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
  • Af-Cam
  • 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
  • Crazy Ivan
  • 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
  • F-35 Watch
  • 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 Bubble with Joe Buff
  • 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

  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • 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

NOTE: Comments are limited to 2500 characters and spaces.

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

    Recent Articles
    • Author Steven Pressfield Blogs Afghan Visit With Gen. Mattis
    • Army Fast Tracks GPS Mortar Round
    • That Elephant’s Going To Do What? Where?
    • JSF Costs Jump 50 Percent
    • Let’s Talk AirSea Battle
    • More Vehicle Digital Camouflage
    • Chinese Digi-Camo
    • Defense Spending Headed Down
    • Those Wonderful Sea Lines of Communication
    • Army’s GCV Not Just MGV Warmed Over
    Recent Comments
    • Author Steven Pressfield Blogs Afghan Visit With Gen. Mattis
      Absolutely agree. That approach...
      Kole
    • Army Fast Tracks GPS Mortar Round
      I agree about reducing boom. 81's don't have...
      bduff509
    • Author Steven Pressfield Blogs Afghan Visit With Gen. Mattis
      Very interesting read. I...
      Sev
    • That Elephant’s Going To Do What? Where?
      And then consider this bullshit tanker bidding...
      John
    • Author Steven Pressfield Blogs Afghan Visit With Gen. Mattis
      Pressfield, in supporting his...
      ripr
    • Let’s Talk AirSea Battle
      First of all, I don’t think China wants to risk her...
      Bob
    • That Elephant’s Going To Do What? Where?
      Government procurement is a joke but not as...
      CHOPS
    • Army (might) Abandon “Leap” for M4 Replacement
      I should also point out that...
      A Realist
    • Army (might) Abandon “Leap” for M4 Replacement
      Let's examine the...
      A Realist
    • Russian F-22 (PAK-FA) First Test Flight Revealed
      you really like Russia dude. The Pak Fa...
      gunnar
  • 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| © 2010 Military Advantage