Less-lethal
  • Logistics
  • Los Alamos and Labs
  • M4 Monopoly
  • Medic!
  • Mercs
  • Missiles
  • Money Money Money
  • Most Wanted
  • MRAP Edge
  • Net-Centric
  • Nukes
  • Old Skool
  • Our Shrinking Planet
  • PEO Soldier
  • Planes, Copters, Blimps
  • Podcast
  • Politricks
  • Polmar's Perspective
  • Popular Mechanics
  • Rapid Fire
  • Raptor Watch
  • Red Team
  • Retro-Futuro
  • Robots
  • Roll Your Own
  • Sabra Tech
  • Ships and Subs
  • Snipertech
  • Soldier Systems
  • Space
  • Special Ops
  • Star Wars
  • Strategery
  • Stray Trons
  • Tactical Development
  • Terror Tech
  • The Deadlies
  • The Defense Biz
  • The Peoples' Site
  • The Sunday Paper
  • The Tanker Tango
  • The View from Av Week
  • Those Nutty Norks
  • Training and Sims
  • Trimble on the Case
  • Uncategorized
  • Video Lounge
  • War Update
  • Ward'z Wonderz
  • You can run…

Archives

  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007
  • July 2007
  • June 2007
  • May 2007
  • April 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007
  • January 2007
  • December 2006
  • November 2006
  • October 2006
  • September 2006
  • August 2006
  • July 2006
  • June 2006
  • May 2006
  • April 2006
  • March 2006
  • February 2006
  • January 2006
  • December 2005
  • November 2005
  • October 2005
  • September 2005
  • August 2005
  • July 2005
  • June 2005
  • May 2005
  • April 2005
  • March 2005
  • February 2005
  • January 2005
  • December 2004
  • November 2004
  • October 2004
  • September 2004
  • August 2004
  • July 2004
  • June 2004
  • May 2004
  • April 2004
  • March 2004
  • February 2004
  • January 2004
  • December 2003
  • November 2003
  • October 2003
  • September 2003
  • August 2003
  • July 2003
  • June 2003
  • May 2003
  • April 2003
  • March 2003
  • February 2003
  • January 2003

Home » Av Week Extra » Army Aviation Accidents Top $16 Billion

Army Aviation Accidents Top $16 Billion

This arti­cle first appeared at Aviation Week​.com.

U.S. Army avi­a­tion acci­dents and inci­dents have cost the ser­vice about $16.2 bil­lion over the past dozen years, accord­ing to an exclu­sive Aerospace DAILY analy­sis of data pro­vided by the Army Combat Readiness/​Safety Center (USACRC).

The aver­age cost per an acci­dent or inci­dent for the more than 30,000 events was $539,281, the analy­sis shows, with a max­i­mum single-​​event cost of about $62.4 mil­lion. The mishaps have lead to 2,856 deaths.

So far this fis­cal year — Oct. 1 through Nov. 10 — the ser­vice seems to be off on solid foot­ing as far as mishaps go, accord­ing to online sta­tis­tics released through the USACRC.

The Army shows seven reported Class A-​​C avi­a­tion acci­dents in FY ’09. There are three flight acci­dents result­ing in an over­all rate of 2.385 acci­dents per 100,000 hours flown within the Army fly­ing hour pro­gram.

The cur­rent num­ber of Class A-​​C acci­dents is 65 per­cent below last fis­cal year, and 73 per­cent below a three-​​year aver­age of the same peri­ods. The Army has lost no sol­diers this fis­cal year in avi­a­tion mishaps.

Reducing fatal­i­ties and injuries has been a pri­or­ity for Army safety lead­ers. “While I’m not a fan of sta­tis­tics, it is evi­dent sol­diers and lead­ers get it’ by the 46 per­cent decrease in on-​​duty fatal­i­ties across our Army in fis­cal 2008 (com­pared to fis­cal 2007),” wrote Brig. Gen. William Wolf, new direc­tor of Army safety and com­mand­ing gen­eral of the USACRC, in a Nov. 3 let­ter posted on the center’s Web site.

Since 1986, the Army air­craft with the most reported fatal­i­ties due to mishaps are UH-​​60 Black Hawks, with more than 880 events, the analy­sis shows.

Placing sec­ond are the old UH-​​1H Hueys, with more than 460.

Next come Chinook vari­ants, with the CH-​​47D account­ing for more than 250 fatal­i­ties, accord­ing to the analysis.

Read the rest of this story, see what the pres­i­dent should make a pri­or­ity at the Pentagon, check out where Ivan’s look­ing at port calls and take a look at all-​​seeing MAVs from our Aviation Week friends exclu­sively on Military​.com.

– Christian

Share |

November 14th, 2008 | Av Week Extra | 418113 Comments »http://defensetech.org/2008/11/14/army-aviation-accidents-top-16-billion/Army+Aviation+Accidents+Top+%2416+Billion2008-11-14+13%3A32%3A29Ward You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

« « New Lease on Life for the Beloved M-​​14 | An Afghan ‘Surge’ no sure Winner » »

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

  1. WiseGuy1020 says:
    November 15, 2008 at 4:11 am

    any­body know what hap­pened with the $62.4 mil­lion acci­dent? like equip­ment involved?

    Reply
  2. SMSgt Mac says:
    November 16, 2008 at 12:48 pm

    Which should remind every­one (once again) that just being in the mil­i­tary and doing the job isn’t the safest thing in the world.
    It may not have been one piece of equip­ment involved. It could have been a col­li­sion or an acci­dent in a build­ing with mul­ti­ple items inside destroyed/​damaged or just one expen­sive build­ing. If it was just one air­craft involved, off the top of my head I think the only Army asset that might be in that price range would be the RC-​​12. One did crash in Europe a few years ago

    Reply
  3. Cole says:
    November 16, 2008 at 7:25 pm

    Correction: CSAR-​​X is only a $15 bil­lion program…mixed it up with KC-​​X.
    Wonder if the $16 bil­lion claimed acci­dent expense was just in the past 12 years as stated in one place, or since 1986 (22 years), as a year cited elsewhere?

    Reply
  4. SMSgt Mac says:
    November 16, 2008 at 8:21 pm

    Cole, A ques­tion:
    Where are you get­ting any­thing in the arti­cle that indi­cated any­one thought ‘hot­dog­ging’ was involved or that there was any agenda going on? Safety stats are rou­tinely com­piled and info used to pro­mote safety and drive down the acci­dent rate. there had to be no one look­ing for this infor­ma­tion for it to come out. Perhaps there another arti­cle some­place that pro­vided con­text for what stim­u­lated your state­ment– some­thing else we should know about?

    Reply
  5. Cole says:
    November 16, 2008 at 11:40 pm

    SMsgMac, nope on other arti­cles or official/​rumored infor­ma­tion.
    But a google search for Army Class A acci­dent infor­ma­tion, blocked my access due to insuf­fi­cient secu­rity cer­tifi­cate as I assume it would any­one else. That leads me to believe the infor­ma­tion was gained via the free­dom of infor­ma­tion act. Why was only Army avi­a­tion of inter­est and why was money even an issue instead of the lives involved?
    The 12 years vs 22 years is also impor­tant. If it was only $16 bil­lion since 1986, that isn’t much moneywise…not that it should mat­ter. Anytime money comes up, I smell an impli­ca­tion of waste or malfea­sance by some.
    Or maybe I’m para­noid. Our guys are pros and America is lucky to have them and their air­craft, just like in all the services.

    Reply
  6. Cole says:
    November 18, 2008 at 7:41 am

    “The mishaps have lead to 2,856 deaths.“
    —————————————-
    I ques­tioned this “fact” and found a Congressional Research Service study from 2002 that indi­cated that between 1980 and 2000, there were in fact 2,863 deaths asso­ci­ated with mil­i­tary avi­a­tion accidents.…ACROSS ALL 4 SERVICES. The Army had 553, com­pared to 1153 for the USAF, 494 for the Marines, and 665 for the Navy.
    In addi­tion, com­par­ing HELICOPTER acci­dents, between 1991 and 2001, the USAF heli­copter fleet expe­ri­enced 2.93 Class A acci­dents per 100,000 hours and the Marine expe­ri­enced 2.84 Class As. The Army, accord­ing to this study, expe­ri­enced 1.98 acci­dents per 100,000 hours in its nearly all heli­copter fleet.

    Reply
  7. Dougo says:
    January 9, 2009 at 11:27 pm

    Sir: I would like to know how many Military per­son­nel of all serviced,have died in 2008 serv­ing through out the world? Of acci­dent on or off duty?
    I believe we have post in other coun­try. Thanx..

    Reply
  8. Josh says:
    January 13, 2009 at 3:44 pm

    We need to improve on these crshes with more mil­i­tary technogly

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Click here to cancel reply.

Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree

By commenting on this topic you agree to the terms and conditions of our User Agreement

    Today's Hottest Topics
    • New Camo Pattern on the Block
    • Pinnacle's New Armor
    • Army Launches Examination of Armor Testing
    • Marines Quiet About Brutal New Weapon
    • BREAK-BREAK: Units to Get New Camo Revealed
    Recent Comments
    • Army Launches Examination of Armor Testing
      They are going to have to look at the whole...
      Wembley
    • New Camo Pattern on the Block
      Just look at this " picture " for a moment. The...
      Zandor
    • Zapping Drones from a Truck
      I know LOSAT seemed awesome but wasn't it cancelled? I...
      JimboJones
    • BAE to Market Mantis UAV to North America
      Yes you're quite right, I get to witness...
      JimboJones
    • New Camo Pattern on the Block
      I'm disappointed. When are they going to make clothes...
      Nadnerbus
    • VTOL JSF Arrives at Pax River
      Part II : * USMC attempts to make a single seat (no...
      freefallingbomb
    • VTOL JSF Arrives at Pax River
      Part I : I think we're not the only ones on the...
      freefallingbomb
    • Zapping Drones from a Truck
      Part III : Guided missiles will also be programmed to...
      freefallingbomb
    • Zapping Drones from a Truck
      Part II : If a tank shoots at another tank at only 5...
      freefallingbomb
    • Zapping Drones from a Truck
      Part I : To the poster "Will" : You wrote:...
      freefallingbomb
    Recent Articles
    • Army Launches Examination of Armor Testing
    • New Camo Pattern on the Block
    • BAE to Market Mantis UAV to North America
    • Pinnacle’s New Armor
    • Zapping Drones from a Truck
    • Northrop Invests Own Money In Fire Scout
    • IMINT: French Fashion Mavens Model MultiCam
    • VTOL JSF Arrives at Pax River
    • Super Cavitation and the Truth
    • Mantis Begins Search For Prey
    Recent Hot Topics
    • Marines Quiet About Brutal New Weapon
    • The Osprey has Landed
    • UPDATED: Details on Army's New Afghanistan Duds
    • VTOL JSF Arrives at Pax River
    • Iraq Cyber Attack and the DigiSEALs
    • Pinnacle's New Armor
    • (Proof) The Osprey Has Landed
    • Grim Wanat Footage
    • REPLACEMENT ARM, GOOD AS NEW
    • IMINT: French Fashion Mavens Model MultiCam
  • Channels: Military.com | Military Benefits | Military News | Off Duty | Join the Military | Military Education | Veteran Jobs | Military Money | Military Deals | Military Family | Military Community
  • Military.com Network: Military.com | MilBlogging | Defense Tech | DoD Buzz | SpouseBuzz | Fred's Place | GI Bill Express
  • Services: Army | Navy | Air Force | Marine Corps | Coast Guard | National Guard | Military Spouse
  • About Military.com About Us | Advertise With Us | Press | Affiliate Program | Monster Network | Help | Feedback | Privacy Policy | User Agreement | © 2009 Military Advantage